The Official Rapido APT-E Thread

[Rob Rossington]

It was good to see the model over the weekend, having ordered on the basis that the photos from Warley looked so good.

 

It looks soooooo good in the flesh!

[John B]

So, Damian and Paul, it's an easy job to re-gauge it to EM then?

[Worsdell forever]

So, Damian and Paul, it's an easy job to re-gauge it to EM then?

 

Felton Lane is 00 so it ran ok, Damian was cheating...

[Andy Reichert]

I wasn't able to subjectively gauge the amount of auto-tilting action from the video.  Or even notice it, although I'm not familiar with the real thing either.

 

Is there a "Spec" for that vs. radius on the model now?

 

I'm curious.   Andy

[Andy Y]

Thanks to Shildon MRC and the Runswick Leamside team I had the chance to see the APT-E on the move. I'm impressed with the tilt/articulation methods, there's a glimpse of how it works in the video.

 

[Grimly Feendish]

Andy,

 

very nice.

 

Any idea where the prototype HST came from?

 

Thanks,

 

John.

[Andy Y]

Sadly not John; I think it was one of the Shildon MRC members who'd disappeared by the time I'd gone back to take some stills.

[SRman]

I liked that prototype HSDT too. That's quite a nice piece of footage.

I did notice a bit of a wobble in the trailing driving car of the APT in several of the shots. Presumably just a wobbly wheel set that should be easily fixed before production begins. It does look very impressive, though. The articulation is quite fascinating and looks as if it will cope with all of the possible ups and downs and twists of the model on sharper than scale curves and gradients.

 

It's a pity I can't justify a set (too many other commitments and pre-orders!) although I'd like to wish Rapido and NRM/Locomotion every success with it.

[Budgie]

Interesting to see the Stirling single in the background.

[Mr_Tilt]

That looks tremendous, especially the opening shots. 

 

Like going back in time..... 

[mozzer models]

Andy,

 

very nice.

 

Any idea where the prototype HST came from?

 

Thanks,

 

John.

Genesis Kits do a cab http://pluto.servers.rbl-mer.misp.co.uk/~torqueoc/genesiskits.co.uk/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=21&Itemid=3&vmcchk=1&Itemid=3

[rapidotrains]

Hi guys,

 

Bill uploaded a video showing off some of the APT-E sounds:

 

https://youtu.be/34XNk9tCpE8

 

The deadline is less than two weeks away!  Please make sure you order yours before the deadline:

 

http://www.locomotionmodels.com/apt-e.htm/

 

Thanks,

 

Jason

 

[Mr_Tilt]

I know I was heavily involved in all this APT-E sound business (Bif was sending me 4-5 chunks of sounds at a time and asking which one sounds most like the real thing  ) and that I was there while Bill was recording that vid, but it sounds SO real to me! Even the crowd sounds help as there was always a background of chatter going on in the train!

 

I've got to agree about the layout too, the 'Duchy' looks superb and I just wish we could have taken E-Train that far West back in the 70s. Thundering up and down the Devon abd Cornwall banks and tilting round those sharp curves would have been a real work out.

[47137]

I remember being quite shocked when the train was withdrawn from service. As a teenager heading towards a career in engineering, I imagined the train would be a platform for continuous development and trials. So why was it withdrawn and preserved, instead of being retained as a test bed?

 

- Richard.

[modelpara]

I remember being quite shocked when the train was withdrawn from service. As a teenager heading towards a career in engineering, I imagined the train would be a platform for continuous development and trials. So why was it withdrawn and preserved, instead of being retained as a test bed?

 

- Richard.

 

I would defer to Mr Tilt for the correct answer but I suspect it was because Gas Turbines are very expensive to run and the APT-P was coming out around then or soon after as the next stage of development.

[47137]

Yes I'd like an official view too. The gas turbine might have been expensive to run, but it would allow operation on a wider range of tracks. The apt-p has always struck me as a peculiar beast; a set of three prototypes tested using customers, which doesn't fit easily into the idea of design experimentation, or design development, or a revenue earning train.

 

- Richard.

[Mr_Tilt]

How long have you got? 

 

It's a long and varied tale, but I'll try and give you the short form version.

 

The APT-Ps were always intended to be built in both 25 kV and gas turbine powered versions, that is until the fuel crisis of 1973 when fuel costs multiplied by four almost overnight. At a stroke that knocked the gas turbine version on the head and so all APT-Ps would be 25 kV and at that time limited to use on the WCML as there were very few other lines that were electrified at the time. 

 

In addition we'd learned things with E-Train that indicated that the method of articulation we used on that train, with pin joints between the vehicles under the joint modules and with the long heavy steering beams connecting the ball joints under the ends, resulted in some undesirable lateral stability modes. Not only that but the tilt system geometry, with vertical tilt jacks mounted above the secondary suspension, meant that a tilt system failure always ended up with the vehicle falling over. (it happened a LOT!)

 

That lot resulted in a radical redesign for the P-Trains, with near horizontal tilt jacks mounted below the secondary suspension and a swing link geometry that meant the vehicles could swing back parallel with the track in the event of a tilt system failure. The articulation of the P-Trains wasn't so stiff as on the E-Train and it was hoped that this would not give the lateral instability mentioned above.

 

This meant that there was very little in common between E-Train and the P-Trains, apart from the high speed wheelsets and steering axles etc. 

By 1975 we'd already built Hastings Coach (Lab 4) to test the BT12 non-articulated bogies and POP Train was being re-built into POP II form to test the BT11 articulated bogies for P-Train and neither of these bogies could have been fitted to the E-Train structure, or not without some radical and expensive re-work on it anyway. This meant E-Train could no longer contribute to the project and so it was retired. 

 

The original concept for the P-Trains was to have five sets, but the MoT decided that was too expensive and only funded three, and yet they STILL expected the project to follow the same development schedule. Engineers they were NOT! 

 

The Dec '81 service start date was pushed heavily by the MoT, Government and BR marketing, but of course none of them were engineers either, so what could they know about such things? It would have helped the P-Train's timescale if the CM&EE had transferred the APD development team across as well as the design team for the P-Trains, but they knew better. or thought they did anyway............

 

I hope that clarifies things somewhat, or at least gives you some idea about how complex the situation was back then.

[Mr_Tilt]

I remember being quite shocked when the train was withdrawn from service. As a teenager heading towards a career in engineering, I imagined the train would be a platform for continuous development and trials. So why was it withdrawn and preserved, instead of being retained as a test bed?

 

- Richard.

 

 Actually E-Train wasn't preserved.

 

After we delivered it to the NRM in 1976 one coach, TC2, was taken out of the consist and moved into the Great Hall where  it was mounted on on E1T bogie and the last remaining SA bogie. A small hydraulic pack was built and installed in the pit beneath the coach and  every few hours and NRM staff guy would come along and twiddle a control valve to tilt the coach and show the public how the bogie parts moved. The rest of the train was left outside in the Yorkshire weather, for 24 years!!!!!

 

Only after Paul Leadley formed the APT-E Conservation & Support Group in April 2000 was any preservation work carried out, and by then there was a LOT needed doing for sure!

[47137]

I pursued the career and soon discovered the opinions of the politicians and the bean counters do override ideas like good design. But having enjoyed reading the accounts in the last two posts, I am now asking myself, "to follow apt-e, why not build one, four or five car, 25kV set, to refine the technologies?". It seems like the p-train was rather a shot in the dark, as though someone was desperate to see a train in commercial service. Perhaps someone in Government was wanting to wrap up the R&D activity and jump straight into a finished product? Going from one experimental set to five prototypes seems a bit of a leap of faith.

 

- Richard.

[Mr_Tilt]

. It seems like the p-train was rather a shot in the dark, as though someone was desperate to see a train in commercial service. Perhaps someone in Government was wanting to wrap up the R&D activity and jump straight into a finished product? Going from one experimental set to five prototypes seems a bit of a leap of faith.

 

- Richard.

 

Exactly.

 

Effectively they put a development project into service, and far too early as well. The whole project was woefully underfunded compared to the French TGV/LGV project, a factor of ten difference would be not be exaggerating it, but then successive British Governments have singularly failed to understand engineering anyway, all through history.

[jjb1970]

I wonder if we'll see more gas turbine powered trains. Traditionally they were very heavy on fuel but modern engines are not that far behind diesel engines and it is possible to maintain efficiency at high turn down ratios which was the real Achilles heel of gas turbines for many applications. The lower fuel consumption would be offset by much higher energy density and ease of maintenance I think. Some of the modern high speed engines pack a lot of power into a small unit (eg. some of the MTU engines) but they're complex and pretty maintenance heavy. For some applications that need to combine high power with low-ish weight I think it would be worth having another look at gas turbine engines.

I must say this APT-E is a brilliant release, to me it remains perhaps the most futuristic train ever produced in Britain and the most stylish train made in the post steam era. I remember how as a very small boy it represented a much brighter future. Some day I hope to see Rapido do the LRC demonstrator too as that was another inspirational train and looked much nicer than the production units I think.

[sjgardiner]

I must say this APT-E is a brilliant release, to me it remains perhaps the most futuristic train ever produced in Britain and the most stylish train made in the post steam era. I remember how as a very small boy it represented a much brighter future. Some day I hope to see Rapido do the LRC demonstrator too as that was another inspirational train and looked much nicer than the production units I think.

 

Rapido did the Demonstrator scheme - http://www.rapidotrains.com/scllrcloco.html#LRC_DEMO

 

It's not 100% detail accurate as the costs of tooling would not have born out value for the number of demonstrator units they could sell, but having seen it in person, i wish i'd had the $$ to order a second LRC locomotive, as the Demonstrator Scheme looks absolutely fantastic, and the detail differences are not so significant that most would notice or care.

 

Stephen

[47137]

I must say this APT-E is a brilliant release, to me it remains perhaps the most futuristic train ever produced in Britain and the most stylish train made in the post steam era. I remember how as a very small boy it represented a much brighter future.

There was something special about the APT-E. I ordered a 6-car analogue set some months ago, fair enough I suppose but having seen the "cybermen" video I've now ordered a 4-car DCC+sound set too. Neither train is remotely suitable for my own layout. I am telling myself, I shall run the analogue set on the club layout, and I shall run the DCC set on the new club layout, and when both me and the club settle on DCC I shall sell on the analogue set. But the vibes I am getting tell me I shall assemble a seven-car set, for whatever layout is next, and keep all of both trains as a heirloom. I have declared a personal moratorium on motive power purchases for the rest of 2015.

 

- Richard.

[jjb1970]

Rapido did the Demonstrator scheme - http://www.rapidotrains.com/scllrcloco.html#LRC_DEMO

 

It's not 100% detail accurate as the costs of tooling would not have born out value for the number of demonstrator units they could sell, but having seen it in person, i wish i'd had the $$ to order a second LRC locomotive, as the Demonstrator Scheme looks absolutely fantastic, and the detail differences are not so significant that most would notice or care.

 

Stephen

I ordered a demo model from Rapido and am awaiting delivery with great excitement. As you say, the model does look good but it is very significantly different from the actual demo. The nose of the demo was much cleaner and more streamlined. The demonstrator was a glorious looking train and ranks up with the APT-E as a train that represented the future when I was small.

[piranha230]

I hope Rapido will do the Apt-p to follow up after the Apt-e.

I am sure plenty of people would buy them.