Imaginary Locomotives

[brack]

On the imaginary locos front, what if the loco builder's injunction of the late 19th century went a bit further and all loco building ended up in the hands of private builders. The role of the railway CME would lose some of its sheen, and perhaps the (often uncelebrated) design staff at the loco builders might get more credit.

What impact would this have on loco types? I'd suggest more rapid sharing of successful innovations, perhaps standard(ish) designs common to several lines. Design family resemblances more down to the builder than the railway company?

[Compound2632]

On the imaginary locos front, what if the loco builder's injunction of the late 19th century went a bit further and all loco building ended up in the hands of private builders. The role of the railway CME would lose some of its sheen, and perhaps the (often uncelebrated) design staff at the loco builders might get more credit.

What impact would this have on loco types? I'd suggest more rapid sharing of successful innovations, perhaps standard(ish) designs common to several lines. Design family resemblances more down to the builder than the railway company?

 

A lot of very conservative design from the Glasgow builders - who were very confident that they knew best. They were keen on this idea and argued that railway companies had no business building their own locomotives.

 

On the other hand, earlier widespread adoption of Belpaire boilers from Beyer, Peacock & Co?

Churchward?

Two different series of locos (Saint & Star)

 

Keith

 Like I said, someone would be along soon!

[Corbs]

2000th post so I thought I should make something big!

 

Another take on the Hawksworth 'big thing' sometimes referred to as a Cathedral. Taking on board what people have been saying (inside framed front bogie, 4-8-0 arrangement, wide cab, long splasher, Hawksworth tender (increased to maximum height without needing a Stanier style curve at the top - 4,000gal maybe?)).

Cracked frames, what cracked frames?!

 

It's made using a County cab and tender (stretched in height), chimney, safety valve and splasher, boiler bands, mixed with a boiler from a King (scaled up and stretched in length, smokebox length reduced at front and extended at the back), and the King front end with the County front bogie.

For the sake of it here's the 2-8-0 (which uses standard County boiler, front end, cab and tender) and the 4-4-0 (except this is now long wheel base but with traditional GWR valve gear).

[Niels]

A longer driving wheel axle spacing might have helped.

 

 

A three cylinder School has a bigger swaying couple and Bulleid modified one to have no reciprocatory balance at all before doing it on all MNs.

The cheap and dirty  solution for  the GWR County was maybe just  to  have  had  stiffer horizontal springs in the boggie .

Edited September 20, 2018 by Niels

[Mr_Tilt]

I do like the look of that 'Cathedral', that would have looked very imposing zapping through Sonning Cutting with 13-14 on the back. 

[The Johnster]

Churchward used a shorter wheelbase than he might have for the his Counties because they were designed for work on the North to West line, which was joint with the LNWR, which banned 6-coupled express engines on it.  He thought that some of the curvature on the route would benefit from shorter coupled wheelbases.  Rough riders or not, they were strong engines that were suitable for plodding up banks with heavy trains, and ideal for the North to West.

[rue_d_etropal]

Sean O'Connor made a similar Bulleid tank loco.

Thought I should bring talk back to Bulleid, as this is one design I looked at many years ago, when I firsr saw picture in book by Robin Barnes. I did start to cut up an old Airfix kit(it was pre Dapol days), but it got no further.

As I am now designing models for 3D printing, one loco I have on my list is the Q1, so why not some modified versions.

Obviously the 4-6-4T, but also maybe a simple mod taking a Q1 into an 0-6-4T. One problem with the Q1 is that the wheels are actually rforward than many other 060s so an 0-6-2T would not be feasible. Looking at the other end, it would be easy to turn it into an 2-6-4T, but would that front end be too light weight. Back to the 4-6-4T. 

Now as an 0-6-4, I would initially use the shape of the Q1, but for the 4-6-4T I would be tempted to not just do the one one illustrated with a BOB/WC type shape(narrow cab), but also a more basic one with a Q1 shape. The boiler would be slightly longer, but otherwise much of the Q1 design can be used.

First job is to get a Q1 designed, then modify it step by step.

 

On the subject of the GWR 4-4-o, there is a nice one in book by Robin Barnes, and he refers to it as a River class.

Edited September 19, 2018 by rue_d_etropal

[melmerby]

More musings, this time Hawksworth picking up from Churchward on large mixed traffic 2-8-0s.

The 4710 class.

gwr hawksworth 4710.jpg

Starting with the Churchward 47XX,

Hawksworth could use the same size boiler, updated and pressed to 280psi, County style wide cab, 6' 0" wheels as on Hall abut keeping the cylinder size from the 47XX and he would have had a fast mixed traffic loco with a nominal TE of around 36000lb.

Use the 8' 6" wide tender from the County to match the cab but lengthened and supported on two 4 wheel bogies.

That would be some beast with BR rating of probably 8MT.

Quite what it would be used for is another matter!

 

Keith

Edited September 19, 2018 by melmerby

[Gilwell Park]

Hi

 

I have in fact built a GWR inside cylinder, inside frame 4-4-0. I have been considering this for some time and at one stage thought about converting a Hornby County but then saw a drawing of such an engine. The artist had clearly heard about the new 3200 4-4-0 being built at Swindon and drew out a sketch based upon the 2200 0-6-0, as we now know the two designs were completely different. My rationale is that having converted all 40 Dukes with Bulldog frames Swindon realised that the old curved frame Bulldogs, some converted from Dukes, were in a similar bad way. They therefore withdrew the worst and replaced them with new build 4-4-0.

 

The model is built on a Triang L1 chassis, giving it a 10' wheelbase instead of the Swindon standard 8' 6" and 6' wheels instead of 5'8". The running plate is L1 & the cab from a Mainline 2251. I had intended using a Kitmaster City boiler but baulked at replacing the handrails so found an old Mainline 4300 body on Ebay and used that instead. This is a Swindon standard 4 boiler, larger than the standard 2 or 10 which would probably have been used, however it looks ok. I liked the old Bulldog names so christened mine Exmoor. The tender is Triang Lord of the Isles, with pick up.

 

Hope you like it. It runs very well with the original X04 motor.

 

Roger

[Corbs]

Hi

 

I have in fact built a GWR inside cylinder, inside frame 4-4-0. I have been considering this for some time and at one stage thought about converting a Hornby County but then saw a drawing of such an engine. The artist had clearly heard about the new 3200 4-4-0 being built at Swindon and drew out a sketch based upon the 2200 0-6-0, as we now know the two designs were completely different. My rationale is that having converted all 40 Dukes with Bulldog frames Swindon realised that the old curved frame Bulldogs, some converted from Dukes, were in a similar bad way. They therefore withdrew the worst and replaced them with new build 4-4-0.

 

The model is built on a Triang L1 chassis, giving it a 10' wheelbase instead of the Swindon standard 8' 6" and 6' wheels instead of 5'8". The running plate is L1 & the cab from a Mainline 2251. I had intended using a Kitmaster City boiler but baulked at replacing the handrails so found an old Mainline 4300 body on Ebay and used that instead. This is a Swindon standard 4 boiler, larger than the standard 2 or 10 which would probably have been used, however it looks ok. I liked the old Bulldog names so christened mine Exmoor. The tender is Triang Lord of the Isles, with pick up.

 

Hope you like it. It runs very well with the original X04 motor.

 

Roger

 

Looks lovely, was this the drawing you refer to?

[BernardTPM]

The model is built on a Triang L1 chassis, giving it a 10' wheelbase instead of the Swindon standard 8' 6" and 6' wheels instead of 5'8".

Interestingly you'd get closer with the old Triang-Hornby M7 chassis. Originally the same 6' (24mm*) wheels, but at 8' 3" wheelbase (33mm). Quite a bit out for an M7, but very close to what you want. I believe some time later (1990s?) they put smaller 5' 6" (22mm) wheels on the M7 which would be marginally closer to 5' 8". The chassi of the all-new M is far to scale to be useful here though!

 

* 24.4mm when I put a mic over them.

[Gilwell Park]

Looks lovely, was this the drawing you refer to?

7950224416_44f70af177_c.jpg

Yes it was. I can't remember where I found it now.

Roger

[rue_d_etropal]

Continuing with my Q1 project. First variation is an 0-6-4T version. I will see if I can also make it an 0-6-2T, but from this I want to extend forwards, and then evolve into the one depicted in book. Also want to try out some other versions with tender, maybe even a version based on the mockup on the School loco.

For speed of development I have not done the wheels, but will do, especial;ly when it moves onto longer versions.

[RedGemAlchemist]

Looks lovely, was this the drawing you refer to?

7950224416_44f70af177_c.jpg

I've seen all of those drawings before. Interesting viewing.

[rue_d_etropal]

I've seen all of those drawings before. Interesting viewing.

I think MRN and MRC have both had these types of drawings.

[RedGemAlchemist]

I think MRN and MRC have both had these types of drawings.

I think so, yeah.

[Satan's Goldfish]

I've stretch a Brit and turned it into a Mikado..... just because...

 

 

I don't think there's any practical need for this!

 

That is all.

[rue_d_etropal]

Someone going by the name of VC Cornish did quite a few of these proposals in MRN in the 40s. I have a couple of bound copies from then.

[RedGemAlchemist]

Someone going by the name of VC Cornish did quite a few of these proposals in MRN in the 40s. I have a couple of bound copies from then.

Ah yes, that's the name I was looking for!

[Corbs]

It's interesting to look at a 1930s-1940s point of view. The poke at Thompson and Bulleid is quite funny. Also the pontification on what was to become the 'Dukedogs' and the 'Counties'. I see the Hawksworth 2-8-0 somewhat resembles what I did on the previous page....

 

 

Edited September 25, 2018 by Corbs

[Satan's Goldfish]

The "Marchioness" looks very similar to the LMS 2-8-2 I did a page or so ago...

[john new]

Thank you for including the SLS image, we still exist. Love the Midland 4-4-4T, that is one that should have been built.

Edited September 25, 2018 by john new

[Gibbo675]

Hi Folks,

 

I do like the Thompson rebuild of a Stirling, total madness.

 

I'm currently painting the BR [non] Standard Mallet and also part way through a 'Marchioness' type contraption made from Dapol Bullied and 9F kits, they were a cheap auction on eBay and couldn't resist. Unfortunately it will be a Bullied with spoked wheels not BFB's. The BR [non] Standard Franco Crosti-Garrett is on its way soon.

 

 

Gibbo.

[rockershovel]

The “MacGlehn” looks wrong, somehow.. the cylinders are too far forward? Surely a distinctive characteristic of this sort of loco, is the outside cylinders behind the bogie? I know that a lot of De Glenn locomotives don’t actually share this feature, and it looks quite ghastly on the LNER A1/1 (which isn’t a De Glenn type at all), so perhaps we are better off without it...

 

Fun stuff, though. The MR 4-4-4T looks rather smart, doesn’t it? Looking around, real-life variants seem not to have been particularly successful so perhaps Crewe were well advised not to persevere..

[Ramblin Rich]

The MR 4-4-4T looks rather smart, doesn’t it? Looking around, real-life variants seem not to have been particularly successful so perhaps Crewe were well advised not to persevere..

Derby, surely? It does look nice, very much like a London Tilbury Southend 4-4-2 with a bigger bunker.