EddieB

Oops, what about the GER Decapod?

Not in its original form - just a mere 17ft 7in

Would it be the G.E.R. 'Decapod' after it was rebuilt as a 0-8-0 tender loco?

Correct!

According to C. Langley Aldrich the coupled wheelbase was 23ft 3in.

As far as I can see all driving wheels were flanged and I don't know how much sideplay there was (certainlty the original had some lateral movement and the centre wheels were flangeless), but this must have one difficult loco when it came to negotiating curves.

To you "DS239".

BR Standard 9F 21'8"?

No.

Dub Dee 2-10-0 maybe? 29ft 8in

No - that's the total wheelbase, including the leading pony truck. The coupled wheelbase was 21ft.

Both answers around two feet too short.

Clarification needed - by "coupled wheelbase" I mean the maximum distance between sets of driving wheels rigidly coupled together (by a coupling rod, no less), and with no articulation in between.

So no Garratts (unless the coupled wheelbase of each engine unit exceeded that of the longest non-articulated locomotive(s) - which it didn't).

Ok, a nice straight-forward question first up.

Which British steam locomotive or locomotive type (and by that I mean saw service on the railways of Great Britain) had the longest coupled wheelbase?

Well, you're partway there, being correct about the rebuilt engine, although it was the length of the sandbox fillers which were unique. There were other differences, one of which I'll record here: the pipework on the left side of the boiler was the most obvious, being kinked halfway along, whilst all the others had the kink just short of the smokebox. Can anyone recall the other difference (these made this locomotive instantly recognizable from either side).

 

It was unique when built, although that state didn't last until rebuilding and wasn't instantly obvious. Can anyone get that plus the other unique rebuilt feature?? If not, I'll pass the wand to Eddie.

 

JE

Ah, you mean that it had multi-part welded wheel centres when first built, as opposed to cast centres employed on the rest of the class? (All still to the Boxpok pattern, of course).

After rebuilding the placement of sandboxes and their fillers was unique on 35018 (and a source of problems that were never rectified).

Not sure what was unique before rebuilding, but I think it was the last of its batch to be named. Or was it the only Bulleid to pull a royal train???

I also felt the Princess was a poor thing compared to the Hornby Dublo 3-rail Duchess of Atholl I'd inherited from next door's kid in the mid-50s, still less the Duchess of Montrose (avec smoke deflectors) which was Hornby's current offering at the time.

You've given me another one - the horrible bogie and trailing pony truck that still persists right through into Hornby's current "Princess" offering.

(As remarked upon by the review in Model Rail, but not, no no no in Hornby Mag).

I note that the BBC report says "when" and not "if" a bus breaks down.

And here is 37065 at Sheffield in June 1985 showing that it had 2 different fronts at the same time

Phew! This thread is good, but becoming a little hard to trawl through.

37065 wasn't the only one to have different front ends at the same time.

First, here's another of 37065, taken at Thornaby, 30th May 1986. Not a great photo, but at least it shows both ends are different.

Now for two pictures of 37102 at Tyne Yard, also on 30th May 1986, from each end. This was a split headcode version that was given one plain front following accident repair.

the TEE trains, and those French diesels in the first clip, do seem to have a really nice stylish look to them

 

Mike

Well, yes indeed. The French even hired a car stylist, Paul Arzens, to design some of their diesel and electric loco bodies. Having said that, one of my favourite electric locos - 2D2 5538 series (« Femmes enceintes ») appears in the first clip at Poitiers (just before the lineside shot you admired), but this was a pre-Arzens design.

An excellent find and some interesting material there.

I think these videos may date from the late 'fifties as the CC65000 entered service in 1957, and the TEE network was set up in the same year (when Kraftwerk were still in metallic nappies). Reclassification and renumbering (e.g. from 060.DB to CC65000) took place in 1962, so the material must pre-date this. Incidentally the last examples of the Etat 231.F Pacifics (shown in the first clip) finished in 1965 - unfortunately none survive.

Well IRS 15EL (2009) gives the location as Carnforth, whilst "Surviving Steam in the British Isles" (Mundy, LCGB 2011) as East Lancashire Railway, Bury.

An AEI ad. from 1962 showing a locomotive built in 1931. A diesel electric Bo-Bo built by Metropolitan Vickers for service at Fords Dagenham plant. AEI was a holding company formed in 1928 and included both Metro Vicks and BTH. Up to 1959 both companies operated largely independenty and competed with each other but from 1959 the separate names were dropped and the all the AEI companies operated as a single marketing unit. The photo shows the locomotive at work in the vicinity of the Dagenham blast furnace, the only 'modern' blast furnace to operate in the South East.

 

 

 

One of these locomotives (or more strictly the superstructure of one and the engine of another) survives in preservation on the Kent & East Sussex Railway: https://www.kesr.org.uk/stock-register/diesel-locomotives/102-bth-no-40-bo-bo.html

Either 05001 if it's still capable of running

Cheers,

John E.

As far as I know, 05001 has been on static display at the DB museum, Nürnberg, since 1963, so would require substantial refitting to be returned to running order. Were it to be, then it should have the capability to be faster than 18201.

May be cheap Bernard, but look at the postage. Try estimating the cost of building a three bed semi!!

Ah, but there's always the option of not paying postage - whereupon the seller will deliver for free to a window near you!

I'm going back to a subject which was a core part of my A Level History with prestige and the Third Reich!

 

The question of why is an interesting one - given the establishment's love of going for bigger and better, Speer's designs for future cities being a wonderful example, I'm surprised they didn't try to push this one. I think it would certainly have been worth them trying - wonderful propaganda material too!

Good points, I suspect that there were plans that never prevailed because of the intervention of the war. A similar situation prevented the E19 class of electrics from testing at 225km/h (which I think would have set a pre-war record).

So the will was there, but never triumphed. Erm.

This locomotive surely would pose the greatest threat to Mallards record. Does anyone know if it has got anywhere near the permitted 112mph or is that just a theoretical figure rounded to 180 kph to allow for an occasional topping of 100 mph? In my earlier rather insular post I was only considering British locomotives. Serves me right!

 

Edit;- 5th July 1995 on test 18-201 reached 112 mph.

I'm probably not alone in hoping that Mallard's record will be kept sacrosanct, given that it was set during the Golden Age of steam traction and has remained for nearly three-quarters of a century. If the will existed, I'm sure that the Germans could take 18-201 near or near-abouts by risking running the boiler at higher pressure.

Then again, for all its superb engineering, 18-201 doesn't represent the latest technological developments. The efforts of Chapelon, Porta and Wardale were primarily devoted to greater efficiencies than higher speed, but I'm certain that were they to be applied, then Mallard's record could be left trailing. Thankfully the proposed 5AT locomotive, if it ever gets built, seems to perpetuate the "mixed traffic" 4-6-0 concept (think Class 5/Modified Hall/B1) with greater efficiency, rather than a top link express which could challenge for the record.

Ex-DR experimental Pacific 18.201 is certified for a limit of 180km/h (112mph), so could theoretically do the "ton". Having 7ft diameter driving wheels helps....

Yes, 7'7" is nearer the mark [compares with 6'8" for Mallard]. With a boiler rating 236 psi (16.3 bar) [250 psi] and 3 cylinders of 20" diameter [3 cyls, 18.5" ø], I'd say that the only things keeping 18-201 from challenging the steam record are the speed limit restriction (like certain German cars?) and then possibly a higher boiler pressure.

Another one was located about a mile North of Saffron Walden. There were two sidings off the branch line and, having no run-round facilities, wagons were propelled the short distance up grade from Saffron Walden.

From memory, the facility opened during WW2 and fell into disuse in the 'fifties.

If modelling the recent era, you absolutely must have a static preserved 1524mm gauge Finnish steam locomotive parked in the timber yard.

Enfield Timber has/had a number of these locomotives scattered about (locations change). Here is VR Hr1 1016 (Tampella 946/1955) in the timber yard adjacent to Southbury station, August 2001. (The locomotive has since moved to a private collection and is no longer on public display).

If you want a nice original slide of Looe there is one on ebay now, my link, but is it worth £102????

At risk of repeatng what I posted on a related thread, too much railway photography is undervalued and yes, it is worth it, because at least two bidders are prepared to pay in excess of £100. How do you value an unrepeatable photograph, sold with copyright?

From what I can see, it looks a good image of publishable quality (pity the lister didn't say what film stock it was shot on), well lit and of obvious historical value and offered with a starting price of £4.99.

There's one going on eBay at the moment - http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/RARE-Wills-LMS-Deeley-Flatiron-0-6-4-loco-kit-built-/330530259291?pt=UK_Trains_Railway_Models&hash=item4cf523815b. Looks black in the first picture, maroon in the others.

The Flatiron was the first whitemetal loco kit I built (and it shows!), based on the original "Jinty" chassis option. In many ways I think an unbuilt kit would attract more interest than a partially built kit and the same over a finished kit - unless it was built and finished to the highest standards.

The distinctive looks has made the prototype a popular model, even if the class were poor runners (like my model) and lasted only into the late 'thirties. I have a few photographs (mainly Photomatic) which I cannot post because of copyright. There are some links below (the last with quite a few images).

http://www.old-dalby.com/images/nottm1930-2.jpg

http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/mrbg143.htm

http://kettlesgalore.fotopic.net/p65810378.html

 

Think I'll save up for a rake........

You'll need to save hard: http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Blec-PDR-75-Power-Rake-/120683522104?pt=UK_BOI_FarmingEquipment_RL&hash=item1c194c6838

[sorry]

Given the amount of information that you have at your disposal, can you shed any more light on the 'early' green livery issue?

No, if I had that information I would have replied earlier in this thread. Nearly all photos I've seen are in black and white and relate to "in service" times, by which time all appear to have carried the standard dark green - and no personal recollections either, I wasn't born when they were first introduced!

Railway Bylines Summer Special No. 2 has a photo feature on the W&M railbuses, mainly compiled from early publicity photos shortly after delivery at Stratford and while running trials on the Witham-Maldon branch, before speed whiskers were applied. From the tonal range and mild vignetting of the images reproduced, I would infer that the originals were in colour, and indeed the colour image linked to on Flickr in an earlier post is to be found within the photo feature. Interestingly, Railway Bylines gives the date of this image (and others in the same spot) as June 1958, and draws attention to the towing instructions painted in white on the bufferbeam - which are stated to have been added a short while after delivery. On the other hand, a previous double page spread appears to show E79961 in exactly the same position at Stratford, in the company of Brush Type 2 D5501, that image being dated to April 1958.

Certainly the photos of the railbuses trialling on the Witham-Maldon branch are without speed whiskers, and it may well be that these hadn't been added by June 1958, if some of the pictures taken at Stratford indeed date to that month (which I now doubt).

Paye (op cit) notes that some railbuses were sent to Cambridge in April 1958 for testing on the Saffron Waldon and Mildenhall branches. Two of the Witham-Maldon publicity photographs were used to promote the new service/timetable on the Saffron Walden branch, which I can confirm (from signal box records) was inaugurated on the date advertised, Monday 7th July 1958.

While I have collected numerous photographs and illustrations in books of the W&M railbuses in service, early photographs of them on the Saffron Walden branch seem to be rare and I'm not aware of seeing any without speed whiskers or warning panels.

It may be worth mentioning that when the railbuses acquired their yellow warning panels, there were two sizes of "small" panels. E79961/2/4 had larger panels than E79960/3 . Hopefully these represent the different styles modelled by Heljan.