brack

It's fair to say that many of the companies were financed from the uk, often headquartered here too and had majority uk shareholders, at least originally. Hence they tended to be equipped by british firms. Quite a few saw themselves as british railway companies, just the track happened to be located elsewhere (and not just in our actual colonies, for example quite a few argentinian lines fit the description too, or several spanish lines such as Alcoy- Gandia).

May I ask where you got yours from? I have one on preorder from 3djake, so if yours came from there perhaps mine will shortly be arriving? Wasnt expecting it til the 26th, but it seems they do turn up early on occasions.

Well he ran the place for 5 years whilst fowler was seconded during the war looking after munitions on aircraft construction and presumably his limitations weren't yet obvious prior to that. Post grouping answering the question is easy: Because he was from Derby.

With all due respect (and acknowledging that the gentlemen in question likely knew far more than I regarding their charges), I'm not sure any up or sp retired engineers could have any relevant comparative experience to base their opinions on, given they would have no experience of garratt operations. The south african experience might be slight more informed, but their last 2 mallets went in 1960 (MJ1, Canadian built lighter locos for branch line service, the mainline mallets went 20 years earlier), so it's likely there was little comparative experience to inform his opinions either. Fortunately there was a proper trial. The South African Railways had quite a number of hefty mallets which they used over steeply graded mainlines (they had previously tried kitson meyers), the biggest of which, the MH was the most powerful 3'6" loco in the world when built in 1914. Post WW1 they ordered a garratt (class GA) with the same effective wheel arrangement (2662), boiler capacity, grate area, axle load and tractive effort as the mallet, specifically to compare the 2 types (the garratt was however 46 tons lighter - no tender). Whilst the GA garratt was found to need stronger frames and carrying wheels on the inner ends of the power bogies (it was somewhat experimental, and 50% bigger than any previous garratts), it handled heavier trains than the mallets at faster speeds and used less coal and water when tested on the Mallet's duties on the Natal main line. While the MH was not a bad design at all (they were highly regarded by the SAR) and lasted another 20 years before withdrawal, SAR never ordered another mallet or simple articulated, but instead ordered large numbers of garratts until the end of steam. They were fooled into buying a few of the inferior fake lookalikes buy persuasive prices and salesmen (modified fairies and union garratts- fairly transparent attempts to get around patents), but the conclusion to the experiment of garratt vs mallet in mainline service on steeply graded lines was emphatic. Yes the late american articulated locos were more advanced than a ww1 era mallet, but the garratts BP turned out at the end were vastly improved too, using similar technology, the cast steel engine beds even coming from the same foundry in the US. The mallet design forces you to build a long thin boiler, which in thermal terms is the worst possible shape - indeed some of the larger us locos essentially used the front half as a pre heater or long smokebox as there wasnt much heat transfer going on that far from the fire. A garratt pushes you towards a shorter, fatter boiler, which is the optimum shape, and has clear space around and underneath the firebox so it can be as large as required within the loading gauge. A double bogied loco will ride better than a semi-articulated one (eg. mallet) and on curves the garratt will have greater stability as the boiler goes inside the curve, whereas on the mallet it overhangs the outside of the curve at the front, which gets worse the bigger it is (hence the santa fe 2-10-10-2s with the ball and socket and concertina joints in the boiler barrel, which were predictably unsuccessful). The only advantage the mallet has is one fewer set of flexible steam joints. The point is sometimes made of adhesive weight reducing as fuel/water is used up on garratts, but this is only to the extent it occurs on a tank loco, and (as on the GMAM, though this was more to reduce axle loading) you can get around this by reducing water supplies on the loco itself and having a tank wagon as auxiliary water tender.

It might have been a better choice as train engine, rather than banker up the hill. Cant have been that bad to have done the job for 25 years though, 18-20 trips up the hill each day. I can understand why crews wouldnt be keen - twice the work as mentioned above, plus the unpleasant privilege of being the 3rd hardworking loco on the train through the tunnels breathing all the smoke. Essentially getting rostered onto the U1 meant harder work in the worst conditions.

Given they were deliberately designed for reduced hammer blow to give the same forces on the track as the castles, one might suggest that hammer blow was quite well understood at the time, at least by some.

Smith's Rivers could have operated over all of the Highland's main routes if Alexander Newlands (the chief civil engineer) hadnt been (or more likely pretended to be) utterly ignorant of any recent research in the previous few decades directly affecting his job. They put far less weight and stress on the rails than the clans or the Big Bens (which actually had a higher static axle loading) and were specifically designed to be within the dynamic loading of the castles. Newlands and Smith didnt get on or communicate, which is clearly a failing of both of them. But Newlands was fully aware of all the above, yet chose to wait until the locos were delivered to make his stand, when it caused maximum damage to his rival. This was also the time it caused maximum damage to the company, as they were desperate for power during ww1. The greater lack of competence is surely his on the grounds of either neglect to keep abreast of research on hammer blow or allowing his pettiness and personal dislikes to damage the company. Even if one accepts Newlands' position regarding static axle loading the question remains as to why he made no great play regarding Drummond's Big Bens. It was simply a man putting his personal vendetta ahead of his professional duties, but that ought to be filed under incompetent civil engineers.

A number of the LNER and constituent CMEs seem to be related, often by marrying daughters of prominent engineers! Have a look at the engineers biographies on lner.info. The other thing that struck me was how closely linked quite a few were to Stephenson - eg. The Worsdell's dad made the carriages for the liverpool & manchester, fletcher was Stephenson's apprentice, Holden snr his nephew, then holden jnr. In terms of marriages Raven's daughter was married to thompson, Ivatt snr's daughter married to bulleid, Ivatt jnr at the LMS etc.

I think perhaps that sudden change provided an immediate way to separate a good, innovative designer who understood what was going on inside a loco from those who were simply producing minor variations on an existing theme (eg. The Caley 460 designs). Several designers who had previously shown themselves as innovative were perhaps now too long in the tooth to change with the times. Those who were most successful looked at overseas practice where larger locos were already established and copied/adapted accordingly. Churchward for instance must have recognised the need for improvements in boiler/firebox design as he looked at US boiler construction, but borrowed the front end from france. The NER made several visits to the US, in particular to the Pennsylvania Railroad, where close links probably stem from both of the worsdell's having worked at altoona in their career. This influenced the big engine policy, the NER atlantics, boiler sizes and electrification. Apparently some information was passed back the other way too. Gresley was obviously inspired by both transatlantic and cross channel influences. What I find particularly interesting are the NER 4 cylinder compound atlantics - credited to W Worsdell but he openly acknowledged they were his draughtsman, W Smith's idea and design. Worsdell allowed Smith to spend more on them than he had budgeted on his own locos, and they were excellent locos. To me, that is a CME who is confident enough in his own position to allow someone below him in the hierarchy free rein to have a go at something quite at odds with his own ideas (he hated compounds for a start).

There was only 3.5 years between then, but the 5s were a much more modern design with higher boiler pressure, smaller cylinders, piston valves, higher factor of adhesion and built superheated, so they should perform better. Sam Carse wrote that Nasmyth Wilson had argued for 14" cylinders on the class 4s but the loco superintendent, Livesey wanted 15". Experience suggested the manufacturers might have had a point and the class 5 had 14" cylinders. I know it was only a few years between them, but there was quite a bit of technological improvement. The 4s were much better once superheated and a row of tubes taken out, but yes, the 5s were better.

But Sodor was connected to the mainland (post 1915 I believe, but I stand ready to be corrected by ardent devotees). If you modelled the Bideford, Appledore and Westward Ho! on the other hand....

Thing is, we're assuming again that CMEs can be judged solely on new loco designs produced during their tenure. Were the locos and stock maintained well?, were economies and efficiencies made? Did the loco works themselves need developing? Did he manage his staff well? Could he work within the budgets and constraints given? There was much more to the role than merely turning out new designs . Whilst we may look at one or two and decide they were rubbish (mostly on the grounds of new loco designs they've rubber stamped), they may have been very good at other aspects of the job. As for Baltic tanks in the UK, there was only one design that was truly successful, built by Nasmyth Wilson in 1904. The shortest lived of the 4 lasted 48 years before a combination of age and dwindling traffic did for them, the eldest outlasted the railway itself, was preserved, then scrapped by thieves in 1968. CDRJC class 4.

H.A. Hoy resigned from the L&Y when beyer peacock offered him £2000 per year plus 2.5% commission on net profits to be general manager (their managing director having resigned). He also took with him several key staff from the L&Y: AE Kyffin (appointed chief draughtsman), AC Rogerson (appointed works manager, formerly Chief Outdoor Machinery assistant) and Edgar Alcock (appointed deputy works manager, and who went to Hunslet as their works manager on Hoy's death). Given Beyer were reorganising the works and electrifying all their machinery (only the second engineering works in the country to do so) around that time and Hoy's experience of working with electricity at Horwich, reorganizing the works there and the move from Miles Platting, he might have been chosen for a purpose. Whilst at Beyers he patented a steam lorry and they built a few, whilst also looking at automobiles and buying land for a loco works in montreal (never built due to legal wrangling, the land was sold in 1912) - it seems there was some thought to diversify their output away from steam locos. As it happened, the first garratt schemes were prepared and built under his watch, which certainly saw the company good for the next half century.

Disappointed nobody is hollowing out the exhaust steam pipe and using it as a conduit...

Would the station not be essentially perpendicular to the through lines? As currently drawn it seems to necessitate reversal for any arrival/departure heading across the bridge. Itd make more sense* to build a terminus perpendicular, with a cut off for through running providing a triangle for turning stock. *I appreciate this might not be the goal

The cab is rather modern, and it has quite a fat boiler for pre edwardian times.

I asked them this via email a few days ago, they said they would take care of tax etc as itd be shipped from within the EU. In fairness, at $150 postage I would expect them to take care of everything, and deliver it in a carved, gilded, mink lined wooden box. In the end I pre ordered a mars pro (for 26 june) as I dont absolutely need the larger build area and would rather get on with things sort of now than wait 3 months (plus my original budget was only for an original mars). Well done for getting hold of a Saturn - a friend on another forum managed to get one in his basket but by the time the payment page loaded they were all gone.

To be honest I dont care much for skiing (my wife does, I suspect it's down to her more middle class upbringing in the home counties) but I absolutely loved the long sledge runs in switzerland. Tremendous fun (and I actually got quite decent at it).

My wife and I sledged it nearly a decade ago. Having never done more than slide 20 yards straight down a hill it was a learning experience - I remember near the start there was a sign telling beginners to go left, but as i hadnt yet worked out how to steer.... Nearer the bottom a load of skiers crossed our run on the level (terrifying, when I really didnt have that much control and there were skiers going right to left across in front of us, there were other tobogganers around us as well, so we were definitely on the right path) and then bizarrely on the outskirts of grindelwald I encountered a car driving up the sledge run! (Yes, we were on the right path!). In the few years after we did preda-bergun a few times (more fun and more scenic in my opinion). Then we had kids, and haven't left the country since!

King C Gillette did ok. And named his son king as well.

What if its near a 5G mast?

Nah, just listening to the lies at five, starring our democratically elected betters.

I thought a father actually looking after their own progeny was officially deemed exceptional circumstances now.

Not in the 1840s when it was built. Originally broad gauge, standard gauged just before ww1 as the broad gauge locos were knackered and it was easier to regauge the line and get standard gauge steam locos, the 01s didn't arrive until the line had been operating for over a century.

Afraid not. For starters dolbadarn is a different class to the others (dinorwic port class - dome, different bufferbeams, frames and a touch bigger than an Alice class), but they also have a handful of Ruston diesels and in the past they had locos built by Jung, Henschel and O&K.