844fan

Oil fired?

 

It's not an oil pump is it?

 

Best

Simon

No no you misunderstood me. I was talking about large American engines being oil fired thus not having a need to clean a smokebox so larger air pumps could be placed on their front. Like this Blue Ridge https://i.pinimg.com/474x/06/07/29/060729ceec05ad04d4f22f6dc2fd4855--steam-locomotive-national-railways.jpg 

Since they often ran in pairs on the Condor...

 

BoCoBo.jpg

 

Cheers

David

My my that is a very neat Metrovick you have there.

At first glance, Westinghouse pump.

 

Zoom in, and the middle "cylinder" has what appear to be cooling fins, which a Westinghouse pump doesn't need. This suggests it's electrical, perhaps a turbo generator, but it doesn't have electric lighting, so why would it need a generator? There could be other things, like pumps, which run hot, and need cooling, hence the fins, or are high pressure and need stiffening ribs, but I'm struggling to think of why they'd be necessary on a steam loco.

 

And there is a further, lower, smaller cylinder, they all appear to be coaxial, suggesting a common shaft rotates or reciprocates within them.

 

So no, I'm guessing.

 

Simon

Yeah that was my thinking too. I've never seen a Westinghouse quite like this and my first guess was a generator as well. Hmm for the tank engine I mentioned it would make sense for a generator to be installed though incase the work place needed a emergency power supply but here it would be kind of superfluous since A. it has no high power head lamps, B. Would most likely use oil lamps, C. I for mainline use and D. you can plainly see it has air brakes from the brake pipe not being ribbed like a Vacuum pump system would need.

I think I'll just go with the Generator for my interpretation of Waverley but yeah it is most likely a Westinghouse pump.  

I am pretty certain it is a westinghouse pump.  Some came with fins, some without, some single barrel some double.

 

http://www.mecanictrains.fr/140C.htm

 

The pump for the 140C is the first item listed and is clearly finned.

 

Since I am no engineer I cannot explain the benefits or otherwise of fins, but I would guess that temperature (and therefore the degree of superheat) would be an important factor.

I have no explanation for the fins either since like you say I'm not a engineer but based off all my father has taught me on electronics and heat sinks that is most definitely what they are for on this pump. I do find it funny how far forward this pump is placed yet it is also out of the way of the Smokebox door something so many large American designs failed to do with they giant sets at the front essentially blocking the face of the engine. I suppose with oil firing you don't need to clean as much in there but still covering the face of a locomotive is down right barbaric.

Hey all,

I've been visiting the Imaginary Locomotives thread and I happened upon a photo of a engine thanks to the discussion being on freelance locos with Gooch Valve Gears and it being used as a example.

A lovely engine and no mistake but that device on the side of her smokebox has me intrigued due to it's close resemblance of a Industrial tank built by Henry Henry Hughes. The tank engine is Waverley from the Alderney Breakwater for reference and I've been trying to figure out what the device on the tank is and then I saw this loco. I have a sneaking suspicion I know what 030.C.815's is and if so I'm back at square one on figuring out what it is on Waverley but I st am not 100% sure here so does anyone know what it is on 030.C.815 here?  

A small point but these locos were built for the C.F.de l'Ouest not by it. The example in the Mulhouse museum was built by Fives-Lille but no fewer than ten manufacturers built batches of the 339 locos that formed this class between 1867 and 1885. 

Unlike in Britain where the larger railways built most of their own, it was more common elsewhere for railway operating companies to order their locos from specialist companies. I don't know how unusual the practice of French railways of ordering locos to the same design in batches from different manufacturers often over an extended timescale was but I suspect government industrial policy may have played a part in this.

Another factor that works is to cross reference her running number. Never understood the numbering scheme that France, Japan and a few Belgian railways use with the whole "Number.Letter.Number" thing. Keep it simple like 1001 or one of my personal favorites 4014. Just not sure why they made it complex is all I mean.

Nope. Post was racist. Offence was given. And please don’t lecture me on the French Language.

How is it racist? I see no mention of Race in the aforementioned post only country. Unless your saying that a Latin based language speaking culture is endemic of their race and not merely a point of where they were born and raised which in of itself is borderline racist too.

Seriously? What other form of culinary humour is there? Anyway, what is the bread box thing for, if not bread? Next back is sand and the one nearest the cab is the safety valves; the one right at the front of the boiler looks to do with steam to the cylinders.

Coffee pot maybe? Java is the thing to wake up to and keep you going and let's face it that size of a pot could keep a whole yard awake. But I'm not interested in domes I just want to know what the blazes that mechanical thing is next to the smokebox!

Hmm do you guys mind if I use that photo over in the Prototype section? Better place to ask there since this is for Imaginary/freelance designs.

Speaking of I do have a plan for a modified Paget 2-6-2 loco. Quite simply that engines outside looks with a normal (if large) Firebox and normal inside motions and not the experimental Steam Motor and Jack Shaft rig. I'll be making a line drawing soon.

Don't know about that but the big dustbin-like thing on the front ring of the boiler is to hold the crew's supply of baguette. The lid lifts off.

Well to cook it properly you would need a steam injected oven, but I'm not certain I'm with you on this one. I note no provision on the loco for storage of frog parts, snails, mouldy cheeses, strings of onions or other alliums, gitanes, white flags or mistresses, so I'm not convinced that a french loco needs to have facilities for stereotypical gallic accessories.

Are we seriously stooping to culinary humor?

Does look wonderfully Gallic though, doesn't it?

It does look interesting but is it a vac pump or what? That is the big question here.

It does look rather wonderful though I'm reliably informed that many of the French locos  actually had Gooch valve gear like this ex CF de l'Ouest 0-6-0 (SNCF class 3-030C)

3_-_SNCF_030_C_815 cc Alf van Beem.JPG

For some reason the Gooch development of Stephenson was far more popular with French railways than with ours.

 

If you saw the Burt Lancaster movie "The Train" it was one of these that was deliberately derailed to start the crash sequence at "Rive-Reine" (really Acquigny) This class of originally over 300 locos  had a remarkably long life with the first batch built in 1867 and the last of them still in service in the mid 1960s.

Whoa whoa whoa! That apparatus on that loco's Smokebox what is it?! I have seen something very similar on a Henry Huges Industrial and by the looks of this it could be the same kind of machine. Unless and I'm betting my assumption is right that it is a brake pump then it can't be the same as the engine I mentioned had nor fitted Brakes only it's hand brake and a van for it's trains.

Hey all this is a bit of a follow up to my Industrial Tank topic in a way since it deals with a Industrial company built loco.

 

Anyway I was looking over the Industrial Railway Society's back issues and found this little locomotive in this article on the IRS site.

 

http://www.irsociety.co.uk/Archives/52/Alderney.htm#Camel she is in the last photo at the bottom.

 

Ok I know this topic is old and I do hope you'll pardon me for bumping it like a shunted truck but I had a thought about the photo of Waverley from the link in my OP. First off as sad as I am to admit it I have decided to try my best at designing a reasonable look alike of the tank engine given that I have only that photo to go off of and not a measurement to find. So while I'm going to do it as close as I can it technically will be a freelanced design.

I've already decided to find a fellow Hughes 0-4-0 from my recent purchase of "Chronicles of Bolton Sidings" which has so many great diagrams. But there is one thing about Waverley that is the proverbial elephant in the room and that is the small motor/pump/feed/flywheel thing on her smokebox. I have never seen anything like it and I'm just wondering what kind of device it could be and what I could use as a reasonable replacement as far as looks.

If my eye serves me well from what I see the device is fully enclosed like it was a envelope or a Dome cover like case. 

this one?

http://modelengineeringwebsite.com/LBSCR_B4_loco_files/RIMG0393.jpg

 

 

the wheels are now painted and left to dry. I couldnt take off the rods because the crank pin nuts wouldnt come off, when i assembled them a small drop of super glue was put onto the thread to stop them coming off on their own but now when trying to take them off the crankpin bolt just spins in its hole and i cant get a screwdriver to the head behind, so it was quicker and easier to take the wheels off instead

Rebecca (140) by Sam, on Flickr

Quite a lovely livery for your little Kitson. For my Kitson I'm going for a blue with white and teal stripes and lining much like how the photo you showed (I think it was you so pardon me if I am wrong) on the Kitson topic. I think it'll look quite smart and while the blue will be a differnt shade I got the idea from Bluebell the P class who is the namesake of her railway. Bluebells forever!

i recently came into possession of 7mm drawings of the GER and an industrial Nielson in a 1972 Model Railway News

Oh nice Sam. Maybe a future project for modeling be quite interesting to see a Neilson with your Kitson tank. Boy would I love to see those drawings.

Hey all,

I'm working on something for a friend and I need some details to help me make accurate representations. Now given the subject I'm not 100% sure this belongs in the UK Prototypes section since I'm not sure what the proper stance on The Isle of Man on whether or not it falls under UK Prototype so if I've posted this in the wrong section please forgive my mistake and have it moved to the proper place please.

Anyway I'm working on some scale drawings for a friend. Now with me the drawings are done in Pixel art and colored up but they are in scale. My friend is quite interested in the Beyer, Peacock and Company 2-4-0 Tank engines of the Isle of Man in particular Loch and Sutherland. 

Now I know what their wheel size is well the drivers anyway but I need a better reference point like how long they are from headstock to headstock, How tall are their funnels and what ever else I can get my hands on to make them as accurate as possible. Does anyone perhaps know of a set of drawings of this loco class? I just want to get this done right as it is a gift and I don't want to make something subpar.

Any help would be much appreciated and again I do hope I posted this in the correct place since again the Isle of Man is in a kind of grey area that I'm not sure of the only parts of the UK I know beyond a shadow of a doubt is Scotland, England and Wales. Not for a lack of research mind I just couldn't find a straight answer. I mean no offense I promise I just am absolutely unsure.

Thank you,

844fan

I've just managed to really confuse myself by finding an error or two in my favorite book after reading this post.

 

I have a copy of John Scott-Morgan's The Colonel Stephens Railways A Pictoral Survey that I have read many times.

 

The engine in Sir Douglas' post at the bottom of the first page is the first loco named Chichester which was apparently built as a standard gauge 0-6-0st in 1847 for the GWR by the Longbottom Railway Foundry.  After being sold out of service it found itself as the contractors loco during the building of the HM&ST and was taken into service.  It is shown during construction running as an 0-4-2st still with 6 driving wheels but with rear rods removed,  it was rebuilt with small trailing wheels soon after the line opened in 1897.

 

My knowledge of the GWR is somewhat lacking but would they have owned standard gauge loco's in 1847?

 

The book incorrectly captions a photo of the ex PDSWJR 0-4-2st as being the second Chichester when it in in fact Hesperus (you would think I would have spotted that before).

 

The real second Chichester was a Hudswell Clark 0-6-0st of 1903

 

 

The other loco's named Hesperus were an ex LSWR Ilfracombe goods 0-6-0 on the S&MR and a Sharp Stewart 2-4-0t on the WC&PR that started life on The Princes Risborough and Watlington Railway before being absorbed by the GWR.

Well now this is quite interesting to hear. This actually give some credence to a concept I have had some debates about. The fact that the loco was modified to a 0-4-2 just by removing it's rear coupling rods and not automatically having them replaced reminds me of the liberties that were taken in a film recently and yet again I find myself dragging fiction into my topics. 

What I mean is the recent Thomas special has caused quite a stir in the fan community (Proud to be part of it too) but I'm not talking about the issue everyone else has as I'm perfectly fine with the whole controlling their springs and bouncing (It was in the Railway series with Duncan after all) but that is not my point to being made in this reply here. No my point regarding the new film involves the Decapod character introduced in it The character Hurrican. This loco was chosen for work in a steelworks due to how powerful a Decapod really would of been especially if it still had all it's cylinders and they remained in perfect sync but the writers who try to keep the series grounded in realism while still appealing to young fans notice something about this namely that a Decapod could never take the kind of curves that a steelworks would need.

Their solution they made it a 0-6-4 by removing part of the coupling rods between the third set and the fourth set. Due to the rigging they use though they left the rear wheels with coupling rods so they weren't connected to the drive rod but at the same time they followed the motions this is just a quirk of the CG but it makes sense in a way by making the engine a 0-6-4 and the way it worked was much like a radial axel for the rear wheels which would allow quite a bit of leeway for taking sharp bends.

Again I really am sorry to bring Thomas up in a serious discussion but that just reminded me of the way it was handled there. Though I'd have to say realisticly the rods remaing on the rear set in this instance makes sense too even if it's not a animation error or shortcut as if you were to turn the Decapod into a 0-6-4 without having new wheels made and onlt had the original drivers you would need to keep the wheels balanced and since it had wheel weights would be unbalanced otherwise.

Ok now let's get back on topic.  Hmm I think they may have had a few lines that were dual gauge by then as that was the plan for the bridge at... d'oh I think it was the saltash Richard Ince built a lovely replica of the one I'm thinking of and it's been a bit of a bottle neck due to it not being funded for dual gauge as the Mad Bridgeman himself said in Mark Found's Garden Railway. I'm no expert on the GWR either beyond knowing they were the most maverick in terms of design norms they always had to try to stand out and I'm not saying that is wrong quite the opposite otherwise we would never have had Hymaks or Westerns.

It's worth tracking down a copy of D Bradford-Barton's 'Redruth and Chasewater railway' for details of these locos (and masses of general information about mining in Cornwall in the 19th century). 

Why is it I can find these books all over Abebooks but not one of the Railway series collections for under a hundred? Joking aside looks like I have another book to look into Thanks very much.

the third engine of the redruth & chasewater "Spitfire"

Neilson 540 - redruth & chasewater spitfire.jpg

Quite a large box tank too compared to the old 0-4-2 "Neil" designs. (I hope you don't mind me nicknameing the old Box Tanks after the one the Rev. Awdry created.)

The answer is very simple - there is no pump to model.

 

In the UK (and I imagine elsewhere) the vacuum was normally generated by an ejector - a device with no moving parts similar to the injectors used to get water into the boiler without needing a pump. This makes providing vacuum brakes on a steam engine much easier than air brakes.

 

Even now, steam excursions run on the main line in the UK with vacuum braked stock.

 

Now I have no idea where the ejectors (usually more than one I think) went but they weren't a large object mounted externally like an air pump and I suspect there would be nothing to see on a model any more than the injectors would be modelled.

 

I am a little surprised by the question though, in the sense that if you're building something from scratch presumably you are working from drawings or photographs which would show brake pumps if present?

I still have trouble wraping my head around water injectors and how they work with no moving parts. Is it a syphon effect or some other means of pushing the water through. But if that really is the case then all I need is the brake pipe to be added. 

As for the surprise thing this loco is American stock converted to work for on a UK railway setup. Therefore while the prototype (Which is small enough for the loading gauge. Don't look at me like I'm hit entertainment.) is real I need to draw new plans for it. It's a mix of fantasy and real world practices you see. 

There were vacuum pumps, both the GWR and LNWR used them. They were driven off the (usually driver's side) crosshead, so with inside cylinders would not be visible. They were a long, thin cylinder into which a piston rod was driven by the crosshead. On GWR outside cylinder locos, probably from a later period, they were just below the running plate behind the cylinder. With LMS locos, they were hung from the left hand outer slidebar. The LMS abolished them about 1838.

 

The ejectors were often external and mounted on the boiler or firebox sides. They are prominent on GWR locos in front of the driver's side of the cab, likewise with Stanier locos. Midland and early LMS locos had them, again on the drivers side near the boiler / smokebox postiton. They are very easily seen in photos.

 

Pump fitted engines generally had only a single cone ejector to release the brakes when standing or running slowly; those without had two cones within a single housing. There was a large set of cones to get a quick release, and a smaller set to maintain the vacuum when running.

 

Generally, photos will be your friend here.

So some had dedicated pumps while others did not? Like I said above I have no idea how these no moving part setups work a diagram of it in action would help me understand I'm sure but I don't need to know the full engineering on it unless I intend to build a steam engine and that I will do before I leave this world but not just yet.

Though if you have any references on the matter I'd be happy to see them.

Worth noting that British freight wagons traditionally were not fitted with any automatic brakes even into the 1960s & 70s.

 

Some key long distance or higher speed freight services had vacuum brakes portions or throughout but many local or slow workings had none and relied on loco brakes and the guards van. Descending gradients required individual wagons to have their brakes pinned on to help control speed.

Most railway enthusiasts should know this already. Early US goods/freight cars also were done this way hence why you will often see that hand crank wheel on boxcars and our Brakevan equivalent the Caboose. Sad to say even with all these rules for keeping a train going and slowing down at the right time we still can't fix the bigest problem that causes accidents and destruction. We just can't fix stupid.

What time period are you modelling?

Starting in 1900 on up. 

Ok I finally figured out that my railway I'm designing for both modeling and for written media would use Vacuum Braking as typical of it's era and on in a British local. Now all I need is to understand where the brake pumps are usually mounted and what exactly they look like as I may have said before I know what Westinghouse Air Pumps look like and you'll have to forgive me for that seeing as I'm in the US and Air Brakes were the norm here.

I do know how the Brake Pipe should look for this at the very least. But I just have no clue on Vacuum Pumps. So if anyone knows good images of both the pump and their typical mounting points on your bog standard loco they would be very much welcome.

I have considerable experience of splicing and chopping sound files. First is to obtain an adequately long whistle play with no wavering in the middle. This can frequently preclude recording in a station as doppler effect will ruin your chances. Asking the train crew on a preserved line to give a three second whistle blow at full strength is the best option.

 

Audacity then receives the WAV files created and it pays for those to be to CD standard. The whistle file seen on screen will have a lead in and you then need to zoom in and find a cut point where the 'waves' cross the median line. Then you go and repeat the exercise at the tail end. Save both files to the parameters specified in the decoder manual. You are left with a 2 second blast. Play that in Audacity on aloop setting. Any hiccups will be apparent. Start chopping the file in zoom mode until you have one that doesn't hiccup. Save that in WAV. Any saves in Audacity will be done by 'export' rather than 'save'. Keep the original file intact by saving. An Audacity project file is juts as good.

 

Now load the three files into your decoder and use F2 as the recipient. Go into the file and make the centre file on 'loop'. Done well you now have a whistle file that will play all the time you have F2 depressed. I use F2 as that is the one used on Digitrax which I have.

 

It is a lot of work and can be fraught in the extreme but get it right and get up to speed on the layout and give along blast as you pass a whistle sign. Magic!

Well I'm not sure if this can help me as for the moment I'm not encoding DCC sound. Though the editing of sound clips and methodology are on the same level. Seein as I'm hoping to use these for video productions till I do get to DCC encoding (Long story short I have no room in my house for a layout at this time) would you be willing to coach me in editing these? I recorded the current one myself as a MP3 but it can be reformated to Wav when the time comes.

Also before any arguments start on why I posted here when I'm not encoding for DCC is as my friend Olddudders said those with the skill and knowledge I needed would more likely be here and it's technically not false I do plan to encode them onto a chip one day but for now I want to learn how to make the whistles I need for any occasion.

Its in chronicles of boultons siding which had three chapters on strange geared engines, this book has all the same drawings and is easier to source at a better price except you don't get as much of the back story of the locos https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0853613974?tag=vig-21

I bit the bullet and purchased the book. The seller has good feedback and they ship internationally so I thought why not. Thanks very much.

These locos were rarely seen outside the Melting Shop, where they moved loads of scrap and pig iron to charge the furnaces. Unless something untoward happened, the only time they'd be seen elsewhere would be during 'Stop Fortnight', when they'd be found in the former 'Llanelly Foundry' building, undergoing overhaul.

Hidden gems indeed. Hot tiresome work but built to deliver it really must be said that most industrial designs were much much tougher than many mass produced locos. I can't imagine a Jinty lasting nearly as long in those conditions and we all know Jintys are tough little tank engines.

501 was the last of the class in service and was being kept for the National Collection. Sadly it was involved in a fatal collision in 1971 by Contumil depot and written off. 

 

The day before we had a run down the Douro Valley from Regua to Porto behind 501 possibly its last working.. 

 

I did not know CP had joined the 1930s streamlining craze. Thanks for the photo.

Ah pitty another engine that fell victim to someone's carelessness not to mention the lives of her crew and anyone who were on either train. Unless they had been using more modern signaling setups and not the old signalbox system if that's the case darn malfunctions. 

Well that must of been a thrilling ride I must say she looks like she could of given a A3 a decent race. Ah I was born far too late to have had such wonderful opportunity but I hold hope to ride behind all three UP steamers one day and if I'm truly lucky have a view of 844's cab. That lady and me we go back to the very beginning of my love of steam along with a certain blue tank engine who she served to help into my side of the pond. "Reach for the wind, Reach for the whistle go where the railway runs. Reach for the words, Reach for the story follow the Rainbow Sun! To a Shining Time Station, where dreams can come true, your own imagination waiting there for you."

Pardon my reminisceing just rembering happier times with my mother.

I can't take credit for the photo alone Fenway my friend Walt and his Railway club are the ones who posted it on Deviant Art as it is club property and Walt was the one they gave permission to post it. But I will say your welcome from both of us glad to have given you a look at this beauty.

The apparently small cylinder size is due to the compound arrangement - smaller diameter high pressure outside cylinders on the outside (though the photos and drawings I've seen so far only show the same side), larger diameter low pressure cylinders on the inside.

Ah so kind of like the LNWR Teutonic class in the fact that they had smaller outside cylinders and larger inside ones. Though I have no doubt that these engine worked a lot better than the old LNWR design which is a shame since the Teutonics were a hansome bunch but poorly designed in valve gear setup. Seriously having a set of wheels that only went in the direction they last turned with a pair controlled by the drive was asking for trouble.

To keep the thread ticking over in the meantime, here's a photo of 503 - after de-streamlining - in a scrapline at an unknown location and date.

 

https://trains.smugmug.com/Photos-of-70s-trains/Locomotiva-via-larga/i-wPvrth6/A

A shame to see such a splendid engine at the worst point in her life. Really though the cylinder block looks quite small for a engine this size especially since her shrouding make it look much bigger. Ah but that is why shrouds are put on in the first place to hide the less savory parts.

All in all I can see basically where all the Streamlined Shroud went already. Should be easy enough to make a reasonable look alike once I have that side view. Eddie my friend you never cease to amaze my friend. Thanks again.