Thread: Steam Locomotive Restoration Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=029402
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
This thread is probably doomed, but I'll give it a kick anyway.
There has been enormous news on the steam preservation front in North America. Two Class I (mainline) railroads decided to return the two finest examples of North American steam locomotives to operating condition.
First, the Union Pacific repurchased 4-8-8-4 Big Boy #4014 with the intention running her. While of course debateable (see Chesapeake & Ohio's 2-6-6-6 Alleghanys or the Northern Pacific 2-8-8-4 Yellowstones), the Big Boys are considered the ultimate development of articulated design for freight service.
On the other side the Mississippi, Norfolk Southern is funding the return to steam of J-class 4-8-4 #611, which may be considered the ultimate steam passenger locomotive design in North America. 611 is recorded as running perfectly at 80 mph after her 1956 wreck on one cylinder, with the other driver and rod disabled. She is that well-balanced.
Those from across the pond will of course swamp this thread, but the restoration to main-line operation of two of the best designs ever built, and but their respective original owners to boot, is nothing short of miraculous.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
Sorry, meant to put this in Heaven. Could a friendly host please move it?
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
The J-Class were amazing. Pity none of the NYC Niagaras survived.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
The 611 is now in the Museum of Transportation in Roanoke, Virginia. It will be used for passenger excursions.
ETA: It not only ran out of Roanoke. It was built in Roanoke.
Moo
[ 13. December 2015, 22:24: Message edited by: Moo ]
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
Earlier this year I went to Frederick, MD and rode the coal-fired steam train. It runs on a short course, perhaps 6 miles and back again.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
The Big Boys and J class were both outstanding designs, miles ahead of what others in other countries were offering at the time.
Restoration news in NSW has been good, with the Lachlan Valley Railway being able to maintain a decent programme - despite the closure of most lines in that valley. Their stock is well maintained and permission to run on public lines throughout the State has not been a problem. The really good news is that the restoration of 6029 - a 4-8-4 + 4-8-4 Garratt - has been completed and it also runs regular services.
Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on
:
Gee D, my brother may have passed on the links. I can't find my link but if you search on youtube garratt 6029, you will find a series of very well filmed videos of the Restored 6029 and runs from Canberra toGoulbutn and similar. There are quite a few in the links down the righthand side of page, all with that engine.
Mum grew up opposite the yards in Lithgow and all her life could identify the engine class by sound alone as it steamed past at Lawson. Sometimes the actual specific engine in the class, not just 3801.
[ 14. December 2015, 01:51: Message edited by: Lothlorien ]
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Sorry, meant to put this in Heaven. Could a friendly host please move it?
Anyone following the story of the the preservation and restoration of Sir Nigel Gresley's Flying Scotsman would probably think that Purgatory was not a bad call, however heavenly the outcome may soon be. But it was always a lovely locomotive and will be again quite soon. I hope I'll still be around and on this side of the ocean when UPRR's Big Boy is back in steam - I'd love to see it. But really, I like them a bit smaller. The Duke of Sutherland's Dunrobin will soon be running again at Beamish and will be at the very top of my list of engines to see, closely followed by the NGG16 Garratts in Wales, now I've seen some of them in Africa.
At some point we might have a profound and scholarly discussion on the evident connection between steam locomotives and hymns. Whenever I sing, "This is the day that the Lord has made" the strong rhythm and the restrained melody bring me a vision of a railway scene in the highlands, perhaps the Pass of Druimuachdar on a summer day...
Posted by Barnabas Aus (# 15869) on
:
Stercus, Cecil J. Allen commented many years ago on the link between church music, church musicians and railway enthusiasm.
To GeeD and Lothlorien, news out this last weekend that 6029 has finally been granted permission to run within Sydney Trains territory and will be based out of Sydney on May and June next, with suburban runs and excursions to Gosford and Lithgow planned.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
Thanks Barnabas - we shall probably hear it going up the grade from Epping through Pennant Hills to Hornsby. The restoration has been a labour of love for a group of dedicated volunteers for many years.
It would make a great trip to Virginia to see the J class in action, perhaps pulling a train of streamilned coaches again, rather than a standing exhibit. It was a very advanced loco indeed, and the BR standard class locos were just no match for it in either performance or ease of maintenance. The same for the restored Big Boy climbing Sherman Hill with a full load of freight behind it.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
It was a very advanced loco indeed, and the BR standard class locos were just no match for it in either performance or ease of maintenance.
Over on another forum I'm a member of there is a periodic debate about whether there was any point to the BR standards, or should BR just have built more of the designs it already had and thought worked? I know they did this as well, but should it have been instead?
Given the strictures though of the post-war economy, I think the standards were remarkably good. The only one that people really thought didn't hit the mark was the Standard Class 6, but arguably if they'd built more than 10 of them they'd have had critical mass to iron out the problems. I hope the Hengist group eventually finish building their new one so we can see what they were really capable of.
I'm a member of the group building the new Standard Class 3 tank, which is essentially the mongrel offspring of an LMS tank and a Large Prairie. It will be good to see that finished.
But really you can't beat the Talyllyn.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
But really you can't beat the Talyllyn.
The folk at Boston Lodge might have something to say about that ...
Of course, one of the reasons that the late-model N&W steam locos were so successful was their advanced maintenance regime with "lubritoriums". I don't think any other railway/road ever did anything similar.
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on
:
Stercus Tauri: quote:
At some point we might have a profound and scholarly discussion on the evident connection between steam locomotives and hymns. Whenever I sing, "This is the day that the Lord has made" the strong rhythm and the restrained melody bring me a vision of a railway scene in the highlands, perhaps the Pass of Druimuachdar on a summer day...
Oh, we can find more direct connections than that.
To take one example: my Other Half (whose train set is currently all over the living room floor as part of the Christmas decorations) sang one of his favourite hymns a couple of weeks ago: "Lo, he comes with clouds descending."
Nobody else in the choir could understand why we were singing "Thousand thousand saints attending, swell the triumph of his train " with big grins on our faces.
Then there's the line in "All things bright and beautiful": "He lights the Evening Star."
Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gee D:
Thanks Barnabas - we shall probably hear it going up the grade from Epping through Pennant Hills to Hornsby. The restoration has been a labour of love...
I did not realise you could have heard it there. We used to hear the big goods trains at night coming down the hill from Eastwood to West Ryde on their way to the city.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Re. Hymns: there is the line "Jesus takes the highest station ..." - clearly Snowdon Summit.
The Americans might differ ...
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on
:
I've heard that there is a problem for heritage lines in the UK getting hold of the "right kind" of coal. Is that an issue elsewhere?
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
In addition to the J class locomotives for passenger service, Roanoke also built the A class locomotives for freight. Here is a description of the A class from this site quote:
The Class A locomotive was known for its durability and power. It routinely pulled 150 cars loaded with coal at an average speed of 70 miles per hour. The N&W shops built 43 Class A engines in the 1940s. The 1218 on display is the only one that escaped the scrap yard.
Moo
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Re. Hymns: there is the line "Jesus takes the highest station ..." - clearly Snowdon Summit.
The Americans might differ ...
I'm surprised nobody's quoted "When through the whirls of wheels and of engines humming..."
Incidentally, any views on the new GWR livery? I would have thought if you're going to spend thousands on a new paint job, something a bit less disappointing might be good. I know it's supposed to be harking back to the glorious age of steam (and I still have vivid memories of sticking my head out of the window to enjoy the summer scenery and getting an eyewatering blast of smuts) but it doesn't really work for me and the trains don't seem to be going any faster.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Stercus Tauri: quote:
At some point we might have a profound and scholarly discussion on the evident connection between steam locomotives and hymns. Whenever I sing, "This is the day that the Lord has made" the strong rhythm and the restrained melody bring me a vision of a railway scene in the highlands, perhaps the Pass of Druimuachdar on a summer day...
Oh, we can find more direct connections than that.
To take one example: my Other Half (whose train set is currently all over the living room floor as part of the Christmas decorations) sang one of his favourite hymns a couple of weeks ago: "Lo, he comes with clouds descending."
Nobody else in the choir could understand why we were singing "Thousand thousand saints attending, swell the triumph of his train " with big grins on our faces.
I am not a devotee of the GWR, but have always admired the simplicity of the visual lines, and the elegance (to my eye) of the early Saints, and was very happy to learn that one would be reincarnated. "Reincarnation" means restored to flesh and blood, more or less, doesn't it? It really is the right word.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
I don't know - saints are Christian, reincarnation is Buddhist. Sounds dangerously syncretistic to me.
Anyway, I don't like the early Saints with the straight framing at the back, I prefer the sort with the dropped frames under the cab.
In any case, I prefer the "Star" class - one of which happily survives.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I don't know - saints are Christian, reincarnation is Buddhist. Sounds dangerously syncretistic to me.
Anyway, I don't like the early Saints with the straight framing at the back, I prefer the sort with the dropped frames under the cab.
In any case, I prefer the "Star" class - one of which happily survives.
I wish a Bulldog had survived into preservation (I know there's a Dukedog, but that's not quite the same). As a devotee of all things Great and Western I'm quite excited about the new Night Owl. Periodically I think about volunteering on my local line (getting on for the quintessential GWR branch line), but never quite get around to it. They only have one steam engine, and that they hire in every year.
In my wild and mis-spent youth (ie when I was 14-15), I was an engine cleaner on one of the premier preserved lines. Then exams, university and life got in the way before I could pass as a fireman. I'll get back to it eventually.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Betjemaniac, picking up on your remarks about the BR Standards, my guess would be that they were overtaken by the Modernisation Plan in 1955. Given that the first Standards appeared in 1951, I would say that there simply wasn't the will to do the necessary development work on the engines that were built, given that they were effectively obsolete as soon as they left the builders, hence the generally lacklustre performance of the Clans (Class 6). You would note that 71000 has done its best work in preservation, now that the draughting issues have been sorted out.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I don't know - saints are Christian, reincarnation is Buddhist. Sounds dangerously syncretistic to me.
Anyway, I don't like the early Saints with the straight framing at the back, I prefer the sort with the dropped frames under the cab.
In any case, I prefer the "Star" class - one of which happily survives.
Dear BT, I must disagree with you most profoundly on this important matter. The straight line of the footplate under the cab of the early Saints gives an impression of lightness and speed, of god-like swiftness, whereas the dropped framing of the later engines suggests that it is sitting back in an armchair, waiting to be served a cup of tea. I know - this is the kind of thing that can make a theological dispute look quite tame if it gets out of control. But I can handle it.
As to reincarnation, I thought it was a safer word than resurrection, which might have had a few people working on a blasphemy charge.
Posted by Lothlorien (# 4927) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas Aus:
Stercus, Cecil J. Allen commented many years ago on the link between church music, church musicians and railway enthusiasm.
To GeeD and Lothlorien, news out this last weekend that 6029 has finally been granted permission to run within Sydney Trains territory and will be based out of Sydney on May and June next, with suburban runs and excursions to Gosford and Lithgow planned.
I mentioned this to my brother, Barnabas. He knew of it already, straight from the horse's mouth so to speak. An assistant at a well known thriving hardware chain at Belrose worked on the restoration. Brother is planning on booking seat to Gosford. Lithow trip sounds inviting to me.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Nerd alert
I would like to have seen a Clan but never did. There weren't very many and they had a very limited distribution. It's a bit of a puzzle why they were built. One would have thought a bigger 4-6-0 than the 73000 series, which was basically a Black 5 with Standard fittings, would have had better adhesion. If it had not been for Riddle's insistence on two cylinders, I'd have thought this could have been done starting from either the Rebuilt Scot or a Castle with different clearances and a firebox designed to burn northern as well as South Wales coal.
I've heard that when Scots began to run through from Leeds to Edinburgh via Carlisle, some drivers on the Waverley line preferred them to A3s because they were not as given to slipping.
I did see Duke of Gloucester in steam days.
If I were starting afresh with the BR Standard fleet, I think I'd have left out the Clans, the 75000 series, the 77000 series and possibly the 82000 series. It is a bit difficult to see what they were for.
I would also probably have carried on producing LMS Black 5s, Doodlebugs, Mickey Mice, the last series of LMS 2-6-4s and the small 2-6-2s, possibly with redesigned cabs, and not bothered designing the 73000, 76000, 78000, 80000 and 84000 series at all. They were almost identical to the LMS designs on which they were based.
Saints and Bulldogs had all gone before my time, and my earliest memories are mainly on ex-LMS territory. I did see quite a few Compounds and Garrets. People always say 'the Midland never built anything bigger than a 4-4-0 but Compounds were larger than some 4-6-0s on other lines. I also twice saw a Fowler Austin 7, which were rare unless you lived in the right place. I'd like to have seen a parallel boilered Scot, but didn't.
On holiday in 1956, I saw a Brighton Atlantic. One of those is being recreated. I also saw some SECR Ds.
If that leaves you envious rather than bored, you too are a nerd
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
The J-Class were amazing. Pity none of the NYC Niagaras survived.
Many lines, like the Union Pacific, the Santa Fe and Chesapeake & Ohio had excellent locomotive fleets, though they were all standard designs based on standard practices. The N&W was in a class by itself.
The New York Central had a terrible record of preservation, which is all the worse because they initiated the "Superpower" era in the 1920's. The largest steam locomotive preserved from that line is a 2-8-0 Consolidation. This from the road that gave us 2-8-4 Berkshires, 4-6-4 Hudsons and of course the famous Niagaras.
I put it down to the NYC's straightened financial circumstances starting in the 1940's; it was the start of the long-slow descent into the abyss that became Penn Central.
The Pennsy was only marginally better at preserving its locomotives. That road was terribly managed starting in the 1940's (the NYC's management was better) and it showed.
There only two surviving Decapods, no J-1 Texas examples, no Santa Fe's and two K-4 Pacifics, neither of which run.
It's a big of irony that for most of its history the Norfolk & Western was controlled by the PRR.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid
The N&W was in a class by itself.
The N&W's main business was hauling large quantities of coal over the mountains. They built excellent locomotives because they needed them.
Moo
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
SPK, at least there is preserved at least one Pennsy Mountain and Atlantic. The Santa Fe Texans (which ran on PRR rails in Ohio in the 1950s under lease) were actually larger and several survive. There is a Nickel Plate Hudson which appears to be almost a duplicate of a NYC Hudson but, alas, no Niagara.
There is a movement to build a new PRR T-1, along the lines of our British cousins and the Tornado.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
While I am not a huge fan of the J class locomotives of the N&W, they were impressive. Always preferred the GS-2/GS-4/GS-6 locos of the Southern Pacific, either in the great Daylight orange/red/black color scheme or in black.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
SPK, at least there is preserved at least one Pennsy Mountain and Atlantic. The Santa Fe Texans (which ran on PRR rails in Ohio in the 1950s under lease) were actually larger and several survive. There is a Nickel Plate Hudson which appears to be almost a duplicate of a NYC Hudson but, alas, no Niagara.
There is a movement to build a new PRR T-1, along the lines of our British cousins and the Tornado.
The Pennsy built 125 J1 Texas 2-10-4 types in WWII based on a C&O design, that's what I referred to. They were unusual (for the PRR) in many respects, including their valve gear, radial-stay fireboxes. I wasn't referring to the ATSF leases, though I did refer to the Santa Fe (2-10-2) type.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
While I am not a huge fan of the J class locomotives of the N&W, they were impressive. Always preferred the GS-2/GS-4/GS-6 locos of the Southern Pacific, either in the great Daylight orange/red/black color scheme or in black.
I like them both - not that I've ever seen them or, indeed, been to the US.
I didn't know that there was a scheme to reincarnate a Pennsy T-1. I wish them luck - they'll certainly need it. And they won't be able to use it to trundle up and down a preserved branch line, it will have to be main line Class 1 use or nothing!
PS Am I alone (says he, venturing into dangerous territory) the only one who'd like to see a GG-1 electric hauled out of a museum and used again? Mind you, there might be technological problems in doing that (interference with modern signalling or traction current systems, for example).
[ 15. December 2015, 07:05: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
[QB]
On holiday in 1956, I saw a Brighton Atlantic. One of those is being recreated.
Even speaking as a GWR partisan, those are the most beautiful steam locomotives ever built (especially in fully lined BR black with the bicycling lion). I've been waiting for the Bachmann model to come out for 18 months now, and I haven't even got a 00 layout to run it on.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
[QB]
On holiday in 1956, I saw a Brighton Atlantic. One of those is being recreated.
Even speaking as a GWR partisan, those are the most beautiful steam locomotives ever built (especially in fully lined BR black with the bicycling lion). I've been waiting for the Bachmann model to come out for 18 months now, and I haven't even got a 00 layout to run it on.
I have to agree that the Brighton Atlantics were beautiful but the 4-4-2 arrangement, big or small, tender or tank, is naturally well-proportioned. The Adams 0415 4-4-2 tanks are beautiful too (even if they couldn't pull the skin off a rice pudding) and if anyone can think of an ugly or even plain 4-4-2 let me know.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
if anyone can think of an ugly or even plain 4-4-2 let me know.
The 2 GWR French ones? La France and President.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
if anyone can think of an ugly or even plain 4-4-2 let me know.
The 2 GWR French ones? La France and President.
I think you have me there!
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
if anyone can think of an ugly or even plain 4-4-2 let me know.
The 2 GWR French ones? La France and President.
I think you have me there!
it was the best of lines, it was the worst of lines...
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
The Great Central "Jersey Lilies" were particularly well-proportioned.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
PS I don't know if you'd call them beautiful ... but the Milwaukee Road Class A and the Belgian Class 12 Atlantics were pretty special.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Enoch, I believe that the logic for building the Clans was the desire to have a class 6 locomotive with a wide firebox - something not easily accommodated over a coupled axle. As you may be aware, Riddles' original thinking on what was to become the 9F's was a 2-8-2, again for the wide firebox. Riddles was concerned that having a coupled axle under the firebox would constrain the ashpan too much and inhibit air flow. I cannot remember which of his designers it was schemed out the ashpan used on the 9F's, showing that sufficient clearance could be achieved by using 5 foot coupled wheels. The rest, as they say, is history.
Riddles was concerned by deteriorating coal quality, hence the desire to fit large grates to the Standards wherever possible.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
SPK: I know the difference between a PRR and an ATSF Texas. My point was that if we are to preserve locomotives, the ATSF version of the Texas was more impressive and the loss of the PRR example is not as serious. Sort of the way that the Nickle Plate Hudson at least gives the flavor of the NYC Hudson.
My greater regret is that we have no preserved Niagara, maybe the greatest Northern ever (though N&W folks will disagree, I'm sure).
BTW, I saw the Big Boy being prepped at the LA County Fairgrounds just beforeher journey up to Colton and then Cheyenne. At first they couldn't move her, then realized that her drivers had been welded to the track. (Earthquakes). Once the weld was freed, she rolled as easily as when she was outshopped at ALCO in 1941.
Also BTW, the T-1 restoration has a Facebook page. They are slowly trying to raise money. Apparently, the loco's reputation for wheel slippage may have been exaggerated, and more a function of engineer mistakes than of design. They were a tricky lot though.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
I have a particular liking for the PRR Texas types, I admit. I like the CPR Selkirks (as they called them) even better, but they were the largest locomotives ever run in Canada.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
Also BTW, the T-1 restoration has a Facebook page. They are slowly trying to raise money. Apparently, the loco's reputation for wheel slippage may have been exaggerated, and more a function of engineer mistakes than of design. They were a tricky lot though.
On the subject of duplexes, Francis Webb of the LNWR and Dugald Drummond of the LSWR designed "doubled singles" like this. Some of Webb's were very prone to slipping, not helped by the separate pairs of drivers rotating in different directions! Why Drummond bothered is a mystery as his 4-4-0's were plenty capable enough.
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on
:
There was talk of Garrats in the thread above - I thought since my city was home to Beyer-Peacock, people might like to see this!
Our heritage museums are great, but East Manchester itself is a theme-park of post-industrial decay. The city must have been quite a place when it was busy.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
In Algeria, there were some express Garratts. I'd like to have seen one.
I have to admit to being puzzled what the benefits actually might be of a Duplex that is not articulated and has rigid frames. As Sioni Sais has said, the Webb and Drummond ones seem to have been complete turkeys. Articulation creates its own problems, but enables one to have a bigger engine that can go round curves. That's why small narrow gauge ones were popular. In effect, a Garratt is a double header with one big shared boiler and one crew.
Darlienwr I think you're right about what the Clan was supposed to be, but I'm still not sure why not just build more Brits. The Clans didn't regularly work on lines Brits were too heavy for - or for that matter Scots. And Pacifics are much more given to slipping, viz the Bulleid ones.
Going back to Atlantics, I quite like the French ones, but the GWR's own Atlantics, which were a 4-6-0 with a trailing axle in stead of the rear driver do look a bit peculiar in photos. They got converted back again.
[ 15. December 2015, 22:51: Message edited by: Enoch ]
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
On the subject of duplex drive I believe the principle was to reduce "hammer blow" but there are ways to do that which don't involve indecisive locomotives, such as cunningly phasing the motion, which can be done neatly with 3-cylinder arrangements.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Duplexes were pretty cursed on North American rails. The Baltimore & Ohio built one in 1937, which spent much time in the shops and was scrapped by 1950 (and the B&O was a late steam user).
My favorite duplex, the Pennsy's S-1 (6-4-4-6), was actually longer (locomotive size) than a Big Boy. She only served on the line for about four years however, and was scrapped at age 10 in 1949. The S-1 could, however, handle a 1200 ton train at 100 mph on level ground. As long as the wheels didn't slip. She was too long for much of the PRR's route, and basically handled trains only between Chicago and Crestline Ohio. I think that T-1s could venture as far east as Harrisburg, where GG-1s took up the slack.
The T-1s similarly had a short lifespan on the Pennsy, but it is also true that the railroad was pretty rapidly dieselizing its passenger traffic by the late 1940s, since its principal passenger locomotive, the K-4s, was aging rapidly and had to be double-headed on heavy trains.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
SPK: Yeah, the Selkirks were impressive. Canadian steam is under appreciated in the states, but there are many examples of CN and CP locomotives that have been preserved I also liked the Pennsy Texas types, with their curved cab windows. Very snazzy.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
Especially at the weird collection that is Steamtown National Historic Site.
I am perhaps drawn to the PRR Texas locomotives as the rest of the PRR's steam designs during that era were a failed freak show (like the S-1 and the T-1).
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
This is an absorbing discussion, even for those of us who have little or no knowledge of North American locomotives. Although serious and well-informed it has at times a flavour of the great Myles na gCopaleen's 'For Steam Men' (and that is intended to be high praise).
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Something really curious from over here, about North American steam development are cab-forward locomotives. We had push-pull fitted tank engines, which could be driven from a driving compartment at the other end of the train. But engines built that way, we never had.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Yes. Whyever not?
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Something really curious from over here, about North American steam development are cab-forward locomotives. We had push-pull fitted tank engines, which could be driven from a driving compartment at the other end of the train. But engines built that way, we never had.
Unless you count Bullied's "Leader" class! This had three cabs: one at each end for the driver and a cubbyhole in the centre for the poor fireman.
I expect the "Cab Forwards" aand many other big locomotives had mechanical stokers, because they would be a serious job for a man to fire.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Of course some of the very early Hackworth locos, with the "out-and-back" flue-type boiler, had the tender and the fireman out at the front, with the driver at the back.
I think you could get away with a "remote" driver on an autotrain because the firing required was not particularly arduous or complex. But a mainline loco going up Shap (say) would need careful co-ordination between driver and stoker.
I was under the impression that the US cab-forwards - at least the Southern Pacific ones - were oil-fired. The Leaders would have been better with oil firing IMO, apart from anything else that cubby hole was extremely hot and potentially lethal in the event of an accident which turned the loco onto its side.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
Sooner or later someone will ask why such huge sums of money are going into projects to restore and recreate old locomotives, what is the benefit, and how can it be justified. I am not sure of the right answer, but it has given an enormous amount of pleasure to an enormous number of people since it began to take off seriously. I have pleasant memories of visiting the Bluebell Railway just after it reopened in the 1960s, and I want my grandchildren to find out what it was that excited me when I was their ages. The sounds and smells can't be expressed in words or videos - you have to be there. Is it worth it? I think so.
Nothing in railway preservation has really excited me as much as the recreation of a Gresley P2 in something close to its original form, even if calling it "Prince of Wales" seems out of keeping with the glorious names of the originals, "Cock o' The North", "Earl Marischal", and so on. The opportunity to update some of its features, particularly the rotary valve gear, will tell us if, like the "Duke of Gloucester", it really can be the magnificent engine it almost was, so I'm looking forward to its completion. In my time the P2s were reduced to the unfortunate Thompson rebuilds, but my father used to see them on the line they were built for when he lived in Cupar, so there's small sentimental attachment to them.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
The Southern Pacific cab forwards (and there is a wonderful example in the California Railroad Museum in Sacramento) were oil-fired, as were most steam locomotives operating west of the Rockies (The Big Boys were coal-fired, but then Wyoming had ample supplies of the stuff).
The cab forwards were designed to handle the many tunnels and snow sheds on the Sierra Nevada crossing. Crews would become nearly asphyxiated due to the collected smoke in those tunnels and sheds. The oil feed was pressurized to enter the firebox just to the rear of the cab, and the locomotive ran constantly in reverse, if compared to a number steam locomotive.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Whilst I appreciate our British shipmates love of their own steam lccos, I must admit that I am somewhat baffled by British steam. For example, the SR's Q1 0-6-0, which I guess was the equivalent of the DR's Kriegslok, appears completely bizarre to me, as the only 20th century North American locomotives with that wheel arrangement were switchers. Was this due to the very limited loading gauge of British lines?
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
No - the British equivalent of the Kriegslok was the WD-type 2-8-0 (2-10=0 also available).
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Continued ... I'm not sure about the genesis of the Q1 - other railways were building "ordinary" locos but Bulleid always had to be different. Mind you, the Q1s were good locos and could easily run at up to 70mph (in both directions). I doubt if the earlier Qs, designed by Maunsell, could do that although they were mechanically fairly similar.
Ivatt and the LMS were the company that finally ditched the traditional inside-cylinder 0-6-0 arrangement and went for outside-cylinder 2-6-0s which then formed the basis for the BR Standards. They also decided on diesel shunters (switchers) more than the others.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
You beat me to it, LA Dave. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Further, all locomotives larger than Mikado or Pacific had to have a mechanical stoker.
The Interstate Commerce Commission in the US mandated that all locomotives with a weight of 160,000 (passenger) or 175,000 (freight) lbs or more on drivers required a mechanical stoker.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Thanks, SPK. I recently watched a 1940s video on how to fire a LMS locomotive (I think a Pacific), and essentially the fireman was shoveling about 5-6 shovelfuls every two minutes when running on level ground. Moreover, the coal was not broken up in appropriately sized pieces for the firebox, but had to be broken up by the fireman.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
A mechanical stoker was tried on a 9F. Apparently, it was fine when it worked, but it was very fussy about what sort of coal it could happen. Unless the coal was preselected before coaling to be the right size, the stoker was likely to jam. Often this was in ways that the fireman could not sort on the move. Because the mechanism was in the way, it was difficult/impossible to fire it manually.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
I would have thought that mechanical stokers would have been most successful in places where the coal was fairly soft and of low quality. That usually wasn't the case in Britain, where hard coal was prized for locomotive work.
What were useful in Britain were the mechanical coal pushers that brought forward coal from the back of the tender. That LMS "Coronations" had them but I don't know which other classes may have had them.
In today's climate it does seem a trifle bizarre t think that high-speed public transport was dependent on the physical labour of one man.
[ 17. December 2015, 07:58: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Surfing Madness (# 11087) on
:
Tangent alert. <trying to work out how to ice a steam train shaped Christmas cake, and still keep the shape> carry on as you were.
Posted by Moo (# 107) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Surfing Madness:
Tangent alert. <trying to work out how to ice a steam train shaped Christmas cake, and still keep the shape> carry on as you were.
Use a forcing bag with a star-shaped tip, and place the stars so they touch each other.
Moo
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on
:
<more tangent> Round candies for the wheels -- select them for size, and stick them into position with more frosting. Gumdrops or other dome-shaped candies to mount on top. Put all the unused candies into a dish and serve on a side table.
Posted by Alaric the Goth (# 511) on
:
I haven't posted on SoF much recently, but this is a thread to tempt me back!
I like 4-4-2s. It is sad that WW2 caused the LNER to scrap the NBR Atlantic (I think it was 'Midlothian') that they had set aside for preservation. An NER Raven 'Z' class 4-4-2 would be good to have had as well, as the story told by the two NER 2-4-0s and the one M1 4-4-0 is incomplete.
The LNER is my favourite 'Big Four' company if you haven't guessed!
Posted by Alaric the Goth (# 511) on
:
I'm not that into replicas, by the way. The 'Saint' I just about approve of as it reverses the process that made the first 'Hall' and uses most of the components of 4942 'Maindy Hall'. There are enough Halls preserved as 'Halls'.
The Std. 2MT 2-6-2T on the Bluebell is an alright project too. 78059 had no tender and most of its components are being used on the 'tank' version. Three of its class survive as 2-6-0s (I've ridden behind 2 of them).
I don't like the 'County' though. It involved taking the boiler from the only 8F to survive that was Doncaster-built, and scrapping the rest. 8Fs are much more interesting than 'Counties anyway.
[ 17. December 2015, 13:45: Message edited by: Alaric the Goth ]
Posted by Lord Pontivillian (# 14308) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
What were useful in Britain were the mechanical coal pushers that brought forward coal from the back of the tender. That LMS "Coronations" had them but I don't know which other classes may have had them.
I have a feeling that the LMS Garratts had coal pushers, but they had a tendency to be unreliable.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
Whilst I appreciate our British shipmates love of their own steam lccos, I must admit that I am somewhat baffled by British steam. For example, the SR's Q1 0-6-0, which I guess was the equivalent of the DR's Kriegslok, appears completely bizarre to me, as the only 20th century North American locomotives with that wheel arrangement were switchers. Was this due to the very limited loading gauge of British lines?
Part of the reason for the Q1's was Bullied's fascination with Total Adhesion, which would culminate in the "Leaders". Essentially, the Q1 was the consequence of the largest boiler that could be accommodated on the minimum practical chassis - 6 wheels - and still be useable in mainline service. Bullied used a 6-wheel chassis because fewer wheels would have restricted the boiler to the point that it was not worth the effort. The lack of running plates and the curious boiler cladding were the result of trying to keep the overall weight down, enabling a bigger boiler. Bullied preferred not to have carrying axles if he could avoid them - in his view, all axles should be driven. Result? The Q1.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
What were useful in Britain were the mechanical coal pushers that brought forward coal from the back of the tender. That LMS "Coronations" had them but I don't know which other classes may have had them.
I have a feeling that the LMS Garratts had coal pushers, but they had a tendency to be unreliable.
I fancy you will find that the LMS Garratts (which were totally ruined by the Derby traditionalists) had rotary coal bunkers (a Beyer-Peacock 'special') rather than coal pushers. They were apt to jam, owing to an accumulation of small coal in the inaccessible space under the bunker.
Posted by andras (# 2065) on
:
Gresley's comment on the Q1 was allegedly 'My God, Oliver, where do you put the key?'
Can I put in a plug for CP's Royal Hudsons? They look stunning, and go like the clappers. Mind you, the Jubilees were pretty fine too.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Re. the LMS Garratts: this website states that "Getting the coal from the bunker forward proved to be "a challenge". Two experiments were done to improve the forwarding of coal. One locomotive of the main batch, no 4986, received a rotary bunker from the start. Steam operated coal pushers were installed on no 4996. As the latter did not prove adequate rotary coal bunkers were fitted to all but two members of the class from 1931 onwards".
[ 17. December 2015, 17:38: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
I'd never heard of the CPR "Jubilees" (a term not used in Britain to describe a wheel arrangement). But this is interesting.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
I think that the CPR "Jubilees" wheel arrangement was unique to 20th century North American railroading. Regarding four drivers, the Atlantic type, 4-4-2, was quite popular prior to the advent of the Pacific, 4-6-2, in the 1910s. The Milwaukee Road, however, had Alco build a magnificent Atlantic in 1935 to power its "Hiawatha" speedsters between Chicago and Minneapolis-St. Paul, a distance of about 400 miles. The Hiawatha could make this trip in 6 1/2 hours, and the Atlantic was capable of hauling a five-car train at more than 100 mph. The Milwaukee Road competed with Burlington and the Chicago & Northwestern on this route.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Regarding self-stokers on British locomotives, the film that I saw regarding how to stoke showed the coal supply as consisting of widely varying sizes of coal, which required the fireman to break up the pieces to manageable size. Self-stokers on North American locomotives had to use fairly uniform sizes of coal (about 2 inches in diameter). Generally, this was soft, or bituminous coal, though I know that the Lackawanna advertised its used of hard, anthracite coal (the "route of the Phoebe Snow" whose dress was always white, because she traveled the route of the Anthracite).
It was simply impossible for a fireman to stoke the fires on the larger North American locomotives at a rate that would sustain the required boiler pressure and steaming rates. In fact, some of the smaller hand-fired locomotives had to use two firemen to keep up with the demand.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
The Jubilees were built as 4-4-2 after the Milwaukee Road pattern, but with a larger firebox which lengthened them into 4-4-4's. Western Coal, as my grandfather would tell you, was soft and bituminous.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
... What were useful in Britain were the mechanical coal pushers that brought forward coal from the back of the tender. That LMS "Coronations" had them but I don't know which other classes may have had them. ...
I have heard that the later Britannias that had bigger tenders also had them. The Duke of Gloucester in its present incarnation has one but I don't know whether it always did.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
SPk: I did not know that the Jubilees were sort of a Hiawatha on steroids. Impressive locos though. There are many accounts of North American locos exceeding 120 mph, but none were ever measured with a dyno car and, thus, honors have to be accorded the A4 Mallard (which was a magnificent locomotive). The DR's streamlined Pacifics were also mighty fast, and the record run in Germany was on a level grade, not a falling grade, as was the case for the Mallard's run.
For years, claims were made for a PRR E2 Atlantic, number 7002, which supposedly hit 127 mph on a stretch of track in Ohio hauling the Pennsylvania Limited in 1905. This claim is now considered fairly dubious, but it does show how fast the Atlantics were, even in 1905.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
<snip> honors have to be accorded the A4 Mallard (which was a magnificent locomotive). <snip>
Happy flashback to NCIS!
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Naval Criminal Investigative Service? Surely not. ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Here is "Bittern", "Mallard's" sister, going well on a test run a couple of years ago. Sadly she's now out of service as her boiler certificate has expired.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Here is "Bittern", "Mallard's" sister, going well on a test run a couple of years ago. Sadly she's now out of service as her boiler certificate has expired.
She doesn't actually appear to be going at any great speed!
I did travel behind a very dingy looking A4 in c 1962. That was from Grantham to Kings Cross and was the first train journey I can remember. Once we got to London we changed to a DMU to St Albans which I thought wonderful because you could see out the front! That was before blinds were introduced ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Here is "Bittern", "Mallard's" sister, going well on a test run a couple of years ago. Sadly she's now out of service as her boiler certificate has expired.
She doesn't actually appear to be going at any great speed!
Such is the problem with telephoto lenses, I think!
quote:
I did travel behind a very dingy looking A4 in c 1962. That was from Grantham to Kings Cross and was the first train journey I can remember. Once we got to London we changed to a DMU to St Albans which I thought wonderful because you could see out the front! That was before blinds were introduced
I used to go to school on those DMUs every day from 1964-71. We used to love sitting behind the driver and watch him drive the train, although sometimes they drew the blinds so as to be private. Sometimes we rode in the back carriage and looked out of the rear windows instead. Later on they refurbished the units and took out the windows into the cabs.
In the late 60s they were building the M1 motorway beside the line. Imagine our surprise to come out of Elstree Tunnel one afternoon and see a German V2 rocket standing on the site of what was to become Scratchwood Services! It was of course a film prop from the nearby studios.
These units were different to all others as they had hydraulic transmission instead of mechanical. This made them much smoother as there was no great shudder when the driver changed gear. They also had Rolls-Royce engines which we thought was very upmarket! My older sister had been using the same line to go to school, starting off on steam trains but changing to diesel c.1960.
[ 18. December 2015, 16:46: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
P.S. Never travelled behind an A4 (or seen one in action) ![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
. "Bittern" was supposed to come here a couple of years ago but was deemed to be out of gauge.
[ 18. December 2015, 16:48: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
I've travelled behind an A4 doing 112½ mph. It was Sir Nigel Gresley down Stoke Bank south of Grantham in 1959.
Posted by andras (# 2065) on
:
The Leaders, of course, were really Fairlies, but Bullied never admitted the fact!
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Strictly speaking, no, as the Leaders had only a single boiler (albeit with an unconventional firebox) whereas Fairlies had a double boiler.
The book I have on articulated steam locomotives would probably classify the Leaders as an updated Kitson-Meyer - a design of double bogie locomotive with a single boiler and with the bogies separated sufficiently for the firebox and ashpan to drop between them.
Posted by Ariel (# 58) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Here is "Bittern", "Mallard's" sister, going well on a test run a couple of years ago. Sadly she's now out of service as her boiler certificate has expired.
That's a beauty. I'd love to have seen that myself.
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Naval Criminal Investigative Service? Surely not.
Indeed, yes! The Mallard is mentioned in several episodes, most poignantly this week.
/End tangent!
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Jealous of you Brits who rode behind steam in the 1960s. The pace of dieselization was such that only the Norfolk & Western and the Grand Trunk Western were still using steam in 1960, the year the passenger service ended. Most passenger trains had been dieselized years before. In my home area, the Chesapeake & Ohio dieselized passenger trains by about 1950. C&O was a coal road, like the N&W, and ran railroad car ferries across Lake Michigan which were steam powered and coal fired and built as late as 1952. One survivor still makes daily crossings in the summer from Ludington, Michigan to Manitowoc, Wisconsin.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
Jealous of you Brits who rode behind steam in the 1960s. The pace of dieselization was such that only the Norfolk & Western and the Grand Trunk Western were still using steam in 1960, the year the passenger service ended. Most passenger trains had been dieselized years before. In my home area, the Chesapeake & Ohio dieselized passenger trains by about 1950. C&O was a coal road, like the N&W, and ran railroad car ferries across Lake Michigan which were steam powered and coal fired and built as late as 1952. One survivor still makes daily crossings in the summer from Ludington, Michigan to Manitowoc, Wisconsin.
We were lucky then and we are lucky now: I think Britain has more preserved railway, both lines and mileage, than anywhere else and nowhere is the enthusiasm stronger. My concern is that those operating and especially maintaining the railways are getting on in years. I wonder if the preserved railways could get business-like and recruit a few apprentice technicians for locomotives, carriages and permanent way?
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Some do: see here and here. But I imagine that only the "big boys" could do this.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
The skills and initiative involved should be very, very marketable.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Some do: see here and here. But I imagine that only the "big boys" could do this.
I'm very pleased to hear this!
I don't think you would need more than to be a "big boy" and I wouldn't describe the Mid-Hants in that way. You would however need a FE college with a good engineering department before considering it. I am sure other railways could arrange similar but it takes commitment and that takes money: I suppose it'll have for me to win the Lottery to change a few minds.
Posted by andras (# 2065) on
:
Kitson-Meyer- now that's a suggestion you don't see every day! But, of course, many Fairlies were built as singles, though you may actually be right in your suggestion!
Either way, the Leaders were wretched engines, whereas the Fairlies are the gift that keeps on giving.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Good point about single Fairlies (an example in the UK would be Taliesin, the new-build on the Ffestiniog), but you would note that Fairlies had one boiler barrel per engine bogie, whereas the Leaders had one boiler between the two power bogies, a la Kitson Meyer.
To be fair to Bullied and the Leaders, a large part of the problem was that Bullied was a lone voice and one that was largely out of favour at the time. BR were not interested in the Leader concept - they were pursuing Riddles' views to build the Standards - and the Leader concept in no way fitted in with the Standard Steam program. As a result, there was no will to develop the design to the point that it worked properly. I believe that the use of sleeve valves was unhelpful; a feature that had never been made to work on locomotive steam in this country. You might note that Bullied's subsequent work on these lines (the Turf Burner for the Irish railway system) used conventional piston valves on its power bogies.
Posted by andras (# 2065) on
:
In the end, of course, Bob Fairlie's concept, shorn of the straitjacket of steam technology, carried all before it; almost every diesel locomotive in the world has a body-mounted prime mover and a pair of power bogies.
The stablity of the single Fairlies was legendary; on the Maine two-footers they were reported to have run at mile-a-minute speeds, and even if that was not literally true they were certainly very steady runners.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Interesting. I had thought that the Fairley type had a number of inherent flaws compared to either a Mallet or a Garrett, such as an increasing problem with carrying fuel as the size of the locomotive increased and the problem of crew accommodation as the size increased. From either of those points of view, I would have thought that the Garrett offered a better layout.
Saying which, as I understand it, the USA made little or no use of the Garrett layout, any more than this country used the Mallet. Are there any transatlantic views on this question?
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by andras:
... The stablity of the single Fairlies was legendary; on the Maine two-footers they were reported to have run at mile-a-minute speeds, and even if that was not literally true they were certainly very steady runners.
I'm intrigued by that, and would be interested to know more about a railway and a development I know nothing about. Fairlies of course are familiar from Wales, but I'm completely ignorant about the railways of Maine. Unless you mean something different by what you've said, nobody here has habitually run anything on 2' gauge at that sort of speed.
Reciprocating steam engines turn over relatively slowly. They can therefore drive directly. One cycle of the piston translates into one revolution of the wheels. This has the advantage that there's no intermediate stepping down in the transmission which wastes energy, and is mechanically complicated, but the disadvantage that the size of the driving wheels replace any sort of gearing. There's a trade off between speed and power. Express engines have big wheels. Freight engines have small ones.
As far as British practice is concerned, there have been very few examples of steam engines with gearing. Most have been a bit in the freak category. Furthermore, anything designed to enable a reciprocating steam engine to drive powered bogies at speed would have to step the transmission up rather than down. If such a thing has ever been done successfully, it must have been somewhere else in a very different engineering tradition.
The BR 9Fs with only 5' wheels were conventional reciprocating locomotives designed for slow heavy freight use. To everyone's surprise, including those that drove them, they were, nevertheless, recorded at up to 90 mph on occasions. It was a surprising ability of a well designed engine. They weren't designed to do that. 5' would be too big a diameter for a pair of powered bogies.
There aren't really any other examples of small wheeled locomotives here comfortably able to run at those speeds. By all reports, the GWR 47xxs more or less reached their uncomfortable limits at 60-65 mph. The Somerset and Dorset 2-8-0s were pressed into passenger use in summer, but not at speed and their bearings could not really take it.
The large numbers of assorted 0-6-0s that were used on passenger trains rarely lumbered along at much over about 50 mph.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
To be fair to Bullied and the Leaders, a large part of the problem was that Bullied was a lone voice and one that was largely out of favour at the time. BR were not interested in the Leader concept - they were pursuing Riddles' views to build the Standards - and the Leader concept in no way fitted in with the Standard Steam program. As a result, there was no will to develop the design to the point that it worked properly.
I agree that his turf burning locos in Ireland moved things on a bit, but I'm afraid I'm in the camp that counts Bulleid in the "bit of a loose cannon" category.
He managed to get express passenger locos built in the middle of wartime prohibitions of constructing that category by counting them as "mixed traffic" (ahem), most of his highest profile engines did better (IMO) when someone else had rebuilt them and got rid of the "innovative" bits, and the Leader shows vision, but a complete lack of common sense - it might have worked better (to link the earlier part of the thread) if he'd fitted either a mechanical stoker or oil firing.
As it was the poor old fireman just had to get melted. If I won the lottery, I might just build one to see what it could do with the kinks ironed out.
OTOH, all is forgiven for his Tavern Car alone...
Having said all that, he seems to attract far more plaudits than brickbats. For a designer seemingly doomed for all time for the "crime" of not being Gresley, I'd love someone to salvage the reputation of Thompson.
This thread is really making me want to get back on the footplate....
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
You cannot be serious ... Nice idea, but people hated them: you couldn't see out of them.
[ 21. December 2015, 09:53: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
You cannot be serious ... Nice idea, but people hated them: you couldn't see out of them.
Point taken, but how often do you look out of a pub? Anyway, they did have headroom unlike his double-deck trains. Believe it or not a small*, dedicated and (I think) slightly unhinged group is trying to renovate four of these carriages.
*They would have to be small, to get in and out of the things. Remember that the UK loading gauge is pretty puny.
[ 21. December 2015, 10:49: Message edited by: Sioni Sais ]
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
You think our standard loading gauge is small? Try the Glasgow Subway: here and here.
[ 21. December 2015, 11:11: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
You cannot be serious ... Nice idea, but people hated them: you couldn't see out of them.
Point taken, but how often do you look out of a pub? Anyway, they did have headroom unlike his double-deck trains. Believe it or not a small*, dedicated and (I think) slightly unhinged group is trying to renovate four of these carriages.
*They would have to be small, to get in and out of the things. Remember that the UK loading gauge is pretty puny.
Is it not 2 small, dedicated and slightly unhinged group trying to do 2 each? It's complicated anyway...
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I'd love someone to salvage the reputation of Thompson.
Any designer who takes a magnificent locomotive like this and turns it into this monstrosity deserves all the bad reputation he has coming.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I'd love someone to salvage the reputation of Thompson.
Any designer who takes a magnificent locomotive like this and turns it into this monstrosity deserves all the bad reputation he has coming.
Is that because of what he did to the class? Or because it was Great Northern he did it to first.
There are all sorts of claims and counterclaims about the A1/1s, but it is reasonably likely that if more of them had been rebuilt (and the oldest, eg Great Northern, needed rebuilding or scrapping anyway) then they wouldn't have been withdrawn before the more numerous unrebuilt examples.
AIUI, BR policy was to withdraw the smaller classes first, leaving the larger fleets operational - regardless of relative merit. The A1/1 rebuild solved some of the problems with the earlier class, created others, but was IIRC relatively popular with the crews if not the enthusiasts.
Anyway, he did design the B1, which was both good looking and a performer in most eyes.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
3 other words which occurred to me after the edit window:
conjugated valve gear
Wartime restrictions on maintenance meant it had to go for the sake of fitter sanity. Gresley wouldn't/couldn't/didn't do it. Thompson got on with it.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
If the LNER had had the optical alignment methods which were brought from Swindon in BR days, then the conjugated valve gears would have proved less problematic.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
If the LNER had had the optical alignment methods which were brought from Swindon in BR days, then the conjugated valve gears would have proved less problematic.
That all makes sense, because Harry Holcroft, who devised the conjugated valve-gear in the first place was trained on the GWR before working with Gresley (and on the Southern, which also had many 3-cylinder locomotives).
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
If the LNER had had the optical alignment methods which were brought from Swindon in BR days, then the conjugated valve gears would have proved less problematic.
*aiming for Geek knowledge of the Year(TM)*
the heavy general overhaul cycle mandated by Doncaster for LNER locomotives fitted with conjugated valve gear was intervals of 40,000 miles. Haymarket MPD, for reasons best known to itself, brought that interval down unilaterally to 30,000 miles and apparently achieved measurable gains in performance/decreases in failure. No one (to my knowledge) has ever got to the bottom of why no other MPD followed suit.
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Is that because of what he did to the class? Or because it was Great Northern he did it to first.
He took a beautiful locomotive and deliberately made it as ugly as possible because he didn't like the man who had designed it.
As for the merits of the conversion, I think it says it all that as soon as Peppercorn took over he completely redesigned the new A1s so that they would be both excellent and elegant machines.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Is that because of what he did to the class? Or because it was Great Northern he did it to first.
He took a beautiful locomotive and deliberately made it as ugly as possible because he didn't like the man who had designed it.
As for the merits of the conversion, I think it says it all that as soon as Peppercorn took over he completely redesigned the new A1s so that they would be both excellent and elegant machines.
The alternative viewpoint is that Thompson and Gresley were two sides of the same coin - autocratic perfectionists. Gresley throughout his career seems to have had a Brunel-like habit of dismissing any improvements to his engines which he hadn't thought of. If GN hadn't been rebuilt it was fit only for the scrapheap.
Get CJ Allen* on the 1945 locomotive trials - Great Northern vs Sir Ralph Wedgwood (single chimney A4). Dead heat in most things except where GN edged it. Pound for pound the A1/1 was better at its job (never mind the aesthetics) than anything the LNER/BR(E/NE/Sc) had apart from the double chimney A4 *at the time.*
The A2/2 was also an improvement on the P2 in terms of fuel consumption over the same mileage.
*Assuming you haven't already.
Apologies to uninterested onlookers - I should have known better. There are corners of the internet which get into 40 page sagas when Thompson is mentioned. I'm not even an LNER fan, I've just always felt a bit sorry for him. Best man for the CME job when he got it and trying to sort out the LNER's locomotive stud with a war on and a succession of personal tragedies.
I've defended the A1/1 and the A2/2 - the B1 and K1 IMO don't need defending. He knew what he was doing, and only the near deification of Gresley (who, in fairness, must have neared deserving that right until the moment he threw it all away by leaving Swindon ) has coloured the way he's remembered.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
Another factor with locomotive designers/CMEs is that some are locomotive men while others are railway men, who concentrate on keeping the locomotives out of the 'shops and on the road. They have little romance about them and know that it's rolling stock that earns revenue, not the motive power. That is where Thompson, Riddles and Collett of the Great Western are. Churchward, Collett's predecessor, was half-and-half: while Dean's deputy he was an experimenter but once the formula for reliable, powerful locomotives had been defined, he became a refiner. Other innovators at Swindon had to move on to see any of their ideas come to fruition, such as Holcroft but most notably Sir William Stanier who was GWR through and through, but modernised the LMS out of all recognition in about five years!
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Something to bear in mind in relation to the Gresley-Holcroft conjugated gear is an observation made by Kenneth Cook who moved from Swindon to Doncaster to take over what had been Peppercorn's chair - thanks to the Zeiss optical equipment, the GWR scrapped at tighter tolerances than the LNER manufactured. It is little wonder that most LNER locomotives clanked noticeably when running.
Note also that it was Cook who solved the A4's perennial problems with the inside big end by substituting the GWR equivalent.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Yes, Britain has, per capita, probably the finet collection of preserved steam. I would love to travel on some of the British steam lines, and maybe that will be possible (on the same trip I visit Belfast and feed my Titanica obsession). On that trip I also want to go to York. The Minster and the railway museum -- I suppose that's heaven on earth!
In the US, while there is a fair amount of smaller preserved types (such as 2-8-0 freight locos) only in the last 30 or so years have the larger types become operable again. Removed from city parks, they are now in steam, or soon will be, again.
Some of the more notable examples of the bigger locos are:
1. Pere Marquette 1225, a 1941 Berkshire (2-8-4)
2. Nickel Plate 765, 1944 Berkshire
3. Union Pacific 844, 1944 Northern (4-8-4)
4. Union Pacific 3985, 1943 Challenger (4-6-6-4)
5. Southern Pacific 4449, 1941 Northern (Daylight)
6. Milwaukee Road 261, 1944 Northern
7. Santa Fe 3751, 1927 Northern
8. Norfolk & Western 611, 1950 Northern
AND . . .
9. Union Pacific 4014, 1941 Big Boy (4-8-8-4)
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I've defended the A1/1 and the A2/2 - the B1 and K1 IMO don't need defending.
That's not what Gerry Fiennes thought when he only had B1s to run front-line express services on the Great Eastern main line c.1950 (together with the old B12s and Gresley's B17s, of course). He snapped up the Britannias as soon as he heard about them and, for a while, the line became the fastest in Britain (2 hours to Norwich: fastest [electric] train today takes 1h40m).
Mind you, the "Brits" had their teething problems (flexing coupling rods and driving wheels which worked loose on their axles), so for a while some Bulleid Light Pacifics were drafted in. That would have been a sight for the spotters!
[ 21. December 2015, 17:21: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
That's not an entirely fair comparison. In BR terms, the B1 was only a class 5, comparable to the ex LMS class 5. A Britannia was a class 7. A fairer comparator is whether an engine crew would rather have a B1 or a Sandringham.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
If the LNER had had the optical alignment methods which were brought from Swindon in BR days, then the conjugated valve gears would have proved less problematic.
*aiming for Geek knowledge of the Year(TM)*
the heavy general overhaul cycle mandated by Doncaster for LNER locomotives fitted with conjugated valve gear was intervals of 40,000 miles. Haymarket MPD, for reasons best known to itself, brought that interval down unilaterally to 30,000 miles and apparently achieved measurable gains in performance/decreases in failure. No one (to my knowledge) has ever got to the bottom of why no other MPD followed suit.
Not possessing the mountain of knowledge or the erudition of the other posters here, I can only guess at the answer to the question. Typically, I believe the shedmaster would have been responsible for costs incurred at his depot and an early overhaul was a major expense to be avoided if at all possible. At Haymarket, I would guess that the various costs of covering premature failures on the east coast main line were likely rather high, making the early overhaul cost-effective. (40,000 miles seems rather low for a general overhaul and sounds more like a light repair. It's only 50 return trips to London).
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
If the LNER had had the optical alignment methods which were brought from Swindon in BR days, then the conjugated valve gears would have proved less problematic.
*aiming for Geek knowledge of the Year(TM)*
the heavy general overhaul cycle mandated by Doncaster for LNER locomotives fitted with conjugated valve gear was intervals of 40,000 miles. Haymarket MPD, for reasons best known to itself, brought that interval down unilaterally to 30,000 miles and apparently achieved measurable gains in performance/decreases in failure. No one (to my knowledge) has ever got to the bottom of why no other MPD followed suit.
Not possessing the mountain of knowledge or the erudition of the other posters here, I can only guess at the answer to the question. Typically, I believe the shedmaster would have been responsible for costs incurred at his depot and an early overhaul was a major expense to be avoided if at all possible. At Haymarket, I would guess that the various costs of covering premature failures on the east coast main line were likely rather high, making the early overhaul cost-effective. (40,000 miles seems rather low for a general overhaul and sounds more like a light repair. It's only 50 return trips to London).
you are of course right, it was the routine not the heavy general. That theory also makes sense re Haymarket, although they were clearly acting on their own initiative.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Typical Scots, wanting to do their own thing! (My wife had better not read this, as she comes from Haggis-land).
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Did Haymarket perform what we might call a cost/benefit analysis and conclude that, overall, it cost them less to give the conjugated gear a once-over every 30 000 miles rather than deal with a mounting number of increasingly expensive repairs by leaving it to the 'official' 40 000 miles?
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
I have no idea ... But I suspect, in those days, they would merely have thought things through pragmatically. i.e. "We don't want the bl**dy things breaking down on the road, it's such a bother, so we'll get them serviced more frequently". It could be that more frequent maintenance actually reduced the time that locomotives had to spend out of service, as failures (and consequent repairs) were minimised.
But this is all supposition.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Darllenwr:
Did Haymarket perform what we might call a cost/benefit analysis and conclude that, overall, it cost them less to give the conjugated gear a once-over every 30 000 miles rather than deal with a mounting number of increasingly expensive repairs by leaving it to the 'official' 40 000 miles?
Quite possibly.
I have a book titled "Railway Operating Statistics" by C P Mossop and the first edition is from 1910, for the North Eastern Railway, a notably businesslike and profitable concern.
The edition I have is an early LNER reprint from 1923 and while there is basic stuff it also provides plenty of material for poor sods like me who have to devise KPIs from time to time, and persuade managers that they are worthwhile.
I reckon railways were right at the forefront of this.
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
Kenneth Cook wrote an Engineering Autobiography after he moved from Swindon to take charge of Darlington and Doncaster. (I believe the book is titled "Swindon Steam"). From the book I infer that Swindon at least had made the move from reactive to preventative maintenance in the 1930's, as Cook speaks of a carefully developed scheme of tracking cards which enabled Swindon to call locomotives in for overhaul, rather than having to wait for them to be delivered.
A significant part of the reason for developing this scheme was to make the workload at Swindon more predictable by ensuring a steady throughput of locomotives for heavy overhaul. A side effect was that it was therefore necessary to build (and overhaul) the locomotives with sufficient care that it was unlikely that they would need significant workshop attention before Swindon called them in. As a consequence, shopping intervals steadily increased at Swindon during the 30's.
Cook subsequently introduced his system to Doncaster and Darlington, almost certainly extending the life of the Gresley pacifics as a result.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
I have a book titled "Railway Operating Statistics" by C P Mossop and the first edition is from 1910, for the North Eastern Railway, a notably businesslike and profitable concern.
The edition I have is an early LNER reprint from 1923 and while there is basic stuff it also provides plenty of material for poor sods like me who have to devise KPIs from time to time, and persuade managers that they are worthwhile...
It is wonderful to think that there is a bit of the UK civil service whose performance measurement regime is derived from the work of the NER over a century ago!
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
It is wonderful to think that there is a bit of the UK civil service whose performance measurement regime is derived from the work of the NER over a century ago!
Sssh! I'm trying to keep this a secret!
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
It is safe with us.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
/tangent
My kids clubbed together and bought me a 4mm/OO model of this (even down to the number) IMHO it must one of the most beautiful locomotives ever. Runs very nicely too.
All I now need are a couple of the right kind of coaches (cash) and a model of the Lyme Regis branch line c 1958 for it to run on (me & time).
tangent/
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Of course said locomotive still exists although you'll have to wait a long time to see it running again.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Of course said locomotive still exists although you'll have to wait a long time to see it running again.
This is one of the debates about restoration. The Adams 0415 is unique, has been off the rails for 25 years and it doesn't look like she's going to be in steam again soon. When I win the Lottery, and this will probably take the Euromillions, I might open a boilermakers to specialise in preserved steam, as this appears to be the critical factor for so many preserved locos.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Indeed, I'm surprised how many working locos, including ex-Barry wrecks, still have their original boilers. But they won't go on for ever, however much they are welded and retubed.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Deadly sin of Envy alert
Sioni, I'm envious, but after what I've said on this and other threads about personal memories, I'm not sure whether I dare say that we had a holiday in Lyme Regis in 1955. I did not see 30583, but I did see the other two.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Deadly sin of Envy alert
Sioni, I'm envious, but after what I've said on this and other threads about personal memories, I'm not sure whether I dare say that we had a holiday in Lyme Regis in 1955. I did not see 30583, but I did see the other two.
You lucky man!
We had a sort of a holiday in Axminster in 1968 (In know it was then because it coincided with the Mexico Olympics), staying with friends who ran a pub in the town. We did have a day out in Lyme, albeit on the bus
Posted by Darllenwr (# 14520) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Indeed, I'm surprised how many working locos, including ex-Barry wrecks, still have their original boilers. But they won't go on for ever, however much they are welded and retubed.
In fairness, it is not disastrous - after all, it was possible to build Tornado from scratch, and the new P2 project is going ahead on the assumption that building another new boiler is perfectly possible. The issue is one of whether the preservation movement can afford it?
One of the attractions of narrow-gauge and miniature steam is that the costs are lower. But even then, the figures are apt to put one in mind of telephone numbers. The skills exist to build new boilers as well as to repair existing ones. Raising the money to pay for those skills is the problem.
And, extending the thought somewhat, it beats me how our American preservationist friends can even contemplate the sorts of costs that they must face. Building a new 250 psi boiler for, say, a Duchess class pacific is expensive. What must it cost constructing a new boiler for a Big Boy?
Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on
:
Tangentially, based on 30583's history, was The East Kent Railway a Colonel Stephens-run line?
Only today I moved my 1908 SE&CR chair from my parents to our house, rescued/pilfered many years ago from a ditch on the Northiam extension of another Colonel Stephens line....
AG
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sandemaniac:
Tangentially, based on 30583's history, was The East Kent Railway a Colonel Stephens-run line?
Only today I moved my 1908 SE&CR chair from my parents to our house, rescued/pilfered many years ago from a ditch on the Northiam extension of another Colonel Stephens line....
AG
The East Kent Light Railway was indeed part of Col. Stephen's empire. The East Kent Railway was a major constituent (says Wiki) of the London Chatham and Dover Railway, which in turn became part of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway (the SE&CR) and in 1923 the Southern Railway.
Colonel Stephen would have looked favourably on you reusing a discarded chair!
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Pedant (know-all) alert
I think technically, neither the South Eastern nor the London, Chatham and Dover became part of the South East and Chatham. They entered into a Working Arrangement, with the SECR as the vehicle for that arrangement. The two companies continued to exist, behind it, both with their shareholdings. The profits were split on a fixed percentage (from recollection approximately 60/40) between the two companies. They both eventually became part of the Southern at the grouping.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
Important news for all those with lots of money and space and who need a steam locomotive or two. Transnet (was South African Railways) have over 30 steam locomotives for sale, though some are in poor condition. Some are historically very interesting, going back to David Hendrie, who went to the Natal Government Railway from the Highland over a century ago, and many are of British origin. There are two GMA Garratts available, and although there are several preserved already, you simply can't have too many of them. I would take one, but this year's project has to be a new car.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Very tempting, but won't they all be 3' 6", which will mean one can't bring one back and play with it here.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Very tempting, but won't they all be 3' 6", which will mean one can't bring one back and play with it here.
For two reasons. The standard gauge in South Africa is less than standard gauge in Britain but the loading gauge (height and width of stock) is greater than in Britain. That is to say, even if you construct 3' 6" track, your structures will get in the way. Over to you, America.
Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on
:
Sorry, out of luck. We don't have any Cape Gauge lines in North America; all our Narrow Gauge is Three Foot or Two Foot, and the Two Foot is gone.
And a Garratt? I have a lot of time for articulated locomotives, but not Garratts, as they never ran in North America.
If it operated cab-forward and it wasn't built by the Southern Pacific, I'm not interested.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
SPK: Have you ever read "Perfecting the American Steam Locomotive"? It is by a retired professor of engineering at, I believe, Texas A&M, and discusses in great detail the development of American (not much about Canada I am afraid) steam locomotives from their origin to the 4-4-0, then the second generation (Consolidateds, Pacifics) and ending with a thorough discussion of the origin of "Superpower" types, most notably the Berkshires and Northerns. There is also a thorough discussion of the big articulated classes. The author makes the point that Mallets before superpower were slow drag engines. The UP Challengers and Big Boys, on the other hand, could haul 100-car freights at 70 mph.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:
Sorry, out of luck. We don't have any Cape Gauge lines in North America; all our Narrow Gauge is Three Foot or Two Foot, and the Two Foot is gone.
And a Garratt? I have a lot of time for articulated locomotives, but not Garratts, as they never ran in North America.
If it operated cab-forward and it wasn't built by the Southern Pacific, I'm not interested.
Sigh... I was looking forward to someone offering to operate the first Garratt in North America. It's never too late to change the course of history.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
SPK: Have you ever read "Perfecting the American Steam Locomotive"? It is by a retired professor of engineering at, I believe, Texas A&M, and discusses in great detail the development of American (not much about Canada I am afraid) steam locomotives from their origin to the 4-4-0, then the second generation (Consolidateds, Pacifics) and ending with a thorough discussion of the origin of "Superpower" types, most notably the Berkshires and Northerns. There is also a thorough discussion of the big articulated classes. The author makes the point that Mallets before superpower were slow drag engines. The UP Challengers and Big Boys, on the other hand, could haul 100-car freights at 70 mph.
Did the Big Boys go that fast, especially over the mountains? (I know the Challengers did). The N&W Class A's had a good turn of speed, too - and even one of their Y6b's was timed at over 60mph.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Big Boys could reportedly reach 80 mph. The biggest Rocky Mountain grade on the UP, Sherman Hill, has a grade of, I think, 1.5 percent. The summit is over 8,000 feet in elevation.
Obviously, on a long grade, the train would be slower, but the speeds that I mentioned were on level stretches, pulling what were, for the time, massive trains. The Big Boys had a tractive effort of more than 135,000 pounds.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
My recollection is that a Big Boy could if required pull one of the City streamliners to California at a bit over 80. You Tube has videos of a Challenger, 844 and Southern Pacific 4449 all drawing passenger stock at that sort of speed in recent times. Big Boys and Challengers had enormous margins of safety built in. I don't think any other Mallets could safely run at that sort of speed and only the Algerian Garrats of other articulated locos could match them. The drivers of the NSWGR 60 class were too small, although they had the power and balance.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
No, the magnificent home-built A class of the Norfolk & Western were capable of speeds greater than 60 mph (they had 70-inch drivers) and I think (and SPK can confirm) that the Southern Pacific cab-forwards were also capable of those speeds, or at least some classes of them.
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on
:
Wheel size doesn't appear to be a reliable indicator of maximum possible speed. The British Railways 9F class, which had 5' drivers in a 2-10-0 configuration were designed for heavy freight but could do over 80mph on passenger trains on the East Coast Main and the London to South Wales lines.
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on
:
Although wheel size is an important factor - think of it as a built in gear ratio - balance and steam passages seem to have been quite important. Whether it was simply their size or what, 9Fs seem to have been very steady on their feet, or should that be wheels.
For speed, though, not only has the steam got to be able to get into the cylinders quickly. The used steam needs to get out of them again and quickly up the chimney. Otherwise, its presence will strangulate what the fresh steam for the next stroke can actually achieve.
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by LA Dave:
No, the magnificent home-built A class of the Norfolk & Western were capable of speeds greater than 60 mph (they had 70-inch drivers) and I think (and SPK can confirm) that the Southern Pacific cab-forwards were also capable of those speeds, or at least some classes of them.
Agreed that they were sound and well designed locos, but there's quite a difference between running safely at 60 to 65, and at over 80.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
Although wheel size is an important factor - think of it as a built in gear ratio - balance and steam passages seem to have been quite important. Whether it was simply their size or what, 9Fs seem to have been very steady on their feet, or should that be wheels.
For speed, though, not only has the steam got to be able to get into the cylinders quickly. The used steam needs to get out of them again and quickly up the chimney. Otherwise, its presence will strangulate what the fresh steam for the next stroke can actually achieve.
I agree with all that ... but, with small wheels, piston speeds are going to be high which means lots of bits of heavy metal whipping back and forth and whirling round and round! I think it was that reason that speed limit were placed on the 9Fs.
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on
:
I think it's about time this thread got a bit more serious, I mean, will there be steam locomotives in Heaven? Who will get to drive them, and who will do the dirty work of raking out fireboxes, washing out boilers, and greasing valve motion and brake gear between the frames, eh? Will it be a co-operative venture with Hell? This is stuff that will some day affect all of us and we should be looking to how we're going to spend eternity. Personally, I hope the Highland Railway will have some of its finest locomotives restored to life there and that I will get to drive them.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I think it's about time this thread got a bit more serious, I mean, will there be steam locomotives in Heaven? Who will get to drive them, and who will do the dirty work of raking out fireboxes, washing out boilers, and greasing valve motion and brake gear between the frames, eh? Will it be a co-operative venture with Hell? This is stuff that will some day affect all of us and we should be looking to how we're going to spend eternity. Personally, I hope the Highland Railway will have some of its finest locomotives restored to life there and that I will get to drive them.
Judging by The Titfield Thunderbolt, and the Cadeby Light Railway, it's necessary to be in Holy Orders to drive. Bishops also get first go at relief firemen if a professional is unavailable.
Those who have seen the excellent little 1950s film Railway with a Heart of Gold (made on the Talyllyn) will however appreciate the necessity of keeping the clergy away from pointwork.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
Will there be steam locomotives in Heaven? Who will get to drive them, and who will do the dirty work of raking out fireboxes, washing out boilers, and greasing valve motion and brake gear between the frames, eh?
All heavenly locos will be fitted with L D Porta's Producer Gas Combustion system and utilise perfect coal, thus rendering smokebox and ashpan cleaning unnecessary. Heavenly water (from the river in the final chapter in Revelation) will cause neither scale nor rusting. All bearings will be sealed and non-wearing, fitted with balls or rollers and be furnished with a perfected version of the Norfolk & Western J-class lubritorium system.
[ 26. January 2016, 15:48: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
Will there be steam locomotives in Heaven? Who will get to drive them, and who will do the dirty work of raking out fireboxes, washing out boilers, and greasing valve motion and brake gear between the frames, eh?
All heavenly locos will be fitted with L D Porta's Producer Gas Combustion system and utilise perfect coal, thus rendering smokebox and ashpan cleaning unnecessary. Heavenly water (from the river in the final chapter in Revelation) will cause neither scale nor rusting. All bearings will be sealed and non-wearing, fitted with balls or rollers and be furnished with a perfected version of the Norfolk & Western J-class lubritorium system.
I'd always assumed that given God has a Wonderful Railway, the attempts of other companies wouldn't be going through the gates
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
Hmm ... the GW had a more generous loading gauge than other British companies, so you might find them hard to keep out ...
However, things would be different if you insisted on the Broad Gauge, although that would make Heaven a very Protestant place as the "Saints" (not to mention the "Abbeys") would be kept out too.
Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on
:
Heaven will be full of massive, red-blooded, North American steam I am sure. With soft bituminous coal-filled tenders that, with the right fireman, will when burned produce lovely clouds of black, sooty smoke. Certainly J-class NYCRR Hudsons (none were preserved on earth), Niagaras (same) PRR T-1s (in heaven, no problem with wheel slip), SP cab-forwards galore, one or more of those big Baldwin turbines built for the C&) (in heaven, all will work), etc. etc.
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on
:
What about "Jawn Henry"? Or did that go to the other place?
Posted by Crotalus (# 4959) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Those who have seen the excellent little 1950s film Railway with a Heart of Gold (made on the Talyllyn) will however appreciate the necessity of keeping the clergy away from pointwork.
Link here:
Railway with a Heart of Gold
There's a connection between this film and that of Bittern posted above by Baptist Trainfan in that the same person is in charge of the locomotive in each case. (In the Talyllyn film the 'BBC actor' is just doing what actors do.)
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Crotalus:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Those who have seen the excellent little 1950s film Railway with a Heart of Gold (made on the Talyllyn) will however appreciate the necessity of keeping the clergy away from pointwork.
Link here:
Railway with a Heart of Gold
There's a connection between this film and that of Bittern posted above by Baptist Trainfan in that the same person is in charge of the locomotive in each case. (In the Talyllyn film the 'BBC actor' is just doing what actors do.)
In some ways (and I say this as a TRPS member) I'm often a little sorry that the Talyllyn isn't *exactly* like it is here, and in Railway Adventure.
Of course, it would probably have killed someone by now if it were.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0