Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by Hermod, May 12, 2017.
You can see another one of these at Quainton.
While we hear a lot about the UK CME's what about those who designed loco's at the private builders? The EAR Class 59 being a case to point...............
My new prophet Adrian Tester argues that Bulleid Cs were miles better than Ivatt (junior) s 2-6-0 items.
It could have been stepping stone to the logical best British loading gauge ocomotive that was never made.
Not British, but in keeping with some other offerings, how about this 3-cylinder Škoda beast, with double Kylchap and mechanical stoker?
It really ought to have been "better" as it was bigger. Whether those who had to prepare and dispose, not to mention repair a C1 felt they were better is unlikely. I gather it was difficult to utilise the undoubted haulage ability of a C1 as the braking ability to cope with a capacity load of un-braked British goods wagons was, at best, marginal. An s15 4-6-0 had much better stopping ability.
Enthusiasts sometime forget such issues in their enthusiasm.
There are or at least were some large scale [concept] models made of Bulleids' pacifics built in the same fashion. I remember reading and seeing photos of these models in a feature by the late John[?] Click one time aprentice to Bulleid in the forties. One thing he didn't mention to Bulleid was seeing one or two of those early pacifics with holes kicked into the casing to gain access to various parts of the inners for maintance etc...... Mind the Q1s were so ugly they were beautiful in a weird sort of way.
It's the restriction of Gasworks Tunnel.
It seems to me that the s15's & King Arthurs may not have got the recognition they deserved
Not easy to get from Settle to Carisle.
Picture reminds me of 1970 where wife to be and me visited Checoslovakia .Travelled through DDR and first locomotive seen over border was one of the ligth blue tank 4-8-4 tanks.A couple of days later we visited Karlstein (By rail of course) and was pulled back to Praha by sister engine 498.101.
I had brougth a book by a mr Durrant as guide and cover picture showed 498.101.
I went up and showed it to the crew.
They were schocked and pleased at the same time.
Photographing trains were a crime but it was surprising/pleasing for them to see their steed as cover on a western book.
I should have misused the opportunity for begging a ride ,but did not.My late wife would have enjoyed it immensely.
You have a fine railway museum in Odense, perhaps not on the same scale as the UK, but certainly well worth a visit.
It is more cultured than Your York thing.
There was a locomotive concert once.
20 General Motors locomotive played a fanfare conducted by Michael Schoenwandt that leads Royal Danish orchester.
My wife went over and had programe signed by him.
I think it unlikely that 100 mph steam fans trains can mingle with present electric and diesel trains on mainlines.
Steamlocomotives have not power enough.Max boiler diameter 6feet five inch dia 9feet four up.
It is more realistic to run max 75 on Settle Carisle.
Double track,six regular trains a day.
No overhead wires.Very scenic.
My proposal very schematic.
The bigger than WD 2-10-0 boiler makes 1.5 tons more per wheelset
WD 2-10- 0 are Britains best looking locomotives and the first moving english steam locomotive I saw on a visit 1975 on Severn Valley
Or maybe ...
Cox my former Guru says max 1400 horsepower for a 6feet 5inch boiler Brittania locomotives more than five minutes at 90.
A British 1600 horsepower diesel loco with how many waggons that fast?
What makes the best locomotive will always be a personal matter and on what criteria you are judging it . contenders from me would be.
For sheer power and presence
For quaint Victorian elegance
OK.The big one about 200 horsepower more.
Picture is pure art.
LMS 160 tons/65 adhesive(sometimes)
WD mod 140tons/75 adhesive(always)
A two cylinder compound uses less steam/hp than fourcylinder simple
The only 1600 hp express diesel design that comes to mind is 10000 and 10001 and they had to run as a pair for comparison with a Stanier pacific.
The earlier Type 4 diesels were around 2000 to 2200 hp and weren't considered equal to a Class 7P or 8P steam loco, only with the later designs of 2700 hp were the largest express steam locos satisfactorily superseded.
I don't think you can directly compare the measured ihp of a steam loco with the quoted bhp of a diesel.
My mentioning of diesels is not a defence of diesels or railroads in general.
It is a testmethod finding the number of paying steamlovers a British 6 feet 5 inch locomotive like Tornado/P2/Duke etc can haul at what speed without being a nuissance to other trains.
The Tornado boiler has been repaired and flogging have been proposed as cause
Cox gives max steam production one hour full blast for a Britania/V2/9F etc as very close to 31000 lbs and indicated horsepower as 2200/1990 and 2070.
For a Britania this gives measured drawbar horsepower 1800/1600 at 50 and 70 mph and 1400 if extrapolated to 90 mph.The difference between indicated and drawbar is mechanical friction, steam waste and locomotive air resistance.The air resistance of a test diesel and a steam locmotive cannot be very different and there are losses from diesel crankshaft to drawbar .
Making a Tornado one hour capability test with a 2000 hp diesel is not an order of magnitude of.
Separate names with a comma.