Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by aron33, Aug 15, 2017.
An improved roller bearing A4 would certainly get some financial support from me.
the Duchess's were never optimised for maximum performance because they did all that was asked , but I would like to see a new oil burning 46256 , redraughted to modern standards and with the niggles in the valve gear sorted . bathtub optional.
now that could be capable of 3500+ HP continuous ......oh , and passed for 120 mph running
In any case Stanier (in fact, almost certainly Coleman) had designed a 4-6-4 and a 4-8-4 as the next step (and a nice 2-6-2 for the V1 type duty) - if we're going to build pointlessly large and ahistorical locos which won't earn their keep, why not go for one or both of those...?
My favourite candidate for a new build project; weighing in at 5 tons it would be a tremendously fun device to tour with.
mainly because they would have been used for 700+ tons which we don't need . probably not needed when they were designed for that matter .
had oil burning been a realistic option at the time ,the LMS may well have done exactly what I have suggested . they wanted 3000hp. a Duchess can do that if you give it enough to eat.
a modernised Duchess would wiz 12 coaches along at a very pleasant rate without the hassle of a new design.
I would imagine the prospect of 120mph crossing the Vale of York may generate a bit of interest .
One of the lesser known tasks for these engines was the West Coast Postal, which they took between Crewe and Perth overnight. It was a special link and not in the promotion links: a man had to apply for it and many who did found that they couldn't cope. These men simply reverted to their normal progression route. Why?
If the train was of 16 bogies it was a light one. Normally it was 17, sometimes 18 and 19 and 20 not unknown. There are stories of 21 on the odd occasion. They were not assisted on Shap or Beattock, and the same Crewe, always 5A men, worked throughout, coming back with the return working the following day. The load was generally between 600 and 7oo tons. Allan C Baker has a lot to say about this working in various publications.
That could be good fun, imagine phoning up somewhere with the request 'I'm thinking of visiting in the next week or so, would you have a spare path and crew?'
Not knowing the numbers ,but if half the heritage buisness is on 2 and a half feet or less,it could be fun to have a two-cylinder compound version of the Darjeling Himaleya B-class.
There is already a simple/ original in England.
Comparison and betting will be easy and it will be miles cheaper to build than a mainline 6 coupled or worse..
The class B was constructed in 1887 and one was working for life in a coal mine in Assam recently.
Some awfull good engineering.
How much change shall be allowed ?
If I pay, inside frames and frame water tank will be allowed ,but no visible welding.
Two cylinder compound with steam jacked HP cylinder ,reheat and nicely isolated LP cylinder.
Some of the movies on Youtube shows how dangerous the cylinders are when being within 2 inches of tomatoes and humans.
A bigger LP cylinder makes it much worse.Inside frames helps.
Simple. Because the people who fund these projects in mass are generally fans of BR steam.
Moved to Compound thread.Sorry
No bathtub please, yuck.
yep = i know this , but data on the running of the Postal is hard to find .... as you say , it was beyond the abilities of many .
if you have any links to further info I would be grateful.
I had a feeling you would mention the Postal - you are getting to be predictable .lol
I agree . but liked by some
Oh dear! now what can I do to astonish the world? I'll have to work on that!
Most of my information on the Postal comes from Allan C. Baker, so all I can do is refer you to his writings. 'Crewe Sheds' is a good start.
To be fair, at the present time the number of successfully-completed new-build projects of narrow gauge locos is far, far greater than the number of successfully-completed standard gauge ones! Moreover one of the fastest-proceeding "under construction" standard gauge ones is of something that never ran in BR days in the form being reproduced.
Don't really know the narrow gauge numbers, but maybe "early replicas" is actually leading - several versions of Rocket; Sans Pareil; Novelty; Steam Elephant; Locomotion; Puffing Billy; Catch-me-who-Can etc. They always seem to get forgotten in any numbers game.
Good point Tom. Some of the narrow gauge locos are a bit of a grey area. Does Tom Rolt count as a new build? What about Earl Of Merioneth? I suspect that Welsh Pony completes her overhaul, she may well contain a greater proportion of new material than the latter!
Oh, I don't know - they are better than they used to be.
OK, I'm going out now
A smaller version of the 'Bug' methinks.... since 'Gazelle' still exists, are you proposing the original 2-2-2 speeder version?
Just on the Ffestiniog you’ve had four new builds since 1979: Earl of Merioneth, David Lloyd George, Taliesin, Lyd, which isn’t too bad going.
I guess that ‘new building’ double fairlies when you have double fairlies already working means that you don’t have the engineering unknowns that seem to hit so many projects and the accumulated knowledge makes it easier to new build locos.
Separate names with a comma.