If this project is successful, it will certainly be a fascinating sight to see in operation with all those reciprocating levers and cranks...I wonder how contemporary boiler safety regulations would impact this replica, if at all..ditch lights anyone? Just kidding... Whats interesting is the recent trend to resurrect examples from early American railroading history..I wonder if coaches will be next to haul behind this beast..if I recall..they were equally bizarre looking..like stage coaches.. looks like a challenge to fire..with that high tech tender..
http://www.wayneindependent.com/news/x1699628227/New-Stourbridge-Lion-replica-to-be-built
A smaller scale replica run under compressed air gives an impression of how Byzantine the workings of this engine this machine are..watch your fingers kids..stand back!
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
IIRC the first passenger cars were indeed built by a stagecoach manufacturer because...well, who else would build them?? So they were basically stagecoach bodies on RR wheels. I suppose that's why passenger cars came to be called "coaches"??
The B&O Museum had their steam weekend this past weekend. I did not attend but one of the locomotives that was supposed to operate was a 1927 replica of an 1837 locomotive called the "Lafayette". The train was supposed to consist of replicas of that type of passenger car (converted stage coaches), also constructed in 1927. We had a Nor-Easter here over the weekend. I don't know how Baltimore was affected. The fact of the matter is that replicas already exist of that type of passenger car, and Honesdale, PA also had a replica of the Stourbridge Lion on display.
Why replicate a very un-succesful locomotive, that never moved an inch in revenue service? Silliness, methinks. The replica, in Honesdale, serves its purpose and is done well.
I ask the same question considereing how virtually useless it was not being capapble of pulling anything of consequence. The replica in Honsedale is owned by the D&H Company and on perminent loan to the museum I believe, and there might be legal restrictions on fireing it up or it just might not be in condition to be fired and moved. However, I've been told it is a simple machine to replicate in that it has only one flue and all the simple mechanisims are out in the open.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
It wasn't useless. It was too heavy for the wooden track that D&H built.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
PV...too heavy for track it was! But it is still somewhat questionable as to replicating a replicate.
If anyone is interested, the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, DC (I forget which building off hand, Arts & Industry perhaps?) has the boiler and other parts of the original Stourbridge Lion on display. It only weighed 8 tons, but as was pointed out, the rails in use at that time could not handle the "great weight of the locomotive". I wonder what those folks back then would have thought when they saw a UP Big Boy or a C&O Allegheny come chugging by!
Actually, the last I knew it was on loan to the B&O Museum in Baltimore, MD.
Phoebe VetActually, the last I knew it was on loan to the B&O Museum in Baltimore, MD.
Yep, still there as of last week. At least what little is actually left of it--amounts to the boiler, one cylinder, and one rocking lever.
Its British cousin "Puffing Billy" is still running, or at least their replica still runs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqkKcy6HWTM&feature=related
Have fun with your trains
I thought the replica of the Stourbridge Lion is esconced in the Canal Museum at Honesdale, PA. on permanent loan from the D&H. When was it take out...it was there less than a year ago when I drove by and saw it as it is visible from the street.
henry6 I thought the replica of the Stourbridge Lion is ensconced in the Canal Museum at Honesdale, PA. on permanent loan from the D&H. When was it take out...it was there less than a year ago when I drove by and saw it as it is visible from the street.
I thought the replica of the Stourbridge Lion is ensconced in the Canal Museum at Honesdale, PA. on permanent loan from the D&H. When was it take out...it was there less than a year ago when I drove by and saw it as it is visible from the street.
You are correct. There is a replica of the Lion in Honesdale. What belongs to the Smithsonian and currently resides in Baltimore are the remaining pieces of the original Lion.
OK. Now it makes sense.
The Stourbridge Lion, by all accurate and honest accounts, was not a rousing success. Beside the "great weight" issue making it too heavy for the track structure, the single flue would not provide enough heating surface in such a locomotive to allow much steaming capacity, and thus power output. Thank goodness, as the positioning of the cylinders, rocking arms and main rods to the front driving wheels, coupled with the lack of counterweights, would have made for a rather rough ride.
The Rocket, Stephenson's successful entry in the Rainhill trials, was successful because it had a boiler incorporating multiple firetubes, greatly increasing the heating surface and thus the steam generating capacity. That's why virtually all successful locomotive designs to follow used the same boiler construction pattern. The Rocket's cylinders were originally mounted at an elevated angle of around 30 degrees, but this caused a rough ride. They were soon lowered to an angle of only 8 degrees, providing for a much smoother ride and vastly decreasing the dynamic augment forces on the primitive track structure.
I understand that the Stourbridge Lion could manage to drag itself and several lightweight coaches, but was not able to achieve the goal it was designed to perform, which was to haul loaded coal wagons. Still, it is interesting to see these early examples of steam power and to see how rapidly technology developed. Barely twenty years later, quite capable locomotives had transformed transportation in this country and in Europe as well.
No one claimed the Lion was a rousing success. The claim is that it was the first steam engine to run on rails in America.
The Wright Flyer was not a rousing success. It only went 112 feet, the pilot had to lay on the wing and a bunch of guys had to push it down the hill. But it's still in the Smithsonian.
Off topic: I took a train to Asheville Sunday. You live in very pretty country.
Having missed the chance to support the Tornado, I do not want to miss this one.
How can we help???
Thanks,
Kevin Olsen
(Modelling the 1830 to 1850 period in HO scale)
Regardless of the relative success or failure of the original Lion, it's encouraging to see efforts to replicate old steam. The recent completion of the "Tornado" in Britain and "Leviathan" here bode well for the possibility that someone will undertake the building of other significant American locomotives, albeit using modern tools, techniques, and materials.
Who wouldn't want to see a Niagara or a "Mother Hubbard" or {insert favorite locomotive} under steam again?
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
To parse whether the first American steam locomotive was a model of efficiency is something only a infinitesimally minuscule portion of the population ruminates over. Does the Jefferson memorial have an efficient roofing system? To bring living history to the young, as opposed to the perverse strategy Moe Larry and Curly have designed over in Green Bay that will squelch the 261,one of a handful of operable nationally historic locomotives, is an admirable quest, regardless if it hauled one potato rather than two.
As several people have pointed out, the original was just plain too heavy for the track - a common problem with early locomotives anywhere.
There is, in the National Railway Museum, York in the UK, a complete sister of the 'Stourbridge Lion'. 'Agenoria' was built, like the 'Lion', by Foster & Raistrick in 1829. It shows the grasshopper beams and the simple boiler that really were rendered completely obsolete by 'Rocket' of the same year. By 1830, 'Planet' had been built for the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, and all subsequent locos show the layout that Robert Stephenson produced with 'Planet'
You can see 'Agenoria' at:http://www.steamlocomotive.info/vlocomotive.cfm?Display=4045
There are several working replicas of very early locomotives in the UK:
Locomotion, Puffing Billy, Steam Elephant, Rocket, Sans Pareil, the Penydarren loco, and some later ones including the 7 foot gauge 'Firefly' and 'Iron Duke'
By all means, go ahead and build the replica - generations of people have never seen these things in action. At best they have a static exhibit, or a few remaining parts, or at worst only photographs or drawings. To see one in action is the only way to appreciate it.
By the way, the same applies to other machines - paddle steamers, vintage aircraft and old cars.
The "Stourbridge Lion" was a failure, from the day it got off the boat from "Over There". Stop pissing money down a rat hole! Granted, the "Wright Flyer" only did 122', ten times as much as the "Lion" ever did. The replica, in Honesdale, did its job. Some things have to be laid to rest. Giving money to the "261" project is meaningful and will be appreciated for years-to-come.
Having said that, I have a 1989 Ford Mustang "GT" with a blown 4.9 (a.k.a. the 5.0) V-8 motor. All contributions acknowledged and apprecitate! Please mark all checks "Donation" in the memo box. Nothing over $11,000, please. Thank you very much.
Its hard to beleive that in less than 10 years steam technology went from this in 1829:
to the 4-4-0 in 1836, the quintsential model engine for the next 50 years
V.S...
If this trend continues, we may be able to have a parade of living history in steam much like our friends in England enjoy. While perhaps not a near term possibility, at least we are approaching a reasonable feasibility.
I would be interested in what examples our fellow posters think should be added to this list of American motive power. I say American for practical reasons, but I would love to see the Red Devil included..the shame is that non articulated power houses like the Q2 are only found in old photographs. Failures are fascinating and have a certain mystique attached to them like Jawn Henry or the T1..we could debate endlessly what constitutes success..but all are developmental steps whether they were or are dead ends..whatever happened to the diesel the DOE outfitted to run on pulverized coal..? Of course it's not reciprocating steam but I use it as an example of an apparent dead end, but is interesting...
wallyworldI would be interested in what examples our fellow posters think should be added to this list of American motive power.
It would be nice to have a cross section of motive power from across the country - from the workaday to the wondrous. Everybody has a favorite (I'm lucky - there are several editions of my favorite still around), and each of us can certainly make a case that ours should be the first example built.
Just as (if not more) important is trackage on which to run such power, which is getting rarer by the day. Not just so they can run, but to provide a source of income with which to continue building other locomotives.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.