Next New Build In The UK

10477 views
70 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Next New Build In The UK
Posted by kgbw49 on Saturday, December 05, 2015 10:06 PM

Meanwhile, across the pond....this is a P2 Mikado - 3 cylinder if I understand correctly. The next in line - 2007 Prince of Wales is under construction.

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 7,262 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 9:47 AM

Wow, that thing was gorgeous!  Leave it to the Brits to take a workhorse like a Mikado and make it look like a racehorse!

  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,852 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Sunday, December 06, 2015 11:37 AM

They need to do her in full A4-like streamliner casing.

  • Member since
    December, 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 1,031 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 12:26 PM

Buy the English magazine called naturally, The Railway Magazine. There's always info about it. After the knowledge was put together to build the Tornado a few short years ago, the plan is to keep on building new steam. The PoWs frame is almost complete and the wheels have been delivered. There's others under construction, too. Those limeys don't screw around!

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 7,262 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 1:42 PM

I wonder how they manage the fundraising?  Maybe we should pay 'em to come over here and show us how it's done?

Or maybe it's the British people G.A.S. a bit more than Americans do about their steam heritage?  After all, next to penicillin and parliamentary democracy Britain's greatest gift to the world was the steam locomotive.

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 7,262 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 1:43 PM

NorthWest

They need to do her in full A4-like streamliner casing.

 

I disagree, it looked great the way it was.  Why mess with perfection?

  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,852 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Sunday, December 06, 2015 2:25 PM

Firelock, while the first two looked like the images above they were rebuilt with A4-like streamlining. The later 4 of the class had A4-like streamlining from the builder.

http://www.lner.info/locos/P/p2.php

It's kind of a moot point because I have learned that another group is trying to build another P2 with that streamlining.

Why build one when you can build two?

Doncaster P2 Locomotive Trust

http://www.cockothenorth.co.uk/mission_statement.html

https://www.facebook.com/Doncaster-P2-Locomotive-Trust-Cock-O-The-North-193996747368324/

 You've got to love the British enthusiasm!

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 2:33 PM

These locomotives apparently had the most tractive force of any UK locomotive, even more than the 9F 2-10-0.

P2 - 43,462 TE on 20 Long Ton Axle Load

9F - 39,667 TE on 15.5 Long Ton Axle Load

Here is the stream-lined version:

  • Member since
    August, 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 7,262 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 2:36 PM

Honestly, I really don't care for that A4 streamlining, the older exterior styling of the locomotive strikes me as a lot more businesslike, if you see what I mean.

I just looked at the "Cock O' The North" website.  Man, if they've got Brian Blessed on their side anything's possible!  Ever seen Kenneth Branagh's "Henry The Fifth?"  Mr. Blessed was in it, and he was BORN to wear armor!

  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,852 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Sunday, December 06, 2015 2:55 PM

The other project (same as A1 Trust people).

http://www.p2steam.com/

 

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 4:54 PM

It is pretty amazing that while the P2s were apparently the most powerful steam locomotives in the UK with about 43,000 lbs tractive effort, the SP and UP each had Pacifics that basically had equivalent tractive effort to the LNER P2.

  • Member since
    December, 2008
  • From: Toronto, Canada
  • 1,031 posts
Posted by 54light15 on Sunday, December 06, 2015 6:14 PM

To finance it, the Brits have what they call a Covenator scheme where you subscibe a certain amount of money per week to go towards it. Like they say, a P2 for the price of a pint a week, there's www.p2steam.com  email at enquiries@p2steam.com There's government grants given via a historic lottery as well.

  • Member since
    November, 2014
  • 61 posts
Posted by JoeBlow on Thursday, December 10, 2015 6:27 PM

54light15
To finance it, the Brits have what they call a Covenator scheme where you subscibe a certain amount of money per week to go towards it. Like they say, a P2 for the price of a pint a week, there's www.p2steam.com  email at enquiries@p2steam.com

I'm surprised that has not been tried here in the U.S. by a group of steam enthusiasts using a subscription or a campaign on a website like Kickstarter. Go to any railroad museum and you'll notice that the steam locomotives are always the most popular, even if they are static.

  • Member since
    April, 2003
  • 289,155 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, December 10, 2015 7:38 PM

JoeBlow

 I'm surprised that has not been tried here in the U.S. by a group of steam enthusiasts using a subscription or a campaign on a website like Kickstarter. 

They have. The PRR T1 Trust (among others) heavily promotes the idea of regular monthly contributions. In fact, they say this is how the most money can be raised the fastest, everyone contributing ten or fifteen doallars a month. Most organizations have a "make this a regular mothly contribution" option when donating on their website.

  • Member since
    January, 2002
  • 3,105 posts
Posted by M636C on Thursday, December 10, 2015 8:36 PM

kgbw49

It is pretty amazing that while the P2s were apparently the most powerful steam locomotives in the UK with about 43,000 lbs tractive effort, the SP and UP each had Pacifics that basically had equivalent tractive effort to the LNER P2.

 
If the SP or UP had to fit a locomotive into a height of 13 feet and a width of about 9 feet (so a foot narrower and nearly two feet lower, on the same gauge), they would have probably ended up with locomotives of lower tractive effort too, since the diameter of the cylinders is one of the major figures in calculating tractive effort and the maximum cylinder size is limited by the overall width. The P2 had 74" driving wheels, which kept the tractive effort down, too. But being a three cylinder locomotive it had a reasonable horsepower for its small size.
 
M636C
  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Thursday, December 10, 2015 8:56 PM

Indeed. Not a criticism of the designers in the UK, just an observation about how much smaller in size UK and continental steam is compared to here in North America. I have been to the National Railroad Museum several times and the Dwight D. Eisenhower is very compact compared to the other steam exhibits. What they have been able to accomplish in the UK is very, very impressive! And it will be interesting to hear what they find out about the P2 in terms of performance - they may prove that their rebuilding in the early 1940s was perhaps not necessary. With Tornado and the Prince of Wales, they are doing a steam-powered version of Jurrasic Park, bringing extinct beasts back to life! Good stuff!

  • Member since
    April, 2015
  • 11 posts
Posted by BLW2102 on Thursday, December 10, 2015 9:30 PM
I believe the American Steam Railroad with the Fire Up 2100 project has such a monthly donation of $21.00 for 12 months to fund the Reading T-1 2100 restoration.
  • Member since
    March, 2013
  • 392 posts
Posted by Dr D on Friday, December 11, 2015 7:52 AM

Enthusiasm for English Steam Power - this can be seen in America in the Western United States.  Union Pacific with the commitment to a long term corporate steam program featuring reconstruction of its Cheyenne locomotive facility and projected operation of UP 4-8-8-4, UP 4-6-6-4 and UP 4-8-4 class locomotives.

Elsewhere especially in Colorado much of the Denver & Rio Grande Western steam locomotive roster of 2-8-2 mikado locomotives are in operation - I believe about ten operational engines are running on their original main lines of the Durango Silverton Railroad and Cumbries Toltec Senic Railroad.  This is remarkable and is happening no where else in the USA.

Another Colorado phenomenon is the literal circle of track at Golden Colorado at the Colorado Railroad Museum.  Here engines re-restored to operation with a full roundhouse crew just to run on a small circle of track around the musuem - a la like a huge toy train layout.  Yes, the ultra sounding of the boilers, the repair of running gear - the re-laging of the boilers - the complete restoration of locomotives - just to go around a large circle of track the size of a football field.  Go figure!

Also in Nevada, the Nevada State Government funding with a Federal Congressional grant of $10 million - thanks Senator Harry Reid - Democrat from Nevada - for the re tracking of the original mainline of the Virgina And Truckee Railroad with operation of trains using an assorted collection of orphan steam locomotives gathered from everywhere standing in for the original Virginia Truckee locomotives located primarily in different California museums.  

Thats right - the State of Nevada is doing the reclamation of the original railroad grade - the survey of land including clearing of tunnels.  The purchase of massive amounts of ties, spikes, rail joiners, bolts, and rails.  The assembly of a competent crew and the relaying of the main line track including functional stations, and water tank facilities.  Go figure this! - can you imagine Pennsylvania or New York or Indiana doing this?  

And further in Nevada there is the reproduction of the Virginia Truckee 2-6-0 1896 steam locomotive Lyon as operational replacement for existing on site museum Virginia Truckee 4-4-0 1875 steam engine Inyo.  Also very unusual, because we seldom see the recreation of a scrapped steam engine - just to supliment the operation of an existing historic steam engine which is functional at the same location in the same capacity.  

This is definitely a Nevada State Government operation the US National Park Service could get its head around considering the screwed up operation and what is going on at National Park Service, Steamtown USA site in Scranton PA.  

Oddly the National Park Service claims the Virgina Truckee Railroad as a Historic Site lending their letterhead to an operation they seem to have little interest in or claim to in face of what the Nevada State Government is doing.

Western Maryland Scenic - the East Broad Top - the Pennsylvania State Railroad Museum - Steamtown USA - the New York Central Railroad Museum - Project 1225 - the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn MI - yes these too - are evidence of steam train ENTHUSIASM - and it could happen elsewhere!

Doc

  • Member since
    October, 2014
  • 1,644 posts
Posted by Wizlish on Friday, December 18, 2015 10:43 AM

M636C
If the SP or UP had to fit a locomotive into a height of 13 feet and a width of about 9 feet (so a foot narrower and nearly two feet lower, on the same gauge), they would have probably ended up with locomotives of lower tractive effort too, since the diameter of the cylinders is one of the major figures in calculating tractive effort and the maximum cylinder size is limited by the overall width.

Let's also remember that the permissible axle load on the 'permanent way' was lower (and yes, there was a slightly higher load allowed for the 'better balance' of multiple-cylinder locomotives on at least some British railways).  That means that the effective factor of adhesion would have to be lower, although perhaps not as dramatically lower as, say, the Golsdorf 2-6-4s (which still awe me for what they can do within strict limitations!)   Peter will have specific numbers and contexts for this.

Even with all that, I believe one of the limitations on P2 development was that they were too powerful for the 'available trains' on the anticipated routes... this was a platform limitation, in part imposed by very heavy traffic across platform ends that made 'sticking out' even by an additional car length or so impossible. 

On the flip side -- I suspect the much lower frontal area imposed by the British loading gauge was a substantial factor in Mallard's ability to get to 125 mph... there was a similar thing a few years ago when one of the truck magazines wanted to build a 200 mph diesel truck, and used one of the small pickups for the body...

  • Member since
    January, 2011
  • 485 posts
Posted by tomstamey on Monday, December 28, 2015 8:31 PM

Note the different valve gears on the streamlined version.

  • Member since
    September, 2002
  • From: NZ
  • 242 posts
Posted by Gunneral on Tuesday, December 29, 2015 6:42 PM

To Dr D.

As a matter of interest, this is a disscussion about the NEW BUILD of Brit locomotives from the old builders plans from BITD, they are being built and engineered from the ground up and are not RESTORATION projects they are completely NEW builds which are being built by Brit steam enthusiasts and public donations.

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Tuesday, December 29, 2015 8:28 PM

I seem to recall with Tornado, the group that designed and built that unit did some minor engineering modifications when computer analysis indicated it would be beneficial to the overall performance of the locomotive, essentially "tweaking" the original design. I can't recall specifically what they were - I just recall reading about it.

What will really be fascinating to monitor with two groups doing new builds of essentially identical locomotives is whether, after computer modeling is completed, they also come up with tweaks to the design that enhance operation, and if so, do the two groups come to the same conclusion!

Two 74"-drivered Mikados - they will really be something to see!

 

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Tuesday, December 29, 2015 8:30 PM

I seem to recall with Tornado, the group that designed and built that unit did some minor engineering modifications when computer analysis indicated it would be beneficial to the overall performance of the locomotive, essentially "tweaking" the original design. I can't recall specifically what they were - I just recall reading about it.

What will really be fascinating to monitor with two groups doing new builds of essentially identical locomotives is whether, after computer modeling is completed, they also come up with tweaks to the design that enhance operation, and if so, do the two groups come to the same conclusion and do the same adjustments, or different ones!

Two 74"-drivered Mikados - they will really be something to see!

 

  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Sunday, August 07, 2016 8:59 PM

Looks like major progress across the pond on the 3 cylinder P2 Mikado...

07011601 - Smokebox on frames DE

And some excellent information at this link:

https://www.p2steam.com/

 

  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 2,852 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Sunday, August 07, 2016 11:56 PM

Wow, she's really coming along. Thanks, and very impressive!

  • Member since
    March, 2016
  • From: Burbank IL (near Clearing)
  • 10,163 posts
Posted by CSSHEGEWISCH on Monday, August 08, 2016 7:32 AM

It's interesting to note that the locomotive will be on a built-up rather than a cast frame.  Was this standard practice in the UK?

The daily commute is part of everyday life but I get two rides a day out of it. Paul
  • Member since
    September, 2014
  • 992 posts
Posted by ROBERT WILLISON on Monday, August 08, 2016 11:58 AM

Total beautiful locomotive, leave to the Brits to build a new steamer. Now just wondering how the 2102 is coming along.

  • Member since
    April, 2016
  • 466 posts
Posted by Shadow the Cats owner on Monday, August 08, 2016 2:56 PM
Look what the NYC did with their Niagara's. a domeless 4-8-4 that would fit thru the needed tunnels still would run 100 MPH+ produced over 6000 HP and could clear the yard on freights when needed according to what I have read. To bad not one of those beauties was saved. Can you imagine one of them at speed today or here is to hoping the group rebuilding 5051 the T1 makes it even I can not wait to see her running. .
  • Member since
    January, 2015
  • 957 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Monday, August 08, 2016 5:46 PM

Here is a link to some great CAD design pictures showing the proposed construction of the major components:

https://www.p2steam.com/design/

They are able to progress quickly because they are also able to incorporate "common" components already designed and used in 60163 "Tornado".

They are going to use the same tender, as an example, and the trailing truck to accomodate a larger ashpan, as another example.

They also are going to use thicker components on the driving rods than on the original, apparently, and will be using roller bearings throughout.

Here is a P2 pickin' 'em up and layin' 'em down...

  • Member since
    January, 2002
  • 3,105 posts
Posted by M636C on Monday, August 08, 2016 9:03 PM

CSSHEGEWISCH

It's interesting to note that the locomotive will be on a built-up rather than a cast frame.  Was this standard practice in the UK?

 
Yes, the riveted and bolted steel plate frame was standard in Britain and in Europe. The British never used cast or slab bar frames, although the Germans did so from 1925. The French pretty much stayed with plate frames except for locomotives built in the USA.
 
The Germans developed one piece welded steel plate frames during WWII as a substitute for their rolled slab bar frames, and continued to use these after WWII.
 
M636C

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy

Search the Community