Would a rail link Edinburgh - airport cut journey time significantly? And what are the plans for a tramway network? Are they controversial? I have been once to Edenburgh, like to go back someday.
greetings,
Marc Immeker
There is a photo in the March "Railfan and Railroad" of an 1851 Cumberland Valey 2-2-2. It's a very primative looking thing compared to UK and European steam of the same era.
Go forward just 50 years though and North American steam design outstripped anything on this side of the Atlantic.
John Bakeer wrote:Tulyar,Just heard that Hornby are to release an upgraded Caly 4-2-2 later this year, if my memory serves me right? The original shared the same chassis as the Lord of the Isles, so we may see an upgrade of that one too, hopefully without the dreadful Magnadhesion.
Tulyar,
Just heard that Hornby are to release an upgraded Caly 4-2-2 later this year, if my memory serves me right? The original shared the same chassis as the Lord of the Isles, so we may see an upgrade of that one too, hopefully without the dreadful Magnadhesion.
John Baker
To a large extent yes - the GWR especially.
After Nationalisation also there were 172 Standard class 5 (73xxx) and 80 heavy Standard class 4 (75xxx) 4-6-0's built by BR, along with a large number of LMS type Black 5 (44xxx), LNER B1 (61xxx) and GWR Hall (69 and 79xx) classes to 4-6-0 designation.
Nationalisation did not mean the end of previous practice. Whilst we lament the horrendous waste of steam engines built under BR with a 30 year design life being scrapped after 6 years it's worth remembering that the last B1's were built in 1951, 3 years after nationalisation and the supposed drive to efficiencies through standardisation.
I suppose we must draw from this the conclusion that right from the outset the policies and priorities of the nationalised railway were hopelessly muddled.
As an aside consideration of the 4-6-0 type and it's usage brings to the fore another example of divergence of US and UK terminology. Such classes would be referred to North America as dual service or dual purpose, whereas we'd call them mixed traffic.
Once rode a double-headed fantrip out of Toronto with two 4-6-0's. About 1958, if memory is correct. And the Pennsy G-5's were continued to be built in the 1920's and provided most of the non-electric service on the LIRR until well after WWII. Also in suburban service out of Pittsburgh. But of course the E-6's and K-4's were the stars of the passenger service.
But all four in Britain contued to build or buy 4-6-0's until nationalization, if I am correct on this. And all four used them as dual purpose, again if I am correct.
daveklepper wrote: comparing American to British:Interesting that the nearest thing to a standard North American passenger locomotive in the height of the steam era was the Pacific, 4-6-2, and the Mikado 2-8-2 for frieght work. Neither dual service. But the standard in Great Britain was the ten wheeler, 4-6-0, for both, defnitely dual service. And British Rail received new 4-6-0's, quite a few, after WWII. But production of the 4-6-0's in the USA and Canada had just about stopped some 30 year earlier, with the good G-5 PRR suburban and local frieght engine being possibly the most modern example.
comparing American to British:
Interesting that the nearest thing to a standard North American passenger locomotive in the height of the steam era was the Pacific, 4-6-2, and the Mikado 2-8-2 for frieght work. Neither dual service. But the standard in Great Britain was the ten wheeler, 4-6-0, for both, defnitely dual service. And British Rail received new 4-6-0's, quite a few, after WWII. But production of the 4-6-0's in the USA and Canada had just about stopped some 30 year earlier, with the good G-5 PRR suburban and local frieght engine being possibly the most modern example.
The Canadian Pacific Railway made good use of its G3 Class Pacifics in freight service in addition to hauling heavy weight passenger trains (75 in dia. drivers, 45,000 lbs T.E.). While the CPR's last 4-6-0's (D10H's) were built in 1913, many D10's remained in service to the end of steam in the late 50's (63 in. dia drivers, 33-34,000 lbs T.E.).
Isambard
Grizzly Northern history, Tales from the Grizzly and news on line at isambard5935.blogspot.com
It is also interesting that other US equipment was trialed in the British Empire around this time namely in Australia the classic Baldwin 4-4-0 were puchased to compare against the Beyer Peocock built NSWGR 12 class which was also a 4-4-0 ( Which were based upon the Metropolitan condensing tank engines) While it was claimed that the British built loco's performed much better and had used better materials and of a higher standard of workmanship than the Baldwin. The Baldwin was in some ways a much better engine than the 12 class these were.
1. The Baldwin used a bogie leading truck as against a leading Bissel truck which only allowed for lateral movement.
2. The Baldwin used bar frames.
3. Valve gear was easier to get to. To set the valves you had to smash the smoke box floor out.
4. Better suspension as a result the Baldwin was no where near as hash on the track than British designs at the time.
Here is some info on U105
http://www.infobluemountains.net.au/rail/baldwin_u105.htm
The Baldwins British competitor
http://tinyurl.com/ytvwfs
John Bakeer wrote:Dave, The GWR had numerous tank loco's with 2 wheel trailing trucks, but I am not aware of any standard gauge tender engines other than the odd ones inherited from companies they took over. I once had a Hornby 00 scale model of a 2-2-2 but I think this was in reality a broad gauge machine. No doubt others will add their greater knowledge to this item.
Dave,
The GWR had numerous tank loco's with 2 wheel trailing trucks, but I am not aware of any standard gauge tender engines other than the odd ones inherited from companies they took over. I once had a Hornby 00 scale model of a 2-2-2 but I think this was in reality a broad gauge machine. No doubt others will add their greater knowledge to this item.
Murphy Siding wrote: Tulyar15 wrote: John Bakeer wrote:the only WD2-10-0 I Know of was Gordon on the Longmoor Military Railway, who built it and where it is? I do not know"Gordon" was built by the North British loco at Glasgow, as were all the WD 2-10-0's. Since the closure of the Longmoor Military Railway in 1969, "Gordon" has been based on the Severn Valley Railway. As an American, I find this rather amusing. Gordon is know to most kids as the big blue express engine on Thomas the Tank Engine, on television.
Tulyar15 wrote: John Bakeer wrote:the only WD2-10-0 I Know of was Gordon on the Longmoor Military Railway, who built it and where it is? I do not know"Gordon" was built by the North British loco at Glasgow, as were all the WD 2-10-0's. Since the closure of the Longmoor Military Railway in 1969, "Gordon" has been based on the Severn Valley Railway.
John Bakeer wrote:the only WD2-10-0 I Know of was Gordon on the Longmoor Military Railway, who built it and where it is? I do not know
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
devils wrote: The only wooden structure left is Barmouth Bridge in North Wales (I think). That traverses an estuary with a swing bridge in the middle and was threatened by worm attack in the late 70's. Reference has already been made on this thread to it somewhere. .cogload
The only wooden structure left is Barmouth Bridge in North Wales (I think). That traverses an estuary with a swing bridge in the middle and was threatened by worm attack in the late 70's. Reference has already been made on this thread to it somewhere.
.
cogload
Cogload,
I can assure you that Brunel's Loughor viaduct between Swansea and Llanelli is still in (intensive) use today. The track was singled back in the very late 1980s, but the viaduct is still good for 75mph for passenger trains, both DMU and HST, but down to 20mph for Loaded Freights (Steel Coil trains going west to Trostre and Loaded Oil Tanks heading east) when they have to be diverted from the Swansea Distric Line from time to time.
Don't forget, Brunel also designed notable timber viaducts at Aberdare, on the Dare Valley branch off the Vale of Neath Railway.
Martin
John Bakeer wrote: Marc,I have just come across the Colonel Stephens Society web site;http//www.colonelstephenssociety.org.uk
Marc,
I have just come across the Colonel Stephens Society web site;
http//www.colonelstephenssociety.org.uk
Thanks John!
You'll need to go back to about the time I joined this forum in 2004 when an extended correspondence took place about the mysterious Atlantic. The L&Y only assembled it they did not purchase, I doubt if it was actually purchased by any one.
John Bakeer wrote: the only WD2-10-0 I Know of was Gordon on the Longmoor Military Railway, who built it and where it is? I do not know
daveklepper wrote:Yes, I am still here. But before I receive more pictures, I'll have to move to larger quarters. I note the comment about the Southern being more advanced than G_d's Wonderful Railway, and I suppose that is reflected in the fact the all other three had Pacifics as their top passenger power and the GWR ten-wheelers. Did the GWR own any steam power with a trailing truck under the firebox?
Yes, I am still here. But before I receive more pictures, I'll have to move to larger quarters. I note the comment about the Southern being more advanced than G_d's Wonderful Railway, and I suppose that is reflected in the fact the all other three had Pacifics as their top passenger power and the GWR ten-wheelers. Did the GWR own any steam power with a trailing truck under the firebox?
John Bakeer wrote: --------The only US loco' to be fitted with Walschaerts vlve motion was UP's 3 cylinder 2-12-2 as built the had the Gresley conjugated system, as the UP shops had problems setting them a third set of motion was added to the RHS leading to a rather odd appearance. Apparently they enjoyed some success but were soon replaced by articulated because the long rigid wheel base caused problems in yards etc.
--------The only US loco' to be fitted with Walschaerts vlve motion was UP's 3 cylinder 2-12-2 as built the had the Gresley conjugated system, as the UP shops had problems setting them a third set of motion was added to the RHS leading to a rather odd appearance. Apparently they enjoyed some success but were soon replaced by articulated because the long rigid wheel base caused problems in yards etc.
This a bit off topic to the thread perhaps, but is prompted by the above:
The Walschaerts valve gear design was widely used in both U.S. and Canadian railroads. Some 88 Union Pacific 9000 Class loco's were built by Alco from 1926 to 1930 for heavy freight use. As built they had the Gresley conjugating valve system for the third cylinder. On eight engines this system was later replaced with a triple Walschaerts valve gear hung on the right side. In 1936 the 9000's were moved from main line service to a slower-speed division, superseded by the higher speed 4-6-6-4 Challengers. The 9000's continued in service into the early 1950's.
Loco Profile No. 16 features the UP 4-12-2's and is a good read (published September 1971).
We've recently moved to smaller quarters, hence the need (instruction!) to "get rid of all that stuff if you want to build another layout."
The A4 is probably best compared with the GWR King class, but direct comparisons are difficult to draw because of the different territory over which each operated. In terms of output and efficiency the Kings would always be at a disadvantage because of their smaller superheaters.
A4's, however, had a tendency to unreliabilty, a particular achillees heel being the inside big ends.
Whilst the Southern light and heavy pacifics were undoubtedly revolutionary their idiosyncracies prior to rebuilding also led to erratic performances.
So - hat in the ring time - that leaves us with Stanier's LMS Duchesses.
The 1948 loco trials were conducted just after the nationalisation of Britains railways, with a view to taking the best bits of all of the pre-nationalisation types to establish a best practise for the standard engines to be built subsequently.
Nobody, in hindsight, could suggest that the trials were undertaken in perfect or impartial conditions. The infrastructure of the railways was in poor condition after maintenance starvation during WW2 and the majority of the test engineers were from the LMS works at Derby.
In the express loco category, however, the Duchesses returned the best efficiencies, drawbar horsepower and reliabilty.
Oddly, though, and illustrative of the inconclusive nature of the tests the SR light pacifics were trialled on the steeply graded Highland main line from Perth to Inverness. On one occasion a light pacific established a time over this road (including Slochd Summit, which is the closest we get to Dunsmuir) which has STILL never been beaten....
Yes, I am still here. But before I receive more pictures, I'll have to move to larger quarters. I note the comment about the Southern being more advanced than G_d's Wonderful Railway, and I suppose that is reflected in the fact the all other three had Pacifics as their top passenger power and the GWR ten-wheelers. Did the GWR own any steam power with a trailing truck under the firebox? How does a Manor or Castle compare in performance compared with a Gresley A-4?
Also, concerning Blackpool and IofM, I am an LRTA member, read Trams and Urban Transit cover-to-cover, like Trains and Classic Trains, and visit www.lrta.org often. I'd say T&UT is definitely my third favorite magazine. I've been an LRTA (formerly LRTL, League replaced by Association) member for possibly more than 40 years.
Murphy - and anyone else interested...
I'm starting an exercise on thinning out my collection (5000+) of photographic prints.
These date from the early 80's to digital (2000) and are mainly UK although there's a fair bit of Western Europe (especially Ireland and Switzerland) and some US.
If anyone wants anything specific let me know and I'll see if I've got it. I'd have to charge postage but any prints are free.
Daveklepper - if you're still out there - plenty of Isle of Man and Blackpool stuff!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.