Great Britains steam locomotives

Mark

I am no expert on British steam.

But the answer is yes, their steam locomtives used sand to gain better adhesion.

Seems a lot of the steam locomotives were provided sand boxes located under the locomotive to provide sand to individaul wheels.

Here is a link that explains this design http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/basic12.htm

Mark,

Yes, they do.  Between 2:00 and 3:00 minutes on the video, when the loco is broadside to the camera, you will see 2 tubes with screw lids.  These are the inlets to the sand box.  Photos, from olden days, show men climbing ladders with buckets of sand to fill th boxes.  Labour was cheap.

ChipR

Thank you! Human ingenuity takes many twists and turns!

Hi Guys, generally speaking it was policy in Britain for things like sandboxes /pipework etc., to be tucked away out of sight to keep the locos as "tidy" and as uncluttered looking as possible.

Whereas in the states and in continental europe these things were generally sat on top or slung on the boiler sides.So generally British steam engines have cleaner lines than their overseas equivalents.However this tendency in british design wasn't as practical and was often more labour intensive. More modern British steam loco design especially in the nationalised British Railways "standard" steam types post 1947 tended to follow US and German practice more with easier access to working parts etc.however another limitation on UK steam design was the loading gauge. British locos generally top out at 13 feet whereas in Continental Europe and the states engines could be built much taller and wider . This limitation set on british railways was apparently from way back when the powerfull British land-owning "upper-crust" decided that train heights had to be minimal so as  to blight their landscape as little as possible. Such was/is the British class system.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S..._of_British_Railways    

Hi Guys,what might have been if british steam had continued to be developed.... This solitary class "8" has quite a story and is quite a locomotive....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BR_Standard_Class_8

The DUKE in trouble again

Well, I'm more Artist than Engineer, so I think tucking away bits & pieces is a good idea.  And "tidy" is a virtue.

The size limitations made for some eye-pleasing designs.  NYC Hudsons were so sleek as a result of size limitations on the old (for an American) line.  

Good for the "upper-crust" if we end up with less blight rather than more.  Lucky the Aristos put up some resistance, or everything would look like the hopelessly-ugly endless sprawl far too common here in the US.

"hopelessly-ugly endless sprawl"?   

You mean like:

1) Southern Railway PS4 Pacifics.

2) NYC Hudsons.

3) DL&W Hudsons.

4) B&O Pacifics.

5) CB&Q Hudsons & Northerns & Colorados.

6) Northern Pacific A-5 Northerns & Z-8 Challengers.

7) Southern Pacific GS class Daylights.

8) Union Pacific FEF class Northerns.

9)  C&O H-8 2-6-6-6s.

Plus dozens more!!!!!!

Hi Guys,as for the "Duke in Trouble".Aye there appears to be some problem rearing its head but I'm sure the guys who run the loco will sort it out.It has been performing well for years now so this recent problem I'd think is something fix-able. As for the british land-owning classes .many of them were happy to take the revenues from the new railways but wanted the least visual impact where they crossed their lands.

 There was one exception to the rule in Western England  and that was Brunel's great western railway.(or Gods Wonderfull Railway)as it was known. He built his railway to 7foot gauge , he argued vociferously and correctly  for 7ft to be made the standard ,however too much track had been laid all over Britain by that time to 4ft8.5" that his non standard lines were isolated and eventually they were re-laid to 4ft8.5. He argued that 7ft was better for the amount of stuff that could have been carried and would have been far more stable at speed, ....the man was right methinks ?? very old picture attached shows GWR 7ft gauge locos awaiting scrapping back in the day. When you look at that photoI think the man was right.Brunel was a fine engineer of French extraction.Likewise the finest steam locomotive engineer ever was probably Andre Chapelon also French. Anyway ,4ft8.5 won the day.The second picture I've posted is probably the finest steam locomotive ever built and it wasn't British,American or German but French.Andre Chapelon's 4-8-4. 21 ton axle load and capable of producing 5,500Horsepower. It was scrapped in 1960 ,when built it caused c onsternation among the pro-electric lobby in France because it was so good. As for US steam, I think some American steam was butt-ugly for sure but certainly NOT the USRA types and their copies and derivatives and I'd have to pretty much agree with HOT WATER's list of good looking American steam.

As for the land owning Aristos.....well , the French and Russians had the right idea when it came to Aristocrats in my humble opinion..... and for that matter your own USA in 1776. Unfortunately over here in the UK we are still lumbered with "aristos"and all their stupid pomp and twaddle. Up the republic ! ha ha      DAVY 

So, any of you guys from GB have any thoughts about the odd exhaust on that video posted above (on the first page) of the "Union of South Africa"?

I went and searched Youtube for other videos of that A4, "Union of South Africa", and all the videos taken in 2012 exhibit that really odd exhaust "pop". However, all the videos from 2007 reflect a fantastic sounding, extremely sharp exhaust, typical of a well maintained three cylinder locomotive.

Soooooo, I wonder what happened to her? Any help from you guys in the old country?

Don't know about the A4 not soundin right ??? but here's American and British steam in unison.  USA wartime 2-8-0 and British standard class 9f 2-10-0 haul modern stone train in 2008  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUPZZLB1di8&feature=related  AND diesels just don't and never will create this atmosphere......http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYXZTyiEVWc&feature=related  enjoy and finally  A4 engine Sir Nigel Gresley same location and even faster   ....sounds fine to me .... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=runBptNy7_8&feature=related  crank up the volume and enjoy !.

Boy, you're right! the Sir Nigel Gresley sure sounds a LOT better that that poor Union of South Africa!

Davy Mac: I am aware that Andre Chapaleon was an excellent locomotive designer, who pulled an awful lot of horsepower out of relatively small locomotives, but how did the 4-8-4 cited above produce 5500 horsepower? Look at the size of American 4-8-4's which produced that amount of horsepower and thay were significantly bigger boilered machines (N&W J, UP FEF, Espee GS, SantaFe 2900, etc.). BTW, I happened to be on a passenger train in the Spring of 1971, traveling from Paris to Luxembourg, and saw that locomotive rusting away at a locomotive shed somewhere en route!

      The Duke of Gloucester is Caparotti valve gear equipped. Are there any other Caparotti equipped locomotives running today?

Hi Mark, I think you must have seen a similar locomotive because according to my info the loco was cut up in 1960. And  though its been a while since I read the history of that loco I remember it being said that it was indeed the match of much bigger American machines. It also gave the new French electric locos of the time a run for their money apparently. There is plenty information on Chapelon on the internet.I'll dig about and see if I can find the links and post them.    Davy  

Regarding the size (height) of the more modern British steamer, I've always thought they were smaller due to the smaller already existing structures such as tunnels and bridges. The standard gauge network was built when much smaller locos were used and it was such a large network the undertaking of rebuilding these would have been too expensive and impractical.

Dave ,thats right,but the tunnels ,bridges and loading gauge etc., was set not because of the size of locos but because as I wrote earlier that the land owning classes wanted minimal visual railway impact on their lands. Railways weren't loved by landowners in those days. They were seen as a blight on the landscape but a necessary unstoppable evil. A case of the NIMBYattitude. "not in my back yard" I wasn't around in the 1800s but thats according to the rail-history books I've read anyway. MARK.... just copied this extract on Andre Chapelon's locomotive in question...QUOTE  :  SNCF 242A1

The lone SNCF 242A1 prototype, rebuilt from an unsuccessful Etat three-cylinder 4-8-2 simple expansion locomotive 241.101 into a 4-8-4 compound locomotive. This remarkable locomotive achieved both extraordinary power outputs and efficiencies in coal and water use,^[18] but no further examples were built as SNCF focused on electric traction for its future motive power development. 242A1 was trialed on many test runs which showed that this locomotive was equal in power output as the (then) existed SNCF electric locomotives. Here, for the first time in Europe, was a steam locomotive with a 20-ton axle load which not only was at least as powerful as the most powerful high-speed electric locomotive but which could repeatedly develop its maximum power without any mechanical trouble. Developing 5,300 ihp (4,000 kW)[vague] in the cylinders and with 65,679 lbf (292.15 kN) of peak tractive effort, 46,225 lbf (205.62 kN) mean tractive effort—nothing in Europe could touch it. While Nr.242A1 being tested the electrical engineers were designing the locomotives for 512 km (318 mi) Paris - Lyon line, which was to be electrified. An electric locomotive slightly more powerful than the successful Paris - Orléans 2-D-2 type electric locomotive was contemplated. But when the test results of the test of 242A1 become known, the design was hurriedly changed to incorporate the maximum capacity possible within a 23-ton axle load, and then the 144-ton 9100 class http://commons.wikimedia.org/w...:SNCF_Class_2D2_9100 was produced with over 1.000 hp (0.746 kW) more than the originally designed. Thus the performances of the Mistral and other heavy passenger express trains would not have been so outstanding if 242A1 had not existed.

Therefore Andre Chapelon indirectly influenced French electric locomotive design. In addition 242A1 demonstrated the suitability of the Sauvage-Smith system of compounding for French conditions and the designs for future French steam locomotives, prepared but unfortunately stopped, were of Sauvage-Smith compounding system.

In ordinary service 242A1 was allocated at Le Mans depot (SNCF Region-3 Ouest and hauled express trains in 1950 - 1960 between Le Mans and Brest 411 km. Nr. 242A1 did not last long, it was withdrawn from service and hurriedly scrapped in 1960.

Builder details:

• SNCF 242A1 2D2-h3v (1)600x720 (HP) / (2)680x760 (LP) 1950 148 tons Marine Homecourt 339 / 1945 (rebuilt from 2D1-h3 Fives Lille 4800 / 1932) Written off from books 10 / 1960.

So, any of you guys from GB have any thoughts about the odd exhaust on that video posted above (on the first page) of the "Union of South Africa"?

Actually Hot Water, I was hoping you might know. One thing I did note in the video is the small stream of steam constantly eminating from below the cylinders. When the engine is running slowly, one can see that it is in time with the piston stroke. But which side of the piston, and why, I do not know. The closest thing I have seen on American engines is when the engine is starting, the cylinder cocks (correct term?) are often left open for the first few strokes. I presume this is to eliminate any condensed steam (water) so the piston and cylinder is not ruined.

Chris

LVHR

Davey Mack: Dug into my archives and was able to find some data on Chapelon's 242A1. I must say (and I am certainly not a mechanical engineer) but the horsepower that locomotive produced is uncanny. It had a 54 sq. foot grate area, 2720 sq ft heating surface + 1249 sq. ft of superheater surface, which is roughly one half a big US 4-8-4's steam generation plant. It also had two firebox syphons and a rather complicated 4 cylinder design and 290 boiler pressure. All in all, it sounds like what might be a well designed American 4-6-2, none of which could come close to 5500 horsepower. Mr. Chapaleon seems to have signed a pact with the Devil to nullify the laws of physics! But then, there is that 3' 6" gauge South African Railways 4-8-4 worked over by an Argentinian steam locomotive "expert" which is reputed to put out something like 4200 drawbar horsepower, if memory serves (the "Red Devil"). My resource also quotes the 5500 hp figure for the 242A1.

        Regarding the French 4-8-4 I saw, it clearly was not the 242A1, based on your scrapping date (also confirmed by my resource). I did not know the French had more then one 4-8-4.

Hi Mark,well I'm no expert myself so I have to take whats written down by historians on trust . However the previously posted British locomotive "Duke of Gloucester" has quite a story. An experimental one off she was a semi-scrapped wreck when adopted and restored by a group of engineers. The locomotive has developed some problem recently but since restoration has put in some amazing performances compared to when she was in regular service. In her early life she consumed vast amounts of coal and was a poor steamer. The team of engineers who rebuilt her also noted that she had some built in faults and rectified these. Her performances re-built and fine tuned were astounding. Old drivers who knew the loco back in the day couldn't believe they were witnessing the same locomotive. Likewise the Swiss a few years back took a German Kriegslok 2-10-0 rebuilt it and greatly increased the horsepower of that machine. In South Africa David Wardale an English engineer who still lives here in Scotland re-hashed one of the South African Railways steam locos and after re-build it was more economical to run than the diesels that were being brought in to replace steam. (THE RED DEVIL) The Argentinian engineer you are talking about was LD Porta. Now deceased.

 But the man to talk to is David Wardale. I sense you are a bit doubtfull about the facts and figures compared to bigger American machines but the question has to be asked how much more powerfull would those same American machines be if Chapelons principles been applied to them ?     DAVY

Mark heres some stuff on David Wardale ,there is also comparison to much bigger American machines http://www.trainweb.org/tusp/wardale.html and also heres some footage of the previously mentioned ex german Kriegslok re-vamped by DLM of switzerland.  No slouch,no weakling at 3000hp and cleaner than the most modern diesel. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAvzUjxmLN0&feature=relmfu

That may be a little misleading. Britain severly cut back it's rail lines in the early sixties, and there were some mainlines that went out of service that later came back to life under tourist-type operations...so you can ride a steam train on a "mainline" but it's not part of the current BR system. British Rail over the years also has allowed restored steam to operate on it's regular lines for periods, such as the scenic line from Ft.William to Mallaig which I think uses steam in the summer months. However I think these are joint arrangements betwen BR and tourist lines or museums etc. I don't think the engines are owned and maintained by BR.

Hi there Stix,there is no "British Rail" as such now.Thats long gone.Everything has been privatised. However I "think" that the track and infrastructure is owned/maintained seperately and I again"think" that the government partially owns that.The trains are all run by seperate companies,like Virgin, Scot-rail etc.,etc.etc, freight is handled by what was EWS I believe now Deutschebahn, Freightliner and DRS. But I long ago gave up on who owns or runs what. But you are right, the steam trains are not in regular daily service as such. Though as you rightly pointed out the steam trains run daily on the 40 odd mile West Highland line here in Scotland during the summer season. They are operated by the "West Coast Railway Company" which I think is based in Carnforth NorthWest England. The locomotives head up to Fort William here in Scotland in the spring and return south at the back end of the year when the running season finishes.   Cheers  DAVY 

could be call the "the catch of the day"......

Cool video, thanks for posting it, LaFondue!

Catch of today August 8....The Fellsman with a 1937 class K4 in the lead

Video doesn't play for me, just sits there and does nothing. Something must be wrong, and I don't think it is our new MAC.

my mistake somehow...fixed...sorry

Hi Guys,Charlie (Pennsy K4) hope you don't think I'm nit pickin or bein offensive,far from it, but you have spelled "Britain" wrong ,should be BRITAIN,you have brit "i" an. Doesn't bother me other than I keep pronouncing it in my head the way you've written it every time I go to the post.  ha ha !   DAVY 

Davy

Thank you for pointed that out.

spelling was never my strong suit

Will be more careful in the future.

A three cylinder K4. How about THAT!

Following up on Davy's post, Network Rail is the authority responsible for the management and maintenance of Great Britain's railway infrastructure.

Bob    

Hi Guys, aye but not a Pennsy K4 guys !   different animal entirely.   DAVY

Take a ride on The Scottish west highland line.... enjoy... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4TiO8t_GJg

I've been wondering about that too. Is it possible that one cylinder blowdown cock was stuck open? Or valves badly out of time?

Incidentally A4 is the same class as "Mallard", which holds the official world record for speed on a steam locomotive, 126 MPH.

let's continue this thread...with today's catch of day August 15....the mallard can be seen starting @ 5:00....

Your video will not play. It states "Embedding disabled by request"  Watch on YouTube.

Hot Water

It played after clicking on the underlined - watch on YouTube

Try it

you will like it

I just want to thank everyone who have posted the photos and videos in this thread.  They are terrific.

Stuart

Luv dem British steam whistles

Now THAT is what three cylinder steam locomotives are supposed to sound like!  GREAT video.