Fitting air brakes on locomotives

I cant understand why it wasnt made mandatory from day one, as soon as everyone went over to air brake for any ML pased loco to have Air braking and for all railtour stock also to be air braked, a vacuum braked engine and stock on todays railway if it needs rescueing is a problem, back in th 80's and 90's when there was still engines with vacuum brakes it wasnt a problem. but now it is,
JH seems to have made the decision that its not wise to put all your eggs in one basket, and i believe his engines are registered with both DBS and West Coast so if LSL can meet both operators requirements it shouldnt be to much of a problem for them, to go over to DBS if West Coast cant continue

 

It would be cheaper and quicker to fit air braking equipment to the current mainline vacuum only steam locos, than it would be for DBS to train steam drivers, firemen and inspectors to cover all of WCR's steam work.
In terms of productive driving lost while said drivers are learning steam.

 

One of the problems with retro-fitting air brakes is aesthetics. Air pumps really need to be accessible but that means putting them in full view. Imagine an A4 with an air pump sat up front by the smokebox. There would be an outcry. 60007 has an air pump and it is hidden deep in its underbelly. If there is a problem with it and there isn't a pit available, you have a problem. And for those who say that air brake systems should be reliable; they should, but they often aren't. My experience of air brakes is limited to 2253, 6046, 44871, 45407 and 76079 and all have provided problems at one time or another, generally with the pump simply stopping. Perhaps I'm just unlucky, though!

 

Maybe that's part of the problem with it not being in full view (but where else would you put it, when it comes to aesthetics?....) to do with the through flow of air/cooling the equipment.......... I'm no "expert" but every loco I've seen images of extant or otherwise, the air pump is always mounted forward, and plainly in view........

 

The fitting on 35028 Clan Line (at the back of the tender) has always seemed to me to be very neat and unobtrusive. It also seems to be extremely reliable.

 

Just mount 'em on the side of the cab where the fireman can attend if necessary, like on proper engines

Tom

 

Meaning?..... anything LNER?.......

 

I don't think this arrangement is allowed any more. Happy to be told I'm wrong, though.

 

Some have it between the frames, 73050 being one example.

 

These operators don't seem to be unlucky:-
http://www.iwsteamrailway.co.uk/default.aspx
http://www.hsb-wr.de/en/mehr-erfahren/das-unternehmen/about-us/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heritage_railroads_in_the_United_States

etc

 

Are you sure that those listed above have NEVER had an air pump failure?

 

Seems like a topic worthy of its own thread. Anyway, many moons ago I raised the question of air pump reliability and whether anyone was interested in developing a 21st century alternative, but was told it wasn't a significant problem.

 

No. But I doubt they have the same amount of bad luck as Steve!

 

Point taken.

 

i have often wondered why an air compressor and back up pump cant be fitted to a support coach, and that controlled from the engine provides the air for the the braking system
modern stock have lightweight compressors mounted underneath the frames or if an full brake, inside, that way any problem, the support crew can turn to back up, whilst sorting out the main compressor that way engines need only to be through piped with a controller

 

There are evidently several possible ways to skin this particular cat, and no necessity for everyone to do it the same way. You do need a source of power, and a boiler full of steam is the most obvious. But you could have a steam turbine providing electrical power for various purposes, and use some of that power to drive an electrical compressor. Or you could use diesel power in the support coach. Steam on the Met has sometimes run with a temporary air brake valve installed on the steam loco and the air supply coming from the diesel or electric loco at the other end of the train.

But a steam-powered reciprocating pump has been the usual method on many railways in many countries, and normally only one per loco. That implies that failures have been rare enough to be tolerable. But doesn't Tornado normally have two, and hadn't one of them gone wrong and been removed when Sod's Law struck and the second one failed in north Wales?

 

Alas, yes, the failure of both pumps was caused by a combination of events but ultimately down to the grade of lubricating oil being used for the pumps. Meiningen carried out some analysis of lubricants and concluded that the compressor oil used in the air side of the pumps did not have a sufficiently high temperature capability to cope with the 10 bar pressure the pumps produce. This was evidenced by the formation of carbon on the air valves in the pump. The original choice of compressor oil was based on need to minimise contamination of rubber seals in brake equipment. A change in grade has seen the pumps work satisfactorily since. Quick thinking by Traction Inspector Gareth Jones at Rhyl ensured passengers were able to alight instead of being stuck outside the station limits.

Foxy