9F With Giesl ejector

so i stumbled across this image as of late but im not sure how to add it to the wiki for the 9F

 

Not sure how to add it to the wiki, but that's a nice photograph!

Richard.

 

Do you know whats behind it?

 

AFAIK the NCB had a lot of dross coal that they offered to BR at a competitive price.

It was an experiment to see if they could use it.

 

Looks like a 45xx ;-)

 

Could be a 42xx/52xx as it looks like a rear section of coupling rod under the bunker. 92250 has an 86A Ebbw Jc. shedplate. Several 42xx/52xx were also allocated there but no 45xx at that period AFAIK.
Ray.

 

Diesels aren't really my thing, but I think it's a class 40

Tom

 

No one has mentioned 92250's other claim to fame. Outshopped in December 1958 it was the very last of 7331 steam locos built at Crewe (despite Wiki claiming it was built at Swindon)

Peter

 

It shows - it's a class 37!

 

Wiki has a bit of a crisis about that batch as later down the page it is noted that the preserved ones from the batch were built at Crewe.

 

English Electric type 3, in those days..

 

E S Cox says in one of his books that Riddles and his men did not want to try the injector, as they knew the 9F had a good steam circuit already. However Giesl and his backers went behind their backs to the the BR chairman, and Riddles was ordered to undertake the trial. Not surprisingly the injector did not give enough of an improvement to justify the cost.

 

Is there any proper evidence that 34064 and 34092 were better locos than others of their class, or is this just enthuiasts hearsay? After all, like the 9F boiler, the Bulleid boilers were already among the best steam producers used in this country.

Peter

 

What did they do when the boiler water level dropped to a critical level?

Richard.

 

I’ve wondered that. I’ve read things like “the Giesel ejector giving an extra coach haulage capacity to 34092”. How? The ejector didn’t increase tractive effort or adhesion.

 

That does rather sound like a Giesl salesman's sales pitch. If it was generally acknowleged that it was the equal of a Merchant it is surprising that it does not seem to have been utilised more on diagrams intended for the larger pacifics. I'll be interested to see what @S.A.C. Martin uncovers about 34064 when he gets stuck into his research for his promised book on Bulleid and his lcomotives.

Peter

 

I believe that rather like the work that led to the SAR Class 26 the reason for fitting the Giesel to Fighter Command was to reduce spark throwing not not improve performance. This would mean that any improvement in performance would not necessarily have been utilised in the way that it might have been in other circumstances.