Fictitious Locomotives etc...

I have just scanned a batch of images from 'Model Railway News' from the early 1940's showing some inspired locomotive ideas...

an 0-4-4 coal tank?
'Modern' GWR 4-4-0?
What the GWR 'County' would look like before anyone had seen one!
3 Cylinder H2?
2-8-2 Duchess?

And a taster....
A GCR ROD, if the GWR went to town on it

Scan 3 by Steve Purves, on Flickr
Clicking the like will take you to the full set on Flickr

Enjoy!
Steve

 

[h=2]92203 "Black Prince", 92214 "Cock of the North",[/h]

 

Perhaps you should rename that 'ugly locomotives'! Not really 'lookers' are they...

 

I have always enjoyed these 'what ifs'. I thoroughly recommend the book 'Locomotives that Never Were' by Robin Barnes, with lovely watercolours of each 'might have been' class.

 

Where's that chap on FaceBook that has a prediliction for new build LNER locomotives when we need him?

This is what the heritage world has been missing all along...

Tom

 

The best ficticious locomotive drawing I have seen is in Sir William Stanier's Presidential speech to the Instituition of Mechanical Engineers in 1941 "The Position of the Locomotive in Mechanical Engineering". To illustrate a section of his talk on compounding, Stanier showed an engineering drawing of a Princess-Coronation configured as a four cylinder compounding based on Andrea Chapeleon's principles. The drawing shows that although he found a way of physically fitting the large low pressure cylinders within the loading gauge to do so means that he did not have sufficient space for "the bearing and crank dimensions shown by experiance to be essential for freedom from heated bearings and for high mileage between repairs" - in short "The answer is that the thermal gain would be more than counteracted by mechanical loss".

The drawing shows that the Compound-Duchess' axleboxes would have to fit in an area of just 7 inches for the 10" diameter journal (Duchess axleboxes are 10 inches).

Stanier's presentation was open and honest. He admits that in experimental work areas (such as the Turbomotive) he is struggling to draw conclusions as he does not have access to a locomotive testing facility to obtain the data he requires. He also devotes part of the time in advising young engineers on how to progress in their careers based on his experiances. Although I am not anti LNER I have to say this is in complete contrast to Gresley's 1936 paper (on the advantages of three cylinder locomotives over two and four cylinders), where he closed the meeting with the words "I understand it is customary on these occaisions to answer questions from the audiance, however I have no desire to do so, if anyone wishes enter into a discussion with me there is such a thing a correspondance!"

 

Weren't BR going to build a 2-8-2 class based on the Britannia's but Riddes decided to go for the 9F with its 2-10-0 arrangement.

Any idea where I can get that Locomotives That Never Were book that Jamie's mentioned. I found 2 on Amazon but I don't want to pay either £92.95 or £257 for it. I guess it'll be difficult seeing as it originates from 1985.

 

I got mine on ebay for about £15 five years ago...

 

Just looked on eBay and although they don't have the book they do have a copy of Steam Railway Magazine also from 1985. Presumably using images from the book. There is a Youtube video showing some of the designs including a Bulleid Spam Can tank engine (although wasn't that one of Bulleid's designs for the Leader Class)

Edit: Turns out there are places selling that book but they appear to be in Australia and from prices from £26.

 

The ROD doesn't look a million miles away from a 28XX/38XX, but I guess that would of been the whole point.

That 2-8-0 County looks a bit of a beast, bet that would of earnt it's keep west of Newton Abbott.

The 99XX looks out of gauge even even by GWR standards!, if a new GWR express type had ever appeared, I think it would of been a King with a Longer/Wider firebox and 4-6-2 wheel arrangment, though some think a 4-8-0 would of been more likely.

 

Clutching at straws, done a author/title search on Waterstones & W H Smith. No go I'm afraid.

EDIT,
Some examples of the author's work here.

http://www.robinbarnes.net/

 

There are a bunch of GWR abandoned projects shown in RCTS vol 9, as some will know. It gives some ideas of the challenges that the draughtsman faced. There were quite a number of attempts at a Manor with a standard or lightly modified boiler for instance until they eventually gave up and designed a new one. The Manor's a good example of the problems faced - the object of the exercise was to get a loco with a good bit more boiler capacity than a 43xx Mogul, because the Std 4 boiler would run short on steam on heavier and faster work. But the trouble was not only was there only really about 8 tons extra weight carrying available from a 4-6-0 over a 2-6-0, but also that the extra carrying was in at the front where it was least use. So that's why the Manor ended up with a longish boiler with diameter halfway between Std 2 and Std 4, but also a shortish firebox.

The real beast aamongst the GW projects that didn't get built was a 2-10-2 tank with a Std 7 (47xx) boiler. With tractive effort of over 40,000lbs and over 17tons on all the driving axles it would probably have been able to have a good go at dragging a 9f backwards...

 

Abebooks is always a good site to search. Lo and behold: robin barnes - locomotives - AbeBooks

 

What fun. I'm particularly tickled by the Thompson rebuild of a Stirling Single.

 

It's lovely book. Got my copy years ago in an ordinary 2nd hand bookshop for a couple of pounds.

 

I read a good article a few years ago that the GW would have been better off strengthening a few bridges for Halls instead of designing new locomotives like Manors to fit certain routes.

 

Can see why that would of been desirable, the Manors took a good few years to get right whereas the number 1 boiler on Halls & Granges worked straight out of the box, woulden't but too hard to upgrade run of the mill under/overbridges, but then you have to consider huge great unique things like Barmouth.

 

This one?

The Model Railway News April 1945 by Steve Purves, on Flickr
It was attached to an article referencing the new GWR loco announcement... Turns out they were never 99XX after all, they emerged as 10XX Counties instead!

I'm quite a fan of the 'dukedog' prediction...

The Model Railway News July 1944 by Steve Purves, on Flickr
Steve

 

That's the one Steve, apart from the obvious differences (continous splasher etc), the boiler looks bigger than what emerged as the County, even looks bigger than a King boiler to my eyes, looks like a massive boiler and cylinders on what are in relation, tiny driving wheels.

The "Dukedog predicition" looks somewhat more modern than what actually rolled out of Swindon!, similar to a GWR version of a Midland 2P.

I've always been fascinated by these "might of beens", didn't someone in BR propose a 10F (a 3 Cylinder 9F) at one point ?.

 

Well, they are drawings, so the proportions aren't always going to be spot on.

Locomotives that Never Were includes a post war GWR proposal for a pacific based on the kings.

though again LTNW shows a post war proposal for a 4-4-0 with outside walschaerts.

that isn't included in LTNW, though the 2-8-2 is.

Luckily I'm close to Winchester and the Hampshire Library Railway archive - which has a copy. Fascinating reading.