Loco developement ex Tornado thread

No one has written it on here (lately) but I know several otherwise quite intelligent people who seem to believe it. It always comes up when there's a double-header with a multi-exhaust loco paired with a simpler design, such as an A4 and a Castle, Tangmere and a Britannia, etc. One of these sages will say something like "Bittern wasn't doing much" simply because the single-chimney loco was twice as loud and throwing exhaust high into the air. As a video shooter, a loco that makes a lot of noise and puts up a good exhaust, well clear of the boiler, makes a very rewarding subject. On the other hand, I do wonder how much energy the loco is wasting fighting against its own exhaust.

 

I think I'd broadly agree with this. Very roughly, it costs hardly any more to put on a tour with, say, a Class 8 and thirteen coaches or a Class 5 and nine. The track access will be the same; the hire of the carriages more or less the same; the marketing costs for the promoter more or less the same; the crew costs more or less the same etc. Even the difference in coal consumption is neglible: if the difference was say using 8 tons or 10 tons in the day, that only represents a few hundred pounds difference: the cost of perhaps three tickets. But four extra coaches means potentially 150 or more extra passengers. The bigger engine can take a bigger load; or alternatively take the same load but accelerate quicker, which - in a stop/start environment we have in the UK - is actually more important for pathing than the ability to run at a high sustained speed.

I do wonder about some of what I'd term "big new builds at the small end of the spectrum", such as the Clan or the Patriot. To me, they look too small to really be viable on the mainline, and too big to be cost effective on preserved lines. For example - and no offence meant - why would you choose a Clan on the mainline, when a Brittania will take a coach or two more with the same timings and costs, but fifty extra paying passengers? And why would you choose a Clan on a preserved line pulling five or six coaches, when a Standard 4 or Maunsell mogul or GW Manor would do the same job more cheaply? With all those engines, there will be a certain cachet when they are new and people want to travel behind them - either on preserved lines or the mainline. But that won't last, and I fear the owners will have engines that don't really suit either market. Whereas, to take extremes, Tornado or 82045 both seem ideally suited to the niches they have been built for.

Tom

 

Could a compromise to the unwanted "box on the back" be a resurrection of the motor coach of the former SR DEMU units? Even if at the original 500hp rating there would be welcome kick up the back end and, aesthetically, they would blend in seamlessly with Mark 1 stock. They would also be very useful for backing complete trains at triangles etc.

 

Perhaps we need a "NatPres common misapprehension list" that people have to check before posting. Such as:

"More noise does not equal more power"
"A locomotive's identity is determined by an accountant, not by the frames"
"Railway history existed before the 1950s"


Any others?

Tom

 

I've personally wanted prices to go up and number of carriages to come down for a while now. Tyseley win the day, it seems to me, in terms of passenger satisfaction - from the non-enthusiast to the hardcore stop-watch watcher - every time, hardly ever a box on the back, and I can't remember the last time one of their trains was notably late, or cancelled. If they can do it, so can the others.