BR Standard class 6 No. 72010 'Hengist' and Clan Discussion Thread

Yes this is very true.

The Clans seemed to have gained a 'Marmite' reputation during their working days, crews either loved them or hated them. However, we are not building a Clan 'warts and all'. With the latest technology and expertise from the likes of the AMRC (Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre / Boeing) and the Advanced Steam Traction Trust a lot of those warts are being removed. As always, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating and until we're shovelling coal onto the grate everything is educated speculation.

Will Hengist have the problems of the past, No. Are we doing our best with expert assistance to ensure we get a modern steam loco fit for the mainline in the 21st century, YES.

 

I would like to know the case for ordering additional Clans for the Southern already awash with more Bulleid Pacifics than they knew what to do with.

 

The fundamental difference is that, having ordered a first batch of Metrovics and a first batch of Swindon Type 1's, they didn't order any more.
The main problem with the Clans was they looked bigger than they were. A Clan is the same length as a Britannia and only 1'-3" shorter than 71000. Size doesn't always equate with power.

 

Indeed, neither did the southern region need two Brits to help out on Boat train Duty, but they got them. Suspect that as mentioned earlier in this thread the Clans we're to be evaluated against Bulleid Lights and the King arthurs with a view to making a decision about the future of those classes. Cox and co we're clearly impressed by the light Pacific concept but my opinion is that the features they took from the Bulleid Pacifics into the Standards we're not always the right ones.

 

I think the Brits were more showing off the latest development on a prestige train used by important foreign travellers and maybe 70014 was a bit of a two fingered salute to the French.

 

Care to elaborate? What do you think they took from the Bulleid Pacifics that should have been left out, and what do you think they left out that should have been included?

Tom

 

The ones they should have taken ?
The Boiler, the Lemaitre, the BSB Wheels.
The ones that they did take or copied elements of - footplate and cab, tenders, trailing truck, frame stretcher design, frame spacing and construction, motion brackets and slide bars. Unfortunately the later three worked perfectly well with 3 small cylinders but are not ideal for two large ones.
The Bullied and Standard Pacifics are to my mind two ends of the same same stick and are two schools of designs that added up to less than the sum of the parts put into them.
The Rebuilt Bulleids are to my mind slightly oversized versions of what the Standard Pacifics should have been
Only in the Restored Duke of Gloucester in its pomp do all the elements combine to great effect

 

Following on from Tom's questions, which Rebuilt Bulleids have you in mind, the big ones or the slightly smaller ones?

Cheers,

Alan

 

The Class 14s were wonderful locomotives but they were designed for work that evaporated as they were being built.

 

Sorry, in waxing Lyrical mode today.
Merchant = Brit, wc/bb=clan...

 

Like when the Dover shedmaster put "Sir Francis Drake" on a train conveying the Spanish Ambassador.

 

Bulleid slidebars? That design was picked up by Bulleid whilst he was at Doncaster with Gresley.

 

Correct.
On a Bullied pacific they are relatively short (24 inch stroke) and only supported in the middle
On Gresley designs they tend to be anchored to the cylinder on one end and supported 2 /3rds along on a 26 inch stroke. ( think they might be like that on a standard 5)
Intuitively the latter would be more suitable 20 inch cylinders and a 28 inch stroke than then the former... ?

 

Slidebars are best supported at their mid point where the greatest forces are. Best kept off the cylinders. (Especially if you have to renew the rear cover joint!)

 

Correct. The 14s went on to prove themselves in rough industrial use over a number of years. The running gear was simple and robust, much like that of a steam locomotive, and designed to be maintained at small to medium sized R&M Depots.

 

The net result may be the same but the reasons are different. 'I'm not having any more because they are rubbish' and 'They're good but I'm not having any more because I don't need them' are fundamentally different.

 

Did any of the original Clans have the BR1B tender?


Thanks

Keith

 

No they didn't and this is a moot point for some. The Cancelled order for the additional 15 Clans included BR1B tenders....
However for working the Southern region BR1G's or BR1F'S would have been more appropriate so whether the New tenders would have stayed with the Clans for long or been exchanged for others is a proper conjecture.
The official Party line for 72010 is that it should look as close as possible as the originally ordered one - that means a Br1B/C profile.... but with the spaces re arranged to give less coal, more water. Potentially this would require the chassis to be a BR1F to take the weight (though its probably easier to change the 1F design to look like a 1B than change a 1B to carry nearly as much as a 1f)

 

Thanks for the info


Keith