Ton up Tornado

If I recall aright, the reason for the A1 Trust not being able to adopt Porta's proposals was not so much because the result would no longer have been a Peppercorn A1 (it could still have been little different in appearance and much of its design) but that a lot more development work and testing would have been needed. In principle, something looking pretty much like an A1 (or an A3 or an A4 or, for that matter, a Duchess) but taking full account of the Chapelon-Porta-Wardale school could be built. But the 5AT project was more realistic in scope and even that failed for lack of enough support. (Though I do wonder whether the lack of support was itself due to less skillful marketing than the A1 Trust have applied to their projects.)

 

I suspect marketing has a lot to do with it, plus the A1 trust has a working reminder that they mean business, and the back up to make it happen, Any new build has to proove it isnt an WIBN idea, and that there is people that can deliver on the promise, when the Bluebell come to do their next new build, they can in turn, turn to BeachyHead and say "heres one we made earlier" now support us with the next one.
As regards regular 90 mph running, that an engine can do 90plus 10, don't mean it will regularly do it, i suspect that it will only be sanctioned on the occasions when its desirable, and for operational requirements for instance, 60163 will only be permitted to run regularly at 90 i suspect on certain bits of track, such as the East Coast mainline where its going to be able to path it easier at the top speed, than at 75mph, or in cases where a delay has impacted on the availible pathes, where if an engine can be re pathed at 90 to make up time or to get it out of the way of regular traffic, and most likily there was to be additional sub class of approoved steam engines that are passed to operate above 75mph i would think it will be only certain Air braked locos .

 

The enthusiast who puts his hand in his pocket for a newbuild is not interested in the development of the steam locomotive per se. He wants a loco that is at least visibly the same as a loco as used on pre or post nationalisation British railways, and preferrably as close to the same internally as possible.

Personally, I'd put my hand in my pocket for a super A3 but certainly wouldn't bother for some heavy load hauler or the 5 AT

 

Isn't that what the A1 Trust said they wanted to do? Sure I saw somewhere they wanted to build a second boiler for Tornado as well as the P2 one so they could swap them round as and when.

 

This was the loco, the Norvegian State Railways cl. 49c, the Dovre Giant. Truly remarkable engines with very modest 15.5 ton axle load they were built to climb ramps of 1:55 at 60 km/h with a 300 ton train.
Could add that the comparison with the DR cl. 01 was done on mostly level racing ground (not the mountains the 49 were designed for). And the NSB 49 were 4 cyl. superheated compounds. A design the germans had ruled out as a complication with little benefit after their trials with the cl. 02 pacifics.


The cl. 49c was slightly modified and built by Krupp of the original Norvegian 49a and b design.
The locomotive in the picture 49c 470 is preserved in Hamar.
Lots of information (in German):
http://www.jvmv2.se/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=45142
And condensed in English:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSB_Class_49
(Where the axle load is wrong, but the adhesion weight is correct.)

 

Wiki has no info on # cyls. and I cant decipher German, so what were they 3 cyl, 4 cyl?? Compound obviously

 

I believe that the boiler to be built for 2007 will be similar to that fitted to 60163 - the original P2 boilers were longer, but to compensate, 2007's smokebox will be longer than the originals, so the overall length of the boiler/smokebox combination will be correct. So, the plan is, as I understand it, to have 3 boilers to swap between the 2 locomotives, thus minimising 'down time' during major overhauls.

 

Four cylinder compounds, the Norvegian built 49a/b took advantage of the wider Scandinavian profile and had bigger LP cylinders (720 mm), but the Krupp built 49c was squeezed into the continental profile with 650 mm LP cyl. The NSB 49 were 10% lighter than the DR 01, and 14 % lighter than the DR 02 (compounds) but they had 5 m2 grate with Nichols syphons compared with the German 4.4 m2.

 

4-cylinder, superheated compound according to the German text.

 

The 2007/Tornado boiler also works at higher pressure than the original P2, so this should compensate in terms of power output for being shorter than the original P2 boiler. As I understand it the larger smokebox should help to smooth out the exhaust pulses to reduce the risk of sucking the fire off the grate during rapid acceleration. I wonder how the valve gear they are planning is likely to affect this. I have not heard much about their development of the valve gear or cylinder block in recent times. I hope this does not become a stumbling block (pun not intended) because the target for steaming in 2020 is creeping up on us..

It will be interesting to find out how the new setup will affect steaming ability, something which I'm sure A1SLT will have worked out. I wonder what it will sound like. I'm guessing more like a roar than a series of blasts.

 

Agreed - and yes, it will be interesting to see how 2007 performs and sounds.

 

Another handy gimme from the 250psi is that the cylinders can be a fair bit smaller.
With the get out of jail free 'Walshaerts' available for only a slight loss of face, figure that the trust must have a high degree of confidence in the Franklin/Lentz gear.
The sound profile of other poppet valve gear Loco with a Kylchap, Duke of Gloucester, with its very distinct and crisp 'Chuffs' is your best comparison.
Roars tend to occur when the exhaust release is unnecessarily prolonged and one event merges into the next (Jubilee)

 

Great articles in these two Mags which arrived today. HR article reveals that 60163 already hit 90mph during her third ML test run in 2008.

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

 

Didn't the Driver who took 60163 out that night get in trouble for that?

 

Yes. He decided to retire a few months later.

 

Still doing turns on preserved ?

 

Yes, he was suspended as he didn't have permission from DB or the A1 Trust.

 

As it was 15mph over the agreed top speed, they must not have been in a hurry to tell him off on the footplate!!!

 

Was a traction inspector there, turning a blind eye?

 

That's a good point, maybe he was driving!!!!