P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

Didn't someone already mention the 135 degrees for Lord Nelsons ? Castles are solid Machines, Rebuilt Scots are also, but the Lord Nelsons are just Poetry.

 

Except the Nelsons. 135 degrees for them.

Beaten to it by class8mikado

 

Deleted

 

Yes. We've had all this before somewhere..

The crank angle is about 3° different again, say, 123° to allow for the higher inclined angle of the cylinder.

What's interesting, is how it's done. In the case of the P2 it's got to be in the keyway/journal setting.

Anyone care to elaborate?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

Cheers! One does one's best to be bl●●dy awkward!

 

Right! 'Cos I've noticed that Bulleids have a weird off-beat chatter that's totally unlike the LNER/LMS 3-cylinder types...

 

Depends on the LNER types. The use of unified drive frequently necessitates the three cylinders not being in the same plane. The inside cylinder occupies a raised, inclined position to allow for the need to drive on the second driven axle. There are the odd exceptions, D49 4-4-0s and B16 4-6-0s and not forgetting the original A2 Pacifics, there were others, but these examples will serve. These types all have unified drive on the front axle.
The original A1, the A3, A4, K3, K4, O2, P1, P2, V1, V2, V3 and V4 all have unified drive on the second axle, and so do the Bulleid Pacifics. Family resemblance?
The B17 class had divided drive, as do the LM 4-6-0s and so too post Gresley LNE Pacifics. Those that have looked in more recent years at the best way to design a high power locomotive look to three cylinders and unified drive.
The "off beat chatter" could be down to a number of factors. One German engineer in his analysis believed that this was inevitable because the exhaust tracts were not uniform across the three cylinders. Interestingly one of the engineers that works on one of the preserved A4s has pointed out that the exhaust from the inside cylinder is far more direct than that from the outside cylinders. Then you have to consider the valve setting, expansion allowances and more.
We seldom indicate our charges, neither do we measure cyclical variation in drawbar pull. The engines are set up as well as we are decently able to. They generally perform well and are reliable all things considered. Those responsible for the engines have a good "feel" for their charges and make it their business to notice and attend to anything that is out of the ordinary.

 

My Father told me that Gresley 3 cylinder engines had very uneven exhaust beats when the conjugated valve gear was worn. This was especially true during WW2 when engines lacked good maintenance. He had personal experience of this when travelling on the ECML.

 

There's certainly a difference between the off-beat chatter of a well-set-up Bulleid (in the case of Clan Line accelerating 700 tons up Gomshall Bank from a signal check at Tangley Crossing- as recorded in - it was an apocalyptically loud blatter!) and the sound of one where the valve events clearly aren't right. I remember 92 Squadron on a visit to the Bluebell when I was a kid making an odd one-wheeze-three sound, while Blackmoor Vale was making classic Bulleid chatter - and, when they double-headed, seemed to be doing most of the work.

 

This is true, but you have to ask the question as to why the maintenance was poor. The conjugated gear was grease lubricated, it was also fitted with roller/ ball bearings but these were replaced due to wartime shortages. This grease lubrication was what might be called a shed job rather than a crew job as I understand it and it came to be overlooked/forgotten because of wartime circumstances. This could be seen as a management failure, all it needed was for it to be insisted on that the grease points were charged before a locomotive went out on a job, and making a crew responsibility might have been helpful.

 

During wartime weren't the roller bearings replaced with plain bushes as well?

 

Blaming this on a management failure completely under estimates the difficulty that everbody was working under during wartime. There are very few people alive today who can recall working in WW2. My Father was not a railwayman but did manage to convey to me the trials of living and working during this period. Just think of the difficulties: the blackout, air raids and warnings interupting work, reduced staffing, lack of materials, heavy traffic and perhaps seeing some of your work mates killed at work.

 

So, if an important maintenance item is being neglected, who is responsible for taking action to ensure that this issue is addressed?
Or is this neglect acceptable because of difficult circumstances? And if one item is acceptable how many items make up an unacceptable level?

 

all sounds quite simple dunnitt?...……………..except that although the railways were a reserved occupation a great many men went off to fight .
POWs comprised a lot of the shed staff . now you really should have a go at persuading a bunch of Italians that lubing up a valve gear was summat they really ought to be doing when a little while before we were doing our best to kill the blighters

 

I tend to think that most people who have escaped a warzone would be reasonably happy to be away from it and also to prove themselves useful to their captors/ rescuers if treated fairly.

 

Slightly off topic but that reminds me of a story from my grandmother when she was working at Park Hall near Oswestry. They had a German POW working as a gardener in the grounds who seemed to be pleasant and hard working. Eventually he moved to another camp, the following spring the daffodils came up carefully planted in the form of a swastika.

 

Several versions of that story have appeared over the years.

 

No sense of humour them krauts...

 

Bloody Hell! There's no stopping these guys!
https://www.p2steam.com/2018/06/07/boiler-tenders-issued/

The headline sounds very interesting - Makes it sound like a secondary steam generator to be incorporated in the tender!

Richard.

 

Ha ha good one Richard, unless I have missed something ? Otherwise, I like the fact that British industry has been offered the opportunity to produce the P2 boiler.