The perfect 'new' engine for preserved railways?

I fancied holding a right bloody dust up robust debate and ask this sort of question. It's also probably my first "wibble" style thread.

So let's say you've seen the genie of the lamp, or what have you and you've got your money to build/buy your own preserved railway but as genies are mischievous beings you don't have motive power! We also know in the wider "market" these days the remaining stock of steam engines are tiny, or there's already examples hanging about of existing designs. So, you need to build a new engine but genies being gits that they are, there are conditions:

1. You can only pick one type, but you can have a half dozen of that type. Which should be enough for a strong "home fleet".
2. You cannot use designs where examples are already preserved.
3. The engine should be suitable for your line, no matter the length you're still stuck to 25mph running after all.

Think that might prove a nice challenge.

 

Standard class 3 tank - thread closed

 

GWR Bulldog class which will have many different looking engines but the same class, and all with names including some with names/number plate combined. And they are not big chuffers.

 

The next batch of OVS's Leader Class, with one to be sent over the Solent to the IOWSR.

 

'River' class tank?

 

I propose a Midland 3F tender engine - they were simple and robust, a numerous and historic class. Good turn of speed, but not too fast. Suitable for ex-midland branches in particular, but if you changed the cab design, smokebox door, safety valve cover and chimney, the GWR types could paint it green and call it a Dean Goods. Saw it done in Railway Modeller once - most effective.

 

Would a Dean Good’s be allowed, seeing as the one preserved has not/will not run?

 

Fowler class 4 2-6-4 tank or Stanier class 4 2-6-4 tank (2 cylinder version)

Bob.

 

Looks like we are heading towards a 2-6-4T dominated line......................

 

Well, it isn't quite a Dean Goods, bound to have a few rivets in the wrong place etc. The point is, the 3F would be absolutely right for the KWVR, extremely useful at Wirksworth - and we can spread the cost by selling on the surplus to the GWR types who will be too busy checking the shade of paint through a spectrometer to notice anything amiss.

 

Or you could build a Stanier class 3 2-6-2 tank !

Bob.

 

Drummond Black Motor

 

As my line is going to be the Hayling Island branch, i’m going to request an LNER U1 rather than an SR U1 and a nice fleet of mk1s.

More seriously, what my line would need would depend on the route and the former companies connected to it. My needs if I manage Bath Green Park to Bournemouth West are going to be different than if I were to running a shorter branchline.

 

Yes I can see the sense of a Stainier 4MT 2-6-4T, but what about a Brighton I3 4-4-2T for something slightly older and prettier?

Cheers, Neil

 

And the first superheated loco to boot....................... (Ducks)

 

At the risk of being controversial - what about a Q1 0-6-0

 

Metropolitan Railway K class 2-6-4T (later LNER class L2). Essentially a 2-6-4T version of a Maunsell N class. I had to exclude the SR K class (essentially similar, but 6'0" rather than 5'6" driving wheel) on the technicality that one is notionally preserved.

Tom

 

We all know its either a standard 3 or 4 Tank... but with my Apple Green leanings its a Thomson L1... built with a fair bit of 'license to improve'.

 

A 4400, the small wheeled version of the 45xx small prairie would be a useful bit of kit at 25mph. Probably much the same performance as the BR locomotive at 25mph, and ten times more charisma to draw in the public. And with a large amount of commonality with the 45s they should be relatively cheap to build.

 

Like building it as a 2-8-2 tank and beefed-up axle boxes?