Streamlined Non-Pacifics

Canada says eh



to a slightly round smokebox door



CP also went in for it.

Canadian Pacific Jubilees (better than the LMS?)



to the Royal Hudsons



to a Streamlined 2-10-4



Sources:

https://www.railarchive.net/randomsteam/cnr6400.htm
http://silverhawkauthor.com/steam-locomotives-and-trains-of-canada_364.html
https://www.rapidotrains.com/hudson-master-class/
https://www.rapidotrains.com/iocs-future-releases/
http://www.trainweb.org/oldtimetrains/photos/cpr_steam/T1.htm

 

Is it possible that a Great Western loco got there first? From the testimony of a former Mather Dixon & Co. employee many years later:-

 

Not overly sure it was worth the Italians streamlining a 2-8-0 with a maximum speed of 65 km/h!


Though possibly a bit more effective on a 120 km/h 2-6-2.

 

That one looks as if it could double up as a paddle steamer!

 

To go back a few posts, the streamlined Schools looked spectacular. I'd love to have seen it. Imagine being 7 or 8 and seeing that, you'd know you were living in the space age.

 

You may have a point there.

 

I'm afraid my idea of streamlining does not include some of the foregoing - a pointy smokebox door or a wraparound cow catcher doesn't do it imo.

neither does this French offering . Semi streamlined - but gorgeous

 

Conventional wisdom has it that for most locos the streamlining was pretty much of cosmetic/publicity value. Looking at a well known internet site, the Coronation class pacifics were three tons heavier in streamlined form, which would have incurred extra fuel costs at all speeds, whereas streamlining has little effect at low speed (air resistance rising with the square of velocity rather than linearly)

 

Almost certainly style over content.

I mean the 2-10-4 was based in Calgary for going over the mountains which they weren’t doing at high speed.

 

Howzabout this French-built Pacific for Algeria : ?

https://www.trains-worldexpresses.com/800/816-06m.JPG

 

There was, according to this account, a Streamlined DHR B Class during WW2.

https://www.irfca.org/articles/isrs/fnrm5-dhr-streamliner.html

Photos are hard to find but I did find an artist's impression on the internet.

 

Someone made a 16mm scale model of Jervis Bay http://www.sidestreet.info/Gallery/Gallery2/Ga2.html

Found a picture http://users.fini.net/~bersano/english-anglais/english-anglais/DHR_B Class_John Ager_1942.jpg

Streamlined garratts also include various African ones that had streamlined front tanks. Like those Algerian ones. They had unusual valve gear as well.

 

I didn't realise the Schools actually ran on the mainline at all - are there any photos, please?

 

Some key American offerings: from the New York Central (mostly 4-6-4s) and the drop dead gorgeous Norfolk & Western J-class

 

I think it only ran like this once but here you are.

 

The photo @Matt37401 has included is the only photo I've ever seen - certainly nothing of it actually running.

Tom

 

I rather think there's been one very specific advantage missed off here - certainly true of the Gresley locomotives fitted with the Bugatti front end.

Smoke deflection.

The wedge shape and the aerofoils lifted the smoke away from the driver's line of sight. This is best demonstrated by looking at Youtube videos to compare between single chimney Flying Scotsman and the double chimney A4s running in preservation.

The bugatti front end locos, by and large, significantly better at smoke deflection. Fitting it to the W1, the P2s and the two B17s were part of a publicity drive, absolutely, but it also remains an absolute fact that the front ends served this practical purpose too - and it did it very well (and still do it well today).

There is an argument that 2007 Prince of Wales might have been better off adopting the P2/3 spec with streamlined front end and piston valves - both known quantities for smoke deflection and everyday use.

However - within the casing of no.2007, and particular behind the chimney, there have been modifications made to improve the smoke deflection ability of the original Cock O' The North style front end. Should it work, it'll likely retain the magnificence of this shape with a performance similar to that of the Bugatti front end.

Smoke deflection is a much forgot about bit of locomotive design, sadly.

 

It did save on power requirements - but to get the most out of the casing, you have to be going significantly faster than normal line speeds. Mallard's 126mph (or 125mph dependent on your point of view) would have been an unlikely aim were it not for the combination of the Bugatti front end plus the double kylchap plus the boiler type plus conjugated valve gear (which, although in the Mallard high speed run latterly ran hot, is inherently good for high speed, driving all onto one axle).