What Ifs, and Locos that never were.

Michael Edge built this model of the 'what if?' Horwich Mallet.

 

If Colonel Stevens had sorted out HS2 (and potentially HS1 as well), would that mean the KESR might run from Cheriton to up North...???

 

It's not Colonel Stevens you need, it's this man:



On the board of the Manchester, Sheffield and Lincoln, the Metropolitan Railway, the South Eastern Railway, and the Chemin de Fer du Nord; if his scheme for a channel tunnel had got beyond the test bores that were dug, he'd have had control of a high speed line from Paris to Manchester and ultimately Liverpool.

Tom

 

...... although the notion of an archetypal Col. Stephens back-to-back railcar set spluttering into Gare du Nord after a marathon 48hr slog from Manchester does conjure up some interesting images.

 

“The next departure from platform 6 is the 0900 Manchester Central to Paris Gare du Nord, calling today at Sheffield and Nottingham; calling tomorrow at Leicester and Rugby; by Tuesday we hope to make it into Buckinghamshire; Ashford on Wednesday or Thursday; conceivably Calais by Friday and arriving into Paris early next week. First class ticket holders are in coach A at the rear of the train. We regret to announce that due to the crowded nature of this service and lack of corridor connections the buffet trolley is not able to pass through the train today, but if you require hot water for tea it can be obtained from the footplate, where Holman, your train manager, will also be driving, firing and checking tickets...”



(Via: http://colonelstephenssociety.co.uk/locomotive notes topics/gazelle.html)

Tom

 

I think you’d find that Northern wouldn’t be so careful with script on a Pacer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I had visions of a Terrier and Birdcage stock flat out along HS2 but your suggestion looks much better.

 

They'd have a script...???

 

You could argue that anything with a booster truck (e.g. P1 as built) or tender was an articulated loco

 

Thanks a lot Tom. That was a really interesting engine!

Knut

 

Wow! look at that. Fantastic! Thanks for the pictures Corbs!

Knut

 

Bluetrain, if you are interested you can find drawing of the class 53 and other never realised german steam locomotives here:https://www.google.no/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjh29mL2rHjAhUuxqYKHZrNA3YQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&ved=&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stummiforum.de%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ft%3D88085&psig=AOvVaw11EKoC1epVaRRCmFUomiWB&ust=1563100676034487&psig=AOvVaw11EKoC1epVaRRCmFUomiWB&ust=1563100676034487

Knut

 

You need something better than a Terrier for HS2, a Derby 4 at least

 

Thanks very much for the link to the details of those abortive German extra-large war locomotive designs. I'd never previously heard of them. The designs look gigantic, and yet the model 2-6-8-0 is small when placed beside a model of the Union Pacific 4-8-8-4 "Big Boy". The designs were presumably intended for use in conquered Soviet territory, as that was probably the only area of Europe to have turntables long enough for them (Soviet 2-8-4 and 2-10-2 engines with 12-wheel tenders were almost as long as the 27m shown for the overall length of the 2-6-8-0). The German designs were perhaps less bonkers than the Soviet 4-14-4.

The only British-based locomotive in this league was the single 178 ton 2-8-0+0-8-2 Garratt used on LNER for banking:

https://www.lner.info/locos/U/u1.php

 

I'm going to tread warily, partly through sensitivity, partly because German loco design is well off my specialist knowledge. Looking at those wartime German designs - I'm reminded that in weapons manufacture, there was a degree of "gigantism" during the latter part of the war in Germany. There were real or increasingly speculative concepts for bombers that could reach America with a viable load (well beyond the technology of the early 1940s); ever increasing tanks of which the 190 ton "Maus" was built, but others that were to all intents and purposes large naval gun turrets on tracks were sketched out; giant super guns like the V3 that could hit target a hundred miles away; the Silbervogel rocket that was to be launched off a 3km monorail and bomb anywhere in the world from space before returning to earth. To a large degree, those concepts ranged from the "buildable but impractical" like the Maus through to beyond any realistic combination of contemporary technological viability and strategic usefulness - but that didn't stop considerable design resources being expended on them.

The constraints of loading gauge in railway design probably precluded the really outlandish - most of those designs do at least look feasible when compared with, say, contemporary US designs. But I do wonder whether they were seriously proposed, or were simply an opportunity for designers to doodle knowing that an ethos of "bigger" might be encouraged. Certainly, I suspect that on cost and practicality grounds, in a war economy two 2-10-0s were probably a sounder and more flexible investment than a single big Mallet of double the power and cost - not least because twice as many small locos would take double the air power to immobilise. The big American designs could operate free from enemy action and with concomitant investment in the servicing and infrastructure facilities to make them a practical success.

Tom

 

Thanks Tom - you clearly know far more than me about German WW2 super-weapons, as well as about most things to do with railways!

The American railroads had to move very heavy freight flows for long distances along largely single-track routes. Their solution was to marshal the traffic into small numbers of heavy trains, comprising long rakes of high-capacity air-braked wagons hauled along at reasonable speeds by super-powerful locomotives. As you rightly point out, the whole railway infrastructure had to develop in line with these locos - track and bridge strength, depot and workshop facilities, turntables, breakdown cranes, etc.

Those German wartime designs were modest by USA standards but very large by European standards, albeit comparable with the largest Soviet types. I suspect that, while some engineers were enthusiastically sketching out their ideas, their more conservative colleagues might have been dragging feet to ensure they didn't actually get built. I notice that one of the designs was for a "Modified Fairlie", which reminded me of a certain product of Brighton Works during that era. Now if the Riddles Austerity 2-8-0s & 2-10-0s had instead been designed by Oliver Bulleid .....?

 

And Le Quai Internationale at the Gare du Nord has a corrugated tin shed for customs....

 

But what do (did) the operators want?

I suggest that before any UK Super Freight loco could be constructed it would require close coupled fully fitted all steel wagons - and that in turn means updated freight facilities at both ends which was never going to happen

 

Well, there were exceptions.....

 

A.E 'Dusty' Durrant, acknowledged expert on bendy locos, classified said 'certain product' as "a sophisticated Kitson-Meyer", although I'll readily grant you the difference between that and a (not a Garratt) 'Modified Fairlie' seems confined to inboard vs. outboard bogies (if they can be described thus) ..... and rather more cynically, to which patent was being infringed!