Shap Mountaineer: 27/09/25

The site I pinched it from said 15.4 tonnes but there are short and long tonnes so I didn't go there.

 

14,000 litres of water is 14,000kg - or 14 tons.

Tom

 

Thanks everyone

 

That's about 10% over - but it could be the discrepancy represents the weight of the tank, or possibly represents the difference between "capacity" and "useable capacity". Or int could be short tons (which are about 10% less than an imperial ton or metric tonne) but unlikely unless you went to a US site, since only teh Americans routinely use short tons.

1 tonne (metric) = 1000kg
1 ton (imperial) = 2,240lbs = 1016kg - as near equivalent to a metric tonne a makes no odds for most purposes.
1 short ton (US) = 2000lbs = 907kg

Tom

 

Just checked back, 13.8 imperial tons the middle one of your three. 15.4 short tons. But is the vehicle weight constrained or volume constrained? Don't know.

 

Capacity of a GUV is 14 tons evenly distributed. What's the positioning of the tanks inside Tyseley's vehicle? One each end, right over the bogies?

 

It will be constrained by weight. If you took a cylindrical tank 2m in diameter (which would comfortably fit inside the profile of a Mark 1 carriage interior) then a 14,000 litre tank will be about 4.5 metres long, or only about a quarter of the useable internal length. In other words, you could (fag packet calculation) get a tank carrying about 56 tons of water inside a Mark 1 body shell, but the structure of the carriage wasn't built to cope with that load.

Tom

 

Thanks to all who have commented on my post

John NB Thanks for your remarks. It is perhaps worth noting that whilst the LMS and LNE seem to have gone in for the large coaling towers, they never in any way replaced all of the old fashioned coaling stages which all railways used in one form or another and there were many such stages to be seen all over the BR system to the end of steam. The GW stages were developed to use tubs which held a nominal 1/2 ton of coal which made the recording of coal issued to each engine a quite simple task for the coal men to note. The GW system also allowed the coal men to load each tub with a mixture of coals from different wagons as per Henry Simpson's description of the system. That didn't always work out, because the Wolverhampton division's locomotive superintendent, E G Wainwright, noted that at many 'stations' (as he called them), there was not sufficient coal stage accommodation to mix the coal with advantage. He also noted that the adequate mixing of coal was very difficult in a division (his) which was supplied with only a very small quantity of South Wales coal. That may be taken as further confirmation that the extensive Wolverhampton division was being run on predominantly local hard coals. The stage at Tyseley had two sides which allowed different qualities and sources of coal to be delivered to the passenger and goods sides.
I also have to say John that you were very fortunate to be in the right place all those years ago for the high speed ride behind a 'merchant'. The highest I ever made was 96 a very long time ago.

With regard to the GUV, as 5944 points out, the carrying capacity is a very handy 14 proper tons equally distributed (very important point that). There had been a number of various failed attempts by others to come up with water tankers of one sort or another, but they probably suffered from being overly ambitious. A critical analysis of operations indicated that another 3,000 gallons would be about right. That led to looking at the BR Mk1 General Utility Vehicle (GUV) with its 14 tons capacity. These had done much magnificent work on the old BRUTE circuit where their capacity was almost legendary. The first iteration was quickly got together for us by David Smith to enable the Bristolian to be run non-stop in 2010. That had a large round tank located over each bogie and worked well enough. We had previously been fortunate to obtain from HSBC Rail 96100, the World's only 110 mph GUV which had been mounted on B5 bogies as an experiment to see whether it was possible to run a 110mph car carrier on the WCML. As such it proved to be probably the steadiest riding vehicle we possessed and so we decided to equip it with water tanks. At that time we were helping Chiltern to assemble their water jetting train and that used industrial IBC tanks of 1000 litres capacity which pointed the way for us. All we had to do was spread 14 of them out along the length of the van and connect them all together with suitable plastic pipe and we had a 14 Tonnes load. IBCs were readily available, robust, cheap and easily replaced.The mathematicians amongst us will note that 14 tonnes is around 504 lbs lighter than 14 proper tons so there was a small leeway. The max possible capacity is therefore around 3,085 gallons. The connection to the engine works on a gravity head, once the tender tank level has equalised. The tanks have a fairly low centre of gravity for the load and that obviously falls as the level diminishes to empty, and the vehicle returns to tare weight. We did actually unofficially christen the vehicle REG (Range Extension GUV), but never branded it as such to avoid confounding the easily befuddled, and we also revised its max speed to 100mph at the vehicle library. It has been a great benefit which has enabled a number of high profile non-stop runs, the longest of which was Droitwich to Hereford via Gloucester and Newport I am told, but it also helps to avoid the cost of a tanker on many runs. The avoidance of water stops also has a very interesting effect on coal and water consumptions.

Finally, Swiss Toni, great to know you are still out there, it's been a while since I heard from you!

Best Wishes
Bob

 

That's very kind Bob, and as the Americans would say, "Right back at you".
Keep up the great work, Regards.

 

Thanks for the answer and for your very informative post regarding coal; facts, knowledge and experience are always better than conjecture. Back to the water carrier, I was fairly sure that I had seen a picture of the inside of "REG" showing several interconnected water containers but, of course, couldn't find one. I was beginning to think that I had "dreamt it", so thanks again for putting my mind at rest.

 

Following @bob.meanley's reference to the 2010 run in post #107, I took a trip back in time mostly via NP and "The Pride of Swindon 5043 to Carlisle via the S&C - 16 October" thread. Regrettably the links to many of the videos no longer work but some can still be found on YouTube. (A search on YouTube for "Pride of Swindon" produces a mixture of, civic pride awards, gay processions and some of 5043 in action.)

I was particularly drawn to another excellent post in this thread by Bob (#167), where he provided details of the design and development of the DC Castle and how it compares favourably to its much larger cousin, the Duchess in terms of ihp/sq ft of grate area. He reported that Mike Notley expected that the previous record of 66.6/sq ft would be beaten for the final 1.5 miles to Ais Gill. Later in the thread @Penricecastle (#269) reported that Mike Notley had calculated a figure of 2030edhp for the final mile. I suspect that the ihp figure would be around 200hp higher - 2230hp. This would have given 74.3ihp per sq ft of grate area - whew, exceptional!

So how did Clun Castle fare in comparison. After the 37 had backed off, the final 1.5 miles to Ais Gill required an average edhp of 1400 and an ihp of around 1600, 53.3ihp per sq ft of grate area. The figures for Shap (MP 31.5 - MP 37.25) are a more modest, 1050edhp, 1250ihp.

The climb by 5043 was superlative and will probably never be surpassed, equalled or even remotely challenged by a Castle locomotive. It was just all round excellence from locomotive design and maintenance, through to good coal and the skills of the crew on the day. 7029 had challenges of a different kind; a delayed start from Carnforth, and a subsequent wait in the loop at Grayrigg, did nothing for a fire that was already coping with some indifferent coal. The climb of Shap reflected that. Later in the day, Clun was given her head for the last couple of miles to Ais Gill and besides sounding superb produced some very good horse power figures.

We were fortunate to have a nice autumnal day, the Saturday before was endless very heavy rain whilst yesterday we felt the effects of Storm Amy. So two runs, 15 years apart and not a single piece of "Welsh steam coal" was burned.

 

which equals 3079.56498 gallons [ 1 gallon = 4.54609 litres] which possibly allows for about 45 miles of normal steam running [5000 gallons allow 72 miles IIRC]

 

It’s more complex than that.

If you have a 4000 gallon tender, you probably want a safety margin of 1000 gallons, so you have 3000 gallons of useable capacity. If you add another 3000 gallons, you still only need 1000 of contingency - so you have in effect doubled your range.

Oh - and it is completely daft to quote conversions to 5 decimal places. You have in effect quoted the volume of the carrier to 0.1 ml - rather less than a pinprick in amongst 14 tons of water …

Tom

 

A quick and crude non-scientific analysis of the numbers from the 1948 exchanges suggests around 35 gallons / mile on the express pax runs, some being higher (the original MNs were usually 40+) and some generally lower (Scot and A4). The King was low superheat single chimney so is not necessarily a good guide for a Castle in final form.