34046 Braunton

At least one Bulleid Pacific benefited from re-draughting during BR days and that was 34064 Fighter Command, which was equipped with a Geisl Ejector in 1962. It has been suggested, not least by footplate crews at the time, that this was a very successful conversion and Fighter Command was considered improved to the extent of being a match for a larger Merchant Navy.

As we know, 34092 City of Wells was equipped with a Geisl Ejector during 1985 and this fitment certainly took the locomotive's performance to another level. Hopefully, we will have the opportunity to witness 34092 repeating some of those sparkling performances on the main line sometime within the foreseeable future.

Cheers

Alan

 

But was/ is there any variation in the size of the system fited to the various Lner Classes or was it also a 'one size fits all' appoach ?

 

Coulden't say, what I meant was when the Double Kylchap was compared to the standard exhaust, it would have emphasised the difference getting the exhaust and draughting right makes.

 

It's interesting that Maunsell did a lot of experimental work with Holcroft looking at the draughting of various locos, in particular the N / N1 / U / K class locos from the mogul family, trying to get the front ends just right. When Bulleid took over, similar work carried on looking at various Maunsell engines that had a reputation for being indifferent steamers (especially the LN and the Q; they had less success transforming the King Arthurs and Schools because there was nothing fundamentally wrong with those locos in the first place). However, I'm less aware that there was the same level of work was carried out looking at the steaming of the Bulleid designs.

One obvious explanation is simply that the war intervened, so there was less opportunity to take a loco out of traffic and start subjecting it to carefully controlled tests. It is also true that, particularly the MNs, had numerous teething problems when built and probably design office work was consumed resolving those problems, so there would be little incentive to study the one part of the design that was demonstrably successful - i.e. the boiler as a prime steam producer.

However, I do also wonder if Bulleid was actually very bothered. He was on record as saying he designed his locos to burn coal and produce steam as fast as possible, which was why when first built the locos didn't (as I recall) even have dampers to control airflow - Bulleid didn't seem that concerned about nuancing the steam production. The measured steaming rates were a long way in excess of what the cylinders could use. So in practical terms - if the drafting wasn't quite optimal, I suspect Bulleid wasn't too worried provided the locos were never short of steam, which demonstrably they weren't. They were clearly overboilered or under-cylindered, depending on your point of view.

Whereas to my eyes at least, a lot of GW locos look rather the opposite way round - somewhat under-boilered for the cylinder size. Which means there would be more incentive trying to make the boiler as free-steaming as possible, to the extent that careful experimentation of blast pipe geometry etc would be worthwhile.

Tom

 

Braunton on the Cath Ex yesterday..... Steam.....

 

and much as i would like to comment on Draughting on the GWR thanks to Duty Druid we are back on track / thread.

 

Is Braunton servicable and will it be on the tour around Kent next week?