Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by arthur maunsell, Jan 22, 2019.
Perhaps the single could be fitted with a booster?
Photos show Dean singles with about a dozen bogie clerestories, I presume that would equate to about 9 Mk 1s. I assume the load would have been less west of Bristol where Wellington Bank would seem about equivalent to the Severn Valley (1 in 80 but taken at a higher speed). The only photo definitely west of Bristol I found having a quick look online shows at least 5 coaches at Dawlish but there were almost certainly more in the tunnel it was emerging from.
I note in SR that a new build Crampton is proposed so people obviously think there will be work for locomotives of lessor power?
Presumably this one: http://www.cramptonlocomotivetrust.org.uk/
I’m in two minds about that project. On the one hand, they appear to have done some serious design work and also raised (and spent on design) a non trivial amount of money - not remotely enough for the project, but still an amount that indicates serious support well beyond counting likes on Facebook. On the other hand, there appear to have been no website updates for two years. So I don’t know if the project is still extant or not - maybe operational reality has bitten?
That said, for use on demonstration lines - Rocket, Fire Fly, Planet, Locomotion, Steam Elephant and so on - all those exist as new build replicas, so clearly there is some kind of market.
If someone wants to build something good luck to them, I don't buy the oft used argument that it takes money from other schemes as ultimately people will fund what they want to see, its why I still think a Dean Single could be fairly successful as within the GWR echo chamber I occupy there seems to be very substantial interest and potential support for such a project.
I assume it is still going as off the top of my head (to check would involve getting off my backside and walking down the garden to check) the SR piece of yesterday seemed to suggest some engagement with someone associated with the project, Facebook gets a lot of stick but it provides a ready conduit for easy regular engagement with supporters, a nice website is all well and good but it needs someone to update and manage, Facebook allows regular communication quicker and easier with little web expertise needed.
Dean Single and perhaps an Armstrong Goods would fill a lot of gaps, be something difference and especially in the case of the latter provide something of use for many railways, hell for economies of scale build a batch....
The question is, in building a Dean Single, what would be the principle aim? To have an engine that can run on a variety of preserved lines, or to have a working Dean Single? I don't think that 'suitability for xyz line' comes into it too much. If it was ever to be built, I could see it staying mainly at Didcot, with occasional forays out as a headliner at galas.
That said, I do feel that right now the GWS needs to be concentrating more on the future of Didcot as a museum, and avoid being distracted by another high profile loco project. I can understand the philosophy of starting research 'in the background,' but I have seen how these things can quietly get pushed up the priority list, particularly when the driving force behind them is older people, who understandably want to see something within their lifetime. I can see it being something done in the future, but on the back of a number of bequests. Assuming of course, that there are enough movers and shakers around in the future to make it happen. (Of course, if a group separate from the GWS wants to have a crack at building one elsewhere, that's another matter.)
Then again, although it wouln't be the same as having a 'proper' Dean Single, for a fraction of the cost you could always give Iron Duke a makeover as a Rover, and have a fat Dean Single instead.
I suspect a separate stand alone project along the lines of the Churchward* County could be the most sensible approach....
BTW it was Churchward's birthday yesterday, he would have been 162. Happy birthday GJ!
none of them are Dainton or Rattery though, I don't think most lines would be a probelm.
I think the idea is to have a replica representing the pre Churchward era.
All major GWS projects are pretty independent with their own work crews and finance pools though. The point about the Churchward County, AIUI, is that its not a GWS project. Its being done off site so it doesn't impact on GWS volunteer resources and finance. At least that's my understanding of what I've just read on a GWS Echo of a few years ago.
Assuming (my assumption) that a Dean Single project does reach the point at which the research has been successfully completed and its appropriate to think about cutting metal then one would hope that the Saint, Pendennis and the 7200 would be complete, so there might be space, facilities and volunteers available at Didcot. But the previous sentence is absolutely and completely my conjecture.
Incidentally the GWS have just launched a new "project" for fundraising, but its nothing to do with new builds. Its called the Small Locomotive Fund, and the concept is that those who see that as a priority can donate money which will be ringfenced for the overhaul of smaller locomotives.
The 1 in 36 on the ELR is short but from the Bury direction it is difficult as it's on a sharp curve shortly after leaving Bolton Street and you can't get much of a run at it.
Could a single get up the 1 in 100 to Box Tunnel in the up direction with that sort of load?
Not if your thinking of a Dean single as rebuilt by the GWR with a taper boiler.
They never had a taper boiler. It wouldn't have fitted between the driving wheels.
There were a lot of boiler changes though, you are quite right in that.
The best known variant is the original, familiar from Triang, with large dome and raised round top firebox.
Next was the early parallel version of the standard 2 boiler, with a high raised belpaire firebox and no dome. The first of these was 1900. This boiler was much higher pitched than others with a short chimney. There were 13 of these at one time.
1901/2 saw a raised belpaire firebox version of the original boiler, so with a dome, but only on 2 locomotives.
In 1909 they fitted 180psi domed round top firebox boilers, again similar to the original, to 6 locomotives.
The last type, from 1910, was again domed and vaguely similar to the original, but with a raised belpaire firebox, a drum head smokebox and sometimes top feed. None were ever superheated. There were about 30 of these.
I rather like the looks of the Standard 2 version, but you're quite right, it doesn't have that Victorian look...
The Tri-ang version for me, though I think the couplers might need changing,
Something like this, maybe
5bf3c812b3c46f6e09b8797a60f89c9f by ross posted Feb 4, 2019 at 12:09 AM
Is any mainline certified stock actually fitted with Hornby couplers?
According to Basingstoke Station Information Centre yes, if their mural is modelled from real life:
Nice one Tom. Sort of feel like that was inevitable ..... ask a silly question and all that!
I was going to ask about DCC compatibility, but methinks I'll give that one a miss .....
Coupling compatibility seems to be a recurring problem for northern, normally addressed by running the stock into each other at ever greater velocity until the couplings engage.
We had a variation on the theme at Preston the other week when two 185's loved each other so much there was no separating them, cue a 20 minute delay until the high vis man with the official stick arrived, prodded the couplings a bit and hey presto we were free. Perhaps Hornby couplings would improve their woeful performance....
Sent from my SM-J330FN using Tapatalk
Anyone got a copy of the photo of Whiston at Foxfield fitted with a tension lock coupling a few years ago?!
Separate names with a comma.