42424 - New Build Fowler Tank

<BlatantPlug>I think 32424 will be finished first - you could always ask to borrow that for a gala and engage in a spot of clandestine renumbering!</BlatantPlug>

Tom

 

Wouldn't be as good, though........

 

I am sure it will, Tom, give their respective stages of development. If I ever get a chance to drive that beauty, my cup will truly runneth over!

 

Another poster wonders, quite rightly, about the relevance of this divergence from the original topic. However, having got here. can I just say that aero engines, even in wartime, were cosseted to a degree unheard of in a loco. shed. They were carefully warmed up and rebuilt after a set number of flying hours. According to two sources ( one to me personally , an R.N. Engineer Commander, and another an R.A.F. mechanic recounted by his son) sleeve valve aero engines were a pain in the botty! Bulleid could and should have found out. This is not, however, the way dabblers work.

PH

 

That agrees with my fathers view that that the RR Merlin engine was vastly easier to work on than the Bristol Centaurus engine. Also front line bomber squadrons used unit replacement changing engines or turbo chargers with refurbished examples to provide maximum aircraft availability. I think he said an engine change on a Lancaster took 6 or 7 hours plus ground and air testing.

Cheers, Neil

 

It is sometimes essential in engineering to test something to show it is really a bad idea. Mr Bulleid played this important role.

 

Sorry, it had already been tested and found to be a bad idea in the commercial world.

Paul H

 

Yes, though Bulleid tested the sleeve valve idea by modifying H1 Atlantic "Hartland Point", and an objective view of that loco, following considerable period of running, should have made it clear that it had higher coal and water consumption, suffered valve gear breakages while in service and on a number of occasions contrived to get stuck in a position such that it would not start in either direction. Despite that, the Leader project went ahead...

Tom

 

Mainly because I don't think the trial results were fully analysed before the Board rushed into ordering them.

 

Indeed, and, for those who aren't quite sure what one looks like, here is a rare survivor bolted onto one of its main users, the Hawker Typhoon (RAFM Cosford).

 

S.A.C.Martin surely has a point here in contrasting the lambasting given to Thompson (IMHO possibly rightly) with the excuses made for Bulleid (IMHO probably over generously). Once again sorry for thread divergence!

PH

 

An engine so powerful the damn thing could even fly without wings

Tom

 

The debate about the advantages and disadvantages of poppet valves and sleeve valves in aircraft engines is far more nuanced than the facile hearsay reported in this thread. As an elementary starting point anyone interested could start by reading Fedden - The Life of Sir Roy Fedden.

 

For those of us in need of a very brief primer, and without ready access to a library copy, please could you provide a brief pointer to the key issues.

Sent from my GT-N8010 using Tapatalk

 

For a second I looked on Nat pres and thought people were interested in the Fowler 2-6-4 tank.....

No real updates to be said about it at the moment. As you can imagine all our efforts are being pumped into the Patriot, however if there is anyone who isn't particularly interested in that loco but would want to be part of the build of the tank please do get in contact.

 

What I was getting at was that it seems the results coming from Hartland Point (ie. don't use sleeve valves on a steam locomotive) weren't really applied to the main design. This can probably be attributed to two things: Bulleid wanting to plough on regardless (likely), and the pressure provided by the SR Board in placing an order for a fleet (equally likely). Anyway, back to Fowler...

 

Back to Fowler - its a nice loco and I look forward to seeing it. It was just what the Southern could have done with, instead of wasting money on the Leader

 

Not sure. The Southern had a very capable 2-6-4T of their own, but it didn't like their permanent way. Would the LMS version do any better?

 

The Southern seemed to get a bit paranoid about using tank locos for high speed passenger work after the River Class derailment. The W Class 2-6-4Ts were allocated to the two local sheds to where I spent my spotting years, Hither Green and Norwood Junction and spent their time plodding around with transfer freights from North London and were never seen on passenger trains. This is not surprising as I don't think Norwood Junction had regular passenger turns and Hither Green only had one, a commuter train from Cannon Street for which it always kept its only King Arthur in pristine condition.
It would have been interesting to see how the Ws performed in comparison to the LMS and Standard tanks on passenger work.