New Build Claud Hamilton

Well I for one am not against Lempor or any other overseas development simply because it wasn't invented here, after all my two favourite classes of UK loco use front end draughting from abroad, i.e. Lemaître and Kylchap. I'm sure GWR 4-cylinder locos would benefit from a very modern front end but you would then lose the magic of the sound that is so unmistakably GWR. Same for the Claud.

 

I'm someone who generally tends to come down in the conservation camp, but I really have no problem with a lempor fitted to most preserved locomotives, let alone new designs. It doesn't detract from the visual (as long as the diffuser is fitted into the original style chimney)

 

Did I blink? When did this become a don't use foreign invented engine parts discussion??? and what on earth does that matter? Most engines have superheaters, invented by Dr. Wilhelm Schmidt, so does that make a difference?

 

Walschaert, Belpaire...

 

...and injectors care of Henri Giffard

 

Indeed - you might need to look north of the border for native designs...

 

I think it was started by my remark that I wouldn't like a Claud with a Lempor purely on "audio" grounds, which has nothing to do with where the Lempor was invented. Paulhitch then responded with his "Anglo Saxon Attitude" remarks. As far as I'm concerned, those who build a loco can equip it with what gizmos they like but if it was my money being spent then I'd stick as close to the original as possible, warts and all.
To illustrate my remarks regarding sound, WD118 'Brussels' arrived at the KWVR with a reputation as a poor steamer but by golly it sounded fantastic as the crews thrashed it in an attempt to get some sort of a performance out of it. It was then fitted with a modified front end, single Kylchap(?), and its steaming was transformed but IMHO it sounded nowhere near as good as it used to.

 

I think I'm with you on that, and I wouldn't have thought that steam production would be much of an issue on preserved lines as it would out on the main lines due to short running and lots of stops. I was also led to believe that the Clauds had become very good machines in LNER days, but had been displaced by B17s and never got the chance to shine.

 

Are you sure there isn't some black magic in there was well?:lol: I can never get my head round how they work!

 

"Anglo Saxon Attitudes" comes from Lewis Carroll's "Through the Looking Glass" and has come to mean an obsession with matters British or, merely, a "not invented here" attitude.

Without wishing to be too fierce, what sort of chuff a locomotive makes is of zero importance. What does matter is how well it goes and how much fuel gets used. A glimpse at martyn bane's website http://www.martynbane.co.uk is recommended. It gives considerable detail about Lempor and its application to machines on heritage railways.

I did say I would not get involved any further in the rights and wrongs of choosing to build a replica of such a machine as "C.H." My views are unchanged. However if it is to stand a chance on the main line network then it has to be draughted to steam as reliably as possible and ****** the sort of chuff it makes. There is one possible snag with Lempor though. Although I cannot verify this, I have been told that narrow gauge locomotives tend to have better ratios of port areas to cylinder volumne than standard gauge ones. The good results obtained on narrow gauge machines may not therefore be equalled by their larger brethren

P.H.

 

I'm sorry to say you are wrong there. You ask any GWR fan if they would be bothered that the sharp bark of the exhaust of any GWR engine was to be changed to a whimpy wheeze for the sake of a few pounds of coal per mile and I think you'll find they will get quite hot under the collar about it. I'm no GWR fan, but the sound of their exhausts is one of their fabulous features.

 

I am sorry to say you are wrong there!! It may well be the price that has to be paid to keep steam on the main line for a few more incidents of serious delay, like those recently caused by bad fuel, will not be popular with Network Rail etc. Whatever floats people's boat but "big chuffs" may have to be confined to heritage lines.

Ironically the person who observed that narrow gauge locos. tended to have better sized ports than standard gauge ones, belongs to a support group for a G.W.R. machine. When I teased him by suggesting "his" loco would benefit from Lempor, the reply was that the port sizes were on the small side and this would cause problems.

P.H.

I

 

It's basically as far as I can see a case of originality versus improved running. Any engineer in the world would advocate the latter (although if you go too far down that path you'll end up building a Class 67!) and it is a matter of personal preference which you aim toward in this sort of context. Personally, I'd err toward the latter.

 

Nobody other than you has mentioned main line use, and also the only person I've ever heard say that clauds were dull steamers was again, you. I find it very hard to believe that a dull steamer could hold the record for fastest steam engine for a while. Also they were made so powerfull during rebuilds that the 16/3s broke their frames, again thats not going to happen if their out of breath most the time.
And to cap it all no matter what you say, sound matters. It matters to me, and many others on here. You cannot make remarks about what people do and do not care about. Everybody is different with their own oppinions.

 

Here, here and I'm no GWR fan either. The new build steam locos on the Swiss rack lines may be super efficient but they lack charisma IMHO because they sound no louder than a well oiled sewing machine. Deciding whether to ride behind one of those or experience the full blooded thrash of one of the older conventional rack locos is a no brainer for me. For thrash junkies like me, it's all abound the noise from up front.

 

This thread seems to be getting a touch personal! Please read Mr. Hardy's accounts of his experiences in East Anglia. One of these was called "Steam in the Blood" I recall.

If the costs of running the thing are to be met, it has to be practical. There cannot be any case for building a machine with 7ft. wheels just for branch line use. Plenty of more practical G.E.R. designs for this purpose were devised. If the engine is to be purely for heritage railway use then let it be one of those.

One of the things which attracts me to the A1 project is that, although those in charge are self evidently enthusiasts, they are businessmen as well. They realise their machine has to earn its keep and that, as the railway system changes, this will become more and more difficult. Sometimes the decisions this involves do not go down too well with the gricing fraternity but that cannot be helped.

P.H.

 

Personally, I'm with the "gotta sound right" camp. Even if it uses slightly more coal.

If Oliver Cromwell or Nunney Castle or Earl Bathurst or Lydham Manor were "improved" to sound like, well, like Tornado*, I would be very sad!

*I like Tornado, but it does make working hard sound like not working hard!

 

Funny, that's why I love it to some extent.

But each to their own. One man's meat is another man's poisson.

 

Best of luck! I'll be following the developments closely and I'll be sure to contribute with donations. As a fan of pre-grouping rail, it'll be wonderful to see a rebuild of one of the GER's premiere and most feted classes. This along with the LBSCR Atlantic, the NER O class, and GER M15 should redress some of the imbalance in the preservation ledger.

I hope that someone will address the lack of representation from other major pre-grouping constitutients, namely some representatives of the Midland, the LNWR and GCR of which precious few examples exist today. A Johnson 4-4-0 (the Beatrice for instance), a Johnson 0-4-4t both in fully-lined 1906 crimson-lake, a Robinson C4 'Jersey Lilly' Atlantic, and for example a LNWR Whales 4-4-0 Precursor and 4-4-2 Precursor tank (it would be realtively easy and cost-effective to build both since the Precursor tank was a variant of the Precursor) would be wonderful additions and eminently suitable for preservation society running given their size and mechanical simplicity. Seeing a Jersey Lilly in GCR livery on the GCR mainline would be wonderful. One can dream!