Potential New Builds

A new build does not neccisarrily have to follow the orriginal designs. For example a lempor ejector, self lubricating fully sealed roller bearings and drop down ash pan are just a few things that would probably appear on new builds to give them an edge in efficiency and maintenance over their older counter parts without these features.

 

the trouble is that the public want a traditional looking loco , so it would need to look lke a steam loco, but saying that, theres nothing to say that you couldnt have roller axleboxes , if you can find suitable sized roller bearings off the shelf but it would internally use modern lagging materials, and things like hopper ashpans and self cleaning smokeboxes things like simple stephenson valve gear is trouble free and trusted rather than using an untried system is it not best to stick with tried and trusted designs that work?

 

Thats what i mean. Tried and trusted designs with modern features, hidden within the traditional outline of the locomotive.

 

AFAIK one is still there, the other got scrapped.

 

Problem is brand new designs need to go through rigourous tests whereas original designs have "grandfather rights".

What could be built thats suitable for the front of it?

 

i'd personally love to see a Claud made, and also a 3MT tank, I think a Claud would be a huge success! it would be very popular, and i think it would draw a huge amount of passengers to any railway it visits

 

IIRC the other one has been set aside for the B17 new build? (I might have seriously got the wrong end of the stick here!)

 

Wasn't one set aside for a V4 build?

 

Meteor Models do a kit for Cardean and I keep thinking about the 7mm version - so far from the depths of my armchair. I have an interest in a certain Bagnall 0-6-0 which will soak up my available cash for the forseeable future.

There are three separate reasons for building replica locomotives, 1) Artistic reasons. 2) To prove an engineering theory 3) To operate traffic on a given railway and take advantage of the lower maintenance cost of a brand new engine. Some projects mange to combine two heads together. Under 3) you would begin by considering the simplest locomotive capable of doing the job; any frills on that have got to repay the extra capital cost by savings in operating expenditure. That is why you get the debate between the merits of the 3MT and for example, a black motor or a lambton tank, and until you run both together you won't know.

Unfortunately a totally new design is going to have substantial costs in proving the design and I am sceptical that these would produce sufficient economies on the average 25mph heritage railway.

Tim

 

There are various problems with a straight new build to a new design - lack of grandfather rights, the question of authenticity/heritage etc. As with Tornado and the plans for Lyn, secreting modern labour saving and economic working devices into a classic design is quite another matter however, definitely a proven avenue.

The proposal that new-builds - or at least, new-builds built first to work, second to plug a gap - be of a type many parts of which will be interchangeable with others is an excellent idea, a Black motor would be a nice new-build, as would some of the later Billinton LBSCR designs.

Have to say that in my opinion just because a type of loco is already extant doesn't mean a rebuild should be ruled out - this really isn't the case on NG (Statfold Hunslets, Corris Tattoo and Falcon, Ffestiniog Double Fairlie's...).

If a Black motor was built another couple of M7s wouldn't come amiss. A Dean goods would be nice, considering the likelihood of 2516 coming out of Swindon anytime soon (and would tick the standardised parts box - 39xx anyone?).

This may also become, increasingly, the way to turn in the future when old locomotives in the NRM and otherwise become simply too precious as artefacts to keep using, wearing and replacing parts as we do (this is of course what we're already doing when it comes to the earliest locos - Rocket, Locomotion etc.). Will Green Arrow run again? No? Then let's build The Green Howards! A Star anyone? L&Y 2-4-2T?

 

Yes I think it was, however a quick search on google turns up nothing, and I did hear that the project had died.....

 

My argument isnt that we, as preservationists should build a whole new engine, but groups should get together to produce a standard kit of parts such as axles, wheels, cylinders,boiler barrel fire box componants, that would produce an engine of roughly class 4 power then its down to what ever railway or group to produce what ever loco it is that they want groups could state what frames they want or obtain the other componants themselves

 

So basically, work out what locomotives could be produced from the same standard toolings and components - i.e, sharing roller bearing axle box types, boiler, perhaps driving wheels, and the rest is bolt on and cosmetic?

Makes a lot of sense. That way groups can order in bulk, which will be cheaper per unit cost than ordering a few one-offs. Economies of scale and all that.

 

I might be missing something but I don't see how this could work? If you're building a standard boiler barrel what happens if a group comes along that want one 6" longer? A different taper? Different sized wheels? Different number of spokes? Surely it would be better to stick to one class?

 

I think the preserved railway movement is too individual to work on such a scale. There are still plenty of unrestored engines that could be useful for many railways and workshops are regularly replacing major components on the ones that are in almost constant use. Each railway has different needs, aims and motivations to make a standard new-build work properly.

 

I think that's the point. You pick certain types which can be built from components of another. Look at the similarities between the GNR atlantic and the LBSCR atlantics, for example. Sharp Stewart 4-4-0s were used by quite a few pre-grouping companies in this country (and abroad!) and while the aesthetic detail differences would be different, the engine underneath would be the same.

It all depends upon groups of people agreeing to the one basic design that allows for imitations of variants thereafter.

 

I'm not sure that that would work. Even with the optimum measurements the number of locomotives would still I fear be few, and as enthusiastic preservationists when building from scratch we'll want to get it right, not 'near enough'. For example, the 82045 project were going to use the wheels off a 4mt Mogul - until they found out that said wheels had one too many spokes.

Moreover a company building large expensive parts such as boilers and cylinder castings would not want them sitting around on the shelf (be a damned big shelf, too) - they'd want a guaranteed level of custom before they'd cut/cast metal.

I think sticking to one class a la Statfold would be the way forward going down this route, or classes so close as to be practically the same locos - Black Motors, M7s, K10s. I do not think that a standardised set of parts under all manner of different locos would be cost effective, or acceptable to those constructing the new builds.

 

I am in complete agreement with your thoughts - hence my suggestion of the extremely similar (read identical!) Sharp Stewart 4-4-0s.

 

I'd like to see one of these locos as a new build. You could maybe bypass the newbuild bit by utilizing the remains of that donor Jinty at Butterly, it's unlikely it will ever be restored as a Jinty in the near future. I don't have the drawings t hand, but it looks possible to cut off the backs of the frame plates, build a tender and make the crinolines bigger for the cladding to hide the smaller boiler. They're very much alike, and a tender version of the jinty would possibly be more useful to preserved lines and better range for an economic loco, not to mention the added benefit of Donald or Douglas at Thomas events.

Wouldn't be entirely genuine, but all that matters at the end of the day is a useful loco that more or less looks the part. It'd be something like the GWR mogul at the West Sommerset