Turbomotive II?... Newbuild.....

Ok with all the talk of newbuilds designed specifically for mainline running meeting modern conditions, but what about a new 'turbomotive' with a difference?.. It might sound a bit madcap but bear with me...

OK this thing would have to look like a steam locomotive obviously, but with some major differences...

What I would be suggesting essentially a mobile steam driven power station...

I am thinking garrett - high number of axles to spread the load - reducing the weight restrictions.
A boiler which is a steam engine boiler and looks like one (not cased in like a leader).

Drivers cabs built into the tenders at each end (for maximum visibility without deminishing the steam engine 'garrett' look.

Pivoting power bogies at each end with whatever wheel arrangement would be best (shall we say 4-6-4, 4-6-4 for starters - leading bogies both ways to ensure stability at higher speeds, greater articulation for tighter corners, con rods to make her resemble a true steam locomotive (you could even have a hybrid with steam cylinders with more oomph for starting and with electric motors for the higher speeds driving the axles.

However I'd suggest some vital differences...

Include a pantograph mounted on top of the tenders for working under overhead wires.... why?.... Well this thing could be run as a true electric locomotive, taking current off the overhead for two reasons -
a) to enable the kind of performance we could get with an electric locomotive. I'm guessing given the red tape this might bypass any future restrictions on steam?...
b)To preheat the boiler with an immersion heater - yes you still have an oil/gas(natural,methane, whatever)/coal fired boiler to allow working away from the overhead but it builds up steam quicker.

You then use the steam power (either conventional cylinders or via electric motors driven by a dynamo) whilst away from the overhead...

Essentially it looks like a steam locomotive (and a Garrett which face it you don't see many of in the UK)... but it's also an electric locomotive..

You could even dress it up as a project to increase the UK's dependance on it's own resources (coal) or renewable resources (methane gas) - could there be susidies there?...

Should the design be sucessful you could even launch a modern company running such units or sell them to other mainline companies?

Discuss....

 

Or a Garratt even. Garretts were road locos.

 

Why?

If you want a thermally efficient way of turning coal (or natural gas, or indeed nuclear or renewables) into mass transit, use a remote power station and, ideally, 25KV overhead.

If the capital cost of that is too great for the wires but you want an efficient quick start prime mover, use a diesel electric locomotive.

If you are interested in the nostalgia market, use a conventional steam engine - ideally an old one, but failing that, a new one (like Tornado) that to all intents and purposes is identical to an old one. You'll have to live with slow preparation and disposal times and the effect on the track limiting use to certain routes, as well as needing to follow it with a water supply, so the operating cost will be high and effectively you are catering to a leisure market niche.

Your proposal is none of those things - it isn't a replica of something old, so won't fit the heritage niche. But it is massively complex, so will have lower reliability than a 25kV overhead electric, won't be quick start; will still require more prep and disposal than a diesel so won't be cheap to operate; will still require water tankers to chase around the country following it and will hammer the track due to reciprocating masses, so will be restricted to certain routes and need periodic stops for water.

Sorry - non starter. Makes 5AT look sensible I'm afraid...

Tom

 

Get Hornby to make one first.

 

Road test it on the Barnstaple to Biddeford?...

 

With James May at the controller.

 

I suggested something of the sort a while ago and the response was a good deal more aggressive than the posts above. It would, of course cost a fortune, and perhaps it's best just to let steam live on as a heritage rather than the future. I could still dream though!

 

Why?.. Don't most cities have fire hydrant's in this day and age?...

 

Not necessarily near stations I guess - certainly every steam engine that comes through where I live has a fire engine in attendance for watering.

But you need to answer the key question - what's this design for? If it is the nostalgia market - it's not nostalgic. If it is the mass transport market - it's not efficient, either thermally or in terms of manpower. So what's the problem this is designed to solve? It looks like a solution desperately seeking a problem.

Tom

 

If you mean like america then no. There are water mains which the likes of the fire brigade use when required.

The bigger issue is hard or soft water. Scale is not good for boilers.

 

No I didn't mean like in America, I meant like the little manhole things that are in the road (and are usually painted Yellow)

 

With a turbomotive there is the real possibility of condensing at least some of the exhaust steam to help conserve water (some would still be needed to provide draught on the fire) , but I agree that such a machine would be of little interest to most enthusiasts. You've only to read numerous threads to appreciate how much most contributors prize "loudness" and this would be a machine that would simply produce a continuous roar at all speeds - no chuffing whatsoever. How dull is that?

I've long maintained that Bulleid went the wrong way with the Leader - a twin bogie turbomotive with reversible turbines (or reversing gearboxes) would have stood far more chance of success. The LMS turbomotive was one of the more successful experimental designs, but fitting the mechanics inot a conventional steam loco chassis was hardly inspired thinking.

 

Funnily enough I've heard the same objections to the Electric Bikes in the TT races on the basis of noise.


So it seems the Turbomotive II isn't a popular option....Kitson-Still anyone?.....

 

Perhaps the OP's proposal would possibly make more sense, and appeal to the nostalgia crowd if a modernised version of Bullied's Leader class was on the drawing board.

Having read about its development and testing it appears that it was a good idea but poorly carried out although perhaps too innovative and possibly some more R & D could have produced something that could have worked. Its also possible that it suffered from the initial idea being sold as a replacement for the M7 tanks.... quite how a 100+ton loco with 2 x 3 axle bogies could be suggested as a replacement for a 50T 0-4-4 tank loco I'll never know, Bullied must have been one heck of a salesman!

 

The Heilmann steam-electric locomotive of 1897 is quite similar to what the original poster suggested, although it wasn't a turbine loco. See:
http://www.aqpl43.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/heilmann/heilman4.jpg

 

How did they clean the smoke box in Leader ?
Wasn't there a drivers cab in front of it heating up the driver ?, or was that the reason for the boiler being mounted off centre ?

 

I believe the off centre boiler was to enable communication between driving cab and firing position by way of a corridor. This in turn required the firehole door to be placed off centre, so firing was kind of lop-sided. In practice the corridor was part-filled with cast iron weights to even out the off-centre weight-distribution (!!) so whether the corridor ever proved practical in service I don't know.

As for emptying the smokebox: this was initially via a small hole in the smokebox that enabled ash to fall directly onto the ground while in motion: this could be operated in motion via a lever from the driver's cab - presumably after giving one or other crew member warning to whack the blower on first! A trial set-up on U class 31896 was said to have been successful, but for whatever reason, it didn't work on the leader (possibly because the mechanism rapidly got jammed with ash, preventing the flap closing properly and thus creating problems getting a proper draft on the fire in normal service, though why this troubled the leader and not the U Boat I don't know). Accordingly the flap was later welded up; I assume then that the smokebox had to be cleared via the driver's cab.

Tom

 

Ah, but wasn't it so that comparisons could be made with the standard Lizzies?