Current and Proposed New-Builds

Thank you for confirming. Interesting thought - the centre cylinder must be further forward then to fit onto the front axle. That begs the question as to the arrangement. It's almost comparable with the Thompson Pacifics, except for the obvious difference of the position of the front bogie.

 

They had Gresley conjugated valve gear, but with the conjugating levers behind the cylinders as in the D49s, with divided drive. Locomotives of the LNER Part 2B is your friend (or the January 1929 issue of the Locomotive Magazine).

 

The centre cylinder is forward on the B17, unlike the D49. Does that mean the B17's 2:1 gear was behind the centre cylinder, driving onto the front axle, and in front of the outside ones, driving onto the middle axle?

 

Have a look at the picture of 61621 on this page https://www.lner.info/locos/B/b17.php

I'd say it's fairly clear there's no 2:1 gear ahead of the cylinders, therefore it's behind all three, probably with a fairly long centre valve spindle. Behind the cylinders is in some ways a better position for the gear, because it removes thermal expansion of the outside valve spindles from the inputs supplied to the inside cylinder derived motion.

The B17 cylinder layout is most comparable to the Royal Scots and descendents, plus the Peppercorn Pacifics, just with added 2:1 gear, and is the logical layout for a large wheeled 3-cylinder 4-6-0 since it permits the firebox to come right up to the second axle.

 

The similarity with the D49s is the position of the conjugating levers, behind the cylinders. I am not sure I understand your question entirely, as an examination of photos will show the lack of V2/A3/A4 etc valve slidebar extensions in front of the outside cylinders. I attach an image of the valve slidebars on a K4 for information. There would not physically be room for a drive to the back of the inside valve chest from the front of the outside valve chests on a B17. The inside cylinder drove onto the leading coupled axle. Locos of the LNER details a number of issues faced at the design stage to fit it all in.

 

Gresley actually spent a lot of money on the Raven A2's up to about 1930 (see Green Guide) but then clearly decided there was no more to be had from them. I think by the time you'd have put on an A3 boiler and rebuilt the front end like the B16/3's you'd still have ended up with 5 heavy long wheelbase non-standard locos and it was probably more cost effective to build an extra 5 Gresley Pacific's, they having already proved acceptable to the NE men.

That is just my own thought process, not necessarily what HNG thought.

 

Since there is only a few Caledonian engines that have been preserved, why not add on to that, like the possibility of building a new Dunalastair?

 

A lovely engine!

However, I would prefer one of this, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Caledonian_Railway_4-6-0_locomotive,_903_Cardean_(Howden,_Boys'_Book_of_Locomotives,_1907).jpg

Knut

 

I do like a new Cardean, especially with a steamboat whistle fitted.

 

Nice looking and probably more useful than a Cardean

 

yummy

 

from the GER Society page...…………………………...incidently there are some excellent pics there if you have not visited


The cylinders were provided with piston valves for the first time on a GER locomotive, and they were of large size, contributing to the free running of the locomotive. The S69s were also superheated from the outset, with the Schmidtt pattern, but the Robinson type was later used, and became standard for the class. Although produced under the direction of Stephen Holden, the design was mainly due to E.S. Tiddeman, the head of the Locomotive Drawing Office. Apparently, the only contribution that S.D. Holden made was not until the prototype, No. 1500, was wheeled out for inspection: He said that he wanted curved brass beading on the cab sides, similar to that of the ‘Clauds’. He was told that because of the smaller driving wheel diameter, the corresponding beading would not allow enough room for the numberplate. Holden was however adamant, with the result that the remainder of the class from No. 1505 onwards had the cab side beading, and specially-designed numberplates that were shallower in depth


another Chief Draughtsman who maybe did not get the credit he deserved . S Holden was (allegedly) pretty inefective

 

With apologies if this has been asked before, with each new build group, what is the average number of members/patrons? Is it generally around the 70 to 100 mark? Also what is an idealistic number of members/patrons to bring a project to to fruition?

 

You never need to apologise for a question my friend

 

Thank you @240P15 My reason for asking is that these new build projects require large sums of money to see them through and I wondered if there is a correlation between membership/patron size and the time taken to complete the projects? I'm guessing there is, but is there an optimum membership size that is needed to keep things progressing and build on the successes along the way to completion? Thanks for any insights people are able to offer.

 

I cannot imagine that their is one size or ratio that fits all, some groups will have relatively small numbers but are still successful. The most important thing is to have a project that will appeal to your intended location and audience.

 

I think it's generally a case of the bigger, the better. However, the mix of people is important. A group of hundreds shelf stackers, fast food workers and semi-professional photographers will probably do worse than a handful of people who include a draftsman, machinist, welder, fabricator, etc etc. It also comes down to project management.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Steam Beano article about new builds. Some very pithy observations about funding vs expected cost, "If income continues at current rate, it will take over 100 years to build this engine, not accounting for inflation"

 

Although is that not the case with many projects you have to start slow to build up members and show you mean business, some will fail to make the step up in gear needed to complete and will fall by the wayside, but if you don't try you'll never achieve anything. Are there not parallels in this with quite a few Barry restorations too, some get there (with quite variable timescales) others eventually get sold on to other groups for completion?

 

To be fair to SR, I think some of the comments are spot on. The "other" P2 and the Man Utd projects have both been going for a long time and have made little progress. I think some realism is required about some of these projects.

Keith

 

What is the current situation with the Doncaster P2 project?