Locomotive abuse

Abuse is causing unnecessary stress to the loco.

A event I have heard about at a well known heritage line was that of a light engine leaving the station to go back to the sheds, the driver of a large tender engine opening the regulator wide open, causing the loco to slip, shutting the regulator then doing the same thing THREE more times!!! [-X

 

"You're a very ugly engine"

Is that enough locomotive abuse? :-k

 

Well, its not just abuse while working hard i'd be worried about... Heard a lil story today...

 

The difference is a BR engine would of had a huge engineering support function behind it and the public purse to bail out any repairs, a preserved engine would have limited resources to support it.

From the point of view of comparing locomotive utilisation between the steam age and today, I am suprised nobody has mentioned the effects on boilers in this thread. I gather many BR engines were kept continiously in steam or at least "hot" for days on end between boiler washouts, yet preserved loco boilers are more frequently cycled between hot and cold as their running days are not concurrent and overnight babysitters in unsocial hours being difficult/impossible to resource.

With this thermic-cycling and the fatigue it presumably causes, are preserved locomotive boilers more prone to leaks and damage today than fifty years ago? Also could shuttling on a preserved railway cause a boiler be thermically cycled more than if it were on a long mainline run?

 

Some excellent points I think - I also agree very much with JIMC's sentiments in the previous post. Point 8 - using the injectors - I don't quite understand that - surely the ideal situation is to try and keep everything to do with the boiler constant - steam pressure, superheat, water level etc, and this would be aided by a driver who kept his demand for steam constant ?

Point 9 is, I think the area that I am most ignorant about. From a simplistic theoretical standpoint under any given set of circumstances the amount of work done by the locomotive in hauling a train is FxD, force multiplied by distance. Unlike a car with several gears a locomotive has a fixed relationship between one stroke of the piston and the distance moved. So, to do a given amount of work which is kinder (not more efficient) to the engine - steam at a lower steam chest pressure admitted for a longer stroke or steam at a higher pressure admitted for a shorter part of the stroke and allowed to expand ?

 

Wasn't there a story about somebody taking Flying Scotsman from Manchester to Liverpool in full forward gear all the way and just about emptying the tender in the process ?

 

Of course it could! Have to agree with you there! Engines in ,( nearly said BR days then, but why narrow your view to the last 2 decades of a 150 yr. story!),steam days were kept in steam & run day in , day out, & were much better for it. Some classes could take more 'abuse' than others, & then it depended on the personality of the driver, & as we all know, there's drivers & there's drivers!!
It's Thursday night now, Braunton is due to run on Saturday , she was lit up yesterday!!!

 

Ref point 8 there are some (poor) firemen who appear to operate the injectors according to where they are on a trip rather than in order to manage the boiler properly - "I have reached point X therefore I put on the injector" syndrome - not properly looking at the water level, anticipating the road ahead & the demand for steam.

Ref cut off - your description above overlooks the need for each engine of the loco to get rid of its exhaust steam before starting the next cycle. Therefore when starting away long cut off is appropriate to start the train & there is plenty of time for the exhaust part of the cycle; at speed there is very little time for exhaust so short cut off is necessary. Each loco will have a narrowish range of cut off within which it will run happily dependant on load/gradient/speed etc - skilled drivers understand this and by being in empathy with the loco can tell what the most appropriate cut off for the work in hand is.

 

To Southport in September 1987 actually. I understand that the driver and traction inspector on the footplate were subsequently disciplined fort their mishandling of the loco over the 34 miles between Manchester and Southport. Fortunately the facilities available at Steamport at the time included a coal merchant who was willing to come in to work to supply a tenderful during the day; unfortunately the Liverpool Area Manager was on hand ( being also a "bit of an enthusiast" ) and the issues were quickly identified - and dealt with - including the subsequent disciplinary procedures.

 

Re the use of injectors and in fairness to firemen (and passed cleaners)

Since most preserved lines are short and speed limits are low large loco's are hard pressed to get out of "first valve" on the regulator, there is no opportunity to use an exhaust steam injector at a constant rate so you are forced back on the use of a live steam injector. The geography of the line is then bound to play a part. You'll seek to avoid putting the injectors on when climbing a bank (because you don't want to risk dropping boiler pressure too far) where the driver has the regulator open and tend to put them on at summits and on the downhills. So you can't avoid following the geography to some extent. Admittedly that a long way from blindly just whacking it on as you pass a certain milepost and whacking it off as you pass another one.

 

So they should be! This begs the question , where & how did the driver & traction inspector learn there trade!! To drive 34 miles in full forward gear should be a sacking offence.
Also firemen who put the injector on at geographical points instead of how the engine is working - well! I blame their tutors, even then they should have enough sympathy with the engine & common sense to realise thats not right!

 

I'll try and answer the expansive working question.
In theory, with a long travel valve, high superheat engine, maximum steam chest pressure, ie maximum superheat too, minimum cut off. I say in theory, as you can "pull an engine up" too far, especially at preserved line speeds, and they start to "see saw." Also, the higher the initial temp & pressure of the steam you admit, the higher it will be as exhaust, so easier to get rid of. To be honest, most preserved lines are too short, and too easy a route, to ever even get the superheater properly warmed up. You've also got to allow for rail conditions; when it's slippy, it's often better to go for the most even pressure over the full stroke of the piston, ie lower s/c pressure, long cut off. A case of getting the job done over efficiency.

Just to emphasise - full regulator driving is NOT working the engine hard. You are making the maximum use of the superheater; the key is use of the reverser.

A personal view on abuse:
1. Cutting corners on prep
2. "" "" on disposal
3. Failure to keep the cab clean. - It reflects on your general attitude to the job.
4. showing off.
5. Arriving on shed with a low water level, and then filling up the boiler after the fire has been dropped.

 

Could have been a classic case of "a little bit of knowledge" in that the Gresley conjugated valve as fitted to most of his 3-cylinder designs required drivers to start off in full forward gear in order to set / settle the valve gear. Once the loco was moving the gear should be reduced to something nearer 20 - 25 and the locos would happily run as long as there was a little "fire in the belly", but it might have been that the crew were not told / ignored / the second part of the instruction.

For those who visited the Kings Cross complex in steam days the drivers' expertise could be judged by whether they managed to reduce the cut-off before they entered Gas Works Tunnel as most Kings Cross drivers reckoned to get trains up the hill through to Finsbury Park in nothing more than 40 - 45% cut-off.

This didn't only happen with LNER locos as there were reports that Midland Compound 1000 was driven by a Carnforth driver who didn't realise that once the regulator was opened it needed to be shut to allow the steam access to the higher pressure cylinders; on this occasion 1000 ran on low pressure cylinders only.

I have no further details of this piece of "bad driving" but I would presume that all drivers had days when unfamiliarity / forgetfulness / senior moment resulted in a memorable experience.

 

Off topic, but to answer a couple of the points in the above post:

This doesn't make sense - the gradient falls steeply in to Gas Works Tunnel. Even with the present day 15 mph permitted speed, you've powered down well before you get into it, probably at about 10 mph. The gradient does the rest. IIRC, the permitted speed in steam days was only 7mph?

40 - 45% cut off at say 45mph by FP is working hard! Please see the posts above about getting rid of exhaust steam too.

Sorry, but not the case. The engine only goes into full compound mode, ie boiler steam into the HP cylinder only on Full Reg. Please see LMS Questions for enginemen, 1931, p26.

 

Its a pity there arnt many steam days drivers, which mean, ex BR, to advise us on here ,there the only people i'd listen to.

 

Why? There are probably better enginemen on heritage railways then some of the drivers or firemen who worked for BR.

 

True, but what I mean is the expierience & familliarity of doing the job day in, day out.

 

It's a mistake to assume that anyone who worked for BR on the footplate was a 'god'.