Thanks, which will explain why it didn’t appear under a search for diesel hydraulics.It’s not a hydraulic. It’s a “loaf”, better known as the Metro-Vick Type 2 Co-Bo, or Class 28 under TOPS.
One of the none top reliable Met-Vick Co-Bos. Only class to use the unusual Co-Bo wheel arrangement with one six and one four-wheeled bogie, intended to give more equitable weight distribution.I presume this is a Western diesel hydraulic? It’s not a Class 42 “Baby Warship”, though, but I can’t think what it is. Can the experts here please help me out? TIA...
If, back in the day, you had had a Hornby Dublo train set you may have had one (or seen it in the catalogue) however!I presume this is a Western diesel hydraulic? It’s not a Class 42 “Baby Warship”, though, but I can’t think what it is. Can the experts here please help me out? TIA...
I saw it at Swindon in the early late 70s/early 80s.And D5705 survives to this day at Bury, the subject of a very long term restoration project.
It’s like a ‘Baby “Baby Warship”’.I remember him asking dad if it was a real BR loco...
Are you sure?One was stored for years on Bristol Bath Road in the 1970s.. I have at least one photograph of it.
Are you sure?
There was a 22 dumped by the bridge and visible from the road 1977-80, never saw a 28 there
TDB968006, previously D5705 and S15705, arrived in Bristol from Danygraig 10-02-1976 for carriage heating work, but was withdrawn in September 1977. It was stored out of use, latterly at Bath Road, until moved to Swindon 11 June 1980. All Class 22 were scrapped by the end of 1972.
Source: Volume 4 of Roger Harris’ The Allocation History of BR Diesels & Electrics (Third Edition).
Maybe! That would have been a quality set - but probably sold off cheaply - with the end of Hornby Dublo production (on sale of the business to Triang) in 1964 I believe the Co-Bos were an item where large stocks of unsold models were inherited by Tri-ang - so they would have sold them cheaply I suspect to shift them. Given Dublo's legendary high quality of construction it would have been a far better runner than the real thing I suspect!My younger brother had the Hornby set which included a class 28 Co-Bo, it must have been about 65/66 ish?
I remember him asking dad if it was a real BR loco...
...and as @WesternLancer points out, it did seem a bad choice for a basic set. Maybe it was a cunning plan to encourage you to buy another loco very soon afterwards?
Crossley engines were pretty poorly regarded in bus use.I commented in another thread about class28. What exactly was the problem with the Crossley engines fitted? They had an excellent reputation for stationary and marine engines much like English Electric had prior to any rail application. They had been in the engine building business for donkey's years before CoBos were even thought of.
I only ever saw one 28 in operation, it was one evening , just going dark, a lot of noise and a shower of sparks from the exhaust, very dramatic but did not inspire confidence!
I have a vague recollection of reading something in connection with the Irish locos that said that it was related to the varying loads or engine speeds that were required when in rail use. When in marine and stationary use the output is much steadier. Someone with better technical knowledge may be able to confirm or correct this.I commented in another thread about class28. What exactly was the problem with the Crossley engines fitted? They had an excellent reputation for stationary and marine engines much like English Electric had prior to any rail application. They had been in the engine building business for donkey's years before CoBos were even thought of.
The Thomas character was BoCo, not CoBo (not that it makes much difference!).Pretty sure that one of Thomas the Tank Engine's friends was called Co-Bo