Tornado, Betton Grange, The Unknown Warrior Baby Deltic Etc

[Top Shed]

Hi All,

We seem to be entering a new era of of our railway Heritage Scene.

Indeed it is hoped we all get to see these marvels of 20th Century Engineering operate for real.

However the more the complex the machine the more complexities are involved with re creating lost locomotives hence the engineers undertaking the Baby Deltic project utilising the route of "modification" to an existing platform. The Baby Deltic may not turn out an exact replica but should operate perform and sound like the originals did and I look forward to that day.
Indeed the IDRS 10000 Project is much the same, utilising the nearest existing platform, original design bogies and a Mk1 SVT engine with later designed electrical equipment. (Indeed original specification signature parts have also been sourced).
With this being the case and vast designs done, done again and revised again until we have a realistic working locomotive blueprint, wht I want to know is how many of you wouls support such a project either moraly, financially or physically with the fact that this locomotive will never be a 100% bonafide replica.
I am not asking for your support just your opinion as a wider railway community as your feedback is greatly apprieciated here no matter how negative or positive. We will also be able to answer any questions about the project.

In the words of our President ex EE Commisioning Engineer for 10000/10001 "Do not try and replicate this design as it was a prototype with issues that all prototypes have" indeed we believe we have managed known problems effectively, efficently and cost effectively.

Over to you .......go on you know you want to......

Best Regards

Top Shed

 

[E&W Lucas]

Diesel preservation is very niche. Tricky to raise money; tricky to get people to ride behind the things in worthwhile numbers. Enthusiasts too often obsessed with one class, rather than the genre as a whole.

The idea of an approximation using available components is a sensible and realistic approach. I wonder what you will be allowed to do with it, once you've built it. Presumably preserved railways only.

Not a project for me - I sold my soul to a certain railway in Yorkshire years ago - but I wish you well.

 

[Bevan Price]

I can only wish moral support and wish good luck to those involved with such projects. My handicrafts skills are such that they would probably be a negative contribution.

I think that following the example of the reconstruction of 71000 Duke of Gloucester is the best way to go. They identified the deficiences in the original design, and modified the design to produce a fine locomotive which (externally) looks just like the original - but is both more reliable and a better performer.

The next problem is how to earn / obtain enough money to keep the loco in working order for the next century or three......., or at the very least, how to pay for safe, dry storage space for a rarely used museum piece.

 

[cin88]

I'm a big believer in getting as close to original as possible, however it isn't always possible so getting a close approximation or even improving in areas is often preferable. If I was based nearby then i'd probably lend my unskilled hands to the baby deltic project, but as it happens, said hands are being utilised by the ELR Diesel Group. I'd most likely be on hand to help keep it running if it was ever a visiting loco though as English Electric locos are what I primarily deal with.

 

[Top Shed]

All very apt replies ....Thank You.

Agreed on the diesel versus steam and pet types...

I am also interested to here from the steam only enthusiasts point of view on this also after all it was the diesel variant of the excellent Black 5 with Duchess esque streamlining?

Would you prefer /support such a loco assisting a steam special?

 

[colchesterken]

I like to see the new builds incorporating modem technology, as they improved "The Duke"
I was disappointed the project to build a 125 mph black 5 seems to have failed
It would be nice to know where steam or indeed early diesel types could have been improved ie the class 57 s, how about a rebuild cl 37 as was done with the 73 s
I thought it would be good to befurb John Hamden with the latest electric gear A/c motors etc. it is in too bad a state to restore as original

 

[BestWestern]

I have to say I personally have very little interest in this rather niche area of preservation; I saw Tornado at the West Somerset Railway a few months back and it didn't stir me particularly. If 'blokes in sheds' want to knock up a few pretend locos for whatever reason then that's fine by me, just so long as the proper stuff isn't suffering as a result!

 

[Top Shed]

Indeed the 5AT I believe i was called would have provided the platform in which to showcase how efficient and powerful a truely modern steam locomotive could be both initial cost and the running of. Although I would say this...........It is only realistic to assume that with the ever increase in age use and mileage not to mention the lack of competent trained skilled engineers that can blue in white metal bearings actually rivet boilers etc etc then if steam were to have a long term future then "Inproved design steam locomotives would be a part of that. I have first hand knowledge of what stress cycles does to steel over time and once the critical stage has been reached repair is only temporary (very temporary in my experience). LMS 10000 project creates an "Improved" D16/1 that will have the sound and precence indeed replicate in many ways with the deficiencies built out a very underutilised class 58 chassis, a completely re worked and overhauled heavier duty version of the "Fox designed" bogies (underutilised again) new axles, referbished EE 538 traction motors, sub 100 hours 16 SVT mk1 with original Brown and Boveri turbo charges (albeit fitted with later design main bearings) Class 58/ 56 /HST electrical control and brake equipment, a partially brand new cooler group based on the original but with increased capacity, Vacuum brakes as per class 37. Original design cab fittings modified to incorporate later controls, a modern fire suppression system More substantial cab design internally to incorporate crew protection with the use of modern materials and construction methods within the superstructure to assist with weight control and removal and replacement of body panels to assist repairs servicing.
The designs have taken two years to complete by various people, the rolling chassis has been costed, one power unit is secured and paid for with another one (the only other identical one in existance we think) has been inspected and agreed to be offered to us once it is no longer required. The bogies await a final transfer deal with the owners.
The class 58s are about to become "on the market" and we need to collect some signiture parts from abroard before they get melted down. (catches, latches control towers instruments, gauges, covers, plaques, cylinder heads etc etc.

Indeed the time to market and fundraise is here for us,,,,,,,,,,,
Who in the steam fraternity actually find this plan offensive to them, or with the above blueprint in place would support this project?

In light of the fact that this loco would support the likes of the new builds on the main line????
There is only so many hours in which a deltic engine will run for, there are only so many hours and millions of miles a 4 6 2 chassis will flex and vibrate for???????????????

Thank you for your replies thus far

Best Regards

Top Shed

 

[BestWestern]

Come on though, nobody really believes steam is ever going to make a comeback, short of a far off doomsday scenario where the world runs out of electricity... Which is unlikely to leave any fossil fuels left for burning in a steam loco!

 

[alexl92]

I love any project to re-create a lost class and even if it's not an exact replica, it's still great to see something close.

Thoroughly disagree with Best Western's assertion that they're 'pretend'. Each new build steam locomotive is every bit as much of a kettle as Furness 20, Mallard or the Duke.

 

[E&W Lucas]

Indeed the 5AT I believe i was called would have provided the platform in which to showcase how efficient and powerful a truely modern steam locomotive could be both initial cost and the running of. Although I would say this...........It is only realistic to assume that with the ever increase in age use and mileage not to mention the lack of competent trained skilled engineers that can blue in white metal bearings actually rivet boilers etc etc then if steam were to have a long term future then "Inproved design steam locomotives would be a part of that. I have first hand knowledge of what stress cycles does to steel over time and once the critical stage has been reached repair is only temporary (very temporary in my experience). LMS 10000 project creates an "Improved" D16/1 that will have the sound and precence indeed replicate in many ways with the deficiencies built out a very underutilised class 58 chassis, a completely re worked and overhauled heavier duty version of the "Fox designed" bogies (underutilised again) new axles, referbished EE 538 traction motors, sub 100 hours 16 SVT mk1 with original Brown and Boveri turbo charges (albeit fitted with later design main bearings) Class 58/ 56 /HST electrical control and brake equipment, a partially brand new cooler group based on the original but with increased capacity, Vacuum brakes as per class 37. Original design cab fittings modified to incorporate later controls, a modern fire suppression system More substantial cab design internally to incorporate crew protection with the use of modern materials and construction methods within the superstructure to assist with weight control and removal and replacement of body panels to assist repairs servicing.
The designs have taken two years to complete by various people, the rolling chassis has been costed, one power unit is secured and paid for with another one (the only other identical one in existance we think) has been inspected and agreed to be offered to us once it is no longer required. The bogies await a final transfer deal with the owners.
The class 58s are about to become "on the market" and we need to collect some signiture parts from abroard before they get melted down. (catches, latches control towers instruments, gauges, covers, plaques, cylinder heads etc etc.

Indeed the time to market and fundraise is here for us,,,,,,,,,,,
Who in the steam fraternity actually find this plan offensive to them, or with the above blueprint in place would support this project?

In light of the fact that this loco would support the likes of the new builds on the main line????
There is only so many hours in which a deltic engine will run for, there are only so many hours and millions of miles a 4 6 2 chassis will flex and vibrate for???????????????

Thank you for your replies thus far

Best Regards

Top Shed

Once you started to go into the specifics, I started to have serious doubts.

1. Why the Class 58 frames?
Cutting a new set would be one of the smaller costs you would face, and surely all the structural support will be in the wrong place for a totally different loco?
2. Why HST, etc brake equipment? Then you talk of vacuum gear off a 37.
Can I suggest you go and review a few schematics?
3. Are you really going to try and get mainline approval for a loco built of recycled parts?
I think a lot of preserved railways would be asking questions before they let it run, never mind NR. Structural integrity, stability, weight distribution, etc.

 

[Top Shed]

Class 58 frames
The 58 utilised the same principle chassis ie fully load bearing.
The 58 chassis is 300mm longer (in real terms with buffer wear less than this 58016 is 250mm longer)
The 58 chassis is proven, tested by RTC Derby (now Serco) fit for purpose as a rail going vehicle.
The class 58 is not a new locomotive therefore does not come under what "Delta Rail considers "A New Locomotive" hence no need for Euro 3B emmission controls, Overide protection, Crash crumple zones etc etc etc etc etc (you get the picture)
The class 58 chassis is drilled stress relieved straightened and naturalised through the correct fabrication processes and normal use.

D16/1 chassis had around two miles of welding, it was pieced together from whatever structural pieces was available commercially in post war austerity.
We have a price for a replica (which it must be for any chance of derogation and it five times that of an original then it has to be tested, flattened drilled at Sheffield forgemasters etc.
Our president who did 200k in the pair of them for EE said this was the locos achilles heel, and both could be said to flex excessively.

The rest I will answer shortly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The class 58 was designed in the same drawing office 30 years later and indeed had some individuals involved whom were instrumental in the design for 10000!
As you know it was designed for export order possibilities and mirrored American Modular practices as did 10000. It has been proven that the platform was capable of accepting different power equipment and a 16 SVT fits in a 58 frame as is without fundemental modification. The Ruston 12 cylinder (EE12CSVT) with all its higher ouput and noise suppression equipment weighs in slightly more than our 16SVT MK1.
Weight balance has been achieved to this end as there are no on board fuel tanks and significantly smaller cooler group ie much the same as a class 45 cooler group (slightly larger than 10000 original equipment).
The brake equipment on a class 58 is the nearest thing to modular brake equipment BR used, it was found on class 43s 56s 58s 89s 90s 91s. Produced by Davies and Metcalfe and is still widely used very reliably. The VB system will have to be as per 1960s locos with the system operation independent to the loco and train air brake system.
10000 was unique they were vacuum only much akin to a Mk1 coach.

Schematics we have purchased very many over the last two years from all loco types including 10000. (Indeed there are the majority of drawings from the loco minus power equipment at The NRM search engine.)We also own a copy of the drawings for EM2 Bogies.
Asthetic appearance
The internal layout of the class 58 with a new cooler group, 16SVT and other bespoke parts actually comes very close to the original. The class 58 power cables even follow the same route as 10000 to the main control cubicle in the same place. The place where the boiler went is filled with air recievers the location of the boiler water tank has brake equipment and a TM Blower there. The place where the original fuel tanks were is not occupied except for a TM blower.
To top it off a class 58 has the same distance between cab bulkheads as 10000 did!
H.G. Ivatt went to work for Brush after his BR days came to an end, he was instrumental in the design for the class 31 and indeed was instrumental in the design for a type 5 freight locomotive for export order that never happened.
This raises the question of whether some of this design work ended up with BR within the class 58?
Indeed without the superstructure both locomotives are remarkably simliar.
To add to this the vast majority of the costs involved surround the bogie rebuild and the fabrication of the superstructure.
The Centre of gravity is lower than 10000 and is the same as a class 58, structural integrity is the same as a class 58 with increased driver / collision protection.
The weight distribution is equal on all axles.
The overall weight is below a fully functional class 58 by a significant margin.
The design is well within loading gauge. (This will become a real issue for steam in the next few years.)
I would suggest that this blueprint is fit for purpose within Network Rail and our excellent Heritage Railways.

Thanks for your questions indeed they were well recieved, I hope I have answered them satisfactorily...................Please keep them coming.

Best Regards

Top Shed

 

[E&W Lucas]

Thank you. A couple of "bait" questions have given you the opportunity to demonstrate that you're not a bunch of spotters designing something on the back of a fag packet!
I'm pleased.
Going back to the brake arrangement, and being familiar with a wide range of loco configurations, including the E70, I'm still left scratching my head with that idea.
Presumably the original locos were had a similar set up to a class 24?
If I was aiming to produce a dual braked "first generation" diesel, I would keep away from 2nd generation brake systems. Taking an electrically operated automatic air brake valve, and then presumably adding some form of proportional valve, so that it will also apply a vacuum train brake, is going to produce something complex, and I expect very cumbersome in operation. If you don't think a vacuum only loco is an option, then I would strongly suggest copying a dual braked first generation arrangement.
That's intended to be a helpful suggestion, from someone with experience of operating a very wide range of traction.

 

[Top Shed]

E and W Lucas,

You're comments are very true and I have not been detailed enough about the brake system. Indeed the 58 compressor, frame, drive motor, belts has to go.
A. It was not the best set up in the world by a long way.
B. The main feed system was indeed extremely heavy in construction to the point whereas I believe it was ballast to a certain extent to balance the weight of the loco.
C. Indeed there are four extra cylinders to sit here as well as where the huge class 58 heat exchangers.

Early loco types of pressure/vacuum generation are part of the design with class 47 being favourite. Indeed incorporating this within the Davies and Metcalfe system requires further developement.
I apprieciate your comments and would like to ask with your experience how you would ideally make a reliable duel braked loco?

I look forward to your replies.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just to add it is ironic that the recessed frame sealing plates actually accomodate the 16 cylinder engine. Also to my knowledge class 58 frame sealing was very good with adequate effluent drain off and very little evidence of effluent leakage onto the underframes, indeed to some extent this was a problem on a lot of loco types causing many bogie fires over the years.
In some way though the amount of coal dust to be found in this area on a 58 would have created a real fire hazard and would have acted in some way as Spill Dry!

Another issue we have is the hydraulic hand brake! We do not want to construct a loco that has the potential to bugger off into the sunset due to loss of applied pressure.

 

[E&W Lucas]

E and W Lucas,

You're comments are very true and I have not been detailed enough about the brake system. Indeed the 58 compressor, frame, drive motor, belts has to go.
A. It was not the best set up in the world by a long way.
B. The main feed system was indeed extremely heavy in construction to the point whereas I believe it was ballast to a certain extent to balance the weight of the loco.
C. Indeed there are four extra cylinders to sit here as well as where the huge class 58 heat exchangers.

Early loco types of pressure/vacuum generation are part of the design with class 47 being favourite. Indeed incorporating this within the Davies and Metcalfe system requires further developement.
I apprieciate your comments and would like to ask with your experience how you would ideally make a reliable duel braked loco?

I look forward to your replies.
[.

I've no experience of 58s, but presumably you're faced with a larger compressor than you'll need, and obviously a total absence of exhauseter(s)?
Depending upon what you can source at an acceptable cost, surely the most historically realistic and operationally sensible solution, would be to copy the full set up from an extant loco design?
Dual braked 47, 37 or whatever. Don't forget also that an E70 self laps, and that's a long way from the "first generation" experience.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Another issue we have is the hydraulic hand brake! We do not want to construct a loco that has the potential to bugger off into the sunset due to loss of applied pressure.

As per original - wheel on secondman's side!
Forget all this new fangled nonsense. Though I would seek to retain the detection that prevents taking power, if the parking brake is still applied!

 

[Top Shed]

The most realistic and originally accurate is utilise the equipment from a redundant class 46 or early 47 (the 45s are 220v dc), obviously class 47 would be the easiest route as there is no such thing as redundant 46 and neither should there be!

The original hand brake is the favoured route, it does require further design and a crossbrace extending on the chassis under the cabs. With double proximity switches one visual warning and the prevention for taking power.

Many Thanks for your advice.

 

[TheBeard]

Think new builders in time is becoming a niche in railways, not quite preservation, more preservation of skills

 

[Top Shed]

Think new builders in time is becoming a niche in railways, not quite preservation, more preservation of skills

It is preservation and education of skills that will become increasingly scarce with the continued level of de-industrialisation of this country.

What was the last British designed and built 1500hp to 3000hp locomotive for use in mainland Britain?