Depends, you do have things such as monomotor bogies to two and three-axle designs powered by a single motor but those don't seem to have found favour in the UK. Though that's not two motors powering three axles, which may or may not exist as a design.
I can see how monomotor bogies work, although I hadn’t really thought about them in the context of this discussion. It’s no different to having multiple powered axles on an HGV really. Two motors powering three axles could be done, I’m sure it would throw up problems though. Modern control systems could probably overcome them but we’re into “solution for a problem that doesn’t exist” territory I think!
I think also wasn't the design based on an earlier export loco that used A1A bogies to weight spread on lightweight railways?
Yes I believe this is correct. It was a proven design, just a bit unusual in the UK.
Interesting thanks for the info. So really, was the design flawed? Driving all wheels should be a no-brainer, right?
..
And what about the 40s, 44, 45, 46s. Why did those gigantic engines have non-driving wheels?
The design was flawed in that it was too heavy for a Type 2. Having two unpowered axles just to take the weight isn’t a desirable feature really. That said, when you look at what was available at the time and the experiences with other Type 2 locos it could be argued that the weight was more of a trade-off than a flaw…
Having all wheels/axles powered would normally be a no-brainer but that would have necessitated them being an EE Type 3, otherwise known as a Class 37. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to us now but I suppose at the time there must have been a definite need for a less powerful locomotive.
In regard to the 40s, 44s, 45s and 46s it’s a similar story; they were simply too heavy to get away with a Co-Co arrangement. If you look at their younger relatives (the 50s and 47s respectively) they were more powerful but lighter; again I think it can be put down to advances in technology. We now have Type 5 Bo-Bo locomotives to prove the point!