Are steam engines better now in preservation than they were in ordinary service

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

I live near a busy railway line in South Wales and we have quite frequent visits by steam specials . The thing that fascinates me is that years ago the goods trains used to lumber past at little more than walking pace with often two banking engines as well as the train engine . Nowadays essentially the same weight of train soars past at 70mph with one big GE diesel at the front which is what you’d expect but the astonishing thing is that very heavy steam hauled passenger trains can now do almost the same speed and without any assisting engine . I would be fascinated to know how such a vast improvement in hauling power of the engines seems to have been achieved – anybody know ???

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

[Laurence BParticipant @laurenceb]

I suppose it depended on the class of loco being used and its mechanical condition.

In the early ‘sixties I’d sometimes go train spotting at Lichfield Trent Valley and watch express train roar through at speed behing a ‘Semi’, Scot,or Jubilee.

On the other hand,I’d see goods trains plodding very slowly through Sutton Park station on the Castle Bromwich-Walsall line,hauled by some of the last few LNWR G2a 0-8-0’s (like ‘Wessie’ being described in ‘another’ magazine).

Then there were the last steam locos based at Oxley (Wolverhampton) shed.The less said about the state of them,the better!

So I guess the locos in preservation today are in much better condition,and Traffic Inspectors are more likely to fail a defective loco nowadays,than in the good old days of clapped out steamers!

 

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

The engines in the sixties were mostly 42’s 72’s with occassional class 5 and 9F turns . Oddly the 9F’s did not do much better than the much older GW engines .

On steam excursions we have had these engines in recent years  :
Castle , Tornado , class 5’s , Bullied pacific , A4 , Britania and Duke of Gloucester .

 

I have been told that the heavy but small wheel GW  tanks steamed very poorly at slower speeds and got into a situation where going just a little faster would have made them run better but they could not develop enough power to get any speed up .

[John OlsenParticipant @johnolsen79199]

Didn’t you Brits used to run lots of goods trains with unbraked four wheel wagons? It would be a brave man who would take a setup like that too much faster than walking pace.

 But the steam express trains in the UK were capable of some good speeds, 100 mph would not have been that uncommon. Well, Mallard did 126mph did’nt she. 

 

Not that our trains here in New Zealand were ever all that fast, you really don’t want to go too quick on a 3 ft 6 in gauge setup, especially when a lot of it is through fairly mountainous country. But when they put the Westinghouse brake in, they did it on all the stock so the goods trains could stop too. Even so, general maximum speeds tended to be around 60mph or so, apart from a few rare occasions in ideal places. I have been in a Fiat Diesel powered railcar (DMU if you prefer) doing 80 mph, on an ideal piece of dead flat dead straight line, and you hear of the odd steam loco having reached that sort of speed, probably without official approval.

 

regards

John

[Eric CoxParticipant @ericcox50497]

i didn’t think NZ had a passenger rail infrastructure, I thought it was all goods traffic.

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

Now I’m no steam buff, but it is obvious that the preserved steam locos are going to be generally in better condition that they were 50 years ago. Afterall, they now represent  a large financial asset which may well have had many man-hours spent on it to get it running again. Not that British Rail didn’t have financial assets ‘cos they did, but in the closing days of steam, there would be no incentive to really look after them.

 

But as John Olsen says, a lot of the 60’s goods trains were indeed the unbraked loose coupled trains, and it’s only really with the advent of braked stock and the ultra powerful diesel-electrics that line speeds could be increased. Mind you, there is rather more skill involved, so I understand, in getting a loose coupled train moving (and stopping) than there is in driving a fully braked close coupled train attached to a 4000HP diesel-electric.

 

As regards the 9F’s, if they were used on loose coupled freight, then they are still going to be limited to the same slowspeed restrictions as any other loco. But, I have read that when used on passenger duties, they were indeed capable of a fair turn of speed.

 

But what about banking/double heading etc. There is an important point here. If a freight train was limited to slow speed due to being loose coupled and unbraked, then the train would not be able to build up any momentum, therefore when faced with a steep bank, the loco would need assistance to get up it, whereas today’s trains, travelling at much higher speeds, do indeed have the benefit of momentum. How much, I don’t know, but it must help.

 

As an aside, I have at various times played with the Microsoft Train Simulator which does have all the various parameters built in. Just for fun one day, I deliberately stalled a Class31 hauled  freight train on a bank. It would not restart. And yet, when given even a slow run at the bottom could climb the bank with ease. Momentum? Or something else?

 

Final comment. Is it fair to compare a mainline steam express loco with perhaps 400ton behind with a goods loco with perhaps (guessing) double that amount behind?

 

Regards,

 

Peter G. Shaw

 

 

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

No way Eric, Auckland and Wellington have commutor trains, I’m not sure (John Olsen will know), of other services in the North Island. Here in he south we have three trains running, one goes north from Christchurch to Picton, another south to Dunedin, and the third west from Christchurch over the alps to Greymouth, this east west line carrys the greatest amount of freight of any line in NZ, we get about 8 coal trains a day, thes consist 30 waggons of 90 ton with 2 DX locos, the most powerful diesels NZR has. To go through the Otira tunnel with a full train the add 5 extra locos so that the train can maintain 80Kph up quite an incline. This last line is the one that passes through my home town of Darfield. There is a pic of a section of the line after our eartquake in the albums. We also get steam trains through reasonably often, they are mostly oil fired, and they take two tanker waggons of oil for the trip. Ian S C

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi, I always understood that most of the goods loco’s had smaller wheels for thier pulling power, whereas pasenger loco’s had large wheels for thier speed, and the mixed traffic loco’s had wheels of a size somwhere in between.

 

Regards Nick.

[V8EngParticipant @v8eng]

Just after leaving school I worked for British Rail (WR), some steam locos were still in service as well as diesels.

The Castles etc certainly hauled passenger stock along very rapidly, trailing steam and smoke they were a delight to watch .

Edited By V8Eng on 20/10/2010 20:54:47

[John OlsenParticipant @johnolsen79199]

Well, as it happens I ran into a couple of English visitors from Warwickshire yesterday. They are taking the train down to Wellington in a day or two, so it seems we do still have passenger trains on that route. They are also going to do the trip Ian mentioned, over the Midland line from Christchurch to Greymouth. (That would be the NZ midlands, not the UK ones!) Being at a loose end for the day, I ended up showing them around our museum of transport and technology.

 

I don’t know off hand what other regular scheduled services there are in the North Island, but I think they still run a regular service from Masterton to Wellington on the Wairarapa branch . There are occasional steam excursions on some of the other lines that would otherwise only be used for freight. There are indeed commuter trains in Auckland, although the system still needs some work to be able to mention it with a straight face, electrification for one thing. Wellington has a very good electric system, which I depended on for commuting for many years.

 

But yes, Nicholas, they did vary the wheel sizes as you mention. Most of our locos here were really mixed traffic, there were never really enough to justify too many separate classes.  Having said that, of the last two main classes, the K series (K, Ka, Kb) were more aimed at freight work, while the J and Ja were more aimed at express passenger work. Now if you want a nice grunty model for passenger hauling , consider that these are quite comparable in overall size to a UK mainline loco, but being on narrow gauge, they make a much larger model when scaled to suit the track. (eg a 3 in scale model on 7.25 inch track….) They might not suit UK tastes though, they are very much in the “exposed plumbing” style.  They tend to be a fusion of UK and American practice, eg compensated springing as per America, but plate frames as per the UK.

 

From what I have heard, it is quite true that it is harder to restart once stalled .  I’m not sure if  “stiction” would be a factor in this, it possibly could be, especially with plain bearing stock.

 

regards

John

[MICHAEL WILLIAMSParticipant @michaelwilliams41215]

Thanks for the responses so far received .

 

New Zealand is of course on the bottom of the world which means that all trains

there run downhill whereas in the UK they all have to run uphill .

 

Restarting a loose coupled train on even a slight gradient will always be much more difficult than on the flat . The difference between static and rolling friction is a part of this but mainly it is due to the different state of the couplings between the wagons .

On the flat the couplings are all loose and the engine does not have to start the whole train at once – the engine pulls  the first truck away a few inches then the coupling to the next wagon tightens and its gets drawn away in cascade all down the train . By

the time the whole train is moving the engine will have gone at least several feet and be working freely . On an up gradient all the couplings will be taut and the engine will

have to start the whole dead weight in one go . One of the functions of a brake van and one of the functions of a banking engine was coupling control – keeping them

loose going uphill and tight going downhill .

[Keith LongParticipant @keithlong89920]

Michael

Please stop posting in bold we don’t like being shouted at!

Just click on the upper case B in the header on the posting box to toggle between bold and normal.

Thank you

Keith

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

With our coal trains they had to change the coupling system from the old hook and single buffer to the American type(?Knuckle), the trains carry 1800 ton, soon to be 2700 ton, there’s not much slack between the waggons. I think the rolling stock on other trains is the old system, That includes the privately owned steam trains. One other train we get though here, usually at night, and only once a fortnight, the gold ore from the West Coast comming over for processing. Ian S C

[Martin WParticipant @martinw]

The comment re starting loose coupled trains on a gradient is not strictly correct.

 

The difficulty in starting a loose coupled train on an incline/gradient will depend whether the loco is going to move the train with or against the gradient. If with the incline then gravity will help as the trucks will want to roll that way and as soon as the loco moves they will follow .

 

The sound of a loose coupled train with slack couplings moving off is an abiding memory of my younger years and I can still recall trying to count the number clanks to estimate the size of the train. The only thing that this achieved was to determine the general size never the number of wagons (not enough fingers  on each hand) 

 

Just a thought!!

 

Martin 

[John OlsenParticipant @johnolsen79199]

Surely in the UK and elsewhere the southbound trains are going downhill while the northbound trains are going uphill?

 

One excessively bold experiment that was tried here was a 6 cylinder Garrett locomotive. They bought three of them, for use on the steep section of the North Island main trunk. The trouble is they had not done their sums properly beforehand, the tractive effort available was considerably more than the drawgear in the wagons could stand. A smaller version with four cylinders would have done all that was needed, and would not have had the troubles that were experienced with leaks between the cylinders and the frames.

 

regards

John

[Ian S CParticipant @iansc]

The 3 Garratts were rebuilt as 6 Pacific types as G 4 swith 3 cylinders, and used on the Midland line, but wern’t thought well of, the localy designed and built Kb was much better. One of these would make a great model, or a Ja, Jb, K or Ka, the booster on the rear bogey could be a bit fiddly on the Kb, but any of those would be big, might be good for 2 1/2″ .  Ian S C

[MichaelRParticipant @michaelr]

 

 

Posted by John Olsen on 21/10/2010 22:40:08:

Surely in the UK and elsewhere the southbound trains are going downhill while the northbound trains are going uphill?

John, if I travel from Glasgow to London the train goes “UP” to London.

 

Quote. All lines have a defined “UP”and “Down” direction, to or from the major city. The up line went towards the major city or, on a branch line, towards the junction with the main line. London was usually the major city.

 

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

Surely in the UK and elsewhere the southbound trains are going downhill while the northbound trains are going uphill?

 

This reminds of a few years ago when my youngest grandson asked why the ferry from England to Norway took 1 hour less returning, than it did going. My answer was that if he looked at the map, he would see that it was downhill from Norway, hence it was faster. He didn’t know whether to believe me or not – I think he realised that there was something not quite right, but didn’t know what! 

 

Rotten to my grandchildren I am!

 

Regards,

 

Peter G. Shaw

 

 

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

Nonsense, it depends whether you are going with or against the rotation of the earth

 

Neil

[William RobertsParticipant @williamroberts98085]

Micheal

              As regards trains going faster? the passenger trains  now are only about eight light weight cars long thats why if you see 2 yellows you have to be getting hold of them with the brake or you wont stop at the red, in the steam days the breakfast car left Doncaster with 15 cars on counted as 30 tons per car and stopped in Retford 17 miles away  171/2 minutes later. Some of these engines on the GNR were 40 and 50 years old and still doing what they were built to do at over 100 mph.

 

        Regards the old goods trains being slow? a lot of those engines were only built to do 40 mph but could pull what would take 3 or 4 diesels or electrics to do now.

      When the first diesels came into service if one  failed and a steam engine was put on it had to be a lower class engine so it didnt show the diesel up. If the train is on an up gradient you should stop with a tight coupling so the train will not run back , it is only on the level or down gradients you hear the snatch of the couplings as the train starts.

       Been there done that we didnt have t shirts in those days.

         Bill.

[Frank DolmanParticipant @frankdolman72357]

     Peter Shaw’s grandson was right to be suspicious.  There has been a great

   deal of muddled thinking of this sort in the past.  For example it was quite

   wrong to believe, as many did, that GWR employed the Main Line Gauge

   to prevent trains falling off the rails where the track ran sideways as much

   of the GWR does.

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

The correct answer to my grandson’s question as to why the ferry took one hour less on the return journey is actually a combination of  Norway being 1 hour in front of us and the actual ferry timings.

But I couldn’t resist saying something outrageous!

And yes, my grandson’s now know to be suspicious of anything I say which sounds slightly dubious.

 

Isn’t it a pity that children grow up!

Regards,

Peter G. Shaw

Edited By Peter G. Shaw on 23/10/2010 09:28:48

[Steve PurvesParticipant @stevepurves30189]

Posted by William Roberts on 22/10/2010 20:52:59:

        Regards the old goods trains being slow? a lot of those engines were only built to do 40 mph but could pull what would take 3 or 4 diesels or electrics to do now.

      When the first diesels came into service if one  failed and a steam engine was put on it had to be a lower class engine so it didnt show the diesel up. 

 

I’m sorry, but I don’t believe this to be true, I am a steam enthusiast like the next man but this doesn’t sound right. For example the BR 9F 2-10-0, regarded by some to be the best ‘all round’ steam locomotive has 39,667 lbf of tractive effort. In fact 92203 holds the record for the heaviest train ever hauled by a steam locomotive in Britain in 1982 with an aggregate train of 2178 drawbar tonnes. To compare this to a Brush type 4 (class 47) of 1962; these ran alongside steam for several years, has 55,000 to 60,000 lbf of tractive effort. Also of note, an English Electric type 3 (class 37) has a maximum of 55,000 lbf of TE and these were noted to be underpowered in recent years. At the other end of the scale, the Class 60 built at Brush works in the late 1980’s (of which many of the hundred built have now been withdrawn) has a staggering 106,500 lbf of TE, that figure is the reduced one as they were de-rated after a year in service due to being too powerful!

[Sub MandrelParticipant @submandrel]

It’s worth noting that steam locos have their greatest torque avauilable when stationary, which gives them a real advantage when startiong a stationary train over, say, deisel, even if they have lest tractive effort available.

 

Neil

[Author]

Posts