The most powerful train in the world?

[strange6]

Was the Deltic at one time. Any ideas to what it is now?

For all you Deltic fans, just uncovered this little gem on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xSbmBhFnQk

Personally, I think these are the best trains the UK has ever produced.

 

[starrymarkb]

I believe the current leaders are the Brush Shuttle locomotives and the Swedish IORE. IIRC The IORE wins on power at rail though, being geared for a top speed of 40mph and heavily ballasted (130t Co-Co electric) for 8000t ore trains, whereas the Shuttle has a top speed of 90mph

Most powerful Bo-Bo for unspecialised use is the Swiss Re465 for BLS - which is a souped up Re460 for working the steep Lotschberg route. They have been supplanted by less powerful, but multisystem TRAXX locos in recent years so don't see as much use as they did.

 

[daikilo]

Was the Deltic at one time. Any ideas to what it is now?

For all you Deltic fans, just uncovered this little gem on youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xSbmBhFnQk

Personally, I think these are the best trains the UK has ever produced.

Firstly, the Delitic was probably the most powerful Diesel locomotive when it was first shown and for many years that followed, but others appeared. At the time of this video the HS4000 Kestrel may have been the most powerful but may have already been sold to Russia.

 

[The Decapod]

This must be a contender for the most powerful TRAIN in the world - taking the topic title literally - very long US freight train hauled by 10 large diesel locos in multiple - not sure if all 10 locos are pulling their weight, though. Some are rather quiet, like they're just going along for the ride!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyOG3j-qJQQ
The Deltic was indeed the most powerful diesel loco in its day, until Kestrel came along.

A net search shows that the EMD DDA40X, at 6600 bhp is the world's most powerful diesel loco ever - twice the power of a a Deltic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EMD_DDA40X

These must have been pretty powerful too, although I don't know their bhp equivalent:
http://www.rocousa.com/BigBoy/bigboy4.jpg

BR experimented with uprating the power of a Class 47 loco to something approaching that of a Deltic but the unfortunate guinea-pig's engine exploded on the London to Norwich line as a result, damaging the loco so badly it was scrapped.

 

[strange6]

Give me a Deltic anyday!

 

[The Decapod]

Give me a Deltic anyday!

OK - it's on its way

 

[starrymarkb]

This must be a contender for the most powerful TRAIN in the world - taking the topic title literally - very long US freight train hauled by 10 large diesel locos in multiple - not sure if all 10 locos are pulling their weight, though. Some are rather quiet, like they're just going along for the ride!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyOG3j-qJQQ

I've seen 4 Re465s on a Swiss freight - all motoring - would have been around 36000hp!

 

[route:oxford]

How "gentle" were the Deltics to the track in comparison to say the 67s?

Usually the Network Rail track-access charge document is a fairly good indicator as to the wear caused to the network, but class 55 isn't listed on the one that I'm looking at.

 

[jrhilton]

Was the Deltic at one time.

Is this diesel only? I presume it must be as the DRG Class E94 for example was in use before the Deltic and it had higher power output and starting/continuous tractive effort, but was electric. It was designed for very heavy freight loads and was being made from the 1940s to late 1950s.

 

[notadriver]

What about high speed train sets ? China is the new world leader in high speed train travel and it's CRH380A EMU boasts an incredible 20+MW of power for a 16 car formation. By comparison Eurostar has 12.2 MW for 20 cars and I believe it boasts the best power to weight ratio of ANY EMU in Britain. I could be wrong though !

 

[strange6]

As far as engineering excellence is concerned, I consider diesel to be the standard. from an engineering point of view, it is much more of an art to extract pure horsepower from an ICE rather than electricity

 

[Kingfisher200262]

What about high speed train sets ? China is the new world leader in high speed train travel and it's CRH380A EMU boasts an incredible 20+MW of power for a 16 car formation. By comparison Eurostar has 12.2 MW for 20 cars and I believe it boasts the best power to weight ratio of ANY EMU in Britain. I could be wrong though !

I decided not to join in the fun on this thread until someone else raised the C word....

Apart from high speed, China boasts some pretty powerful freight trains. I've stared at this freight train for ages and still can't count the wagons. Anyway, each of the two locos is 9600 kW (so 19200 kW or 26700 hp) and each wagon has a payload of 80 tonnes and a tare weight of 19.2 tonnes. I reckon that's a trailing load of something like 17000 tonnes, with just two permanently coupled locos with one cab at each end of the coupled pair.

 

[Oracle]

A 3 x 4-REP once trialled on the SR had 9,600 hp in theory with 12 cars. Were the REPs the highest-powered EMUs in the British Isles until the Eurostars?

 

[notadriver]

A 3 x 4-REP once trialled on the SR had 9,600 hp in theory with 12 cars. Were the REPs the highest-powered EMUs in the British Isles until the Eurostars?

Well AFAIK 4REPs run that way would have to have the other units cut out due to current supply limitations. But you're right. Most modern units have 2000hp. The closest comparison is the Javelin which with 5 cars has around 4500hp.

 

[Bittern]

Not quite the same, but the LMS Princess Coronation hold the title of the most powerful steam loco in Britain, which makes 6233 Duchess of Sutherland the most powerful steam loco in preservation. Would've thought a 9F would've been more powerful, somehow.

 

[silvermachine]

Not quite the same, but the LMS Princess Coronation hold the title of the most powerful steam loco in Britain, which makes 6233 Duchess of Sutherland the most powerful steam loco in preservation. Would've thought a 9F would've been more powerful, somehow.

There is a difference between the the tractive effort ( which was high for the 9f - 10 coupled and relatively small wheels and lower for the coronation - 6 coupled large wheels) and the horsepower.

More details are here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tractive_force

So the coronation was powerful and built for speed, the 9f was less powerful and designed to pull heavy loads - and to be cheaper to maintain.

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Think of the 9F and a Coronation as a racehorse and a carthorse. One's built for speed the other's built for power. Having said that, a few 9Fs were clocked at 80 mph + with one at a genuine 90mph when on passenger work. Mechanical proof that two cylinders with a properly balanced front end is no inhibition to speed. My slide-rule calculations reveal that 90mph with five foot wheels is equal to 125mph with 6' 8" wheels.
Deltics? 99 tons and rated at 3,300 hp in 1955 when the same company was about to start building 133 ton 2,000 hp locos for B.R. and B.R. themselves were building 133 ton locos rated at 2,300 hp. The Deltics truly were a revolutionary locomotive. It's a personal source of wonderment for me as to whether the HST would have happened if B.R. had accepted English Electric's proposal for a "Super Deltic" with two uprated engines rated at 2,200 hp each in a class 50 bodyshell for about 110 tons. But B.R. were set firmly against any more high revving engines - so they bought Paxman "Valentas" for the HST. Doh!

 

[Ian Mayes]

Not quite the same, but the LMS Princess Coronation hold the title of the most powerful steam loco in Britain, which makes 6233 Duchess of Sutherland the most powerful steam loco in preservation. Would've thought a 9F would've been more powerful, somehow.

Hmmm....interesting. I would take a look at GWR's King Class locos. You might be surprised. Diesels? An A4 Pacific could put down 3300kW to the rails. That was more than the first diesels that replaced them! Powerful diesels? HS4000 Kestrel was rated at 4000 hp. A lovely locomotive, BR senior instructor Ted Mayes (my uncle) drove her. What is more he showed me and my other uncle underneath and inside her at Shirebrook Loco Engine Sheds, and I can remember her beautiful canary yellow and black livery whilst being parked outside the sheds as a boy. Pity she ended her life derelict and finally scrapped in Russia. What a waste of a fine loco. The Russians only ever wanted her for the Sultzer engine, so that they could static test bed the thing and develop the engine for their next high speed express diesel. Bloody waste!

 

[The Barlow Boy]

Hmmm....interesting. I would take a look at GWR's King Class locos. You might be surprised. Diesels? An A4 Pacific could put down 3300kW to the rails. That was more than the first diesels that replaced them! Powerful diesels? HS4000 Kestrel was rated at 4000 hp. A lovely locomotive, BR senior instructor Ted Mayes (my uncle) drove her. What is more he showed me and my other uncle underneath and inside her at Shirebrook Loco Engine Sheds, and I can remember her beautiful canary yellow and black livery whilst being parked outside the sheds as a boy. Pity she ended her life derelict and finally scrapped in Russia. What a waste of a fine loco. The Russians only ever wanted her for the Sultzer engine, so that they could static test bed the thing and develop the engine for their next high speed express diesel. Bloody waste!

Um, I know I left school a long time ago - over 45 years - but I think that your KW to HP conversion may be a little out. 3,300 KW is about 4,425 HP. The most powerful locomotives were - as has been stated - the Princess Coronations. On test one managed a drawbar pull of 3,333 HP. That was with two firemen continuously shovelling coal onto that enormous 50 square foot grate (imagine a square 7'X7'). I doubt that an A4 could knock out much more than about 2,300HP at the drawbar.
Bear in mind that power doesn't necessarily equal speed or speed necessarily equal power. The analogy might be an elephant and a cheetah. Which one is strongest, which one is fastest?

 

[merlodlliw]

This was a powerful coal burner

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Pacific_Big_Boy

 

[RichW1]

Does anyone know the power differences at rail between Pendolino and Class 91 because on paper it reads Pendolino hp: 6,800 or so and class 91 hp:6080 but the Pendolino feels like it accelerates much quicker - dare I say I'm impressed!

By the way Bittern....Britain is 3 nations but ONE country as the nations individually do not meet the necessary independence criteria for a country from currency to taxation to where the overall parliament resides to foreign policy etc etc. We do have an odd system though in sport deciding on Great Britain sometimes and then seperate other times - weird and not fair because under that system Texas should be allowed to have a separate team to the USA and they have MORE powers than any devolved government here!! but this a whole seperate topic - sorry all.

 

[sprinterguy]

I don’t know the actual figures, but a Pendo will be able to put down a greater proportion of its’ power on the rail as it is using distributed traction over twelve powered axles throughout the train, rather than four on a class 91, leading to a much faster acceleration as well as better rail adhesion.

 

[RichW1]

that certainly feels the case - the Pendos pull out of Euston so fast compared to anything else I've been on in the UK. Wonder if the 11-car ones will have an extra set of powered axles to counter the extra weight? Either way, they'll be better than anything else we have performance-wise for many years I suspect! Such a shame the railways were built with the loading guages they were or the Pendos might have had a little more space, that said I don't find them as claustrophobic as many on here seem to find them.

Power though, that's the best we have I think? TGV sets are about 13,000 HP as a unit I believe but that's not power at rail. But can't compete with that above which in China or US etc but then we don't have the market for it in the same way I suppose but jesus the rails must take a battering!!!

 

[sprinterguy]

Yeah, one of the additional carriages for the eleven coach sets is, AFAIK, an MSO. The Pendolinos are indeed incredibly swift off the mark.

 

[Zoe]

Britain is 3 nations but ONE country as the nations individually do not meet the necessary independence criteria for a country

Britain is a single sovereign state. A country does not have to be a sovereign state. National Statistics say the UK is four countries: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/geography/uk_countries.asp

 

[Ian Mayes]

Um, I know I left school a long time ago - over 45 years - but I think that your KW to HP conversion may be a little out. 3,300 KW is about 4,425 HP. The most powerful locomotives were - as has been stated - the Princess Coronations. On test one managed a drawbar pull of 3,333 HP. That was with two firemen continuously shovelling coal onto that enormous 50 square foot grate (imagine a square 7'X7'). I doubt that an A4 could knock out much more than about 2,300HP at the drawbar.
Bear in mind that power doesn't necessarily equal speed or speed necessarily equal power. The analogy might be an elephant and a cheetah. Which one is strongest, which one is fastest?

Of course Barlow Boy you are correct. And 1 hp is still 746 Watts! I was probably thinking of the Princess Coronation Class when I noted that in the earlier days of diesel, steam was still king, and that was 3300 hp at the bar of a Princess Coronation. Gresley noted that what could be done with diesel could be done with steam, and that is why he continued with it for so long. Next time engage brain before writing.

Speed or strength? It was probably that the King Class could pull the heaviest loads. I heard that one GWR director having been asked to explain why his main line steam loco was costing more than an A4 to produce responded, 'It can pull two of those things backwards!' The King Class were powerful beasts, but I think you are right the Big Lizzies probably pipped them.

My uncle Percy was on the Big Lizzies on the West Coast Mainline route. He loved them, but noted that they had been developed to replace the earlier Princess class locos. Why? The Princess class were crap firers. Poor steamers. No wonder the firebox area was so large on a Princess Coronation Class. The LMS had decided that on the replacement for the Princess class steaming would not be a problem.

Yes, interesting past........Herbert Spencer (mothers side), Bill Mayes - engine drivers on LNER/BR - I have my grandfather Mayes BR 45 year long service award, a Smiths gold watch engraved, Ted Mayes - senior instructor with LNER/BR - later to be involved much with HS4000 Kestrel tests - uncles Donald, Keith, Malcolm Spencer (mothers side) - firemen on LNER/BR, uncle Percy - main line West Coast services on LMS/BR from Euston to Glasgow (I think). Every Saturday afternoon endless discussions of the railway rule book, and arguments about who was the best when Percy visited nearly drove my grandmother beserk.

How I did not end up on the railways? I will never know! Probably I lost it when steam left. Had Flying Scotsman (without crew) all to myself on Shirebrook station in about '68. After a civic function on the platform (I could not get anywhere near her so looked on from the bridge as she pulled away), she had to reverse back due to a points failure on the Mansfield loop. Great memories. Just me alone with the loco. I always remember touching her name plate. The smell of a steamer still attracts me even today. Wonderful smell. Steam......it is in my blood!

 

[RichW1]

Britain is a single sovereign state. A country does not have to be a sovereign state. National Statistics say the UK is four countries: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/geography/uk_countries.asp

Hey Zoe, taken a couple here from world geographers - though it seems we are all countries but NOT sovereign States which is where the confusion seems to have lay. A country doesn't mean you're recognised - it just means you constitute a people, culture and place and claim it as a place distinct from others. This does not give any form of recognition in global politics however, just like the countries of the former Yugoslavia. The UK is a very unique set-up as a State. I think we should just go for total independence because too many people get worked up in Scotland (maybe rightly so, maybe not) and I hear very few Scots arguing the previous or current status quo for us to stay together as one Nation State.

http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/scotlandnot.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland#Government_and_politics (see part 3:Government and Politics)

Essentially Scotland cannot do anything without the permission of the UK parliament and powers can be revoked at any time. Scotland is not independently in charge of its own destiny and until that changes it is part of the UK and not a separate entity in its own right even though it appears and feels separate in many ways. It feels miore separate now since devolution in culture and identity I think, but constitutionally it is not a separate State to the UK.

However....I think it might come but I'm really 50/50 because every time there's a poll, most vote to stay in the Union of UK as a country and don't want separation. I don't know how it got here but I think it's a mess.

 

[Bittern]

By the way Bittern....Britain is 3 nations but ONE country as the nations individually do not meet the necessary independence criteria for a country from currency to taxation to where the overall parliament resides to foreign policy etc etc. We do have an odd system though in sport deciding on Great Britain sometimes and then seperate other times - weird and not fair because under that system Texas should be allowed to have a separate team to the USA and they have MORE powers than any devolved government here!! but this a whole seperate topic - sorry all.

Try again.

 

[fgwrich]

Slightly off topic for a moment, but i was passed by a pretty powerful pair earlier on Mendips Jumbo Train - albiet the empty return workings...DB Red Pair of 60011(3,100 hp) & 59206 (3,300 hp) - If only the pair could work together, then you'd have a pretty impressive 6,400 hp!

 

[DaveNewcastle]

My admiration for the Deltic is more in the story of the development of its engine design than in the locomotive that we all know.

Napier's challenge was a very confined space with the requirement for high power, so he adopted two strategies - leave out the unnnecessary, and multiply the heart of each element that delivers power, several times. (Meanwhile, other were building larger and larger petrol engines, with huge bores and huge displacements).
It was unusual enough just to propose that each cylinder would be open ended and have a piston at each end, it was even more unusual to propose that they would work on a 'two-stroke' cycle (instead of the common 4-strokes of firing & power, exhaust, re-fuelling, compression that most 'big engine' designers had adopted), but the remarkable concept was to build 6 banks of these cylinders in a Delta shape, so that they drove 3 parallel crankshafts, with each cylinder being connected to 2 of those crankshafts. (That adds up to 18 cylinders and 36 pistons per engine).
But what still impreses me is that he did the maths, he knew it would work, and he was sure it would be efficient, but it wasn't until he'd got a prototype in the lab which wasn't performing that he realised that to get those 36 pistons delivering power together, one of the crankshafts would have to rotate in the opposite direction!

The man was a genius.
Some of his relatives did pure maths.

Most of you will have seen this 3D animation:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBTF5Ps4Scs&feature=player_embedded
Here's a simpler one:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3bj47TAYiU

And one more thing. It took no more than 2 or 3 seconds on the start button from cold to get them running. None of today's GM machines would let you do that!