This may be being a bit cheeky, but is it reasonable (or accurate) to expect a model of an experimental prototype to be any more reliable than the original? I bet the model has a much simpler drive train than the real thing though!
The "Fell" loco really was an innovative design. The aim of matching diesel engines to the torque/power/speed requirements of of fast and heavy trains without resorting to expensive electric transmission was logical one and the idea of using multiple engines linked by differentials, with high levels of supercharging at low speeds to deliver constant power was clever too. It would be very interesting to see any reports that were written at the time into the locomotive's performance in service.It did - as shown here.
Its final demise was caused by a fire in the train heating boiler whilst working a service train
Your links are very interesting. Rocket obviously achieved everyday use, but so it seems did Sans Pareil, both on the L&M, at least initially. The modifications to Rocket following the success of Northumbrian are well-known, but the unsuccessful experiments with Lord Dundonald's rotary engines rather less so.
.
Some of the "unsuccessful" experiments nevertheless proved a point or two. IIRC the de Glehn compounds demonstrated that 4 cylinders were a good idea, but compounding wasn't worth it. Didn't these compounds also provide useful information about higher boiler pressures and the benefits of splitting the drive between two driving axles.Going back in time, but Churchward did a whole range of one-off (or small batch) experimental locos, some survived to form first examples of a class after a few years, others didn't. Possibly the 4-6-2 Great Bear is the best known, but there were all sorts of others; Saints built as 4-4-2 instead of 4-6-0, and even three built in France and shipped over. They were all done very thoroughly, with engineers assigned to run substantial comparison tests between classes. Churchward must have really got the ear of the directors to spend so much on building experiments. A number of the failures were rebuilt to be (sort of) compliant with more established types.
I think the most 'successful' of all was the first loco, No 1490, built in 1898 when Churchward was still No 2 to Dean (but Dean was in poor health and Churchward was effectively running the show) with this odd arrangement called a 'Pannier Tank'
Yes, sadly so.
The A3s had three variants, the large deflectors fitted to ‘Humorist’, the ineffective small smokebox deflectors fitted to four other locos, and the very successful German-type fitted to the majority of the class. There is an excellent BR released photograph in the March 1962 issue of Modern Railways, showing an unidentified A3 heading north in arctic conditions near Hatfield on New Year’s Day 1962. The draught created from the German-type deflectors is lifting the thick exhaust, highlighted in the freezing conditions, well above the engine and coaches, an excellent example of their effectiveness. This photograph has appeared in many publications over the years!
Even these GWR French 4-4-2s had their own initial experiment, the first one coming in 1903, the other pair two years later. One wonders why further such locos were required. They then lasted more than 20 years, mainly running from Oxford on various second-line passenger services, so can't have been that unsuccessful - although one notes their time was ended shortly after Churchward finally retired and Collett took over.
And now on the East Somerset Railway. The donor of the underframe was S4378 - the third coach in the Ramsgate train - which was directly under the Lewisham flyover when it collapsed, having been brought down by the derailment of the tender and leading coach.
Also the only 150s to have intermediate (cabless) cars. Although several 3 car units have been formed more recently, this has always been by adding a driving car to an existing 2 car set, thus leaving a redundant cab in the middle.
I don't think they have. Not sure they were strictly speaking an experiment - simply different gearing intended for freight use. Later renumbered E3096/8/9 when regeared as a standard AL1 and two standard AL3s. The second AL1 never carried E3302 but entered service as E3097. And what would have been E3305 became E3100 and the subject of a completely different experiment!
I seem to recall it kept its original glazing for a while - possibly until the unit was refurbished. A thread from 2011 confirms this https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/455-8-puzzle-replaced-dtso-way-back-when.54892/
Not necessarily a problem. The Sudostbahn units operating the local services on the Gotthard Line have vending machines - and make very nice tea too!
Not for the first time - one was done way back in 1962, fashioned out of one compartment of a Mk1 SK. It was used on the Cambrian Coast Express from Aberystwyth to Shrewsbury in the morning, and the return in the afternoon, the part of the journey from Paddington which didn't have a restaurant car. A bank of vending machines for hot drinks, cold drinks, various foods, cigarettes (this is 1962), etc. They were apparently just normal commercial vending machines of the era which didn't take to well too rail travel - it didn't last long. Conversion done at Swindon, who painted it chocolate and cream after an edict had gone out for no more vehicles in that scheme, which caused an upset.
According to Holcroft, who I think was at Swindon at the time, this was an extended trial to compare long term fuel consumption, running and maintenance costs between the French and Swindon locos, comparing compounding vs simple, 4-4-2 vs 4-6-0, etc. Views on valve gear valve travel, boiler pressure, balancing/split drive and other matters appear to have been refined at the same time. More than one compound was needed to do all of this. The second pair were more powerful than La France (the first one), which perhaps equated better with the twenty home-grown trial engines. The outcomes from all of this set the parameters for much of the standardisation which followed.
The high speed trains in China have very hot water dispensers for adding to your dry noodle cups!
Last April in Japan I travelled from Nagoya to Osaka on one of the Kintetsu Railway's Hinotori trains which have vending machines for coffee that also dispense free hot water:
314s had driving motors, not trailers.
This unit was later experimentally fitted with thyristor control & oil cooled rectifiers from 1971 to 1981. See here for more details.Class 303 (AM3) No.035 had experimental Deans sliding doors fitted:
The only major differences in the 'new' 64588 was the door partitions, grabpoles, luggage racks and floor trim; everything else was standard with the rest of the 314 fleet. There is a mockup out there of a proposed 314 interior refurbishment; contrast and compare that with the real thing pre-Saltire refurb:
Two other Underground examples would be the 1935 & 1956 stocks, prototypes for the 1938 and 1959/1962 stocks respectively.
Surely the Caprotti experiment was on the Black 5s? The Standard 5s were more or less "Production".
Presumably anthracite would be a higher cost but did it have a higher thermal content to even things up?
yes it would, though it may burn slower simply due to the hardness of the coal
