Recreating lost train types

[2392]

Mm, yes. The Coronation Scot set wasn't quite as unique as the LNER efforts but I do prefer the styling.

I'm old enough to remember the GWS vintage set out on the main line, would love to see that again.

I too remember the Gas Works set out and about on the national network. The one and only time I saw it in action, was from a NELPG organised special. The GWS set was headed by a Gresley "Tommy" electric [a class 76] on the Woodhead route. The NELPG train had started at Newcastle working round the coast via Sunderland and Hartlepool with the K1 [6]2005 to Middlesbrough, then a diesel to York and Green Arrow from York to Dinting.

 

[Pinza-C55]

The NBL Warships (class 41s) seem to have more of a following than the class 42 & 43 versions. I can only assume this is simply because it's a "lost class", because they were hideous (IMO) compared to their little brothers.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. The size of D600 in Barry scrapyard was massively impressive and I loved the NBL typical styling with all the louvres, it just looked like a machine that meant business. Same with the Class 16s which I never saw "in the metal".

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. The size of D600 in Barry scrapyard was massively impressive and I loved the NBL typical styling with all the louvres, it just looked like a machine that meant business. Same with the Class 16s which I never saw "in the metal".

It's probably just because I'm a bit of a Germanophile, and the D8** Warships look more like a miniature version of their West German cousin the V200.

 

[HSP 2]

Are any of the S.R. DD4s still around?

 

[D6975]

Thanks, don't suppose you know the class(es)?

Couldn't seem to turn it up but I may have not searched for the right thing.

68000 class if memory serves.

edit - yes it does

12LVA 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705, 1706

 

[Richard Scott]

68000 class if memory serves.

edit - yes it does

12LVA 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705, 1706

68000 is correct, 68081 is still in service with SNCF but not sure if any others survive. There were also the 68500s which were identical but had an AGO engine. Seemingly these were interchangeable as a few 68000s became 68500s and vice versa.
Six 68500s are listed as preserved (one as a source of spares), two of which started life as 68000s and one as a 68500, converted to a 68000 and then back to a 68500!!!!

 

[hexagon789]

68000 class if memory serves.

edit - yes it does

12LVA 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705, 1706

Cheers, I was looking into the wrong place

 

[Journeyman]

Are any of the S.R. DD4s still around?

Do you mean the 4-DD double deck EMUs? If so, 2 motor coaches survive, but both in very poor condition.

 

[hexagon789]

Do you mean the 4-DD double deck EMUs? If so, 2 motor coaches survive, but both in very poor condition.

I believe 13003 was under going restoration though I've no idea how advanced that was

 

[MP33]

I always thought and this would also apply to steam traction. That if you built a replica on the outside exactly as the original. It would not matter what was on the inside. No one is going to see in the engine compartment and if the compartment was open as a static display, almost everyone would not notice the difference.

With modern regulations would there have to be additional safety features, notices anyway?

 

[Spartacus]

There’s a few strange ones, Flying Scotsman ran for years with a spare A4 boiler and I think they ran into issues with Tornado’s boiler as it’s welded, but all UK regulations for locomotive engines are for riveted boilers.

The big difference with diesels is different power units sound totally different, even the same basic block depending on size, while engineering wise it makes a much bigger difference than on a steam loco where much more depends on what goes on away from the boiler.

 

[DB]

There’s a few strange ones, Flying Scotsman ran for years with a spare A4 boiler and I think they ran into issues with Tornado’s boiler as it’s welded, but all UK regulations for locomotive engines are for riveted boilers.

The big difference with diesels is different power units sound totally different, even the same basic block depending on size, while engineering wise it makes a much bigger difference than on a steam loco where much more depends on what goes on away from the boiler.

The sound of particular diesels is also heavily influenced by the turbochargers.

 

[CW2]

While this thread is very interesting, and informative, wouldn't it be better to concentrate efforts on those classes which were to some extent "successful". After all, there's not much point in expending thousands of hours and large amounts of cash in recreating something which is only capable of sulking at the back of the shed, or self-combusting? So as a quick filter I'd say "Yes" to:
- Kestrel
- Falcon
- Lion
- DP2
... and a firm "No" to
- Anything built by North British
- Anything built by Metro-Vick

There are several classes of DMU such as Trans-Pennine and Swindon Inter-City which would be good to recreate. Maybe the Swindon Cross-Country units too.

Just a personal view - I'm sure others will disagree!

 

[hexagon789]

After all, there's not much point in expending thousands of hours and large amounts of cash in recreating something which is only capable of sulking at the back of the shed, or self-combusting?

I think that can depend on how they go about/develop the re-creation. 71000 Duke of Gloucester was after all renowned for giving pretty poor service in general traffic with BR but she was preserved, the preservation team made a few minor alterations and now she is one of the strongest pullers in preservation - a significant transformation.

So if similar alterations were made to certain of the less reliable classes if they were recreated to make them work, though I don't think it could be done with all of them without essentially creating a new design.

 

[reddragon]

I think that can depend on how they go about/develop the re-creation. 71000 Duke of Gloucester was after all renowned for giving pretty poor service in general traffic with BR but she was preserved, the preservation team made a few minor alterations and now she is one of the strongest pullers in preservation - a significant transformation.

So if similar alterations were made to certain of the less reliable classes if they were recreated to make them work, though I don't think it could be done with all of them without essentially creating a new design.

There is a marked difference between a loco that needed a bigger air intake and a loco with a useless system however, if the German original MAN equipment was used that was reliable it would be possible to make a NBL loco work.

 

[hexagon789]

There is a marked difference between a loco that needed a bigger air intake and a loco with a useless system however, if the German original MAN equipment was used that was reliable it would be possible to make a NBL loco work.

Well wasn't that the issue with DoG - the original construction made two significant deviations from the drawings which contributed to it's originally poor performance.

With certain of the unreliable diesels alternating some of the equipment could make them more viable.

All this is of course speculation, most of those unreliable classes no longer with us are unlikely to see the light if day ever again.

 

[Pinza-C55]

While this thread is very interesting, and informative, wouldn't it be better to concentrate efforts on those classes which were to some extent "successful". After all, there's not much point in expending thousands of hours and large amounts of cash in recreating something which is only capable of sulking at the back of the shed, or self-combusting? So as a quick filter I'd say "Yes" to:
- Kestrel
- Falcon
- Lion
- DP2
... and a firm "No" to
- Anything built by North British
- Anything built by Metro-Vick

There are several classes of DMU such as Trans-Pennine and Swindon Inter-City which would be good to recreate. Maybe the Swindon Cross-Country units too.

Just a personal view - I'm sure others will disagree!

Many of the less successful classes were unsuccessful because of poor maintenance or small numbers. The Class 14s and 15s, as far as I understand were mainly withdrawn because of lack of work for their power range and many of the 14s went on to work for the NCB where they wouldn't be as well maintained as they would be by BR. As successful as the 37s and 31s were I wouldn't get excited if they were at a diesel gala but when the Metro Vick Co-Bo hauls its first train I will pay good money to be on it.

Btw when it comes to steam I would love to see an LNER steam railcar recreated.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_06_2010/post-6751-127628640192_thumb.jpg

 

[2392]

There’s a few strange ones, Flying Scotsman ran for years with a spare A4 boiler and I think they ran into issues with Tornado’s boiler as it’s welded, but all UK regulations for locomotive engines are for riveted boilers.

The big difference with diesels is different power units sound totally different, even the same basic block depending on size, while engineering wise it makes a much bigger difference than on a steam loco where much more depends on what goes on away from the boiler.

Yes indeed, she did. It was found in the fifties that by making a slight modification to the "spare" A4 boilers. They could be fitted to the none streamlined A3s too. In turn when fitted to an A3 the A4 boiler would be fitted with A3 safety valves, which would blow off at 220psi, rather than the A4 valves which blew at 250..... Something that was only found out by accident [the swapping of boilers], when the boilersmith at Kings + Top Shed ordered a set of superheater elements and finding they wouldn't fit the A3 he was repairing. In turn Peter Townend the Shedmaster got in touch with The Plant [Doncaster Works] and was asked which A3? He was then informed that the engine concerned had an A4 boiler and hence forth when ordering new superheater elements to include the loco number, so Doncaster would know which set to send....... Apparently you can/could tell which boiler is/was which by the placement of the washout hatches along the upper part of the firebox.

 

[Richard Scott]

The sound of particular diesels is also heavily influenced by the turbochargers.

Where the turbo is the dominant noise, if you listen to a non turbo GM and a turbo GM they don't really sound too different. The straight through exhaust of the non turbo is louder. Design of cylinder heads can vary the sound.

 

[Bevan Price]

Many of the less successful classes were unsuccessful because of poor maintenance or small numbers. The Class 14s and 15s, as far as I understand were mainly withdrawn because of lack of work for their power range and many of the 14s went on to work for the NCB where they wouldn't be as well maintained as they would be by BR. As successful as the 37s and 31s were I wouldn't get excited if they were at a diesel gala but when the Metro Vick Co-Bo hauls its first train I will pay good money to be on it.

Btw when it comes to steam I would love to see an LNER steam railcar recreated.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_06_2010/post-6751-127628640192_thumb.jpg

The Class 14s were built to replace Pannier tanks on the Western Region -- at the same time as most work for pannier tanks was ceasing. At Swindon in the 1960s, you could see incomplete Class 14s in the shops, and then go outside and see quite young 94xx pannier tanks outside waiting to be scrapped.

 

[randyrippley]

I'd like to see a 47 rebuilt as a replica of HS4000 Kestrel. Anyone have a spare Sulzer Vee 16LVA24?

As I understand it, there was only the one engine ever put into service.
Sulzer pulled the plug on the LVA series after Kestrel got no commercial interest

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Dec 2020 ==

Thanks, don't suppose you know the class(es)?

Couldn't seem to turn it up but I may have not searched for the right thing.

Also the ten (?) Brush 4s sold to Cuba with Clayton builders plates (somewhere I've seen a photo of one of them being assembled at the Clayton erecting shop alongside class 17s so statements that they were built at Brush may be wrong)

 

[hexagon789]

Also the ten (?) Brush 4s sold to Cuba with Clayton builders plates (somewhere I've seen a photo of one of them being assembled at the Clayton erecting shop alongside class 17s so statements that they were built at Brush may be wrong)

I've seen conflicting information on that as well, some suggests Brush built them but Clayton put their plates on and shipped them due to Cold War tensions etc etc; others that Clayton built them. Not sure which is correct

 

[Richard Scott]

I've seen conflicting information on that as well, some suggests Brush built them but Clayton put their plates on and shipped them due to Cold War tensions etc etc; others that Clayton built them. Not sure which is correct

Think there was a political reason, possibly Brush was owned by Hawker Siddeley, so military links there not good for something sold to a communist country? Guessing there.

 

[MP33]

Something I feel is not right. Is to build a narrow gauge or garden railway replica of a standard gauge steam locomotive and put diesel or electric traction inside.

 

[MarkyT]

Yes indeed, she did. It was found in the fifties that by making a slight modification to the "spare" A4 boilers. They could be fitted to the none streamlined A3s too. In turn when fitted to an A3 the A4 boiler would be fitted with A3 safety valves, which would blow off at 220psi, rather than the A4 valves which blew at 250..... Something that was only found out by accident [the swapping of boilers], when the boilersmith at Kings + Top Shed ordered a set of superheater elements and finding they wouldn't fit the A3 he was repairing. In turn Peter Townend the Shedmaster got in touch with The Plant [Doncaster Works] and was asked which A3? He was then informed that the engine concerned had an A4 boiler and hence forth when ordering new superheater elements to include the loco number, so Doncaster would know which set to send....... Apparently you can/could tell which boiler is/was which by the placement of the washout hatches along the upper part of the firebox.

Dad (Peter Townend) told me Doncaster made a conscious decision to only manufacture one pattern of Gresley pacific boiler in the 1950s that would be suitable for fitting to either class as required at overhaul. The only difference in the safety valves would be the pressure setting, i.e. how tight the adjusting nut is turned against the spring. The separate smokebox assembly is rather different clearly, with a sloped cutaway at the front to accommodate the streamlined casing.

 

[hexagon789]

Think there was a political reason, possibly Brush was owned by Hawker Siddeley, so military links there not good for something sold to a communist country? Guessing there.

I have read of that being the reason, but as with many things you read lots of slightly different variations so I'm still not sure what the exact truth of the matter is.

 

[randyrippley]

Think there was a political reason, possibly Brush was owned by Hawker Siddeley, so military links there not good for something sold to a communist country? Guessing there.

Brush was part of Hawker Siddeley, so the risk of the USA taking action over what they would regard as sanctions-busting trade to Cuba was real.
What is unclear is whether the locos were assembled at Brush or Clayton. As I said earlier, I've seen a photo of one in process of being built at Clayton alongside class 17s, but also its been stated elsewhere on the internet that they were assembled at Brush, with a corresponding ten 47 builds being shifted to Crewe. What is certain is that wherever they were actually erected, they carried Clayton builders plates.
It does all raise another question: why were they built with the French 12LVA24 engines - did Vickers / Barrow Shipbuilders also fear American retributions if their engines went to Cuba?