LNER Locomotives that never were
Moderators: 52D, Tom F, Rlangham, Atlantic 3279, Blink Bonny, Saint Johnstoun, richard
- Saint Johnstoun
- LNER A3 4-6-2
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: 63A - Scotland
Loco Drawings
Thanks for the encouragement - I have around 15000 images created on computer of locos, rolling stock, buses and trams - it's kept me amused for the last 10 years or so!
I have a lot of proper LNER locos covered, as well as the rival LMS organisation. Ask and it will be given unto you!
Although most of my bus and tram graphics are in full colour I've yet to launch out into liveries with the locos.
I have a lot of proper LNER locos covered, as well as the rival LMS organisation. Ask and it will be given unto you!
Although most of my bus and tram graphics are in full colour I've yet to launch out into liveries with the locos.
- Saint Johnstoun
- LNER A3 4-6-2
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: 63A - Scotland
V4
Two drawings of the V4 coming up shortly.
- Saint Johnstoun
- LNER A3 4-6-2
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: 63A - Scotland
Proposed Diesel
This was the proposal with Beardmore engine using one of the Newport Shildon Electrics as a base.
- Attachments
-
- DE1.TIF
- (184.82 KiB) Downloaded 238 times
- Saint Johnstoun
- LNER A3 4-6-2
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: 63A - Scotland
What is it?
One for all you out there to give me an answer to.
- Attachments
-
- Z1B.TIF
- ?
- (285.04 KiB) Downloaded 311 times
Z1B
B1 proposal with an O6 (Stanier 8F) boiler?
I think I remember reading somewhere that on test, the thermal efficiency of a B1 compared quite well with an LMS or BR Standard 5MT; if that was the case then the complexity of the taper boiler and Belpaire firebox didn't add a lot. Presumably B1s were cheaper to build (and maintain?) than their LMS or BR equivalents, so I've been wondering would a range of smaller BR Standard locomotives based on Thompson/Peppercorn practice have been more cost effective?
Wonder what answer I'll get to that question on an LNER forum
I think I remember reading somewhere that on test, the thermal efficiency of a B1 compared quite well with an LMS or BR Standard 5MT; if that was the case then the complexity of the taper boiler and Belpaire firebox didn't add a lot. Presumably B1s were cheaper to build (and maintain?) than their LMS or BR equivalents, so I've been wondering would a range of smaller BR Standard locomotives based on Thompson/Peppercorn practice have been more cost effective?
Wonder what answer I'll get to that question on an LNER forum
David Ball
- richard
- LNER A4 4-6-2 'Streak'
- Posts: 3390
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2005 5:11 pm
- Location: Wichita Falls, Texas
- Contact:
Although the BR Exchange Trials have their critics, the Thompson B1 and Black 5 were well matched. Each performed slightly better in the other's territory!
The Black 5 was a 1930s design, compared to the simpler/cheaper wartime B1 - so you could probably argue that the B1 would have been more cost effective compared to the Standard Black 5.
For the mixed traffic tanks, then you'd be looking at the Thompson L1. These had their teething problems which would not have helped in the 1940s?
Richard
The Black 5 was a 1930s design, compared to the simpler/cheaper wartime B1 - so you could probably argue that the B1 would have been more cost effective compared to the Standard Black 5.
For the mixed traffic tanks, then you'd be looking at the Thompson L1. These had their teething problems which would not have helped in the 1940s?
Richard
Richard Marsden
LNER Encyclopedia
LNER Encyclopedia
- redtoon1892
- GNR C1 4-4-2
- Posts: 736
- Joined: Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:41 pm
- Location: GATESHEAD
- Contact:
-
- LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:32 pm
- Location: Newbury, Berks
- Saint Johnstoun
- LNER A3 4-6-2
- Posts: 1236
- Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 11:12 pm
- Location: 63A - Scotland
B1 with BR No 3 boiler
By 1955, trouble with the original B1 boilers was being experienced with fracturing of the firebox plates and serious consideration was taken to fit the BR No. 3 boiler to these engines and Doncaster drawing office drew up the proposal. Before any authority was sought to rebuild any of the class remedial work on existing boilers had mostly solved the problem and the project was abandoned.
- silver fox
- GCR O4 2-8-0 'ROD'
- Posts: 535
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:51 pm
- Location: 50A Clifton originally of 88A
- Contact:
You wouldn't have the full streamlined A4 I could decorate in to each of the 35?
I have tried doing trains, but couldn't work out the wheels, I found trucks dead easy!
I have tried doing trains, but couldn't work out the wheels, I found trucks dead easy!
- Attachments
-
- 1-04A001.GIF
- (11.8 KiB) Downloaded 200 times
-
- 10-04D010.GIF
- (11.76 KiB) Downloaded 108 times
-
- 12-04A012.GIF
- (10.35 KiB) Downloaded 72 times
-
- 18-04A018.GIF
- (18.48 KiB) Downloaded 71 times
-
- 23-04A023.GIF
- (14.96 KiB) Downloaded 145 times
-
- GCR D11 4-4-0 'Improved Director'
- Posts: 486
- Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:42 pm
- Location: Cambridgeshire
Interesting stuff, and bravo on the draughting skills.
It is always good to see how these plans one reads about might have turned out. The complete lack of drama in the 'semi-streamlined' A4 proposal certainly shows just what a publicity coup LNER achieved in the final engine!
I would be interested to see how LNER loco design would have gone if Robinson became CME, or any of the other pre-group NE companies for that matter. How would the NER Pacific dsign have developed in the 30's for instance?! Or would it- maybe they would have gone overhead electric in the 20's!
you can't beat an exercise counterfactual history
Will
It is always good to see how these plans one reads about might have turned out. The complete lack of drama in the 'semi-streamlined' A4 proposal certainly shows just what a publicity coup LNER achieved in the final engine!
I would be interested to see how LNER loco design would have gone if Robinson became CME, or any of the other pre-group NE companies for that matter. How would the NER Pacific dsign have developed in the 30's for instance?! Or would it- maybe they would have gone overhead electric in the 20's!
you can't beat an exercise counterfactual history
Will
- silver fox
- GCR O4 2-8-0 'ROD'
- Posts: 535
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:51 pm
- Location: 50A Clifton originally of 88A
- Contact:
That's to point, the A4 might never have been for 2 reasons;
1)Robinson was the first choice, but being close to retirement, he sugested Gresley.
2)The A4 when tested in the wind tunnel had smoke pretruding in to the cab, so it was abandoned, but then for some reason it was retested, and it was found to be ok, after someone put his thumb print behind the chimney creating a little dimple.
1)Robinson was the first choice, but being close to retirement, he sugested Gresley.
2)The A4 when tested in the wind tunnel had smoke pretruding in to the cab, so it was abandoned, but then for some reason it was retested, and it was found to be ok, after someone put his thumb print behind the chimney creating a little dimple.
-
- LNER V2 2-6-2 'Green Arrow'
- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 8:32 pm
- Location: Newbury, Berks
and what would have happened if the LNER board had decided they were satisfied with the German plans for a high speed DMU service (like the Flying Hamburger) to run between KX and Newcastle.... and had Gresley not had the chance to show what an A3 could do in the way of high speed running?
A topper is proper if the train's a non-stopper!
- silver fox
- GCR O4 2-8-0 'ROD'
- Posts: 535
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 11:51 pm
- Location: 50A Clifton originally of 88A
- Contact: