New builds missing a trick?
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2011 5:58 pm
In short - how much of Tornado's genealogy, applied to a new build P2 (2007 & 2001), is also potentially applicable to a Thompson A2/2?
Further, how much of that needing to be made for a P2 can also be applied to an A2/2?
I'm curious as it strikes me that potentially the A1SLT and DP2LT could help kill three birds with one stone and fill a significant gap in the history of the ECML, if a third group could be found that wanted to build a lone Thompson Pacific; to complete the lineup of the designers and their Pacific wheelbase charges.
The supreme advantage would be ordering in triplicate any components common to all three builds - bringing the price down per item further than simply doubling the order, as has been suggested previously.
Of course the stumbling block would be interest in yet another new build locomotive (and particularly a Thompson machine), and perhaps spreading the money across three locomotive builds, all substantial locomotives and costs probably around, but not limited to, £3 million each; but the possibility of this particular design, derived from the original P2s, of which two replicas in varying forms may or may not be built in the future, being built, intrigues.
It's more a hypothetical "what would be possible" than a call to arms, "let's go build an A2/2", but I wonder if the possibility of filling that final gap (bar the Raven Pacifics, of course) would garner interest.
From what limited information I can garner, and understand, behind the leading set of drivers on a P2, the frames are identical between A2/2 and P2, with the change being the driving wheels, and the front frames ahead (where of course a new set to accommodate a four wheel bogie and divided drive plus three cylinders was welded on). The boiler was a few inches shorter on the A2/2 and also had its pressure reduced to 225lb from 250lb. Everything beyond that point backwards towards the tender remained the same (i.e. the cab and its layout and the cartazzi arrangement).
Of course the possibility of improving the Thompson design, and eradicating the main sources of trouble - the separate cylinder blocks (necessary in wartime conditions) and doing a "Tornado" in terms of roller bearing axleboxes throughout, and various other modern day accoutrements is again, an intriguing thought.
As I say, don't take this as "I want to build an A2/2" more as a hypothetical pondering on a wet Sunday afternoon!
Further, how much of that needing to be made for a P2 can also be applied to an A2/2?
I'm curious as it strikes me that potentially the A1SLT and DP2LT could help kill three birds with one stone and fill a significant gap in the history of the ECML, if a third group could be found that wanted to build a lone Thompson Pacific; to complete the lineup of the designers and their Pacific wheelbase charges.
The supreme advantage would be ordering in triplicate any components common to all three builds - bringing the price down per item further than simply doubling the order, as has been suggested previously.
Of course the stumbling block would be interest in yet another new build locomotive (and particularly a Thompson machine), and perhaps spreading the money across three locomotive builds, all substantial locomotives and costs probably around, but not limited to, £3 million each; but the possibility of this particular design, derived from the original P2s, of which two replicas in varying forms may or may not be built in the future, being built, intrigues.
It's more a hypothetical "what would be possible" than a call to arms, "let's go build an A2/2", but I wonder if the possibility of filling that final gap (bar the Raven Pacifics, of course) would garner interest.
From what limited information I can garner, and understand, behind the leading set of drivers on a P2, the frames are identical between A2/2 and P2, with the change being the driving wheels, and the front frames ahead (where of course a new set to accommodate a four wheel bogie and divided drive plus three cylinders was welded on). The boiler was a few inches shorter on the A2/2 and also had its pressure reduced to 225lb from 250lb. Everything beyond that point backwards towards the tender remained the same (i.e. the cab and its layout and the cartazzi arrangement).
Of course the possibility of improving the Thompson design, and eradicating the main sources of trouble - the separate cylinder blocks (necessary in wartime conditions) and doing a "Tornado" in terms of roller bearing axleboxes throughout, and various other modern day accoutrements is again, an intriguing thought.
As I say, don't take this as "I want to build an A2/2" more as a hypothetical pondering on a wet Sunday afternoon!
) to add to the 'new build' collection.. obviously off topic for this discussion though.