Leader model

Loading thread data ...
There was me thinking it was the yanks in the 1940's who demonstrated the way to go with most steam gone by the end of the 1950's.
Chris
Reply to
Chris
The second man was kept on to look after the steam heat boiler in the diesel and then to keep the driver company until DOO came in 1980's.
Chris
Reply to
Chris
[snip of claim that the fireman of an oil fired engine can work from a reote cab]
[dishonest snip of why the fireman needs to be next to the firebox instead of in a remote cab]
Reply to
Christopher A. Lee
: : European railways had already demonstrated that diesel/electric was the : way to go - the only real question is why BR built any steam engines at : all, except that Riddles fancied having a go at doing one or two. Leader : was indeed a revolutionary idea, but would have had to be super-efficient : to cover the costs of coal distribution and handling alone, never mind
Wrong, you forget that the infrastructure already existed for the servicing of coal fired locos, the same was not the case for servicing diesel locos and the only mass electrification scheme was the Southern's suburban and two mainline schemes - unlike mainland Europe the UK's railway system was largely, although grossly under maintained, intact and did not need wholesale rebuilding after WW2. To have built diesel or electric locos instead of the BR Standard's would have cost vastly more, and we would have had to import more oil (at a time when we simple didn't have the currency reserves (as has been pointed out), it was only with some crafty Govt. accounting in the mid 1950s that money was found to fund the 1955 'modernisation plan' (the money was a loan to BR, that had to be paid back later, thus didn't really show up as Govt spending...).
: the operating costs (BR never intended having double manning on diesel/ : electric, it was the Unions that forced that) and the huge support : network required simply to run the engines, never mind the trains.
Rubbish, if not perhaps you can tell us how the driver could both drive the train and maintain the steam heating boiler, indeed the early diesel locos still had water scoops to replenish the steam heating water tank...
: : The steam era was a great "romantic" era (except for those who had to : work every day with it, especially the unsung ones like the boiler : cleaners who had a life expectancy of diddly-squat)
Total bollocks, the railway personal who had the most dangerous jobs were the train shunter, track worker and (in hind-sight) the boiler makers. locomotive cleaners were well down the order of things, otherwise it would not have been part of the career ladder towards Fireman and ultimately driver...
but it's day had : already passed before WWII (LMS 10000 etc).
Err, LMS 10000 and 10001 were both post war designs!
Reply to
Jerry
: : >
: > : : [snip of claim that the fireman of an oil fired engine can work from a : reote cab] : : >: Have you ever ridden in the cab of an oil fired engine? : >: : > : : [dishonest snip of why the fireman needs to be next to the firebox : instead of in a remote cab] : : >Your point being what exactly?...
Just to put your comments in context I'll quote from the message you replied to;
"Also, had it been possible to use oil firing (as intended) the firebox end of the boiler could have been placed so it backed onto one of the cabs - unfortunately having to manually stoke the firebox with coal meant the fire-hole door had to be placed 'amidships', next to the coal bunker..."
and then your reply to the above;
"Have you ever ridden in the cab of an oil fired engine?
When I lived in California one of my closest friends fired oil-fired engines regularly and I often rode with him. Because it wasn't a common skill he was in regular demand for visiting engines.
And I saw what he did. He constantly monitored the fire, before adjusting the flame which required opening and closing the fire door. Otherwise it would be like adding coal without bothering to check the condition of the fire."
So I'll ask again, your point was what - exactly...
Reply to
Jerry
To deviate from the Leader topic - if oil-fired steam still existed as a everyday form of traction, would it have been possible to replace the fireman by a computer ? Program the load & route details, and a computer ought to be able to monitor the fire & boiler conditions, and ensure that an optimum amount of fuel was provided for a complete trip .
(Just a dream, I know it will never happen in real life..)
Bevan
Reply to
Bevan Price
Nice to see him properly defended. Whats the new biog - would like to read that. Believe Webb produced some good engines and some dogs, the problem is the dogs were mostly left to continue to run as dogs. Did he know ? was everyone afraid to tell him ? Or was he to important to acknowledge that mistakes had been made ?
His legacy could be described as a stable of underpowered engines with some really dodgy ones, but all Whale had to do was to put together a set of new engines using the best features from Webbs designs to give an excellent set of locos. So perhaps Webbs only error was that he didnt appear to learn from mistakes. A feature of the position and time perhaps.
cheers, Simon
Reply to
simon
But wasnt it LMS 10000 and BR 10001 or did they both manage to run before BR ?
CHeers, Simon
Reply to
simon
:
: >
: > : > : : > Err, LMS 10000 and 10001 were both post war designs! : > : > : But wasnt it LMS 10000 and BR 10001 or did they both manage to run before BR : ? :
I never said otherwise!
Reply to
Jerry
F.W. Webb: In the right place at the right time (Chacksfield, pub. Oakwood, 2007). Strongly recommended.
Badly served by his outside staff, maybe? Not uncommon back when, though few seem to have been as ignorant of what was happening as Whitelegg on the G&SW..
The "underpowered" (more "undersized", really) is perhaps more down to Sir Richard Moon and his passion for keeping things cheap. Whale, of course, came is as the Moon was waning.
Interesting that the running superintendent who made a clean sweep of Webb's 3-cyl passenger compounds went straight from "next CME" to power station manager in Siberia (or the L&NW's equivalent) in very short order.
Not uncommon in that era, again! The same accusation could have been levelled at Pat Stirling..
Reply to
Andrew Robert Breen
Very true, but usually comparing UK to US practice get comments like "not comparing like-for-like" etc, whereas UK and European practice generally speaking only differs in detail.
Cheers Richard
Reply to
beamends
I guess everyone forgets to mention it then!
Well, that and not having sufficient raw materials - particularly steel.
I was applying a touch of irony there!
Cheers Richard
Reply to
beamends
The Unions wanted the boiler looking after, it was never intended to need looking after.
The Second Man, in the 70's/80's, was only there when required, i.e the driver didn't get a break between the 3rd and 5th hours of a turn - he had to be a passed man. The boiler, when present, only required a minimum of a Traction Trainee who had passed out on boilers. With it taking around 4 to 5 years for a driver to become fully qualified then, trainees were aplenty. The exception being where speeds were over 100mph, where the Second Man had to have route knowledge as well. This was imposed by the Unions. Surprisingly, when OMO and Flexible Rostering came in the Unions grudingly went along with it.
Cheers Richard
Reply to
beamends
Think you'll be pleasantly surprised. It's (opinion only!) a much more substantial bit of work than the other books by him I've read.
And yes, I'd still like a model Teutonic...
Reply to
Andrew Robert Breen

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.