Most repairable 00 locos

I don't think there was that much difference between the class 40 and the class 37. The 40 had a larger engine, but used the extra 250 hp to haul the extra weight.

Not really. Steam heating boilers were used on both sides of the Atlantic. They didn't need to be that big, nor need a large capacity tank. They used scoops to pick up from water troughs, just like steam engines. In the US the steam heating boiler was the difference between the F7 and the FP7.

The problem in the UK was that the ones used weren't particularly reliable.

"Christopher A. Lee" wrote

Wasn't the latter around a foot longer to accomodate the steam boiler? If I'm right that must had added a fair amount to the weight of the FP7.

John.

The V200.1 gave 2700hp on 4 axles.

My mistake.

There were passenger F7s with steam boilers, and FP7s which were 4 ft longer, with greater water capacity.

I was confusing the two.

It's significant that the earlier F3s had passenger and freight versions but no FP3 - and were used for long distance passenger trains like the WP section of the California Zephyr from Oakland to Salt Lake City were passenger F3s. Something like 1400 miles by rail.

They did later acquire some FP7s

I guessed that this was after the days of steam when they no longer used water troughs and needed the extra capacity.

That is quite pokey - how heavy was it?

Would I be right in saying same engines as a Western?

A few ton more plus all the water storage

87 tonnes. The original V200 gave 2200hp (PSi) but the engine manufacturer uprated it to 2700hp with the same reliability in time for the second batch.(V200.1) Well, third batch really, if you count the seven prototypes as the first batch and V200.008 on as the second. I don't know what engines were fitted to the Western.

When introduced the spent a long time on Paddington- Wolverhampton services as a stop-gap until the EE Type 4's were available. Unfotunately the EE Type 4's weren't up to the job (they had to have shorter trains to keep to time-table), so the Warships carried on until the Westerns were ready.

I always hated the Warships when they were alive, but they were actually remarkable engines.

Cheers Richard

I have always thought of them as ugly, the Western was a thing of beauty in comparison. The only thing against the Hymek is that it was up against one of the most reliable locos ever in its class with the 37.

My favourite type 4 is the 50 though - I just like the performance and the sound - I have had some fantastic runs behind them.

The hydraulics were a weird bunch but still interesting. My favourite I think is the Hymek - I will have to get a model one day. But I find odd small engines not around now the most fascinating, like teh NBL machines

I never had the pleasure of working with the hydraulics (but did spend an hour looking round the pseudo Western Yeoman at Merehead), but our only 50 turn was the Exeter-Acton goods - not looked forward too with delight I'm affraid.

Cheers Richard