dodgy place this internet...

On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 09:49:26 +1200, in article
<[email protected]> [email protected] "EMB" wrote:

> Simon Isaacs wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:58:01 +0100, Ian Rawlings
> > <[email protected]> scribbled the following nonsense:
> >
> >
> >>On 2006-06-23, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>you find ways to spend money you haven't got...
> >>>
> >>>http://www.festrail.co.uk/guestdrv.htm
> >>
> >>14 miles of driving sounds nice, but 14 miles of firing? Sounds like
> >>hard work!
> >
> >
> > should imagine it is.... They run on fuel oil as I found out last
> > year when I asked the question. The fuel oil is burned to generate
> > the steam. Something to do with coal generating sparks in a national
> > park...
>
> Oil converted ones just ain't right - they smell wrong and they are far
> too easy to fire.

In some ways they're harder to fire, since they don't have the thermal
inertia of a half-ton of red-hot coal in the firebox. Every time the
driver adjusts the steam use, which affects the draught, you have to
adjust the fuelling.

You can still arrange things to use steam, briefly, faster than the
sustained steaming rate, but it has that little bit less reserve of
energy in the system than coal firing allows.


--
David G. Bell -- SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.

"I am Number Two," said Penfold. "You are Number Six."

On 2006-06-24, EMB <[email protected]> wrote:

> There's a bit more to it than just throwing coal into a firebox -
> getting it right is an art form which takes a fair while to perfect (and
> which some people can never master).

Any idea how long the firebox is? ISTR that the more advanced boilers
use a honeycomb of pipes that sit in the hot gasses from the fire, but
given the length of the engine I doubt that they run the whole length
of it, or do they? In which case getting coal dispersed and burning
at the same time could be quite hard. Even a 10-foot long evenly
spaced fire could be quite hard though I expect.

I've got a few old Eagle annuals in the loft somewhere, might have to
dig them out, I think they had cross-section views. I suppose the
newfangled internet could come up with better but it's not quite the
same ;-) Get a bit of the old Dan Dare while I'm at it.

> With you being a non-physical computer geek type I think that after a
> mile of shovelling your arms would probably drop off which is likely to
> be amusing rather than boring. ;-)

The word "painful" would be more appropriate I think... I stopped
exercising regularly a few years ago, but since then have pulled
several muscles around my ribs doing quite simple jobs on the pinz, so
am taking up exercise again. Ouch!

--
Blast off and strike the evil Bydo empire!

In message <[email protected]>
Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:

> On or around Sat, 24 Jun 2006 10:58:53 +0100, beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
> >
> >Dirty inefficient things! We used to shunt the bitumen sidings
> >at Cranmore, adjacent East Sommerset Railway. On one trip they
> >wanted to move Evening Star out of the shed for a photo shoot
> >to promote the "Heaviest load moved by a steam locomotive"
> >world record stunt at Merehead Quarry. It would have taken 2
> >hours to raise steam, and something like 4 hours to cool down
> >and clean, all for 2 mins work.
>
> Once, I was in Minehead for a day on a different excuse and noted the
> station which is now the terminus of the north somerset railway or whatever
> they call it. glanced through the gates... coo, a steam loco, lets go and
> have a butchers. Only the bloody Evening Star sitting there at the
> platform. It's bloody big close-up.
>
> >We, completely aginst the rules, used our Class 47 to loose
> >shunt it! - and shunted their sidings while we were at it.
> >As the BR driver observed (he'd passed out on 9F's during
> >the steam days) - "nice to look at, and excellent for
> >making breakfast, but I'd not swap for all the tea in China".
>
> the 47 was pretty successful - they had and doubtless still have a hell of a
> lot of 'em.

Easily the best all-rounder - especially now they are rated back at
100mph.

>
> I've been behind one on the relief train from Paddington on friday night,
> hauling about a dozen coaches with no apparent effort.

Kicking the little grey memory cells back into gear, 12 coaches is
36 x 12 = 432 tons train weight (the engine wasn't added to
passenger train weights in my day), but the Pitsea & Chadwell Heath
stonie was 41 tipplers - 35 x 41 = 1435 + 117 for the engine =
1552 tons - a 47 could do either with ease.
The speed would be about 35 to 40 mph over Savernake[1],
after climbing continuously from Lavington - something around 10 miles.
Then it was coasting from Savernake, brakes on through the Crofton
Curves, coast again (with possibly a bit of a boost through Theale)
and trundle up the board at Reading West - hopefully to get our
pathway through Reading on the Up & Down Through, putting on a display
of full-power through the station, then either full-tilt up the
Up Fast or a pain-in-the bum trip behined a stopper on the Up Slow
to Acton.
Just ocasionaly the "Terrible Twins" (2x Class 37's) would not be
available and a single 47 would do the Acton, 37 x 50 Ton Procor's
plus the engine, 2004 Tons - about 20mph over Savernake but would
coast all the way to Reading at 60mph.
We once got lumbered with a Class 56 on the Pitsea & Chadwell -
they never tried them again on our stone trains while I was there,
a truly dreadful machine (at least the Bulgarian built ones were,
now all withdrawn). For some reason they tried Class 50's on the
5,000 ton experiments (actually, thinking about it, they used
them because they were equipped for multiple working, whereas
the Class 47's weren't). A 5,000 ton train going round the
Westbury avoider at 60mph was a pretty impressive sight
(and sound).

Happy days....

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
RISC-OS - Where have all the good guys gone?
Lib Dems - Townies keeping comedy alive

On or around Sun, 25 Jun 2006 08:32:39 +0100, Ian Rawlings
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>On 2006-06-24, EMB <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There's a bit more to it than just throwing coal into a firebox -
>> getting it right is an art form which takes a fair while to perfect (and
>> which some people can never master).
>
>Any idea how long the firebox is? ISTR that the more advanced boilers
>use a honeycomb of pipes that sit in the hot gasses from the fire, but
>given the length of the engine I doubt that they run the whole length
>of it, or do they? In which case getting coal dispersed and burning
>at the same time could be quite hard. Even a 10-foot long evenly
>spaced fire could be quite hard though I expect.

nah, the firebox is at one end. The boiler tubes carry the hot gas from the
firebox to the smokebox at the other end, and the steam exhaust goes up the
chimney and thereby creates a forced draft. For when you're standing still,
you have a "blower" which feeds steam from jets at the bottom of the chimney
to achieve the same effect.

On a big loco the firebox is still quite big, though. I understand that you
try to arrange the fire to be sloping from back (of loco) to front so that
you can scatter the coal down it by gravity, to a degree. It's also
important to have coal that doesn't generate clinker, and not to let a hole
develop in the fire, otherwise all the draft goes through the hole and the
rest of the fire doesn't burn properly.

The continuous and heavy shovelling of coal only applies when the loco's
working hard and using a lot of steam. Under normal running conditions a
suitably-sized and properly designed loco has spare boiler capacity...

in fact, it must be quite hard to successfully and efficiently run one of
the really big locos with a few coaches-full of tourists behind.

>The word "painful" would be more appropriate I think... I stopped
>exercising regularly a few years ago, but since then have pulled
>several muscles around my ribs doing quite simple jobs on the pinz, so
>am taking up exercise again. Ouch!

yeah, I must do that.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Festina Lente" (Hasten slowly) Suetonius (c.70-c.140) Augustus, 25

On or around Sun, 25 Jun 2006 09:49:26 +1200, EMB <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Simon Isaacs wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:58:01 +0100, Ian Rawlings
>> <[email protected]> scribbled the following nonsense:
>>
>>
>>>On 2006-06-23, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>you find ways to spend money you haven't got...
>>>>
>>>>http://www.festrail.co.uk/guestdrv.htm
>>>
>>>14 miles of driving sounds nice, but 14 miles of firing? Sounds like
>>>hard work!
>>
>>
>> should imagine it is.... They run on fuel oil as I found out last
>> year when I asked the question. The fuel oil is burned to generate
>> the steam. Something to do with coal generating sparks in a national
>> park...
>
>Oil converted ones just ain't right - they smell wrong and they are far
>too easy to fire.

Henllan still have coal fired ones.

Welsh highland have a couple of titchy garretts, from southern africa
somewhere. Must find out when they run 'em and go and see 'em in action.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"There is plenty of time to win this game, and to thrash the Spaniards
too" Sir Francis Drake (1540? - 1596) Attr. saying when the Armarda was
sighted, 20th July 1588

On or around Sun, 25 Jun 2006 13:03:10 +0100, beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>Just ocasionaly the "Terrible Twins" (2x Class 37's)

ah, now, I used to like the 37s. very rare sight at Paddington where I used
to don my anorak... but something came in double-headed by a pair once, to
universal approval from the sad types at the end of the long platform the
number of which I forget... 8 I think.

Naturally I wasn't there when they crashed whichever 50 it was.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"There is plenty of time to win this game, and to thrash the Spaniards
too" Sir Francis Drake (1540? - 1596) Attr. saying when the Armarda was
sighted, 20th July 1588

On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 13:56:49 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>you find ways to spend money you haven't got...
>
>http://www.festrail.co.uk/guestdrv.htm

Snot cheap, though. I donated 50 quid to the Bluebell some years ago
and got a day playing and driving one of theirs.


--
Coming quite soon:
http://www.ulrc.net

In article <[email protected]>, Simon Isaacs
<[email protected]> writes
>On Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:58:01 +0100, Ian Rawlings
><[email protected]> scribbled the following nonsense:
>
>>On 2006-06-23, Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> you find ways to spend money you haven't got...
>>>
>>> http://www.festrail.co.uk/guestdrv.htm
>>
>>14 miles of driving sounds nice, but 14 miles of firing? Sounds like
>>hard work!
>
>should imagine it is.... They run on fuel oil as I found out last
>year when I asked the question. The fuel oil is burned to generate
>the steam. Something to do with coal generating sparks in a national
>park...


Rumour has it they are starting to convert to coal as oil is getting too
expensive.


Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "news" with "adrian" and "nospam" with "ffoil"
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.