|
|
Post by donashton on Oct 1, 2014 9:01:42 GMT
Hi Ben,
Right with you - used to see the morning trip freight with Q1 every day through Egham.
Bullied broke all the rules. Q1 should not have had locomotive links driving to a 180 degree rocker and outside admission, nor was it good practice to increase the ratio so much. Valve events would indeed require some careful tweaking, but what a machine!
Don.
|
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 1, 2014 9:04:36 GMT
Thought I'd save Rogers thread from the horrors of the Q1! Here's a vid from the early 90s of her in steam around SP. youtu.be/sHfuWnB9ArEHappily the valve events were tweaked and got spot on but only a year or 2 before withdrawal, there are other vids with better demonstration of the bad valve events, in no way did it effect the engines hauling ability though, just sounded rough! Cheers Ben Fixed that for you... |
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Oct 1, 2014 9:57:11 GMT
hi ben, nick feast described a Q1 for 3.5"g in ME about 5 years ago. he copied don young's DERBY 2P joy valve gear and chassis. there is a copy of don ashton's excellent article on the fullsize Q1 valve gear here with drawings and pics www.bulleidlocos.org.uk/(S(0bvsjx1nbk2unbldpmiolpzb))/_q1/q1Valvegear.aspxas don states above, the Bulllied Q1 ought to have had launch links instead of loco links with this arrangement of stephensons valve gear. if as Ben states the preserved Q1 has valve gear parts made for the Maunsell Q class this is very interesting! cheers, julian |
|
|
|
Post by gingerneer on Oct 1, 2014 10:23:29 GMT
All very interesting, and similar to the in 'bad' design to the LBSC Molly (his take on a LMS Jinty) i have under the bench. Although LBSC went one better with a slot in the rocker lever which the valve spindle ran in to avoid another link, all it does is introduce a variable dimension increasing or decreasing depending on the arc of the rocker lever. Not doubt Molly's were built and ran, but there could be more efficient.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 1, 2014 10:34:18 GMT
It looks to me like the sort of monstrosity you would get from putting an apprentice in the design office. Whether it worked well or not, it has the grace and lines of a shoe box.
|
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 1, 2014 11:02:49 GMT
The nickname 'Ugly Duckling' was very apt...
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Oct 1, 2014 11:41:55 GMT
the humble 0-6-0 tender loco was the most numerous of locos built in the UK,
Bulleid's Q1 being the last type to be designed of this type and so the first of these locos was reserved for preservation as part of the National Collection.
some of the 0-6-0 locos were extremely long lasting and very successful such as the GWR Armstrong Standard Goods, and the Dean Goods (one of which is preserved and incarcerated in 'STEAM' at swindon).
some of the 0-6-0 locos were rubbish such as Marsh's C3 class for the LBSCR. the LBSCR Billinton C2s were also pretty useless until re-boilered. it never ceases to amaze me how what should be a relatively 'standard' type could produce such huge differences of performance and usefulness depending on who designed them!
very few 0-6-0 locos survived into preservation. the MHR have actually added to the list by adding a tender to an 0-6-0 austerity saddle tank and removing the saddle tank to produce something that looks like the old LSWR 'Black Motors'.
when Collett designed his GWR 2251 class in 1930 a modern boiler was added to an existing Victorian chassis design.
the Bullied Q1 class used modern piston valves, superheat, and a boiler with the largest grate that would fit!
in miniature there are very few 0-6-0 tender loco designs, which is always a bit surprising as it's an ideal type with all weight being available for adhesion. LBSC's joy valve gear 5"g MINX (an LBSCR C2X) is a superb design but hasnt been listed for very many years. martin evans' 5"g STRATFORD is one of his best designs but ive seen very few built.
ben, according to Jim Russell 8 of the Maunsell Qs were fitted with BR standard 4 chimneys from 1958 onwards after tests at swindon, 541 having its Bullied chimney replaced with a BR type in preservation.
roger, the box like shape of the Bullied Q1s was to reduce weight so the locos had as much route availability as possible. once you add a belpaire firebox and superheaters the axle load quickly approaches or goes over the maximum permitted for most routes.
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by donashton on Oct 1, 2014 20:14:21 GMT
Julian,
I stand to be corrected on the actual figure, but Bullied saved enough wartime material for a further 9 (or 11) engines!
Don.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2014 22:00:45 GMT
hi BEN------------- just found this on the 'net... >>>>>>>>>>>>  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2014 22:32:20 GMT
I sort of "Cut my firing teeth" at the SVR on 3205........I'm sure there was an echo in that cavernous Castle-sized cab !! NO, that's not me-----bottom of the door seems to have a slight air leak !!---------------------------  |
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Oct 2, 2014 0:14:33 GMT
hi alan,
now if Collett had only built the 2251 class as a shortened version of the 56XX class (which had piston valves and a modern valve gear) the 2251's might have been far better locos! instead the chassis design was basically a Dean Goods of 1882 vintage which itself was based on much older designs - all with top suspended loco links and short travel valves.
my old late great friend john edwards of the then whitchurch and district MES (cardiff) built a 2251 loco in 5"g and it jumped off the old Highfield Road track on one spectacular occasion that i witnessed.
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 0:41:14 GMT
Yes, I'd forgotten they had slide valves --------------- bloody awkward to work on with their sliding buckles in the middle and sharing a common steam chest.............I see from my "Nutty" that the 56xx had the No.2 boiler fited----so what did these 2251's have then ??..EDIT}--- ok GOOGLE says it was a No.10.
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Oct 2, 2014 0:43:32 GMT
hi alan,
the 2251 class were the first to use the standard number 10 boiler
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 0:45:59 GMT
ships that pass in the night---------again !!-----------see EDIT above.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 0:52:47 GMT
Julian-----what with one posting after the other we seem to be forming a Q ---- at least 1 of us is ---- which makes it a Q1 posting and we're back on-thread once more ---phew, that was close !
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Oct 2, 2014 1:13:36 GMT
hi alan,
i think that a 56XX shortened chassis would have formed a far superior basis for a modern 0-6-0 loco, and resolved the problems with the Q1 valve gear that don refers to ie problems with outside admission piston valves plus large eccentrics for loco links and large suspension offset (my own view is that the L1 valve gear was copied on the Bullied Q1 same as on the Maunsell Q class, and the L1 valve gear was based on the SECR E1 valve gear due to altering the original E class valve gear to give long lap on new piston valve cylinders retaining the original E class valve gear parts with larger rocker arms and eccentric advance reset on loco links).
the boiler on the Q1 was quite revolutionary for an 0-6-0 loco, using the largest flanging blocks that would fit the SR loading gauge for a firebox namely those for the SR Lord Nelson class.
ive had rides behind the Q and Q1 on the Bluebell and dont remember a problem with the sound from the exhaust on the Q1. i did like the Maunsell Q class - very workmanlike and attractive. there is an awful lot of the the Q class in the Bulleid Q1 - perhaps the whole valve gear (did the Maunsell Q class have inside admission piston valves?), plus the same Ashford type steam reverser. this suggests that Bullied's input to the Q1 was the Box-Firth wheels, and boiler design, and removal of anything that reduced weight and wasnt strictly needed, utilising the existing Q class chassis. i havent seen this commented upon in any of my vast collection of SR locos books, but deserves perhaps re-appraisal.
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 1:19:03 GMT
Night-night-----------talk again later
|
|
|
|
Post by andyhigham on Oct 2, 2014 11:23:36 GMT
Not exactly an even beat.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 11:31:39 GMT
Not exactly an even beat. ------------------------ more of a "Fascinating Rhythm"-----------Uh-oh, I feel a song coming on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and just listen to those appropriate words !!....... www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRSmEMc8vvA |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2014 15:45:04 GMT
Apparently Robin Hood had a green quiver !!--------Hey-ho, takes all types, I suppose ??
|
|
