|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 19:36:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 7, 2014 19:51:25 GMT
I think it's just a talking shop to be honest. Look at their web site and they've done nothing in the past two years by the look of it.
|
|
|
Post by GeorgeRay on Oct 7, 2014 20:01:16 GMT
This looks like the project that's been publicised as trying to break Mallards record?
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 7, 2014 21:40:00 GMT
Well, if it is, they don't mention it on their web site. In fact they don't really say anything of any consequence on their web site.
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Oct 7, 2014 22:26:42 GMT
It's in there somewhere, something about achieving 130 mph.
EDIT:
|
|
|
Post by Jim Woods on Oct 7, 2014 23:19:18 GMT
I think the breaking Mallard's record would be this one, www.5at.co.uk/bit of a still born project I think.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 23:51:27 GMT
I think the breaking Mallard's record would be this one, www.5at.co.uk/bit of a still born project I think. -------------Failed to raise the £11 MILLION needed............Not surprised as they had allowed the "High-Tech" approach to blind them to some fundamental facts, the most glaringly obvious --- as every Heritage Main-line operator knows ----- There aren't any turntables anymore !!.PLUS}--allied to the old mainframe type of design, ugh !! It should have been a double ended bogie vehicle from the outset.....
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 8, 2014 8:02:17 GMT
I'm just amazed that they thought it was worth even looking at. They must have been pretty naive to think that they could come along, wave a high tech wand, and come up with something practical that wasn't going to cost the earth. If any of them had seen a picture of a full sized locomotive boiler, they would immediately have seen that this is not something that was going to come cheap.
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 8, 2014 9:14:08 GMT
Black 5 fanatics I think, who just wanted to prove it was such a brilliant engine (which it was) that could be improved still further by the application of technology. Completly the wrong design philosophy. Technology should have dictated the design
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 9:38:23 GMT
A better Black 5 has been around for ages now, it's called a Standard 5
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 9:53:19 GMT
And Black 5's Grand-Daddy }---------- 49xx Hall !!.....Still putting in main-line performances in this day and age !!
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 8, 2014 11:54:40 GMT
A better Black 5 has been around for ages now, it's called a Standard 5 pah!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 12:29:01 GMT
I can legitimately say that having sampled both
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 8, 2014 13:14:32 GMT
I sense 'coal shovels at dawn' approaching...
|
|
|
Post by fostergp6nhp on Oct 8, 2014 16:18:38 GMT
A better Black 5 has been around for ages now, it's called a Standard 5 On the S&D standard 5's used to do what the Southern men required a Merchant Navy to do.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 16:44:38 GMT
A better Black 5 has been around for ages now, it's called a Standard 5 pah! ------------------------------------------- Shouldn't that be "Squawk" ??
|
|
|
Post by jordanleeds on Oct 8, 2014 19:11:47 GMT
The future is bright the future is Caprotti!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2014 22:53:09 GMT
Why not do away with all those Walshaerts flailing valve gear rods, that extremely complex Caprotti cam-box and just have a nice, simple steam turbine as per the LMS Turbomotive ??...........If Bulleid had fitted one per bogie on the Leader, then that would have been 4,000 Horse Power on tap !!---------- Make modern use of a high-output, auto controlled, oil-fired boiler and we could be onto a winner ??
|
|
|
Post by Roger on Oct 9, 2014 6:59:58 GMT
Sadly not.... the efficiency wouldn't be even close to a Diesel and it would cost ten times as much. I'm afraid external combustion engines can't hope to compete. Why have a boiler when all you need is a cylinder to burn the fuel in?
|
|
|
Post by ejparrott on Oct 9, 2014 8:35:16 GMT
Nuclear reactor it is then!
|
|