@@LBSC70The ticking is the anti-vacuum (aka a “snifting” valve). They serve the same purpose as a small ejector but without wasting steam. They only actually help remove the brake when the loco is going over about 15-20mph though which means that the large ejector has to be left on if the train is going below that speed, which is the only major drawback.
The main problem the 5AT has always (sadly) faced is that no major investor has much faith or interest in an excuse to reinvent the steam locomotive for the 21st Century. Given how advanced electric traction is now, there’s pretty much no going back. Awesome as it would have been to see, the idea is more or less dead and barely talked about nowadays. The Advanced Steam Traction Trust are more focused on developing better forms of biocoal than reinventing the engine itself.
I believe that what the 5AT group should’ve done from the beginning was approach owners of existing Black 5s and Standard 5s to work on and improve their locos first, and then, once the results build trust with the public, pitch the idea of the 5AT.
The best reasonable excuse for reinventing steam locomotives is hydrogen power since it creates 0 emmisions* Even tho it may just be another gadgetbahn many people think the future is cleaner technology (like those tesla triangle cars even if making those batteries hurts the envoirment)
Meanwhile, in New Zealand, there’s a guy doing hands on engineering to try his hand at advanced steam technology, he goes by Sam Mackwell. You guys ever heard of him?
This was an instant must-watch for me. The 5AT is one of my favorite big engine concepts ever. And if it were somehow built, it may well have been my favorite big engine ever (I say big engine bc the LB&SCR E2s are still my #1). Like us Yankees' very own PRR S1, the 5AT would have pushed steam to its limits. I really hope one day someone with the cash and guts takes the leap to answer the what if. Those are the best kinds of questions. :D
Back around 2007-2010, I did some contract work with Wardale to render it into 3D. Part of the reasoning being that he wanted to have actual working (as in rigged/animated) design models of various parts of the locomotive design, and then a fully rendered model of the locomotive and all its variants. There were actually quite a few more than people knew about. Whatever the case, he sent me copies of his various design elements, and over the course of a year, I modeled and rendered about half the model, before I started running into problems. Some aspects of the design that he wanted to incorporate, while they made sense on paper, actually wouldn't work in practice. For example, he planned to have a curious 'double' valve gear on the pistons. Not unlike the Vauclain compound locomotives, where you had a low pressure, and high pressure piston contained in the same piston cradle. Not a piston inside the frames mind, but two pistons built in one that worked off a singular drive rod. Rather than taking the previous design element that had been used with Vauclain Compounds, he'd instead created this strange system with two eccentrics, and two completely separate valve systems. During rendering of that part, it became painfully obvious to me that there was no actual way to make that fit within the design constraints he had placed. This prompted him to redesign the piston system, completely removing the odd compound pistons in favor of a more conventional piston and valve gear system. Though in many of our discussions, he noted that if I could figure out how to make it work, he would have much rather I continue with that design element. I remember informing him that while I could 'make it work' in theory, since I wasn't an engineer, I couldn't guarantee that any modifications I made would actually work in real life. After all, I was a simple 3d rendering artist, and any modifications could potentially break the laws of physics. The final engineering renders were delivered to him in early 2010, around March I believe, and featured a rough outline of the streamlined, and non-streamlined variant; with two tenders. The first tender being a conventional coal fired tender, and the second being a proposed diesel fuel tender, both built roughly along the same lines of a black 5 tender, though with some of his own proposed modifications. I expected to continue working with him on the project, but at that point he was already questioning whether or not it was even plausible to continue the project. By 2012, as we all know, the project had been abandoned. I believe I still have some of those renders somewhere on a hard drive, though I'd have to find them. I have often thought about going back and uploading them for history's sake, though I'm not certain what if any good they could do for people.
Woah! Regardless of what you do with the models, that certainly sounds like an honor. It is curious to me though why he wouldn't have someone working on making a CAD model, as that is usually the standard for modern engineering. I know the tech has been around since the 80's but I suppose that it is possible that actual ability not just make parts but assemblies in CAD wasn't quite there yet.
@@eliyahzayin5469 I'm a mechanical design engineer. If I had Wardale's designs, I could make a CAD model happen. It would be an incredibly large undertaking to do in my spare time for free, so everyone would have to be *very* patient, though.
@@eliyahzayin5469 At the time, he was trying to get a 'realistic' 3D model of the locomotive produced for a reasonably popular model railway simulation game. Specifically Trainz. Speaking with him at the time, he felt that this might drum up more interest in the project, in a kind of grass roots type of situation. The idea being that if people could see what the locomotives would look like in operation, even through a game, it would draw further interest to the overall project itself and might help secure funding.
I think it would be more feasible to see something similar built for miniature gauge. I’d love to see a 15inch gauge AT5 charging around on the RH&DR or BVR
HELL YEA! Finally glad someone is giving Wardale the credit and recognition he deserves. I bought his book and fell in love with his work, sad that 5AT never truly got off the ground.
Thanks for a fascinating video. Andre Chapelon was doing similar things in France - rebuilding and improving existing locomotive designs. His masterpiece, the 242-A1, developed 5500 continuous horsepower. Chapelon also envisaged steam continuing until the late 20th century. He and his ideas were swept aside by the SNCF in the rush to electrify.
We know some about how modern steam engines perfom. Meiningen works together with dlm/slm in the nineties built a series of rack locomotives based on an old class but completely revamped with modern steam tech. One man operated, electric preheaters etc.
I actually talked about the 5AT in comparison to other newbuild and modern steam groups for a college final! My rough take on it was that Wardale unfortunately didn't do a good job at finding a core group to pitch to. Unlike Tornado (and other semi-traditional new builds) the 5AT couldn't tie into a preexisting history while at the same time it was often too traditional for a lot of the people interesting in modern steam (Reading through the 5AT website's FAQ and Duke team correspondence is rather painful) (ETA) To be more precise, while there haven't been any super successful modern steam groups, there are a few that got further off the ground, and they largely did so by having a very very specific reason to exist. For example, DLM in Switzerland is built on a brand of 1) environmentalism and 2) making the operation of steam locomotives more friendly to every day use--the crown of this being their German Class 58 rebuild that has a cab experience comparable to an electric locomotive. Newbuilds have gained even higher success from focusing on resurecting lost classes rather than targeting an intentionally modern design. However, modernizing/improving has often set as a necessity, especially for unproven designs like the PRR T1 and Gresley P2 (Which, since both these designs relied on poppet valves, ironically means that two groups working to rebuild OLD designs are actively developing/improving a much more modern valve gear than what Wardale wanted for the 5AT) The impression I've gotten from the 5AT website and most of it's press was that there wasn't any real reason for it beyond 'modern steam locomotive.' There was talk of it for the heritage sector but also talk about sending it (or at least a variation of it) to third world countries that still rely on coal. I really don't think WHO they were building for was very well thought out and with the combination of trying to find a traditional investor rather than what the A1 trust did was the main funding killer. I am excited for the Revolution Project that the Advanced Steam Traction Trust has been currently doing, as it feels more grounded and (because they're starting with a mini-gauge prototype) likely to succeed.
Fun fact; Poland genuinly used steam locos, EVEN UP TO THE LATE 2000S. Yes, Poland, which by 1999 had on-paper had phased out steam engines, still used steam locos up until like, 2005. Mind you, we were following in the BR's footsteps, we had a modernization plan[though that didn't include a version of the Beeching Axe], and surprise surprise, still had loco maintenance facilities up until the 2000s.
If we hadn't gone the diesel route, the plan wasn't better steam engines, but electricity. That's why the standards had a 40 year lifespan. By that time, it was predicted nearly the entirety of the UK would have been electrified. Sadly, short terminism won out, and we are still arguing over electrification to this very day, despite the need for it being greater than ever
I always felt that instead of the classic running gear, a modern steam engine would be more like a further development of the Deutsche Reichsbahn BR 19.10. This prototype with a steammotor concept had made very promising testruns with speeds up and over 175 km/h. Unfortunally it was developed in a time when it was no longer possible to further finnish it's development and the US took it as "loot". Scrapping it after a few years of sitting .
I love the story of The Duke of Gloucester. An experimental design brought in to replace an engine that was totalled during the Harrow and Wealdstone Rail disaster. A perfect albeit morbid opportunity for Riddles to produce a new locomotive. However due to some design oversights (there's a bit more to it than that) it was an incredibly poor performer. Hated among the crews that had to operate her. She was sent for scrap after 8 years of service. The hulk was eventually rescued from Barry scrapyard and restoration began. But what sets this story apart from many others is that alot of time and effort was put into rectifying the issues that plagued the Duke whilst in service. After restoration was completed, it was one of the most powerful and best performing engines ever seen on UK metals. Numerous speed records were smashed and firmly cemented its place in preservation history. Had British Rail had the foresight to invest in further developing this design, who knows what doors may have opened for prolonging steam in the UK? A really interesting story if you fancy a steam deep dive.
A lot of that performance was due to the perception of the Duke being a “Big Brit” and he crews treated like a Brit which was a 2 Cylinder design. One of the crew wrote into steam railway saying that he didn’t have trouble with the Duke, however he had recognised the Duke as a 3 Cylinder and so had fired the Duke as would a Royal Scot which was also a 3 Cylinder. Provided the power he needed and didn’t struggle to steam. Was only built as Riddles desperate to produce an a express Engine and the destruction of Princess Anne gave him an excuse. Without the crash then would never have been built. Much of what was found by the preservation group was not so much the design in itself was bad, but when had been built then the design had not been followed, and those build flaws have been corrected. However by the time the Duke was out then BR already made the decision with the Diesel/Electric move so nobody had been interested in spending time on sorting out what was going to remain a “one off”.
Actually, the engine in the Harrow accident was 'totalled' so that the 'experimental design' could be brought in. Riddles had 71000 built without authority and then had to find a space for it. Since no-one wanted it, he then created a vacancy on the LMR by withdrawing 6202. The accident happened in October 1952. 6202 was withdrawn May 1954. 71000 entered traffic May 1954. Coincidence?
As most modern steamengines goes we have to look at the French. The most technological advanced steam engines who ran in revenue service were French engines designed for the SNCF. Class 232 U.I. had rollerbearings like post war German engines, an automated coal stoker like American engines, high pressure boiler like some experimental UK engines had and an unique French fully automated compound system for the cillinders. Steam engines are unbelievable powerfull but to creating the steam in energy wastefull small steam boilers killed them of . Modern electric locomotives are in fact indirect steam locomotives. Most electrical power comes from power plants who create their electric with steam turbines who get their steam form massive efficient steam boilers.
It should be mentioned that Livio D Porta had pitched a plan to the Tornado trust some time ago that considerably improved upon the design of the A1 class to something comparable to the 5AT, including separate valve gear for each cylinder, improved piston valves rings and liners, lempor exhaust and a GPCS firebox.
Honestly I daydreamed of this too many times, if any of us had a shot at it and develop a 21st century steam loco it would have to have a mix of electric and steam propulsion, it would be mixed fueled for both solid and liquid fuel burning. Going further it would use those compact +10,000psi pressured steam generators used in steam cars from the 1920s but losing the loco's inconic horizontal boiler. Given that battery electric EMUs and shunters existed in the 1920s as well like the Drumm trains of Dublin, it seems like a missed oppertunity that the inefficiencies of warming up and the wear'n'tear of starting and stopping heavy trains weren't complimented by a battery-electric regen "accumulator" system. While on the other hand steam performs best at constant speed which is the absolute opposite for electricity. Hell we've had several decades of Diesel dynamic braking wasting electricity into heat before anyone bothered to harvest that energy with batteries.
oil burning steam turbine electric, with maybe a small booster engine for goods, and a more normal steam engine with auxiliary electric motors is what I'm thinking of. That way you get most, if not all of the advantages of diesel electrics, but you have the grunt power and top end performance of steam.
the 5AT project would've been wonderful, but I don't think that those power, tractive effort, and speed goals are at all beyond a Gresley A4, especially if given a Lempore exhaust. Considering how 2509 SILVER LINK did on her first day without a special exhaust, at a low regulator setting, the only thing stopping SIR NIGEL GRESLEY from repeating that and breaking records is the signaling equipment and regulations, the former of which has been done for big boy 4014 already. I say give SIR NIGEL GRESLEY a lempore exhaust, maybe lightweight con and coupling rods like her originals, and we have the winning idea, far easier and cheaper than a complete new build, though a bit more maintenance heavy, and slightly less efficient.
As much as this would've been incredible to see, I just don't think it ever would have been a big enough improvement to justify the project. Sure, the loco would've worked very well, and in terms of power, speed, reliability and efficiency would've been an improvement over existing steam designs, but it still has most of the major, inherent design faults of any steam locomotive: 1. It still requires two crew members (driver & fireman) to operate it, doubling operating costs. Diesels only require a driver. 2. It still requires said crew members to turn up at six in the morning to light the fire, and still be on duty well into the night to dispose of the fire once the running is finished. With a diesel, all you need to do is press the 'on' button, and press the 'off' button. (A simplification I know, but overall still a lot quicker than steam). 3. It still has all of the oiling points. Whilst the fireman is lighting up, the driver still has to go around and oil up all of the motion. Whilst a diesel driver does still have to oil up certain parts of the loco, the process is much simpler and quicker. 4. It still has a tender. You are still dragging around an extra wagon with the fuel, adding weight that is not present with a diesel. And of course this also necessitates the reintroduction of turntables. 5. It still has a long boiler at one end, and a long tender at the other. Visibility in comparison to a diesel with cabs at either end is incredibly limited. 6.It still has a boiler that undergoes incredible stresses during operation. This means both that there is a higher risk of a potentially catastrophic explosion, and of course the 10 year boiler ticket would necessitate overhauls, meaning potentially years out of action every decade each time the ticket expires. 7. It still has a fixed wheelbase, which would limit the tightness of corners it could go around. 8. It still has the hammerblow effect of the pistons on the rails, meaning increased track maintenance compared with diesels. 9. It still burns oil/coal, which as we all know are fuel sources both damaging to the climate and becoming harder and more expensive to source. It's important to remember that when diesels came along at first they were very often inferior in terms of speed, power and reliability to their steam predecessors. However, they were specifically introduced because they did away with all of these inherent steam loco flaws. And of course, modern diesels and electrics are generally far faster, more powerful and more economical than the best steam locomotives, so I don't see how this steam loco would ever be able to match them. I absolutely love steam locomotives and will always prefer the drama, noise, smells, sights and soul of them over the bland, boring, soulless, plastic boxes on wheels that rule the main line today. However there was a very practical reason for the replacement of steam in the first place, and I just cannot see how the 5AT could have possibly improved on the efficient, quiet and practical trains of today. That being said it is still a very interesting topic and one that people can (and will probably) debate for many years to come!
These are all very well thought out comments. One thing you don't mention is the changing labour market. Steam requires a larger workforce, especially for preparation and disposal, cooling,clearing ash and soot etc. Diesel and electric need fewer staff, but with technical qualifications. In a changing environment, steams biggest advantage, simplicity, turned into its greatest drawback.
I live in Darlington & North Road is still my nearest station. The lads here have some experience in building a steam locomotive to modern standards. Why not consult them? I'd like to see a steam locomotive built with all kinds of modern features, such as automatic coal loading, or a different grade such as lignite; the driver placed at the front, away from the heat; perhaps a multi-fuel Sterling engine; fly-by-wire controls; covered wheels for better streamlining; steam directed downwards to get rid of ice & weeds. Some of these ideas won't be feasible, but at least let's look at them.
The problem with steam is a fundamental one. A steam engine has to carry fuel and (a lot of) water. A diesel engine only needs to carry fuel and electric locos dont even need to carry that. There is simply no way around that
I did a design sprint on modern steam locos. From what I can tell a huge problem with them is their public perception as antiquated technology. Any new engine would need to shed any resemblance with traditional steam locomotives
I'm just gonna come out and say it, because I think everyone's been afraid to thusfar. Steam trains should be using water-tube boilers, not fire-tube boilers. Water tube boilers are much more lightweight, and they capture the heat energy of the flue gases much more efficiently. Water tube boilers are a supremely well understood technology, there's little about them that we don't know. They were never used on locomotives, but they WERE standard issue on another type of steam-propelled vehicle. US-navy steam turbine powered warships of both world wars used water-tube boilers. These are MUCH more efficient and much lighter than fire-tube boilers of similar capacity. They have the steam output to actually support a steam turbine prime mover, something fire tube boilers can not do. Switching to a water-tube boiler and a steam turbine would entirely eliminate any hammering on the rails that a piston steam engine's connecting rods might induce by the nature of their offset mass, and you can quite easily connect the steam turbine directly to an electric generator, making the locomotive able to use the existing electrical technology such as traction motors bogies generators and switchgear of Diesel locomotives, while also allowing easy conversion to a fully electric locomotive if local infrastructure has provisions for such. The water tube boiler has additional advantages, it's more fuel efficient AND more powerful than a fire-tube boiler of the same operating mass (there's a balance to be struck, fuel efficiency can be traded for power output and vice-versa to a degree), and this is the primary reason why a steam turbine is viable in the first place. You can even have these water-tube boilers be oil-fired, meaning they can use the existing infrastructure that supports Diesel locomotives. Thermodynamic efficiency of a steam turbine can be higher than even a Diesel locomotive, at least in theory.
Problem is that water tube boilers have hot external surfaces. The idea was tried with the Hush-hush locomotive in 1929. There are fundamental problems in adapting it for locomotives.
The performance improvements sound good until you take into account the appalling thermal efficiency of a steam engine, this design has a thermal efficiency of 14% whilst a modern diesel locomotives are bettering 50%.
Went the same way as all those people who said they’d keep 200 steam locomotives going in South Africa! I think one guy is trying to keep it going now!
The answer is very simple, the Diesel. Rudolph was on to something, he wanted higher efficiency and he got it. Steamers have a thermal efficiency of less than 10% while Diesels often can exceed 30%. Note that there are no steamships either, another win for the mighty diesel. Mind you, I love the complications of the steamer, boilers, the mechanical complexity of the whole thing, the noise and smoke, the sound of the whistle, all great things. The diesel just goes about business getting the job done like a good appliance, no drama. Ocean going steamers really weren't very practical until the development of the triple reduction engine design, they used too much fuel and water before that. The Titanic went one step further with a low pressure turbine using the exhaust steam from the outside engines to power a centerline propellor to get the last bit out of the steam. The Mallet, a double reduction design saw very limited application in the US, it was a great design but the rail shops didn't like it, too complicated, but it got two uses out of the steam. The brits built a number of rigid chassis locomotives with high pressure cylinders driving cranks on the front axles and low pressure cylinders on the outside looking like a conventional locomotive, mechanically complicated but going in the right direction. These served well into the sixties on british lines. The brits had other designs used on colonial railways that put more of the locomotive weight on the drivers unlike the Pennsy's 6-4-4-6 design that put 60% of the engine on the pilots, why not build a 4-6-6-4 instead. OK, for fun the steamer is by far the most interesting but if you are running a railroad and want to make money doing so, buy diesels.
I have been thinking about methods to supply steam which do not involve fossil fuels such as small modular reactors and steam generators, or some other idea not yet thought, Such a system, if it could get over its own concerns, could make steam viable as low cost and emission free. The extra torque provided by steam should still have many uses. And if any loco frame could be suited to this endeavor, it would be the 5AT.
I love that beautiful concept art of this potential locomotive... Steam is one of those classic forms of energy that I believe has a lot of unforseen potential... But I'm not a engineer, so, eh
I've always wondered with the 5AT, would the heritage railtour crowd want to be pulled by something with no provenance? I understand people wanting to ride behind an original loco or even a replica/recreation of one like Tornado is or the Bretton grange etc but would they line up in the same number for a new design of loco?
you've hit the nail. what would this loco be for? clearly steam locos at the head of a train is never coming back as the go to for the modern railway. so rail tours, okay but this is a loco with no story, pedigree or heritage. im not even particularly interested in the replicas tbh...
You say this isn't the engine I came here for, but maybe I had none in particular that I wanted to see. Eventually I hope to make an entire rail line with mostly if not fully steam engines. Narrow gauge, but still.
I beg that this project is revived and people start to invest in it. Personally I’d recommend hydrogen steam power to power the pistons. How is a good question. Looks like I got some homework to do.
surely what you do is build a big boiler and or hydrogen generator or whatever and generate enough power for the train and all its train friends and the nearby cities and then distribute that power from the centralised power generation location to all these things by wires thus being safer, cheaper, more efficient. oh wait that's called a power station and catenary and its what we already do...
"Do you think the 5AT Project could have been the success that it claimed to be?" Probably much better than the failed ACE 3000 Series Project from the USA that was never put into the final building stages back in the 1980s I'll admit.
I think the best concept idea for a modern steam engine would be using heaters to heat the water to make high pressure steam kinda like those electric teak kettles u can get a the store that would use just water and a heating eliment to make steam with out oil or coal needed as when the steam goes threw the stack it just simply becomes vapor that evaporites and that is my ideal idea of what the future steam train would look like and could be ran automusly using ai and navigation to make it as effciant as possible
I look constantly at ATM's to see if anyone was too impatient to grab their cash, but no luck yet. Puffing Billy Railway in Victoria Australia has converted one of their NA 2-6-2 tank locos to burn oil but not heavy oil as it often the case. This conversion is to burn light oil or distillate and the burner looks like a large domestic gas stove with four large burners and a small central burner arranged like the white dots on a dice representing the number five. They run through a forest and often have to have a small water cart train following the main train to look for spot fires started by flying cinders. The diesel fuel means no need to look for a new supplier of fuel as they have diesels already. The whole burner system is Swiss designed. Maybe the UK could look into it for it means no flying cinders and no coal to buy or coal ash to get rid of. Yes the smell of coal is nice but having locos running on the mainline even if oil fired is better than no steam locos running on the mainline. Unlike other steam locos that are oil fired, the NA Puffing Billy Loco doesn't produce clouds of black smoke even when working up steep 1 in 30 grades.
Electricity is still subject to thermodynamic and transmission losses, and there is a lot of expensive infrastructure to install and maintain. It's only worthwhile if there is sufficient traffic.
The 5AT looks like a very draggy design. The A4 was properly streamlined to reduce drag, and the 5AT would waste a lot of power getting up to any reasonable speed. Also a diesel locomotive has a thermal efficiency of around double that of the 5AT, meaning no one will want to run it commercially diesel locomotive is available.
It's a different story in practice, as the Brienz-Rothorn railway discovered when their new steam locomotives began running in 1993. There is also the matter of capital costs to consider. A steam locomotive is an inexpensive piece of kit if there is a decent production run, and locomotives spend a lot of time doing nothing at all.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 That thermal efficiency does not give the full picture. Hence the unexpected results with the Brienz-Rothorn locomotives. Even the manufacturer, DLM, was surprised and it took quite a lot of investigation to discover what was going on.
Yes, he may well be the greatest. A book by Colonel Rogers entitled "Chapelon : Genius of French Steam" explains his achievements. His 240P was an astonishingly good performer. I think that the book has been reprinted, and I recommend it.
Agreed. Chapelon is really the only person to have _actually_ produced massive efficiency and performance improvements by modifying existing engines. I believe he did this with a thorough and scientific understanding of thermodynamics and gas and steam flow. It's a shame he was never given the chance to produce a "clean sheet" design because what he _did_ produce was actually an embarrassment to France's new electric locos which had to be uprated to save face. We can only speculate what he might have achieved with modern computers and CFD software. Even so, it is unlikely that steam could ever be made as efficient as modern electric traction.
Forget reviving main line steam. Technology is further than that. Also the cost issue will never be solved cuz - economy + it alienates railways. I'd love to see it happen, but the steam age simply ended with the combustion engine and stuff like solar and hydrogen could replace the Diesel as well soon.
The steam vs. diesel tests conducted by the New York Central Railroad in 1946, between new Niagara-class 4-8-4 locomotives and new EMD E7 units, showed that modern steamers could compete quite successfully on an operational cost basis with diesels. But a variety of factors led to the dieselization of most American railroads by the late 1950s, and the Niagaras were all scrapped in 1956. The American ACE 3000 was a proposed modern 4-4-4-2 coal-burning duplex-drive steam locomotive design for Ross Rowland's ACE 3000 Project for the American Coal Enterprises, proposed in the 1970s. Like the project in the video, sufficient funds could not be procured to build a prototype locomotive. I'm a mechanical engineer, and I firmly believe coal-burning steam locomotives could be built that could still compete with diesel-electrics today. However, the political climate surrounding "climate change" would probably not allow it.
It´s a pity you have no knowledge of railways and their engines! If you had, you would know that the efficiency of external combustions engines will always be way below that of internal combustions engines and that the unsprung masses of the valve gear put a strict limit to the speed of a steam engine of conventional design. If there was ever a chance for steam engines to stay "modern", it was destroyed at Ft. Eustis in the USA in 1951, when the stolen class 19 steam motor engine was scrapped.
Surely the answer is to raise funds from the preservation world + from any interested entreprenuers, including smokeless fuel manufacturers/suppliers? Mechanical engineering training school apprentices could have a very valuable input too! I think it could be done.
Considering that now, in the uk, we have a higher percentage of multimillionaires than ever before, it does seem remarkable that those with essentially bottomless pockets seem uninterested in this sort of innovation. I followed the project closely at the time and was very sad when it all came to an end. Thank you for making this video. It did contain information previously unheard.
not really at all. whats the point, what innovation? we have electrified mainlines which are far more efficient and as a brucie bonus don't require a load of little bombs on wheels screeching around the network. there's literally zero box that this would win over a modern diesel let alone an electric railway
technically any train that is nuclear would be a steam locomotive due to how reactors work though reactors in everything is also seen as an outdated look on the future too
A full scale build of this is probably not feasible, at least not as a _5_AT. Headways seem to lean more towards 6P or higher these days. I recall the 5AT was proposed to use British-Caprotti valve gear at one stage, which I think would’ve helped a lot for a career in passenger use. Not sure Wardale had much experience there Now what I’m surprised no one’s tried is a Live Steam model of the 5AT
The 5AT was designed to weigh 80 metric tons and produce an indicated output of 3,200 hp at 113 km/h with a maximum operating speed of 180km/h. How many class 6P or 7P can equal this level? The answer is none. The design was based on that of the Std 5 because it was an accepted and understood type which made dealing with the responsible regulatory bodies far more straight forward. Why was the build not feasible given that the creation of new members of lost designs has been going on for some time now? Wardale learned from Porta who learned from Chapelon and though AXC did use poppet valves on some designs he reverted to piston valves on his later engines for good reasons. Porta would not consider the use of poppet valves since they offered no advantages over his piston valve design. You could build a very different locomotive than the 5AT; say a water tube boiler type with a working pressure of 32.75 bar and triple expansion compound drive. It would be a fascinating project but it would be very expensive and your chance of being able to run it would be very low because such a type lies well outside existing experience.
4014 the big boy locomotive needs to go to England and show you Brits a thing or two on steam power and I wanna see how fast he is I get to drive it or fire it ❤
what would Britain learn from a very simple four cylinder machine? 'if you have the space you can build as big as you like' err yeah ill file that with 'if you pay more you get a better plane seat or a bigger house' in the 'well durrrr' folder. anyway the sight of big bog being pushed around by diesels despite its supposed power is laughably tragic and pathetic and really disappointing...
@@andrewyoung749 its not even pushed by the diesel lmao, the only reason diesel is added because the dynamic brake reduced wear and tear on Big Boys brake shoes (it takes 200$ just to replace it)
I don't know why you didn't mention No.71000 ? That's literally the peak of steam advancement and has shown what you could do with boiling water. It kind of made the 5AT project obsolete, as the 5AT wouldn't improve on performance or possibly cylinder efficiency over the Duke. Be interesting to see how well it goes during its next ticket. Future vid?🤔
@poshdan4071 regardless of it not being quite upto scratch when built, it still had the highest cylinder efficiency ever recorded and then has gone onto show how well it does work. As I said in the comment, that because 71000 had shown how good it is, it kind of made the 5AT project redundant. It definitely should've got a mention or a segment.
L.D.PORTER & DAVID WARDALE - THE ADVANCED STEAM LOCO. There appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding as to how L.D. Porta & Wardale fit into the picture. And in particular what L.D.Porta (who was the mentor) was after. "Increased power" was a fundamental bonus of the primary target of Porta's work. Which was to increase the efficiency of the steam locomotive so as to make it MORE efficient than the Diesel !!!! The "Red Devil" of SAR was effectively Wardale applying what L.D. Porta had explained to him would be the way forward. Porta it must be realised was involved in a number of projects worldwide, including in non-British speaking countries including Spain. Having watched a Video of Porta in Lleida Spain, explaining the sensible improvements for a preserved Beyer Garratt. None other than a British built broad Gauge (5ft 6in) 4-6-2+2-6-4 EXPRESS type Garratt, to the person in charge of the loco (nicknamed the "Carrot" because of his red hair). It became sadly evident that the Spanish "Carrot" had no comprehension of the radical changes to that Garratt that Porta was explaining. As a result that Garratt, the last express type on the planet, is not fully restored. The Carrot, had to repair the firebox, so the idiot cut through the main frames so he could slide the firebox out sideways to repair it. Simply because the roof in the building where the loco was housed was too low, to lift off the boiler ! Having then realised this is not a clever idea, he put the firebox back into the loco "unrepaired", and welded the mainframe back up, and carefully hid the fact by machine polishing the weld marks. So the loco still resides in Catalonia, Northern Spain in a part rebuilt condition. Porta also aided Roger Waller of SLM Winterthur in the serious modernisation of an ex German WW2 (Class 52) 2-10-0. This loco was effectively the culmination of Porta's work. And proved it was more efficient than the Diesel. This 2-10-0 loco was rebuilt with low emission output (using light diesel fuel), modern thermal insulation techniques, "total automatic self lighting up", one man operation, full roller bearing on wheels and coupling/connecting rods, & a more efficient valve gear. The onus being on removing the expensive manpower numbers normally required simply to prepare a steam loco for work, and further manpower to operate it. Which effectively requires around a dozen people just to prepare & operate one large steam loco for a days work!!!
Sick 19D number 2685 Wesley is in a video I volunteer on the railway wich he operates at The red devil was restored but it had a piston ring failure or something She has specially made rings and cylinder sleeves With a special formula for the material Wich no one knows Without that recipe that steam locomotive might never steam again i dont think
Look up the PRR T1 5550, she's getting (re)build. That type of engine, might have created a whole new type of setup. As for that 5AT, it needs a walk true tender. And look at the Mallard, way better streamlining. The 5AT does remind me of a DR locomotive that was constructed from two other locomotives, painted black, in German style. So somebody might have talked to that guy, back then. That or some spying. So she might actually, already exist, funny that, right? Might want to look at the Triplex locomotives, but using a reverse drive mallet & a Garrett, to get a true triplex. Weight of the boiler needs to rest on all drive wheels, to make a Triplex work, with the mallet drivers house, becoming the classic Garrett nose mounted water tank. Even lets you streamline her.
The 5at wasn't the only steam future project there's also the American ace3000 it was made in 1985 and it resembles a big American diesel engine with a wide cab and a full cowl body except it has steam driveweels and was actually diesel powered and it had a diesel unit reversed similar than it but no steam driveweels and it probably had a m3 america horn or k5la airchime and the diesel unit reversed by it was actually a coal storage unit it was made for the chessis system or know as conrail seaboard system aka csx and the original paint was all red with a white stripe
I've never been convinced. Streamlining has no effect below 70 mph, and a BR Class 5 has no need for a big tender. I don't believe for one minute that it could have reached 110 mph let along 130 mph. I doubt if it would have been as good as the Riddles design, and, in any case, the 9F 2-10-0 and Duke of Gloucester were more powerful engines to start from.
In addition to your planned improvements in the steam engine design, have you considered the many benefits of designing a hybrid electric steam locomotive which can generate stored electric power when not applying tractive effort to the main drivers? One can design an engine which utilizes large driving wheels for speed while the acceleration would be boosted by electric traction thereby solving a problem which has plagued traditional steam locomotives - getting started. It should be capable to utilize regenerative braking and should be capable of running on electrified and non-electrified tracks, thereby eliminating the need to switch locomotives on routes which have partial electrification. With Amtrak hoping to increase and enhance rail service in the U.S. over the next decade, this would be a good time to promote a sustainable mode. Hybrid modality has improved the petrol powered automobile, virtually doubling its efficiency; why not for the steam loco?
in fallout they took what looked like a steam locomotive and added nuclear power onto it and im assuming the top speed was high cause nuclear power is fast and if thjey added a engine to it then it would be a body of steam but nuclear engine at its core
No, the steam engine was not doomed by the diesel engine.... it was doomed by electric traction in different forms. Converting fuel... solid like coal or fluid like oil is best done in large powerplants to get the maximum efficiency. Which means that anything done to diesel locomotives or the steam counterpart will never make them come even close to the electric locomotive in efficiency.
I like how you say “puffing in an exaggerated manner” while footage of a manor plays in the background, cheeky that.
Why do Great Western Engines make a ticking noise whenever they are puffing under their own power,
Halls, manors, panniers, prairies, 14xxs they do it
@LBSC70 it's just the nature of the valves on Western designs
@@ChristheXelent Ok thanks
@@LBSC70The ticking is the anti-vacuum (aka a “snifting” valve). They serve the same purpose as a small ejector but without wasting steam. They only actually help remove the brake when the loco is going over about 15-20mph though which means that the large ejector has to be left on if the train is going below that speed, which is the only major drawback.
@@BrokenIET thanks for explaining it
The main problem the 5AT has always (sadly) faced is that no major investor has much faith or interest in an excuse to reinvent the steam locomotive for the 21st Century. Given how advanced electric traction is now, there’s pretty much no going back.
Awesome as it would have been to see, the idea is more or less dead and barely talked about nowadays. The Advanced Steam Traction Trust are more focused on developing better forms of biocoal than reinventing the engine itself.
I believe that what the 5AT group should’ve done from the beginning was approach owners of existing Black 5s and Standard 5s to work on and improve their locos first, and then, once the results build trust with the public, pitch the idea of the 5AT.
The best reasonable excuse for reinventing steam locomotives is hydrogen power since it creates 0 emmisions*
Even tho it may just be another gadgetbahn many people think the future is cleaner technology (like those tesla triangle cars even if making those batteries hurts the envoirment)
Meanwhile, in New Zealand, there’s a guy doing hands on engineering to try his hand at advanced steam technology, he goes by Sam Mackwell. You guys ever heard of him?
Surprises that the advanced steam trust hasn't advised on combining a battery electric booster to steam traction
@@AndrewHager02do tell
This was an instant must-watch for me. The 5AT is one of my favorite big engine concepts ever. And if it were somehow built, it may well have been my favorite big engine ever (I say big engine bc the LB&SCR E2s are still my #1). Like us Yankees' very own PRR S1, the 5AT would have pushed steam to its limits. I really hope one day someone with the cash and guts takes the leap to answer the what if. Those are the best kinds of questions. :D
They are building a new PRR T1, but the S1 was also an interesting g engine.
Back around 2007-2010, I did some contract work with Wardale to render it into 3D. Part of the reasoning being that he wanted to have actual working (as in rigged/animated) design models of various parts of the locomotive design, and then a fully rendered model of the locomotive and all its variants. There were actually quite a few more than people knew about. Whatever the case, he sent me copies of his various design elements, and over the course of a year, I modeled and rendered about half the model, before I started running into problems. Some aspects of the design that he wanted to incorporate, while they made sense on paper, actually wouldn't work in practice. For example, he planned to have a curious 'double' valve gear on the pistons. Not unlike the Vauclain compound locomotives, where you had a low pressure, and high pressure piston contained in the same piston cradle. Not a piston inside the frames mind, but two pistons built in one that worked off a singular drive rod. Rather than taking the previous design element that had been used with Vauclain Compounds, he'd instead created this strange system with two eccentrics, and two completely separate valve systems. During rendering of that part, it became painfully obvious to me that there was no actual way to make that fit within the design constraints he had placed. This prompted him to redesign the piston system, completely removing the odd compound pistons in favor of a more conventional piston and valve gear system. Though in many of our discussions, he noted that if I could figure out how to make it work, he would have much rather I continue with that design element. I remember informing him that while I could 'make it work' in theory, since I wasn't an engineer, I couldn't guarantee that any modifications I made would actually work in real life. After all, I was a simple 3d rendering artist, and any modifications could potentially break the laws of physics. The final engineering renders were delivered to him in early 2010, around March I believe, and featured a rough outline of the streamlined, and non-streamlined variant; with two tenders. The first tender being a conventional coal fired tender, and the second being a proposed diesel fuel tender, both built roughly along the same lines of a black 5 tender, though with some of his own proposed modifications. I expected to continue working with him on the project, but at that point he was already questioning whether or not it was even plausible to continue the project. By 2012, as we all know, the project had been abandoned. I believe I still have some of those renders somewhere on a hard drive, though I'd have to find them. I have often thought about going back and uploading them for history's sake, though I'm not certain what if any good they could do for people.
Woah! Regardless of what you do with the models, that certainly sounds like an honor.
It is curious to me though why he wouldn't have someone working on making a CAD model, as that is usually the standard for modern engineering. I know the tech has been around since the 80's but I suppose that it is possible that actual ability not just make parts but assemblies in CAD wasn't quite there yet.
would be cool if someone could use them to build models from.
@@eliyahzayin5469 I'm a mechanical design engineer. If I had Wardale's designs, I could make a CAD model happen. It would be an incredibly large undertaking to do in my spare time for free, so everyone would have to be *very* patient, though.
@@eliyahzayin5469 At the time, he was trying to get a 'realistic' 3D model of the locomotive produced for a reasonably popular model railway simulation game. Specifically Trainz. Speaking with him at the time, he felt that this might drum up more interest in the project, in a kind of grass roots type of situation. The idea being that if people could see what the locomotives would look like in operation, even through a game, it would draw further interest to the overall project itself and might help secure funding.
I think it would be more feasible to see something similar built for miniature gauge.
I’d love to see a 15inch gauge AT5 charging around on the RH&DR or BVR
HELL YEA! Finally glad someone is giving Wardale the credit and recognition he deserves. I bought his book and fell in love with his work, sad that 5AT never truly got off the ground.
Thanks for a fascinating video. Andre Chapelon was doing similar things in France - rebuilding and improving existing locomotive designs. His masterpiece, the 242-A1, developed 5500 continuous horsepower. Chapelon also envisaged steam continuing until the late 20th century. He and his ideas were swept aside by the SNCF in the rush to electrify.
Making a miniature replica could show what it is capable of to an extent and could put to use new machineing technology
Livio Dante Porta deserves a full mention.
Maybe, or maybe not. As you said, unless it happens we will never know for certain. However, I would love to see it happen.
You and me both
We know some about how modern steam engines perfom. Meiningen works together with dlm/slm in the nineties built a series of rack locomotives based on an old class but completely revamped with modern steam tech. One man operated, electric preheaters etc.
Was not expecting to see Iowa City and the IAIS QJs at 7:01 😂❤❤🎉 litterally just up the hill from that bridge!
The 5AT would’ve made a great Thomas and Friends character in the Hit Era.
I actually talked about the 5AT in comparison to other newbuild and modern steam groups for a college final! My rough take on it was that Wardale unfortunately didn't do a good job at finding a core group to pitch to. Unlike Tornado (and other semi-traditional new builds) the 5AT couldn't tie into a preexisting history while at the same time it was often too traditional for a lot of the people interesting in modern steam (Reading through the 5AT website's FAQ and Duke team correspondence is rather painful)
(ETA)
To be more precise, while there haven't been any super successful modern steam groups, there are a few that got further off the ground, and they largely did so by having a very very specific reason to exist. For example, DLM in Switzerland is built on a brand of 1) environmentalism and 2) making the operation of steam locomotives more friendly to every day use--the crown of this being their German Class 58 rebuild that has a cab experience comparable to an electric locomotive.
Newbuilds have gained even higher success from focusing on resurecting lost classes rather than targeting an intentionally modern design. However, modernizing/improving has often set as a necessity, especially for unproven designs like the PRR T1 and Gresley P2 (Which, since both these designs relied on poppet valves, ironically means that two groups working to rebuild OLD designs are actively developing/improving a much more modern valve gear than what Wardale wanted for the 5AT)
The impression I've gotten from the 5AT website and most of it's press was that there wasn't any real reason for it beyond 'modern steam locomotive.' There was talk of it for the heritage sector but also talk about sending it (or at least a variation of it) to third world countries that still rely on coal. I really don't think WHO they were building for was very well thought out and with the combination of trying to find a traditional investor rather than what the A1 trust did was the main funding killer.
I am excited for the Revolution Project that the Advanced Steam Traction Trust has been currently doing, as it feels more grounded and (because they're starting with a mini-gauge prototype) likely to succeed.
Fun fact; Poland genuinly used steam locos, EVEN UP TO THE LATE 2000S. Yes, Poland, which by 1999 had on-paper had phased out steam engines, still used steam locos up until like, 2005. Mind you, we were following in the BR's footsteps, we had a modernization plan[though that didn't include a version of the Beeching Axe], and surprise surprise, still had loco maintenance facilities up until the 2000s.
If we hadn't gone the diesel route, the plan wasn't better steam engines, but electricity. That's why the standards had a 40 year lifespan. By that time, it was predicted nearly the entirety of the UK would have been electrified. Sadly, short terminism won out, and we are still arguing over electrification to this very day, despite the need for it being greater than ever
A lot of the network is not busy enough to be worth electrifying.
The 5AT project had potential and it can actually be possible for steam to make it's comeback especially with gasoline prices on the rise
I always felt that instead of the classic running gear, a modern steam engine would be more like a further development of the Deutsche Reichsbahn BR 19.10. This prototype with a steammotor concept had made very promising testruns with speeds up and over 175 km/h. Unfortunally it was developed in a time when it was no longer possible to further finnish it's development and the US took it as "loot". Scrapping it after a few years of sitting .
Some of the paintings remind me of the german Br18 201 a lot. Espacially because of the white stripes on the side...
when i was younger i used to think this was frieda from the great race's basis lol
i now know she is a DB class 10
I love the story of The Duke of Gloucester. An experimental design brought in to replace an engine that was totalled during the Harrow and Wealdstone Rail disaster.
A perfect albeit morbid opportunity for Riddles to produce a new locomotive. However due to some design oversights (there's a bit more to it than that) it was an incredibly poor performer. Hated among the crews that had to operate her. She was sent for scrap after 8 years of service.
The hulk was eventually rescued from Barry scrapyard and restoration began.
But what sets this story apart from many others is that alot of time and effort was put into rectifying the issues that plagued the Duke whilst in service.
After restoration was completed, it was one of the most powerful and best performing engines ever seen on UK metals. Numerous speed records were smashed and firmly cemented its place in preservation history. Had British Rail had the foresight to invest in further developing this design, who knows what doors may have opened for prolonging steam in the UK?
A really interesting story if you fancy a steam deep dive.
A lot of that performance was due to the perception of the Duke being a “Big Brit” and he crews treated like a Brit which was a 2 Cylinder design.
One of the crew wrote into steam railway saying that he didn’t have trouble with the Duke, however he had recognised the Duke as a 3 Cylinder and so had fired the Duke as would a Royal Scot which was also a 3 Cylinder. Provided the power he needed and didn’t struggle to steam.
Was only built as Riddles desperate to produce an a express Engine and the destruction of Princess Anne gave him an excuse. Without the crash then would never have been built.
Much of what was found by the preservation group was not so much the design in itself was bad, but when had been built then the design had not been followed, and those build flaws have been corrected.
However by the time the Duke was out then BR already made the decision with the Diesel/Electric move so nobody had been interested in spending time on sorting out what was going to remain a “one off”.
Actually, the engine in the Harrow accident was 'totalled' so that the 'experimental design' could be brought in. Riddles had 71000 built without authority and then had to find a space for it. Since no-one wanted it, he then created a vacancy on the LMR by withdrawing 6202. The accident happened in October 1952. 6202 was withdrawn May 1954. 71000 entered traffic May 1954. Coincidence?
As most modern steamengines goes we have to look at the French.
The most technological advanced steam engines who ran in revenue service were French engines designed for the SNCF.
Class 232 U.I. had rollerbearings like post war German engines, an automated coal stoker like American engines, high pressure boiler like some experimental UK engines had and an unique French fully automated compound system for the cillinders.
Steam engines are unbelievable powerfull but to creating the steam in energy wastefull small steam boilers killed them of .
Modern electric locomotives are in fact indirect steam locomotives.
Most electrical power comes from power plants who
create their electric with steam turbines who get their steam form massive efficient steam boilers.
It should be mentioned that Livio D Porta had pitched a plan to the Tornado trust some time ago that considerably improved upon the design of the A1 class to something comparable to the 5AT, including separate valve gear for each cylinder, improved piston valves rings and liners, lempor exhaust and a GPCS firebox.
Honestly I daydreamed of this too many times, if any of us had a shot at it and develop a 21st century steam loco it would have to have a mix of electric and steam propulsion, it would be mixed fueled for both solid and liquid fuel burning. Going further it would use those compact +10,000psi pressured steam generators used in steam cars from the 1920s but losing the loco's inconic horizontal boiler.
Given that battery electric EMUs and shunters existed in the 1920s as well like the Drumm trains of Dublin, it seems like a missed oppertunity that the inefficiencies of warming up and the wear'n'tear of starting and stopping heavy trains weren't complimented by a battery-electric regen "accumulator" system. While on the other hand steam performs best at constant speed which is the absolute opposite for electricity.
Hell we've had several decades of Diesel dynamic braking wasting electricity into heat before anyone bothered to harvest that energy with batteries.
oil burning steam turbine electric, with maybe a small booster engine for goods, and a more normal steam engine with auxiliary electric motors is what I'm thinking of. That way you get most, if not all of the advantages of diesel electrics, but you have the grunt power and top end performance of steam.
Robin Barnes did a lovely book back in the 1980s- "Locomotives That Never Were", with some lovely illustrations of loco designs that were not built..
that Class 26 is a Monster of a Loco, all in all a very interesting topic who knows what might happen in the future
0:22 I think of a gleaming bright steamer thundering down
the 5AT project would've been wonderful, but I don't think that those power, tractive effort, and speed goals are at all beyond a Gresley A4, especially if given a Lempore exhaust. Considering how 2509 SILVER LINK did on her first day without a special exhaust, at a low regulator setting, the only thing stopping SIR NIGEL GRESLEY from repeating that and breaking records is the signaling equipment and regulations, the former of which has been done for big boy 4014 already. I say give SIR NIGEL GRESLEY a lempore exhaust, maybe lightweight con and coupling rods like her originals, and we have the winning idea, far easier and cheaper than a complete new build, though a bit more maintenance heavy, and slightly less efficient.
As much as this would've been incredible to see, I just don't think it ever would have been a big enough improvement to justify the project. Sure, the loco would've worked very well, and in terms of power, speed, reliability and efficiency would've been an improvement over existing steam designs, but it still has most of the major, inherent design faults of any steam locomotive:
1. It still requires two crew members (driver & fireman) to operate it, doubling operating costs. Diesels only require a driver.
2. It still requires said crew members to turn up at six in the morning to light the fire, and still be on duty well into the night to dispose of the fire once the running is finished. With a diesel, all you need to do is press the 'on' button, and press the 'off' button. (A simplification I know, but overall still a lot quicker than steam).
3. It still has all of the oiling points. Whilst the fireman is lighting up, the driver still has to go around and oil up all of the motion. Whilst a diesel driver does still have to oil up certain parts of the loco, the process is much simpler and quicker.
4. It still has a tender. You are still dragging around an extra wagon with the fuel, adding weight that is not present with a diesel. And of course this also necessitates the reintroduction of turntables.
5. It still has a long boiler at one end, and a long tender at the other. Visibility in comparison to a diesel with cabs at either end is incredibly limited.
6.It still has a boiler that undergoes incredible stresses during operation. This means both that there is a higher risk of a potentially catastrophic explosion, and of course the 10 year boiler ticket would necessitate overhauls, meaning potentially years out of action every decade each time the ticket expires.
7. It still has a fixed wheelbase, which would limit the tightness of corners it could go around.
8. It still has the hammerblow effect of the pistons on the rails, meaning increased track maintenance compared with diesels.
9. It still burns oil/coal, which as we all know are fuel sources both damaging to the climate and becoming harder and more expensive to source.
It's important to remember that when diesels came along at first they were very often inferior in terms of speed, power and reliability to their steam predecessors. However, they were specifically introduced because they did away with all of these inherent steam loco flaws. And of course, modern diesels and electrics are generally far faster, more powerful and more economical than the best steam locomotives, so I don't see how this steam loco would ever be able to match them.
I absolutely love steam locomotives and will always prefer the drama, noise, smells, sights and soul of them over the bland, boring, soulless, plastic boxes on wheels that rule the main line today. However there was a very practical reason for the replacement of steam in the first place, and I just cannot see how the 5AT could have possibly improved on the efficient, quiet and practical trains of today.
That being said it is still a very interesting topic and one that people can (and will probably) debate for many years to come!
These are all very well thought out comments. One thing you don't mention is the changing labour market. Steam requires a larger workforce, especially for preparation and disposal, cooling,clearing ash and soot etc. Diesel and electric need fewer staff, but with technical qualifications. In a changing environment, steams biggest advantage, simplicity, turned into its greatest drawback.
I live in Darlington & North Road is still my nearest station. The lads here have some experience in building a steam locomotive to modern standards. Why not consult them?
I'd like to see a steam locomotive built with all kinds of modern features, such as automatic coal loading, or a different grade such as lignite; the driver placed at the front, away from the heat; perhaps a multi-fuel Sterling engine; fly-by-wire controls; covered wheels for better streamlining; steam directed downwards to get rid of ice & weeds. Some of these ideas won't be feasible, but at least let's look at them.
The problem with steam is a fundamental one. A steam engine has to carry fuel and (a lot of) water. A diesel engine only needs to carry fuel and electric locos dont even need to carry that. There is simply no way around that
What a Lovely Loco the 'Red Devil' is 🤔🚂🚂🚂
It’s lovely to meet you!
I wouldn’t even complain if someone just made a static version of the engine, just to see how breathtaking it would’ve been
9:39 okay that IS Just a DB br 10, BC of the Body
Bet that 5AT engine shown at 10:07 wouldn't have worked very well, because the valve-gear expansion-links have been fitted backwards !
Great video. :D
Please do a video of the ACE 3000 steam locomotive. It was an American version of the 5AT developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
They are planning to make a tank engine version instead and are testing a miniature version
Great video, Max!
I did a design sprint on modern steam locos. From what I can tell a huge problem with them is their public perception as antiquated technology. Any new engine would need to shed any resemblance with traditional steam locomotives
I'd love to see what David Wardale could do with a 9F. Roller bearings on the driving crank, producer gas combustion, very high super heat etc.
Great content - thanks
I'm just gonna come out and say it, because I think everyone's been afraid to thusfar.
Steam trains should be using water-tube boilers, not fire-tube boilers.
Water tube boilers are much more lightweight, and they capture the heat energy of the flue gases much more efficiently.
Water tube boilers are a supremely well understood technology, there's little about them that we don't know.
They were never used on locomotives, but they WERE standard issue on another type of steam-propelled vehicle. US-navy steam turbine powered warships of both world wars used water-tube boilers.
These are MUCH more efficient and much lighter than fire-tube boilers of similar capacity.
They have the steam output to actually support a steam turbine prime mover, something fire tube boilers can not do. Switching to a water-tube boiler and a steam turbine would entirely eliminate any hammering on the rails that a piston steam engine's connecting rods might induce by the nature of their offset mass, and you can quite easily connect the steam turbine directly to an electric generator, making the locomotive able to use the existing electrical technology such as traction motors bogies generators and switchgear of Diesel locomotives, while also allowing easy conversion to a fully electric locomotive if local infrastructure has provisions for such.
The water tube boiler has additional advantages, it's more fuel efficient AND more powerful than a fire-tube boiler of the same operating mass (there's a balance to be struck, fuel efficiency can be traded for power output and vice-versa to a degree), and this is the primary reason why a steam turbine is viable in the first place.
You can even have these water-tube boilers be oil-fired, meaning they can use the existing infrastructure that supports Diesel locomotives.
Thermodynamic efficiency of a steam turbine can be higher than even a Diesel locomotive, at least in theory.
Problem is that water tube boilers have hot external surfaces. The idea was tried with the Hush-hush locomotive in 1929. There are fundamental problems in adapting it for locomotives.
I'm not sure about the 5AT being the fastest but it would certainly have been the ugliest.
The performance improvements sound good until you take into account the appalling thermal efficiency of a steam engine, this design has a thermal efficiency of 14% whilst a modern diesel locomotives are bettering 50%.
There is a fleet of modern steam locos being built for the UK. Class 99. The electric side is generated by steam at power stations.
Went the same way as all those people who said they’d keep 200 steam locomotives going in South Africa! I think one guy is trying to keep it going now!
The answer is very simple, the Diesel. Rudolph was on to something, he wanted higher efficiency and he got it. Steamers have a thermal efficiency of less than 10% while Diesels often can exceed 30%. Note that there are no steamships either, another win for the mighty diesel. Mind you, I love the complications of the steamer, boilers, the mechanical complexity of the whole thing, the noise and smoke, the sound of the whistle, all great things. The diesel just goes about business getting the job done like a good appliance, no drama. Ocean going steamers really weren't very practical until the development of the triple reduction engine design, they used too much fuel and water before that. The Titanic went one step further with a low pressure turbine using the exhaust steam from the outside engines to power a centerline propellor to get the last bit out of the steam. The Mallet, a double reduction design saw very limited application in the US, it was a great design but the rail shops didn't like it, too complicated, but it got two uses out of the steam. The brits built a number of rigid chassis locomotives with high pressure cylinders driving cranks on the front axles and low pressure cylinders on the outside looking like a conventional locomotive, mechanically complicated but going in the right direction. These served well into the sixties on british lines. The brits had other designs used on colonial railways that put more of the locomotive weight on the drivers unlike the Pennsy's 6-4-4-6 design that put 60% of the engine on the pilots, why not build a 4-6-6-4 instead. OK, for fun the steamer is by far the most interesting but if you are running a railroad and want to make money doing so, buy diesels.
I have been thinking about methods to supply steam which do not involve fossil fuels such as small modular reactors and steam generators, or some other idea not yet thought, Such a system, if it could get over its own concerns, could make steam viable as low cost and emission free. The extra torque provided by steam should still have many uses. And if any loco frame could be suited to this endeavor, it would be the 5AT.
I love that beautiful concept art of this potential locomotive... Steam is one of those classic forms of energy that I believe has a lot of unforseen potential... But I'm not a engineer, so, eh
I've always wondered with the 5AT, would the heritage railtour crowd want to be pulled by something with no provenance? I understand people wanting to ride behind an original loco or even a replica/recreation of one like Tornado is or the Bretton grange etc but would they line up in the same number for a new design of loco?
you've hit the nail. what would this loco be for?
clearly steam locos at the head of a train is never coming back as the go to for the modern railway.
so rail tours, okay but this is a loco with no story, pedigree or heritage.
im not even particularly interested in the replicas tbh...
You say this isn't the engine I came here for, but maybe I had none in particular that I wanted to see.
Eventually I hope to make an entire rail line with mostly if not fully steam engines. Narrow gauge, but still.
Would've been pretty interesting if sometime like this had happened. Steam Engines are wonderful.
I beg that this project is revived and people start to invest in it. Personally I’d recommend hydrogen steam power to power the pistons. How is a good question. Looks like I got some homework to do.
surely what you do is build a big boiler and or hydrogen generator or whatever and generate enough power for the train and all its train friends and the nearby cities and then distribute that power from the centralised power generation location to all these things by wires thus being safer, cheaper, more efficient. oh wait that's called a power station and catenary and its what we already do...
"Do you think the 5AT Project could have been the success that it claimed to be?" Probably much better than the failed ACE 3000 Series Project from the USA that was never put into the final building stages back in the 1980s I'll admit.
I think the best concept idea for a modern steam engine would be using heaters to heat the water to make high pressure steam kinda like those electric teak kettles u can get a the store that would use just water and a heating eliment to make steam with out oil or coal needed as when the steam goes threw the stack it just simply becomes vapor that evaporites and that is my ideal idea of what the future steam train would look like and could be ran automusly using ai and navigation to make it as effciant as possible
I look constantly at ATM's to see if anyone was too impatient to grab their cash, but no luck yet. Puffing Billy Railway in Victoria Australia has converted one of their NA 2-6-2 tank locos to burn oil but not heavy oil as it often the case. This conversion is to burn light oil or distillate and the burner looks like a large domestic gas stove with four large burners and a small central burner arranged like the white dots on a dice representing the number five. They run through a forest and often have to have a small water cart train following the main train to look for spot fires started by flying cinders. The diesel fuel means no need to look for a new supplier of fuel as they have diesels already. The whole burner system is Swiss designed. Maybe the UK could look into it for it means no flying cinders and no coal to buy or coal ash to get rid of. Yes the smell of coal is nice but having locos running on the mainline even if oil fired is better than no steam locos running on the mainline. Unlike other steam locos that are oil fired, the NA Puffing Billy Loco doesn't produce clouds of black smoke even when working up steep 1 in 30 grades.
From an engineering standpoint, modern techniques for steam c an match the efficiencies of diesel-electrics, but both are put to shame by electric
Electricity is still subject to thermodynamic and transmission losses, and there is a lot of expensive infrastructure to install and maintain. It's only worthwhile if there is sufficient traffic.
The 5AT looks like a very draggy design. The A4 was properly streamlined to reduce drag, and the 5AT would waste a lot of power getting up to any reasonable speed.
Also a diesel locomotive has a thermal efficiency of around double that of the 5AT, meaning no one will want to run it commercially diesel locomotive is available.
It's a different story in practice, as the Brienz-Rothorn railway discovered when their new steam locomotives began running in 1993. There is also the matter of capital costs to consider. A steam locomotive is an inexpensive piece of kit if there is a decent production run, and locomotives spend a lot of time doing nothing at all.
@physiocrat7143 and which point are you responding to?
@@neiloflongbeck5705
That thermal efficiency does not give the full picture. Hence the unexpected results with the Brienz-Rothorn locomotives. Even the manufacturer, DLM, was surprised and it took quite a lot of investigation to discover what was going on.
@physiocrat7143 thanks I'll look it up.
@@neiloflongbeck5705
The information is on the webside of dlm-ag.ch
This project is regressive in relation to Chapelons projects. he isn't even mentioned!
Yes, he may well be the greatest. A book by Colonel Rogers entitled "Chapelon : Genius of French Steam" explains his achievements. His 240P was an astonishingly good performer. I think that the book has been reprinted, and I recommend it.
Agreed. Chapelon is really the only person to have _actually_ produced massive efficiency and performance improvements by modifying existing engines. I believe he did this with a thorough and scientific understanding of thermodynamics and gas and steam flow. It's a shame he was never given the chance to produce a "clean sheet" design because what he _did_ produce was actually an embarrassment to France's new electric locos which had to be uprated to save face. We can only speculate what he might have achieved with modern computers and CFD software. Even so, it is unlikely that steam could ever be made as efficient as modern electric traction.
Now theres only 1 working 9f in the world at the nymr the one at the gcr is now waiting to get its boiler thingy done
Forget reviving main line steam. Technology is further than that. Also the cost issue will never be solved cuz - economy + it alienates railways. I'd love to see it happen, but the steam age simply ended with the combustion engine and stuff like solar and hydrogen could replace the Diesel as well soon.
Economy? The latest bi-modes cost around £3 million per vehicle and a heavy equipment is lugged around dead all the time.
I buy a ticket for the Euromillions Lottery each week, so that if I ever win I could finance a 5AT.
Diesels are cool, but BR rushed it too much.
The steam vs. diesel tests conducted by the New York Central Railroad in 1946, between new Niagara-class 4-8-4 locomotives and new EMD E7 units, showed that modern steamers could compete quite successfully on an operational cost basis with diesels. But a variety of factors led to the dieselization of most American railroads by the late 1950s, and the Niagaras were all scrapped in 1956.
The American ACE 3000 was a proposed modern 4-4-4-2 coal-burning duplex-drive steam locomotive design for Ross Rowland's ACE 3000 Project for the American Coal Enterprises, proposed in the 1970s. Like the project in the video, sufficient funds could not be procured to build a prototype locomotive.
I'm a mechanical engineer, and I firmly believe coal-burning steam locomotives could be built that could still compete with diesel-electrics today. However, the political climate surrounding "climate change" would probably not allow it.
It´s a pity you have no knowledge of railways and their engines! If you had, you would know that the efficiency of external combustions engines will always be way below that of internal combustions engines and that the unsprung masses of the valve gear put a strict limit to the speed of a steam engine of conventional design. If there was ever a chance for steam engines to stay "modern", it was destroyed at Ft. Eustis in the USA in 1951, when the stolen class 19 steam motor engine was scrapped.
Surely the answer is to raise funds from the preservation world + from any interested entreprenuers, including smokeless fuel manufacturers/suppliers? Mechanical engineering training school apprentices could have a very valuable input too! I think it could be done.
Considering that now, in the uk, we have a higher percentage of multimillionaires than ever before, it does seem remarkable that those with essentially bottomless pockets seem uninterested in this sort of innovation. I followed the project closely at the time and was very sad when it all came to an end. Thank you for making this video. It did contain information previously unheard.
not really at all. whats the point, what innovation?
we have electrified mainlines which are far more efficient and as a brucie bonus don't require a load of little bombs on wheels screeching around the network. there's literally zero box that this would win over a modern diesel let alone an electric railway
Remember, Duke of Gloucester is more efficient than when she was built.
15:37 I often wondered how would steam engines would look like if they didn't stop past Evening Star?
There has in the US the T1 trust is built, rebuilding the Pennsylvania railroad T1 class from scratch
technically any train that is nuclear would be a steam locomotive due to how reactors work though reactors in everything is also seen as an outdated look on the future too
I kind of wish they built it, would've interesting
if someone could make a smaller model of it and then test it would be nice
There the Mackwell locomotive company that’s trying to do something similar
A full scale build of this is probably not feasible, at least not as a _5_AT. Headways seem to lean more towards 6P or higher these days. I recall the 5AT was proposed to use British-Caprotti valve gear at one stage, which I think would’ve helped a lot for a career in passenger use. Not sure Wardale had much experience there
Now what I’m surprised no one’s tried is a Live Steam model of the 5AT
The 5AT was designed to weigh 80 metric tons and produce an indicated output of 3,200 hp at 113 km/h with a maximum operating speed of 180km/h. How many class 6P or 7P can equal this level? The answer is none. The design was based on that of the Std 5 because it was an accepted and understood type which made dealing with the responsible regulatory bodies far more straight forward. Why was the build not feasible given that the creation of new members of lost designs has been going on for some time now? Wardale learned from Porta who learned from Chapelon and though AXC did use poppet valves on some designs he reverted to piston valves on his later engines for good reasons. Porta would not consider the use of poppet valves since they offered no advantages over his piston valve design. You could build a very different locomotive than the 5AT; say a water tube boiler type with a working pressure of 32.75 bar and triple expansion compound drive. It would be a fascinating project but it would be very expensive and your chance of being able to run it would be very low because such a type lies well outside existing experience.
I love how you just showed wesly instead of the modified class 19D 😂
Looks just like the DR 18 314.
With the latter being a 4 cilinder engine though (and a Pacific).
4014 the big boy locomotive needs to go to England and show you Brits a thing or two on steam power and I wanna see how fast he is I get to drive it or fire it ❤
Mate we invented the god dame things
It isn't going to go that far or that fast - only as far as the first bridge it comes to!
Not possible with UKs god awfully small loading gauge
what would Britain learn from a very simple four cylinder machine? 'if you have the space you can build as big as you like' err yeah ill file that with 'if you pay more you get a better plane seat or a bigger house' in the 'well durrrr' folder.
anyway the sight of big bog being pushed around by diesels despite its supposed power is laughably tragic and pathetic and really disappointing...
@@andrewyoung749 its not even pushed by the diesel lmao, the only reason diesel is added because the dynamic brake reduced wear and tear on Big Boys brake shoes (it takes 200$ just to replace it)
The 5AT would make for a nice HO Scale model train engine.
I don't know why you didn't mention No.71000 ? That's literally the peak of steam advancement and has shown what you could do with boiling water.
It kind of made the 5AT project obsolete, as the 5AT wouldn't improve on performance or possibly cylinder efficiency over the Duke.
Be interesting to see how well it goes during its next ticket.
Future vid?🤔
Probably because it wasn’t a good runner when it was built. Granted it’s had improvements made to it in preservation
@poshdan4071 regardless of it not being quite upto scratch when built, it still had the highest cylinder efficiency ever recorded and then has gone onto show how well it does work.
As I said in the comment, that because 71000 had shown how good it is, it kind of made the 5AT project redundant. It definitely should've got a mention or a segment.
L.D.PORTER & DAVID WARDALE - THE ADVANCED STEAM LOCO.
There appears to be a fundamental misunderstanding as to how L.D. Porta & Wardale fit into the picture. And in particular what L.D.Porta (who was the mentor) was after. "Increased power" was a fundamental bonus of the primary target of Porta's work. Which was to increase the efficiency of the steam locomotive so as to make it MORE efficient than the Diesel !!!! The "Red Devil" of SAR was effectively Wardale applying what L.D. Porta had explained to him would be the way forward. Porta it must be realised was involved in a number of projects worldwide, including in non-British speaking countries including Spain.
Having watched a Video of Porta in Lleida Spain, explaining the sensible improvements for a preserved Beyer Garratt. None other than a British built broad Gauge (5ft 6in) 4-6-2+2-6-4 EXPRESS type Garratt, to the person in charge of the loco (nicknamed the "Carrot" because of his red hair). It became sadly evident that the Spanish "Carrot" had no comprehension of the radical changes to that Garratt that Porta was explaining. As a result that Garratt, the last express type on the planet, is not fully restored. The Carrot, had to repair the firebox, so the idiot cut through the main frames so he could slide the firebox out sideways to repair it. Simply because the roof in the building where the loco was housed was too low, to lift off the boiler ! Having then realised this is not a clever idea, he put the firebox back into the loco "unrepaired", and welded the mainframe back up, and carefully hid the fact by machine polishing the weld marks. So the loco still resides in Catalonia, Northern Spain in a part rebuilt condition.
Porta also aided Roger Waller of SLM Winterthur in the serious modernisation of an ex German WW2 (Class 52) 2-10-0. This loco was effectively the culmination of Porta's work. And proved it was more efficient than the Diesel. This 2-10-0 loco was rebuilt with low emission output (using light diesel fuel), modern thermal insulation techniques, "total automatic self lighting up", one man operation, full roller bearing on wheels and coupling/connecting rods, & a more efficient valve gear. The onus being on removing the expensive manpower numbers normally required simply to prepare a steam loco for work, and further manpower to operate it. Which effectively requires around a dozen people just to prepare & operate one large steam loco for a days work!!!
I wonder if this is good material for a future Thomas/RWS story?
For me anyway when I think of a modern steam engine I think of an electric boiler maybe with a huge battery or maybe even a third rail
The Red Devil must be a fan of Manchester United
Sick 19D number 2685 Wesley is in a video
I volunteer on the railway wich he operates at
The red devil was restored but it had a piston ring failure or something
She has specially made rings and cylinder sleeves
With a special formula for the material
Wich no one knows
Without that recipe that steam locomotive might never steam again i dont think
I've got the recipe
@@supraman1395 i demand that recipe
What is a fully open regulator?
Look up the PRR T1 5550, she's getting (re)build.
That type of engine, might have created a whole new type of setup.
As for that 5AT, it needs a walk true tender.
And look at the Mallard, way better streamlining.
The 5AT does remind me of a DR locomotive that was constructed from two other locomotives, painted black, in German style.
So somebody might have talked to that guy, back then.
That or some spying.
So she might actually, already exist, funny that, right?
Might want to look at the Triplex locomotives, but using a reverse drive mallet & a Garrett, to get a true triplex.
Weight of the boiler needs to rest on all drive wheels, to make a Triplex work, with the mallet drivers house, becoming the classic Garrett nose mounted water tank.
Even lets you streamline her.
The 5at wasn't the only steam future project there's also the American ace3000 it was made in 1985 and it resembles a big American diesel engine with a wide cab and a full cowl body except it has steam driveweels and was actually diesel powered and it had a diesel unit reversed similar than it but no steam driveweels and it probably had a m3 america horn or k5la airchime and the diesel unit reversed by it was actually a coal storage unit it was made for the chessis system or know as conrail seaboard system aka csx and the original paint was all red with a white stripe
I've never been convinced. Streamlining has no effect below 70 mph, and a BR Class 5 has no need for a big tender. I don't believe for one minute that it could have reached 110 mph let along 130 mph. I doubt if it would have been as good as the Riddles design, and, in any case, the 9F 2-10-0 and Duke of Gloucester were more powerful engines to start from.
I watched through this entire video expecting the loco to have been build to the construction underway, it’s a shame they couldn’t fund it
In addition to your planned improvements in the steam engine design, have you considered the many benefits of designing a hybrid electric steam locomotive which can generate stored electric power when not applying tractive effort to the main drivers? One can design an engine which utilizes large driving wheels for speed while the acceleration would be boosted by electric traction thereby solving a problem which has plagued traditional steam locomotives - getting started. It should be capable to utilize regenerative braking and should be capable of running on electrified and non-electrified tracks, thereby eliminating the need to switch locomotives on routes which have partial electrification. With Amtrak hoping to increase and enhance rail service in the U.S. over the next decade, this would be a good time to promote a sustainable mode. Hybrid modality has improved the petrol powered automobile, virtually doubling its efficiency; why not for the steam loco?
The thought is why doesn’t someone make it in 5inch gauge or miniature as it could work in that gauge?
Even futuristic steam engines can also be a thing of the past
I really want to imagine the 5at could’ve smoked mallards speed record
in fallout they took what looked like a steam locomotive and added nuclear power onto it and im assuming the top speed was high cause nuclear power is fast and if thjey added a engine to it then it would be a body of steam but nuclear engine at its core
No, the steam engine was not doomed by the diesel engine.... it was doomed by electric traction in different forms. Converting fuel... solid like coal or fluid like oil is best done in large powerplants to get the maximum efficiency. Which means that anything done to diesel locomotives or the steam counterpart will never make them come even close to the electric locomotive in efficiency.
Only if the route carries enough traffic to be worth the investment in fixed electrification infrastructure.
THAT'S ME IN 14:57
Make a guide rail on boxhill