Newbie tank engine question.

Fodda · Post by **Fodda** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 4:38 pm

Right. Here we go again, Fodz needs educationalising.

Here's the thing, tank engines... Pannier and saddle. I understand the physical differences, but were there any particular benefits of one system over another? I've seen pictures of both kinds from early to late steam period, so they were obviously both used for a good long while.

And were there any other tank engine styles? When I started typing this I thought I could remember three types, but for the life of me I can only name two.

Zackybong1 · Post by **Zackybong1** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 4:51 pm

Side tank Fodda. (T) eg, N7, N2, J68 etc.

Thanks to Duncharris for swift reply. I'm not much cop with steam

duncharris · Post by **duncharris** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 6:25 pm

erm, the suffice after the Whyte classification system was:

e.g. 0-6-0T = side tank (tanks down the side of the boiler)
e.g. 0-6-0PT = pannier tank (tanks along the top of the boiler like on a horse - a funny GWR thing)
e.g. 0-6-0ST = saddle tank (tank over the top, also like on a horse)
e.g. 0-4-0WT = well tank (not quite sure what this was either, but they appeared to have very short tanks near the cab

GavinW · Post by **GavinW** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 7:04 pm

A well tank is what it says, a "well" between the frames and perhaps a bunker tank as well. Look at the Beattie tank that has just been restored. Looks like no water capacity!!

Tank locos are the steam equivalent of WYSIWYG!!!

TOMMO79 · Post by **TOMMO79** » Mon Dec 23, 2002 10:16 pm

I think well tanks are below the boiler or cab between the frames. Not sure if you need a bucket and rope to get to the water though

As for pannier tanks they always look more square ( probably to increase water capacity) than a saddletank which curves to the profile of the boiler.

dforrest · Post by **dforrest** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 1:21 am

The well tank is something I have never hard of. Has anyone a photograph of one they could post?

Christopher125 · Post by **Christopher125** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:29 am

Hi

Saddle tanks have an advantage in the fact that the water gets warmed up by the heat of the boiler before entering it, but because of all this water the engine will have a very high centre-of-gravity, meaning most saddletanks are restricted to industrial lines and can't usually work at speeds above 40 mph.(correct me if i'm wrong)

Chris

decapod · Post by **decapod** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 9:50 am

I imagine that is why the GWR converted most of it's ST's in the early 1900's to PT's - it would lower the centre of gravity quite a bit and keep some of the extra heating.

Fodda · Post by **Fodda** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 11:15 am

Thanks for the info all. That makes sense... I suppose you'd need a smaller boiler for a saddle than a pannier too?

Christopher125 · Post by **Christopher125** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 12:56 pm

Hi

The boiler dosen't neccesarily have to be smaller; look at the MHR's 'Fuller' rebuild (an austerity saddletank turned into a tender engine). The engine looks normal......(apart from the fact that it looks like an austerity without a saddletank).

Chris

ThinLizzy · Post by **ThinLizzy** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 6:57 pm

Any One Ever Heard of The Brighton Terrier? They Were Used To Shunt Fratton Yard {in the days of steam}, Portsmouth and Southsea Station Area And Other South Coast Areas Of The Southern.

Electricfox · Post by **Electricfox** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 7:51 pm

The Beattie Well Tanks used to run the China Clay services, but I can't remember where.
But...to answer a question with a question...
I've heard of and seen an Adams Radial Tank...but why exactly is it called a Radial tank?

duncharris · Post by **duncharris** » Tue Dec 24, 2002 8:59 pm

Electricfox wrote:I've heard of and seen an Adams Radial Tank...but why exactly is it called a Radial tank?

It's got nothing to do with the tank, just that it was a tank engine which had a radial axle.

"Axles designed to move laterally entering a curve in an effort to reduce the flange and rail wear incurred with rigid axles. The design was normally confined to the leading or trailing carrying axles of a locomotive. The idea was first tried successfully by W B Adams of the London & South Western Railway in 1863 and was subsequently taken up by FW Webb [of the LNWR] and others. The axle could be guided by either curved axleboxes, as in the original Adams design or by a curved transverse frame as in Webb's design"

dforrest · Post by **dforrest** » Wed Dec 25, 2002 12:19 am

dforrest wrote:The well tank is something I have never hard of. Has anyone a photograph of one they could post?

Well, if anyone is interested, I found a photo of a Well Tank. This as apparently a LSWR Beyer-Peacock Well Tank.