What is the best sounds to use with the prototype SR Diesel

jimmyladd · Post by **jimmyladd** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:32 pm

Oh by the way the lettering on EE engines stood for this
C= Intercooled
S= Turbo or Supercharged
T= Traction version (IE made specially for use in trains)
V= Vee formation
The reason why class 50's didn't whistle could well be to do with the type of turbo, its possition, and air filtration
Jim

arabiandisco · Post by **arabiandisco** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 1:53 pm

And sulzer's letters...

(I only know the ones applicable to peaks): for example, 12LDA28B

12 = number of cylinders (duh!)
L = Locomotive
D = Diesel
A = Aftercooled
28 = Cylinder bore (cm)
B = B version - class 44 had the A version, 47s have/had the C version.

Almost all their eninges that found use in the UK were LDA of some kind.

thenudehamster · Post by **thenudehamster** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 2:07 pm

All this talk of turbos and superchargers masks to some extent the other technical point about Deltics and certain other (EMD engines for one) engine types.
Deltics were a two-stroke engine, and, turbocharged or not, they also had to have a mechanical blower to get the initial air into the engine,as two-stroke diesels, unlike petrol engines, have no inherent 'suck'.
Not being too well up on the differing types of engines fitted to different loco classes, is it not possible that some of the 'whine' or 'whistle' might be attributable to the mechanical blower?

jbilton · Post by **jbilton** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 2:08 pm

jimmyladd wrote:The Baby Deltics certainly did have a turbo fitted, as the engine in them was even more highly tuned than there big brothers. I was lucky enough to see D5901 running though Burton Station in 1975/6 (carn't remember which). It was running light engin at about 15mph, but it was absolutely screaming its tits off! A most unbelievable sound! Many years later I found that it had a problem with its load regulator and wouldn't go over 15 mph. It never ran again. What a pitty it wasn't saved.
Jim

Yep she used to come to Lincoln with a short test train about the same time...used to hear it before you saw it....was slightly higher pitched than a production Deltic...but still unmistakable.
I was once caught out in Yarmouth...in the early eighties...as there was a Deltic powered ex trawler there at the time. Heard it strike up...so went looking at the station...but then followed the sounds down to the moorside...and there it was humming away...brilliant.
Unfortunately the moorings were restricted to 5 knots... so never did hear it go properly.

jbilton · Post by **jbilton** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 2:19 pm

thenudehamster wrote:All this talk of turbos and superchargers masks to some extent the other technical point about Deltics and certain other (EMD engines for one) engine types.
Deltics were a two-stroke engine, and, turbocharged or not, they also had to have a mechanical blower to get the initial air into the engine,as two-stroke diesels, unlike petrol engines, have no inherent 'suck'.
Not being too well up on the differing types of engines fitted to different loco classes, is it not possible that some of the 'whine' or 'whistle' might be attributable to the mechanical blower?

One of the noisest parts of the Deltics is the phase gearing ...straped on the end....when they strike up or are switched off it rattles around for a good 30 seconds longer than the engine...sounds like its well broken.

Fantastic sounding locos though....had my headout of the first coach once all the way from Doncaster to Grantham...we were late and I swear we went over 100mph a couple of times.
Driver knew his stuff he kept the revs right up on the limits of the field diverts all the way....never had such a fast ride...brilliant.

greenknight · Post by **greenknight** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 3:06 pm

Thanks all for the replies - and thanks for the EE & Sulzer nomenclature. That will sort out a few arguments I'm sure!

Thinking about the 16(C)SVT, it's quite a testimony to the basic design of the engine considering that it started out in life as a 1600hp engine, but by the time it was used in the class 50s it was banging out 2700hp! i.e. approx 70% more power.

The basic design must have been pretty sound!

GK

arabiandisco · Post by **arabiandisco** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 4:00 pm

It is quite impressive to think that exactly the same block as you'd find in 10000 giving out 1600hp would be giving 2700hp a few years later in a 50... Shows how things progressed in Turbocharging and the like over thoe years between 1947 and 1969.

thenudehamster · Post by **thenudehamster** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 4:25 pm

Reminiscent of the Merlin engine used in WWII aircraft. It started out at about 1100 hp and by war's end was pushing 2200 with a two-stage supercharger.

jbilton · Post by **jbilton** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 4:30 pm

thenudehamster wrote:Reminiscent of the Merlin engine used in WWII aircraft. It started out at about 1100 hp and by war's end was pushing 2200 with a two-stage supercharger.

Oh yes Barry another one of my all time favourites
Jon

Although I always remember the clip from the Frank Whittle story...where he rings an Air ministry officer and says something like "its now developing 25,000 Ilbs of thrust"....and he replies "Yes alright...but we get that much from a MK? Merlin"...and Whittle replies "Yes but its only at half speed ".

thenudehamster · Post by **thenudehamster** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 4:52 pm

Classic Ministry man, Jon...

Didn't they say something similar about the Deltic until the BR traffic managers actually demanded some?

jimmyladd · Post by **jimmyladd** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:35 pm

greenknight wrote:Thanks all for the replies - and thanks for the EE & Sulzer nomenclature. That will sort out a few arguments I'm sure!

Thinking about the 16(C)SVT, it's quite a testimony to the basic design of the engine considering that it started out in life as a 1600hp engine, but by the time it was used in the class 50s it was banging out 2700hp! i.e. approx 70% more power.

The basic design must have been pretty sound!

GK

up to 3300 bhp in a class 56, and i think the first engines of this design were less than 1000 bhp in the thirties.

jimmyladd · Post by **jimmyladd** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:38 pm

thenudehamster wrote:All this talk of turbos and superchargers masks to some extent the other technical point about Deltics and certain other (EMD engines for one) engine types.
Deltics were a two-stroke engine, and, turbocharged or not, they also had to have a mechanical blower to get the initial air into the engine,as two-stroke diesels, unlike petrol engines, have no inherent 'suck'.
Not being too well up on the differing types of engines fitted to different loco classes, is it not possible that some of the 'whine' or 'whistle' might be attributable to the mechanical blower?

Barry I think a crossley HSTV8 two stroke diesel engine had a thing called a pulse scavenge blower on it, but what ever that was I have no idea, but I read somewhere it had no moving parts! The mind boggles!

alisterbetts · Post by **alisterbetts** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 8:49 pm

jbilton wrote:
thenudehamster wrote:All this talk of turbos and superchargers masks to some extent the other technical point about Deltics and certain other (EMD engines for one) engine types.
Deltics were a two-stroke engine, and, turbocharged or not, they also had to have a mechanical blower to get the initial air into the engine,as two-stroke diesels, unlike petrol engines, have no inherent 'suck'.
Not being too well up on the differing types of engines fitted to different loco classes, is it not possible that some of the 'whine' or 'whistle' might be attributable to the mechanical blower?
One of the noisest parts of the Deltics is the phase gearing ...straped on the end....when they strike up or are switched off it rattles around for a good 30 seconds longer than the engine...sounds like its well broken.
Fantastic sounding locos though....had my headout of the first coach once all the way from Doncaster to Grantham...we were late and I swear we went over 100mph a couple of times.
Driver knew his stuff he kept the revs right up on the limits of the field diverts all the way....never had such a fast ride...brilliant.

Frequently remember hearing that crashing noise as a deltic shut down on the blocks.... as for timings, have a set on timings (somewhere in the attic) behind 55005 on a late running 0900 KX which on several occasions hit 107-108mph for long stretches... what a beast!

arabiandisco · Post by **arabiandisco** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:43 pm

jimmyladd wrote:
greenknight wrote:Thanks all for the replies - and thanks for the EE & Sulzer nomenclature. That will sort out a few arguments I'm sure!

Thinking about the 16(C)SVT, it's quite a testimony to the basic design of the engine considering that it started out in life as a 1600hp engine, but by the time it was used in the class 50s it was banging out 2700hp! i.e. approx 70% more power.

The basic design must have been pretty sound!

GK
up to 3300 bhp in a class 56, and i think the first engines of this design were less than 1000 bhp in the thirties.

Didn't the 56 have a paxman engine? Or did they buy out EE's engine department and develop it further?

greenknight · Post by **greenknight** » Fri Nov 19, 2004 9:47 pm

alisterbetts: Very true! Nothing could catch a Deltic - well not until the Flying Banana appeared (Class 43). Mallard would have given a Deltic a run for it's money though!

Not sure if this is true, but ISTR reading somewhere that when it first appeared, the Deltic was the most powerful diesel loco in the world. But I guess that record didn't last long. It was broken in this country by the appearance of the HS4000 (AKA Kestrel). And that WAS a brute! Shame it never went into production, but it was just too heavy!

Jimmylad; FYI, the Class 56s had a Ruston Paxman 16RK3CT engine not an EE engine, and this has the same power rating as a Deltic! (Ok I admit there were TWO 18 cylinder Napier Deltic engines in a Deltic)

GK