5 MORE of the WORST TRAINS EVER - History in the Dark
2021 ж. 15 Қаз.
58 004 Рет қаралды
There's EVEN MORE trains that are really, REALLY bad!
Patreon - / darknessthecurse
Discord - / discord
Tiktok -
Twitter - / darkthecurse
Twitch - / edgerabbit
Podcast - rss.com/podcasts/darknessthec...
Other channels:
Gaming and Commentaries: / @darknessthecurse
Stream Highlights: / channel
---
I WRITE BOOKS! YOU CAN FIND THEM HERE:
Abyss: www.amazon.com/Abyss-Books-Pr...
Pryde: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08...
Abyss on Audible: www.amazon.com/hz/audible/mlp...
#trains #railfan #top5
Hey all, I need to correct a flub of mine in this video! I used the Union Pacific Big Boy as an example of a "duplex" locomotive. This isn't exactly right as they were articulated and therefore would be "Mallet" type locomotives. Duplexes have rigid frames and were used but not as successful as Mallets.
A good example of a duplex would be the Pennsy‘s last new steam locomotives, The T1 class which were rigid framed 4-4-4-4s
Well if you want to be picky, they aren’t exactly mallets either. Mallets are compound articulateds, and they use steam twice when the leftover steam from the rear high pressure cylinders goes to the front low pressure cylinders. Simple articulateds, on the other hand, have equal sized cylinders that all use the same pressure of steam. Challengers and big boys are considered simple articulateds.
With all due respect, I love the 2-8-8-8-2 triplex locomotives. Although I understand their flaws.
Also you need to understand the iterations of APT - APT-E and APT-P, the E or Experimental was not bad - it was to prove the technology, the P or prototype was where issues were. What you dont understand is the whole project was funded on a shoestring.
You think the Class 74s were loud you obviously have never heard a Class 25 Hymek Diesel Hydraulic. They sounded like a seriously angry grizzly bear
I think the quadriplex loco patent was just to avoid people getting a serious patent on a 2-8-8-8-8-2 loco
If Union Pacific desires to make an articulated diesel hydraulic with side rods yeah that's just going to be messed up
There was a union Pacific hexaplex delirium made
Belgium pulled of a quadruplex
BoCo is an engineering masterpiece compared to Thomas’ basis, the E2. It wasn’t notoriously wobbly, didn’t steam well and didn’t have enough capacity or power to do much if anything.
We cannot forget the LB&SCR Marsh class I1! Their boilers were terrible, fireboxes were too small and said boilers would eventually be used on the E2’s!
@@daylightman8459 hence the LB&SCR I1 had a rude nickname
@@nathanchan4653 Ah yes, the LBSC W*nkers!
Too bad Brighton never worked to improve the entirety of the class. It would’ve been nice to see how they could’ve been upgraded into LB&SCR E2X locomotives.
If we're talking about Thomas the tank engine characters why not talk about Garrett engine
Be: “why can’t you act normal Class 74: **autistic screaming**
Let's get a few things straight on the APT ... One of the problems that could not be overcome at the time was stringing 25kv to each end of the train in order to get the power at each end. A pantograph at each end would cause rippling in the catenary and damage. Therefore, the power was in a central power car. When the technology was sold and then bought back from the Italian's (Pendolino), that 25kv was allowed to be strung along the length of the train. It is not that the idea was crap, the design team had their hands tied by red tape and lack of funding.
Little note: the Class 74 were actually rebuilds of 10 members of the Class 71 which were 3rd rail electrics that used a flywheel booster (More or less the same as the Southern Railway Class 70) and had a pantograph for use in freight yards (This was removed from a few examples in later life) Only 71001 is preserved today and is on display at Locomotion in Shilden.
Firstly, great video and series! The APT was not a failure in the sense of being a BAD train. the train was actually a prototype that was pushed into service for political reasons to apease a government which at the time was not interested in trains full stop. The train had plenty of innovation, but it just wasnt 100% ready (like any prototype) the production version was not built before it was cancelled. As you have noted in the video, the tilt mechanism was sold to Italy, and was later used in the Pendalino trains, which are very successfull, and the class 390 is running in the very line that the APT was intended to. So not a bad train, just bad government, and silly political mayhem.
And that's it in a nutshell. Us Limeys gave the world so much, or nearly did, then seemed to get cold feet and let someone else take the honours,; it wasn't the first time, but it was certainly one of the last, the way big engineering was allowed to die here. So sad.
APT's tilt tech was not sold to Fiat. They developed their own independently of the APT & it is a revision of this, not the APT's, which is used in the Pendolinos. APTs tilt is used in the UKs class 221 Voyagers though.
It's a common trope to blame Maggie as she was PM when APT was cancelled (despite BR being praised by her for getting the *InterCity 125* right), but it was numerous governments - mostly Labour - which were at fault for the project being underfunded, rushed into pre-production service, and doomed to never be in viable on UK track, because BR requests to update Signalling were rejected every time. The later *InterCity 225* never got to run at her intended top speed of 140mph, because the signalling was unfit to handle above 123mph. The 165mph APT would have faced the same issue. The Pendalino's can't run at full speed in the UK either, for the Same reason.
An important thing to remember is that BR made some incredibly good trains, too. The class 43 (or Intercity 125 as a train set) was a fantastic train that managed to combine speed and comfort so well that they were - and still are by some operators - used for over forty years in express service. It is the fastest diesel locomotive in the world with a maximum speed of 143 mph and a service maximum of 125 mph (hence the name). They were replaced in around 2017 by modern trains that were electric or bi-mode, had completely new interiors and were much better for the environment but a lot of people still prefer the Intercity 125 for its superior ride quality and comfort. To put that into perspective, people prefer a series of old British Rail trains, the newest of which produced in 1982 and the oldest in 1975, to brand new hitachi trains that entered development just 7 years ago. Also, as an interesting side note, when they were first built they had Paxman Valenta engines that made a magnificent screech when leaving a station that I actually do love as far as diesel sounds go (there are a few videos of this sound on youtube but the engines were replaced with newer ones so they’re all fairly old videos).
The funny thing is that the Valentas were updated versions of the Ventura in the 74s. I presume it was a combination of the speed, power and iconic nature of the HST, plus people being more used to the sounds of diesels and jets (which the Valenta and Ventura both do a good impression of) by the 70s, that meant that people accepted and even came to love the sound.
For the RP-210, it was actually a diesel-hydraulic/third rail locomotive, later modified with a pantograph. It wasn't originally built with a pantograph. Since the Voith Hydraulic system is German, that's why the instructions were in German. As for why the New York Central and New Haven Railroads didn't buy a full-fledged diesel, New York City placed a ban on steam locomotive operations on June 30, 1908, which would later spread to diesels as well, meaning that literally the only way for a train to get into New York City was under electric power. This is why American dual-modes were created: To take electricity where needed, then to finish the trip under diesel power.
Funny you use that wording at the end for the dual modes. "Take electricity where needed then finish the trip under diesel power" because the US seems to to use their dual modes the opposite way compared to other countries.
In sweden we simply duplex drive a diesel and a Electric loco when ee have that problem. It looks really strange when a Electric loco some roaling along on a non Electric rail. Granted, the non Electric one is mostly low speed, so it really dont matter. On the high speed part the system can be set so the diesel ad power only when the Electric is at full force. Its is pretty smart, specially when starting from a standstill. Sometimes in the north its so cold that the ice of the cables dont melt away, the the diesel is also used to push the Electric train along to a spot where it is power. So that setup is actually fairly common
@@russellgxy2905 Honestly, you're not wrong.
The Baldwin RP-210 was also among the first North American locomotives to be built with AC HEP, which was probably the biggest trendsetting aspect of it.
The other reason for the German instruction manual, is s that bothevtge Locomotives prime move,and HEP generator were, in fact, Maybach diesels made in Germany... Similar engines were used on the Southern Pacific / Denver Rio Grande ande and Western Diesel -Hydraulic freight Locomotives
The APT was too early for it's time. If it was started in the 80's it would have been successful, because of the technology at the time been improved from when they started the project in the early 1970's. It was the first tilting train in the world, which then led onto other trains like the class 390.
By the end of its trials, the APT was actually quite successful but the track on the west coast route for which it was intended was still too poor and too congested. It didn't improve until the upgrades started in the late 90's by which time the APT was long gone. Meanwhile lack of capacity on ECML was investigated back in the 70's and proposals for improvement were made around 1980. The first of those proposals came in to effect last year! HS2 will effectively waste the money spent on the upgrades to WCML and now looks unlikely to take any of the capacity required on ECML. Much of the ECML is straight or having only shallow bends and would be suitable for trains running at HS2 speeds if is wasn't for the other traffic.
AFAIK the passive tilt Pendolino in Italy was introduced in to service first. APT's failure was in part down to trying out too much new technology, for example it had hydrodynamic(kinetic?) brakes that used water as a resistance to slow the train down, naturally the water froze and was later replaced by a glycol solution. The project was basically cancelled right at the point where is was pretty much finished
@@dglcomputers1498 It was the tread brakes that froze up. Water in air lines is not a good thing. The HK brakes actually worked.
As Chris said the apt was fine it was the track at issue and yes Chris thing is when thatcher along a lot of the area set aside by pre br companies for expansion got sold off eg the great western line from Birmingham to London could be 4 tracks from bordesly for a long way Solihull and Olton both have 4 platforms there’s a bridge built by gwr in olton that is wide enough for 4 tracks too but you can’t because the second platform is now a car park…. If you had 4 track you’d have a dedicated set for high speed and a dedicated set for locos service and freight….. but no waste money of something not needed rather than put it into the current network and further improve things
APT could have been successful in America too so their NE Corridor average speed can went from 60MPH to at least 120MPH
by the time the apt went out of service it was really good and the british railways badge with the lion on it that went out in the fifties it was changed to just british rail with the white crossed lines my dude but love the videos you should have your own tv show
The words at 7:00can only be spoken by someone who has never heard a Class 37. Tbh pretty much any diesel loco sounds good on thrash.
The *Intercity 125* too, especially when she had the Paxman Valenta.
The best passenger trains in Britain now, were designed from the APT. Virgin trains had them made, but this time they are working, and very successful. There are two of these designs now. The Voyager, which are diesel powered trains, and the Pendelino, which is the electric version.
i really love the use of railroad tycoon 2 music in your videos dude
The 74 would have likely succeeded had rail ferries continued to be popular IMHO. But, with the rising popularity of automobiles and auto ferries, and passenger planes that could make it to Paris faster than ferries could get you to the french shore, it seemed inevitable. It would be like trying to open a train ferry after the chunnel was built.
I’ve been on those pendolinos at high speed and if they start tilting, you definitely know about it… it’s not that comfy at all!
The APT was a pretty near miss to be honest. It would have been a success if the Ministry of Transport had thrown enough money at it. The ultimate proof of this, is that the Italians made the tilting train concept work, and we ended up buying it off them.
The APT was very advanced marvel of engineering that wasn't quite perfect. The tilting mechanism was actually patented by BR and Fiat Ferroviaria of Italy purchased them so they later returned to the British network as the British Rail Class 390.
Fiat did not purchase APT's tilt. They developed their own at the same time & it is this which is used in the APT.
What makes the Class 74's even worse is that they were rebuilds from successful electric engines
actually, the original APT wasn't a disaster, the APT-E as it was called was never meant for public service and was intended to find the faults and iron them out, its big achilleas heel was its gas turbine engines were very fuel hungry. The later APT-P and its problems with making people ill was largely a result of the press launch where the invited news paper reporters did what news paper reporters in the UK do best, i.e, got heroically drunk then blamed anything but the beer for their illness
Precisely. Government underfunding didn't help either (throughout the project).
When you said nobody likes hearing a diesel I could just see everybody who likes GEs giving you a death stare
EMD Fan is probably haunting him right now
@@alpzepta That's right!
History In The Dark: 'If it doesn't function, it doesn't mean anything...' ALCO RSD-15: 'hey what about me?'
I do believe that a number of the Triplex engines were rebuilt into 2-8-8-0 that were successful. The problem of the Triplex was the boiler could note keep up with the steam demand of its three engines.
As far as I’m aware, the only triplex that was rebuilt was the Virginian’s 2-8-8-8-4. The locomotive itself was rebuilt into a 2-8-8-0, and the third set of drivers and tender were rebuilt into a 2-8-2.
So for the first train you mentioned. I believe that you were trying to say that the trains has a lot of low end torque and not a lot of horses power. This is very similar to pickup trucks in a sense.
Thomas was originally meant to be based off the LNER J50 which is also a Gresley design.
I heard the change happened because the illustrator for that book was from the South Coast, only had reference material for the E2, and didn’t think it mattered all that much what he drew the character as so long as it was as an 0-6-0T. This sort of thing was pretty common with the series for the first few books, before Awdry decided to make sure every engine he came up with came with a very large folder of reference photos that the illustrators had to work from. It was a lot worse with the first illustrator though. Awdry had a very specific vision of the three engines starring in the first book. 1. Edward, a 4-4-0 from the Victorian era who was small and old-fashioned. 2. Henry, a 4-4-2 Atlantic who was middle-sized and the standard sort of engine used when the book took place. 3. Gordon, a 4-6-2 Pacific who was the biggest and latest in steam engine technology during the time period the book was set. (Side note: Gordon was only one year old in the beginning of the book series, while Thomas was eight.) The first illustrator, however, didn’t draw Henry the way he was supposed to. Instead, he drew Henry the exact same way he drew Gordon. As a 4-6-2 Pacific. This was because the first illustrator _could not give less of a shit about the job even if his life depended on it._ He thought illustrating a children’s book about talking trains was beneath him, and did the worst job he could get away with. If you’re reading this and thinking “hang on a moment, I’ve read the first book and the illustrations are fine!” that’s because a later illustrator redid the first book’s pictures for all later printings.
So... BR was ahead of its time? The journalists who got queasy had had a bit to drink the previous night.
Another great list!
The Baldwin 210 was "Train X" which was supposed to save the 20th Century Limited (spoiler alert: it didn't). Railroad management called it the Explorer, but the train crews dubbed it the Exploder.
14:45 in all that research on the APT you did you failed no notice the most important part, that the APT-P (the one that entered service) was the *prototype* not the production one, so yes issues were going to be found, thats the point in prototypes. was it over-publicized? yes. was the project underfunded by a government that never really supported it? yes. were there issues at the start as it was only a prototype? yes. was it pressured into service too early in 1981 by a management under pollitical pressure to show something? yes. was the train mechanically sound by 1985? yes. was the government in any way interested in funding the project further by 1985? no. and while you are correct that their were isues with the tilt making people sick, that was litteraly because the tilt worked perfectly, it fooled the ballence mechanisms in the passengers ears into thinking they were stood upright when they infact werent, (the inverse of what causes sea sickness). essensially the tilt was too good, certainly not something that the engineers could have forseen. the APT was a masterpeice in every right for the budget that it was created on (a tiny one) and it only failed due to the politcal will to continue the project drying up, it would have succeeded if the funding had continued and everything that happened during design and testing would have been forgotten. the APT project didnt even turn out poorly since the intercity 225 was developed directly from the APT, so very little was lost since we did end up getting a production train out of the project, and a damn good one at that
The intercity 125 was also developed from the APT program, along side the 370 to be exact
@@electrohalo8798 it was indeed, as side project, it had nothing to do with the APT itself other than the fact that it was indented as the stopgap until the APT came along, it was not related to the apt in any way. but no it wasnt really developd along side the 370, it started practical development with its prototype that was built in 1972, the same time as the APT-E, but it entered service in 1976, the 370s at that time had yet to be built, let alone enter service
In fact, back when the APT was being ridiculed out of existence, the government of the day were very, very, anti-rail indeed. It would never survive all the political sabotage, even if the traffic and route conflicts could have been resolved. Which they couldn't of course. And another classic case of buying our own spare wheel yet again, not much later. There's one born every minute, as they say.
Spares from the local VW dealership! LOL! (Great series, keep 'em coming).
I rode a return journey from Glasgow to Edinburgh on the APT. Under 4 hours each way and it was wonderful!
Re: Baldwin RP-210. I'll give you three reasons why Baldwin created this locomotive (I know...there are probably more): The New York Central, the Pennsylvania Railroad, and the Milwaukee Railroad. All three railroads had electrified sections of track, and switching units (and crews) between sections took time and money. They tried...
Re' APT: A lot of the errors in the video have been addressed already, but here's some more: It's a common trope to blame Maggie as she was PM when APT was cancelled (despite BR being praised by her for getting the *InterCity 125* right), but it was numerous governments - mostly Labour - which were at fault for the project being woefully underfunded, rushed into pre-production service, and doomed to never be in viable on UK track, because BR requests for funding to update Signalling (In-Cab Signalling) were rejected every time. The later *InterCity 225* never got to run at her intended top speed of 140mph, because the signalling was unfit to handle above 123mph. The 165mph APT would have faced the same issue. The Pendalino's can't run at full speed in the UK either, for the Same reason. Until said deficiency is resolved, true high speed rail will *never* be a thing in the UK. (thanks Politicians)
11:41 The way you said that, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Even know the triplex didnt work i still LOVE it so much!!
The APT reminds me a lot of the current situation over here in California with our high speed rail project. Ours however is currently expected to burn maybe 100 billion dollars on the project with their solution being a mixed rail system. Where for bursts it'll be high speed but then alao revert to normal tracks and normal train speeds. Considering all you know of trains, has a system like this ever been pulled off properly and if so where? Cause we approved this rail over a decade ago and it was supposed to be between 10-33 billion for the entire thing and this insanity has seemed like the makings of either a disaster or the kind of story people talk about railways and trains for decades to come. Also good video and I enjoyed hearing you talk about trains. Only brought up the California high speed rail because the British one reminded me. Keep up the good work!
Amtrak does have a similar line on the east coast. The lines to the west of Philadelphia are normal, but north all the way to Manhattan is high speed rail. It's actually quite nice if they can't foot the bill to replace the whole network. But yours sounds like a money pit. I'd need to do further research, but high speed rail is meant to reduce public transit costs for both the management and the consumer. This sounds like...the opposite.
@@HistoryintheDark Ok Amtrak having a similar system out there makes it make more sense to me. But yeah money pit wise this one has been an escalating jump in costs for years and it can be hard while doing research for finding the information that isn't just trying to bury the current governor for the costs but it is fascinating from the amount I've seen that seems pretty trustworthy. It's something that sounds like a parody of public services half the time. Like one of the bids that was accepted to build a part of it was I shit you not $1,234,567,890. Knowing Amtrak made this work on the east coast I'm going to look into that and see how they handled it, see if it had as many issues as ours has had. And if the number sounds like a joke the company's name is Dragados and they got the contract in 2014. I learned this today because I was looking for any that could be a reliable source of info if you wanted to do any research by offering a potential starting point. Thanks again for telling me Amtrak made this system work, have a good night.
I also the herd the reason why the high speed rail project costs a lot more now is that there was a bunch of private investment. But then the state moved the route through the valley, and not a direct line. So then the private funding was pulled. Especially politics and ooh I was the new fancy train. Ment the line is gonna be shit. And would potentially be SLOWER THAN AIR TRAVEL
Also have a look at the London to Paris Eurostar trains. When first running they used 90mph 3rd rail electric lines 750V DC) in the UK until they got to the channel tunnel and raised the pantograph (25kV AC). They would run up to 100 mph through the tunnel. Once in the fresh air in France, they would run at 180mph. Now with a new line into London they can run at high speed on 25kV AC all the way. The trains can also go to Brussels and in Belgium run on overhead 3000V DC. So three forms of electric input for one set of high speed trains that have been working since the mid 90's.
The French TGV was designed to run at high speed on its own right of way and at normal speeds on existing tracks when it entered Paris and Lyon, to avoid the cost of having to build new infrastructure in the cities, where it would have been prohibitively expensive. Also, before the high speed lines were extended, they would use the existing tracks to reach the Riviera.
Lgv also has power switching points, but it's done in a smart way do that the loco doesn't catch fire if it doesn't cut off the power in time
The class 74 were converted from the class 71 to coincide with the extension of electrification to Bournemouth in 1966. They were ecpected to work freight and the occasional boat trains to Southampton docks. This work gradually changed and they became redindant, stored and then scrapped.
The multi mode for ny is is needed as diesels aren't allowed in the tunnels under grand central terminal. They switch at 125th street to full electric and to this day this is the norm for metro north.
APT needed another eight years of development which BR couldn’t give it. They just ran out of money. It would be another company to solve the issues with APT and solve it they did.
A class 74 is sort of preserved. They were electro diesels, rebuilt from pure electric class 71s. They could run on 3rd rail power or their diesel engine, while the class 71s could only run off the 3rd rail. A single class 71 is preserved, and is visually very similar to a 74. The class 71s actually outlasted the 74s in service even though the 74s were rebuilt from them. Also with the baldwin, was the electric pickup not included to allow trains to run into New York City without changing locomotive, as the city banned emission producing locomotives from entering it? This would make sense since the one pictured is in New York Central livery
Regarding the class 74, and for that matter the 73, both electro diesel. Well, the wheel has been re-invented with so-called 'last mile' electro diesels once more. Primarily electric, but with a moderately powered diesel for short off-juice end of route mileage enabling more use to be made of routes not wholly electrified. As per the DRS class 68. 'There's nowt new under t'sun, lad'.
Finally! An electric only train on the list
The erie tri plex are the most powerful engines made. The engines were designed for pushers for the time great if they were made at the time of the big boy think how much more powerful they would've been
The class 74 looks like the result of a 32 tube stock and a Class 47 bred together
I love the Alco 855 .... I wish I could find one in HO
The thing to remember about the various British railways - as the originator of the whole concept of the railway, it was a massive case of FIRST! syndrome. As such, we tried pretty much every idea that was suggested. The good ideas stuck. The bad ideas... well, they tended to stick around much longer than they should've, mainly due to the need for whoever had authorized the stupid idea being built needing to save face. As such, we were pretty much the rest of the world's experimental department, as it was easy to see which ideas worked, and which didn't...
Triplex is one but a QUAD? I don't even want to imagine the outcome
EMD DDA40X also called Centennial. and it is largest diesel locomotive.
History in the Dark: Triplex steam trains are no good! Me: *What about a Dodecaplex steam train?*
You should do a “best locomotives ever” video
The Triplex Locomotives had many issues. The biggest issue was the Tender Engine I.E. the Third driving set could never give full tractive power simply cause the tender gets light as the day progresses. Also the Virginian and the Erie ordered these locomotives and both ended up cutting them up and turning them into various single 8 driving wheel configurations. and it was 4-6 of them build and later converted into other Engines.
Plus alot of Articulated designs back then used the steam twice which was later revised in the 1930's
7:45 "Dependable transportation" and the C855 really didn't go together lol
To me, British Rail fells like the British equivalent of the infamous Penn Central
Honestly it wasn't that bad but the modernization plan was a disaster for the most part
The APT idea was finally successfully developed in italy to the Pendolino design and proved that the idea of the APT train was quite right. But in GB nobody wanted to buy italian technology in the end. How good the italian technology was could also be studied in germany. The class 610 diesel pendolino train was introduced in 1992 and ran successfully until they reached their economical lifetime in 2019 when they were scrapped. They ran really smooth and safe and were pleasant to ride. For the following groups 611 and 612 the typical german "not invented here syndrome" took place and it was considered important to save the italian license fee and make an own development. Result was a desaster for class 611. Most of their lifetime the wagon swing mechanism was kept deactivated when they were running at all. On Class 612 the faults of class 611 were overcome, and they still run today just because they are newer but the riding quality is not comparable to class 610.
it is kind of wired things that I not seen… this is one of those moments of my time… I also love the alcohol stuff to
You didn’t discuss the 855 well. The reason it sucked was because ALCO used aluminum wires in it. Had they used copper wires, the 855 would have been successful.
Fun fact they were also thinking of a quintuplex up to a FREAKING HEXAPLEX! Yeah they really thought bigger 🤨
I think those trains are amazing
The Class 390, 16:50, is actually quite a descent train. Yes, we bought back our own invention because we’re thick morons, but we got more money from it because it didn’t make you vomit
Well you're right about the technology not being ready when the APT entered service because the APT-P sets were never meant to go into regular service- that P stands for Prototype and only three sets were built which was fine for a test programme but was never going to be enough for general use. Political pressure forced the P-trains into service because the development had been going on for so long with no result- at least that was the perception if you believed the newspapers who rarely missed an opportunity to have a go at BR. Speaking of which... Reports of motion sickness seem to be largely the result of a free bar that BR laid on for the media the night before the APTs first service run and the complaints only started when the sun came up after an hour or so of travel. Then you could see that the train was tilting but not feel anything which disagreement of the senses set the hungover hacks to feeling even more woozy and started them writing about the "Queasy Rider". (In fairness that conflict between the eye and the inner ear could affect anyone who was particularly prone to motion sickness but there were few if any complaints from passengers.) On that first run the APT actually performed perfectly but subsequent services were not so blessed, due to exactly the sort of problems that would have been ironed out of these test units if they had been... well... tested a bit more, leading to their almost immediate withdrawal. The P-Trains were reintroduced in the mid '80s (with not a word to the media) to make occasional service runs just as was originally intended and performed well. Most passengers, if they picked up on anything, noticed only that they got to Euston 20 minutes early. BTW the motion sickness was allayed by making the tilt mechanism LESS effective- passengers could both see and feel the tilt so the senses were not in conflict. Although costly in the respect that BR itself saw little benefit from its investment the entire APT programme spent less than £40m- hardly ridiculously expensive when you consider that it did not just build a train but developed a raft of technologies and data used in just about every high speed rail system in the world today. This is due not least to the construction of the Class 91 and Mark 4 coach sets being put out to tender (because Thatcherism was still a thing and if you didn't think dog eat dog capitalism was the best way to do everything you were a communist) and all the APT data was distributed to anyone who cared to bid effectively making much of it public domain. (The contract went to General electric- who subcontracted construction to... BREL! The Class 91s were made by BR at Crewe.) The patentable IC appears to have been bought by Bombardier who made the Voyager and (tilting) Super Voyager- the Pendolino was made by Fiat who developed their own tilting system though no doubt it benefitted from the APT data. Incidentally the Class 91 and Mk4 sets, which were massively successful in service, were effectively the production version of the APT but the perception of those three letters had been so poisoned that BR was never going to call them that.
The APT was not that bad for making people feel sick . What happen was BR invited the national news papers to ride on it . Then did a welcome night before with a free bar . Most of the rail magazine reporters had early night for clear head for writing reports . The national newspaper reporter took full advantage of the free bar and drink into the small hours . The funny thing is guess who went down with travel sickness
Believe it or not but Belgium designers were crazy enough to build a quadruplex a gargantuan 0-6-2+2-4-2-4-2+2-6-0, it had 2 ‘Franco-Crosti’ boilers, a double firebox and pre-heaters on its outer frames, it’s a monstrosity of a Garrett/Mallet hybrid
Cool video I sub
Please do 1 on Franco crosti boiler
there were also 2 different quintuplex locomotives talked about as well but not much more than that, they were a 2-8-8-8-8-8-2 and a 2-10-10-10-10-10-2.
Story of the quadruplex: bigger is better
Slight correction, only the new haven rp210 was tri mode. It was ordered with a third rail shoe for grand central, pantograph for operation between new Rochelle and new haven, and diesel to boston. They put on the third rail shoe in correctly and well, it caught fire in grand central, during the press run…
They were also underpowered, so the single non-failed locomotive couldn’t move the train out of the tunnel and they had to wait an extended period of time to get the train out, to everyone’s annoyance.
Incorrect,good Sir...... The New Haven's RP-210s were equipped with pantographs, due to the length of some of the crossovers in Grand Central Station. Some of them were too long for normal third rail shoes, so a short section was mounted on the ceiling where there wasn't any on the ground. Similar,though much smaller equipment was also mounted on the New Haven's Electric locomotives, and the roofs of the EMD FL- 9s. The RP-210s pantographs were purchased from the Boston MTA Blue Line,due to the very low height of the roofs of the Lightweight Locomotives.
11:40 if the German Diesels in these (Krupp I assume?) are half as robust as an EMD 2 stroke then the VW hardware must have been for small items because I’m certain there wasn’t a single nut, bolt or stud on a VW product back then that was the size of the cylinder head, main bearing, or rod bearing cap on a locomotive sized diesel engine. Heck the rocker arm assembly on an EMD takes a bolt bigger than the spindle threads on a VW beetle.
BR, proof that Leyland was not the only mismanaged corporation in Tatcher's era UK
I don’t know if you did these locomotives for 5 of the best locomotives N&W Y6B,N&W Class A,B&O EM-1,and PRR S-1
Fiat bought the APT technology off BR and built a couple of trains using it, but the system that was derived from the systems used to move aircraft control surfaces was both expensive and bulky taking up passenger space. Fiat thus bought the rights to use the system from the Swedish X2000, which is a simpler bogie based system and this is the system that was used on the Pendalino trains that Britain bought, it is also the system that BR had planned to use on its Mk4 coaches had they not run out of money (afain).
British Railways Are Like This Channel Version Of LJN
As we hopefully move towards electrifying our railroads in the US, it would be cool if the diesel electric locomotives were retrofitted with pantographs to take advantage of grid power and not have to use the engine. They're developing battery electrics, which I guess works, but batteries are still damaging to the environment, just as much as fossil fuels, and I think electrifying the railroad should be top priority. Also, the Swiss made their steam locomotives into steam electrics during WW2, which would be a really cool way of powering steam locomotives in a sustainable and environmentally clean way. No oil wood or coal, just a heating element, maybe an induction element somehow in the firebox, with a pantograph and transformer in the tender in place of the fuel storage. Steam locos could be used on local and scenic lines, perhaps combined with electric multiple unit passenger cars for extra tractive effort and regenerative braking, as you couldn't do regenerative braking through a heating element. This is a pretty solarpunk idea and I doubt it would be considered by very many people, but it would be a cool way of bringing the remaining steamers of the world into environmental relevancy and out of retirement.
13:33-13:47 had me dying
"Dependable transportation" lol
One big problem with British Rail, at least in the early days, was that although there was one company running all the trains, there were still lots of manufacturers all producing their own designs that they wanted BR to buy. Also, each region of BR still had a lot of power when it came to what trains it bought, which meant they would often buy very different designs. The 74 was unique to the Southern Region, the Western Region bought Diesel Hydralics instead of Diesel Electrics. This all added to the large numbers of designs used by BR. Add in that many manufacturers didn't make their own engines, so engines were bought from lots of different companies too, so you could get two very similar looking locomotives made by the same manufacturer but with different engines, some of which were not even designed for rail use (often being designed as generators or marine engines which typically run at constant or more constant speeds compared to locomotive engines which are required to regularly change power output as trains start and stop and speed limits and gradients change). Not only did this increase the change of them buying bad designs, but it also meant that when a design turned out to be bad, there was typically less desire to fix it, instead of scrapping it. As with the 74, there was also the issue of buying specialised locos for certain duties which then dried up due to the changing times (especially the rise of air and road transport). As an alternative, another very bad design was the English Electric Type 2, later known as the Class 30, but these were a big standardised order for lots of regions and because of this their original unreliable engines were replaced and they became the very successful Class 31s which were still used well into the 21st century. Going back to engines. It's mentioned with the 74s that they were noisy. They used the Paxman YJ Ventura which was a light weight, fast revving design, and was particularly noisy due to having a large single turbocharger which also ran at high speed and sounded a bit like a jet engine. An updated version of this, the Y3J which was given the name Valenta though was used in what must be very high on the list for best trains ever, the High Speed Train or Intercity 125. Probably due to a combination of it's speed (still the fastest diesel powered train in the world), the way it revolutionised British Rail (basically doing what the ATP was supposed to do, but at much lower cost and without the need for electrification), and it's iconic status, nobody ever complained about the noise.
The Baldwin 210 sounds like it was tailored to running in/near New York City. Why pump all those diesel fumes into Grand Central Station when you could use the third rail or over head power? Much of the line was electrified. Too bad they didn't know how to execute it right
The APT reminds me of the disaster that were the first tilting ICEs in Germany.
doesnt remind me of it since the APTs were mechanically sound by 1985, something the ICE TDs never were, its just that by 1985 the political will to continue funding the project had dried up. the APT was a victim of politics, not poor engineering
We had a similar story going on in Switzerland. There was a kind of a tilting train developed here too in the 1970's to 80's that was promoted as the next generation of fast trains, being painted in a special orange+cream colour scheme. They built one or two who did not last long. I remember hopping on one of them as functioning as a regional commuter or short connection train. There seems to have been a whole wave of experimental tilting trains in the 70's that mostly got nowhere at first.
The ICE train though has the worst accident in living memory to its name; APT had no accidents, apart from some boozed up journalists losing their lunch.
Shinkansen means New Rail Line
IC4-intercity over 8000 errors on delivery.
How would a triplex make it around bends and turns?
However one win indeed does go to british rail, even though the APT was an utterfailure of mechanical faults, speed restrictions, delays and flaws, the modern tilting trains of the class 270/271 still are far inferior as uppon a SPECIAL testrain were the shedule was segnificantly improved, to a point where one could barely call it a fair comparement against the APT's odds, _the Advanced Passenger Train of the 1970s still outclassed the modern Westcoast mainline expresss stock by roughly 21 seconds_
*390
BJ, TM, GB, TB, and anyone else who came after Thatcher!!! What a waste of effort!!! You might as well all just have stood up and said "Here is my purse/wallet... Fill it for me!"""
History of the dark if you didn't know this the triplexes are actually tank engines because they have wheels on the tender
I actually wonder if the triplex would have done better if it was high pressure steam But then again I’m no engineer
The New York Central version of the RP-210 Was a Diesel Hydraulic ONLY, designed to operate with the Pullman Standard Train X.. known on the NYC as " The Xplorer....... An experimental, low center of gravity higher speed train, originally designed by the Chesapeake and Ohio with the approval of Railroad President Robert R Young. It was an attempt by Baldwin Lima-Hamilton, to save its flagging locomotive production, by using Maybach diesels,with a European style Hydraulic transmission ..... The New Haven variant,is the one with the dual mode drive system..... Necessitated by New Haven's operation into Grand Central Station in New York City. By law only electric operation was allowed in the tunnels of Grand Central and Penn Station, so the New Haven worked with Baldwin to develop a locomotive that could run on third rail in the Grand Central tunnels, while pulling its own Train X. This was actually on paper, a good idea, because the Baldwin locomotive works had designed and built the New Haven's original electric locomotive fleet..... Which were capable of operating either on 11,000 volt AC current, or the New York Central railroads 600 volt DC going into Grand Central Station. As for the roof-mounted pantograph, that was purchased from the Boston MTA to fulfill a need to connect with ceiling mounted third rail over some of the longer crossovers in the entrance of Grand Central Station. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, Baldwin could never get the third rail transition circuitry to work correctly.... In fact the New Haven's demonstration was delayed by several weeks due to repeated testing to try to get the system to work correctly! Finally the train was demonstrated into Grand Central Station, carrying a load of reporters and local officials.....when the transition was attempted, there was a dead short which caused an electric Arc to the locomotives aluminum body, sparking a fire. Eventually, Baldwin worked out MOST of the bugs, but all three of New Haven's prototype lightweights head issues operating into Grand Central on third rail. Both New Haven and New York Central Train X sets were retired and sold to the Jones Tours/Pickens Railroad for tourist service, though one was borrowed for a Number of tests that lead to the development of the United Aircraft Turbotrain.
Did jaguar develop the electronics?
The Baldwin BP-210 was requested by the NYC, so I wouldn't necessarily blame Baldwin for that one...I'd blame the NYC for wanting an engine that could traverse their entire network without needing to be changed between the two different electric systems they used and diesel power. It was ahead of it's time was it's problem, multi power engines today are simple to make with electronics.
How about soivet aa-20
The potosinas of ndem🗿
Where's the Ingalls 4-S? All one of them.
AND THE APT ISNT BAD EITHER
British rail had a lot of interesting and innovative designs. The problem was different ideas originating from the Big 4. As well as the dire need to eliminate steam.sure there were some outstanding designs but there were some right shitters. The APT and the metrovic Co-Bo.were prime examples with the A.P.T it was having people from the air craft industry And with the CO-BO it was the Crossley two stroke prime mover.
gee a british vehicle with electrical problems; you never see that
”nobody likes to hear a diesel” man have you ever heard of thrash
like the sound of a diesel is part of its appeal, especially among enthusiasts in the uk 一 so that whole statements a bit… wrong
One thing you’ve missed with the apt is the fact that after ww2 the uk network was half bombed to hell and hadn’t been maintained since before the war br was formed as it was cheaper than paying reparations we still don’t have a whole up to date network there are parts of the uk mainline still using the analog interlocking system and then we come onto the fact that as you mention the train having to use the same track as local trains which you’ve missed one big political point the government closed a lot of track and sold off a lot of land that was set aside by the pre br companies such as gwr who’s line from Birmingham to London on the Birmingham side could be 4 track but you have the issue of what was meant to be a 3rd and 4th platform is now a car park so now all the railways are heavily boxed in by house alot of the time and lastly you miss the best bit about virgin and you’ll love this….. they claimed it was the uks first tilting train!!!
Apt...australias fastest train...still. sigh.
Us British are very unpredictable when it comes to building transport, sometimes they are brilliant and other times they are rubbish
The APT was meant to be a technological marvel but it failed it inspired the 390 and the HST the APT's successor