20020 cold start leeming bar 18/12/10 

don't be stupid! What a silly idea. It's a swan.

Instablaster...

You sure it was a goose I thought it was a hamster

@@michaelcampin1464 Hamsters don't honk like that.

Your dead right they don't have a starter motor ,they use the main generator to start engine

TrainTrackTrav gotta love 20’s

@@Crewecabking Terrible polluting emissions. Greta Thunberg has declared a climate change crisis. These old locomotives must now be cut and the scrap recycled. We can no longer tolerate these contributions to pollution and global warming.

TrainTrackTrav “I love the smell of napalm in the morning.”

@@DSSteamVideos It's just recycling of polluting scrap in response to climate change and global warming as explained by Greta Thunberg.

@@PreservationEnthusiast you have ruined my childhood, how dare you :D :D :D

Thank you very much for that explanation. I was going to post asking what is happening during the process of the start of one of these engines, I find them fascinating. Thank you.

Hi Captain i am mechanical engineer(retired ) and know these issues. other questions i will answer.

Hi

Wonderful to have this explanation, thank you! What causes the occasional smoke rings and bursts of flame you sometimes see during a cold start? And at what point can the starter motor be disengaged?

@@thromboid the starter disengaged when the main engine rotates himself without help from the starter

Yeah, I remember those whistling turbochargers from trainspotting trips to Toton, Barrow Hill, Shirebrook and all those places in the late 80s/early 90s.

These heaters, and the supplies at parking spots to drive them, are a common feature of the Nordic countries, even for ordinary cars. Obviously with a fire engine you need to be able to start and drive it in very short order.

would take about 60 kilowatts to warm that 25 tonne lump enough to make a difference...

Definitely agree 👍 💯

Yeah why was that, were they just not powerful enough on their own? Why design and build one machi e for them just to always run in pairs. Never understood that.

@@paulshepherd1348 axle loading could be a reason for that. For lighter lines it would be better to have the weight split over two locos rather than one heavy one but just a theory.

@@paulshepherd1348 When they were designed, in the mid-1950s, there was plenty of work for a single 1000hp locomotive and they'd been happily running single-cabbed steam locomotives for a century, so why not a diesel? However, as drivers got used to nearly every other class of diesel locomotive having a cab at both ends, what used to be considered a "normal" level of visibility from a nose-first class 20 came to be regarded as inadequate. As more and more steam locomotives were withdrawn and their depots closed there were fewer turntables available so turning class 20s to run cab-first got harder and harder. Traffic was changing, too, and the railway was no longer running many short or slow freight trains that a 1000hp locomotive could handle. By the early 1970s, all the other mainline classes of under 1100hp had been taken out of service. The class 20s were reliable and coupling them nose-to-nose solved the visibility and power problems, so that's how they came to be used for most of their lives.

@@Railways-by-Greg I don't think axle weight was a big issue. Class 20s had route availability 5, compared to 6 for a class 47 (more than twice as powerful), so either can be used on most of the network.

@@beeble2003 thankyou for that class 20 story, that is really nteresting. I knew there must have been a good reason... i didn't realise they were that old, I thought they were introduced in the early 60s, but designed back in 50s.... like you say they were like a diesel version of a light traffic steam engine. Times change though and they were still fully utilized for their working lives. A lot more character than today's locos thats for sure.

It's the generator that turns over the engine. I think the start button was released at about 1:53.

The unburnt fuel is what you're seeing coming out of the exhaust. And, yes, the cylinders start to fire as they become warm enough to support ignition.

No starter motors were harmed in the video … as there aren’t any 🙂

@@robertmorley9748just back feed the generator

On an engine this old, the valves will be a little worn. The one or two cylinders in the best condition will fire first, others will come in as the speed increases towards normal idle, but some might not fire until heat soaks through from the ones already firing. It matters less once the engine is warmed up, but there's an awful lot of coolant to cycle through before then.

@@Kromaatikse it's a power plant with over 100 litre and 8 cylinders to power up I'm sure it would benefit more from a pee heat of some kind rather than a hard start like this surely

@@steventhornton4716 Theoretically yes, and modern engines do have that. These were designed, however, to have only relatively short periods of shutdown, so most starts would be with already warm coolant, so the extra cost and complexity of a pre-heating system was considered unnecessary. They also don't have large or robust enough batteries to heat the coolant from sub-freezing to, say, room temperature, which is what would be needed - for that they would need to be connected to a shore supply or an auxiliary generator. Worth also remembering that these were originally marine powerplants, so were designed to operate with the coolant consistently *above* freezing, as it would be in thermal contact with seawater.

@@Kromaatikse I'm sure the engineers on the likes of the svr and the East Lancashire railway would be able to set up some kind of auxiliary battery system or a warm air system to aid the fuel ignition I'm some way

No, the white smoke is mostly H2O that crystallizes at once in the cold air due to the abundance of condensation nuclei in the exhaust gas. Combustion of hydrocarbons always creates CO2 and H2O.

TravelDude Well, if you live in the north, you will see that there is visible white vapour coming out of all cars in cold weather. Hydrocarbons burn into CO2 and H2O. An article in Finnish about this by the Tampere Tech U. www.tut.fi/rajapinta/artikkelit/2013/4/miksi-pakokaasu-nakyy-pakkasella "Miksi pakokaasu näkyy pakkasella?" "Why is exhaust gas visible in cold weather (under -0C)"? "Pakokaasussa on palamisprosessin seurauksena noin kymmenys vettä. Kylmällä ilmalla vesi ja joissain tilanteissa - kuten kylmäkäynnistyksen yhteydessä - palamattomat hiilivedyt tiivistyvät pisaroiksi, jotka näkyvät valkoisena savuna." "In exhaust gas there is about one tenth of water due to the combustion process. In cold weather water, and in some cases - such as in cold starting, the unburnt carbohydrates condense into droplets that will be visible as white smoke." "Se mitä näemme, on siis pääosin pieniksi pisaroiksi tiivistynyttä vettä. (...)" "What we see is therefore mainly water condensed into small droplets"

@@Itapirkanmaa2 No, pure white smoke like that from a cold diesel engine is unburnt fuel. Water vapour does condense when it's cold, but not in such dense clouds. Remember that most of the exhaust gas is actually nitrogen that's just gone straight through the engine -- the only way you can get such dense white smoke is from the relatively large droplets of diesel created by the injectors.

@@beeble2003 Fuel burning yields CO2 and H2O. When it's cold, the H2O will condense into visible vapour. Like your breath on a cold day. Excess fuel smoke will be black, see here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cs0goSr0O8o.html

@@Itapirkanmaa2 Yes, burning hydrocarbons gives carbon dioxide and water. Yes, when it's cold, the water condenses. But condensing water does not give dense white smoke like this: it gives thiner, pale grey smoke. Dense white smoke like this is unburnt fuel; as I already explained, the density of the smoke comes from the large droplet size. Black smoke is from fuel that has been burnt without enough oxygen, producing a lot of soot (carbon that's not been oxidized to carbon dioxide or even carbon monoxide).

Yeah there is a video on here that shows someone starting a 37 (I think) indoors in their shed.... Not a good idea... Are these engines the same as a 37? They do sound the same when starting up...

@@martinjh999 Basically the same engine, yes. The 20s had the V-8 version, the 27s had the V-12 and the 40s had the V-16.

@@martinjh999 A lot of the more successful British diesels used the reliable English Electric RK-series engines. Originally a marine design, EE themselves adapted it to railway service with the help of the LMS, first the naturally aspirated inline-6 in shunting engines (which resulted in the Class 08, 09 and 13 after some similar-looking prototypes), then a turbocharged V-16 in the "10000" twins, the second of which was completed just after Nationalisation. The first production models of this effort became the 40 (improved V-16) and the 20 (V-8). A turbocharged inline-4 was also used in the Hastings-line DEMUs, paired with EE507 traction motors normally found on third-rail trains and thus familiar to local technicians. A little later, a further improved V-12 was used for the Class 37, and also to re-engine the Class 30 whose Mirlees engines proved unsuitable for railway service, but became far more reliable in their new Class 31 form. EE were also responsible for the very different Deltic engines used for the 55 and 23. A spare 55 bodyshell was then used to build DP2, housing a yet further improved version of the V-16 with intercooled turbocharging; this led fairly directly to the Class 50 express passenger and Class 56 heavy freight engines. Finally, the ultimate development of the RK-series V-12 developed almost as much power as the 56's V-16, in the Class 58. The 58 had a deficient bogie design which resulted in poor adhesion, otherwise they would likely have been much more successful than they were. RK-series replacement parts are still made by Ruston-Paxman, who took over EE's engine division. This makes keeping these engines in working order comparatively straightforward, especially since 37s are still routinely used on the main line.

These engines do not have any preheating facility. They were originally designed for marine use, where the coolant (which circulated through a heat exchanger with seawater) would at worst be about freezing. In railway use they would often be kept in depot sheds when shut down, which were at least a little warmer than the outside weather. But even shutting them down was not done very often, partly to keep them warm and ready to go, and partly because the batteries sometimes proved unequal to the task of restarting them.

They didn't have glow plugs, no. They were built before the 1970s oil crisis, when diesel was so cheap that they assumed they'd just leave the locomotives idling 24/7.

No diesel engine above say 10 litres of displacement has glow plugs.

No thanks

When they were built, oil was cheap, so they expected the engine would just be left running the whole time. For the few times they were started up, it wasn't felt worth installing pre-heaters because the UK very rarely gets so cold that you _need_ one.

most of time back in day like in states during thier regular service they never shut off if cold

and he filled the whole hospital with smoke upon his arrival.

but it is a class 20 may not sound like that but it is

alright lee calm down