References to Edward’s Exploit where his coupling rods broke off and they were taken off to have one single driving wheel and loads of references to Edward and the cabbages where Edward lost his front wheel as it’s rolling away from him.
I would never do that to my model's as some of them are coming up to +30 year's old and +40 year's old so it will not be happening as they are far too valuable even if they can be very unreliable at times they are still valuable and also once I finish college and university I am going to join the army as a Coldstream guard as my dad served in the army as a Coldstream guard also during my time in the army I want to earn a Victoria Cross as no one in my family who were in the army has ever received a Victoria Cross and if I do receive a Victoria Cross I will be the first person in my family on my dad's side of the family and my mum's side of the family to receive a Victoria Cross and I said to my mum that if I earned a Victoria Cross but I never make it to receive the Victoria Cross myself could she or my dad receive it for me and I would like to have the union flag placed next to a picture of me in my military uniform and I would like the Victoria Cross placed next to my photo and then for my funeral I would like to have a proper burial that a Hero deserves and I also told my mum that I would like to have the Flag placed over my Coffin and have a send off that a Hero deserves and I know that when my dad was fighting in Afghanistan he lost Some of his closest friends but ever since I was little I have always wanted to be in the army I am 16 nearly 17 year's old and my mum told me that when I am 18 I am old enough to make my own decisions but until then as I am living under her roof I have to listen and do what she tells me and me and my mum get along relatively well with each other whereas me and my dad argue with each other and i still love him after all there will not be another person who could be a Dad like him so and although we fight we don't mean some of the things we say but at the end of the day I love my dad no matter what
@@Boxttell11 I have corrected most of my spelling mistakes in my comment and not everything is after all we all make mistakes we are who we are and I am not trying to be Rude but I struggle with spelling words and I also I struggle in school and I struggle to cope with Change/a new environment as I have Autism and ADHD and I also have Dyspraxia which affects fine and gross motor skills and motor planning and coordination and it's not related to intelligence and don't worry Autism and ADHD and Dyspraxia are not life threatening it's just that I will grow up with Autism and ADHD and Dyspraxia and Autism and ADHD just means that my brain works differently to yours and other people's and a wise person once told that Autism is not a disability it's a different ability but it's hard to tell that I have Autism and ADHD because it is a mental disorder and not a physical disorder but hey no hard feelings mate you just pointed out mistakes so I not offended at all so There's no need to apologise if anyone is to apologise it's Me I should check my spellings and punctuation before sending the comment. Cheers. Lewis 👍anyway apart from that what do on your channel?
You've hit the nail on the head in regards to weight distribution. In the history of rail locomotion, they had a lot of trouble with the tracks breaking under the weight of engines, especially in the early days with the cast iron fishbelly rails they were using before they developed wrought iron lengths of track.
Hi Sam I made a Headboard for my 0-6-0 saddle tank in memory of Prince Philip who sadly died yesterday and according to the News Britain and the Commonwealth countries are in 8 days of mourning
You are 100% correct, Sam! The main reason that locomotives had more than one driving wheel has a little bit to do with friction, but mostly to do with weight. One of the big constraints when designing a locomotive was the axle load of the lines it would run on -- in other words, the maximum amount of weight that a locomotive axle could support. The type of rails used in the construction of a railway determined the axle load for that railway, since the rails could only handle supporting so much weight at a single point before snapping. Adding more wheels to a locomotive helped decrease the axle load of that locomotive, spreading the weight out across more axles and allowing for a heavier (and more powerful) locomotive. However, the more leading or trailing axles that took the load, the less overall weight that the driving wheels took on, thus decreasing their friction and the overall tractive effort. Thus, more driving wheels means more power AND more tractive effort to put that power to the rails. (More info on steam locomotive design constraints in replies!)
Of course, driving wheels tend to be large and take up a decent amount of space. If you were to stick driving wheels at the far front or rear of a locomotive, you start having space constraints for the boiler and firebox -- not great when those two are primary contributors to a locomotive's performance. Thus, the leading and trailing wheels were born, allowing for larger boilers, larger fireboxes, heavier locomotives, and greater locomotive power overall.
Then we get to the issue of why locomotives didn't just keep adding axles to be as long as possible. The thing is, they did -- however, they started running into problems with the curve radii of the track. After all, the longer the locomotive, the larger the track curve radii that it requires. Thus, locomotive lengths were constrained as well. It was only until they relooked at parts of some old experiments regarding compound-expansion -- passing steam through multiple cylinders before ejecting it -- that they surpassed that limit with the articulated locomotive, some designs of which becoming the largest steam locomotives ever created: the Union Pacific's 4-8-8-4 Big Boys and the Chesapeake and Ohio's 2-6-6-4 Alleghenies class.
However, you still can't get much longer than the Big Boys and Alleghenies because of another problem: loading gauge. Since the boilers of the articulated locomotives weren't (and really can't be) articulated, they stick out beyond the frames when going around curves. Since railroads have loading gauges that specify how far beyond the rails a piece of rolling stock can extend, the boiler can only stick out so far. I'm unsure if the Alleghenies did this, but I do know that the Big Boys had to taper the front of their boilers to stay within loading gauge. Realistically, the Big Boys and Alleghenies are just about the largest a steam locomotive can get, period.
And that was my little infodump on design constraints of steam locomotives. Don't mind me -- I'm just a big steam locomotive nerd. Hope it was at least interesting to someone! :P
Amazing video you done it again and really peek my interest in different aspects of this hobby . It is not just watching my trains go around the track. Thanks Sam keep those great videos coming.
Very interesting Sam. You could convert one loco to a similar one with a similar body. You should try and go see as many of the locomotives in your collection as possible.
I absolutely LOVE unusual looking engines... shame a lot of the ones I've seen, such as the A55 Decapod, either haven't been produced, have been but are blinking expensive or they aren't available
I'd recommend you start with a train set, I've had several before actually starting a model railway. Hornby Is the main place where you can find them but bachmann make some too (but they are usually more expensive). When it comes to actually making a proper model railway the key is PLANNING. NEVER just start without a clear plan or trust me you'll regret it. When it comes to the baseboards I'd advise getting someone experienced to help you out because without good baseboards you will never achieve a decent railway. Later when it comes to track laying it's important you do the just lay it on the board, cut 2/3 mm Coark to the size of the track pieces and lay the track on top of that so that when you then ballast it you'll get a realistic ballast shoulder. If you need to know anything else please ask. I'm not too experienced but I still have more experience than some people around here...
I read somewhere then the other reason why they had more powered wheels was because of traction when starting. Singles wheelers had a high tendency to wheel slip when they started from a full stop, especially if it was in hill.
Great video! I need to ask a favor though. I’ve just gotten a brand new bachmann Henry in the mail, and just like in your video on the model, only after about five minutes of running his eyes started clicking and snapping back-and-forth, and It was slowing down his motor. What should I do to fix it? You stated in your Henry video that you just used a bit of oil, but I haven’t got any of the proper lubricant products for model trains. It’s also worth mentioning, my Bachmann Gordon had the same problem when I got him. His eye mechanisms seemed to fix itself though.
Keenly watched the intro you said welcome back to another experiment..I thought Genius!! By Jove this may be something really good! Okay..back to watching lol
Thinking of making a larger engine going round bends it normally wouldn't, using modded 'fake' wheels that just hover essentially and not causing derailment on sharp bends .
When I got my new layout I had to use second radius curves and my hornby king class (6013) derailed because of the tight curves. I tried it as a 4-4-2 (Based on the experiment with 4000 north star) but it didnt fix the problem
I have tried something like this with three locomotives myself. One was an 0-4-0 tender loco without its rods because I thought the rods might be a bit weak when I was trying to get the thing running again (it barely moved itself, but the motor worked). The 2nd was removing the trailing axle from a pacific because that axle kept derailing (due to one of the wheels not being able to stay gauged) and the loco runs better. The 3rd one is turning a diesel loco from a B-B into a C-B by replacing the burnt out motor bogie with a spare dummy bogie, so I could have the loco run as a dummy unit
Ahh very interesting - can't believe how many people are seeing better running by removing bogies and ponies... I'm surprised! Thanks for watching, Sam :)
@@SamsTrains I remember having a certain 2-6-0 (i forgot what class) that accidentally had a rear coupling rod broken during some sort of accident while trying to service the thing, so I removed the rod on both ends and, because it had an all-wheel drive mechanism, it was now a 2-4-2-0.
Hello and welcome to another episode of "Sam does potentially dangerous and silly things to his model trains that honestly you shouldn't even think about"
Just like when you see oversized heavy goods vehicles, where there have more than the usually 3 axles, to distribute to weight so the road doesn't get damaged - Often vehicles don't have more wheels because it can't handle the weight, it could carry the vehicle/load on far fewer. Yet another fun yet fascinating video, I do love these random fact finding videos.
Hey Sam, as an idea to follow up from this, how about testing if certain steam engines would still work without their side rods on the wheels, making them effectively old fashioned single wheelers?
Blimey that's bad, are you sure? If you bought it new, maybe ask if you can return it for a replacement, or at least get a partial refund for the fault? I think the valve gear may be loose enough so that the piece has moved the wrong way, that'd be my guess! Thanks for watching, Sam :)
Some food for thought, the available tractive effort is a function of the friction force from the drive wheels. This force is F=(normal force) x (coefficient of friction). So as long as these two factors remain the same the available tractive effort should be unchanged. The removal of unpowered wheels could increase the weight carried by the drives and increase tractive effort. One side note; there are two coefficients of friction static and kinetic. Static friction is when the two surfaces are not in motion i.e. wheels not slipping. Kinetic friction is when the surfaces are moving relative to each other, as in wheel slip. The coefficient of static friction is always greater than that of kinetic friction and the coefficient of kinetic friction is independent of the speed of slip. A slipping wheel will always have the same amount of traction regardless of speed and this will always be less than a non slipping wheel. The force that you are measuring as pulling power is the minimum force that the loco can create for a given power setting. This is useful information however I am uncertain from your videos if you are aware of what you are measuring, to be fair the true peak pulling power of a loco would be difficult to measure accurately and the information would be of little use. All in all an entertaining experiment but no new science was discovered, I'm afraid the the noble prize for model railroading may elude you for this season.
I admit I was shaking with both laughter and fear at the same time. First of all, I was laughing at your wondrous wheel configuration experiment in general. Second of all, the Ghost N7 got involved. Third of all, I was fearing that Duke of Gloucester might topple smoke box over wheels. Thankfully, she didn't. Don't let Angry Ollie, 70013 Oliver Cromwell's nickname, see you do it. She might give you a right angry earful. Jokes and fear aside, 57xx Pannier Tank Engine no. 5775 (in BR Black), Egg Van no. 1 and the four 4-wheeled GWR carriages have been delivered. I'm just waiting on Egg Van no. 2. Little Miss 57xx must be shaking with fear, as she's never dealt with Egg Vans before. Also, I have two other closed vans that are the same as yours: Mighty White Bread and Bird's Eye Fish Fingers. Speaking my new steed's fear of Egg Vans, I've never seen your Railway Children Pannier Tank Engine haul your 7 Egg Vans. Would you dare let her handle those dreaded derailing monsters from DAPOL? Just curious.
Ahh sorry to have provoked such strong emotions within you Kelly - it was a strange one wasn't it? Glad you liked seeing the ghost too! Glad to hear you've had your deliveries at last! :D Thanks for watching, Sam :)
Hi Sam. Your modified P-class (0-4-0) could stand to have a jack shaft for the center axle. This would be similar to some German & Swiss (diesel and/or electric) locomotives that had a motor-driven jack shaft with counterweights that are attached to the side rods. It would also be similar to a U.S.-made Heisler steam locomotive, though there are differences; the Heisler drove the jack shaft with the side rods from the pistons, then that drove a driveshaft through a sort of inverse differential to the driving wheels which were geared, IIRC.
Very interesting sam! And thanks for commenting on my video on you! Ever since I subscribed to you in 2018 I’ve become much smarter in the art of model rail! Thanks
Very interesting video. I think you're correct in your assessment of the results. One thing I would like to know would be if there was a direct correlation between the weights of each loco and their respective tractive efforts. I suspect that there is. The equation for traction is F = μ * N. N is for the weight of the loco pressing down into the track, μ is for coefficient of friction between the wheels and track, and F is for the total force of static friction or traction force. You'll notice there is no function for the contact patch, or number of drive wheels. So, according to the maths and as long as the weight stays the same, traction should be the same. Of course, one issue is the first loco you tested had some of it's weight still supported by the (temporary) pilot axle. Thus, traction was roughly halved because half of N was not being supported by the remaining drive axle. Another thing to consider is static friction vs. kinetic friction. Static friction is when the wheels are trying to move but they've not broke traction yet and kinetic friction is when the drives are wheel-slipping. There should be a small difference between those two values. Maybe, watch the scale as you turn up the power and note any changes before the loco starts wheel-slipping and after it's already wheel-slipping. Anyway, like I said, cool video. Keep 'em coming.
I remember doing this sort of thing but in the opposite effect with an 0-6-0 tender engine i had. So what i basically did was add a front double bogie to it to turn it into a 4-6-0. it was an American design and I removed the cow catcher, bell, knuckle coupler, and the sand boxes from the top, i then gave it wheel arches, buffers, buffer beams, and modified the running board. it basically was a poor women's version of a b17. sadly i don't have it or any images of it.
Nice vid Sam when i saw the thumbnail i thought ''oh dear this is not going to end well" but when i saw the video im like "wow that actually works" very enjoyable video Sam.- Nicholas.
Anyone who has seen my channel, all 4 or so of them, will probably know that I like experimenting. Different kind of experimenting to what’s here, but I do like these experimenting videos you do, keep them coming 👍
Hey Sam, this is completely off topic from the video, but will you get one of Hornby’s new A1’s, I have seen 3 varients so far, I am getting Knight of The Thistle, which one will you get
it happened with me so many times Hornby "Select" stop responding occasionally locomotive goes out of control also locomotive fly around layout literally and and I had to unplugged. I have Roco Multmaus never had an issue
Lol I was running my triang 0-4-0 (7178, the caledonian blue one) which I painted green and numbered 16078. I had just put the motor in but not the connecting rods and started running it as a 2-2-0 but it is now and 0-4-0 again. Just as I ran it this popped up
You basically did an LSWR C14 with that 0-4-0. The C14 class started out as a 2-2-0, but the entire class was later rebuilt into 0-4-0s (and reclassified S14) to increase traction.
i thought for sure the pulling power of everything would go down, but it makes sence if you think about it, if you take away just the power to some wheels but leave the wheels, you decrease drive but keep the same axle load, if you take away the undriven wheel completely, you increase the axle load, increase weight over the wheels, thus increase grip, thats why the class 8 had sligtly more pulling power, you removed more wheels than just driving wheels with the removal of the rear wheels, this was way more fascinating than i thought it would be, and yes, i to tend to overthink things.
You should take an externally driven loco (idk what the technical term is but a loco with pistons and drive rods outside of the wheelbase) that has six or eight driving wheels that is driven by the motor with the same axle that has the wheels connected to the drive rods and remove all of the drive axles and connecting rods except for that one and make a 4-2-4, 4-2-2, 2-2-4 or something of the like. I hope that that made sense and that a model built that way exists. Thank you for the video.
So, how much damage does it do when you hold an engine in place and crank the power to 100? Knowing it's metal scraping on metal, does it do any damage and if so, how much?
This is actually a very interesting video and yes its all about weight distribution. The clan class Pacific were a heavier than the br class 5s but because of they're increase in wheels they actually had a lighter axle loading which is whats important when it comes to weaker track and weaker bridges. I'm not sure but I imagine this means the clan would be able to go over lighter bridges with shorter spans than a class 5 that could go over lighter bridges with longer spans as its overall weight is lower but I'm not sure how the civil engineers would label the line and whether either would be allowed on a line the other can't travel over. But its interesting its science. So thanks for a bizarre but surprisingly interesting video which are both positives to me.
21:34 Taking the Hattons 0-6-0 as an example, the main reason why it would have 6 wheels instead of 4 is... Axle bearing weight. From the first perspective, you can make a larger and heavier locomotive by adding an extra pair of wheels, using the same strength axles. So, the first perspective is Material strength. From the other perspective, weight limits of certain lines. by adding more wheels, you distribute the weight over more track, and/or land, which means you can fit a heavier locomotive on the line. Either way, the basic answer is the same... by adding more wheels, you can create bigger/heavier/stronger engines... which is basically what you said.
Hey Sam if you found an HO scale UP big boy for sale would you buy and review it? They are huge. 4-8-8-4 and an articulated boiler. I would love to see it Also tractive effort has more to due with wheel base size and less with the number of drive wheels, basically meaning you could take out all of the wheels on a 9F (model form cuz the real thing works diffrently) except the outer driver wheels and the non driven wheels and it would still have roughly the same pulling power
At first, I thought this video was going to be another April fool, but you do make some interesting observations. The Hornby Networker has only one driven axle to the annoyance of those who own this model. It is an undeniable fact that more driven axles give a train more traction. This is noticeable when converting EFE tube trains from static to motorized - usually, you can only afford to install a single power bogie. The new EFE tube train from Bachmann is going to have two coreless motors in the power car, but that's going to be very expensive.
Hey Sam @ 6:48 yep that 0-6-0 now a 0-4-0 does look a bit odd!!! Hey I've got the 'Duke of Gloucester' aswell - Lovely Loco - mine came in the 'Gloucester City Pull' Train Set with 3 Carriages R1177 🙂🚂🚂🚂
Believe it or not, the reason for the tractive effort going up is because there is more weight over fewer wheels, which means that it acts like a much heavier smaller loco. Interestingly, one British railway company (I forget which, my father told me the story a few years ago) back in the BR merger (I believe) had their competitor to the Pacifics compared to the pacifics, and found that the lack of a pony truck at the rear caused more mass over the driving wheels, and hence better traction, making it faster when leaving the station and up hills, which made it a superior engine for express routes.
You should bring Sam'sTrainsGaming back... Except you only play locomotive related games. I suggest the first one you play should be Train Sim by the developer 3583 bytes. Stay safe!
I'd be up for a part two :) Suggestions carrying wheels off a Pacific making a 0-6-0, a Super D without is middle side rods as either a 4-4-0, 0-4-4, or 0-4-4-0, and (this is trickier though) a 9F to a 2-6-4 remove the side rod between 3rd and 4th drivers. Another thing I'd be intrigued to see is tender locos or even tenders hauling trains whilst separated (like your April Fools 2016).
While it may be hazardous, the empty side rods on the Duke intrigued me (though I couldn't see much with its dark colours). Remind me of a Thomas episode (Percy Helps Out/Nelson Gets Carried Away) where Thomas derailed and broke off his front left wheel; and we see his rods move as he's hauled onto a trailer. (On five wheels; Is asymmetric not possible for OO models?) On top of that, a few years ago (when I was getting back into Thomas), I came up with a sort of OC in a dilapidated state and a messed up wheel arrangement. Mostly shaped after James it lacked its first left driving wheel (like Thomas in the aforementioned episode), a side rod between its 2nd and 3rd drive wheel, and the tender had no middle axle and the front right wheel missing (yeah a 3-wheel tender's less likely to work; I was a bit of a noob back then). While this idea went abandoned and I came up with my G16 and Y10 stuff last year, I have recently thought of a way to incorporate it in, featuring the dilapidated engine as an incomplete 5 inch gauge model kept in the home (a renovated coach) of the G16 and Y10's owners. I've seen several miniature 5 in/3.5 in gauge videos, and I haven't seen any other fan working of those alive in Thomas universe.
haha, I'll sure think about it! Yes I've been hearing about this episode - I hadn't realised they'd done that in Thomas too! Thanks for watching, Sam :)
Sam I have a couple of suggestions for DMUs I think you would enjoy The bachmann 158 and also the 166 both are old bachmann units but they run really well
Ohhhh I was hoping you'd take a pacific and make a 4-2-2 out of that! Taking the front and back pair of driving wheels :D I'm probably mainly curious if it would even balance right
@Xavier Gaming well, I could take one wheel of one side and leave the other wheel on. Wouldn’t make sense in real life but it would be pretty funny to do on my models.
Question for you Sam: I don't have the space for R3 or R4 curves so am running with R0 and R1 curves. Q: would I be better with 4 or 6 wheel genesis coaches?
In one of the original Thomas stories, Edward becomes a single. I think one of Bachmann’s Thomas Characters would have struggled more than these locomotives
hey sam! my father got me a new bachmann EZ track expanding set for an early birthday present and i just made my layout! im looking for a tank engine that has E-Z mate couplers, if you have any suggestions can you reply me some links? i decided to come to you since you are a model train expert in my opinion and im starting model railroading
Ooh that's great fun! How about that Porter side tank I reviewed a few weeks ago? That was amazing for the money! Sounds good - good luck with the E2! Thanks for watching, Sam :)
Adding more wheels to an engine is like adding more tyre width to a car. There is an amount of contact area that gives optimal traction, and it is determined by the weight and weight distribution. The other thing to consider, like with awd cars, is that in the real world with leaves and oil on the rails, not all wheels may be able to exert the same force on the rail without slippage. More wheels means more probability of applying power to clean, well adhering rail.
Yes that's what I expected too - but adding greater contact area reduces the force on the rail - so the difference is largely cancelled, as seen in the experiment! Thanks for watching, Sam :)
