Home Open Account Help 293 users online

European Railroad Discussion > GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risborough


Date: 08/29/20 02:29
GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risborough
Author: Rattie

GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risborough​ Railway

[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87)]6412 was built at Swindon in 1934 and withdrawal from service in November 1964. GWR 0-6-0PT were built by the Great Western Railway. The locomotives were used for local, suburban and branch line passenger and goods traffic. They were also used on shunting duties, and as banker engines on inclines. Over 20 GWR 0-6-0 PTs have survived into preservation. The Chinnor & Princes Risborough Railway is a preserved standard gauge heritage railway with its headquarters and main station at Chinnor in South Oxfordshire, England. It runs along the foot of the Chilterns escarpment. Chinnor & Princes Risborough Railway, Great Western Railway, 6412, GWR 0-6-0PT, Pannier Tank, Swindon Works, Steam Locomotive, Chinnor, Chilterns escarpment.[/color]

You must be a registered subscriber to watch videos. Join Today!




Date: 08/29/20 08:27
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: 1019X

Nice looking locomotive and very good photography. I must admit as retired American railroad used to the term "on the ground" as meaning a derailment, I was expecting to see a derailment in process when I read the subject line. It always amazes me how the Brits ran a lot of locomotives that were not equip ed with leading wheels  in mainline service



Date: 08/30/20 09:56
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: Winnemucca

Yes, British and European steam locomotives didn’t use lead wheels (correct US term is “pony wheels” or “pilot wheels”) very often.  And the reason was in the difference in the quality of track construction. British railways were built for the ages. British track was heavier and kept in superior alignment and condition.

US railroads, on the other hand, were built in a slapdash fashion. Rail lines were often thrown together hurriedly to meet financial and political deadlines. In tough financial times (a regular fact of life for US railroads) the first expense to be tossed was track maintenance. Because of the the rougher track early American locos without pilot wheels derailed more frequently. Finally US designers came up with the idea of pilot wheels that helped to guide the large drive wheels thru rough trackwork, switches, etc.

Especially interesting because the British were heavy investors in US railroad building. Why they didn’t transfer the British approach of robust construction standards to the US is a point worth mulling. We’ve been living with the consequences ever since.   

John Webb
Trinidad, CA



Date: 08/30/20 10:14
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: pt199

Oil burner?



Date: 08/30/20 10:15
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: Rattie

No, Not many oil burners in UK preservation.
 



Date: 08/30/20 11:10
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: Crabbshell

Thanks so much. Steam is steam love them all, enjoy

Wayne Crabb
San Gabriel, CA



Date: 08/30/20 11:46
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: King_Coal

Very nice video. The locomotive has a modern look.



Date: 08/30/20 15:39
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: BigDave

Winnemucca Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Especially interesting because the British were
> heavy investors in US railroad building. Why they
> didn’t transfer the British approach of robust
> construction standards to the US is a point worth
> mulling. We’ve been living with the consequences
> ever since.   

Because they learned that approach is expensive, and they didn't want their profits threatened?
 



Date: 08/31/20 03:29
Re: GWR 0-6-0PT No 6412 ON THE BALLAST - Chinnor & Princes Risbor
Author: 86235

Winnemucca Wrote:
-----------------------------------------------------
> Especially interesting because the British were
> heavy investors in US railroad building. Why they
> didn’t transfer the British approach of robust
> construction standards to the US is a point worth
> mulling. We’ve been living with the consequences
> ever since.   

I think the answer is probably that they were simply arm's length investors who, like their American counterparts, wanted quick results and weren't that bothered about engineering standards. I'm quite sure they would have adopted the same approach domestically if railways weren't as tightly regulated as they were in the UK once the initial mania was over. Early locomotives were also pretty puny and there was virtually no signalling and no continuous brakes so good sight lines and moderate grades were essential.



[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0603 seconds