I always wondered why there haven’t been any Climax-engines for fast service.
after all, trucks ride much better than a rigid frame with three, four or five axles. several passenger train electric engines have motors connected to the axles by way of cardan-shafts, and they easily make 100 mph.
does anyone know the answer?
of course, Heisler ans Shay engines were not suited for fast trains, because the movements of their pistons had a vertical component.
There have been discussions on this subject before, I think.
I might mention that the ‘step-down’ gearing problem does not necessarily have to be an issue on a locomotive intended for high speed. Many of the same construction details that characterize later locomotives (as discussed, for example, in the recent issue of Trains Magazine) could have been applied to a geared locomotive; an express locomotive would use appropriate gear ratios to keep piston speeds etc. in the proper range. “Legacy” geared engines were usually used for logging and other indifferent-track services where running-gear flexibility and low-speed power were critical – one shouldn’t expect a locomotive built for such services to be capable of high speed as built!
In a sense, the V-engine locomotives of the '30s and '40s are like the Climax without trucks; my impression is that the choice of V rather than ‘horizontally opposed’ (as in the Paget locomotive) was done for more than ‘packaging’ reasons. IIRC one of the Henschel locomotives was said to have run at more than 110mph equivalent without particular problems.
What I believe Martin is suggesting is a steam locomotive with a more-or-less conventional set of cylinders, driving onto quartered cranks on a transverse jackshaft which is then connected via bevel gears to a Cardan-shaft drive and trucks. Note that the imbalance and surge forces in this design would resemble those in a conventional steam locomotive at low speeds, and the vertical component of rod momentum and thrust that led to complaints of ‘bouncing drivers’ in some of the large steam locomotives at high speed would not be particularly solved by this design – you’re NOT getting rid of a ‘vertical component’ just because the stroke of the piston is longitudinal. Furthermore, the room required by the gearcase and drive to the shafts would preclude the use of multiple cylinders.
I am not certain you’d gain too much in operational effectiveness by use of this design over w