As a potentially interesting aside, NACA already had available to it in the late ‘20s (i.e. several years before the NRC testing) a wind-tunnel facility with a 20’ throat capable of taking sustained measurements at 100mph. For this they used a pair of surplus 1000hp submarine diesel engines, which were apparently quite something to fire up and operate.
Mention in the Canadian tech article (on the 6400s) of the Townend ring reminded me of this facility, as the author conveniently forgot, or ignored, the NACA cowling that actually predates the Townend ring as well as being aerodynamically superior at higher airspeed.
I also distinctly remember wind-tunnel models of the train that became M10000 while it still had its TurboTrain-like parabolic nose (which I consider far superior in all respects but cooling to the wormlike ‘face’ that was ultimately foisted on that trainset). Unless I’m sadly mistaken, aerodynamic testing on ideal streamlining for trains was conducted comparatively early (some of the work arriving at the conclusion that McKeen-style streamlining was exactly backward, with the cylindrical curve better at the front and the extended ‘teardrop’ at the rear; the Kamm-chop effect regrettably in the future).
What this leads up to is that statement in the museum notes that
I for one would be highly interested to see exactly which of these ‘copied’ designs were actually disputed; I have a very strong suspicion from nothing more than details in Garth Wilson’s article and the actual claims in the patent that neither Kantola’s Commodore Vanderbilt nor the Mercury locomotives would have been subject to actual patent priority, and I’d have my doubts about either the Aeolus (aka Big Alice the Goon) locomotives on CB&Q or the 1938 C&NW E-4s using the design for 'smoke
The Rexall locomotive was a Mohawk 4-8-2 was it not? I don’t know what a 4-6-6 is but I do know artists and bling companies take extreme liberties with these kind of things. You see it all the time.
Over the years ( and years) friends, acquaintances and family members have bought ‘choo-choo’ stuff for me that they picked here here and there for Christmas and birthdays and almost all of it is really bad functionally impossible creations. Of course I have to be grateful for all this stuff, their intentions are good.
I’m certain most of us have run into this same thing.
Oh dear Overmod, I am afraid you are a little bit over analyzing thing in this case. The designer probably thought that a streamlined 4-8-2 is as ugly as almighty whatever you don’t want to think about, so he/she/it made it a 4-6-6. I really don’t think it is related to the British style “trailing truck” with an extra axle. Or maybe if we have a chance to see the sample of the 4-8-2 batch, we might understand why the designer skipped one bigger driver under the skirting[C]
I really don’t like the reviewed version which they placed the rear end of the trainset to the front and called it a nose. The birdcage on the M-10000 nose should never be removed, if Mr. Young of C&O could place a fish tank on the premier train, why can
Still, Loewy had the greatest number of locomotives displaying his influence (but not really a basic design of his, remember “Rivets”): the GG-1s. More than possibly all streamlined stream locomitfves in total!
In the early 1930s, steam locomotives needed shorter smokestacks if they were to travel through the growing number of tunnels and under bridges that spanned tracks. But, when travelling at high speeds, smoke would billow into their cabs, clouding the engineers’ view of the signals and tracks. Although visibility, and therefore safety, improved at slower speeds, passengers would then complain about delays.
This led Canadian National Railways to enlist NRC to solve the problem. Using its new wind tunnel, NRC tested the aerodynamics of models for existing locomotives and proposed alternate designs, including a sleeker, more streamlined design. One such design was put into production and unveiled in 1936 as the 6400.
The semi-streamlined design resolved the problems and its aerodynamics substantially improved the locomotive’s efficiency. During the 1939 World’s Fair in New York
At least Canada made streamlined steam engine kept their shrouding much longer than America’s “Steam-Streamliner”. Too bad that the industry needed a lot of pair of “wings” instead of a beautiful shrouding. [C]
The co-inventors of the locomotive that became the 6400 are hardly known, but are relatively famous in aviation history.
Canada, 1900 to 1920
The contribution made by Canada began when aviation was in its infancy. W. Rupert Turnbull of Rothesay, New Brunswick, constructed the first Canadian wind tunnel in 1902 and in later years he made valued contributions to both aeronautical science and development. In 1907 Dr. Alexander Graham Bell’s “Aerial Experiment Association” was formed of five members, including two Canadians, J. A. D. McCurdy and F. W. (Casey) Baldwin. This group designed and built a number of successful aircraft in one of which, Silver Dart, McCurdy made the first controlled flight in Canada on February 23, 1909. In August 1909, McCurdy and Baldwin made demonstration flights with the Silver Dart for the Department of Militia under most unfavourable conditions of terrain and wind at Petawawa, which led to destruction of the aircraft. The authorities remained unconvinced of the practical military value of aircraft and declined to give any assistance in furthering the development of aviation.
Less than a decade later, in December, 1916, Canadian Aeroplanes Ltd. was established in Toronto by the Imperial Munitions Board, to provide aircraft for the Royal Flying Corps training units in Canada. Some 2 900 Curtiss IN-4 (Jenny) aeroplanes were manufactured, 1 000 of which were diverted to the United States to offset their production slippages. Also, 30 twin-engined Felixstowe F3 and F5 flying boats (the largest type then in existence) were built in 1
