New Trains – By Gdicm – Parts 1 – 3.:
Firstly: How to waste money and time showing off the Bugatti way. I’d put them in prison for that.
We used to say that if you put a big engine, i.e. a lorry one, in a small car with a suitable transmission you could go any speed. If you had enough road. Less than two minutes to cover a five mile straight on a race track is pointless, not clever. (250 mph Bugatti) Not if you have a good model maker and a proper wind tunnel. It is not proper engineering. It is playing at it.
Anyway: How to construct buses and lorries that run on rails and roads. Part 1.
Note: As a plane pilot needs a pilots licence, or a lorry driver needs a class 1,2,3 licence, and a bus driver needs a passenger carrying license, so a train bus / lorry driver requires to be qualified, with an appropriate license.
Firstly: The rails must be raised to allow the road wheels clear of the track. Can’t be done as they won’t clear the small bridges? Wrong.
Rails can be raised by lowering the sleepers. except over metal bridges, but as they have plenty of clearance the rails can be raised at that point. We’re not after speed.
The rolling stock would be specially built, but no great problem there. With the rail wheels between the road wheels and higher. Enough to keep them clear on the roads. Small rail wheels, and you’d never see them. Transfer boxes for separate drive/s, and automatic gearboxes.
I was studying the modern train carriages in Inverness station. The ones Britain can’t build any more. No wonder. They’re four times longer than they need to be, and an engineering catastrophe. I’d not touch the contraptions for love nor money.
The Flying Scotsman
New Trains – Part 2.:
I’ll probably turn these posts into a single page later. I was thinking about subsidised air and ferry travel to our Islands. How often I’ve heard people from the Hebrides for example saying they get free air travel to hospital on the mainland, and it includes a nights bed and breakfast on the NHS. Compare this to someone having to pay 10,000 pounds for a train commute ticket in England.
Anyway: The train driving wheels should double as the disc brakes, and that way only one single drive shaft is needed. Though four wheel drive sounds better. Hydraulic locking axles for stabilising rail travel. Easy enough.
String a few together and call them a train. These would eventually replace trains as you know them, but apart from being cheaper travel, and much more flexible the rail staff, who would run them, would know little difference, except they’d have to be bus drivers also.
The expense of rail travel is beyond most people, and they resent it. Not to mention the extra travel to and from the too few stations, with added expense.
I have to say this would work better on large continents?
The Really Flying Scotsman
New Trains – Part 3.:
I was thinking today about the vision by the river of Cherbar in the Bible. How the wheels lifted up and ‘turned not as they went’.
This was consistent with what I wrote in Parts 1. and 2., except it means that the wheels on the track must be on a separate drive, or even axle, from the road wheels. In order that they don’t turn while on the rails. Pity that, because it would of simplified the transmission greatly. Any way round this?
Trust a Prophet to complicate things. To be honest I knew the wheels ‘would’ turn with the drive if the disc brakes were doubled as drive wheels, and was thinking about that when the Bible text sprang to mind. (That vision has nothing to do with this I should think. Probably a helicopter or plane, ?)
However: I saw a virtual reality computer programme on the net where they can fly virtual planes through virtual hoops and race them.
That being the case they could build a virtual railway to conform to the minimum requirements to travel on railways. Small bridges exist, and it would cost too much to renew them. Therefore a carriage has to be built to fit. Once the axles were designed and built, they could be tested on a real modified track. With every known obstacle a railway faces included in shutter board joinery. Bridges, crossings, points, on and off access points. etc. On and off is easy. With raised rail it’s just a case of driving on and off with tapered in and rising ends of track. The rails would automatically catch the rail wheels driving on, and leave them when driving off.
Axles could be built firstly with wood in order to find the exact dimensions of every part, and it’s placement.
Electric drives on train tracks. What about Gdicm Electric Motors.
Only when the axles and hydraulics with transfer boxes are perfected by design can the chassis be built. Up to then it’s a case of temporary beams to adjust it ‘Just So’ and attach the hydraulics and axles and suspensions to, bearing in mind the need for carrying people in the passenger frame. (Carriage)
Then and only then could the main frame be included. To fit under the bridges etc. All seems very complicated, but in fact it’s not really, providing each stage is completed within reason before moving to the next.
Better built with a real, purpose-built, track. Or adapt a small section of the Aviemore to Boat o’ Garten steam enthusiasts line. Or the Keith – Dufftown line, or the west coast one. A bit like the early demonstrations of steam, where they built a track for the purpose. Except you’re using it to solve the many problems properly and in the simplest and least expensive manner. Lay out a section of old railway line complete with every obstacle British rail can come up with constructed of wood, and remember they will not be on the side of this, at first. So expect to be told of every obstacle there can be, and some more besides. Those Steam enthusiast lines are everywhere in Britain, and you just need a wee bit.
Remember to use ‘lofting’ when building, and put the dimensions into a computer for the repeat cutting of parts later. Especially for the coaches. It’s cheaper, and more efficient for mass producing, and ensures exact replication every time. Small design changes later are easier also. It’s called evolution.