Why is the 5AT not more innovative?

Why is the 5AT not more innovative?

Should not the 5AT be a more radical design incorporating more innvotive features? In Feb 2009, the following question was asked by a reader in Minnesota, USA: “Why, when you are from the country that rbulleally brought innovation to steam design still persist thinking inside the box? Bulleid went outside the box with the Leader […]

Read More

Why is compound propulsion not proposed for the 5AT?

The following answer is taken from Wardale’s response to a letter from Angus Eickhoff, published in Steam Railway #276 (see ‘Articles and Letters’ page of this website): “Compound expansion for the 5AT has been considered – and rejected. The arguments for and against compounding are too complex to air here, but I am firmly convinced […]

Read More

Are large diameter steam pipes necessary?

Q: Are large (i.e. huge) diameter steam pipes necessary? For example, a smaller steam pipe, provided it has smooth bends, will have less surface area for thermal losses. If the effective delivery of steam to the cylinders is of concern, then can it be solved by having large steam chests or using receivers as on […]

Read More

Why not fit a Steam Jacket to the 5AT Cylinders?

In Oct 2007, John Tasker wrote to ask if steam jacketed cylinder had been considered for the 5AT. He suggests that when a loco is stationary a steam jacket would help reduce thermal losses when starting from cold. Dave Wardale offered the following response: “Cylinder steam jacket. This has been well explained by Porta. It […]

Read More