BigBoyFan4006
\m/
Why was Mallard so much faster than the other A4s? It was built the same way the other A4s where built, yet it was faster than the others. The engineer and fireman maybe?
Last edited:
Question About Mallard
- Thread starter BigBoyFan4006
- Start date
A Mallard's a kind of duck.
A duck goes "quack".
Some things you buy come in plastic shrink-wrap.
If it's tough, sometimes it makes a sound as you pull it apart, as the air goes in.
Kind of sounds like a slow "quack" if you open up the plastic packaging too slowly.
Therefore, if you open a product, you might hear the "quack" as you open up the shrink-wrap.
So, now maybe your post has at least a little relevance to this forum...
...Hope this helped. Maybe post to a forum next time that is actually relevant to the question...
A duck goes "quack".
Some things you buy come in plastic shrink-wrap.
If it's tough, sometimes it makes a sound as you pull it apart, as the air goes in.
Kind of sounds like a slow "quack" if you open up the plastic packaging too slowly.
Therefore, if you open a product, you might hear the "quack" as you open up the shrink-wrap.
So, now maybe your post has at least a little relevance to this forum...
...Hope this helped. Maybe post to a forum next time that is actually relevant to the question...
Last edited:
amigacooke
Well-known member
I doubt that the Mallard was inherently faster than the other locomotives in the class, it was just the loco that was chosen for the record attempt.
amigacooke
Well-known member
Perish the thought that someone might have curiousity answered, even in the wrong place. Couldn't the mods be PM'd?
shaneturner12
Tutorial Creator
Looks like a mod has already done it.
Shane
Shane
BigBoyFan4006
\m/
This is in Prototype Talk!
BigBoyFan4006
\m/
No, no it did not help, thank you very much! So are you saying that I can't ask a question about the former LNER's #4468 "Mallard", a real life locomotive, on Prototype Talk, a forum where we can ask questions and talk about REAL LIFE locomotives and railroads?!?!?!
Mallard holds the record because it just happened to be the particular locomotive chosen on the day of the record breaking run. Mallard was chosen for a variety of reasons.
- It was new, so unlikely to breakdown, but not too new, so had had enough running in to remove any teething troubles.
- It was fitted with a double chimney/blastpipe combination (which not all A4s had), which improves draughting.
Other A4s had previously set speed records including 2509 Silver Link which hit 112mph on the press launch train for the LNER's new streamlined service. Mallard's record run was not an ordinary service train, but (ostensibly) a braking trial to test the effectiveness of new brakes for streamlined expresses (giving a plausible reason to run a train with a dynanometer car). This test was done on the outward journey but, when that was completed, those on board were told that the return journey was going to be a speed run (thus explaining the shorter than usual carriage formation).
Normal running with A4s was limited to 90mph (the ECML speed limit of the time).
- It was new, so unlikely to breakdown, but not too new, so had had enough running in to remove any teething troubles.
- It was fitted with a double chimney/blastpipe combination (which not all A4s had), which improves draughting.
Other A4s had previously set speed records including 2509 Silver Link which hit 112mph on the press launch train for the LNER's new streamlined service. Mallard's record run was not an ordinary service train, but (ostensibly) a braking trial to test the effectiveness of new brakes for streamlined expresses (giving a plausible reason to run a train with a dynanometer car). This test was done on the outward journey but, when that was completed, those on board were told that the return journey was going to be a speed run (thus explaining the shorter than usual carriage formation).
Normal running with A4s was limited to 90mph (the ECML speed limit of the time).
BigBoyFan4006
\m/
Thank you, for being one of two people to ligitimatly answer my question.
Hi Phil,
The point is the driver had permission to exceed the track speed limit and had officials accurately recording the speed of the train.
No doubt at other times A4 locomotives had exceeded the official record speed but if the railway officials found out about it the driver would have been punished for exceeding the speed limit.
The punishment could have included being fined, reduced to fireman for a number of months or in extreme cases it could involve serving jail time.
Here in South Australia when steam engines were being used the large steam engines had recorders in the cabin that used a pen to draw a graph on a roll of paper. When a driver had a fast run exceeding the speed limit by more than a minor amount it was necessary for that paper roll to be 'lost' in transit to head office!
Hope this helps'
Lindsay
The point is the driver had permission to exceed the track speed limit and had officials accurately recording the speed of the train.
No doubt at other times A4 locomotives had exceeded the official record speed but if the railway officials found out about it the driver would have been punished for exceeding the speed limit.
The punishment could have included being fined, reduced to fireman for a number of months or in extreme cases it could involve serving jail time.
Here in South Australia when steam engines were being used the large steam engines had recorders in the cabin that used a pen to draw a graph on a roll of paper. When a driver had a fast run exceeding the speed limit by more than a minor amount it was necessary for that paper roll to be 'lost' in transit to head office!
Hope this helps'
Lindsay
BigBoyFan4006
\m/
Hi Phil,
The point is the driver had permission to exceed the track speed limit and had officials accurately recording the speed of the train.
No doubt at other times A4 locomotives had exceeded the official record speed but if the railway officials found out about it the driver would have been punished for exceeding the speed limit.
The punishment could have included being fined, reduced to fireman for a number of months or in extreme cases it could involve serving jail time.
Here in South Australia when steam engines were being used the large steam engines had recorders in the cabin that used a pen to draw a graph on a roll of paper. When a driver had a fast run exceeding the speed limit by more than a minor amount it was necessary for that paper roll to be 'lost' in transit to head office!
Hope this helps'
Lindsay
That you, Lindsay!
jadebullet
might be back?
It also helps that they decided to use a slight downgrade in order to attempt the record, something that would disqualify the record today. And heaven forbid if you even bring it up that there were most likely trains that beat the record unofficially.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigBoyFan4006
\m/
Oh trust me, I won't! I would react the same way! lol
Last edited by a moderator:
captainkman
You are reading this.
And also those who broke the record officially but covered it up to not enrage the LNER men.
I'm referring to Duchess of Sutherland in 1953, on a run which saw her use the LNER's territory and break Mallard's record along the same stretch of line. British Railways covered it up; they told the crew to not tell anybody.
So it remains undocumented and nobody is going to believe me until I invent a time machine and video it happening.
The story got to me via a trustworthy friend who had a friend whose grandfather was the driver on the day.
Kieran.
Kennilworth
Active member
Hi Kieran
What was Duchess of Sutherland doing on the ECML in 1953? The locomotive exchanges took place in 1948 and were tightly controlled in order to get accurate comparisons between locomotives on service trains. I have a considerable collection of railway books and I have never come across any mention of this before so I think it may be an urban myth. When you consider the number of people who would have to collaborate on such a high speed run - engine crew, guard, control, signalmen and passengers just to name a few - the chances of keeping it quiet were zero.
Regards
Brian
What was Duchess of Sutherland doing on the ECML in 1953? The locomotive exchanges took place in 1948 and were tightly controlled in order to get accurate comparisons between locomotives on service trains. I have a considerable collection of railway books and I have never come across any mention of this before so I think it may be an urban myth. When you consider the number of people who would have to collaborate on such a high speed run - engine crew, guard, control, signalmen and passengers just to name a few - the chances of keeping it quiet were zero.
Regards
Brian
captainkman
You are reading this.
It was a run from Crewe to York via Kings Cross. On the run, the crew were LMS men with one LNER man aboard acting as a pilot as he knew the signals on the line.
The LMS men wanted to take this opportunity to go down Stoke Bank.
2 miles from the downhill at Stoke bank, the driver really opened the engine up.
At the bottom, the LNER pilot saw that Mallard's record had been broken and silently placed his hat over the speedometer. British Railways management told them to keep quiet, so as to not cuase shock.
That's as far as I know.
I also can't find any reference to this event on the internet as a legend or urban myth so it must've happened.
Also, in the early BR days when the GWR became the Western Region, documentation was found to prove City of Truro's speed record.
Kieran.
BLACKWATCH
Mechanical Engineer
I also can't find any reference to this event on the internet that it happened so it must be a legend or urban myth.
Kennilworth
Active member
Hi again
This is hardly conclusive proof of such a run.
In 1953 there would still have been considerable rivalry between former LMS and LNER employees. Anyone from the LMS wouldn't have let such a chance to get the bragging rights go without any comment. Another point is that Crewe to York via King's Cross would have meant that the train would have been going up Stoke Bank and not down it.
As mentioned earlier in this thread, speed attempts had to be carefully set up as it would have been impossible for a train to stop within one signal block from such speeds. The LNER streamlined service trains had to have two blocks kept clear ahead of them so that they could stop in the event of adverse signals, and they didn't need to run at speeds such as these on a regular basis.
If anyone out there has access to any of the railway magazines for 1953 perhaps they could check for evidence that Duchess of Sutherland visited the ECML. Even if there was no mention of a high speed run the fact that the loco visited the ECML would have generated a lot of interest and would therefore have been reported in the railway press of the time.
Regards
Brian
This is hardly conclusive proof of such a run.
In 1953 there would still have been considerable rivalry between former LMS and LNER employees. Anyone from the LMS wouldn't have let such a chance to get the bragging rights go without any comment. Another point is that Crewe to York via King's Cross would have meant that the train would have been going up Stoke Bank and not down it.
As mentioned earlier in this thread, speed attempts had to be carefully set up as it would have been impossible for a train to stop within one signal block from such speeds. The LNER streamlined service trains had to have two blocks kept clear ahead of them so that they could stop in the event of adverse signals, and they didn't need to run at speeds such as these on a regular basis.
If anyone out there has access to any of the railway magazines for 1953 perhaps they could check for evidence that Duchess of Sutherland visited the ECML. Even if there was no mention of a high speed run the fact that the loco visited the ECML would have generated a lot of interest and would therefore have been reported in the railway press of the time.
Regards
Brian