Streamlined vs non-Streamlined Duchess
- Thread starter alexl102
- Start date
hauntedclipp
copper-crowned
Seeing as how the streamlined casing on the real Duchesses were found to have minimal effect on speed by the LMS, I'd expect both the streamlined and unstreamlined versions to have the same spec.
As I understand it, when tested in a wind tunnel, the streamlining was found to be as good as other forms of streamlining used at the time. Whether that in turn had much effect on the achievable speed, I don't know.
I would have thought the creator would have used the same spec for both models but I don't understand engine specs well enough to determine so was wondering if anyone knew.
I would have thought the creator would have used the same spec for both models but I don't understand engine specs well enough to determine so was wondering if anyone knew.
captainkman
You are reading this.
Just have a look at whether or not the engines use the same kuid for their enginespec; I suspect that they do.
Kieran.
Kennilworth
Active member
Hi
Streamlining wasn't all to do with getting trains to run faster but was also to do with the reduction in horsepower required to run timetabled services. There was a huge public relations benefit to the companies as well with the publicity that it generated.
Tests were carried out on the LNER Gresley A4s and the wedge shaped front end was found to save 97 hp over an A3 in overcome head-on air resistance at 80 mph. The faster they went and the bigger the saving, with the difference at 100 mph being 190 hp. This meant a saving on coal consumption and contributed to the feasability of regular non-stop running between Edinburgh and London. It had the additional benefit of improving the drivers visibility by lifting smoke and steam well clear of the locomotive at speed.
The downside to it was the difficulties caused when servicing the locos with panels having to be opened or removed to carry out everyday tasks.
Regards
Brian
Streamlining wasn't all to do with getting trains to run faster but was also to do with the reduction in horsepower required to run timetabled services. There was a huge public relations benefit to the companies as well with the publicity that it generated.
Tests were carried out on the LNER Gresley A4s and the wedge shaped front end was found to save 97 hp over an A3 in overcome head-on air resistance at 80 mph. The faster they went and the bigger the saving, with the difference at 100 mph being 190 hp. This meant a saving on coal consumption and contributed to the feasability of regular non-stop running between Edinburgh and London. It had the additional benefit of improving the drivers visibility by lifting smoke and steam well clear of the locomotive at speed.
The downside to it was the difficulties caused when servicing the locos with panels having to be opened or removed to carry out everyday tasks.
Regards
Brian
That's fascinating - I never realised it was about efficiency more than raw speed. Thanks Brian.
Slightly ironically, the streamlining applied to the Duchesses failed in the area I've highlighted in red - it didn't lift the smoke away like the A4's did. Another reason why it wasn't so popular with staff. Great marketing tho!
hauntedclipp
copper-crowned
Makes sense why it wouldn't lift the smoke away. The A4's wedge shape was designed to push air up and over the train, while the Duchess' upside-down bathtub shape was more focused on pushing the air outward off the sides of the train. The former acted like a sword slicing through the air, while the latter was more like a boat's hull in the water.
captainkman
You are reading this.
Both the DLC Duchesses and Coronations use the same enginespec; I did a 'View Dependent Assets' on the one they use and they are all listed. The DLC locomotives are selected and are in blue.
I also checked their weights; they both have their mass listed as 110000. So their Trainz performance should be identical.
The real Coronation streamlining was not designed to have any real effect as Stanier believed his locomotives did not need fancy streamlining to outperform the A4's; it was therefore added purely for cosmetics and publicity.
Though we all know that the A4's were faster in the end.
Kieran.
I also checked their weights; they both have their mass listed as 110000. So their Trainz performance should be identical.
The real Coronation streamlining was not designed to have any real effect as Stanier believed his locomotives did not need fancy streamlining to outperform the A4's; it was therefore added purely for cosmetics and publicity.
Though we all know that the A4's were faster in the end.
Kieran.
Cheers Kieran.
I guess honestly we'll never know - the Coronations never got the chance to beat it, did they? Taking into account stuff like the slight downhill gradient and long enough straight sections?
Anyway, I'm opening a can of worms there! Nonetheless, I could only get the Trainz Coronation to 112mph - didn't they hit 114 one time?