The Night Mail

[J. S. Bach]

21 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

I find it sad that Rankine is largely forgotten, he was a brilliant man. The Rankine cycle is still the basis of steam power plant, he was a pioneer of the theory of heat engines.

Not by me, it is 531° R here right now. I have always liked it since I learned about it high school physics (or chemistry) as it gives the real temperature..

Edited 15 hours ago by J. S. Bach

[J. S. Bach]

Night Owl from the Piedmont.

[jjb1970]

10 minutes ago, J. S. Bach said:

Not by me, it is 531° R here right now. I have always liked it since I learned about it high school physics (or chemistry) as it gives the real temperature..

 

Over here we use Kelvin, another brilliant man all but unknown outside of scientific and engineering fields.

[AndyID]

6 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

 

Over here we use Kelvin, another brilliant man all but unknown outside of scientific and engineering fields.

 

I think McGonagall mentioned him too. I'll see if I can find it 😄

[Chris Snowdon]

Hi jjb1970

Is this the place to discuss fluid dynamics?  Yes, I think that it is, for a few reasons.

The strength of rail was to get mail from the first port of call to its destination, and speed and efficiency both mattered - "City of Truro" and her crew were doing just that, and it was also the point of TPOs.

Later, the "Blue Riband" wasn't just about showing off to rich 1st Class pax, or shifting huge numbers of people in search of a better life, but keeping the mail-boats going as started by Brunel a century earlier.  Streamlining on the railways had a different driver - definitely to impress 1st Class and business travellers - but also the efficiency angle - either more speed for same effort, or same speed for less effort.  Neither the Brits nor the Germans got that right, and most aerodynamic styling in the US was just "styling" as well.

Whether the subject is an aircraft, ship or train, the various ratios between cross-sectional frontal area and length are mainly equally important and the relationships between the six degrees of freedom are also affected.  I still know of no aircraft or railway design which uses a "bulbous bow", which basically uses a 3d version of the bernoulli effect to reduce drag.  Instead, aircraft get wider rather than longer (or, at least, they should increase in proportion) whereas HSTs seem to go for the "duck-bill" for down-force at the ends.

Thompson should have cared about this (he was a mathematician) but he had no reason to.  Gresley and Stanier were just showing off to Wagner and Witte (who were just showing off in return) and I personally believe that Bulleid just got lucky.  Collett's "ping-pong ball" on KH7 was useless, but he never realised that (1) the A4-style cab-front was a Good Thing and (2) the fairing behind the chimney helped with smoke-deflection: Double-win.

Finally, Raymond Loewe designed some incredibly handsome machines, but Kenneth Graham's worked better, whether you consider his food-mixers or his locomotive body-shells.

regards

cs

[AndyID]

9 minutes ago, Chris Snowdon said:

Hi jjb1970

Is this the place to discuss fluid dynamics? 

 

 You can discuss pretty much anything here. Just don't mention sheds.

 

EDIT: I should probably add spiders to that.

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by AndyID

[Chris Snowdon]

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the etiquette warning.  I don't have "one of those" but will accept that they are taboo anyway.

regards

cs

[polybear]

3 hours ago, AndyID said:

 You can discuss pretty much anything here. Just don't mention sheds.

 

EDIT: I should probably add spiders to that.

 

 

 

Or G*rages.  Or Coffee Cake...or Cream Cake....or.....

 

4 hours ago, Chris Snowdon said:

Have had a brainstorm.  A possible model RMS, if one has the enormous aounts of time, money and space necessary, would be a down-scaled conversion of the old Marcle Models SD 14. 

 

Thanks for mentioning that - looks to be an interesting site;  fellow TMN'ers may wish to peruse the catalogue as there's a lot of HO stuff in there - including buildings/architectural and even HO scale Polish Choo Choo's....

 

edit:  Link:  http://www.marcle.co.uk/index.htm

Edited 11 hours ago by polybear

[AndyID]

4 hours ago, Chris Snowdon said:

Hi jjb1970

Is this the place to discuss fluid dynamics?  Yes, I think that it is, for a few reasons.

The strength of rail was to get mail from the first port of call to its destination, and speed and efficiency both mattered - "City of Truro" and her crew were doing just that, and it was also the point of TPOs.

Later, the "Blue Riband" wasn't just about showing off to rich 1st Class pax, or shifting huge numbers of people in search of a better life, but keeping the mail-boats going as started by Brunel a century earlier.  Streamlining on the railways had a different driver - definitely to impress 1st Class and business travellers - but also the efficiency angle - either more speed for same effort, or same speed for less effort.  Neither the Brits nor the Germans got that right, and most aerodynamic styling in the US was just "styling" as well.

Whether the subject is an aircraft, ship or train, the various ratios between cross-sectional frontal area and length are mainly equally important and the relationships between the six degrees of freedom are also affected.  I still know of no aircraft or railway design which uses a "bulbous bow", which basically uses a 3d version of the bernoulli effect to reduce drag.  Instead, aircraft get wider rather than longer (or, at least, they should increase in proportion) whereas HSTs seem to go for the "duck-bill" for down-force at the ends.

Thompson should have cared about this (he was a mathematician) but he had no reason to.  Gresley and Stanier were just showing off to Wagner and Witte (who were just showing off in return) and I personally believe that Bulleid just got lucky.  Collett's "ping-pong ball" on KH7 was useless, but he never realised that (1) the A4-style cab-front was a Good Thing and (2) the fairing behind the chimney helped with smoke-deflection: Double-win.

Finally, Raymond Loewe designed some incredibly handsome machines, but Kenneth Graham's worked better, whether you consider his food-mixers or his locomotive body-shells.

regards

cs

 

From a strictly engineering perspective I'm inclined to think Collett's thingy stuck on the front of a King was almost as effective as the efforts of Gresely, Stanier and Bullied. It all had much more to do with marketing than actual efficiency.

[Hroth]

13 hours ago, polybear said:

 

Bear doesn't have "A List"

He has "The List"....

 😁

 

 

 

To port or starboard?

 

Just askin'.....

 

(sorry for repeating all the other port/starboard jokes, but I'd gone to bed when it all kicked off...)

 

Edited 9 hours ago by Hroth
apollyologiy

[TheQ]

9 hours ago, Dave Hunt said:

 

The port always goes port.

 

Dave

Except when one vessel is limited by size or draft,

Except when one vessel is following a shipping channel and the other crossing.

Except when one vessel or both are sailing craft.

Except when one vessel is aground.

[Hroth]

1 minute ago, TheQ said:

Except when one vessel is limited by size or draft,

Except when one vessel is following a shipping channel and the other crossing.

Except when one vessel or both are sailing craft.

Except when one vessel is aground.

 

That was the problem then.

The iceberg wasn't displaying the correct navigation lights!

 

[TheQ]

31 minutes ago, AndyID said:

 

From a strictly engineering perspective I'm inclined to think Collett's thingy stuck on the front of a King was almost as effective as the efforts of Gresely, Stanier and Bullied. It all had much more to do with marketing than actual efficiency.

It's well known Collet didn't want to join in the Aero dynamics game. So his "efforts" were a mere sop to management.

[AndyID]

7 minutes ago, TheQ said:

Except when one vessel is limited by size or draft,

Except when one vessel is following a shipping channel and the other crossing.

Except when one vessel or both are sailing craft.

Except when one vessel is aground.

 

I think he might be referring to the bottle of port 😄

[bbishop]

5 hours ago, AndyID said:

 You can discuss pretty much anything here. Just don't mention sheds.

 

EDIT: I should probably add spiders to that.

 

 

or the Midland Railway small engine policy.

[Compound2632]

29 minutes ago, bbishop said:

or the Midland Railway small engine policy.

 

As the South Western discovered, big engines don't work well.

[bbishop]

24 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

As the South Western discovered, big engines don't work well.

S15?

[Happy Hippo]

11 hours ago, SM42 said:

 

The Warsaw Uprising was co-ordinated by word of mouth and runners

 

Andy

Then hung out to dry by their supposed (by this time) allies, the USSR.

 

Who stopped their offensive against  occupied Warsaw, and sat back to watch.

[Happy Hippo]

6 hours ago, Chris Snowdon said:

Is this the place to discuss fluid dynamics?  

Yes, comparisons between the relative merits of a smooth skin(Hippo) against fur (Capybara) in the setting of a temperate climate muddy hollow would be most helpful.

Edited 8 hours ago by Happy Hippo

[Compound2632]

7 minutes ago, bbishop said:

S15?

 

F13. E14. G14. P14. T14. As I said the other day, Robert Urie must have been a very frustrated man.

 

But the great Dugald Drummond gave us the 'Abbotsford' class of 1877, the progenitor of so many superb 4-4-0s, so may be forgiven the sins of his old age.

[Happy Hippo]

1 hour ago, TheQ said:

Except when one vessel is limited by size or draft,

Except when one vessel is following a shipping channel and the other crossing.

Except when one vessel or both are sailing craft.

Except when one vessel is aground.

I think Dave was referring to the circulation of the port decanter at a Mess dinner, where it is always passed to the left.

 

The trouble is that there are too many idiots sitting around the table who are prepared to let the decanter pause for long periods of time whilst they engage is mindless chatter.

 

Of course, in an Army Officers or Warrant Officers and Sgts Mess, the decanter goes around faster than passing the parcel on a Belfast bus.

[New Haven Neil]

6 hours ago, Chris Snowdon said:

Hi jjb1970

Is this the place to discuss fluid dynamics?  Yes, I think that it is, for a few reasons.

The strength of rail was to get mail from the first port of call to its destination, and speed and efficiency both mattered - "City of Truro" and her crew were doing just that, and it was also the point of TPOs.

Later, the "Blue Riband" wasn't just about showing off to rich 1st Class pax, or shifting huge numbers of people in search of a better life, but keeping the mail-boats going as started by Brunel a century earlier.  Streamlining on the railways had a different driver - definitely to impress 1st Class and business travellers - but also the efficiency angle - either more speed for same effort, or same speed for less effort.  Neither the Brits nor the Germans got that right, and most aerodynamic styling in the US was just "styling" as well.

Whether the subject is an aircraft, ship or train, the various ratios between cross-sectional frontal area and length are mainly equally important and the relationships between the six degrees of freedom are also affected.  I still know of no aircraft or railway design which uses a "bulbous bow", which basically uses a 3d version of the bernoulli effect to reduce drag.  Instead, aircraft get wider rather than longer (or, at least, they should increase in proportion) whereas HSTs seem to go for the "duck-bill" for down-force at the ends.

Thompson should have cared about this (he was a mathematician) but he had no reason to.  Gresley and Stanier were just showing off to Wagner and Witte (who were just showing off in return) and I personally believe that Bulleid just got lucky.  Collett's "ping-pong ball" on KH7 was useless, but he never realised that (1) the A4-style cab-front was a Good Thing and (2) the fairing behind the chimney helped with smoke-deflection: Double-win.

Finally, Raymond Loewe designed some incredibly handsome machines, but Kenneth Graham's worked better, whether you consider his food-mixers or his locomotive body-shells.

regards

cs

 

With a big whoosh I right back in Riversdale, 1976 intake, just then......dear old 'Heat'.

 

In our '80 finals there was a fluid dynamics question nobody got right - not even the lecturers afterwards - turned out they had missed out a value....we got credit for trying that question!

[Winslow Boy]

22 minutes ago, New Haven Neil said:

 

With a big whoosh I right back in Riversdale, 1976 intake, just then......dear old 'Heat'.

 

In our '80 finals there was a fluid dynamics question nobody got right - not even the lecturers afterwards - turned out they had missed out a value....we got credit for trying that question!

I take it was how many times you can wind the elastic band before it snaps.

[jjb1970]

8 hours ago, Chris Snowdon said:

 

I've been to a few meetings at a place which has an HO-scale vehicle-ferry in their collection of models, including a couple of goods trains on the rail-deck (tankers and Interferry vans).  If memory serves, then it really can't be that much more than about twelve feet long...

regards

cs

 

Not this one per chance?

 

[Compound2632]

49 minutes ago, Happy Hippo said:

I think Dave was referring to the circulation of the port decanter at a Mess dinner, where it is always passed to the left.

 

indeed, in Oxford colleges too, with the refinement that the most junior fellow sits at the extreme left of the circle around the senior common room fireplace and has the job of carrying the bottle back across to the most senior fellow at the other side of the semicircle. There was one college where the most junior fellow happened to be an engineer - the port slide was invented.