Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
WC'n'F Cab Forward by gunslinger87 WC'n'F Cab Forward by gunslinger87
Been a while since I posted a locomotive drawing.

Well here is another one of my oddball concepts. This is a narrow gauge "Cab Forward" style 4-4-0 heavily inspired by North Pacific Coast #21.
[link]

My version, however, has some alterations. I added a sand dome just behind the steam resevior, a stylish capped stack, saftey ("pop") valves, and a wooden cab with celestory. Due to the unusual arrangement of the locomotive she is designed to be an oil burner.

However the original design of NCP #21 didn't "breath" well, meaning it didn't have enough draft for the fire in the firebox. This was rectified by literally cutting and oval shaped hole right in the front of the locomotive's cab front wall. This fixed the issue, but now you had a HOLE in the front of your cab and the headlight was forced to be mounted higher and causing visual obstruction to the engine crew.

On my design I added an "air scoop" just under the cab. It's the shaded thing just before the steam chests on the cylinders. This allows better draft into the firebox and is don so the headlight didn't need relocating.

Again, the cab is constructed primarily of wood, however the lower portion is steel clad.

The tender I'm actually not all that satisfied by. I would like to revise it and make it more of a traditional tender like those used on either Cooke narrow gauge 2-6-0 or an early to intermediate period "C-16" style tender.

And yes, I know I forgot the bell cord...

Not sure what her road number is to be, yet. I'm leaning towards "26". but I won't decide on that until I can actually sit down and work out a detailed locomotive roster for the Wolf Creek & Flagstone RR. This unique little locomotive is really used as a test bed for experimental advancements in locomotive technology on the WC&F. And I think that's what give the locomotive its charm.

Anyways, I hope you all like her! PLEASE comment if you fave!! :)
Add a Comment:
 
:iconpercyrosalina:
Hi there, I'm thinking of making NPC #21 as a model, and since this is very good reference pictures, may I use this?

Cheers
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2014
Yes, as long as credit is given to who's drawings they are. ;p
I actually drew this engine using scale drawings of NPC #21 from an old issue of the Narrow Gauge & Shortline Gazette. (Best model train magazine EVER!!) :iconfoxhahaplz:

I don't remember the issue off hand, but if you'd like I can look it up and give it to you later? :D
Reply
:iconrockyrailroad578:
Rockyrailroad578 Featured By Owner May 23, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
The whole tender looks kina weird, but then again, you need to make extra sure that it can't be mistaken for another! It'd blend in too much!
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Jun 1, 2014
Eh', I like the idea of a "drop-in" oil conversion for a tender and use that. Either way. :)
Reply
:iconrockyrailroad578:
Rockyrailroad578 Featured By Owner Jun 2, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
It won't be confused for other tenders!
Reply
:icongundammech101:
GundamMech101 Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012
very interesting cab forward, never though about a 4-4-0 cab forwards but now that i think about it, its a great little engine, and yes i agree with you there on the tender, sense it looks like a couple of oil tanks mounted on a flatbed car
Reply
:iconjoel-swedish-dragon:
Joel-Swedish-Dragon Featured By Owner Nov 12, 2012
Heh, neato, man. :meow:
Reply
:iconjavajunkie1976:
Javajunkie1976 Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
You could have introduced a fan blower just behind the crosshead for the firebox problem.
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
It's the 1890s. ^^;
Reply
:iconjavajunkie1976:
Javajunkie1976 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
I know that, the french had a blower attached to the tender of one of their early steam locomotives back in the 30s.
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
1830s? O_o
Reply
:iconjavajunkie1976:
Javajunkie1976 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
Yeah, the French Seguin (or Sequin). Late 1830s early 40s. [link]
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
Well I'll be... :o
I can;t believe they had blowers back then! :rofl:

It's a good idea, yes, if burning solid fuels. With an oil burner, or liquid fuel type, the blower may cause flashing. Where the fuel burning the vaporized fuel suddenly goes out and then reignites. If even only for a brief moment it still allows for noticeable temperature change, cooling, and then reheating when the fire reignites or is re-lit. That is REALLY bad for the flues of the locomotive. Although in concept a blower is a neat idea, but it may complicate the flashing issues of an oil burner.
Reply
:iconjavajunkie1976:
Javajunkie1976 Featured By Owner Nov 13, 2012
That's why during the 1940s, the oil burners started playing around with fuel injection pumps, either driven by one of the drive wheels or on the tender.
Reply
:icondinodanthetrainman:
dinodanthetrainman Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I love this
Reply
:iconsilverwolvesforever:
SilverwolvesForever Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2012  Student Digital Artist
Love it as usual! NPC 21 was a beautiful, if strange, engine in my opinion.

If you are open to tender suggestions, i'd second the motion for a slope-back tender, maybe similar to the as-delivered D&RGW K-27 tenders. It's interesting, how time changes appearances; the current K-27s still around look nothing like how they were delivered beyond the wheel arrangement :)
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
I know all too well!! ;p
[link]
Reply
:iconsilverwolvesforever:
SilverwolvesForever Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012  Student Digital Artist
Ah, I see you do. Somehow I don't remember seeing that drawing when I was looking through your gallery the other day. I like the as-built K-27s much better than the updated ones :)
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
Same here, they have a certain charm to them that the 30s/40s rebuilds don't. I also like the "Second Phase" K-27s, where they rebuilt into single expansion slide valves and larger tenders. However my favorite version has always been the As-Built ones. :)
Reply
:icontrainboi:
trainboi Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2012
NPC No. 21 was fitted with a dome later, but it was a very turn-of-the-century type engine. I love your backdated look.
I feel that your tender woes may never be over, though I haven't seen all the types of tenders. My best bet would be a sort of slopeback, probably rather like those used on the Listowel & Ballybunion Monorail. These looked good with the decorative engines there, so even such a different design as this may do well. It's worth a try.
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
I'd like to stay away from slope back tenders in terms of road locos. I like then with switchers, but they don't seem right on road locomotives. Though I do have a few acceptions here and there. Such as the "As-Built" D&RG K-27 from 1903.
Reply
:icontrainboi:
trainboi Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
I don't really have any other ideas for an "old-timey" oil tender otherwise. This was why I suggested slopeback: [link]. I felt that if such a tender were fitted with wheels beneath the "saddlebags" and the gap in the center removed, the design might do well. I also thought of a standard tender with fitted oil tank, but it achieves too much of a modern look.
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
I actually have a solution and it's been done before. The best example I can show is this.
[link]

Granted it is a slope back tender, but the premis is what I want to point out. The brass box with the filler hatch on top (to the right of the picture) is a "drop in" oil fuel tank. They are designed to simply drop into the fuel bunker in older tenders.

I was thinking of having a tender more like this.
[link]
Only adding a drop in oil fuel tank to replace the coal load.
Reply
:icontrainboi:
trainboi Featured By Owner Nov 9, 2012
The principal is familiar to me; V&T No. 25's oil tanks are sitting on the Nevada State Museum grounds until her tender tank is repaired. I did not know it was simply "drop-in," as most things aren't, but after some thought it occurred to me that the L&BR tenders' central portion looked rather like a conventional tender with a rear-sloping "drop-in" tank. I think this would look a little less utilitarian than the normal rectangular tank, though perhaps it is Hunslet's quaint design that makes this tender look less so than some more usual design.

I might try a round tender like those on the SPNG, but I think this also conflicts with the backdated appearance. See what you think.
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
A "Whale Back" tender is something I hadn't really thought about! :plotting:
Well I'll have to do some digging to see how far back the history of Whale back tenders go, but this particular loco is test-bed basically for new, experimental locomotive technology.
(There's also a company that makes NPC #21 as an HOn3 kit. It's so small that it's difficult to fit a decent motor into it. Though many have gone with tender drives and a whale back tender would make that job easier.)
Reply
:icontrainboi:
trainboi Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
I know Whaleback tenders were in use on the early Cab Forward mallets, and SPNG no. 8 had hers in 1907, so it seems solidly possible that the No. 26 of a road built sometime during or after 1905 would have one.
Reply
:icongunslinger87:
gunslinger87 Featured By Owner Nov 10, 2012
Quite possibly.
Reply
:icondarkriderexe:
Darkriderexe Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2012
I really have to agree with you on the tender. I always wondered why they chose that design.
Reply
:iconjacob-cross:
Jacob-Cross Featured By Owner Nov 8, 2012
X3
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
November 8, 2012
Image Size
1.4 MB
Resolution
6576×5088
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
882 (3 today)
Favourites
22 (who?)
Comments
29
×