Talk:SR Leader class

message: I've reviewed the article, I believe the concerns from the previous review have been addressed with a number of good secondary sources now used and correct PD tags added to the relevant images.  Thus, I'm happy to make the article a good article.  The Rambling Man 12:35, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article review

message: Hello! I have changed the wikilink to priming, which is a dab page, in the "Cylinder design" section so that it links to Priming (steam engine) instead. Note that this is a redlink. I didn't want to leave the link to the dab page, but there are no suitable targets on the dab page, and I suspected that this topic might be worth its own article. If not, please remove the link entirely. Thanks. --Tkynerd 04:25, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not an expert in the field, however I do know for a fact that priming has nothing to do with cylinder design, but may be traced to water carry-over from the boiler. It is mainly linked to impurities in the water making it foam up, fill the steam space and get drawn down the the steam collector pipe. Bulleid was the only British locomotive engineer to address the problem of water quality, adopting the French TIA (Traitement Intégral Armand) on-board water treatment system, doing so with great success so I am surprised that the subject of priming should come up in article on his work. However the man who really solved the whole problem, including priming, was L.D. Porta in the 1970s in Argentina. Boiler Water quality and treatment method is a huge subject, certainly worth its own article. In the meantime, I suggest you follow these links: ; --John of Paris 17:40, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, to be honest, all I was really interested in was getting the dab link fixed so it points to an appropriate target. I could have simply removed the wikilink, but in this case I decided there was a possibility that the subject might deserve its own article. The further research and any changes should be carried out by someone directly concerned with this article. Just, please, don't restore the link to Priming without a dab! :-) --Tkynerd 01:06, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

text: When I wrote the above comment, it hadn't hit me yet that when I'd looked at the "Cylinder design" section again, the link was no longer a redlink. User:Bulleid Pacific has created Priming (steam engine). Excellent, thanks! --Tkynerd 01:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Going on from my comments above, what is being described in the new article is not generally called "priming" and probably involves greater quantities of water. Of course it also involves water-throwing from the chimney, but that is avoided by opening the drain cocks and with piston valves this is a must, otherwise you run the risk blowing off the cylinder covers. With slide valves the danger is less as they will lift off their faces; even so, I would imagine that repeatedly allowing that to happen would not do the exhaust edges much good. What I think Bulleid was hoping to lessen with his valve design would have been condensation due to pressure drop resulting from expansion in the cylinders and the cooling of the steam as a result of giving up heat due to work? The condensation would take the form of droplets in suspension - or wet steam. This would not lead to priming, but to loss of efficiency. It could be counteracted by high superheat giving a greater temperature gradient and/or in some cases by steam jackets that kept the cylinders hot. Bulleid was obviously hoping for a jacket effect from the encircling sleeve valves, however, I suspect it could be shown that such would not have been the case — but that's another story.--John of Paris 11:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Priming]] 

message: Just one more thing. Surely it is not correct to count R.C  Jarvis as one of the designers of this locomotive. He had nothing to to with the design. He simply concluded after tests that it would have needed a complete redesign to have any success.--John of Paris 17:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: R.G. Jarvis??

message: Just think about it. Any bogie is by definition an interchangeable component. It would be hard to make it otherwise. So I don't see how it could have been "at Bulleid's insistence". He probably recommended keeping a pool of extra bogies in order to save time off the road. That would seem logical. But to say that it proved an "ineffective measure" is patently absurd, as there was never an opportunity to put it into effect! Five locomotives were being built, only one of which actually ran and that never reached full operating order.--John of Paris (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Interchangeable bogies?

message: Just occurred to me; as the first working unit wasn't completed until after nationalisation, ought the title to be "BR Leader Class"? – iridescent 13:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: The "Operational details" section mentions "a raised floor covering ballast material.". Was this intended to link to (rock) Track ballast, or was the term "ballast" being used simply to describe "added weight" (similar to Sailing ballast)?. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 16:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Track ballast|Ballast]]?? 

message: "four thermic siphons from beneath the firebox to pre-heat water entering the boiler,"
This is not the function of a thermic syphon.
86.177.23.232 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 22:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thermic syphon 

message: How about nominating this for TFA? It would be a lovely article for the main page, but obviously I thought I ought to ask the main contributors before nominating. I've written a little blurb below: Bob talk 20:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  TFA? 

message: The article describes the locomotive as an 0-6-6-0, but surely 0-6-6-0T is correct. The article also mentions "the tender". AFAIK, the Leader class did not have a tender, which is why 0-6-6-0T is correct. As this is a FA, I won't be bold, but am putting this up for discussion first. Mjroots (talk) 05:59, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No tender indeed; and since the entire water supply was carried on the locomotive main frames, it's a tank engine. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Article suitable amended and corrected. Mjroots (talk) 19:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  0-6-6-0 or 0-6-6-0T 

message: The culmination of the project was a £178,865 5s 0d (£4,074,550.40 in today's money, converted at the 1950 rate) bill for the taxpayer, though when the press reported the story as late as 1953, £500,000 (£11,390,000.00) was claimed to have been "wasted" on the project. R. G. Jarvis, who was placed in charge of the project after Bulleid's departure, insisted that the locomotive required an entire re-design to solve the problems of the original concept.
Isn´t the word used more neutral? Maybe spended, just replace wasted.
eg £500,000 (£11,390,000.00) was claimed to have been used/spended on the project.
Olof nord (talk) 16:01, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The paragraph in question neutrally says what the total bill was, and then goes on to discuss the press reaction, which was that money spent on the project had been wasted. In the sense in which this article uses it, the non-neutral language is correct. – iridescent 20:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Operational assessment

message: Tractive effort is given as "30,000 lbf (Approx.) (133.44 kN)". But if the 30,000 lbf is only approximate, what is the justification for stating the metric conversion to the nearest 0.01 kN? Is that the level of accuracy implied by "Approx."? If the original figure could be several hundred, or even thousand, lbf off then the level of accuracy in the conversion looks excessive. Even if the original figure is plus or minus a few lbf, then (if my math serves me correctly) the error would be around plus or minus a few tens of Newtons, so 0.01 kN accuracy is still pushing it? TheGrappler (talk) 21:23, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  It is listed as approximate due to the fact that there are few records, far less any that indicate the maximum potential of the locomotive. UPDATE: Have revisited the HAV Bulleid source, which includes a general layout diagram and the actual TE of the design, which is 26,300lbf. I have revised the article to reflect this. --Bulleid Pacific (talk) 14:31, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  How approximately is "approx."? 

message: < This included oscillating gear that gave a 25-degree axial movement >
Rotary movement, I think. The axial movement was provided by the valve gear.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.183.83.192 (talk) 14:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sleeve oscillation 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on SR Leader class. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110711081037/http://www.gcrauctions.com/sale113/all-lots.html to http://www.gcrauctions.com/sale113/all-lots.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:11, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified