Jump to content

Talk:Traction engine: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Chenab (talk | contribs)
Line 187: Line 187:


[[User:EdJogg|EdJogg]] ([[User talk:EdJogg|talk]]) 14:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
[[User:EdJogg|EdJogg]] ([[User talk:EdJogg|talk]]) 14:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I've not been able to find an image of the lorry used in the film but thought it was an early Standard Sentinel (Standard in this case being the type, later ones were Super and S Type). The picture on the posters is clearly fictional however. If anyone can point me in the direction of a relevant still from the film I'll try and comment further.
Early Sentinels were built without windscreens - 'The Old Man' doesn't have one. Indeed I think they were always an optional extra on Standards. There are issues with off-centre boilers as well and I cannot think of any real world machine built with one. Balance is not the major problem it is more that it does need someone other than the driver looking after it almost full time as lorry boilers are small and do not have the reserve of steam that traction engine boilers can have.

[[User:Chenab|Chenab]] ([[User talk:Chenab|talk]]) 14:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:09, 10 December 2008

WikiProject iconTrucks Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Trucks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of trucks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconLincolnshire Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Separate U.K. Article?

It seems to me that both the traction engine and steam tractor articles are mainly focusing on the U.K. construction and usage. I think that it would be better if there were separate pages for the U.K. and U.S. engines. Right now, it seems that traction engine is almost completely dominated by descriptions of assorted U.K. steam equipment, terminology, and other information. U.K. and U.S. engines differ greatly in their looks, terminology, and certain design features. 71.136.33.187 17:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't agree more! The main reason for the current UK bias is that the majority of the traction engine information on WP has been added by me, and, as a UK resident, my knowledge and information is entirely UK-based. I have been hoping that other contributors can add US information, and for home-grown products in South America, Africa, Asia... Different articles for UK/US practice may be possible in the future, but not until more non-UK information is forthcoming. How does a US-built traction engine (as opposed to a steam tractor) differ from a UK-built one? -- EdJogg 22:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Ed, I'd be happy to do so. My thoughts are that the Steam Tractor article should be devoted to U.S. Equipment, seeing as that is the more common term in use here. It seems to me that since there is more U.K. information in this article, this would be the logical choice to mostly leave alone as goes U.S. info. As goes the regional manufacturers, perhaps they could be a subsection in this article? Spudmonster 04:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the issues regarding terminology, both pages must continue to cross-refer each other. Feel free to adjust the text as you see fit, but what is there (in this respect) was added on the back of a suggested merge between the two articles, so is probably the minimum you can get away with. If there is sufficient text to warrant it in the future, we can always split-out something like Steam tractor development in North America
Also, must bear in mind that these machines were not restricted to UK/North America – traction engines resembling British designs were manufactured elsewhere in Europe, too
As described below, I think a separate page to list manufacturers worldwide is called-for, since these lists have a tendency to sprawl, and it gives us a common link to use for traction engine, steam tractor and steam roller, and possibly steam lorry too. (Haven't done this yet, keep getting side-tracked by my watchlist!)
EdJogg 11:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My idea was to have traction engine dedicated to U.K. development, with a brief description of north american development and a cross-link to Steam tractor and a note reading something like "For a more complete description, please read the Steam Tractor article". The Steam Tractor article would mainly focus on North American traction engines, and have a cross-link to the traction tngine article, with a note reading "For a more complete description please read the traction engine article". Also, both articles would have a link to the list of other manufacturers worldwide. Spudmonster 21:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We're thinking along the same lines, so I suggest you just 'be bold' and add your updates, and we can take it from there... ...it's easy enough to revert if it doesn't work.
EdJogg 22:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not doing anything yet Ed. I've been quite busy lately, and just haven't had time. Spudmonster 20:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK -- you'll see that I haven't done much here either. Other pages, on the other hand...
(Today I edited articles about a bridge, a railway line, a town in Wiltshire, and a character from an American radio series – all dirctly linked, and all because someone had left a typo in their edit!)
EdJogg 00:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Manufacturers - North America - Merge with Steam tractor?

There is considerable duplication between the manufacturer lists on this page and Steam tractor, probably because most of the US firms would have produced steam tractors at some time.

Are there any objections to the list on this page being merged to Steam tractor? An appropriate link and summary would be included here, of course - and similarly for GB manufacturers on that page back here...

EdJogg 10:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WP guidance is that if there is no contention to a suggested merge, after one month, then the merge can be deemed 'approved'. So this 'merge' will take place in due course.
I have had a slight change of mind and now believe that the best approach is to create a list page, listing all the manufacturers, linked-in from both traction engine and steam tractor. The reasoning behind this is partially due to the overlap of the names used, and it will keep both pages shorter and tidier. I propose to list by country and (for the UK) by county, as now.
I have not yet decided whether steam roller manufacturers should be included in the same list, or retained on their own page. If included, they should be identified in some way.
Steam lorry manufacturers were generally different companies from the (mostly) 'agricultural engineers' who built traction engines, so they will be kept separate.
EdJogg 10:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cornfield Locomotive?

(In response to EdJogg removing the claimed alternative name 'cornfield locomotive' from the introduction...)

I'm not surprised that search engines don't return anything for "cornfield locomotive." They (the search engines) are not infallible, eh? That doesn't mean there's no such usage.

Just for grins, try searching for the phrase "jerk a lung," which is railroad slang for pulling out a drawhead or coupler knuckle. I learned (and used) that phrase during my many years in railroading. Are you going to say no one uses it because Google didn't return a hit?

BDD 03:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I'd dare search for "jerk a lung", it sounds like the sort of phrase that might be blocked by our 'webwasher' filter...
I quite understand your feelings about Google, but I reckon that any 'alternative names' in the introduction should be in reasonably common usage, so using Google hits as a guide seemed a sensible way to gauge this. There are lots of articles about, and pictures of, traction engines / road locomotives / steam tractors on the web, so I would have expected at least some hits if the term was in common usage.
If you can provide a citation (preferably online, though this is, of course, not essential) then there is no problem including the phrase somewhere in the article, noting that "in parts of the US, traction engines were sometimes known as cornfield locomotives". Nevertheless, I don't think it's in sufficiently widespread usage to go in the introduction. Alternatively, that sentence might be more appropriate in the steam tractor article, since that is (inevitably) much more US-biased.
Please forgive me for being sensitive over the naming issues. The terms traction engine and steam tractor are used fairly generically and interchangeably, yet there are certain machines which most definitely fall into the latter category (see the pic in the steam tractor article) and it is a delicate job maintaining the appropriate distance between the two articles. Please feel free to add information (and pictures) about the US machines, on whichever page. US traction engines had a distinct 'look' compared to British-built examples, and many US Steam Tractors/rollers had vertical boilers. Pictures would be good for readers to compare the designs.
EdJogg 09:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ironically, this page will almost certainly now be returned as a hit... :o)
EdJogg 09:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What we CAN use is the (entirely logical) term field locomotive. I have found a reference (with picture) to the 'legendary' 1895 Jacob Price Field Locomotive, which the sales blurb describes as "the most powerful traction engine made". (You see the problem we have in tying down the names??) It does makes sense to add this term somewhere in due course – and I'll include a link to this archive page from steam tractor.
Incidentally, I did find one other reference to 'field locomotive', in the intended context, in a crawler tractor forum...
EdJogg 10:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Names

For the UK keeping one list of names would probably be best for the Traction Engine, Tractors and Roller list as there are very few cases where a firm only made one of the products in that list and most of the major companies made all three.

The section on tractors doesn't reflect the impact that the changes in the law such as the Heavy Motor Car Act and other legislation had. When I get chance I will do something covering that for you.

Only just joined today so still finding my way around and getting a feel for where I can contribute.

Chenab 16:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The manufacturer list will appear one day – I've been consistently distracted elsewhere!
The history of steam-powered road traction is a complete mess on Wikipedia. If you care to look around, you will find that Vehicle has a lot about steam carriages – completely out-of-place in that article. Steam car, Steam tricycle, steam bus also include some information about the history; and there's more at Timeline of steam power. Much of the history is, of course, common to each vehicle type, so I would like to see these modified in order that all the history can be grouped into one article, and listed as the Main Article the others refer to, with only the vehicle-specific history retained.

EdJogg 01:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hadn't looked at all of those - as you say it is a bit of a mess with the early steam carriage stuff being all over the place. Also it is interesting to see that steam bus doesn't mention Clarkson at all who is probably the most important in this country. Will see what I can do to add stuff as and when I get the time.

Chenab 10:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

End of manufacture?

I'm not knowledgeable about traction engines/steam tractors, and I began reading this article with avid interest. But something basic that doesn't seem to be present is a date range for the manufacture and use of these machines. When were they produced? When did production (largely) end? When was the use of these machines superseded by conventional (modern) tractors? Spottacus 01:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Guilty as charged'! The section on 'History' is woefully inadequate. I must stop editing everywhere else on WP and get on with researching it!
I cannot give a definitive answer to your questions, but working from memory, and from the 2004 Great Dorset Steam Fair show guide I can tell you the following, at least from a UK viewpoint.
It is difficult to be certain about the very first traction engine, but several manufacturers started in the 1850s: Aveling & Porter and Clayton & Shuttleworth being two of the first (and, subsequently, largest) builders.
Many manufacturers were still producing engines well into the 1920s, and some of the larger companies continued longer:
  • John Fowler & Co. produced their last showman's engine, the fourth of the Super Lion class, "Supreme" in 1934 (three have been preserved)
  • William Foster & Co Ltd were still producing showman's engines in 1938 (example 4nhp "John Michael")
  • Richard Garrett & Sons just made it into the 1930s. They built the last Burrell engines: the 5nhp road locomotive "Dorothy", the last but one Burrell, was built in 1931.
  • Marshall, Sons & Co.: 4nhp steam roller, "Major Henry", built 1931; 6nhp portable engine "Jenny", 1936.
  • Wallis & Steevens 'Advance' type steam roller, eg 8nhp "Lucy", built 1939
  • Foden were still making over-type steam wagons in 1930 (several of this age preserved)
  • Sentinel Waggon Works were making their much more advanced under-type steam lorries well into the 1930s, eg Sentinel S4 DKN 689, first registered 1937
I've given the names/regs since this will allow you to search the various databases for further information. (see External Links).
As for when they were superseded? I can give some rough figures:
  • Steam rollers were still in commercial use in the UK well into the 1960s, and I suspect that some soldiered on to the early 1970s
  • Showmans engines were still in use into the 1950s
  • Road locomotives were still in use during WW2 – I have a book which recounts one of the last major journeys by these machines, three hauling a large boiler, or similar, on a 100+-mile route over the Pennines in 1944. (It had taken that long for diesel-powered equivalents to match the strength and power of the big road locomotives.)
  • Large numbers of diesel tractors were built during the late 1930s and 1940s, and I suspect that this would have finally spelled the end for the agricultural engines – especially the ploughing engines, as diesel tractors were light enough to direct-haul ploughs on British soils.
There was probably some legislation in the 1930s that made steam road vehicles unviable – which seems to have been the story from day one. It is interesting to speculate how steam lorries, in particular, might have developed differently had the legislation been skewed in their favour...
EdJogg 10:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One or two engines were put back into use for haulage during the Suez Crisis and steam lorries were still in use into the 50s. Strangely a few sets of ploughing engines were probably amongst the last used since they had advantages for dredging large lakes and at least one set worked commercially until a surprisingly late date. As far as showmans engines is concerned that will always be a debate even more so for some of the rides. For instance the set of Gallopers owned by the Downs family is still run as a going concern on the fairs by a showland family. Has that even entered preservation or is it still in its working life?

There was some legislation which is claimed to make things difficult although it was in response to pressures on the railways rather than to make things better for other road vehicles. Chenab (talk) 16:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agricultural engines

As these were 'most common in the countryside' I was hoping to see a little more information on them here, not just in their use for threshing but also for ploughing, pumping, etc. (I'm thinking of the Fowlers & Ransomes engines) Does anyone know a little bit more about them who could expand this area, it would help other articles like John Fowler (agricultural engineer) & the British Agricultural Revolution? Thanks Ephebi 19:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no proof of this, but the intersection between "people who are interested in traction engines" and "people who edit WP" would appear to be vanishingly small (it is currently writing this response :o) ). It is this sort of problem that leads to inconsistencies in WP coverage (consider how much 'popular culture' there is here).
Unfortunately, I'm no expert, and I have few books on the subject and not much time to edit. Contributions from other interested/knowledgeable parties would be most welcome!
EdJogg (talk) 09:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • excellent response - I can see the logic your reply... though it might be different if only someone could make a steam powered web browser... too much pressure on the download pipe guv'nor Ephebi (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Portable engines

Since a Portable Engine provides no "traction" as such shouldn't the section be removed and a seperate article created?7severn7 (talk) 09:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, yes. Considering the scope of 'traction engines' as a topic, it is quite ridiculous that it only has the one page on WP. My intention was to expand until each major sub-type could have its own article. However, I'm a fickle thing and my attentions are frequently drawn elsewhere, which is why the article has been fairly static recently.
Portable engine already exists as a redirect here. And you could split it off as a stub, I suppose. If you can expand it further, even better -- remember there's a minimum size for a DYK entry (which we should be aiming to achiEve), and they must be proposed within 5 days of article creation or significant expansion.
EdJogg (talk) 09:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose DYK stands for Wikipedia:Did you know but I don't see the relevance of that here. I agree that Portable engine should be moved to a separate article and I intend to do it shortly. Are there any objections? Biscuittin (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have now realised the significance of DYK. I have started to create the article at User:Biscuittin/sandbox. Should we call it "Portable engine" or "Portable steam engine"? Biscuittin (talk) 17:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP's naming convention is to use the name by which they are most commonly known. Although "portable steam engine" is more technically correct, and, it must be said, less ambiguous, "portable engine" is the name normally used. In their day there was no other type of engine!
There isn't really a modern, non-steam, equivalent: nowadays you would use a "portable generator" or a "portable compressor", both containing an (IC) engine and some other function.
EdJogg (talk) 10:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have created Portable engine. Biscuittin (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional resources

Crane Engines section in Road Locomotives

The comment that they have a small steam engine at the front to drive the crane is incorrect. I don't know of a single crane engine in the UK which was ever built that way. They all take power from the main engine and generally use a driven shaft to transfer it to a winding drum which may be what is being mistaken for a small engine.

The only other possibility is that someone has seen the Ransomes Sims and Jefferies engine 'Hooky' and got confused by the power steering arrangement which is unique to that engine.

Chenab (talk) 11:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was probably me doing it from memory (tut, tut!), probably thinking of how a steam crane works. Now you mention it, I remember seeing this. I have revised the text to suit, although it is again done from memory and I cannot remember how the drive to the shaft is controlled relative to the crankshaft -- there must be some way of controlling it independently of the wheels.
I guess I need to get some detail photos at GDSF this year!
EdJogg (talk) 17:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One of Our Dinosaurs...steam lorry

The steam wagon in One of Our Dinosaurs is Missing looks like no other type I have ever seen. It was clearly an undertype, but presumably an early one judging by the lack of windscreen (surely NO Sentinel was built without a windscreen?) However, the most characteristic feature was the off-centre boiler, which would surely have unbalanced the vehicle (if genuinely steam-driven). I suspect that it was literally 'made up' for the purposes of the film, but have not said as much in the article as I have no suitable refs.

EdJogg (talk) 14:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've not been able to find an image of the lorry used in the film but thought it was an early Standard Sentinel (Standard in this case being the type, later ones were Super and S Type). The picture on the posters is clearly fictional however. If anyone can point me in the direction of a relevant still from the film I'll try and comment further. Early Sentinels were built without windscreens - 'The Old Man' doesn't have one. Indeed I think they were always an optional extra on Standards. There are issues with off-centre boilers as well and I cannot think of any real world machine built with one. Balance is not the major problem it is more that it does need someone other than the driver looking after it almost full time as lorry boilers are small and do not have the reserve of steam that traction engine boilers can have.

Chenab (talk) 14:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]