The Fell Locomotive | Shell Historical Film Archive
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 лют 2025
- This film introduces the innovative Fell Locomotive, a diesel-powered train with a unique transmission design. In 1951, this locomotive, named after its designer Colonel Fell, emerged as a new approach to main-line traction.
While traditional steam locomotives offer advantages like a long lifespan and smooth acceleration under heavy loads, they are known for being dirty, requiring extensive cleaning and fueling, often consuming over a ton of coal per hour.
The alternatives, until the Fell Locomotive, were electric and diesel-electric engines. The diesel-electric engines were more efficient than steam but still lost 20% of their power through electric transmission.
The Fell Locomotive, on the other hand, employs a direct diesel engine with a novel transmission system inspired by a car's differential. It uses three differentials connected to four engines. Initially, only one engine is engaged, with a 4:1 gear ratio for smooth starting. As speed increases, additional engines are activated, resulting in a seamless transition through all speeds, achieving a final ratio of 1:1 with all four engines running. It is expected that only 6% of power supplied by the diesels will be lost by this original method.
For more information about Shell’s Historic Film Archive please contact: filmservices@shell.com
#Shell #ShellFilmUnit #HistoricFilmArchive #Documentary #History #FellLocomotive #Trains #Locomotive #DieselTrains
---
Shell’s surprising and captivating Historic Film Archive dates from 1934 and covers a rich mix of topics from technology, science and engineering to craftsmanship, motorsport and travelogue.
The Shell Film Unit, responsible for the content, was a highly celebrated part of Britain’s Documentary Movement. Key figures from that movement were involved, including: Jack Beddington, Edgar Anstey, Arthur Elton, John Grierson, Kay Mander, Stuart Legg and Douglas Gordon.
Its films were wide reaching, often screened in cinemas and through the non-theatric film distribution circuit, which brought film to educational establishments and organisations across the UK. While many films covered technological themes related to Shell’s activities, others were entirely unrelated and served purely to educate the general public.
As Shell innovated in technologies that would provide oil and gas products for the world, the Shell Film Unit also innovated in the technological advancement of film, incorporating graphics and different forms of animation as early as the 1930s.
During WW2 the Shell Film Unit was co-opted into war effort, making films for the Ministry of Information’s film division. Its prowess in technological documentary suited the MoI’s need for technical training films.
While the name and the medium has changed many times over the years, the documentary tradition lives on at Shell. Its contemporary film team is part of Shell’s multi-disciplinary in-house agency, Creative Solutions. It continues making award-winning factual content that informs and educates the public, now usually released on social media platforms.
If you enjoyed this video, please check out the full 'Shell Film Unit - Historic Archive' playlist, where you'll find lots more gems!
ua-cam.com/play/PLEPIVJVCFQH2hoYONdHiQlVrvYQ-k4Xay.html
//;*;*;*;*;;*;*;;//..
Just discovered the Shell Film Archive - What a fantastic resource!
That's my weekend gone.
I used to watch the Fell loco crawling around at Derby when I was a young loco-spotter in the 1950s. It seldom actually hauled a train. A brave attempt, but the diesel electric was the way forward.
In labour reduction...
Thank god "the future" decided correctly. Thank you for playing Mr Fell. And a big thank you to our sponsors.
Four Paxman 12RPH engines on the drive and two AEC railcar engines on the blowers. The traction engines had to provide a lot of torque at low speed hense the blowers rather than turbochargers. The main engines would not last well subject to high torque at low speeds. Some of the old timers at Paxman in the 1970's still had nightmares about this monster. You can see the apeal of diesel electric where you only need a single engine that gets to run constant speed. Like steam electric is good at high torque low speed operation.
10-100 ran the St Pancras- Manchester Pennines route for 6 years without fault.
When the Fell engine was withdrawn, work was already under way on a mark 2 version. When the decision was made to abandon the project due to repair costs, the mark 2 was also abandoned.
The prototype locomotive tested was somewhat before its time and a Mark 2 locomotive could have been greatly simplified and improved. About the time 10100 was doing its test running large torque converters were becoming available in sizes to suit the Paxman engines. If the engines could have been fitted with these they could have had normal turbocharging and the AEC engines and Rootes blowers could have been eliminated. Then there would have been room in the centre of the locomotive for side mounted radiators and this would have eliminated the cooling problems. Such a locomotive would have been much quieter too. But it was not to be.
So it wasn't a success?
@bertnl530 No not really, too mechanically complex. Diesel electric was a better solution allowing the engines to run at constant speed whilst providing low speed torque to the wheels.
Even the example model is a work of art!
A wonderfully innovative design that was never going to better the practicalities of Diesel-Hydraulic or Diesel-Electric transmissions.
In June 1951 the Fell locomotive did reach Eastbourne on the south coast, albeit hauled by no.75000 over Southern lines (that had been electrified in 1935)!
The purpose of the visit was a UIC conference. The video catches glimpses of no.75000 at Marylebone.
It was a diesel hydraulic.
In the case of us Americans, attempts at diesel-hyrdaulic power for the railroads starting in the mid-1960's were met with failure, complicated by the rough track and operating conditions which American railroads go through.
Such attempts, know, involved German-design diesel-hydraulics, including Kraus-Maffei units tested on the Denver & Rio Grande Western and Southern Pacific, and the Southern Pacific's having three Alco-built diesel hydraulic road switchers using a Voith-design hydraulic drive. All such were subsequently scrapped.
The hope all along was to use a mix of high horsepower and hydraulic drive to reduce operational costs by having but one diesel-hydraulic locomotive power your typical freight train.
Rudston fell is my great great grandfather, Very proud!
I love the English for inventing things like this... even if it does not work, is great to watch.
Complex? I came across a video today of a monorail railcar with dual contra-rotating gyroscopes having their axes adjusted by automatically controlled pnematic actuators to keep the thing upright. In 1910.
Oh but it did work, it was just that it wasn't very practical, especially in terms of maintenance
Can't believe Shell posted a classic british railway film
I hope they post some more
Shell was involved with the loco's development.
They did good little films on BBC TV such as spraying mosquitos in Africa with a DH Dragon Rapide, clearing ponds and grubbing up hedges and copses on British farms (not very eco) and the development of aero piston engines.
//;*;*;*;*;;*;*;*;;//......
Well, they paid for the film in the first place...
Brilliant innovation, at a time when engineering was valued in the Uk.
Agreed. I wish we had true leaders running the country now so we could innovate make and soar ahead.
@@Isochest Not in keeping with globalist agenda so it'll never happen Im afraid.
A barmey idea, really. The stress of using just 1 engine to haul a train from a standing start must have been phenomenal.
@@Isochest It's not about true leaders. UK chose to move into service based economy and ditch the manufacturing sector.
Once manufacturing is ditched, engineering is generally on a decline.
@@anujmchitale That "service based economy" lie is a load of balls peddled by the politicians. The "move to a service based economy" is just an academic reclassification due to non-core functions in manufacturing companies being passed over to contractors. Take a big manufacturing plant like Ford at Dagenham. In the past, all the cleaners, caterers, drivers, maintenance, training and logistics personnel and so on were employed by Ford so their jobs and financial activity were counted as "manufacturing". These days all the same people are still there, doing the same work in the same place, but they work for contractors like Sodexo, Group 4 and many others, so Ford can focus on what they do best, i.e. make car parts. So these jobs are now counted as "service sector". But make no mistake, they are there because of the manufacturing plant, and paid for by Ford. WE HAVE NOT DITCHED MANUFACTURING IN THE UK! We have many world leading companies, Rolls Royce (jet engines), BAe systems, many car manufacturers and lots of small companies; the UK has the SECOND LARGEST AEROSPACE MANUFACTURING SECTOR IN THE WORLD after only the USA even though we don't make any complete 'planes.
STOP DENIGRATING UK MANUFACTURING! IT'S ALIVE AND WELL! Not as big as it was, but still key, and politicians need to recognise it is still what funds the "service sector" so is core to our economy even though a much smaller percentage of jobs are officially classified as "manufacturing". But if everyone is so ready to keep knocking UK manufacturing and talking it down, the politicians will do so as well and that will be bad for this critical sector.
Decades later, Toyota used the same principle (using a differential to sum the output of two motors) for the hybrid drivetrain of the Prius. With the ICE one one input shaft and an electric motor on the other, they had an infinitely variable gearing which meant the ICE could be kept within a narrow optimal rev range.
Toyota stick to proven designs. That's why they are a global success. Colonel Fell was ahead of his time or out of step with global timeline needs
The Toyota system is very similar, but differs in that it relys on a planetary gear set rather than a true differential gear system.
You beat me to the same comment, I immediately noted the similarly to the prius drive.
Shell - please post more like this
It looks that the engine/gearbox noise in the drivers cabine must have been mindblowing? By the way, a wonderful 1950’s black and white film!
//;*;*;;*;*;*;*;*;;//...!¡;;//..
Apparently passengers on platforms complained about the racket this thing made. The Paxman 12RPH engines gave a very powerful deep throbbing noise when working hard at low revs and it made people feel sick. Look up brown noise.....Constant torque engines are not a good idea!
They've discovered the brown note! \,,/ @@TIMMEH19991
If you look at the thing under construction at 12.35, it is possible envisage how cramped the driving cabs must have been too.
What a mad design. Love it.
Fascinating glimpse into our railroad history. By this date, however, it was very clear in the United States that Diesel-Electric would be the way forward.
It's a very British thing to see something working well elsewhere and then decide to try something completely different. 😂
@@jonathanratcliffe5714 Ironic yet true. That is how we wound up with the railways in the first place.
Hydraulic transmission had yet to be really tried - and it was still until recently when the advantages of hybrid powertrains became clear a good choice for lower power installs, mostly through simplicity; the common Voith drive has a torque converter & a fluid coupling, and once there's no more slip in the torque converter you just empty the oil & fill up the fluid coupling, no gear changes or field weakening stages. There are still advantages, they're just not enough especially now we have robust variable frequency AC drives.
Putting a differential between a pair of torque converters & then driving all wheels, rather than duplicating gearboxes to drive groups of wheels like ended up happening would have been an interesting concept for hydraulic drives.
Using a directly driven supercharger & a wastegate might have made a bit more sense than an entire seperate engine...
@@Karibanu What is intriguing is the parallel of this to the “genset” locomotives of almost a century later. The idea, in principle, is the same: multiple engines on one frame that spool up when necessary.
Creativity kicks in mostly when limits are available, brain is really modeled to imagine and chase the idea.. blindly almost.
Just an add on: a major failing of the fell (apart from the obvious 72 pistons) was it was a little more efficient than the concurrent diesel electrics (never mind that in a short couple of years the DB entered squadron production of the rather iconic V200), its mechanical link also produced an unforseen issue: above 72mph there was a marked drop off in useful power, basically limiting the available speed ceiling to 72mph, and with close on 2000hp for express hauling this lethargic top end was really going no where.
This mechanical linking also of course ended up with the central rods being decoupled, there being no give in the works.
Interesting the car gearbox analogy: appears to be an early dump 'n flow hydramatic: RN1234, R doubling as a park
10-100 (it was never called ten thousand one hundred to my knowledge) reached 80mph on the fast-up line north of Luton and was accelerating when one of the Timken roller bearings failed due to a lack of lubrication, causing the bearing to melt and then seizing a non-drive axle. This was the first time that a roller bearing had been used in a rail application - typically white-metal shell bearings were employed which in hindsight would have been much less disastrous. On efficiency; 10-100 was around 15% more efficient than a diesel-electric design of 1800 HP. On power output; she had 2300HP available thanks to the higher than expected efficiency of the roots blowers and the Ricardo-designed comet heads on the two AECs and four Paxmans. Her design parameters were to match the 1800HP at the drawbar of the Class 5 steam loco but she achieved the pulling power closer to the Class 6.
What is a dump'n'flow Hydramatic?
@gregorymalchuk272 dump n flow was a nickname given to early hydramatics. Basically they emptied the coupling then refilled it again through every shift. They weren't the smoothest hence the prevalence of single speed autos and things like the multi converter dynaflo
@robfell_STG_Surin unfortunate regarding the bearings. Of course roller bearings in locomotives had been in widespread use since the thirties, but I guess this was an anomaly.
They could as you mentioned go above 72mph, however they really didn't have any power above that speed.
Didn't help that it dropped its gearbox doing some rather major damage.
I always wonder if it was harsh on its gearsets and the frame etc.
Hydraulic and electric of course softening the blow somewhat.
I feel the sheds disappointment though at what should've been essentially a viable power output similar to the southern/lms bunch, but couldn't really deliver.
These mechanical engineers of our past are giants. As a mechanical engineer myself i am in awe of their skills, sadly all lost forever.
No! We have many brilliant engineers in the current generation, they just haven't made it into the history books yet! I'm also a mechanical engineer, a member of IMechE committee and chairman of an engineering trade association, and I am regularly in awe of what I see other engineers doing today. Only the next generation will hear their names.
I knew this locomotive had a complex drive system but never knew how it worked. A fascinating idea but I can see why it was never developed with so many engines and gears to maintain. I thought the Deltics were complicated and costly but this would of made them look simple. I think the locomotive worked well but suffered a fire which brought it to it's end.
I believe the steam heat boiler caught fire at Manchester Central in 1958 and was towed back to Derby and withdrawn
@@kevinblakeman8858 Now you have said that I think you are right it was the boiler. I remembered reading about the fire a long time ago and saw a photo of the scorched loco at Derby works where it stayed in a siding with a few more pioneers which were all sadly scrapped
☹️
At last I understand how it worked. The crazy thing is it had two diesel engines just to drive the superchargers.
You understand how it works!?!
Yes, a total of six engines at last count,that should make it very efficient.
in principle yes
Have a separate engine for the superchargers allows the maximum power output from the traction engines. Large high flying aircraft had used a similar arrangement for a period as the propulsion engines were not powerful enough to drive the supercharger as well as keep the aircraft flying.
@@neiloflongbeck5705Yes, I understand why, it is just that this makes the whole thing even more insanely maintainance intense. I know some engines used superchargers for starting and then once up and running then the pressurisation of the inlet was taken up by turbochargers.
12:12 This chap looks like a young Ray Winstone! Fascinating film, thanks for uploading this.
First good explanation how the Fell locomotive works which I have seen.
While a very good idea in theory, it's practical usefulness was severely limited by its overcomplicated nature compared to diesel electric.
The extra maintenance cost of all the engines would never make up for the higher efficiency, which was after all only 14% better than of a diesel electric.
Its principle with the differential drives made it essentially a constant torque drive at constant throttle setting, as adding another engine would increase power and rotational speed at the drive axle, but not torque on the drive axle as gear ratio changed effectively in the same increments as total engine power would do.
Ingenious limey engineering.
Hats up.
Nice PPE e.g tie
Hope nobody got strangled.
and no safety helmet or goggles
A mate of mine got his tie caught up in a grinder, nearly knocked his teeth out!
Ties weren't loose, the bottom was tucked into the shirt underneath the boiler suit, the risks were lower, but nowadays you wouldn't get away with it
I watched this again, it's that good.
Great to hear the sound of this locomotive. By all accounts it was an earth shattering noise!
He probably had a Meccano set when he was a kid. A number 10 with all the gears...
I had to make do with set 6 but I made some great models.😄
Me too, with a gear set.
Was Col. Fell also behind the Fell center rail used on the Isle of Man's Snaefell Mountain Railway for braking?
@@larryellisreed280 No, that was a much earlier Fell, John Baraclough Fell who came up with that system in the 1860s (I think). Used on the short-lived Mont Cenis incline and the long-lived (1878-1955) Rimutaka incline in New Zealand.
@@kiwitrainguy Thanks for the clarification.
Awesome channel for old factual videos, glad I found it, it's much better than some others that fill half the screen with a watermark.
An interesting video, the first I’ve seen that charts the development of the Fell Loco. Some good footage of British Industrial Engineering of the time. Apart from the LMS twins and the odd Mechanical Shunter their was nothing in the UK to compare with the fell in 1951. It did look a good idea for a drive system but compared to what we know now is clearly unsuitable and over complicated.
Absolutely fascinating. Many thanks for posting.
A fantastic piece of engineering but surely someone must have seen that it was far too complicated to be used for everyday service and as they say the rest was history !
Thing is at the time they were replacing infinitely more complicated steam engines.
All new technology is complicated and expensive until mass production refines it.
Also you only have the power of one motor to move the train in the beginning. This seems not very convenient. In contrast diesel electric or diesel hydraulic transmission can always use the complete installed power (minus transmission losses).
@@reinerjung1613Yes I've just realised that, although from standstill it had 4x the torque.
@@althejazzman Really what this does is provide 4x each engine's torque but over four speed ranges since each engine added effectively ups gearing by the same as the torque it can produce.
In other words it has no benefit over a single, large engine and hydraulic drive.
Sort of an irony,the Gen-sets(multiple engines,coupled to generators),used as yard switchers,in the US,are a second generation of the Fell engine! You just never know how things will develop! Thank you 😇 😊!
Fascinating, thank you. That scale model was a thing of beauty. The fulls size loco, not so much!
Very interesting. Lovely old film and very instructive. More recently I saw that it has been proposed to build diesel electric locomotives with 4 smaller prime movers rather than one big one, in the interests of fuel efficiency - displacement on demand I suppose.
Locomotives like that already exist, they’re called Gen-Set units. NRE is one producer of such locomotives and one class I can recall (the 1200 class in Australia) is fitted with three 800hp Cummins engines
i don't know about 4 engines but shunting locos with 1 bigger and 1 smaller diesel are routinely build in Poland. well, rebuild from old units. it was calculated that during shunting operations only smaller engine is needed most of the time.
Narrator: Now under the disapproving eye of the steam enthusiast
Me: 😒 You can say that again
Why is steam popular amongst entusiasts?
I get the torque that steam cars had.
Are u seriously asking me that? STEAM ENGINES ARE AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Brilliant, absolutely brilliant…
The only time I saw it was as Exhibit 28 at the Willesden 16th International Railway Congress Exhibition 26th May 1954. On my home line (LNW) it was the LMS 10000 and BR 10001 that we often saw in service.
Not all locos are diesel electric or electric. Although only a few built and running, the Parry People Mover uses flywheel technology driven by a small diesel. One runs in my home town Stourbridge. I used to deliver to Parrys in the 80s90s and they had a small test track in Cradley Heath. It was fascinating to talk to John at the time. When we had engineers not technicians
Petroleum industry used to use a "fire-less" steam locomotive. A stationary boiler would pump super heated water into a tank that was in place of a boiler. The locomotive would vent the steam as it flashed over for motive power. It was used because it developed the power of a small locomotive without needing a fire that could ignite fumes around refineries.
@@Trump2PrisonOn34Counts There were a few "fireless" steam locomotives used in the United States well into the late 1960's, particularly around oil refineries and chemical plants because of the explosion risk.
Plymouth Locomotive Works (which also produced torque-drive industrial and light switching locomotives) designed short-line locomotives in the 1930's as could operate with propane or butane as the fuel, along with diesel fuel.
In the mid-1950's, the Missouri-Kansas-Texas ("Katy") railway converted two SW1200 switchers to burn propane experimentally, with some success.
Over complexity loves the railways sometimes. I can imagine how it got built though. Diesel electric isn't that much less complex to build (one diesel, one generator, four traction motors, complex electrical controls, four traction blower fans) but it's a lot less complex to maintain because the electrical components don't wear quickly and don't need as much maintenance as this would. I imagine this got built to humour and engineer then an accountant got wind of the maintenance and it just went away.
Fantastic. Learned a lot from this vid. Marvellous soundtrack. Exquisite scenery.
This is interesting in spite of the fact that I struggle to wrap my brain around some concepts.
How many times have I thought or said “I’ll have to wait until this is available in English.”
Engineering…not my gift in life.
A very good video here.
So cool how all men are dressed... hats off for them!
Brilliant! you've built a transmission that only allows you to use 1/4 of your power when pulling away from rest!
That’s precisely why the two AEC bus engines were used to overboost the diesels - thus more than 1/4 power when starting. Diesel electrics do not run at full power when starting either, by the way.
The point of mechanical transmission is it doesn’t waste much energy by getting hot, unlike electric 15:17 transmission which has to be cooled by forced ducted air 15:17 passing through.
Unfortunately the diesel-electric locomotive was so well established by the 1950s that reliability was good. But, diesel electrics had been developed since the 1930s whereas the Fell loco had to jump in as their near equal immediately which was hardly fair.
By the way, hydraulic couplings were used as clutches, being drained or filled and one way clutches were necessary to prevent the idling engines from being spun backwards.
The main idea behind the Fell locomotive has re-emerged as Gen-set switchers in the USA where considerable fuel savings are being made by only running one or two of the three engines as required according to immediate needs.
That gearing arrangement was an interesting thought... I'm a bit surprised they ever built a prototype though, seems like there are so many drawbacks.
I think Col Fell actually forgot to mention that this mode / method (for which he observed)was based on the Royal Navy Admiralty propulsion system (and modified to use in Deltic units) and been in use in HM Submarines for many years prior!
I believe such would be the opposed-piston design, which Fairbanks Morse developed initially for US Navy submarines starting in 1932, eventually adopting such for railroad use, initially on railcars and later on locomotives which, while rather reliable and fuel-efficient, had their share of maintenance issues.
Fairbanks Morse's diesel locomotive production was at Beloit, WI (with Canadian such licenced to the Canadian Locomotive Co., Ltd., of Kingston, ON) between 1947 and 1958.
10 out of 10 for commitment on trying a new idea. However, rather complicated solution. Diesel Electric clearly much better even with the loss between the diesel and the electric motor. still would have been easier to operate. Imagine having to service six diesel engines in one loco! Used a lot of Shell Diesel me thinks...
As much as I love this kind of mechanical engineering, having 1 locomotive need 6 engines to operate seems a little excessive.
The joys of experimentation, Fell was one of the first mainline Diesels in the UK
Moronic....
Amazing engineering and with just a slide rule. TRUELEY a work of mechanical engineering art 😀
Only a quarter of the horsepower &/or tractive effort available at low speed & starting - What were they thinking?
True. I noticed that.
They could have had a deep reduction planetary box on starting engine to get it moving . Like TA in IHC farm tractors had.
Shift on fly to higher ratio once moving
British engineering was, is wonderful. As a American my compliments!
Fascinating film. Great to see footage of H G Ivatt last CME of the LMS.
Brillant!!! A real genius at work!!! and cleaver too!!!
Great 😃😃👍👍 video 😊😊 from Malaysia 🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾🇲🇾
In the same vein as the Turf burner and Leader. An interesting piece of railway history.
Nice idea on paper, but it's obviously a maintenance and reliability nightmare - what were they thinking
The biggest problem i see is you can't have full power at low speed so pulling out of a station and up a steep hill you have to use 1/4 power when you want it all.
Gets me wondering why things stagnated for 70 years though, i wonder if anyone has attempted diesel electric with a mechanical lock out at certain speeds like an automatic gearbox.
@@zopEnglandzip That's a good idea, but I think the problem is the same - complexity, and it's another mechanism to maintain. As locomotives are generally considered 'working prototypes' - the machines are best-served being simple
@@zopEnglandzip the gearbox however was set up so the ratios would change like a car gearbox, the locomotive actually had a decent pulling power at startup, and the mechanical transmission meant it outperformed the diesel electrics at the time, and Britannias between 27 and 65mph. It however was not very efficient at 70mph and above, and having 6 engines meant it was not practical.
If you are referencing History in the Dark's video on the locomotive, he misunderstood how the gearboxes worked. And, frankly, how power, torque and rotational speed are related when comparing the mechanical transmission with a diesel electric.
@@zopEnglandzipyes America did
@@zopEnglandzip I think it would have been a simple modification to make it so that two engines on different primary differentials were engaged, the gear reduction is still 4:1, but with two engines connected for twice the tractive effort.
That was a fascinating film-very enjoyable and informative. The lack of eye protection of the machinists was frightening, though.
Interesting video. When I saw the title The Fell Locomotive I immediately thought of the Fell steam locomotive traction system using a center rail for traction as we used here in New Zealand in the lower north island until the mid 1950s. I assume that this concept didn't do too well and didn't last ..
Meanwhile, on the old Ellan Vannin, the Snaefell Mountain Railway still uses a Fell rail mid-track, howbeit for braking.
P.S / at 14.50 the stretch of railway being traversed (passing W.D 2.10.0 Locomotive being `bAnked ` ) is the Glasgow - Carlisle M.L with the Fell Diesel heading South downgrade from Beattock Summit
Banker is a Caley 0-4-4T
Locomotive 10100 must have had her fare-share of Shell Fuel while on trial
4 bus engines singing in unison... must have been a noisy beast.
Don't forget the extra two engines to power the superchargers.
A bit more than a bus engine .... they were Paxman 12RPH's, I'd like to have seen a bus with 1 of those shoe horned in 😂😂
Only the 2 auxiliary engines were what you'd call 'bus' engines; 6 cylinder AECs as fitted to buses and DMUs.
What a strange machine though, and a shame the preservation movement hadn't yet got going back then!
you know, your only making it sound LOUDER!!!!@@31144
13:00 definitely has a hum to it.
That must have been a horrendous locomotive for the crews. Sat behind two large diesel engines at either end, a large (noisy?) gearbox behind you plus the two engines required for pressure charging the main engines must have made it a very noisy place to work. A friend of mine saw it at Derby works when it was waiting to be scrapped.
It made me realise the diesel electric was quite a bit earlier than I thought.
The spider gears in a differential aren’t meant for continuous reduction like that. They would have been better off using staged epicyclic gearing on multiple stages of hollow concentric input shafts.
The Americans were well advanced with diesel traction, im all for novel ideas but why not make something practical.
Even here in Australia the Victorian railways had a doubled ended B class loco of 1500hp in 1952, highly successful,.
Surely the most successful experimental diesel of that period was DP1 or deltic, which I can remember running on the ECML in 1959.
That came much later, the year in question is 1950. The LMS had already built two American-style locos, Nrs. 10000 and 10001which operated quite satisfactorily until the mid sixties. The gave rise to the "Peak" locos, Classes 44, 45 and 46 - esentially the same design as the LMS prototypes and operative on BR until the early 1990's.
@1258-Eckhart it's a fact that most diesels of the period were no match for a decent steam loco, two LMS diesels were equal to one Duchess and it took production delticss to out perform an an A4 or A3.
It took 4 US diesels to match one big boy but they looked at it differently, with four units if one failed the train didn't fail.
Remember of course in '53 DB had entered squadron production of the iconic 2000 hp V200 diesel hydraulic. Things like the way over the top fell and less than startling lms pair and SR trio really made the western region quite keen on looking at what the Germans were doing. And of course the Germans were pioneers of diesel electric, settling instead upon hydraulic
@@muir8009 The V200s were great, BR just. Wanted to standardise.
Back in the day the regions still had the grouping mentality so regions liked to do there own thing.
The Western had the Class 52s just to be different.
Of course it was really the Black 5 of diesels the 47s that really put standardisation on track
@Steven_Rowe the WR was an ideal testbed for BR to have a play with hydraulics: Devon banks which necessitated power efficiency, and of course if kept all within one region could keep differing facilities and maintenance requirements to a minimum.
West Coast had already been slated for electrification, East Coast was flat enough (although feinnes wasn't happy) and SR Was already pretty much electrified, only leaving the WR.
One of the obvious things is of course by the time of the pilot scheme with its A, B, and C power categories the traffic requirements were rapidly changing. So rapidly of course that in 5 short years by the time of squadron production the power categories had now increased to 5, the preponderance of class A units required had dwindled to almost nothing as the traffic that warranted it had dwindled to almost nothing. So of course the 47, 37,... basically the higher powered units ended up being vaguely useful.
Tellingly this was of course when the Brush type 2's started having its legendary mirrlees issues; power increases it wasn't designed for but the locomotive needed to make itself useful
Very nice great old video old man old train
The major flaw, other than the gearbox, was the cooling of the rear pair of engines when coupled to a train.
In a somewhat related vein, Southern Pacific had issues with diesel locomotives getting adequate air for cooling diesel engines in the long snowsheds and tunnels of the Sierras, Shastas and Siskiyous ... thus leading to collaboration with the Electro-Motive Division to develop the SD45T model road switcher (T meaning "tunnel," as evidenced by a larger air grille in the back to make better use of the air inside tunnels while trains were passing through for cooling the engines off).
Denver & Rio Grande Western also had similar "tunnel motor" road switchers.
Wasn't expecting Shell to post a video about the Fell Mechanical, not gonna lie
Very clever. I don’t quite understand, though, how it would work up a steep incline. If a lower gear was required, then fewer motors would be in use, so that it would only be able to climb the incline very slowly. The main advantage of a diesel electric locomotive, of course, is that it may be built so that it can operate either from the onboard diesel generator or from an overhead line (or even from a third rail) and can therefore run anywhere on the national rail network. It can continue to operate on electrified lines even if the overhead wires are not functioning. It is the most logical form of locomotive.
Not really. A 'regular' diesel electric locomotive can only run under the power of it's internal diesel engine. I think you're misunderstanding the term diesel electric. They are diesel AND electric, not OR. As it states in this video, they are basically small power stations producing electricity to drive the electric motors connected to the axels. There of course locomotives that can use their own prime mover OR external electric supply but that is something different.
@@garybroadhurst3548 That is true of the conventional diesel - electric locomotive. However, in recent years, locomotives have been introduced which can run either using the overhead wires, or on their own internal diesel generator. I know, because I have travelled on trains using them on the West Coast Main Line. They come into the station with their pantograph down sometimes, and sometimes with it up. They can continue to run if the overhead line fails or if they are running onto a line which is not electrified. There are electric only locomotives which are similarly flexible. On the Bedford to Brighton route, the locomotives are designed to use either the overhead line (north of the River) or the third rail (south of the River). I have caught this service at the station where the system changes. The pantograph is lowered and a carbon shoe is lowered onto the third rail. The future of rail transport will, I am sure, be locomotives which can switch easily from diesel, to overhead, to third rail, so as to be able to run anywhere on the network and be able to continue to run even when the overhead power is not available.
@@garybroadhurst3548
The class 73 use[d] either 3rd rail or internal diesel enginr. Apparently the internal diesel engine was rather underpowered.
Steep grades were handled by engaging the 1st engine and flicking the oil scoops for 2,3 and 4. She was capable of pulling away smoothly at any grade.
@@cigmorfil4101 About the closest American equivalent was Electro-Motive's FL-9 model built for the New Haven railroad in the mid-1950's, many of which saw service into the Amtrak era pulling New York-Albany corridor trains without need for the traditional engine change at Harmon-on-Hudson, NY (a/k/a Croton-Harmon).
General Electric also built several cab units for Amtrak in the same general vein as the FL-9 as see service on the Chicago-New York Lake Shore Limited, again with no change of power at Harmon-on-Hudson.
Wow... Wonderful.. Many many thanks shell for this video.. I have been searching this locomotive principles since from 2 decades and now I got it clearly.. And one more request if possible could you also come with the video on Kitson Still steam diesel mechanical locomotive and its principle.. I am waiting for it.. Thanks
I run my old Lister generator on old 'chip fat,. It's older then my 77 years and still works perfectly. From the many repair videos on YT about Briggs and Stratton one can only assume they use high tensile chewing gum. I have to admit around 10 years ago I got the big end re white metaled. It was 0.0015 above tolerance after 70 years. The mains were fine. It smells out of this world under load, 'cod' I think.
The Fell engines I know were steam driven, they had 2 steam motors one for the wheels and one for the central rail friction drive and braking system.
Greetings to the Royal Dutch Shell family
I liked the narrator's post accent.
Meanwhile, across the English Channel, SNCF was well underway with the electrification of France's rail network.
Amazing good talented old Engineer man old Technology old Engine process very best
Six engines to service ... that's a lot of oil changes. Must have sold a lot of Shell Helix!
Wonderful video. I can only imagine that maintenance was the problem with it and not as reliable as the diesel hydraulic which was my favourite and almost made it. There were reasons it didn't.
0:43 1:19 This British Railways Britannia Pacific Express Steam Locomotive Is A Bit Like LNER Gresley A3 Pacific Express Steam Locomotive Flying Scotsman. Thanks Mate. PS I've Didn't Know British Railways Teamed Up With Shell To Make Diesel Locomotives Too. Easy. X
i think mr Fell was acting the goat at this time, but hats off to who ever designed the class 52 diesel
Misha Black.
That thing sounds like a car.
Love the footage.^^
I think it shot was silent. The sound effects added later were pretty poor.
@@1maico1 WHAT?! XD!
Could I make some photo colour out of the footage?
Marvlous film that
Astonishing. A note the fact that this development took place during Clement Attlee's post war Labour Government!
Out of all the people to do a video on the Fell Locomotive, it was Shell.. huh
I wouldn’t be too surprised to find out that they invested in a machine that has 4 big engines. Those engines need lots of fuel, now guess who can supply that fuel 😉 This is probably a marketing video
Shell invested in the locomotive development funding. Bear in mind when the project was started in the late 40s, there were only 2 other mainline diesel locomotives, 10000 and 10001. It made somewhat of sense for them to promote petroleum usage through developing rail traction. 10100, 10800 and 10201 all began running around the same time, mid to late 1950.
The noise is insane but im sure it made for a reliable, effective, and powerful locomotive. Four diesel engines in one I take it.
10100 was not very Successful
No one used to talk about pollution and earth, in that era
How does it reverse?
How did it reverse?
Awesome 👍
They could have added a fluid torque converter with lock up on first two starting diesels for further torque multiplication rather than a simple fluid couple.
Speaking of torque converter locomotives, here in the United States, Davenport Locomotive Works and Plymouth Locomotive Works, both of which specialised in industrial and switching locomotives, produced torque-converter switcher units.
Plymouth Locomotive Works continued torque-converter locomotive production (marketed as "Torquomotives"), mainly for industrial and small-scale switching applications, until winding up its operations around 1990.
@larryellisreed280 Thanks 👍
We had large cranes with torque converter winch link belts .
Yeah the thing is yes, through modern day eyes this diesel is kinda bad but to be fair it is from the very early days of diesel
But the fell is kinda bad still cos it had 4 engines yet had had about as much torque and pulling power as if it had 1 engine
I am impressed.There was an institution for locomitive engineers.Where they have gone?
In 1950, the future of the Diesel locomotive had already been decided in Frankfurt (DB HQ), where Krauss-Maffei (Munich) were commissioned to build the DB Class V80, an immensely successful Diesel-Hydraulic, which led to the building of countless further classes culminating in the best of all, the British Class 52, one of the best locos ever built by anyone anywhere. This intelligence seems to have escaped the Shell concern, which (oddly) makes no mention of it at all in this filmstrip. But the engineers of the GWR (now called the "Western Region") were in 1950 already fully in the picture and knew where to look (hint: not towards Shell).
Bit curious: Shell is promoting the fell, no real reason to look at what DB was doing at the time, and also WR was looking at gas turbines. Really, it was only squadron production of the V200 that had interest from the WR, or BR in actuality, and the V200 was designed for a dissimilar railway with very different operating procedures and requirements
How is the DB dissimilar from the WR? The V200 did sterling service for years on the WR as "Warships" Class 42 and the later DB Class 221 as "Westerns" Class 52. Both classes could have run for ten more years if BR hadn't been so LMS-infested. @@muir8009
But what is holding the shafts that are at low speed from running backwards? How does it get from zero to slow when the motors need a minimum RPM?
The fluid couplings could be drained of fluid (the 4 small levers shown) and when empty of fluid would transmit no torque. At a standstill all 4 fluid coupling would be empty. When you wanted to start moving coupling 1 would be filled and gradually start transmitting torque. As speed increased coupling 2 would be filled and gradually start transmitting torque and so on through 3 and 4. This made the "gear ratio" changes smooth and gradual. Each input shaft had a mechanism (similar to the action of a ratchet or sprag clutch) to prevent reverse rotation of the shaft when its associated fluid coupling was not transmitting torque.
@@Vincent_Sullivan Good explanation
Who's the composer who made the orchestral soundtrack.
And seriously why do 1950s railway documentary always have the best soundtracks
I Absolutely love this locomotive . I just wish they had built 10 - 20 of them like the Pilot scheme Diesels of some 5 years later. P.S I presume the sound on the film is not authentic and was dubbed in by Shell ?
In other words, you can only use one engine to start the train, even though you've got four!
what a funny way to transmit power. What survived was the electric transmission.
6 engines for one locomotive. Yeah that sounds like a British idea. Gloriously impractical and labor intensive.
Heath Robinson, anyone?
We came so far, but we lost it all. Will Britain ever be great again cool video
It seems Barbers were more proficient in cutting gent's hair in those days.
Before the days of high streets full of Turkish barbers 😂😂
@user-zr5yj1od5q You mean they cut hair as well? I'm surprised they have time what with all the other things they get up to!
What train station did he say? 0:45
From the transcript:
0:44 London, Marylebone Station,
0:46 May 1951.
I (not British) hear Marybohn.
@@theopeterbroers819 thanks
@@theopeterbroers819 The posh pronunciation is Marlburn.
@@NickRatnieks l used to live next to "Marleybone" or "marlybun" station - take yer pick
From a time when we were hopeful that a cheap replacement for steam could be found and oil was tuppence a gallon.... "anyone remember how to dig that black stuff out of the ground?"
Still coal shortages in 1950, Houses had to buy 'nutty slack' that just glowed a dull red and gave off yellowy smoke but sometimes gave a flame if you poked it.
We were flogging it overseas like no tomorrow to try and get the silver back from Mr Trumans pornshop. @@johnjephcote7636
@@johnjephcote7636 Much of the better grades of coal went to export, and the domestic market was limited to that obnoxiously polluting brown coal which contributed to the rather dense smog as blanketed London in the winter of 1952.
Да вот кто пишет в коментах что это его любимый локомотив пусть сам косегарит в нём и чай носит на скорости