snipped:
Ok, this gets even more odd. I understand the Vee twin concept and why you 
would choose that but why have a double acting oscillating with the 
complication and (I presume) inefficency of that type of valve gear when you 
could have Vee twin cylinders with conventional valve chests and reversing 
gear? Slightly more complex in terms of linkage etc but more suitable surely?
Roger

Basically because it was cheap and easy to make, is my guess - I have now found 
the 1988 Steam Boat Association Register. Both engine and boiler were made in 
1984 by the Thames Steam Launch Co; the boiler had a heating surface of 35 sq 
ft (as opposed to 140 sq ft for President's old boiler) and the engine had two 
2" x 5" cylinders, a disc crank driving a feed-pump (there was also a hand 
feed-pump) and was condensing. Reversing was by steam ports like a Mamod. At 
55' x 2' draft I would reckon she was underpowered. 

It's worth saying that many of the 'new' boats in the Register are remarkably 
crude (the old ones are OK) and I think sensitive and discerning engineers 
should avoid reading the book.

Though the 90 degree V-twin you suggest is a much better design (especially for 
balance) they're rare, presumably because they require more space and were more 
expensive to build than a side-by-side engine where the same frame can support 
both cylinders. The only large-scale application I can recall were the L&L 
steamers, where presumably the wide hulls gave the space. Gondola has an 
excellent modern example with helical sleeve reverse.

Sean


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to