Talk:Tank locomotive

	Trains Portal
DYK	2007-09-21

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by the Locomotives task force.

This article lacks references.

Other styles

Are there other styles apart from side tank, saddle tank, pannier tank and well tank? Dunc_Harris|☺ 21:23, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I got the photos from http://www.brsince78.co.uk by the way. Dunc_Harris|☺ 08:18, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Not sure it's right to speak of "styles" here. They are alternative functional layouts--John of Paris 15:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology

From the description of side tanks:

The side tanks, however, restrict access to the motion.

What does the word 'motion' mean? It's not explained either here or in Rail terminology. Hairy Dude 00:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I know this answer is a long time coming but... its the valve gear. I believe this term is exclusively used in the UK. I've added a Wikilink in the article. Gwernol 19:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The word "motion" covers not just the valve gear but the connecting rods, crossheads, piston rods – all the parts "in motion". In the States they speak of "inside -connection" or "outside-connection"; however the word "motion" is in usage there but does seem to refer more often to "valve motion".--John of Paris 09:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a pannier tank different from a wing tank. They seem to be two names for the same thing ? 81.2.110.250 14:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image found on commons

Well tank?

Not sure that the Adams 4-4-2T is actually a well tank. The arrangement I think is a combination of a back tank with small side tanks. Next time I visit the Bluebell Line, I'll check. In the meantime it would be safer to give a pic of a Beattie tank where there's no doubt.--John of Paris 09:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As can be seen in this picture, the tank filler is on top of the bunker tank with balancing pipes connecting it to the side tanks. It's pretty clear but I'll check all the same.

--John of Paris 15:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you are right. The most common examples of well tanks I'm aware of were the small narrow gauge industrial tanks by firms like Krauss and O&K. A British firm also made a very similar loco. I'll look to see if I have any free photos. --Michael Johnson 22:15, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an image of a genuine well tank locomotive. --Michael Johnson 03:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient references?

Slambo, How many references would you judge "sufficient"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by John of Paris (talk • contribs) 15:43, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Box tank?

Is it worth mentioning the box tank style? This is the first example I could find easily. It seems to have only been used on a certain type of locomotive for a short amount of time but it might be worthy of inclusion I'm not sure. --Tombomp (talk) 18:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The reference mentions a loco was called "The Box", not that the type was known as a "box tank". You would have to find a better source. --Michael Johnson (talk) 21:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are two more. The book "Highland Railway Locomotives Part 1" describes the locomotive from that link as a box tank. It might not be a widely used descriptor - I'm not an expert. --Tombomp (talk) 09:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You must be referring to the three Stroudley Lochgorm 0-6-0 tanks built from spare parts in 1869. The side tanks were joined over the top of the boiler. Very pretty little engines; they are often considered to be forerunners of the Brighton Terriers. "Box tank" seems to be an apt denomination (otherwise we'll end up with something like "side-saddle tank"!). — By the way we are talking about an arrangement, not a style. --John of Paris (talk) 11:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas?

Nothing at all about Thomas the Tank Engine? I know...but he at least deserves a mention --NE2 04:52, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He does not deserve a mention in this article. Not even in a hatnote. It is illegal to mention Thomas the Tank Engine in this article. Plus, it violates WP:NPOV. Aitraintheeditorandgamer (talk) 05:15, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Uh you know that was posted like 14 years ago right? Pauldron (talk) 02:49, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aitraintheeditorandgamer: how is it "illegal" and why does it violate WP:NPOV? Personally not for or against mentioning it. Fork99 (talk) 02:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tank

It took me the longest time to determine (hopefully correctly) that the "tank" in tank engine refers to water tanks (I was looking all over Thomas trying to figure out "where are the tanks?" (I guess they are on the sides). If I added any mention about what tanks are, it'd be original research, and worse, based on guessing and inference. However, if my interpretation is correct and has sources somewhere, I'm wondering if someone could add it to the beginning sentences so that the article makes more sense for people like me? Thanks! 70.162.184.205 (talk) 03:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was mentioned in the second sentence, but I have reworked the lead paragraph to emphasise this better. -- EdJogg (talk) 13:30, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]