Bluebell Motive Power

A whole bunch of posts seem to have disappeared from this thread …

Tom

 

Has anything disappeared about ‘Big Chufferitus?’
Never mind, I’m sure we’ll be told again in 2022 about what Bluebell are doing wrong, why anything bigger than a Terrier is overkill, why 32424 is a waste of money etc etc… I really can’t wait.

 

The only difference I know is that 263 and 592 had their ownership transferred to the Bluebell Railway Trust by their previous owning groups, 263 in 2008 and 592 in 2014 (which was a bit of a surprise as I thought it was more recent than that).

As Tom mentioned 65 still being privately owned, following Esmond Lewis-Evans passing was ownership then passed to his family?

 

Correction, anything bigger than a 4MT.

 

My apologies Paul, got that one wrong in all seriousness all the best to you for 2022 my friend.

 

Not a great deal of practical difference. When the Bluebell started 60-odd years ago, it collected locos which were owned by the Society. More recently (by which I mean about fifty years ago ...) the operating company was separated from the membership body, and the assets of the Society went to the operating body (i.e. the company), in exchange for the shares in the company being vested in the Society. Thus, most of the locos on the railway, and certainly most of those that arrived early, are owned by the company - about 20 in all.

More recently, both the H class and the C class had been preserved by separate independent charitable Trusts back in the 1960s. Both trusts decided to wind up their activities a few years ago - I suspect probably due to ageing membership. For charitable trusts, it is a general requirement that if they wind up, they should first try to dispose of their assets to another charity with compatible aims. Therefore, in both cases, it made sense that their locos were transferred to the Bluebell Railway Trust (as a charity) rather than to the plc, which would have been more problematic.

The Bluebell Railway Trust shareholding in 80151 derives primarily from a bequest from one of the original owners. If I've done my maths right, the Trust owns 40% of the shares and is the single largest shareholder in the loco.

Tom

 

It's an interesting question, and as ever, there will be overlapping and sometimes conflicting priorities.

From the company's point of view, the primary objective is to have sufficient locos to operate the service. Hiring due to a shortfall diverts investment away from your own assets, and as was seen last autumn, isn't always a sinecure. That objective will tend towards useful traffic locos (i.e. medium and large); the priorities at any one time would then tend to be based around a projection of what will be needed in a few years time. Locos that can run a large mileage between overhauls would be preferred, because the per-mile operating cost is substantially determined by across how many miles you can split the overhaul cost.

Locos that have their own sources of funding and support obviously look attractive - hence I suspect one reason to choose the H class (owned by the Bluebell Railway Trust) over, say, the Dukedog. The 9F is unusual amongst company-owned locos in having an active fund-raising group that has mobilised around it, which I suspect explains why it has been prioritised over, say, 75027.

The volunteer groups based around the Wainwright Villas / Atlantic Shed area perform a valuable role in progressing projects that would probably be considered too risky in timescale / cost for the company workshop to undertake directly. No. 27 is a good example, being a valuable and worthy project, but also to a large extent a substantially new loco. It is unlikely IMHO the company would ever have taken that on as a paid staff project. My personal view is that if 488 has an operating future, it would likely be because it was taken on as a volunteer project, to be completed to a timetable that isn't driven by a planned operational need a short time in the future. Readers of the latest BN will have noticed that the current loco director wishes to improve the facilities in that area to assist those groups; it probably means a second facility like Atlantic House on the space currently occupied by 84030 and No. 27.

The Society Long Term Plan calls for more locos than are strictly needed to run the service (particularly since the loco mileage has decreased significantly over the last decade, a combination of various factors). Bridging that gap, i.e. delivering the long term plan, is a challenge. In particular, to go from ~8 to ~12 locos in traffic at any one time adds a substantial cost: firstly you have to do overhauls much quicker than now; and then you split the traffic over more locos so do fewer miles per overhaul, which increases the per-mile cost (and is only partly reclaimed by virtue of the locos needing less work at a subsequent overhaul on account of lower mileage; some costs are fixed regardless of what you do). I'm not against the LTP aspiration, just that it needs to be recognised that it has a cost over and above running the core service. It's easy to vote in favour of an uncosted plan!

Finally a disclaimer: I'm only a scribe, and don't have any input into the plan beyond that of any other member. From time to time I might disagree with aspects of the policy, but I'm not the one who has stuck my head above the parapet as Director or Trustee, nor as the manager having to organise the work! I've been close enough to many decisions as an observer to realise that there are no easy decisions in that business; hence the people doing those roles have my utmost respect. I just write about it from time to time.

Roughly what I said yesterday before the forum so rudely consigned it to the great electronic dustbin in the sky when someone forgot to put another 50p in the NatPres meter ...

Tom

 

Right - who's up for forming a Radial Support and Overhaul Group?

Thanks for the reply Tom. It's never anything as simple as A or B, but interesting to know what motivates some decisions. I do hope the LTPs don't negate some of the older, 'more-delicate' locos seeing a chance to steam again.

 

Where do I sign up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Adams Radial Supporters and Enthusiasts? Though maybe not with that acronym...

 

I’m all for joining the Sharpthorne Preserved Loco Action Trust (still to my mind the worst cared for and most deserving loco on the line for a bit of TLC). Won’t ever be a revenue earner, but really would love to see it looked after at least…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Watch this space is all I’d say …

Tom

 

Although Baxter is there right now, I quite like the idea of Sharpthorn being posed next to Stepney in Steam Works given their respective roles with the line, both during it's construction and preservation.

 

Without wishing to sound like a toddler - but -

Stepney? Anyone? 55 is such an icon. Would give anything for a footplate ride on one of my earliest memories of steam again.

 

My understanding is that Stepney would need a lot of work to make it operational again, to put it mildly...

 

It was been suggested that the only movable part of Stepney you could overhaul is the whistle. The remainder would have to be new.

 

She must have had a particularly hard life. W11 still runs with the original frames she had for the Paris visit (the mounting holes for the speed indicator are still to be seen) and she may not be the only one working with the original set.

 

It was very encouraging to read in the latest Bluebell News about progress with current overhauls, as well as the reorganisation of the 'Villas' area of the yard. But what hasn't yet been mentioned in this thread is the plan to install a reverse osmosis water treatment plant. I can understand the immediate benefit of increasing washout intervals, but will this hopefully reduce wear and tear on boilers and fireboxes in the long term?

 

From what I understand from the SVR experience, yes in a simple answer. How much by would probably need some digging.

 

The water that comes out of our locos with both of our RO plants at the SVR is more like a slightly muddy puddle colour. Whereas before the RO being installed the water was bright orange and the area around our "splash pad" was thick with this orangey brown sludge.
Whilst it wont pay for itself immediately. It becomes apparent when you start overhauling boilers and there isnt the scaling on the boilers.