35028 Clan Line

If they have got their schedule back on track Clan Line should feature in Hornby: A Model World at 8 tonight on the Yesterday Channel.

 

I have often thought that the MNLPS, should have aquired another MN, or at least a spare boiler, that could have been overhauled at leisure in-between the 7 year tickets, to have enabled 28 to return from overhaul much quicker each time.

 

If money was no object I’m sure they would have done. To run on NR is 7 years but if an intermediate overhaul is done after 5 then you get 10 years.

 

When you think of the number of MN's that made it out of Barry, but realistically won't ever get restored, mostly because the owners doesn't have the funds, or expertise, then one day, when the reality finally hits, some group might decide to donate, their engine to the MNLPS, Either as spares to keep 28 active, or eventually to be restored and as a stablemate, that could take 28'S place and keep the revenue coming in whilst 28 gets overhauled,

 

Because as is well known buying the loco is the expensive part ,overhauling it ,manufacturing missing parts and maintaining it is the cheap part ….so if the owner of the remains of 350xx would kindly donate their basket case to MNLPS whose army of volunteers and money tree will ensure it’s mainline operational by the end of Clan Line’s boiler ticket …

 

Don’t you mean the other way round? We know what a pedant you like to be, so if you are going to be one…

 

Martin - if even an organisation like the MNLPS has to have a fund raising effort independent of their normal running fees to keep one loco going, how do you expect having two will do anything other than make that funding gap twice as large?

Tom

 

overhauls could be paced over a longer time span, so more opertunity to raise funds, Lets say for example, group x decided their engine was never going to get restored by them, so they donate it to MNLPS, clan line has just gotten a 7 year, main line ticket, not everyone wants to do the mainline support thing, so you ask for volunteers to help overhaul the kit of parts, and fund raise, for it, after 5, or 6 years,if funding keeps up with work, the engine is ready to steam, 28 has a year left, and a possible 3 more on preserved lines, if its decided to let it spend some time touring preserved lines, in the meanwhile the other engine, takes 28'S on the mainline, earning money, and keeping the bread and butter revenue coming in, 28 then either continues to work till the boiler certificate expires, then the overhaul gets started, or thte overhaul gets started as soon as it comes off the mainline, in which case, if assuming it takes say 6 years, you then have an overlap of 4 years when possibly both engines could be available either to hire, or to allow the other to have an intermediate, but it means the MNLPS could have a stand by should any additional work come in,

 

That’s in an ideal world though Martin, doesn’t matter if it’s on a heritage line or the mainline, what happens if something like what happens to 7802 at the WSR a few years ago and it then needs a new cylinder block despite not long having an overhaul?
All of a sudden that’s 2 machines/liability’s to raise funds for, your plan could work on paper, but we all know steam locomotives don’t exactly run on paper do they?

 

Although I am involved at the sharp end with Clan Line I don’t feel it’s my place to answer that but there is a MNLPS Committee Member who regularly posts on here who might want to. My own personal opinion is that you are on another planet if you think any purely voluntary group trying to keep one locomotive on the mainline would have the resources to do as you suggest.
Being on the support crew is a privilege but there are enough of us to restrict the number of rostered trips to a maximum of three or four a year so it doesn’t become a chore, it’s two sometimes very long days out. Keeping the engine in the condition you normally see it takes more than the support crews, quite where additional volunteers with the skill to overhaul a spare boiler would come from I’ve got no idea.

 

I am more in favour of the first part of Martin's suggestion, in effect to break a no hoper for spares. I think many of us expect some degree of scrapping to take place in the future, so at least make it to the benefit of the remainder.
Pat

 

Yes, and doesn't she look fantastic on screen, together with Messers Easson and Reynolds (and your good self who I spotted a few times I believe?)

It's very easy to say, but rather more difficult to achieve, unsurprisingly. There is just one Merchant Navy out there that is not under active restoration, running or in a museum, by my calculations, and in reality not all MNs boilers will fit all other MNs actually as far as I'm aware.

'28 is our charge, our main object of affection and dedication. Having a second boiler would be an advantage I am sure, but there are practical realities at play and we're not alone in running for a period, then going into overhaul, and coming out again for a fresh ticket without requiring a spare boiler.

I used to be in the camp of "we need a second engine" - then I became treasurer outright - and now my viewpoint is a little different, as I think JohnB is alluding to (and with respect John, I still think a spare boiler could be good, as it gives those who want to do more engineering in the way of restoration/rebuild something to do when the locomotive is running. Fundamentally you need to encourage all parts of the society to remain active all of the time, and there are more young wannabe locomotive engineers out there than you think, the issue is getting them through the door and retaining them, which is for another thread).

The financial aspects of having two locomotives is certainly different to having one. There are many questions to ask and answer, part of which is do people in the MNLPS really want to see us spending their money on another locomotive that was never part of the original equation. I have posed this a few times and get some mixed answers but the general emphasis I get is that people want us to focus on Clan Line. Not an unfair stance and it's that kind of dedicated, loving support for the locomotive that has made it one of preservation's best mainline performers by virtue of quietly getting on with its own work in the background.

I think, with respect to everyone here on the thread, that the question of having a second MN for any MN owning group has been largely answered for us. Brocklebank Line is now in the hands of SLL and probably represented prior to their acquisition of it the next best chance for a second MN for any such group.

Would access to a second working locomotive be good, to take up the slack and continue to run trains for MNLPS when we need to overhaul Clan Line? Absolutely, but then you need to remove the mindset of running a charity and society and then get into the mindset of running an outright business instead. The accounts already take up a huge amount of my time outside of work hours and everything else I do. Doing it for two locomotives would add to that, and I'm no longer as green as I used to be! Besides which, it probably wouldn't be as fun anymore, and I am sure I am not alone in thinking that.

Part of the magic of the MNLPS - and why I joined - is the love and dedication for this one specific locomotive. It's intoxicating, inspiring and as a society I think there's actually few out there which generate the kind of quiet support the society has. We recently ran a tube appeal - we have been inundated with support financially and with boots on the ground in Devon, helping out with the locomotive- you can't buy that kind of love for a steam locomotive that Clan Line generates, and I will always be grateful for.

 

In fairness to Martin, there is a logic in having a second steam locomotive: if you rely on a specific workstream, it makes sense to continue to run that workstream if you can. But I think it's going to be easier to setup and do that when you have a group already dedicated to two locos (or more) than for one society with one locomotive to add allegiance, time and effort to a second locomotive.

Of course, my views are my own and should not be taken as an indication of the MNLPS' views, but I think they reflect how the society feels.

 

I dare you to suggest purchasing a second boiler to the chief Engineer!!

 

I have, several times, and we always have a cordial discussion.

 

How much does the MNLPS lose when their engine isn't available, for extended periods of time? then at what point does the likes of Belmont look elsewhere? I'm not saying they are going to, but its the main avenue of revenue for the society, Any engine that might be available is nothing more than a stripped chassis, boiler and wheel sets, There is a logic in having readily available spares, that can be overhauled, in readiness for when they are needed, it would make overhauling the engine easier, if such components were overhauled and stored that would be the first scenerio, rather than an outright restoration, but at what point do you decide to carry on and do a full restore, As SAC has said, there is a logic in a second string to your bow,

 

There’s one in the NRM, and it is nice and accessible so you can easily assess the condition of the interior before making an offer!

Tom

 

Also catchup https://uktvplay.co.uk/shows/hornby-a-model-world/series-2/episode-11/6318532511112 about 30 mins in

 

Hi Martin. You do make it sound so simple at times, when it really isn't (my apologies).

My point of view is tempered by the fact I am the treasurer, I know our finances inside and out and I can say, categorically, that right now there's no business case - at all - for a second engine, and there's only a marginal case for a second boiler: and I wouldn't recommend either to the society as it stands as treasurer. A nice to have, rather than a must have.

All very well and good being on the outside and commentating, and I know you mean well, but at the end of the day I think we should probably focus on what we can do, and in the best possible manner: supporting Clan Line.

Let that be the end of it.