Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Well, I suppose what I was saying (and it's obvious if you think about it) that it's only necessary to steam it if nothing smaller that will do the job is available. It gives us more resilience in the event of another loco not being available, so we will hopefully see it used on more than just those few occasions. But it will be expensive to steam for more than the occasional use - however, once you have it in steam you might as well keep it in steam for a week or two.

It was overhauled with a lot of funding from its supporters' groups, and a bequest left for the purpose, but of course when the commitment was made a decade back to buy a new firebox, and overhaul it, coal was a fraction of the price it is now. Its overhaul is a sunk cost now, so it's too late to ask the question why it was done. Look up "sunk cost fallacy" to understand why that argument is not relevant. Another way of looking at it is that if the cost of paying for a day's use for the Hall, plus coal, is cheaper than just coal for a larger loco, which should you choose to use? It would be a more pertinent question to ask now why are we starting overhauling two more locos which are larger than a Class 4/5.

I'd heard a suggestion that we might therefore, once we've had a period of maximising visitor interest in it as a new returnee to steam, send it off on the hire circuit to other railways which are short of steam (returning to Bluebell for occasions we would want it - as you say for Giants of Steam, and Santas). That would help recoup that sunk overhaul cost.
But we've had a change of management since I heard that idea mooted, so we'll have to wait and see.

 

BGs are 6 ft 6in shorter than standard Mk.1s, so they are a bit lighter, and yes, seats are heavy!
But yes, Tom, you are right, 31 tons is a bit light; it's the weight of a BG as built, on BR1 bogies but with simplified single bolster planks, which is what I've got on the web pages. However 6334 is actually on lighter B4 bogies, (so about 29T), and the new 81025 has heavier commonwealth bogies (so 32T) (and of course we don't know yet how much the kitchen would add, but it could be another 3 Tons, although removing the guard's brake will lighten it).
I will update the web pages.
Richard

 

Thank you for an insightful commentary on the situation. I do wonder, however, whether Carina could be a candidate for Stephen Middleton's "pragmatic restoration" approach? I.e., rather than inflate the restoration costs by trying to accurately recreate the original interior, instead look for cheaper alternatives? I'm not saying this should be a project for the Bluebell, but perhaps it could be an option for some other railway which might like a Pullman but can't contemplate the costs of a full restoration?

Sent from my SM-A125F using Tapatalk

 

But Pullman is a synonym for luxury with it's own decor lexicon. Anything less than a completely accurate restoration (caveats for kitchen equipment) is a disservice to the brand. I can't think of any salvageable interior that could be inserted into Carina (ooer). I see where you're coming from but it's very different to installing a MK1 interior into a LMS period 3.

 

I guess any individual or group interested in such a thing knows where to come. (But from memory, Carina also needs structural repairs before you get to the interior, which aren't things you can skimp on).

At the moment, I'd suggest there is a buyer's market for interesting carriages, but without many buyers. It's not just the Bluebell that are rationalising fleets (see the North Norfolk thread, for example) but realistically, if a railway is disposing of rolling stock, it will generally be the stuff that is seen as being on the wrong side of a cost / usefulness equation; and those characteristics are likely to apply to many prospective buyers as well.

Tom

 

Meanwhile, more positive carriage news:

The inaugural March 2024 issue of the SR Coach Group newsletter is now available for everyone to view on-line at https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/sr-coach-group/SRCG_Newsletter_Issue1.pdf . SRCG members receive two newsletters per year, by email, in March and September. The aim is for each issue to contain a mix of current project news and historical articles. If you enjoy reading this first issue, please consider joining the SRCG to support our work (details at https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/sr-coach-group/join.html ) and you’ll receive future editions direct to your inbox at the time they are published.

Tom

 

A big day for Beachy Head - the first movements under its own power!

https://www.facebook.com/1000646827...SJTEVHNpzzgrBCT1b1k5XnMLYDZd8WdCdaogpXxMD2ml/

(Fenchurch looks on approvingly …)

Tom

 

Sir Archie news - for @misspentyouth62

Sir Archie will be on the “A” service this weekend, 15/16 June.

(On the Saturday, the first A departure will be Camelot to allow the re-dedication ceremony to take place, with Sir Archie taking the second and third trains. On Sunday it runs all the A service).

Timetable: https://www.bluebell-railway.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/3-4.png

Tom

 

Was there meant to be an earlier departure too?

 

Yes, I believe there is an 09:20 departure from SP / 10:15 from EG on the Saturday, which must be the B engine.

(The traffic notice for next weekend isn’t out yet, but that extra train was advertised to members).

Tom

 

Much appreciated Tom

 

Timetable for Saturday https://www.bluebell-railway.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Bluebell-Railway-Timetables-2024.pdf

 

Well spotted Ben,

Does anyone know what set 'C' is likely to be formed from?

Would assume it is lighter than set 'B' as it is just the terrier in its own.

Andrew

 

I suspect this is the first publicly available record of movement as the drain cocks are closed...

 

Posted in the Beachy Head thread as well, but the locomotive is to be launched into service in August, over the Bank Holiday weekend.

 

Visited Bluebell today, Camelot as per roster on website, seem to have their major back, getting back to the Bluebell aura of the past. Had a bit of a delay going to HK, a red signal just outside HK that was stuck, signals phones down, so fireman had to walk to HK to get permission to proceed. Passing red signal procedure then used , arrived at HK 30mins late. Apparently a lightning strike had hit the power, knocking out the phones etc. Now if that had been mainline we wouldn't have moved until the signal was sorted so I guess that's progress !

Sent from my SM-A556B using Tapatalk

 

According to the traffic notice:

Set B = South --> North 1503 / 387 / 394 (LNWR Obo + 2 Mets)
Set C = South --> North 6686 / 1336 / 1309 - the three Maunsells.

(I have a hunch though that there is a mistake on the timetable and the set hauled by Fenchurch will in fact be B (Obo + Mets), not C).

The trains with both 72 + 65 are the two sets combined (Obo at the south end), i.e. B+C.

Set A is 5 Mark 1s for Camelot's train on Saturday; strengthened at the north end with two Bulleids (so 7 in total) when Sir Archie takes it.

Tom

 

Thanks Tom,

The Obo on the northern end of the set is fairly unusual (certainly in the last 35 years anyway......)

Andrew

 

It’s not (I might have been unclear) - I put the sets in order south - north. So 1503 at the south end, then two Mets, then 3 Maunsells at the north end.

Tom

 

Thanks Tom,

My ability to read only certain words strike again!

Thanks

Andrew