4472 What colour

Paullad 1984 states :

get rid of that double chimney and silly smoke deflectors!

Why ? As one of many who thinks that not only do these items enhance an already incredible piece of design ( and feels that SNG might also approve ) it is the form in which many remember the loco in its last days of BR operation. 4472 / 60103 has carried so many different guises since being preserved in 1963 that it is difficult to favour one over another - and why shouldn't people have the chance to savour their favourire at least once. Apart from variety being the spice of life it's nice to ring the changes and 4472 / 60103 legitimately allows this.

 

Why paul would you want to comprimise saftey anby removing the smokedeflectors it is proven that they work so we should leave them be yes they aint to my taste but 4472 is better with them than without them and i belive that if somethign is fitted and it improves the loco it should be kept

 

If these are to remain the loco should be repainted as BR 60103. But I would remove them for the same reasons as Alan Pegler did when he preserved the locomotive. Pegler has written that he fully supported fitting double chimneys and smoke deflectors to the A3s whilst still in service, to improve their performance. He was a BR Eastern Region Board member at the time. But when he preserved Flying Scotsman his aim was for it to appear as a 'typical LNER A3' therefore he restored the single chimney arrangement and accepted the loss of performance. This did not appear to be a great handicap for most of the loco's preserved career.

 

Changed days now methinks !

The loco is to be operated on the main line and therefore needs to be equipped to do so; that includes smoke deflectors, double chimney and air-braking which - in no way - respects the LNER A3 Pacific as built !

If you want to see FS as an A3 then be prepared to see it banned from the main line. Preservation is increasingly becoming more of a series of compromises but since many of those who come to see it working will be less knowledgeable members of the public simply pleased to see a real steam locomotive at work on the main line then the rivet counters will have to argue the case amomgst themselves as the NRM - IMHO - will look to cater for the wider public rather than the narrower rivet counting brigade.

 

Why do you consider that smoke deflectors and double chimney are needed for main line operation? There are plenty of single chimney locos around and they don't seem to be handicapped. I can understand why deflectors need to be fitted to a double chimney A3, but IMHO a single chimney variant would do just fine on the main line. Why do you consider an A3 would be banned from the main line?

 

Totally agree with Ian's points. With a single chimney A3's are fine, but with a double chimney drifting smoke obscuring the drivers view becomes a problem. When the NRM first bought 4472 they tried it without smoke deflectors in it's current double chimney form for one trip, the deflectors were back on before it went out again!
Also there is no requirement for air braking either, there are many main line locos out there with vacuum braking. Such locos are currently restricted to operate with WCR, but as this TOC have the lions share of the market that's not a great restriction. I can't help wondering how long it will be before DBS decide that their share of the market is so small a part of their operations that they might as well pull out of steam operation?

 

I can only echo the question - why does a single chimney A3 need smoke defectors? 4472/60103 has spent the vast majority of its life in single chimney form without smoke defectors, including the vast majority of its post-BR mainline career.

Or should we be prepared to see smoke defectors fitted to the King, the Castles, Halls, Black Fives, B1, K1, K4 etc. as "essential" mainline equipment?!?

Steven

 

Is it something to do with the time of year? Exact same discussion just 1 year ago see around page 24.

 

They don't. A3's with a SINGLE chimney are fine without smoke deflectors however the reduced draft you get when they are fitted with a double blast pipe and chimney causes smoke to drift at a lower level thus causing an obstruction to the drivers forward vision. The chacteristics of each loco are unique to that particular class. There is no way you would ever need to fit smoke deflectors to anything from Swindon owing to the design of their locos which all have a strong blast causing the smoke to be lifted well clear of the driver. Having said that there are always odd occations with any loco when drifting and the wind is in the wrong direction that drifting smoke can be an issue for the driver, but an issue which he can more readily control.

 

Hi everyone does anyone have any new updates on her overhaul?

Thanks

 

No - still steady progress. Don't expect anything soon, this is about it being righter than right, not just fixed for the short term. Please be patient...and yes, I'm sure you'll see 60103 in brunswick green ere long, just as I hanker after doing something completely different with it.

 

Please make this its first livery as some of us on here will not be around when you do eventually decide to paint it in brunswick green. As you said elsewhere you would paint 6229 in brunswick green, even in its streamlined form, it would be nice to see both locos in this livery together.

 

Well, seeing as a lot of it is apple green and lined out already, it'll first come out in that livery, but nil desperandum, I would expect it in brunswick sometime during its first ticket.

 

By which you mean?

Anthony, I get the impression from quite a few of your recent posts that the new order at the NRM is changing policies and we will perhaps see a reversion to the Coiley/Bellwood days when a return to steam of virtually anything could not be ruled out.
Now, about the L & Y radial....... It only needs a new chimney!

 

An alternative might be seeing if an improved single chimney exhaust design could be fitted. There is no doubt that the A3 deserves a better exhaust system than that originally fitted - hence the double Kylchap. Providing the blast pipe tip area was larger than that offered by the original single chimney type you would be on the right road, the limited height is obviously the biggest headache but an appreciable improvement in performance should be possible.It would be a work-round that should keep everyone happy.

 

Burn the heretic! w

 

Crackle crackle.... ;-)

 

Im of the opinion that if an engine was built b4 1948, and wasnt extensively rebuilt during BR times, that it shouldnt carry BR livery much. The same goes for 4472. but the apple green is what everyone knows it for, so therefore people will be interested.

Plus, people who may not be around to see it in BR green, youv probably already seen it in BR green , so whatre u complaining about?

 

I never saw 60103 in BR days and saw it only once at Bridgnorth in its BR livery. I never saw 30850 in BR days either. If you want to see locos in Mickey Mouse liveries go to Disney World and let us have chance to see these locos in their BR livery.

 

Anthony,
You may or may not wish to comment on this but in discussion with a railway journalist today and he tells me there's a bit of a kerfuffle at the NRM as it's been discovered that the back to back driving wheel measurement is out by 2mm. Now I wouldn't have thought that 2mm would be that big a deal over a distance in excess of 4ft.