New builds - how many will ever really work?

I also think there is the other point of how much excitement is caused from the locomotive and how the knock on effect is seen throughout the whole industry. Tornado has shown how many extra people it can get to a railway in both enthusiasts and general public. Now things like "namers" will continue that, which will hopefully get more people to volunteer. Where as I don't know if the small modern looking tank engines, out side of enthusiasts, will get there wow factor from it.
Gavin

 

How many of these "facebook" schemes are going to come to nothing? answer proballly all of them, not because they lack the skills or fund raising, but because this country wont have the heavy mechanical facilities to build them, are we as a body missing something here ? railways are now taking on apprentises , and teaching them the old skills, but how much would it benifit the rail industry if a proper college were set up and actually taught all the skills needed to cast ,machine and build an engine from scratch ? if done across the whole industry and not connected to any one railway, but where any railway could order castings etc from as a means of giving work at a reasonable cost it would certainly be more interesting than just machining a block of metal to which you would not know its future use, Preserved workshops would get people with the right skills, and because heavy engineering skills are transferable it could even create jobs elsewhere. it would get kids off the street and would give a route to these maybe loco builders to go from day dreaming to actually achieving it . some may say its not possible , but look at what we could lose ,

 

I can see the logic in the great majority of what you say although that big firebox of the "Atlantic" will take some filling! What you need, I suspect, is a re-creation of Stroudley's "Lyons" class mixed traffic 0-4-2 with its splendid livery, name and handy size. No, I am not volunteering!

 

Like Paul I too am trying to disengage from this thread but can't resist tackling some issues I think are being overlooked! My impression is that there are too few people among the general population who visit preserved railways, travel on the occasional excursion, or turn up at the lineside for a quick snap or to show the kids a steam train,sufficiently knowledgeable, discerning and interested enough to even bother to donate, never mind choose one loco in preference to another. Ask the average visitor at a preserved railway whether they prefer a Dean Single to a LNER P2 and their eyes will glaze over.We overestimate our numbers because we see things from our own little corner. I think they may have a similar lack of interest in providing for future motive power until crisis point arises and there are suddenly no steam locos left to see. Perhaps if someone threatened to sell Flying Scotsman to the Chinese there might be the kind of reaction that occurs when a national treasure is at risk of leaving the country and that might cause them to open their purses. Someone is going to play the 'Tornado' trump card at this point and say it worked ok for that group. Sure it did because it was a novelty but the law of diminishing returns is going to come into play and having twenty odd schemes to choose from is going to take away the novelty value so, unlike SAC Martin, I think the 'Tornado effect' is not enduring. We have never been in this position before and the new builds are also going to be in direct competition with the appeals for funds to keep existing restored locos running.

 

Part of the problem is the hobby is seen as being unobtainable..look at it, ride on it, but don't touch.
Its easy to say turn up and volunteer.. I could goto my local hospital, community library, pub etc and do the same.. thing is.. volunteer to do what exactly ?..


The scrap loco's are so far gone that it would need either limitless funds of dedication from a small group of people for 10 years... dedication from a group of people who never knew what that locomotive looked like in BR days, can see an identical one on another line and has relatively no historical interest to most people (after all the famous, the popular have already been restored).

Add to this the ones that have been restored.. where they are in private hands are really steam powered pension funds.. ask a 30 year old would you part with £1.5mn for a steam engine or a Ferrari.. guess which will win, this is a moot point anyway as few people are walking round with a £1mn in their pocket, to buy something which was sold for £2000 25 years ago and had a team of 30-40 working every spare minute to disassemble, reassemble and have a tightly fastened wreck to play with for another 10 years.. but now really is needing that new boiler barrel replacing, new tender tank etc etc..

What young people like is an obtainable challenge with "celebrity appeal"

This is probably why new builds are taking more interest.. a chance to revive something with history and something to get their teeth into, what is needed is good marketing, good PR and make it easy and exciting.. it's easy to raise £1mn-£2mn from the general public if you get them on your side...I'm surprised we haven't seen some slick marketing to get a new "manchester united" rebuilt... done the right way you could raise that in an afternoon, but as preservation knows, if your on the outside getting £10 can be a chore.

Maybe if workshops, railways, locomotive owners advertised no-commitment skills training, a chance to turn up and learn something, whilst doing something useful and make sure there's an objective thats easy to achieve and easy to say "I did that".. then they can leave and impress their friends and excite their interest for the next level.

Now on a personal note.. I have a 2 year old who loves "choo choos".. it's great.. I combine watching steam with taking my daughter out and giving my wife a break at home every saturday.. if lines had more children's facilities, railways could see more parents looking for things to do.. and believe me at weekends parents do want to find things to do , but without it.. it has to be photo's only.

 

Already been suggested, though it seems to have gone a bit quiet after a lot of noise when first announced Football fans asked to help build new B17 Manchester United - Heritage Railway Magazine

(Off topic) Yes to that - my 2 year old daughter can't get enough of Eastleigh Lakeside Railway, which combines her two favourite things - trains and swings...

Tom

 

Now you are talking! Actually, I've often thought we need a D tank - the absolutely archetypal Sussex branch line engine for more than 60 years; enclosed cab for running backwards (Stroudley tenders were rather low affairs - not nice running backwards in winter); variety of liveries available including Stroudley improved engine green, Marsh Umber and SR Olive; named after local towns and villages for local identity (including "Grinstead", "Lewes" and "Ardingly"); but slightly bigger in coal capacity, water capacity and about twice the tractive effort to give just a bit more in hand relative to a Terrier, once we get our 6 coach Stroudley rake in operation; and considered highly influential of later passenger tank engines on several railways.

Right, that's the plan for after the Craven ... :behindsofa:

(see File:LBSCR Stroudley D class 0-4-2 tank locomotive (Howden, Boys' Book of Locomotives, 1907).jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for a photo).

Tom

 

I've skimmed over most of this topic but I've come across the subject of wheel diameter again. I cannot get my head around this idea that a loco has wheels that are too large for 25 mph running. I've said it before but large wheels are no bar to low speeds. Any steam engine has to be able to start its train from zero speed, no matter what size wheels it has and a steam engine has maximum torque at minimum revs. Big wheels allow it to go faster because the rotational speed of a steam engine is finite. Bigger wheels will reduce the tractive force if all else such as cylinders and pressure, is equal but it is the combination of these variables that counts. OK, if you are designing a new loco to run at 25mph and produce a given tractive effort, you wouldn't give it big wheels because the cylinders would be smaller with smaller wheels. The prime motive there, though, is reducing cost.

 

E.S. Cox suggested that the 6ft.9ins wheels of the "Coronations" were more conducive to slipping than the 6ft. 6ins ones on the "Lizzies". He may have been wrong of course but he would, forgive me, be more likely to know than anyone posting on this forum. It had, I think, more to do with the control of the slip once it had started.

P.H.

 

Don't your Terriers have a bit of a life of slippered ease? Despite stretches of 1 in 60 the Isle of Wight haul 6 four wheelers or their equivalent and a bit more if necessary.

PH. (Sorry about going a bit off topic and contrary to my intention to disengage from this thread!)

 

Probably we do treat them quite carefully (though they are now 140 and 137 years old respectively!), though Stepney at least is in such poor condition mechanically that (to bring this back on topic) it is often reckoned it would be cheaper to do a new build than put her back to full mechanical order - or, looked at the other way, by time you replaced everything that needed replacing, there wouldn't be much you hadn't built from new... Ironically, the boiler is considered to be one of the bits in best condition (but that isn't saying much). She'd certainly need new frames and cylinders just to start the ball rolling.

The big difference between us and the IoW, though, is not the maximum gradient, but the length. By time we get to East Grinstead, we'll be 11 miles long, of which in one direction, about 7 miles will be at gradients of 1:75 or steeper. Put a trailing load of about 80 tons (i.e. 6 four wheelers) behind a Terrier and she'll cope with the load, but would be a bit marginal for water by time you got to EG, especially if the fireman was not absolutely top notch. You'd also certainly have to come in for coal at least once on a 3-trip day, maybe twice, with the impact that has on the timetable. Hence my feeling that a D tank would be ideal for that sort of duty: not only do you have a bit of TE in reserve, but also bigger water and coal capacity.

But this is a very long way in the future, if at all!

Tom

 

Just what has slipping got to do with 25mph running?
If we are going to start talking about slipping, there are any number of factors contributing to a locos propensity to slip and its control. I've no experience of the LMS pacifics but the Coronations had more superheater elements than the Princess Royals. Consequently they have a much greater volume between regulator and steam chest and the contents of this geberally have to be dissipated before a slip ceases once the regulator is shut.

 

Quite a lot.

 

Having seen quite a few Coronation pacifics start trains away from Crewe in the early 1960s, most, if not all, had a small slip when moving away initially.
It did not tend to happen on the incline out of Liverpool Lime Street, because the trains were given a helping hand by the Jinty that brought the ECS in.
Given the fact that the Merseyside Express was load 16, a little push by a Jinty the length of platform 7 at Lime Street made all the difference.

 

Please explain?

 

See post by std tank above. Likely to be more of a problem under 25mph than above. Also see Youtube posting "Leaves on the Line" which, although narrow gauge, shows how even a total adhesion machine can have problems when rail conditions are poor.

P.H.

 

Depends very much on the load I would have thought. A big un is hardly going to have problems with load 6 or 8 is it? Remember, the trains in BR days were normally load 12 or more.

 

You still haven't explained why big wheels cause slipping. Slipping is a function of the coefficient of friction (railhead condition), applied power and adhesive weight all of which are variables. The only one of those variables that can include wheel diameter is adhesive weight where load transfer can be affected by the reaction of the drawbar and, in this case the bigger the wheel, the better.

 

Cox seemed to think they made control more difficult. Right or wrong, he was likely to be better informed than anyone posting here and I include myself!

 

Can't argue with that. However, history is littered with false opinion and ideas by the knowledgeable of their time. Especially locomotive history.