RTC 2025

I remember the 09 incident I was meant to have it on the white rose tour the following weekend after the Lincoln one. Was meant to be the A1 to york and then the A4 back to KX instead it was the A1 both ways

 

Seem to be a few fired up and personal comments flying around which is a shame and unnecessary and not reflective of this forum in my opinion. If you don't agree with something just scroll by or use the ignore button. It isn't necessary to belittle someone because they have a different view to your own.
My thoughts are I think everyone has a fair point on this. Simple question, would Ian have withdrawn 45212 a few weeks ago for overhaul had there not been a loco shortage and trains needing a steam loco? I think we all know the answer to that, but no one can blame Ian for trying to make the loco available and keep passengers happy.
In the meantime we can all acknowledge the fact there are 4 (now 5?) locos sat at Carnforth with valid tickets unable to work RTC trains. Decisions have consequences and because we all care we all have an opinion - that doesn't make us wrong.
I have also said previously that it is possible to believe West Coast have been brilliant for 20 years and have lost the plot now and are causing unnecessary grief for others out of pure stubbornness - I await the pile on for saying something critical of 10A!!

 

Spot on @Big Al.

Sad, because it doesn't have to be this way. They have also cut all ties with A1 Trust too when that loco had started to ease the workload. I'm sure that disagreement could have been resolved more amicably and for benefit of everyone.
Trouble with the nuclear option is if you keep using it sooner or later you end up blowing yourself up too..

 

I was on that one as well. Although it was a shame 60009 missed that one as well, Tornado put in a fantastic performance that day, especially on the first leg thanks to a broken HST.

 

Ok, going off at a bit of a tangent here ……..
Given the number of 5’s in their pool, would it be possible to keep one of the out-of-traffic tenders fit as a standby spare? (Assuming there’s generally one out of traffic?).

 

Very many years ago I believe a 5 (45110?) did a tender swap at Carnforth I think mid tour due to a hot box - so the precedent is certainly there. I'm sure someone will add in some detail!!

 

A few years back i think 45690 used 44932's tender but that was back when the mk1's were in use. Now it would have to be another tender with air brakes

 

Would it need to be air-braked itself, or just piped?

 

Yes, swapped with 48151's tender during Past-Time Rail's Laird of Stranraer in May 2000. Brilliant tour, even with the failures of 45110 (which incidentally earned the nickname The Caravan by the other support crew due to the fact they dragged it around for most of the weekend!)

https://www.sixbellsjunction.co.uk/00s/000527pr.htm

 

On that occasion in 2000, 48151s tender was used, the swop was made in about 2 hrs before the train, The Laird of Stranraer, continued on its journey to Glasgow.
2 days later 45110 was having steaming issues on its return south and was removed from the train at Lockerbie, leaving 45407 to haul the train south.

 

It did on the 'Laird of Stranraer' 3 day tour, and the tender used was the unlined one from 48151, I think that's visible in this shot at Elvanfoot. @5944 beat me to it, but if I remember correctly this weekend with 45110 was one of the reasons the SVR pulled out of main line running shortly afterwards.

 

Tangmere on the last Waverley of the season, approaching Sherburn-in-Elmet this morning.

 

Decided to go last-minute. Fairly slow-going around Leeds, and currently at Skipton. A couple of fast sprints in the Aire Valley, but almost certainly some assistance. I've been told steam comes off at Hellifield on the return, so will bail at Keighley and take a service train back to York.

Fingers crossed something is sorted out regarding the three trips covered by 45212 between now and October, but with so few locomotives available, I suspect these will be cancelled and/or postponed. Just one of those things when dealing with things approaching a century in age.

 

You have to feel sorry for the tour operators such as RYTC and Pathfinder. The increasing number of cancellations, postponements and stock issues is bad enough but stringing them along with the promise of the return of the mk.1s must be very annoying. <BJ>

 

I've been out of this 50 years or more but I can remember a hot box problem that appeared out of the blue. It was on a 4 wheel Barclay. The loco' had a broken spring leaf in the middle of the spring, it had been like it for years, but when the loco was jacked up to send the wheels off for re tyreing we decided to change it. All went to plan and the loco was back to work in a few months, new tyres etc .But it ran a hot box on the new spring side straight away. The usual mixture of cylinder oil and engine oil failed to cure it. Then some one said from another loco dep't, try changing the spring from the other side as well. That we done and all was fine from then on. The B R wagon inspector, who came to our sidings, told me they had orders years ago to change the springs on both sides of a wagon if one was broken .Hot boxes were a problem on loose coupled freight trains ,especially when they speeded up Toton to Brent coal trains. Maybe nothing to do with 45212 ,but it is a good a guess as any.

 

You make an excellent point, the likes of RTC and Pathfinder and their passengers are the losers in this.

WCR need to be honest about their situation both with themselves and their customers and either fit CDL to their mk1’s or fit vacuum brakes to their locomotives.

 

Sorry to rain on your parade Mr Smythe, all WCR steam locos already have vacuum brakes.