Fire Risk

Just look at 4014, very rarely has anything showing from the chimney unless it's deliberate. A MN / WC/BB would be the best test bed

 

Climate's rather different to 1995 though.

 

Vintage Trains are considering it, or at least were last year.
Tyseley Locomotive Works and VT Matters

 

Don't confuse weather with Climate. Yes a warming climate means heatwaves are more likely, but warmer temperatures means the atmosphere holds more moisture too.
The long dry spring was exceptional this year and means much of last year's undergrowth has sat there and dried out providing a fire load, rather than rotting away. The warming climate could however just as easily deliver a very wet spring, as extremes in either direction are more likely.
It's weather patterns that have delivered the prolonged dry weather this year, similar to the first lockdown 5 years ago. Dry ground warms up more quickly too leading to higher temperatures, the Spanish drought a couple of years ago was directly linked to the UK's first 40c due to how quickly the air warmed up over scorched Iberia, which then moved over us.
Also a prediction - mainline steam will be around in 10 years, but much reduced and with at least one mainline oil burner to help mitigate these issues.

 

4014 oil conversion video.

 

The expertise is already being fine tuned.
https://advanced-steam.org/5at/modern-steam/modern-steam-miscellany/dlm-52-8055/

I understand that 141R1244 has been converted to burn light fuel oil instead of heavy oil from its construction.
https://www.mikado1244.ch/mikado-1244/
I think that 141R568 owned by Sir Andrew Cook is also an oil burner.

I do fear that there will be an element of "not invented here" from some elements of the railway community. Or "it didn't work last time" forgetting the different oil to be used and advances in combustion technology.
If weather conditions continue to be unstable, it may be the only way forward for mainline steam.

Cheers, Neil

 

Is that the same Cook as of William Cook Cast Products? Suppliers / sponsors of Tornado, Clan Hengist et al? I had no idea he was a loco owner?

 

I fear that the greatest threat to mainline steam will not be the changing climate but Great British Railways and its interactions with the ORR.

 

https://swissclassictrain.ch/sir-andrew-cook/

The one and same. Also owns about a dozen carriages as well, and the remains of 141.R.73 that used to be at Bressingham before an aborted overhaul in Switzerland.

 

Could you expand on that? I think the whole access charge regime could be an issue, but as long as freight operating companies and open access operators exist on broadly their current basis, there will have to be some form of access rights and bidding for paths for non GBR operators. What are your thoughts?

 

Steam will still be around, but limited to a few routes, because the main routes will all at some point be re signaled with in cab control, and it will have to be able to be retro fitted, Some loco owners, will dig their heels in and refuse to fit new systems, but others will, so the mainline scene will be very much reduced, onto a few routes not yet converted to in cab signalling, until they too get upgraded, then it will only be engines that have in cab systems, that will be allowed, I can see there being one system, that does away with all the others combining ETWP, AWS, and in cab signalling, all using micro circuits, into a box that will fit in a tool locker,

 

Nooooo , not light oil, that will stop me getting a repeat of this, now in the heritage era.

Bryan

 

My thoughts are that it only takes one significant (by which I mean costly) incident and the view about Heritage operations (not just steam) may well change with a nationalised operation.
I know people will claim access goers back to some privatisation agreement, but then a law only has longevity until it is changed.

 

Neil, many thanks for that. I'd forgotten about 52 8055. A steam loco for the future, and said to be very much more environmentally friendly if my glance-reading of various articles on it is correct.

Coming back to what I said earlier on this thread. I imagine it will be a very significant expense to overhaul and rebuild a Merchant Navy pacific to be a light oil burner that is very much more environmentally friendly, and to get it tested and approved for main line use. Which again comes back to one of the 'big hitters' leading the way if they feel so inclined.

But as for me, I'll stay as a member of the MNLPS, and mostly enjoy such as a BR 4MT and a SR U or N class (in BR lined black of course) making occasional visits to the Spa Valley Railway, plus equivalent pleasures at the Bluebell, Mid-Hants and Swanage lines for as long as I can.

Bryan

 

Similar was being said, in the opposite direction, 30-odd years ago for privatisation.

 

Is this a coal or oil burner coming over the horizon?

But it is ok as it is crossing the Continental Divide in the US where those in charge do not believe in climate change

Oil firing isn't as streight forward as some here seem to think.

Peter

 

Even with the current high-volatiles coal currently in circulation, it can be hard at times to control smoke - you can be in a situation with doors wide open and still not get enough secondary air to fully combust the volatiles.

So if you move to a situation where a loco is getting 100% of its energy from volatile oils, rather than say 40% as now with the coal we have, then it may be very difficult to adequately control smoke with oil firing without significant firebox redesign. (I believe “back in the day” some oil burners had hollow stays to allow more secondary air in - but that’s a significant design change for existing locos).

I appreciate that the discussion here has focused on fire risk from dropping cinders from coal burning - but it would be a pyrrhic victory if you found a solution to that problem but only at the expense of widespread opprobrium from locos becoming smokier.

Tom