Bluebell Motive Power

Definitely tighter than desireable, though those numbers will be supplemented with 80151 later this year.

Tom

 

Supplementing the locomotive availability.

Might Tornado inspire an accelerated overhaul? (Or in the future plan: organisation, space and a funding procedure for one? )
When Baxter and Primrose are back would two small engines on a shoulder load train usefully cover for a larger engine needing
a day on shed - washing out or whatever?






a

 

This is quite correct though unfortunately the weight saving from the welded inner firebox was practically nullified because longer stays
were needed and a wider water space, so the foundation ring was extra wide and came out 50% heavier. One of the reasons the first
Merchant Navies were so overweight and why the Light Pacific boilers did not have a traditional solid foundation ring.

To speculate: it is rather a pity that having gone to a steel firebox Bulleid did not go to 300 psi which was in service in the USA & Germany.

 

Baxter is occasionally used for passenger work, but it is not ideal. Although I don't think there is a formal speed limit (unlike Normandy) it isn't ideal for running at 25mph, which is necessary to meet the timetable. When it does get used, it tends to be evening charters and the like, where the timetable is more relaxed.

We can run double headed trains. In general, two P tanks (or Terriers) would be equivalent to a medium engine like the C / H / O1 / E4 etc, that is able to take the load equivalent to Wealden Rambler or Golden Arrow; and a small + medium engine (for example, P + H) would be equal to a large engine (i.e. 6 coaches). A few years ago (round about 2014) we did that a lot of double heading due to loco availability. It's quite fun, but the key issue if you did a significant amount is rostering crews, i.e. you increase the daily numbers needed. That problem is even worse if it happens in an unplanned or erratic way (i.e. hard to roster crews in advance if you don't know in advance if the train engine is going to be 1 *H or 2 * P) . (You also increase the annual loco miles without changing the annual seat miles or passenger miles).

Tom

 

Due back soon, but there is still the work to be done in house in re-staying the firebox. I think in practical terms, 80151 should be in traffic later this year, and Sir Archie should be next year. As always, space seems to be at a premium. I think the plan was probably to finish 80151 and get it out of the workshop before working on 34059, but I don’t know to what extent the issue with 73082 has intruded on timescales and planned workshop occupancy. (The repair of 73082 may well be the kind of thing that the new covered maintenance area over the washout pit - to be built as part of the ASH project - would be useful for: a repair that can be done under cover without disrupting work on locos under heavy overhaul).

Tom

 

Do we know what loco's are intended to go on display when the ASH project is complete? Stepney is confirmed and 75027 is being cosmetically restored for it, but has a decision been made about what others will. According to Steam Railway the plan to cosmetically restore 30064 has been dropped.

 

I haven’t seen a list. As far as I understand, 75027 will be the loco with a wheelchair accessible cab (that was one of the U Boats on the early concept drawings). I’d take a punt that the Adams Radial tank would be in there as well, but beyond that I don’t know.

Tom

 

Many thanks again Tom.

 

Well they do have the required parts sat in the yard at Ropley on out of ticket 73096; I wonder if we will see them go on loan to Sussex to assist the Bluebell until new parts can be made?

 

Perhaps 73096 should be broken up for spares - probably make a profit if it was done carefully. One less in the overhaul queue...

 

Do you like hospital food?......

Comments like that really aren't necessary!

 

There are names for people like you, cant put them on NP as I will get barred, but can put initials and you can guess what they mean; DH,FF,WK,KH, to mention but a few.

 

The announcement on the Camelot Society Facebook page suggested that the loco would be out of traffic for two - three months. I know estimates can sometimes go awry, but that suggests to me that the Society and the Railway have some confidence about the lead times for sourcing replacement parts.

At the moment, 80151 is in the left hand road of the workshop (with Stowe's boiler behind) and 75027 is being prepared for the ASH project in the right hand road, but that painting is due to be finished within a week so I believe. Probably an interesting indicator about Camelot will be whether or not it immediately goes into the space vacated by 75027 once the painters have finished.

Tom

 

Actually I'd rather it was kept together until it can be overhauled; anything that gets removed early can so easily get lost. However several on here seem to think pulling bits off to keep other locos going, such as cylinder covers and even the tender, is a great idea - and it was at them that my tongue in cheek comment was aimed.

As to calling me names, please grow up.

 

I had a feeling you were satirising the usual tendency on here to immediately start offering parts or all of other peoples' locos at the drop of a hat (or cylinder end cover!)



Steven

 

I also thought Lplus was using humour.

 

Also, 73096 isn't at Ropley any more, it left for overhaul to main line at Carnforth about 2 years ago...

 

Finger on the pulse........

 

@BrightonBaltic - not my photo, but take a look at the date:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/70607220@N04/25178976488

Tom