82045 The way ahead?

2999 is a somewhat special case, because the Didcot line is so short. A visit to a longer line gives it a much better run, and that is a good reason for it to spend much of its time away. That's a different situation from 82045's, where any other line that it might visit would not be so different from its home line.

 

Surely you mean Stanier's rather than Gresley's?
A set of MK3's or even 4's might be appropriate for Clan's 1st mainline trip? C20 motive power with C20 stock?

 

We just like to stir the pot at Kidderminster whenever anyone of the LNER group turn up. "Wouldnt this Gresley look good in Maroon.... ".

Any coaching stock that was prevelant in Scotland would be appropriate. A few of us would love to see a few of our Staniers in Blood and Custard but that might be on pain of death.

 

I think it's perfectly natural for the reaction to a new loco entering traffic (now or prospectively in the future) being "Ooh, I'd love to see it at 'xxx'. There may be many reasons for this, it may be that people aren't local to the line where it's based, and especially if it's a bit of a hike away, a day trip for a gala visit may not be completely practical. It may also be that they have memories of that class of loco on a particular role which can't easily be replicated where it's based. To use the example of 82045, perhaps they can remeber 3MTs on the Southern on Green Bulleid and Mk1 stock, which isn't something the SVR can showcase, but something the Bluebell or Swanage can. It may even be that they are certified steam crew at their local line and they'd love the loco to come visit so they can have a go.

I don't think any of the comments to the effect of 'Wouldn't it be nice to see it somewhere else' are to the effect of 'I want it somewhere else permanently', and very few would begrudge 82045 for spending the majority of its time at the Severn Valley. But I don't see the harm in longing for the day when something interesting comes for a holiday in your neck of the woods.

Wishing a loco to go mainline, well, arguably that's a different matter and is something I find harder to back up for some locos. But, people can dream, and this is NP after all!

 

It's unfortunate, from our point of view, that the requirements for "mainline" are mostly the same whether it's Worgret Jn to Wareham, a secondary route such as East Suffolk, or the WCML; and even more stringent for the Cambrian.

 

Can but agree with you MellishR. Just look at "my" railway [I'm a member] the NYMR, they have to apply all the same standards to the stock approved for the 6 miles from Grosmont to Whitby [and occasional trips to Battersby], as to stock approved for running London to Edinburgh....... That's despite the Esk Valley being more Titfield Thunderbolt branch line than East Coast Mainline......

 

Thats not strictly true. The NYMR do have some derogations on their operation to Whitby/Battersby. For example I believe that OTMR is not necessary, although if fitted it must be working. @Steve will remember more about the derogations than I do.

Peter

 

There are the usual ones for exemptions from the ORR for Mk.1 rolling stock from the Railway Safety Regulations 1999. There is no exemption from TPWS, required by the same regulations. Network Rail have given a derogation from the fitting of OTMR but not AWS and GSMR. Not sure of any other derogations in force, other than those specific to steam locomotives in general. i.e DSD

 

May update: http://www.82045.org.uk/news/82045_news-may21.html

 

Blue and grey. It would look better with the diesels.

Patrick

 

More the other way round, perhaps. Were not the first batch of streamlined 'Duchesses' painted blue, a colour of the A4s?

 

A handful of both Gresley and Thompson buffet cars did get blue/grey. I actually thought they looked ok in it.

 

Ideal for a 1970s weekend. Kipper ties, cuppa soups and Slade.



A Gresley in Maroon would also look good with the 82xxx since there were some at Waterloo c1966

 

Lost in the paint ball fight above ......
Did anyone else read this? Excellent progress on the front and rear trucks - I never realised that they are different - the front uses a spring controlled slide, and the rear is a swing link design.
So why so, as they are presumably intended to ride the same in either direction, and swing links have a somewhat chequered history? What did the LMS and GWR use?

 

The LMS Ivatt 2 2-6-2 tanks started with a swing link pony truck at the front and a spring controlled truck at the rear, but from 41290 the trucks were reversed, with the swing link truck at the rear. Why this was done, I don't know.

 

I believe it's normal to have differences between front and rear trucks. They have different harmonics and damp each other out, preventing an interesting ride.
Pat

 

Makes sense!

 

Ah right - that figures.

 

I am not sure that swing links have a chequered history, notwithstanding problem with the P2s and V2s, any more than coil spring side control on bogies has a chequered history because of problems in India. I suspect that swing link side control was globally by far the most common design both on two wheel trucks and bogies, and swing link trucks were common in the UK. However, speeds with steam locos in most countries were generally unremarkable and issues tend to manifest themselves at higher speeds.

The standard GWR Prairie had a leading Bissel truck with side control by inclined slides and a radial truck at the rear with coil spring side control. I think the new build L&B Lyn has swing link trucks fore and aft although the pivot arrangements are different, the front having a standard A frame and that at the back being akin to the virtual design on the Peaks / Class 45 (which gives more room for the ashpan etc).