567 Victorian 4-4-0 New Build

Re-reading the newsletter you're right, it's described initially as 'nearly' finished (and then the longer write-up suggests that it's there or thereabouts).
It's still encouraging though that the component has been progressed at such a pace.

 

There are pictures on FB showing the dragbox being machined - it certainly is a large item. More parts have been removed from Ruddington. There is a steady increase in followers on the FB site. Hopefully some of them will become, or are, financial and/or physical supporters.

 

The tender at Ruddington seems to have had the foliage cleared away from it according to their FB page (pictures on there) with a view to getting work started on it via a Contractor.......

 

I see that the website has been updated.

A number of possible sites listed for its new base, currently favourite is CTL seal alongside the B17 and Clan.

It also gives a 4-7 year completion time frame.

https://www.gcr567loco.co.uk/news?f...mceooZcJPU4zDzYn0JS408rTMEV1p7RFr3ciBKtOllQmy

 

This is really more a question about CTL Seal than No. 567, for which apologies.

What is their main business? Once you get to the stage of erecting the frames, you have a big lump that takes up a fair amount of space, and isn't especially mobile. Equally, we've seen that even well-run new builds are taking 15+ years to get from that stage to completion (probably the rate of construction is largely determined by the rate of fundraising). So in terms of CTL Seal - what is in it for them to have potentially three huge lumps of metal that they are providing space and cover for, and which are likely to be progressing slowly in comparison to more commercial projects?

Space isn't cost free, so I'm wondering what benefit they see in collecting loco projects? I could understand it for one project (there is a degree PR buzz, plus opportunities for apprentices to work maybe under less time pressure than some other projects). But why the second and potentially third locos?

Tom

 

Don't know very much about the project, but I merely read that a suggesting that CTL is the preferred place to erect the frames, not necessarily to provide a long term home? Many of these projects seem to move around all the time, the 47xx has already been at Llangollen, Leaky Finders? and now Tyseley??

 

I think a lot of their work is oil industry related, but I think I read that their MD/someone in higher management is a rail enthusiast, so maybe they're effectively subsidising the projects by providing storage space at a reduced (nil?) cost to the projects.

 

Said before that it won't do them any harm at all either with the public or the heritage industry to be known as "the place where they still build steam engines", but there must come a point at which the space and support they can offer is maximised. Maybe it's one of those intangibles, it adds to the culture of the place and gives a sense of being part of something exciting for those that work there.

 

P.R obviously, counter-cyclical turnover? (The oil industry has had some funny turns of late). They did mention something about apprentices doing stuff at one stage, which I can see both as a thing apprentices might find interesting, and as an awful lot of engineering and engineering techniques in a comparatively small space.

 

No, but I can imagine there may be circumstances in which the company has more space than it currently needs, but the cost of contracting (as in make smaller) the works may be so great as to be uneconomical. Seems to me that with heavy engineering where moving machines, which may require complex and heavy foundations to be reconstructed, reworking the factory to make it more compact might well come with a big price ticket in construction and lost production.

 

I get that, but the counter argument is what would they do if they suddenly saw an upsurge in business. "We'd love to take on your project and I can see you have a rock-solid credit record and are willing to pay up front, but we have no space because of these three projects with uncertain timescales and erratic funding streams that we took on instead ..."

Tom

 

One of my big projects was a machining centre with 18 interconnected machines. Even before anything was placed in position we had spent almost three quarters of a million pounds on swarf and coolant management. All below factory floor level and not visible.
A consultant advised later on that the centre should be moved to optimise the layout of a future production line. I don't think he expected the looks of horror from the plant engineering team.

 

"Well its like this lads. You can have this corner at mate's rates, with the understanding we can move you outside at very short notice if we need the space, or you can pay the full commercial rate and have the space guaranteed."

 

Frankly, if CTL Seal are interested enough to get involved in new-build locomotive construction without affecting their core business, then I don't see any problem, and, presumably, neither do they.
The B17 project was one I never thought I'd see getting anywhere TBH, and it's encouraging to see the progress that it seems to be making now.

As things seem to have finally picked up on the 567 Project after a few years in limbo - judging by progress in the last 6 months - It'll be interesting to see what else this year has in store and that will hopefully garner some more financial support for the Project.

 

A very, very upbeat and encouraging newsletter this evening.

Aside from the construction news, the key takeaways are the formation of a driving wheels/ crank axle/ trailing axle/ springs fund ('any and all donations gratefully received') and ditto a boiler fund. But - I can't see anywhere on the newsletter how to sign up to those funds. It's practically a given that I'll be signing up for a monthly contribution to those, if I can find a way how.