Current and Proposed New-Builds

LMS NCC W class - 5-10 years

 

D15 Claud Hamilton “Phoenix”- dead in the water

 

Has been for a long time in my opinion.

Although I'm not sure what that has to do with my comment about the LMS NCC W class which you quoted?

 

Yes, sadly I think so. The class I'd most liket to see resurrected

 

It was to add to @Gav106 ‘s predictions table, but as a separate category of “started but folded”.
And I do agree with your post on the LMS NCC W, as it would definitely be in the 10-20 year range from completion.

 

Totally agree - was about to post the same. Even that timescale might require an injection of talent.

 

Might I also add the PRR T1 4-4-4-4 “Duplex” no. 5550 to the 5-10 year range, as the frames are getting close to being rotated and have final welding done. Plus, they are now over the 50% mark progress wise.

 

I was wondering about this one so I looked it up*. There was a news update yesterday: https://newprincegeorgesteam.org.uk/news/

Seems like there's active work being done. Which of course doesn't equate to having the ready cash to go further, but it doesn't seem on the face of it like a total no-hoper.

(*it's stuck in my mind for some reason. Probably because it reminds me of Spike Milligan's comments on Prince Charles in 1994)

 

Speaking to the A1SLT recently, it became very obvious that the passing of David Elliott has been a huge loss to them in many ways.

 

I think the lists were focused on SG projects in the UK. Are there other SG projects in the USA or elsewhere?

 

As far as I know, 5550 is the ONLY current SG project in the US.

 

By mass, cost or time?

Tom

 

Mass.

 

Acquiring the sole surviving “Long Haul” tender helped save costs of building one from scratch.

 

Not to mention they built a boiler for the T1 in St. Louis, MO.

 

The life of P2 is strange.
Original a crankshaft breaker and valve gear pestilence and rumored to be cruel to curved track.
Rebuilt to you know what by you know whom and scrapped with no regret.
Planned 2013 as new built with a not very well proven novel valve gear and some totaly unproven frame,wheels modifications.
Preservation movement is a church for worshipping long gone giants so maybe very sensible if locomotive is not stressed to much and run to fast.
If movement had been allowed to degenerate to a playground ,like the grown ups that reenact medival battles,a much more usefull locomotive could have been made.
When Thomson did his ugly deeds speed limit was 60mph or so.
He could have put two Outside cylinders of say 23 inch diameter150mm higher and made two new 13 feet conrods and let them attack third set of drivers.
Remove all inside motion and unite pony truck and first driver into a Zara thing in case he did not like the Krauss Helmholtz scheme.
The lifting of cylinders leaves room for that.
Change phasing of drivers from 60 to 90 degree and they would have been the last LNER locomotives scrapped.

 

Well until someone builds it for the first time, the design will always be unproven. Doesn’t mean new designs can’t be tried.

So now you’re advocating an unproven p2 design?
So it’s ok for your unproven design but not for the p2 trust’s design?
Make your mind up!

Oh and your last sentence is only your opinion-not fact.

 

Both schemes are reenacting a former lost battle.

Have made up my mind :

2 guinees donation for the two cylinder scheme and none for the present.

 

The valve gear is closely based on the American Franklin version of Lens

The valve gear is based on the later US Franklin B version of Lentz which was proven and successful over there, so I don’t understand your comment.

 

If I honestly had the money, I’d pay to have this brought back, since the original was preserved, but torched for the war.
To this day, I still don’t understand what made the powers-that-be decide to sacrifice Midlothian to provide parts for Spitfires and Bren.