P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

Image taken from FB this morning.

 

According to a comment on FB, so it must be true, the Trust intend to steam test it in "Q1 next year"
This seems at odds with my understanding of boiler management in the UK, in that the 10[1] years of "ticket" starts on the steam test.
Unless they are a lot further forwards with other stuff than is currently advertised, is this not a little premature?

FTAOD, I would assume this is a lost in translation matter, or is my understanding of boilers off?
[1] or 12, or whatever, depending on what the boiler inspector allows on inspections year on year

 

You can test a boiler any number of times in a variety of ways, they may for instance want to double check its dimensions when 'warm'
When it is tested to specific criteria in the presence of an inspector qualified to issue said 'ticket' the clock starts.

 

Ta! There's a lot I don't know about boilers

 

There is no written rule on this. It will usually depend on what the written scheme says and even that might not be stated. Written schemes I’ve usually been associated with have stated a hydraulic test at a maximum of 10 yearly intervals and nothing about steaming dates. A lot will depend on what the Inspector thinks. HRA guidance suggests boiler overhauls at 7-10 year intervals but doesn't say when the clock starts ticking. It is not cast in tablets of stone. The inspector will usually say something on his report along the lines of. “At the next examination the boiler shall be removed from the frames ……” when he thinks that the boiler is becoming due for overhaul.
As far as the Pressure Systems Regulations go, it is all down to what’s in the written scheme.

 

Interesting, again, the post in FB states it's been hydraulically-tested, so if correct, presumably the 10 years will not start from hydraulic test, or that won't be the "hydraulic test" for the purposes of the written scheme.

Given the history of Menningem boiler-making generally and specifically the A1SLT boilers, I would imagine both parties will be very keen to prove fitness of the boiler much more than is usually the case.

 

I'm surprised nobody saw this coming up the motorway.

 

I have known different boiler inspectors to interpret things differently depending on the situation, for instance I have known a boiler to be tested at the repair company, but not put onto the frames for two years (stored under a strict regime) only for the final out of frames test to be done two years from the repair test.
Then others have taken it to the letter and only issued the ticket from the final out of frames test.
And others have issued the ticket from the final in frames test, although that situation is becoming rearer.

 

View of firebox from FB post.

Anyone care to compare the flexible stay provision vs previous iterations of Tornado’s boiler before I find the time?

 

Well, it looks good, and it has arrived, so thats also highly positive. This does mark a fundamental milestone in the project, but the machine itself must still be at least 2 years away from running, given the work outstanding. With that in mind, it seems prudent to this observer not to do anything that starts the boiler ticket rolling cycle.

 

I’ve just taken a first proper look at the firebox back head ….. unless my eyes are deceiving me, the stay pattern is asymmetrical?!
From the firehole downwards there’s 5 flexible stays per row on the driver’s side and only 4 on the fireman’s side?
Thoughts?

 

[Edit]Ignore me, I can't count.
(Anyone who has seen my models will know I can't count rivets...)

 

Is this part of the changes needed for left handed firing, with the firehole door shifted to the right for extra space??
I suspect the real reason, if drawn and approved that way, will be far less exciting and related to space constraints.

 

Optimistic with 2 years, treble it, and you may be nearer the mark, the whole inside valve gear needs sorting, testing, then manufactured.
IF, they fit the monobloc before completing its design, measuring, in a confined space become harder, i hope the download from David Elliott is concise in this area.

 

I don't think the firehole door is off-centre. I've certainly never seen a loco like that, except a few examples that had two (side by side) firehole doors.

Looking at the staying pattern, it looks to me that the door is central and there is the same pattern of stays (i.e. the same centre lines of each stay) on each side - it is just that the materials differ in one column. It would be interesting to know why, particularly if this is a new boiler rather than a refurbished old one.

Tom

 

I think the fitting is asymmetric (it's wider on the side with a hinge), but the door is central. To my eye that conceals one vertical row (column) of stay heads, especially from this angle.

 

The smiley didn't come up on the first paragraph. It was not meant seriously!

 

Same number of stays on each side but one more flexible on the LHS?

 

There are five stays different on LHS vs RHS, around the lower half of the firehole door. Which are flexible is beyond my pay grade as a signalling engineer...
Well, we knew there was some remedial work going on before it was delivered, so it's not entirely surprising.