6024 King Edward 1

Here's a view of it during its reversal at Chester South Junction yesterday for those who like to chew over what's missing/changed etc.
RE an earlier comment, both my wife and I commented on hearing a regular "squeak" when it passed us during the turning move .

 

Lets be honest it doesn't really matter a jot in the big scheme of things considering what else has had to be done to get the loco's on the mainline. It did bring to mind a bit in, I think, one of Harold Gasson's books where he noted taking over a LMS loco out on the road and being surprised to find they had doors fitted and pondering whether this was because LMS crews made a habit of falling off!

I think that all the bar cylinders is not new and reflect what has been done previously to get her on the mainline, 6023 was similar fitted with the revised cab profile and sat upon safety valve bonnet before the GWS threw the towel in with taking her mainline.

IIRC the cylinders bore and stroke dimensions are unaltered, what has been changed is the overall dimensions of the casting (I assume due to advances in design/casting etc) to make the whole piece smaller overall (if that makes sense), IIRC something similar has been done with the new cylinders with the 47xx to make her mainline friendly if that ever happens, which I assume led to them not using the 28xx cylinders they planned, but that's a different story.

 

Going around corners at platforms was a issue for the king on the modern railway network because of the swing as the front end is long so the 6024 society made changes to the front and buffer beam to narrow it to help i believe.

 

How it is now and how it was originally

 

Dome cover?!

Yes, safety valves and bonnet knocked off approaching Paddington after reballasting work had been carried out leaving the track too high.

 

KGV suffered similar back in the day as well.

 

Agree with your comments, but we must remember that none of these engines were ever designed or imagined to have the cab full of people that they seem to have nowadays. A driver and fireman was all that was intended with an occasional visit from a footplate inspector.

 

Cab full of people? Four is the limit on mainline and preserved lines.

 

You can't trust domeless engines... they're not respectable

 

28 years on that really means nothing Fred. All sorts of things may have, and almost certainly will have, changed to accommodate new stock or other requirements.

 

I think it needs to go in the paint shop first.

 

I hope so.... love the Kings and I'm not a GWR fan.. very imposing locos...

 

Blue Peter booked for that

 

But presuming that 6024 has the same kinetic envelope as 5043 / 7029 the premise of S&C traversal remains positive IMHO

 

Of course as a standard, however previous HMRI guidelines permitted 5 on suitable engines when circumstances required it. Presume ORR adopted this previous policy, probably comes down to company policy and suitable risk assessments for a specific loco nowadays. Anyway there is plenty of instances all over You Tube showing more than 4 on footplates.

 

Not the case, as some TOCs occasionally operate with a driver, fireman, traction inspector, route conductor driver, and then the owners rep/support crew member. Evidenced in recent times by a DB Cargo operation in the north of England…..