1014 County of Glamorgan

The news that the group has received a £250k bequest will really speed the job up. Should they now consider using this money to build a new boiler rather than butchering the 8F boiler ?

Bob.

 

There's at least one spare 8f boiler up for grabs in Turkey, not that there's any use for it currently ?
If its sat outside not being used.. Why shouldnt they use it ? 48518 is gone, only a new build 8f, or a complete sacrifice of almost the entire spare TCDD 8f could bring it back.. Either way it wouldn't be 48518.
250k will see this loco move along very quickly, cpuld that maybe even get it past the finish line even ?
let's hope lessons are learned and there isn't a repeat of 6023.

Eitherway that's a very generous bequest, we should all be grateful of... We don't have a county in preservation.. We have nearly a dozen 8fs.

 

250K ? wow, someone with a bit of dough really wants to see a County, fair play to them.

 

A bequest usually means that the donor is dead so is unlikely to see it.

 

Ah shame, still fair play to him for giving it to such a cause.

 

There is no mention of a bequest on the website for this project, but lets assume the news above is correct and it just hasn't filered through to whoever updates the website.

Equally there is no recent information about where they are with dismantling the 8F boiler. I mention that because perhaps the group will want to reconsider which way the go now with either remaking an old and no doubt clapped out boiler, or considering starting afresh with a new build boiler and firebox. The very fact that there are quite a number of 8F's preserved in the UK means that--if reasonably repairable--someone is likely to find a use for the boiler from 48518 at some time in the future.

Perhaps someone connected with the project can update us with their thinking.

 

The County website is only updated once a month, normally in the middle of the month. No doubt, mention of the bequest will be in the next update.

 

However the Didcot website says.... Didcot Railway Centre | News | Latest News

 

New boiler, for sure.

Trying to use an 8F boiler will make it a mongrel of a job. For a start the county was pressed to 280, whereas the 8F is 225. The superheater on the 8F is only 21 elements, and the boiler is going to be rather tired anyway, at best. I seem to remember the boiler on 48518 was the least desirable which is why it was left until last. I should think the cost of producing a new boiler fit for the job would not cost significantly more that trying to adapt the 8F boiler.

 

Thanks for the link to the Didcot website, where we do learn that the money is to be spent progressively on the conversion of the 8F boiler. Maybe when phase 1 of this operation starts, ie dismantling the firebox for inspection, there might be a " pause for thought" if it is indeed found to be in poor condition.

 

Richard Watkin is one of the very few people around who actually knows what he's doing with boilers. But he is also the vendor in this case. Even so I should think he would rather make a new boiler. The tricky bit with making a new boiler is folding the wrappers, and forming the door and throatplates. The 8F boilers used all the same pressings as the Black Five and Jubilee boilers. Other than that you are more or less making a new boiler anyway. I wouldn't mess with the 8F boiler in the first place. It's just wasted time and effort. Not really fit for purpose unless all you want to do is steam up and down a siding.

 

TenWheeler, I totally agree with what you are saying, but could I just point out that the subject of using 48518's boiler for the County project was discussed on this forum in a sometimes heated debate when the idea was first brought up.
Also, how can you say that Richard Watkins is the vendor for 48518's boiler? 48518 was one of the ex-Barry 10 locos, nothing to do with Richard.

 

I thought the firebox for this boiler was separated and removed along time ago at llangollen (along with the wheels , axleboxes, cylinders and cab from the frames) ?

 

I suspect that contractor would have been a better description in that I assume that the point is that Mr Watkins is being asked to specify works that he will then be appointed to undertake. However equally this is a fairly common position in engineering and thus i don't think much can be read into it.

 

Well as of sept '11, frames were at Bury, wheels at Llan MPD and the boiler (or what at least looked like an 8f boiler) was at the foot of the embankment near Llan carriage works IIRC, still in tact.

 

48518's boiler is at Didcot, and has been there for some months. I think the boiler you are thinking of is the one for the Grange project.

 

You misunderstood. Vendor in this case means the supplier of the alteration work, not the original boiler. I used the word vendor to emphasise that this is someone who has something to gain from the project going ahead when he is being offered the work. So he's not going to be particularly inclined to be negative about it. Having said that, this particular person has the skills and is a lot more dependable than most people in the preservation "industry". They would probably be very wise to carry out a thorough evaluation of making a proper boiler for this engine with the same contractor before going any further.

 

you're very right in saying that the subject wa fully discussed some while back and the learned opinion of others was that it was a fools mission to utilise it for the County, a view which I also shared. As Tenwheeler has said, Richard Watkin is not going to say no to anyone who asks him to do this but I wouldn't be surprised if he privately had a similar opinion that it was a wasted venture. The firebox tubeplate is wrong, the doorplate is wrong, the foundation ring is wrong and the staying is probably wrong. The barrel is already seen as of being no use. It has got to be a cheaper option to build new and it has got to be stubbornness that persists with the 8F boiler.

 

That argument is a non starter. It assumes that little or no copper will be required to repair the 8F firebox, and I know for sure that is not the case. The cost of repairing copper fireboxes is often comparable with that of a complete new box, and it's the additional cost of re-staying that tips the balance. Not that a new boiler has to have a copper firebox anyway.

The stubborness aspect is an interesting one, and history is littered with countless examples of someone making a pronouncement and then spending the best part of the rest of their lives trying to prove they were correct, and blocking everyone who disagrees or has a different idea. Lots of battles, and even wars have been lost on such issues, and railway preservation is rife with it, unfortunately. And the funny thing is, it's nearly always the more narrow minded, gutless people who do it. You have to keep an open mind and constantly review what you're doing, because applying corrective action always turns out less expensive when it's done in a timely fashion.

I read what 'Steve' wrote yesterday, and tried to think how you could possibly make an 8F boiler fit a brand new County engine and produce a satisfactory result for less than it would cost to make a new boiler. And I just can't see it, however you look at it.