4472 What colour

Some people like it with smoke deflectors as they equal double chimney and thus better performance and some don't but I would never call 4472 or any preserved steam locomotive ghastly!

 

Thanks in copious quantities. Short and to the point is good.

 

Anthony can i just say a big thank you for your comments on 4472.

Your efforts at keeping us up to date on the long running overhaul are much appreciated. The same goes for your interesting blog.

It seems to me that certain posters here are more interested in posting items that could cause concern, without knowing all of the facts.

When 4472 finally is back together we can be assured it will be a "proper" heavy overhaul, with all items working correctly (hopefully).

I think we are very lucky to have somebody on the inside to keep us abreast of the situation, especially taking into account your position.

Keep up the good work.

 

The mediocre tag can only really be levelled at the A3s in the 1950s when ECML performance was not of the best and yes the double chimneys did indeed put the Gresley Pacifics back on top form. Pre war the A3s were anything but mediocre and post preservation 4472 has done some sterling work with a single chimney. I don't believe for one minute that refitting the single chimney would relegate the loco to preserved lines only. Yes 4472 will probably perform better with the Kylchap but that doesn't mean it will be a gutless wonder without.

 

Of course, spamcan 81, I'm sure 4472 crews would find preserved lines boringly easy. But IIRC the loco did suffer disappointing performances and occasional standstills on preservation specials before Kennington decided to refit the Kylchap. Are you prepared to agree that, with the double chimney, 4472 would be a safer bet to perform well on demanding routes like the Drag, and therefore be attractive to more hirers? They of course need the longest (= heaviest) possible rake, to turn a profit.

 

Can you quote these runs that 4472 suffered problems on ? i suspect it was either a difficult route or heavy load or combination of both, overloading a loco seemed more common then all round and i doubt York of all people would be that daft in this day and age.

 

You ssem to be aboslutley conviced that 4472 wil not be required to tackle any" difficult route or heavy load or combination of both", despite what Anthony Coulls has said above about her not being wrapped in cotton wool. Why don't you believe him?

 

I did say "IIRC". The reason I didn't quote chapter and verse was because the information is buried deep within the enormous "6100 Royal Scot" thread on this forum, in the parts where the tribulations of 6100 and 4472 were being compared. Do forgive me for not having the intention to spend the rest of the day finding it.
In any case, from what he wrote in Heritage Railway, Mr Kennington seems to have been convinced that he had done the locomotive a favour by re-installing the Kylchap exhaust system.

 

If my memory serves me right, new tyres were fitted in the overhaul prior to the trip to Australia in 1988

 

I seem to recall reading somewhere that 4472 would not be run to extremes in NRM hands (in so many words) like has happened a few times in the past (600 ton Pullmans for one), certainly it's NRM useage prior to overhaul seemed to support that idea, 4468 didn't do a great deal apart from a few Scarborough & Marylebone runs though i accept that wasn't what we'd call 100% fit in 2010.

As i said in an earlier post if she ends up taking 12 over Shap or 9 over Dainton i'll hold my hands up and admit i was wrong, but the only way i can see her taking on such routes is on loads much reduced to what an engine of comparable power output would be expected to take, hence why i can't see the point in the extra power provided by the Kylchap if it's rarely required, i woulden't mind Anthony proving me wrong however.

 

We'll work the engine appropriately, not flog it to death. We want it to last.

 

Just to clarify, i'd never advocate thrashing any loco, i just mean purely on comparable levels of other preserved machines.

 

I'll not deny that a double Kylchap A3 will in all likelihood be a better performer than one with a single chimney but I also doubt that a single chimney A3 would be incapable of performing adequately on the main line. I've followed 4472 from the lineside and on board for over 40 years now and I've yet to experience a disappointing run by her. On the contrary I've had some excellent runs but sadly never over the S&C. I'd be interested to learn more of the poor runs you mention.

 

I found a summary of the relevant back issue of HR

Heritage Railway | February, 2006 | Issue No: 082 features

32 NEWS FOCUS SPECIAL: SCOTSMAN – A SINGLE REASON FOR A DOUBLE CHIMNEY
At the National Railway Museum, debate is still raging about the next incarnation of Gresley A3 Pacific No 4472 Flying Scotsman following its forthcoming overhaul. Should it re-emerge in its LNER guise with a single chimney, or with a double chimney and a Kylchap exhaust system as in latter BR days? The man who knows the locomotive better than anyone alive today, Roland Kennington, its chief mechanical engineer from 1985 to 2004, outlines to Geoff Courtney the story of the locomotive’s evolution over the past two decades, and gives his clear preference.

Well, first of all, this thread is nothing new, obviously. Secondly, has the decision on single or double chimney actually been taken yet? Third, does anyone have back issue 82 handy, now, to see if RK compared the final 5 years of Kylchap-assisted "good steaming" with actual performances before that?

 

4472 was only lightly used by the NRM due to the state it was in. Interesting article from the yorkshire post, link, below, from January last year. Details the problems they had when first acquiring 4472. Gives some idea to how bad a condition the engine was in!

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/video/Is-Scotsman-running-out-of.4912522.jp

 

This is required reading by all who defend those who had the responsibility for Scotsman before it went to the NRM. If you ever talk to NRM people involved with its overhaul, you'll hear much worse than has been published here.

 

Good grief, I knew she was bad, but no hand brake, a cracked cylinder block, a leaking boiler tube and plumbing fittings does more than suggest that the team looking after her at Southall were out of their depth. Granted they may have had no money in her last weeks/months at Southall but in that condition she just shouldn't have been allowed out.

 

so in whos pockets did the money go?

NO hand brake, Serious steam leaks , leaking tubes, on any other railway the engine would have been stopped so the question could be asked who signed the FTR they should be banned from doing any fitness to run checks , and investigated, they knowingly put the toc crews lives at risk
but didnt bongo say that she was being allowed out with known faughts , i am sorry to say this but isnt it now time to investigate what has gone on, because it looks like the bottom line was to make as money out of scotsman as possible , but not to spend it on the engine , after all, the shareholders didnt get anything back who were the people on the payroll ,and what did they get, my money is on the same names cropping up every time

 

I'm constantly amazed at how bad Scotsman was. NO BRAKES!!! The talk in the sheds at Southall must have been interesting. I agree there should be a full investigation not only on what was going on with Scotsman but also with Royal Scot another Southall wreck.

 

The engine has not been in the best of condition for many years, appearing to teeter between adequate and woeful. The livery is a small matter when all is said and done, compared with the need for absolute thoroughness when it comes to the overhaul. I, for one, am not going to complain about the time it takes , any more than I am going to complain about 34092. Maybe someone will one day feel able to give chapter and verse on all the defects found and the work required to correct the same. It would be, how might it be put, an education?

Thanks again to Anthony Coulls for his input on this thread, perhaps he could leave some updates on the overhaul thread. (what is happening with that boiler?)