92214 Sold

At the risk of being accused of taking this thread off topic:

The Keep up the Pressure appeal (together with some other fundraising efforts by the Camelot Society, Maunsell Soc etc and money straight from the PLC) covers the boiler repairs to 73082, 34059, 65, 928 and 80151. The loco overhaul queue for the next few years covers the same engines plus 541, B473 and 27, with 32424 under construction (and 84030 also under construction, but slower, it seems). Any work on 92240 would not realistically start before that little lot is well underway. To my knowledge the known workshop programme doesn't go beyond that (which represents many years of work); maybe 92240 would be a priority after that, but it if happens, and given the relative abundance of large locos we will have in the next few years, realistically it isn't going to be needed much before some of those locos come out of service - so maybe the early to mid 2020s would be the earliest it would be needed in traffic.

Tom

 

Add Oliver Cromwell and maybe Duke on a visit and that's a line up of Std Classes 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9.

 

Shows how well you know him then, a Black 5 is what he has really wanted above all else for years. I think he bought the 9F thinking he could add some value to the 9F by retyring it and overhauling the boiler then selling it on. Perhaps he now has enough for a Black 5?

The class 4s and 5s are the ideal engines for the modern NYMR but it must be remembered that it wasn't till late LNER or BR days that the sectional appendix was altered to permit 4-6-0s, due to axle load and curvature issues. Even with the curvature eased by slewing across the full width of the former double track formation there are some tight curves that are hard on 8 and 10-coupled engines, so locos like the Q6, 3672 and 92214, although they run high mileages are not ideally suited. The S15 and Schools, on the other hand are so expect to see a lot of them. That's the reason why the railway is not currently funding any work on 3672, but there is a group of volunteers starting to raise money for it, As for the Lambton tanks, they are thought to too small for peak season trains so re only likely tosee significant use in the low season, I don't think anyone knows what the future holds for 60007, but I haven't heard of any group going back to HLF for money towards a second overhaul and I doubt if they would get it.

 

If the price is right a loco fitting the bill will surely be found. There's enough of em about, at least one already said to be open to offers and a couple owned by a business that needs to build a new works soon. Another one or 2 midway through overhauls.
Doubtless everything has its price .......

 

Isn't that a bit of a slur on the other drivers? I assume the NYMR rostering policy is to roster engines of sufficient power for the load, and train crews to be competent to handle the engines and loads. Apart from anything else, if you rostered combinations of loco and load that could only be reliably got from A to B by some wonder driver, you'd very rapidly get a reputation for chaos whenever the said wonder driver wasn't available and the train had to be taken by a mere mortal. I'm not aware that the NYMR has such a reputation, from which I conclude that the crews are all competent to take what are quite challenging loads over a tough line with the moderate-sized motive power (relative to load and gradient) available to them.

Tom

 

If Stuart goes for another loco - and I say if - then the only likely candidate is a Black 5.

 

Do you know something nobody else does?

It may make the run-round quicker but will add 5 minutes to the journey time so no advantage, time wise.

Linespeed Whitby - Grosmont is only 30 mph and trains are restricted to 25 mph unless there are sufficient door stewards on board.

 

Interesting how a chain of events can be set in motion by apparently unrelated developments.

 

Even more suitable for the type of loco's I'm suggesting then, not like it's asking much more of what the freight and small loco's do currently.

 

The Q6 is an interesting one. They weren't allowed over the NYMR proper in BR days but latterly were allowed between Whitby & Grosmont (and onwards to Battersby) so there is a possibility if NELPG want to go down that route. However, the curves into Whitby are horrendous and wouldn't do the wheel tyres any good. The Railway struggles to get a decent life of tyre wear out of its present locos. The problem with 29 is different and related to water capacity. When Pl.2 is commissioned, along with the revised signalling at Grosmont, locos are unlikely to be changed at Grosmont, as presently happens, and 29 just doesn't have the water capacity to do Whitby - Pickering, never mind Grosmont-Whitby-Pickering as it would be in reality. 80135 is going to be tight in this respect and none of the GWR tanks would do it if we still had them, either. It would need a second column at the south end of Pl.3 at Grosmont to make it viable.

 

Admitadly I dont know Stuart well enough as Id like. I have seen him on the footplate and been around when he was working. He is very talented and personally, inspirational. I have just seen him working engines, one of the best runs was with Oliver Cromwell to Whitby and I have a cracking photograph of him looking off the footplate at Battersby. I have just seen him on engines and thought adding that to the 9F he had, that he liked bigger engines, like a Standard design. If he wants a Black 5 then he would be a brilliant owner and operator of one.

With regards engines for the motive power, the future looks to be a pool of standard 4s, and Black 5s. That suits me and gives it a more branch line feel. The other engines might get work, put the focus is for less engine changes and for engines able to do it all. The Q6 I reckon could make it to Whitby if you wanted, but an agreement would have to be made. The tight curves are an issue but this has been the case for sometime. Its also been manageable. 3672 I think in the longer term, even going to Whitby and would be more use than the S15 or the Schools, but I also dont know what funds or the thinking is for them jumping the queue for the overhaul.

The Lambton tanks will be useful during the quieter season, but surely No. 5 is more use. Its bigger and stronger. Perhaps the two together might feature often, but as mentioned, water is the issue.

Gresley I honestly think his days are numbered at the NYMR. I think he will be going mainline and moving to a base that offers better access for it. Not going to Whitby does help the NYMRs plans for the future and while he is an engine that does draw the crowds his departure would allow the possibility of another arriving that can make it to the coastal resort too. Still, I think by and large, joe public still arrives and wont mind if its Gresley, or Eric Tracey. Just so long as theres a number, a name and a photo to take.

The issue will be the chance to pass at Grosmont and whether trains can run round in the station at Whitby while not obstructing the other platform too. Ideally the train shouldnt have to run out to Bog Hall sidings to run round and be able to do it in the station. Then return back to Grosmont quickly, passing the next train there. If this is the case, Id agree it surely needs another linked water tower for Grosmont to be built where you state on Platform 3.

All this is getting away from chat on 92214 so will post a question to the NYMR Discussion thread on this.

 

Despite your dislike of the Maunsell engines they have proved themselves to be well suited to the NYMR 's needs and for the Whitby runs. Both will be back in traffic before a start is made on 3672, and I for one doubt whether 3672 will run to Whitby because it has an 8 wheel tender very similar to 60007's - it was wear on the tender wheel flanges that was a major concern on 60007's test run. It will be a sad day if 60007 leaves the NYMR - it one of the few engines that actually attract the non-enthusiast public in its own right.

You clearly haven't read about the planned new platform at Whitby for NYMR services - this will have a run round, obviating the need to reverse into Bog Hall sidings.

 

Yeah they have proved capable. the S15 I would say more so than the Schools. Is the tender spacing on the wheels of the WD not futher apart than that of the A4. Thats whats got me thinking it might just make it into Whitby...

I quite clearly have read what they plan for Whitby, but having been stood in the station there last month, looking how much room there is to fit it all in, I will be interested to see what plans they come up with and the layout of the station. There is not as much room as you'd think, especially when the supermarket has enroached onto the former area that some of the station and sidings once was. Not long to go to find out.

 

Doesn't that imply a longer wheelbase that would be more problematic ?.

Might have to accept heavy tyre wear on some loco's, the West Highland chews tyres too.

 

There are going to be many who are disappointed that 92214 has departed from nymr. Compared to all of the other preserved 9f's we actually got to hear one thundering up and down those grades

Have we forgotten about the B1? is 61264 still going to be based at nymr when not out on the Mainline?

 

I don't have a diagram for the A4's tender but for reference the WD tender has axle spacings of 5' 3" giving a total wheelbase of 15' 9".

 

It's not just the tender frames. One of the points of contention with 92214 was that the owners didn't like it being stabled overnight at New Bridge, where there are some sharp curves at the stabling point, and someone graphically described the frame being twisted in opposite directions as it passed over them. Not good.

The Whitby & Pickering Railway, don't forget, was originally built as a horse-drawn line and sharp curves were not an issue. They are now.

 

I thought the minimum radius of a 9f with it's flangeless driver was akin to the turning circle of a London taxi..
if a 9F can't go round corners lord help anything else.

 

The plans have already been published and the run round loop is in the station. I believe the Co-op supermarket wall might have a degree of adjustment.

 

So is now the time for the NYMR to start a rebuild of its own? I mean, nothing irrelevant and impractical like a clan, but maybe one that is relevant and practical?

L1: http://www.lner.info/locos/L/l1thompson.shtml
V3: http://www.lner.info/locos/V/v1v3.shtml
A8: http://www.lner.info/locos/A/a8.shtml
J27: http://www.lner.info/locos/J/j27.shtml

There are numerous possibilities.