Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Roster updated today. 65 does run this weekend, next and throughout June.

 

Current Pullman train (3 Pullmans plus BGZ) is well within it's capabilities.
In a couple of years time it'll be 3 Pullmans plus Mk.1 BG which I would have thought it could still do.
By the time Car 36 is added to the train it'll be 4 Pullmans plus BG for half the year, but only 3 Pullmans plus BG for the other half of the year, to give time for the Pullmans to actually receive some maintenance. But 65 will be long out of ticket before Car 36's overhaul is complete, since that won't be a quick job.
I thought the H class has much that same load limit as 65?
Richard

 

The sectional appendix gives the following load limits for the medium locos that can work up trains "to the standard timings for fully-fitted and passenger trains":

C, E4, Dukedog, BR Std 2 - 185 tons
H, O1, Adams Radial - 150 tons

Currently, the Pullman set (Car 64 + Fingall + Car 54 + BGZ) is 137 tons

Car 64 + Fingall + Car 54 + Mk 1 BG = 150 tons (if the weight of the BG listed online is correct, it seems very light to me but maybe seats weigh more than I think!)

Car 64 + Car 36 + Fingall + Car 54 + Mk 1 BG = 188 tons

So the 3 Car + Mk 1 BG is at the weight limit for the O1, H, and Adams Radial.

The 4 Car + Mk 1 BG is technically 3 tons over weight for the "larger" medium locos, but maybe some allowance will be made. It is definitely overweight for the "smaller" medium locos.

Today we had a five coach set behind the O1 (3 Maunsells + 2 Mets) which the guard gave as 136 tons and it romped all over it.

Tom

 

Presumably the "to the standard timings" part also comes into play? Having had the pleasure of doing the Saturday evening dining train a couple of times, that's a generally leisurely pace so presumably could be done by (e.g.) the O1 if it took it's time? More of an issue with the Sunday lunch train fitting it in with the service though, obviously.

 

There is the distinction in the load limits for “to the standard timings” but I think it is to allow a loco to do a heavier ECS move if required on non-operating days. We have a few services that nominally run slower but generally we would still diagram a loco of sufficient power relative to the load to run at normal timings, even if the actual timings are slower. (For example - SteamLights allows 25 minutes for SP - HK but it is no sinecure since it involves lots of acceleration / deceleration between specific points, it isn’t just a 25 minute plod). In other words, a train “not running to standard timings” is by definition not running to any timings: we don’t have graduated limits along the lines of “you can have 150 tons at 15 minute section, but 175 tons at 20 minutes” etc. For example, the E4 is allowed 185 tons at the standard timings, or 220 tons with the instruction “may take as long as is required to work the train safely at the permitted maximum speeds”. In other words, you can plod up the banks, but don’t try to recover time by running on the descents - because there is no time to recover.

The Saturday evening dining train would generally always be one of the large locos, simply because the loco diagrams mean that it is always the loco from the day’s “A” service, which is always one of the larger locos. So weight of the Arrrow will never be an issue since it will have pulled a heavier train earlier in the day. It is the Sunday lunchtime arrow that is more likely to be rostered to a medium sized loco.

Tom

 

Like this medium sized loco Tom.
Although in fairness the one at the back seems to be doing most of the work.

 

I admire much about the Bluebell Railway but IMO an Arrow headboard on such a small loco looks silly.

 

It really does!

 

Latest update to What's New advises us about Pullman car "Carina" being offered up for sale again, the alternative being possibly sold for scrap, and let's pause and take stock here;
A carriage which carried the principal family mourners at Winston Churchill's funeral, in 2024 is potentially facing being cut up for a few pounds. This is part of our national heritage. Perhaps someone on the other side of the Atlantic would be prepared to take it on? Surely even just to place it undercover would be better than the cutters torch?
https://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/pics/pul/carina.html

 

Where has this idea of it been scrapped come from? I've not seen it, the webpage doesn't say anything saying so. This statement is fast not passing the sniff test.

 

You’re talking a restoration in the £100s of thousands. I’m not sure many railways could commit to that level of funding and volunteer/staff time.
I’m quite certain that the bluebell would love to hear from anyone with spare undercover storage space!

 

The update on the 26th mentions that it may be if not purchased and/or relocated. https://www.bluebell-railway.com/brps/whats_new/

I did have a horrible feeling that trying to shoo it off the railway would lead to the same fate that reportedly befell Maunsell 2356 & 4922, I hope my fears remain unrealised in this case.

 

My apologies. That tone is completely different to the main webpage for Carina and the advert on Facebook for it.

 

There was an agreement made that when the 5-BEL trust exchanged DORIS for Carina, that funding or equivalent would be made available to bring Carina up to a similar standard to DORIS in the meantime. I don't know what happened to that agreement, or wether such a thing could be transferred with a change in ownership, but I would somehow doubt it very much.
Here's the text from the news update:
"The sad remains of Pullman Car ‘Carina’ are being offered for sale again, after it’s potential sale last year fell through. Anyone interested in obtaining the stripped shell of this 1952-built Pullman are invited to get in touch, since scrapping will sadly have to be considered if no purchaser can be found."

 

Like I say, didn't see it in the news page so I'll climb down from my high horse. I thought there was just a high level of drama being attached given recent sales.

 

You're absolutely correct. The original need for Doris (and hence Carina to replace Doris) was to provide a back up kitchen for Fingal. Following a review of the Pullman fleet, it was decided that this could be provide much more effectively and cheaply by converting a BG to a full Kitchen. This means that there is no future for Carina at the Bluebell - in addition these 1950s built Pullmans are relatively austere inside as opposed to the 1920s elegance of the other Pullmans. Sad but it's very hard to see what the options are here if no one else wants to take the vehicle on. I applaud the railway for it's honest and transparent approach in the advertising of this vehicle for sale.

David R

 

I believe (open to correction) that the money to bring Carina to the standard of Doris (which wouldn’t in any case have been sufficient for a full restoration) was instead put towards Car No. 54. Given how Car 54 turned out, and the unique role it performs, I think that was the right decision.

At one point there was I believe a concept of eight Pullmans in use. I don’t think it was ever viable with the capital and restoration resources available. The current concept of four car + BG, with redundant provision of kitchen, brake and high capacity saloon so as to allow individual vehicles to be withdrawn without stopping the whole train, makes more sense to me.

Tom

 

Ah, right. I didn't know that, in which case it was money very well spent.

 

Well be thankful alexl102 that the GWR thing will be leaving after this year!
Now you have an Atlantic and (overrated) BLIP back in service.