Flying Scotsman

I'd like this as well seeing as of next year only 3 locos will have worn it in preservation. 35005, 60007 and 6023.

 

60103 in blue would be nice, and would make a welcome change from the LNER green she has carried for the most of her preserved life, but to be authentic, wouldnt you need to remove the double chimney and deflectors? does York have a single chimney casting some where in its collection?

 

Money talks... ;-)

 

So in round figures how much are we talking?

 

60103 in BR green with no smoke deflectors. looked great like this in my opinion.

http://alansgallery.fotopic.net/p57780019.html

when it was BR green in the 90s, it had its smokebox door straps painted silver, was that authentic?

always thought itd be nice to see it running as one of its long scrapped classmates. Blink Bonney or Salmon trout

Mike

 

or Spion Kop

Mike

 

And sandwiched between two brunswick green A4's - now that would be something else!

 

Tenders... I know it regained the corridor tender when it was preserved, but when did it originally lose it and what tender(s) were seen behind it? The photo above suggests the non corridor streamlined tender, but what about GNR tenders with the coal rails.... Has anyone got a secret forgotten tender or anyone brave enough to stick a new tank on?

 

heres another nice film, from when Alan Peglar bought her.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Dd0NQxTlmU&feature=related

Mike

 

I might, probably have, missed something, but has the NRM actually announced which condition FS will be restored to? I assume an A3 boiler with banjo and left hand drive, because to do else would require serious money, but is it to be as a single chimney or double, German deflectors or not?

Regards

 

Double chimney, with deflectors

 

Shame, always thought she looked better as a single chimney machine, ah well

 

I think this debate has been done to death previously on here.

AFAIK she will be restored into the condition which will allow her to operate most reliably on the main line, which means Kylchap exhaust and therefore double chimney, which in turn means smoke deflectors due to the softer exhaust. Anthony please correct me if I'm wrong here. Iain

 

Shame, but never mind. At least it will be running.

Regards

 

As I said before, money talks. If you want a single chimney Scotsman, it will take cash. We don't even have a single chimney casting I'm afraid, plus there's the re-jigging of the front end that it all entails.

Personally I'd love to see it (issues disclaimer of my own views etc etc) as a single, now, if we were to fit Lempor draughting...

 

In brunswick green as 60103 then?

serious question, are the smoke deflectors themselves original, if so are they from Flying scotsman, or are they replicas?

thanks

Mike

 

Well said that man!

 

If a successful appeal for something as unglamourous as vacuum braking can work, im sure one can for a single chimney given how passionate people are about it. I really dont understand why its turned into such a big issue, when you consider how many 10-12 coach trains are being run with 60mph limited Black 5's im sure even a single chimneyed 4472 will be able to cope with all but the most arduous of charters.

Chris

 

Anthony, it does beg the question - why can't both be done?

With a Lempor exhaust system, you effectively have as good as, if not better overall performance at the front end than if the kylchap were fitted. Could it - in theory - be made such that a "single chimney" and a "double chimney" casting could effectively fit over the top of a lempor system, being interchangeable dependent on livery carried?

Of course, that is based on the assumption that people wouldn't be put off by the Lempor exhaust, not being historical for Scotsman (although wasn't one of the other Gresley A1s so fitted at some point?)

I'm glad to hear she's coming up to the home stretch, hopefully a reinvigorated Scotsman will appear before long

The only shame is not having 4472 and 60163 in apple green together...

 

Could you obtain an acceptable installation within the height limitation you would have to work with? You would not achieve an optimum design but anything that offered a larger blast pipe tip area and proportional increase in vacuum and inversely proportional impact on back pressure might be worth looking at. Chimney would have a larger exit diameter, could this be disguised within the original external appearance? Well, Anthony you probably know the man to ask about all this.