MHR Restorations and Overhauls

The Ivatt is a complete locomotive and overhauling the bottom half is straightforward. The boiler, however, could be another issue. Has it had a boiler assessment done yet?
80150, I would think, is a very long term project and should not be brought into the equation of Mid Hants motive power requirements for a few years. 75079, however is a different proposition. Building a new complete tender is a big job, but is straightforward. Also, I believe that a lot of components for this loco had already been obtained by the previous owners.

 

75079 will be a medium term restoration like the black 5. So wont matter about fitting into overhaul queue. 30075 remains in the same situation whilst 30076 just waits for an appropriate slot in the overhaul queue.

Martin, i think you are right about the overhauls situation being reviews once 73096, 31806 and 45379 are out of the workshops. But the word 'once' is the key, just making sure they exits the workshops is the first major task.

But one sticking thing is thomas, that will take utmost priority as it the most commercially useful. That will slow things down over the next year, and 850 is another sticking point, whilst we also have to fit in some bottom end work on 5224 in.

So anyway, it will be a while before anything new is decided, we have to get the running fleet back up to scratch.

(ps no boiler inspection done on 41312, i dont think it is as useful as is being made out, it is about the same usefullness as 30075)

 

I spoke to the owner of 41312 on its last day in service with regard its future overhaul . He said he had a number of options at this pressent time with regards its future and they were of a positive nature but depended on what was done and where.
This engine is of far more use over the line than the YUSA ,It can work a 3 coach off peak train all day just taking water when needed . That can hardly be said of the YUSA tank no super heater and very limited water capacity.Making lots of noise doesnt make a useful loco.

 

What isn't clear from having read through the above (all at one go!) is which overhauls will be the responsibility of the MHR and which are the responsibility of the owners. I don't what arrangements are in place on the MHR in particular, but usually there are two basic situations - free use followed a railway paying for the overhaul or "pay as you use" with the owner paying for the overhaul. Who is paying and who actually does the work is not always the same thing!

Steven

 

A very interesting question and not a very level playing field if both types of operating system are in use side by side better to establish a standardised system then everyone knows where they are.

Therfore what is expected on both sides and anyone entertaining entering the field knows the rules that are being played.

This might explain to some of the watchers why certain things are what they are.It might also help to sort out some of the wood from the trees.

 

Thanks for your informative post which makes some very valid points.

 

Well said! 41312 has been a far more useful loco than 30075 which is noisy but can't pull much.....

 

Good news all around from the mpd today!

30075 had warming fire lit in it, i think new washout plugs have been made, :-D
34007 was being lit, i think because it will be easier to fix injectors when loco is in steam. Has only wadebridge nameplate and crest on one side, nothing on other side.

92212 on footplate experience. 5224 on service trains.

73096 has its piston rod back!!!!! yay, after 2 months. Work is commencing on totally re-assembling the motion, i was helping with the connecting- rods today.
31806 was having a new grate fitted, and work with it is ongoing. 76017 being stripped in boiler shop still for assessment.

45379 has had much of its motion assembled, and is well on the way to completion.

Loco fleet is looking to get more stable. 73096 will only be repainted on the smokebox and round the front and on cylinder, then in autumn it will have a full repaint, to wait for the loco fleet to get more stable. Lots of work for boiler dept, what with 34007 and 30075. But within the next 2 months, we should have 31806 and 73096 will enter service.

 

Thanks for the update LN850. That is fantastic news! It goes to show what a fabulous job the MHR do and Volunteers.

Any news on where the plugs came from for 30075?

I have to say that with 73096 being only painted in certain areas will look alot different - Is Duncan not about to Paint the whole loco?

 

I draw your attention to the bold and underlined part of LN850's original post - keep up at the back....


Keith

 

I am interested in why the USA tank came to the MHR if it is not really of much use on the line. It seemed ideally suited to the short steep line at the East Somerset where it was previously. How many coaches is it allowed at the Mid Hants? I was very impressed with it when I have seen it before and it acquitted itself well at Cheddleton.

 

Isnt this loco owned by the same people who own the un restored ex yugo tank 30076 ? if it is ,it might have been a desire to move their assetts to the MHR because of the facilties that are availible 30075 has moved around a bit, it started off at swanage i believe didnt it?
these engines were designed for shunting yards, so im not that surprised that low water capacity is a problem , these engines were not expected to run up and down steep hills and haul heavy trains , if they were the designer would have provided larger tanks and re- designed other parts that might not be up to such hard work

 

If i am to give you what i believe is the honest reason why 30075, Ropley does have a higher standard of restoration than other places. This isnt me just blowing MHRs trumpet.

What u dont realise is that 30075 does tend to get about 3 days use per week, on introductory footplate courses. This is about the same use as other locos in the fleet. If you want to see it in action, come at galas or on a weekday.

 

Nonsense. You're not talking out of your mouth with that comment.

 

So Carnforth, Bluebell, Crewe, Riley should not bother and send their locos to Ropley? I hope no-one from any lines Engineering departments sees that comment.

 

This is the same kind of self-delusion that has dogged Mid Hants thinking for years. They've convinced themselves that "The Alps" are such an obstacle that it needs a class 5 or more to pull five coaches up them. There are other railways that work their engines just as hard, if not harder, and run a lot more days per year so need a high standard of maintenance for reliability.

 

haha LN850 ruins it for the MHR again! Look mate i like the Mid Hants and enjoy visiting it on gala days, but you really have got to stop making such stupid comments.
You are just blowing the Mid Hants trumpet but off your own back in a selfish way.
Think about how your comments effect the people on the ground at Ropley.
They ,i'm sure don't want to be viewed in the light you portray them in!

 

To be fair, I think Ropley does excellant restoration work, and seems to have a relatively good turn around, but they are by no means on a pedistall in the heritage restoration scene!

 

I wouldnt say that there is much difference now between the standard of restoration that gets carried out at the other sites, in past times how ever i have to say that there was some really shocking work done, i can remember when Dame vera lyn came to the MHR after being bought by cliff brown for accessment before it went to the NYMR no way should that have ran anwhere in the condition that was then in and if my memory serves me well we had some right doggy engines that came on loan for galas from other railways a castle, that had tried to put its own fire out so bad were the leaks, and they just got worse during the day that we had to fail it and use the S160 that by our own standards was worse than useless but the fireman when i handed it over was glad to get it, a jubilie that was so off beat that even with a driver who knew them in br days, he couldnt make it go i used to think that 34105 was hard work but i spent one day on 5593 we called it coal hopper because you shovelled like billy oh and got nowhere , 922203 with most of its superheaters blocked off