SVR Loco Newsy News / discussions

Weirdly I remember the Swedish "B" class at the NVR being very oscillaty.

Chris

 

You surprise me with that

 

I was quite suprised too, my dad and I had a day at the NVR when I was about 15, and we were hauled by the B- there was a very noticeable oscillation in the first carriage.

 

I remember commenting at the gala that 2857 was particularly smooth compared to other 28xx I ridden behind. Apparently this wasn't always the case and 2857 improved considerably after work was completed on its front end a few years back.
Has to be said that wherever she has gone she has drawn very favourable comments. It will pull anything you put behind it, makes a terrific noise, is economical and in the right hands goes like a rocket - I hope it isn't long before she returns. By all accounts she was performing very well and certainly not like a loco at the end of her ticket and in its 105th year!

 

I should also pay tribute to 1501, another firm favourite of mine. A loco that changed many opinions (some better informed than others!) and another engine that would move anything that you put behind it with little fuss. She could be volcanic when opened up though!
I think she suprised quite a few people when she went on hire about how much power she had compared to her size, certainly not your average tank engine. I remember a visit to the West Somerset where she dismissed their gradients with ease and the crews didn't want to give her back!
Very economical too, I agree that the SVR is now short of more frugal motive power - not great with the price of coal the way it is.

 

I did wonder if cleared also meant contract work but surely they can't wait till 2024 for the next project to start? Thats a long time to not have a big active project on the go even with 7802 being worked on off site. Whats next in the queue? I seem to recall 7325 being mooted with 45110 often coming up in the press after returning from Barrow Hill.

 

3850 was moved on by decision of its owning group. Nothing more.

 

Yes, it does, but there should be two shackle threads left unused. But this is sideways oscillation as ti effectively makes the two vehicles one, so longer with better riding properties. But it doesn't do anything for longitudinal surging, except transmit them.

Probably the worst offenders were Francis Webb's three-cylinder compound tanks. According to A.L. Ahrons when used on the Mansion Hose trains: '(The engine gained)“ more unpopularity with the travelling public than probably any locomotive ever built.' 'When leaving Victoria (Underground) a full carriage of passengers were surging backwards and forwards after the manner of a University ‘eight.’

 

I’m setting up a new build Facebook page

 

Which adds and answers a question of what an efficient locomotive for the SVR is. I'm amazed at the work the various Panniers have put in, especially 1501 which is working off piste for its design. 46443 is a fairly ideal locomotive but I'm sure any attempt to fund 45110 or 8233 from the membership base would probably be quite popular.

 

6443 or 8233 I’m quite happy to chuck a few quid towards.
I’d really to love to say the same for 5110 but there really would have to be a decent and robust plan without the goalposts moving halfway through it for me to say the same.

 

The problem for the SVR is the ill advised, in my opinion, £1.5m CBIL loan which requires capital repayments of 300k pa plus overall debt interest charges of c100k.
What money there is has to be focused on track and infrastructure such as the issues in Alveley woods. That said, I would have thought a start on the overhaul of
1501 within the next 12 months would make sense. It appears to be in reasonable nick and surely wouldn"t cost £1m to overhaul. 5764 would also make sense.
Small locos with 4/5 coaches should be economical and able to provide a decent off peak service.

 

Ah another 2 thread culprit!!

Couplings screwed so tight that only two threads show was probably fine Euston - Carlisle, Paddington to Bristol or any other straightish route you care to choose. If is very definitely not fine on lines like the SVR & WSR where there is significant curvature and tender first running.

New drawhooks (when available) cost well north of £2.5k each and the other coupling components a similar amount. Some drawhooks have shown excessive wear due to folk unthinkingly using this 2 threads rule when all that is needed is more like 6 threads showing so long as the buffers remain in good contact. It is also apparent that running with that many threads showing appears to give a better ride in the leading coach.

 

Unfortunately, you can't now tell this to Jack Beaman, who was the SVR senior driver way back in 1970 when he was also in charge of all SVR footplate training. It was he passed on this knowledge when I was completing the fireman's course.

 

Until the drawbar was modified the Britannias could give an uncomfortable for and aft motion to the train. Dick Hardy reckoned that it was sometimes bad enough to set up a tsunami of the soul course in the restaurant car.

 

Some interesting thoughts on coupling here, totally alien to what I and others generally practice on the NYMR. I always screw them up as tight as possible and I’m not aware of any problems this causes, even on our quite curvy line. I don’t even slacken them off to uncouple if the driver has eased up sufficiently. I learnt a long time ago that slack screw couplings can come uncoupled. It happened to me when shunting a GW saloon using a WD austerity 2-10-0. It’s embarrassing when the two part company and you come to a dead stand across the crossing at Grosmont as the shackle has come off the hook and the vacuum hose has become ripped off. I’ve also seen it happen elsewhere as well, which is why I never leave a screw coupling slack. Perhaps it’s a peculiarity of GW couplings, which are fairly rare in Yorkshire these days.
Another thing I learned from my days working is that slack chain’s always wear faster than tight ones because there is movement between the links. The same principle applies to shackles and draw hooks.

 

I've been shown the "two threads showing" thing as well. My normal practice would be to tighten until you can't rotate the bar any more, then back off part of a turn far enough that the bar is vertical.

On surging: the other cause, regardless of coupling, is pulling up a Stephenson valve gear loco too tight at low speed, such that the lead steam not only cushions the moving piston at the end of its stroke (as intended), but actively tries to reverse its direction. A Wainwright P with 4'0" wheels will purr along quite nicely at 25% cut off at 25mph; a Wainwright H with 5'6" wheels won't.

Tom