The future of main line steam

I think you can add(30)850 to this as well, also possibly 30777.

 

Well you can at 5043 but you can't say The Tyseley engineering team isn't first class. So the generalisation falls.

 

It is all about the profesionalism of the owner or owning group. You comment on 60009 a loco which had few problems when it was based at Bridgnorth with a good foundation of support and sensible management. Indeed it had a reputation as a loco you could call on at short notice and saved VSOE from Flying Scotsmans failures more than once. (the days before Tangmere). It isnt a huge suprise that life has not been as easy while based at Thornton Junction. I am suprised that a move to the NYMR has never been formally considered...

You can also look at Rileys small stud of well maintained (preventativly maintained) loco's, generally ready when the phone goes and never short of work. This availability issue is also the only way to ensure the loco makes a decent financial contribution to its own costs. In Birmingham the Halls are operated on a much more limited basis but I guess the careful use, never overloading the loco's pays off when it comes to overhaul. As far as 71000, 6024 and for sure 6201 go I believe they have suffered from a haphazard old boys method of preservation. At the least every loco needs a railwayman who knows about both engineering and paperwork...



I am suprised at you Sidmouth for opening another debate with the inclusion of 6201... particularly one suggestive of mis-management

 

Oh dear ! You might not be looking for 'blame and excuses' but I hear a storm brewing over this one. I think it might be wise to include 'reasons' because there always is one. Some support crew members may be 'getting on' a bit, but there is plenty of evidence on this forum that younger people are taking the interest and responsibility from their older peers.

I do hope you get some sensible responses to this thread and that it does not turn in to a finger pointing, blame calling, egocentric debacle!

 

I think there's a bit of truth in this here.
I am no expert, but as a casual observer,

Steam Locomotives and their owners are both growing older. I dont doubt the older volunteers are probably best placed with experience to maintain them, however 50 years experience on a Castle cannot be passed down to a 30 year old who see's a Castle run once a month even if he attended to it every month.

Even the specialist contractors themselves may not be ideal, no two steam locomotives are identical and even though you can restore a locomotive "by the book standards" that is not the same as true hands on with the same engine type every day for many years.

I noticed an increase in failures due to "bent parts" is this a sign of growing metal fatigue throughout the steam fleet, or a case of new metal and old metal not working together.

Finally as with all engineering (no matter what area).. when one team performs one piece of work, and another works on a separate piece, no matter how much the plans are followed there is always an element of "fudge" bringing them together.

I'm sure the combination of experience, standards, contractors and volunteers will keep the industry going on it's current safe record, but sadly age / wear / experience will all take a toll... but steam locomotives are like vintage cars... maintain them, dont stress them and communication within the industry will keep them running.

 

Just a question slightly off topic...

Hot Axleboxes seem to be an issue for steam trains since the days began, but you dont see sprinters, coaches etc sufer from this at all.

Is there something endemic to a steam locomotive design what makes it prevalent to steam locomotives. (I see tenders and front bogies run hot just as much as the driving wheels under the boiler / firebox ! ) so i'm assuming it's not just down to heat and weight.

is there a case for a rethink in some newer modern technology for solving the most common steam locomotive failures ?

 

modern axleboxes are more likely to be designed using roller-bearings, which are far more reliable than old style friction bearings. however they didn't appear on the scene until the end of steam (there are 3 bagnalls, at the North tyneside, lakeside and somewhere else with roller bearings), and due to their larger size it's not possible to retrofit them into a frame designed to carry friction bearings. it's one of several ideas mooted on this thread: viewtopic.php?f=28&t=18816 a prudent designer of a new build would design roller bearings into his work, but too often those running main line engines refuse to consider that there are better ways of running an engine using modern technology

 

Almost all modern traction units have roller bearings - now these can run hot and I believe are more likely to cause permanent damage to journals etc, if they do, but such instances are much rarer. Plain white metal bearinsg are not these days seen as a brilliant way of doing the job they do - some industrial shunters have nylon bearings for example, whilst the roller bearing (which is as fitted to 60163) is otherwise almost universal.

On the matter of failure and the future of mainline steam, I think this is just one aspect of a much wider problem. For many years, only locos gaining regular work (Fort William to Mallaig being the prime example) could even consider to be viable working only on the mainline (and then at hugely increased maintenance costs compared with heritage line use). Ironically, as there has been somewhat of a shortage of mainline locos in the past couple of years, and a growth in theoretically available work (i.e. before cancellations!), has almost made it theoretically possible for locos to fully earn their keep on the mainline. However, they probably need to do at least 20 to 30 trips per year, and I would assume that a week of, say, Scarborough Spas will not pay 5 x the fee for a one off trip, so regalur work will mean 30 to 40 trips a year are needed.

At this sort of level of work, at least one or two paid people looking after the loco is probably necessary, further raising the "break-even" position. That said, I am aware that at least one owning group admit they have no money for the next overhaul of their loco and that is the problem. Overhauling an express loco is a £0.5 million plus job - probably £1 million if the firebox and other boiler problems are really bottomed to save money at future overhauls. As has been noted elsewhere recently, the way a mainline locos works - having periods of 2 or 3 days in steam rather than a long spell in use like happens on some (but not all) heritage lines - doesn't help. Running costs over a boiler ticket, including intermediate mechancial and boiler work as well as annual inspections and registration - will easily add 50% to that total, although this expenditure will probably mean that up to 10 years to achieved from the boiler ticket rather than the previous 7. Even so, a loco is probably needing to earn at least £100k per annum net of running costs and true consumables to cover reapirs and make provision for the next overhaul. I don't precisely know what the average mainline fee is, and I believe some operators pay a figure which has to cover coal and water as well as loco provision, but it does become a big task for a volunteer group owning a loco. (And all costs become greater if contractors have to be used instead of own staff or volunteers - the above prices probably allow for specialist work by contractors but not routine maintenance and inspections).

I also have ignored that many locos get workshop facilities "free" by being based a a particular railway or depot, as well as at least a certain level of free, volunteer manpower. Even if only the suuport crew are volunteers, thjat must save a minimum of 70 to 100 man-hours per trip - and what would that cost at even National Minimum Wage?

There is a view that doing a small number of trips per year reduces overhaul costs and hence the amount that needs to be earned and this will be true for mechancial work - but if a firebox is life expired, aat best, you merely delay when it needs major work by a few years whilst not accumulating the same levels of cash reserves to do that work.

Hence, I do feel it is right to questiion the future of mainline steam but I believe the question is wider viability not specifically the issues relating to a certain model of how it is done. However, it is almost certainly accurate to say it must be harder to be able to do a viable level of work for smaller, volunteer groups than locos with larger organisations and a pool, however small, of paid staff behind them. You will also find that more groups come to the conclusion of at leats one I know that bread and butter income comes from heritage lines with mainline work as an expensive icing on the cake.

I am not an engineer but do have some experience of the costs of locomotive overhaul!

 

Just looking at 60017 comment about support crews 'getting on' in terms of age, to attract new younger blood into loco support crews. I think loco owners/owning groups should advertise in Steam Railway & Heritage Railway magazine about 'recruiting' in order to keep Steam on the Main Line?

 

What i guess cant help is that to get the younger members involved in mainline steam they would then have to work it around college + uni to be able to gain a PTS and if you look slightly older , like mid 20's they then have the case of needing to work to pay off any UNI loans and to try and keep up rent or what ever ...

Id love to be regular mainline surport crew for an engine but i just dont have the time and money to be able to take off 3 or 4 days from work

 

could it be the case that younger persons would find it hard to get into the support crews as the existing guys wont want to make room for them? Could it be that some loco crews will all reach the point of no return with noone lined up to carry on the good work?

 

Having just read this, I cant help but feel that there may well be a storm brewing.............

FC

 

I would have thought that most would be over-subscribed? Regardless of the hard work involved, its still a privilege to be involved in main-line steam operations?

 

Throwing down the gauntlet..

Are there any locomotive owners out there seeking support crew.. ?

 

Think you'd be very hard pushed to find anybody nowadays that has 50 years UNBROKEN everyday serious experience of castles, there are still a number of very wise old hands kicking about, but they are in their 80's and when BR[w] finished with castles they were probably only in their mid 30's with 20 something years experience of them.... Even back then there would not have been anybody with 50 years castle experience as castles hadn't been around that long....

As for 30 year olds I know of several at various locations around the country that in some cases have done far more in their time and are more capable with loco's than some of the older hands which you say are better placed to maintain them...

Not a very encouraging comment.......

 

Several themes spring to mind. There has been a huge growth in Mainline Steam offerings, but cancellations have become endemic. Is this lack of qualified crew or the frail nature of heritage steam locos? Are there too many offerings now that don't sell well enough to cover their costs? We see failed charter companies and punters losing their money for fares paid and trips not delivered.

Do we need to rationalise (I know a dirty word) around the number of mainline steam locos and trips, then gradually re-expand to meet the real demand? Many trips are run weekly... do we fill these every time? I think not.

So a smaller fleet that keeps the loco busy and in steam, with a reduced capacity more reflecting real demand may be a short term answer.

As for crew, well it is hard to make a living and younger people may see this as a risk. How about homing in on the older but still fit early retirees. Some late 50 year olds are very fit and can learn skills.. ok, it doesn't make up for a lifetime on the railway, but if you had 10 years out of an enthusiast it may fill a void.

None of this is of the ideal world, but if this secures a long term future for mainline steam it may be worth thinking outside the box...

 

I have limited insight into these things but, I think the regular repeat itinerary trips will be the ones that do best in future. NR like them, as the risks are ironed out, Crews like them as they gain experience through repetition, the locos get more regular use and are operated within sensible limits. There is lots of talk about crews not being capable or experienced enough, but I think that those with enough determination to succeed will do so - irrespective of their background. The changing railway is the biggest threat to mainline steam. Busier network, faster trains, fewer paths for 75mph traction, lack of facilities (although this shouldn't get any worse - as there aren't any now!), modernisation (ERTMS - although we overcame OTMR, so there will probably to be a ERTMS solution one day for steam) and trespass.