70000 Britannia

As I understand it, it might have been the size and weight of the cannon boxes on the machine, or possibly the way the axle was mounted on it. I'm not entirely certain on that one, and Mr Langridge doesn't tell us.

By the way, the Brits weren't alone: he also list five Black Fives which suffered the same problem, all with roller bearings. 4758 was the worst with ALL coupled wheels shifted. So had Brit 70015. 70011 had all but the Right Leading move. All failures he recounts were between 09/47 and 10/51. If there were others after that, he doesn't mention them.

 

Can't find any mention of problems with the BR 5MTs. The wheel sets were not interchangeable

 

The decent low loaders and ramps that the reputable hauliers use these days to move locos by road really don't overload springs or bend frames.
Crap track of preserved railways does far more damage to springs than gentle deflection on and off trailers.

 

The deflection of a spring is constrained by the top of the horns and the hornstays so you can't overstress a spring. Bad track may increase the number of cyclic loadings a spring undergoes but I'd suggest the main reason for spring failures is the quality of the spring and not the track.

 

Wouldn't that require, as a minimum, not just new axles but also six entirely new wheel castings? Not exactly a cheap job.

Tom

 

Why has it become commonplace for writers to highlight their witticisms? It rather undermines the joke to have it clumsily pointed out.

 

In the case of 70000 Tom surely it would be 2 new axles, one of which requires replacing anyway, i dont see why replacing the wheels would be required to take an increased axle end, im not aware (thats your cue std tank) that the plain bearing brits had a different wheel pattern
. In the case of the Clan very little work has been done on wheelsets so theoretically its a saving....

However as standard tank points out in his post if new horn guides are required its a bit of a non starter....

Enterprise, the joke is that the joke is so weak it ha
s to be pointed out... (tumbleweed...., ill get me coat, etc.)

 

In theory one could say that the wheels would just require a bigger hole in the middle. However, the driving wheel drawing shows that the keyway is at 30 degrees to the vertical centre line for the plain bearing wheels. So, a new wheel casting would be required. I have not got the drawing for the plain bearing leading and trailing wheels, to compare them.

 

To paraphrase a great shedmaster on the GE section. If only the permitted axle loadings had been improved we could have had the V2s and saved ourselves a great deal of trouble.
Actually the V4, the best locomotive tested in East Anglia, would have been fine.

 

Hopefully she will make it for the Autumn Gala. The LSL folks deserve some good luck with her. Her place on the 2nd Oct CE has now been taken by 34046 according to the SD site.

 

She'll be there, though whether she's static in the yard is another matter!

 

Are there any updates available on Britannia ?

It's still listed for the Mid Hants gala on the 24-26th October, is she likely to be back in action then ?

 

Still in the yard at Ropley today sans said wheel set...........

 

Thanks, that's pretty conclusive then...

 

Like I said in an earlier post..... she'll be at the gala, but whether static in the yard or actually mobile, is open to debate, because those in the know aren't saying anything - and I don't blame them.

Whether the MHR has a replacement lined up, just in case is also open for debate.......... but as time is now rapidly running out, I for one would think they are........... I know its frustrating for all and sundry, but it must be even more so for the parties involved!

 

Just read that the driving wheelset is gone from the SDR to Rileys to have a new axle fitted.

 

Hope its a trouble free pressing and no more flaws found. 70000 is greatly missed.