ScotRail Steam

Possibly no more open than they would be to running a train using a certain Bullied pacific, perhaps, because of its association with a certain Peppercorn Pacific...

 

Too many conspiracy theories doing the rounds here.

Scotrail is not the only mainstream operation to distance itself from WCRC since the events of March this year. Great Western were using West Coast to move coaches to and from Kilmarnock for refurbishment. Guess who's doing that now? It's probably as much to do with their public image as anything else but that's how things work in the real world. To say it's down to a single personality is grossly inaccurate. Now, some of you might be unhappy with a trundle to Brora behind an A1 but - guess what - there's no comparison between 60163 and an 8F on the Highland Mainline.. You win some and you lose some. ;-)

 

Be fair Al, the Far North is not Kings Cross - Edinburgh, just because it might physically fit doesn't make it the best choice, in the same way the Duchess physically fits on the SVR, but ideally is way oversized and overpowered.

No conpsiracy being claimed, just stating reasons why if use of WCR was already unlikely, it's even more so now.

 

Sorry, I must have misunderstood your comment, my response was spurred by the suggestion that Mr Varster [sic] was ,in some way, behind the decision to drop WCRC as Scotrail's preferred steam operator.

 

Fair enough, was more an exaggeration to make a point, you are correct that 60163 over Drummochter would be rather tasty...

 

Did she not complete the fastest run out of Inverness and over Slochd in perseveration last time she was up the HML?
Certainly looked good and a little taster for anyone booked onboard can be found in the video below!

 

Are we actually sure that WCR have been dropped from these trips for any other reason than that Tornado has been offered and is a far more prestigious loco for Scotrail than 48151 (or 45690)?
Plus if there's any delays on the Highland Mainline 60163 is a 75 mph loco as opposed to a 45 mph one. Let's see who's contracted for the Waverley series in September - might not be so easy for DB to resource that one.

 

As reported by The Scotsman the obvious explanation is that Abellio Scotrail sought an alternative after their preferred supplier had their track access suspended:

"ScotRail had also planned to use WCR to run a series of steam specials across Scotland from 20 June but it is now seeking another operator."

Incidentally it's Phil Verster heading up the Scotrail/NR alliance.

 

Or possibly due to the fact that FGW needed to continue moving stock when WCRC were suspended and thus had to turn to someone to do the work - as you rightly say thats how things work in the real world - however I don't recall seeing evidence of distancing themselves?

 

This gives a better idea how the Stanier Class Fives attain an RA5 rating......http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/10551.aspx

 

What's the all up weight of the modified tenders behind 44871 & 45407?

 

Danny, that is irevalent, the max axle load of the heaviest tender axle does not exceed that required for RA5?

 

Nobody said it did. There was discussion in the thread about tender weights and as you'd been good enough to share the rules I thought I'd ask out of curiosity, weighing being of interest. Sorry for asking but thanks for the answer anyhow.

 

We'll forget about the hammerblow of steam locos, then?
The Esk Valley line is RA7 yet Black 5's, B1's, K4's and others of RA 5 and above are restricted to 10 mph on various bridges but diesel locos up to RA7 aren't. Neither are RA4 steam locos. It doesn't fit in with the whole concept of Route Availability.

 

Of the top of my head even the biggest three wheel tenders (Bulleid 6,000 galls, BR1 F etc) would be less than 20 tonnes heaviest axle when full...

 

A bit off topic (or not if Verster is anti steam).....So an organization funded by the taxpayer sets up an additional organization with a company effectively employed by the taxpayer (yet siphoning profits off abroad) and immediately employs a (no doubt) highly paid executive.....to do what exactly? And where do the freight companies fit into this cosy little setup?
No wonder the RMT get uppity about executive pay.

 

Looking at the drawings, an as built Stanier 4000 gallon tender with 9t bunker fully laden is slightly heavier than Bullied rebuilt 6000 gallon. The latter has a longer wheelbase though. The figures are 54t 13c and 53t 6c respectively. A BR1F doesn't appear much heavier than the Stanier, on the drawing board, with a comparable axle load around the 18t 5c mark.

 

The procedures for working out the Route Availability number for rail vehicles.is set out in Railway Group Standard GE/RT8006 'Assessment of Compatibility of Rail Vehicle Weights and Underline Bridges'. This RGS may be found online here: http://www.rgsonline.co.uk/Railway_...re/Railway Group Standards/GERT8006 Iss 2.pdf

But be warned, having done this for one class of steam locomotive I can confirm that it is not straightforward nor is it very illuminating ! It is based on working out the maximum bending moment and end shear of a train of identical vehicles over unsupported bridge spans varying in length from 1m to 50m, and then working out an Equivalent Uniformly Distributed Load for each span in Imperial Tons, and finally subtracting 10 from the maximum EUDL and rounding up to the nearest integer. Phew !