Tangmere to York 13th February

I believe stock was being heated by the 47.

 

And as I remarked, she's done almost the same distance on a tender full of coal from Waterloo to Exeter and that also included getting from Southall or wherever to Waterloo on the ecs.
As for the Elizabethan, that was load 11 so not exactly a lightweight in the mould of the pre war streamliners. Loco changes were more of an operational/roster thing than any problem with shortage of coal.

 

If you work on 50lb / mile as an indicative figure for a big express engine pulling a reasonable train, 200 miles gives 10,000lb of coal - about 4.5tons. That doesn't leave much spare from a 5 ton tender, and that is before you consider any coal used getting from the depot to station at each end. A West Country going from Nine Elms to Waterloo is going about 3 miles - where was 34067 stabled before going to Kings Cross?

Could 34067 get from Kings Cross to York unassisted on one tender of coal? Probably. Could it do it reliably, within 21st century constraints? I'm less sure.

Tom

 

The run I did with '67 to Exeter was long after Nine Elms became a vegetable market so there was a move from Southall involved, not quite as far as Southall to KGX I'll grant you though. If it's considered that Southall - KGX - York is beyond the range of a BB to work safely then one could argue it's a bit naughty to advertise a "steam hauled" tour when it's known from the start that a helping hand is going to be needed.

 

The other factor is the quality of the coal which can vary quite a bit nowadays.

 

Agreed. As an aside I have been on rail tours where bags of coal have appeared from the support coach to top up supplies during water stops.

 

There doesn't look to be too much coal left at Hambleton!

LINK

 

I'd agree with your last sentence, though as others have said, it appears there was a late loco change. What would have been fairly easy for an A4 became too marginal for a WC/BB.

Fundamentally, it seems to me that mainline steam has no real resilience. A loco failure of one engine might mean a replacement by an entirely different type that has different characteristics of available power, gauging and range, making a planned itinerary suddenly very difficult to deliver without compromise. In steam days, a loco a bit marginal for water could stop at most wayside stations and top up, at the expense of running late - now that is not possible, which will inevitably lead (at least sensible) promoters to become more cautious on what represents a feasible safe range between stops. Add to that, modern carriages are heavier (a Maunsell or Bulleid weighs about 32 tons; a Mark 1 with Commonwealth bogies about 37 - that means something like 50 - 60 tons extra on an ostensibly similar train between now and the 1960s). Then you have to accept that, however skilled, a fireman these days may only fire one or two mainline trains a month, and may only fire steam on a particular route perhaps once per year or less, so can't possibly have the experience in coal dodging of someone for whom it was a day-in, day-out occupation, and clearly discretion has to be the better part of valour.

I suspect that "pure steam" is still feasible, if the promoters wish to go conservative on loads, basing things around not what the ideal loco could manage, but what is deliverable with any of the available pool of locos, including the smallest. Quite likely it also means concentrating on a small number of proven routes, done on a repeat itinerary basis. But that inevitably will mean higher prices for fewer seats, and thus far at least, it doesn't seem like anyone is in a hurry to test whether the market is there for such an operation, beyond a few limited cases such as the Jacobite or the Shakespeare Express.

Tom

 

I don't think "pure steam" need be confined to regular repeat-itinerary trips like the Jacobite or Shakespeare Express if you work out an appropriate route and load, Tom. Only yesterday, Tornado took a long train of 12 (or was it 13?) carriages to Worcester and back with no diesel assistance. Vintage Trains has become very adept at working out suitable destinations within the capability of its locos and its trains are "pure steam" too - or if not, you will be informed.

One of the problems I have (and I've e-mailed a couple of operators expressing my frustration over this issue) is that for me, many special steam-hauled excursions - especially those run by SD and RTC - are too long and too ambitious. The original Steam Dreams Canterbury and Salisbury trips were just about right. Both gave a steam engine a good workout - some hill-climbing and plenty of fast running. About 2 hours out and 3 hours back is sufficient for dining customers and the formula of out via Maidstone East and Wye and back via Minster and Dover (for Canterbury trips) or out via Wimbledon, Basingstoke and Grateley and back via Southampton or the Pompey Direct (for Salisbury trips) also made for a more interesting route. A Class 5 could handle these schedules unaided, as 73096 proved, yet they were still fun with a class 7 or 8, even if the locos had more in reserve. No worries about coal, relatively straightforward water stops and you have an interesting destination; it's not too long a day out and there is some attractive scenery - if not in the league of the S&C or the West Highland.

I simply cannot believe that the market for this sort of steam trip has just evaporated. I like to take my wife and to go premier dining on one or two main lines steam trips a year. She's not an enthusiast, but enjoys the sort of day out I have outlined, but is not so keen on 5 or 6 hour journeys. To be honest, after about 3 hours, I've had about enough too, much as I enjoy the experience of a large steam loco being put through its paces. I'm just hoping that with Clan Line needing extra work due to the drop in steam-hauled British Pullman workings and the launch of the "Hosking Belle" later ths year, there might be some "pure steam" runs along the lines I have mentioned - and a bit nearer to home than Birmingham or Fort William.

 

How many times has '67 done KGX - York? There's been one post regarding her having coal problems on a previous run but I'm sure she's made it OK on at least one other occasion or am I mistaken?

 

Wow 14-16 ld. per mile ,I think its was 48/50, other class sevens 38/40 Britt's /Royal Scots etc. Rebuilt WC BBs about 8-10% less. .Only Bullieds tested at Rugby were MN 35022 ,35005 the latter I don't think went on the rollers.

 

Its a real pity the opportunity wasn't taken during the original restoration to fit 34067 with a Giesel ejector. Most accounts seem to suggest that improvements in performance and economy are significant. The visible impact is also negligible on an original Bulleid unlike most conventional locos.

 

Steam consumption and coal consumption don't go together .71000 had the most efficient cylinders ever in the UK but burnt more coal.

 

I think we've stopped discussing Saturday's run and started discussing the merits, or otherwise, of Bulleid pacifics, and there's a thread dedicated to the subject already...

 

"merits, or otherwise"?

Go wash your mouth out with soapy water.

 

But isn't this what happens to *every* thread on Natpres?!

Sent from my D5503 using Tapatalk

 

I find myself in agreement with both John Petley and James Squared - I don't know whether it was trying to broaden their appeal or believing that the simple SD formula wasn't working or commercial imperatives but some of the current itineraries are simply too optimistic. I've written before about expecting 60-90 year old machines being as reliable or performing as consistently as they did in their heydays - and I am still of the belief that I'd rather have Tangmere (or Clan Line for preference) at the front of 9,10,11 or 12 coaches and a diesel at the back to provide train heating and assistance when necessary to protect the schedule, the reputation of the tour operator for getting the job done, and the rest of the network than no steam at all - if that's the price to pay in 2016 so be it for me. There are some truly excellent steam crews around today who have inherited the mantle of the past greats of the footplate - and that's on both sides of the firedoor but....... they are not doing it every day, the coal is somedays almost as bad as Nine Elms at its worst, NR change pathing and water stops at whim and they are on a network that is less and less steam friendly day by day. Frankly it's a bit of a miracle we have steam at all on the mainline - I wish everyone on this forum would make the best of what we have. Until we invent a true groundhog day machine, the 1950s, 60s or whenever will never be back. Enjoy what we have today - in 10 years time we'll look back and say - "wow wasn't that great - sad it's all gone now".

Mike