6201, her new lease of life.

What exactly needs doing - I thought the boiler was overhauled already?

Dave

 

According to the webpage linked above;
The locomotive is in need of a complete set of boiler tubes along with a comprehensive list to bring her back to life.

 

Strange times indeed. A fine engine, but it hasn't been the luckiest thing to run on rails. It has to be said, neither has 71000 or 34067.

 

How many steamings has it actually had since overhaul and presumably a new set of tubes ?, Think questions need to be asked if a number have failed already, As well as other faults

 

Agreed, if some sort of report as to why this situation has arisen so soon after overhaul, could only help the case, leading to an increase in both number and size of donation, as it is a quandary to me and I expect, quite a few others.

 

One gets the impression that they asked Tyseley to do what it could within a fixed and presumably inadequate budget in the hope that the tubes were going to last a bit longer. The organisation seems to keep a low profile, and seems almost to be a one man run show (or one husband and wife as there are two directors with the same surname at the same address, one of whom is apparently the treasurer). They actually do very well in being able to fund most of the overhaul cost as one assumes there is a significant shortfall over net hire / railtour income, and in turning out what has generally been quite a reliable loco but perhaps the members are suffering from a bit of fund raising fatigue causing them to cast the net wider? I note several new directors were appointed in recent years who resigned after a relatively short period which does not sound good, and like many heritage railway bodies, the age profile of the directors is not ideal, with only one director less than 70 (after April), based on the info at Companies House. They might also want to think about becoming a charity to take advantage of gift aid.

 

From, what I admit, is a very vague recollection, were there not ructions within the group a few years back (my understanding would have come entirely from what was posted on here) regarding where the locomotive was to be based/overhauled which might explain a turnover of directors?

 

Personal opinion.
The best interests of the loco would be met by it entering custody of either PRCLT or RS & G T. Failing that, its historical significance would merit a place in the national collection.

 

At a seven yearly general overhaul of a boiler, surely, all tubes have to be removed to enable a thorough internal examination of the boiler to take place.

 

Given the fiasco with 60103, the National Collection is the last place it should go but giving custody with a group such as PRCLT would seem a sensible option or even an agreement with Mr Hosking.
I thought all tubes had to be removed for a 10year overhaul, is this another case of dodgy Chinese metal?

 

One would have thought so, did they complete the boiler overhaul in house or was it a contract job?

 

That is my understanding, in fact is it not mandatory for an out of frames boiler exam at seven years so that a full visual inspection can be carried out?

 

I was told the society's constitution states that the loco is to be gifted to the NRM once the society are unable to look after it.

 

Seem to recall similarly. Hopefully NRM would place it in custody of a suitable partner like the aforementioned.

 

Maybe if they agreed to a 7-yr period in Green the money might come in.

Don't see why others should be asked to pay for poor decisions at the top, and get nothing in return.

 

Fair enough Martin, I was under the impression it was a requirement at the overhaul stage to have all the tubes changed to get a fresh boiler ticket.

 

What will happen if the NRM turn their nose up at it, saying we have got one LMS express engine so we don't need the second one.