Replica builds for heritage lines.

It will be interesting to see how the wider Bluebell community make a decision about their next new build. At its centre will quite rightly be the commitment to finance and a commitment of volunteers, as that will ultimately dictate whether it is a viable proposition at all, but being able to capture the imagination will also be a factor. As a current financial subscriber to Beachy Head, that was a cause that captured my imagination a few years ago. At the moment the preferred options of either a Craven or a K class don't quite have the same impact; Victorian/Edwardian elegance is a strong influence for me and irrespective of which class, the ability to wear Stroudley livery and a name would add impact, so the B4 named "Empress" which could tell a story about how it hauled Queen Victoria's funeral train might be an interesting option.

Another thought in this direction, the later Stroudley modifications to the Craven 2-4-0s would move that concept in the right direction to me. A cab would make a big difference to the footplate crews and again Stroudley livery and a name.

 

What about getting GLADSTONE given away too

 

Lawson Billinton is not the only significant Brighton Locomotive Superintendent with no preserved loco to his name

A K would be a useful traffic loco and has quite a degree of support. On the other hand, mechanically it is complex, which translates to being quite expensive. As I understand, about 50 original drawings survive. By contrast, there are apparently almost no surviving drawings for the L class. A GA drawing for the Craven engine exists, but almost everything else would have to be drawn (and calculated) from scratch; on the other hand, the construction costs and timescale would be less than the K.

I get a sense that the decision is crystallising towards either the Craven or the K - readers of Atlantic News will be aware of my personal preference(!) though as you say, it will ultimately be a decision for the whole railway community to make.

Tom

 

C2x?

PH

 

Useful - buildable - fundable. The last is ultimately the most important.

Tom

 

Whichever loco is chosen, it should be remembered that the build costs will be higher due to the need to build a boiler. The Atlantic project gained a big discount by not having to build a complete boiler.

Keith

 

i still think the way forward is a standard 0-6-0- engine, by standard i mean an replica that used a common set of cylinder block, boiler and frames, with everything else being decided by each individual order, an inside cylinder engine with piston valves, that would be nominally equivalent to a class 4, that means you could assemble any pre grouping engine of this wheel arrangement, either in tender engine, or tank engine varient, from an Adams to an great eastern, ok it wont be a complete identical to original, it will have small veriations, but will look right but the cost savings in using the same patterns for much of it would make it cost effective .

 

I dunno. I suspect as automated manufacture techniques progress there may be less and less advantage in standardised parts. If your patterns are 3D printed on demand from polystyrene, for example, and don't even need to be stored, how much advantage is there in having one or three? I'm not sure that any parts are going to be required in such large numbers that mass production methods will have much to offer. The interesting bit will be as laser scanning becomes really readily available and easy. Scan every cast component when the locomotive is in bits, and file the models somewhere, and the next time one is required just dig out the file and email it to a shop who will put it in their machine, generate a new ply pattern and cast one for you. It can be sitting their ready when required just as one would have been made ready in the old days. The major work is going to be getting all the files, and in that respect the name of Churchward will certainly be blessed...

 

How about unbuilding the Stirling SER to an O and using the O1 boiler and cab to make a new build SECR 01 ?

 

As it is a privately-owned locomotive, that would really be for the owner to decide; however, I can't see it happening, not least because the Stirling boiler was the least satisfactory part of the original design. Incidentally, the boiler about to be put back on that loco comes originally from a Kirtley R1.

Tom

 

Cor thats good! Do they chuck out their fire & empty the ashpan as well?!

 

They're oil burners I believe; do you get much ash with an oil burner?

 

Getting the oil on the shovel is a *************

 

Can't see that being a big problem in preservation, though I don't know much about Southern things, or how bad they were. So an R1 to match when the time comes, would love to see a Stirling design in steam...then there is a spare (other)Stirling tender now...

 

We really need the GER Class G15 replica finished at the NVR:

 

What about building a LSWR T1 isn't there a boiler somewhere.

 

Is that a recent picture?

 

No, found this on the "Personal View of the NVR" Blog:
http://nene-valley.blogspot.com/2010/06/y6-tram-engine-replica.html

 

The original boilers on the class O engines steamed poorly and, being domeless, were somewhat prone to priming. The later series locos (including No. 65) had a revised tube layout which improved the steaming but didn't sort out the issue of priming. The replacement Wainwright boilers had increased pressure, a larger grate area and increased heating surface, as well as a dome, which collectively improved the sustained steaming rate as well as reducing the tendency to prime (and adding bit of TE as well). All told, they were marked improvement, and helped extend the lives of the locos that would otherwise have been largely obsolete by the first decade of the century.

As for a spare tender - I'm not sure quite what you mean: I think you are getting confused between your various Stirlings.

Tom

 

Very easily done! Especially since they covered Scottish, Southern and North Eastern lines several times I think? Highland, GSWR, LBSCR, SER, HBR...