LMS Patriot Project Updates

Fair point.

Fortunately technology (CAD & FEA) make substantiation that much easier for prospective builders of new vessels. I would go further and say not only are we going to see more new boilers, we are going to be seeing more welded new boilers.

The Patriot is a game changer in this regard, and I cant help but wonder who else is going to be giving LNWR a call to do more of the same work for them.

 

Not many, I suspect, if only because I get the impression that the owner of LNWR would prefer them to concentrate on his own fleet!

 

Yes, indeed.

 

That depends if you need to make a profit.

 

I'm not sure - and please don't misunderstand me, I think the Patriot project is excellent and I have thrown a few quid their way - that the Patriot project in terms of welded new boilers is the game changer.

Tornado was for the main line - but even before 60163 new all welded narrow gauge boilers had been made.

It's entirely commendable, but not strictly speaking a game changer.

 

Yeah, I get you, I just think that this being the first superheated new build built here for some time is a big deal if for no other reason that it proves to the Jonny "we dont have ths skills base here anymore" types that we do in fact, and we can make things like this when we put our minds to it.

I also feel now that it is happening, it will create an environment where others think, "maybe we should just start from fresh" on the next overhaul.

Maybe your right, perhaps its not a game changer, but im pretty excited that we are going to be seeing more of this work here in Britain.

Can you tell it bugs me that we outsource so much of our heavy/industrial work to other countries...

 

Not wishing to delve into the complexities, but the patriot boiler is actually a fairly simple rolled steel tube. The more complex part is the conical part of a boiler. 82045 has had this made by using a company that makes wind turbine structures that have a conical shape, 34027 has also had a new boiler, apart from the outer crown sheet, so with it a conical section.

It wont be long until another engine will need a Taw valley type overhaul on the boiler. You cant just keep patching.

 

Just to point out that our boiler is not a welded boiler. It will be traditionally riveted.

But going to welded boilers, Bob Meanley has said he thinks that the fowler 2-6-4tank would be an ideal loco for a welded box.

 

Yes, the two barrel sections have been riveted together. However, photos indicate that each barrel has a welded seam rather than traditional joints with butt straps and rivets. Correct me if I am wrong.

 

Rolling a cone is not rocket science and very little different from rolling a tube. Most plate rolling firms would do that as a routine. The hardest bit is swaging the end of the cone to mate with the parallel second strake if it is having a riveted joint (as distinct from a welded one.)

 

Maybe it's the European in me - but I am happy if we can both do it here and also outsource abroad. I like the fact we have choice, and that is something we should celebrate for steam in general.

Once the skills and facilities are gone, here and abroad, it's difficult to get them back. The future of steam traction does rely to some extent on international cooperation - I'm not aware of a company in the UK that can get the tyres we need for steam locomotives at this point in time, for instance? Only from South Africa I believe.

 

As I said Ralph:

Nothing inconsistent in my view at all.

 

Erm ... Did you actually read the words you quoted? @S.A.C. Martin said "Once the skills and facilities are gone, here and abroad, it's difficult to get them back" which you interpreted as "we may lose our ability to produce things here".

As for the rest of it - exactly which "silly EU" rule means that we have to procure locomotive tyres from South Africa? Last time I checked South Africa wasn't a part of the EU. I'm not even sure which EU rule meant that, for example, the A1 boiler had to be built in Germany - far more likely it was a simple business decision relating to the supplier best able to meet cost, quality and timescale. Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us?

It does help if you actually read what is written first before going into full splenetic reply mode.

Tom

 

I believe that tyres can also be supplied from Germany. The IOWSR are currently having German supplied tyres fitted to 4 coach wheelsets.

 

Thank you Tom - put into words better than I could. One thing I just want to pick up:

That's absolutely the case - but there was also a big question mark over the possibility of building an all new boiler of that size in Britain at the time. There's a split for whether it could have been done here or there...as with any decision made.

Tornado has effectively proven herself to be a prototype for much of the work done for the P2. The boiler has been refined and in some respects re-designed for use on the P2 and without, for example, the issues with stress fractures in the stays a few years back, we wouldn't have an as refined boiler design as we do now. The relationship with Meinengen is I think important and continues to be.

Doubtless now there is more likely an opportunity to build a boiler the size of the 118a type in this country now - but then? Debatable. But fruitless really as it's done, dusted, and Tornado has proven herself very reliable in particular over the last five years (can it really be nine years since she made her mainline debut?)

EDIT: Important point. I don't speak for the trust - just an interested observer, who continues to donate on a regular basis the price of a pint of beer a week.

 

Thought the certification issue was a big factor in going with Meinengen, who were not keen on copper as the trust preferred because they don't use it over there. The redesign into steel has had a few issues, some as a consequence of compromising there own design guidelines/production methods to get closer to the LNER ones which as SACM says provides lessons learned towards producing boiler no 2 and maybe 3. Wonder if Meinengen would work in a 'design only' capacity as we clearly have the ability to make boilers here but how we approve a slight redesign against uncertain sets of fit for purpose criteria seems a bit of a Grey area still...

 

In certain circumstances EU procurement rules mean that you are not allowed to purchase from your own nation preferentially over another EU nation. EU procurement rules in some circumstances also mandate that the lowest tender be taken, not one that might be preferred unless very good reasons in strict form can be stated. But the rules, the circumstances in which they apply and the organisations they apply to are all enormously complicated and I'm not even going to hazard a guess as to their relevance to steam locomotive maintenance by preservation societies. All I know is that there were definitely such rules governing IT purchases by local authorities, and occasionally they forced us into unnecessary, wasteful and time consuming procurement processes when there was only one supplier we had confidence in to do the job. Of course I am also aware of the past abuses which led to such rules being introduced, but sometimes the cure is...

Oh, and I have every confidence that post EU our own central government bureaucrats will manage to develop procurement rules mandating sometimes unnecessary, wasteful and time consuming processes which will be every bit as infuriating as those they replace...