West Somerset Railway General Discussion

yeah just trying to plan ahead to get chance to see it light engine. has from Tues to Friday for rail tour to turn

 

According to the LNER Info site, an A3 wheelbase is 60ft 10.6" so, even allowing forthe flanges, should fit nicely on a 65 ft table. Balancing might be a problem, though. An A1 at 62ft 2.25" plus flanges is going to be rather tight.

 

How does this compare with a Merchant Navy which were turned at Weymouth on a daily basis?

Peter James

 

This diagram gives 61'6" wheelbase; 71' 7.25" total length with a 5 ton / 6000 gallon tender. Without checking (and getting into SR tender minefield territory) I'm not sure to what if any extent that varied with tender variation.



Tom

 

It is not I think an issue of length rather weight, and particularly the maximum axle load, that is the deciding feature . As I mentioned earlier Princess Royal Pacifics have been turned on 65ft dia. turntables.

An A3 according to standard LNER dimensions weighs 102t0ns 19cwts with a maximum axle load of 22tons.

Figures quoted for rebuilt Merchant Navys are
35001-10: 97tons 16cwt, max'm axle load 21tons 12 cwt (on the centre coupled wheels )
35011-20: 97tons 5cwt 21tons 12cwt
35021-30: 96tons 1cwt 21tons 11cwt

Corresponding figures for a Britannia are 94.0 tons and 20.5 tons

Michael Rowe

 

You'd need to add about 7" to this to just clear the flanges.

 

Weymouth turntable and FS.

The picture of FS on Weymouth turntable confirms that the table was a 65' Ransome Rapier built over girder type which was often used by the GWR. The RR table although looking similar to the old GWR built "St Blazey" type 55' and 65' tables was much more solidly constructed and capable of taking much heavier loads. The difference can be seen in that the RR table is much wider and it's girders are straight on top with angular ends, the St Blazey table girders are much closer to the locomotive and sweep in a smooth curve from one end to the other.

The St Blazey over girder tables concentrate all the weight on the centre bearing, when under load the girders deflect and when a large locomotive such as a king or 70xxx are on it the girders deflect by about 1.5" taking up most of the 1.75" rock or sea-saw action of the table. A locomotive such as FS may not be much heavier but due to it's longer wheelbase the weight is distributed more towards the ends which would result in even more deflection (a greater bending moment). The 65' version grew out of the original 55' design and it was getting to the limit of the load that it could be expected to take, hence we have only subjected it to loads that are known to have been carried in BR days.

We have loaded with modern diesels but at such times the support bolts at each end have not been withdrawn, these bolts are designed to take the load of the locomotive as it moves onto and of the table and will support the table to prevent excessive deflection.

Andy.

 

Was it ever planned that the 47 would substitute for the western on Saturday?

But now D1010 is fixed so will work charter train, just wondering?

Looking forward to railtour.

 

I gather there was a problem with D1010 when it returned light engine to Williton on Sun eve, hence the news that D1661 would be called up to haul the special on Sat next giving the DEPG guys plenty of time to analyse and fix the Western's problems. However, yesterday the WSR Plc told me that the Chairman of DEPG had confirmed D1010 will (subject to availability*) do the charter duty next Sat.

Steve

ps * please note the caveat!

 

Andy, thank you, that answers my original question.ie. The Weymouth table was a Ransome and Rapier one . I appreciate the length issue wrt weight distribution (specifically increased 'moment' for FS, increased mass, albeit slightly reduced length, than for a MN, although as the Weymouth t/t is a R&R that becomes irrelevant). I also assume the actual maximum axle weight is relevant i.e. at the instant at which that weight transfers from 'land' to the table as the loco moves on.

Would you turn a rebuilt MN at Minehead, I suspect not ?

Michael Rowe

ps thinking about it whilst in Tescos ! I think 'suspect not' is 'definitely not': MN vs 70xxx 61ft 6inches vs 58' 3", similarly adhesion weight 64 tons 18 cwt vs 61.5 tons. ( I note that max'm axle load for a Brit is always quoted as 20.5 tons which implies an amazing even distribution of weight !) 1e assuming a linear relationship between moment and deflection the 1.5 inches would become c. 1.66 inches ! By the same logic FS would be slightly more ! (and that assumes 1 .5 inches is exactly that and not for instance 1.6 inches)

 

An amendment to the Ops notice issued today (Wednesday 10th) states that there is a change to the plans mentioned previously for Thursday 11th. 5199 will work the 1010MD and 53808 the 1020BL and they will swap trains at Williton, so 5199 will finish the day at BL and 53808 at MD.

 

What a great example of the usefulness of the new signalling arrangements at wilton. A mid day loco swap saves the steaming of a 3rd engine.

 

Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

GWR Sleeping Car no 9038 seen passing Crowcombe on it's way to Minehead for display at next week's Antiques Roadshow at Minehead.https://stephenleek.smugmug.com/Railwayphotos-1/West-Somerset-Railway-2017/i-ksTDvbh

 

Perfectly possible under the old arrangements at WilLIton.

Robin

 

Exactly the procedure for a few years on the Carol trains

 

Deleted

 

But don't the carol trains terminate at WN and return and so the loco swaps are more straight forward? (Ie the down loco switches stock and continues in the same direction and vice versa).
Aren't today's trains through trains and in this case it's the locos that need to get back to where they came from, not the coaches?
How will they achieve that? (Or have I misunderstood? )

Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk

 

I thought the object of the exercise was that the locos didn't get back to where they came from?

 

Ah, I hadn't read the ops notice, just the snippet of a previous post, clear as mud now!!