Tender Austerity at Ribble Steam Railway

I'm not at all outraged by what is after all a hypothetical, and if money were no object I'd a) buy 31, sort it out, and take it back to Grosmont where it belongs and b) build a replica Lambton 0-6-0. If money's no object, why limit yourself?

On the second point, 31 left the SDR years ago and, after a period at the Avon Railway, is now lying in bits at Cranmore. I don't know whether the ESR has any plans for it.

 

The water argument doesn't really hold water. In simplistic terms, the amount of water used to run the service will be constant whatever the loco and will therefore require the same total amount of time to fill. It is whether you fill twice at (
say) five minutes or once at ten minutes. The only advantage of a tender is that you can probably cut down on the number of watering points but not the total time.

 

Surely running a service with e.g. a Class 4 power tank engine is going to use less than e.g. a Class 8 Pacific on the same train?

 

31 ran relatively smoothly but did bounce a bit due to the coil springs on the rear axle. Water was no problem in terms of getting from Grosmont - Pickering and vice versa. Neither was coal but it did need topping up every round trip. I fired it nine times, including its last ever day in steam on 22nd September 1983 (almost 34 years ago!) The load was generally six coaches with a couple of five coach trains and only one recorded seven coach train for which we had a banker Grosmont - Goathland but not return. There was never any problem with it steaming.

 

Obviously. However, that is using extremes. The basic premise is that you require the same energy to operate the train and thus have to boil the same amount of water, everything else being equal. The additional water used will largely be due to the additional weight of the loco. In that context, fitting a tender to an Austerity will increase overall water consumption slightly.

 

Again, thanks Steve. I heard the 3 of them had an indifferent reputation in NCB service but were perhaps not always suitably deployed? I would guess most heritage lines would find good usecfor 31 though.
Incidentally, have you any experience of Ashington 40 how at Weardale? Same wheels as 31, longer wheelbase but outside cylinder.

 

None whatsoever, I'm afraid.

 

Well I've yet to have a red engine.........!

 

It would appear that time has erased the memory of some on this thread who forget that HE2890 was converted by the MHR to be one of the "Thomas the Tank" locomotives representing Dougal as one of Dougal / Douglas twins hence joining James the Red Engine as part of the line's attraction.

Over time - as Thomas the Tank series found its place in the hierarchy of attractions and HE 2890 found itself ousted by bigger engines that had greater public appeal and would have been side-lined had it not been bought by its present owner and modified slightly to resemble an L&Y locomotive that does not look out of place in these northern climes.

Rather than quibble about livery / modifications / questioning if an Austerity is better why not a bit of praise for someone prepared to put his hand in HIS pocket rather than YOURS to present something different for your pleasure.

 

Damn right!

 

I was querying an argument that the tankage of a Hunslet 19x26 was somehow inadequate for normal tourist railway use, not whether it was inappropriate to turn one into Thomas the Tank Engine or a broad gauge 4-2-2 for that matter.

PH

 

Pedant mode on, the Austerity is18x26 cylinder dimension.
Otherwise concur with Fred, the owner of Douglas has a degree of modesty about his acheivements others would do well to copy.

 

No doubt an Austerity tank could be re-jigged into something along the lines of an LNER (CV&HR) N18 0-6-2 ...

 

....or two into a Zwillinge style 0-6-6-0.....


I'll just get my coat.......

 

Never heard of that one so looked it up on the LNER encyclopedia and I see a certain similarity in the running plate/wheels

 

And my argument was one of if you have an engine that is unloved, ignored , sidelined because its not a " glory engine" then why not look at the options there are not that many 0-6-0 tender locos about that look right many are too modern looking for vintage rakes etc, and how many new builds are for lost pre grouping engines that could be reborn using Austerity parts , if that engine was otherwise never going to be restored because its an Austerity.

 

I do wonder how much of the Austerity standard parts could be used in other locos. I think the GCR 4-4-0 being built is using an Austerity cylinder block, no? Could we take all of these standard parts and make something new with new frames and wheels, incorporating Austerity boiler, axle boxes, etc? That might be one way of "standardising" across railways with multiples of parts being made to reduce costs, whilst still doing our own thing with locos we want to represent.

I think it's commendable to take the loco on and I think with the modified running plate it looks the business.

 

Which parts do you mean? I'm not aware of many Austerity parts, boilers etc lying around as 'spares'. Or are you advocating dismantling locos to provide a parts pool for something which may or may not be built?


Keith

 

I'm not certain, and I certainly couldn't tell you what the difference is, but I thought it was a spare RSH 'Ugly' cylinder block.
(What happens if one of the preserved 'Uglies' ever needs a new cylinder block is another question of course - including the two at GCRN, which presumably it was originally acquired for (or with).)

 

Yes that's exactly what is being suggested, the idea being mooted on the Proposed new builds thread.

the Question (hypothetical and in view of the subject of this thread) being could any of those out of ticket/ unrestored/ unloved ? Hunslet austerities lying around be used to create 'something more interesting' (and therefore likely (?) to attract interest and funds) instead. ?
It has already been said that there isn't anything wrong with a Hunslet Austerity which is quite a good Loco for its size other than the sheer 'ordinariness' of them . Having said that there s more scope for an interesting livery on them than any other loco I can think of so they should be a Nat Pres Darling.
Unfortunately I can only find one pic of an N18 and have no idea how to put it on here...