30120

True enough Tom, although maybe they are in line to get Mr Bunch's mysterious class 4....


Keith

 

It is of interest that Eddystone may also be ready this year needing only a repaint and boiler overhaul. The bottom end not needing much work as put under less stress therefore less wear and tear.

 

Really?

Please square the following circle - 5 engines needed, 30120, 80104, 31806 available. Which other two locos that are (a) in traffic right now and (b) available for hire do you suggest they use?

I think your views about large vs small engines might be taken more seriously if you did sometimes accept that any course of action has to fit within available constraints, and sometimes that means making choices other than what are in pure financial terms optimal; and it also means at times having to accept a situation now even if it is against what your long term objective might be.

Tom

 

Who knows, 34028 may immediately go on long term hire to another railway next year. That’s what happened after it’s last overhaul because Swanage had no immediate need for it.

Is Swanage going to making an official announcement on the 30120 loan agreement? The news has only come out from Steam Railway magazine so far.

 

See post 117.

PH

 

I did. It doesn't answer the question - in fact, it refers to yet another Bulleid.

So I'll ask it again.

5 engines needed, 30120, 80104, 31806 available. Which other two locos that are (a) in traffic right now and (b) available for hire do you suggest they use during 2018?

Tom

 

Either a Bulleid or fire up a class 47

 

There is a certain off shore railway not a million miles away from Swanage with an pair of Ivatt Class 2 tanks which would be ideal - they surely constitute "big chufferitis" for such a small railway as that that they are currently on.

Peter

 

About the right size for a line which cannot accommodate any more than five bogies because of platform constraints. Lighter vehicles but steeper, if shorter, ruling gradients than Swanage. The piece of Post 117 which has been conveniently "forgotten" is the last sentence which refers to the SR as feeling Bulleids to be "too big".

PH

 

Not forgotten, but the specific question is about what they should use this year (since that was the context of 34072 and 34053 coming back) - a question you seem to have conveniently "forgotten" to give an answer to!

Why not simply state that long term, Bulleids are too big, but you recognise that the operational requirements of running the planned service mean they are the only realistic choice in the short term?

Tom

 

But that doesn't answer Tom's point Paul. Regardless of whether Swanage views them as too big or not, if they are the only locos available then they need to use them to maintain their service.


Keith

 

Like I said, if nothing else is available steam wise, you have a choice of a Pacific or a diesel, which do you use?

 

Ah progress! That is more or less what I do think. An interim stand in for a 4MT

Diesel

PH

 

I suspect PH has never been involved in loco hire. The first question from a prospective hirer is rarely, if ever, "how big is it?" It's usually "are you available?" Given there is a reported shortage of locos in the marketplace, anything that fits your loading gauge and weight limits will be attractive irrespective of the size.

 

If the NYMR gets Lambton 29 running for this summer it would make a lot of sense to engineer an exchange with Swanage for a Bulleid, but then again the NYMR looks as though it would have no real need for the Bulleid, even if 29 is of no use in the peak season

 

Is there not also an issue of trust and relationship, given that Southern Locomotives* are the hirer, and have their base in Swanage?

* - Full disclosure, I am a (very minor) shareholder in Southern Locomotives.

 

Time for (both of us) to back off I think.

Paul H

 

one option may have been to have hired 34053 to the MHR and in return Swanage get 41312 that way both railways benefit from engines they can make better use of

 

I still maintain that the Isle of Wight managed just fine with 0-4-4 and 0-6-0 tanks for decades so why does it not stick with them instead of going for larger 2-6-2 tanks. Oh - Silly me! there aren't any spare "O2"s left, so they just have to go for something bigger than necessary. One man's (Tom's) necessity is another man's (PH's) "big chufferitis". The Isle of Wight Railway is no different to any other in this respect despite PH 's efforts to convince us otherwise.

Peter

 

Does big chufferitis extend to diesels too? Why use a 47 when a 31 would do?