35009, Shaw Savill

Strange you think my posts are so commanding but I assure you I am under no illusions about the value of my two penneth or the influence thereof!
As anyone who uses social media ought to realise and a "journalist" really should know, its just a virtual equivalent of "chewing the fat" in person - its not a white paper!
So, as for offering some ecomomic proposition for the loose hypothesis that a couple more mainline MNs would have plenty of work, a debate with you really does not merit the investment of my time to prepare a business case for a couple of locos I don't own. You might do the analysis though, part of your professional remit perhaps?
I am genuinely sad my posts ruffle your feathers but perhaps now the ignore or block buttons might be your best bet as far as I'm concerned?

 

I could be wrong here but I understood that MNLPS had already expressed concerns about the next overhaul due to the ever increasing age profile of its working members. Whilst I am sure they may love to have a second MN would they have the resources to put towards it even if someone found the not inconsiderable money that would be required?

 

If another Merchant Navy is to put in an appearance on the big railway, my bet would be on Port Line, but what is the status of 35005 going to be when its overhaul is completed.

 

It might be a false perception on my part but the generally received wisdom around these parts is that 8P power is both essential and in short supply over recent years. There are still only two in mainline service at present. If it is accepted "more 8Ps good", MNs have the twin virtues of being comparatively plentiful and most gauge friendly.
That's as far as my rationale goes.

 

35005 will be based on the MHR and doing the gala touring circuit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I must be losing the power of comprehending English, as it 'seems' (which is now apparently an order) some have taken this comment as an instruction or telling operators what to do - despite the word 'seems' appearing - I was just trying to tot up how many mainline approved locomotives are actually available for service at the moment recently, and didn't find many! In terms of Class 8, arguably what you need for a 12 coach special, even fewer - as low as 3 passenger locos perhaps? (35018, 35028 and 60103 plus 48151 of course)

Hence, there does seem to be an operational need - of course, that isn't to say another one or two would actually be used as many factors would determine that!

Steven

 

Port line would indeed be the most likeliest to be next Mainline Merchant Navy, depending on what work it needs, 35005 will as far as I know not be going mainline, unless someone were to offer to pay for the gubbings and the certification, even then theres no guarantee the MHR will say ok, because every time you have an engine that's needed for rail tour duty, that's an engine you can't roster for your own needs. Ian Riley has had 35009 for quite some time now, and if there was a need for him to have 35009 done he would have done it, I think he is very happy with his 5's, and besides, if he were to fast track number 9, it would take potential work away from 35018, obviously I would be ecstatic if 35009 were to emerge , and that meant 18 came down south as part of a Southern West coast pool( 34016, 34067 and 35018) based on Southall . but that's not going to happen.

 

Thanks, I too was starting to doubt my cognitive functioning as I stood accused of apprently dictating policy to sundry loco owners.
I did the same maths as you, disregarding the A3 on the grounds I thought it is a 7P and restricted load wise in any case as a conservation measure.
So in essence there are three 8Ps at the moment, possibly two more LMS later this year and a couple of LNER ones next year as well as 71000 perhaps.
Both MN28 and 60163 are "contracted" to specific roles and the A2 will be LSL routes. It remains to be seen how 71000 will be managed but currently seems likely to be a part of VTs operations.
On balance, therefore, and purely as conjecture, one or two additional comparatively "go anywhere" MNs might be useful, particularly for RTC and SD trains who still provide the bulk.
Thats not an edict, BTW, Daniel

 

without wishing to be pedantic , 60103 is 7P , 48151 does not have a passenger classification , but if it did , it would possibly be 5P 8F.

mind you , the Scots always punch above their weight

I confess I don't really keep up with ML steam , being unable to sample the delights , but AFAIK we have 46229 , 35018 ,35028 and Tornado, with , hopefully 71000 not too far away .

all the A4s are now out of ticket ??? and I am not sure as to 60532' status .somebody will clarify no doubt

 

A bit of a complex issue this situation. It is difficult to predict where the "mainline market" might be in a few years time. Again, it is impossible to predict locomotive availability, some arising issues are the cause of just one missed excursion and others bring about a good deal of reworking of a whole season.
Another aspect of this situation is the nature of locomotive overhauls. Sometimes they are carried out on schedule and as planned and then there are others that are beset with unforeseen issues; funding shortages, materials shortages, obscure hidden defects and so on.
Something else to work around. Can you actually be certain that a locomotive will continue to be available? An owner may decide to withdraw from active parcipitation, you may get a fair period of notice, but there again, perhaps not.
If it were possible it would be perhaps useful to have more communication and organisation between owners and charter operators so that the feast and famine aspects of locomotive type availability could, perhaps, be narrowed somewhat.

 

It really is a tricky market to make strategic decisions about, totally agree with that. If a typical restoration takes five years, anyone embarking on such a venture in 2013 would have been hard pressed to predict today's emerging infrastructure of multiple TOCs mostly having in-house fleets.
One of the few certainties, it seems (!!) is the ever constricting route restrictions for steam. As is known, MNs suffer less from this problem than their 8P counterparts which perhaps makes them a better prospect for "investment"? As we also know, steam locos are about more than simply "business" when it comes to the decisons made though.

 

Your post implied to me you thought there was enough 8Ps - sorry if that was a misconception.
As for the "we" and "need" in respect of LMS traction we know thats a max of two. Much as my affilliation might be LMS, the practical part of me says MNs would be "more useful". If its a purely business decison, no contest. Thankfully and unusually there is much more sentimentality involved in the real world of steam loco ownership.

 

lol you're right - 46233

 

the problem though is as ever gauging, whilst it may be nice to have more variety if they don't fit the modern railway, you can't use them,

 

60103 is a 7P, however it is Kylchap fitted and these machines were viewed as fully 8P interchangeable. This engine engine can readily handle class 8 loads but efforts are made today to try to conserve the machine for the longer term that were not made so much previously. Scotsman has other uses, mess up the gauging and see what happens when the media get hold of it!
All A4s are currently unavailable. 60009 should be back soon for the final curtain calls. Sir Nigel Gresley's overhaul continues and is looking good. I don't believe that Bittern will return in the foreseeable future, if ever.
At risk of repeating myself here, but the Kings are too restricted. If Network Rail continues in the way that it has been for many years now then we will be looking to Alfred and Judy, converted to inside cylinders , naturally.
The LM class 8s, forget Hamilton and Birmingham, Sutherland yes, Princess Elizabeth hopefully. Margaret Rose, not likely.
That leaves one New Build A1, 71000 which does seem to have problems and a soon to be completed 2-8-2 - and in preservation timetable terms it is soon.
Then you have Clan Line, recently joined by British India Line and then possibilities maybe. We did have Canadian Pacific - a lesson there maybe.

 

Why does 26D_ M have to provide 'proof'? He thinks there seems to be scope for another MN or two in the main line pool. That is just an opinion. Opinions don't need proof or backup, each opinion is equally valid. It belongs to the originator. You either agree or disagree, that's all there is to it.

 

Whilst any locomotive restored to working order is to be celebrated, if more Mainline MN's are required then coming to an arrangement with the restored MN's that don't run Mainline ( P&O, CanPac) would be less expensive...

 

What we need is more Class 8 power no matter which railway they come from. We all have our favourites, A4s for me, but I'd rather have any Class 8 if that means not being shoved around by a box.