1014 County of Glamorgan

Not trying to justify anything, merely expressing exasperation that once again around 4-6 months after the last time this debate is just going around in circles once again.

Despite being a GWS member (in the interests of full disclosure) I have very little (if any) interest in the project which always struck me as rather peculiar and driven by a strange urge by certain people of its period to make various replica's, however, ultimately an 8F missing a boiler is an altogether different kettle of fish and eminently capable of restoration (see black 5 without a boiler which is apparently a viable project), yet after the boiler was removed, the frames have been picked dry by various other projects which seem to be given an entirely free ride in this sorry and needless (with hindsight) affair, which when combined with the appetite to bring this up time and time again does suggest to the more jaded and cynical viewer that perhaps to certain posters the beef is less to do with what happened, and more to do with who it was done by?

 

That photo sickens me. An historical loco (Doncaster built) destroyed for a poorly planned project. The GWS should hang their heads in shame.

 

Hands in the air - nothing to do with it being GWS for me. Just find the whole engineering side of it where the boiler is concerned a bit lacking and not in keeping of the excellence of the society elsewhere.

Just my opinion. My apologies if I’ve added to the frustration - nothing untoward meant, and I certainly don’t wish to offend.

 

Get your facts right on 3. Destruction of a boiler for a questionable inner firebox.

 

We’re going to beg to differ on that.

I prefer to be diplomatic with my wording.

 

If the 8F firebox had been capable of being re-stayed in such a way that the completed boiler was capable of being pressed to 250psi, I don't think the County would be looked upon with such negativity. It seems there is a very strong feeling that 1014 will be a de-tuned version of the original. It's a great pity that the insurance assessors. or whoever it was decreed that the resultant boiler could not take 250psi pressure, only 225psi. As I see it, this is the root cause of all the negativity towards the project.

Is it not possible for a reassessment of the boiler issue to be considered? Could the overhauled firebox be sold by the GWS to an 8F or black 5 owner/owning group? Increasingly, fireboxes will be reaching the end of their lives and needing replacement. Nothing would be lost if the firebox could be sold at cost plus overhaul charges, only a lengthening of the time scale in order to complete the project.

The GWS could then start again with a clean boiler sheet and, with the advancements which have now taken place in boiler manufacture, produce a correct 280psi County boiler. It would only need to be pressed to 250psi, as that's the state in which the double chimney final versions ran.

Another advantage, which I don't think has been mentioned here recently, is the question of the degree of superheat. I could be wrong here, but I think I read that 1014 will have a three-row superheater fitted, as did the re-draughted double chimney Counties as first modified. I think the final modification and final "tune-up" to the class was the upgrading to even higher superheat with a four-row superheater arrangement. All this would be possible with a completely new boiler.

If the GWS were courageous enough to make the big decision to go for a completely new boiler, it might create much renewed interest in the County project.

The people who consider that the present 1014 plans will produce a non-genuine "mongrel" GWR 4-6-0 would have no further argument.

With a brand new 250psi boiler and firebox and (quite importantly) a four-row superheater, 1014 would be a very potent machine indeed.

Jut my thoughts, but something that I feel the GWS ought to consider.

 

I agree with all that except the 250 psi. A brand new boiler might as well be designed for 280 psi, giving a bit more power from the Hall-sized cylinders, or a reasonable amount of power with new gauge-friendlier cylinders.

 

Hi there.
I did state in the third paragraph that they should produce a correct County boiler capable of being pressed to 280psi, although it would only need to be set at 250psi, as per the 1950's lowering of the boiler pressure. With the four-row superheater and 250psi the Counties steamed consistently, but setting the valves for 280psi could be a useful option, thinking about it.
Cheers.

 

Is the "scene" in the UK hard pressed to embrace making new boilers? Or are there some good reasons not to go down that route? New welded boilers seem to be very doable here. That is a very general enquiry and not project specific btw.

 

I think if you asked the question now, there would be a lot more confidence about the ability to make new, large boilers, of both welded (“Tornado”) and traditional (“Patriot”) construction. Many other preserved locos have also had very substantial boiler renewals in the last decade or so, bordering on complete renewal of pretty much any component.

The issue though I think is that the question isn’t being asked now: it was asked the best part of twenty years ago and a different answer arose. I suspect that if you started out now to construct a new build County, you’d take it as read that a new boiler would need to be, and could be, constructed.

Tom

 

Thanks Tom. So is "new" boiler one of those things that was on the list of not possible or just plain too expensive when preservation was still finding its feet?

 

I don't remember the technical psychological term, but when one has started down a particular path there is a tendency to continue that way even as it becomes clearer and clearer that there would be a better way. I can't see the County team being willing to commission and pay for a new boiler when they have invested so much time and money into the present one.

 

In political science and economics it is known as 'path dependency' that the 'costs of return' are considered to be too great to abandon a given branch. The classically cited example in the literature actually draws on railway history - namely the decision to adopt standard rather than broad gauge - even though the advantages of broad gauge were obvious, the costs of re-engineering all the routes built to standard gauge was considered too great.

BUT

The thing with Path Dependency as a concept is that it is not teleological. You are not 'locked into' but at various points in time moments of 'critical juncture' occur. For example a revolution (in an extreme example) where the path can be called into question and a new path taken. So the question would be whether or not this represents a moment of critical juncture for the County project.

(I do know what you mean by the psychological term but I can't think what it is at the moment).

 

Sounds like a perfect description of the Brexit process Sorry to digress ....

 

Only slightly OT, but what are the plans for the boiler for 4709?

 

In theory a good move, might have been able to use slimmer cylinders though I suspect these are already done ? but we have to ask ourselves why the counties and Bulleid Pacifics we're all detuned to 250psi... and whether this would cause problems with sourcing important ancillaries such as Injectors....

 

I'd hazard a guess that the stresses go up exponentially so wear and tear increase significant and the higher the pressure the more rigorous the water treatment has to be to avoid scaling ?

 

I seem to recall in the case of the Bulleids, it was noticed that they were very rarely worked much beyond about 200psi of steam chest pressure, so reducing the boiler pressure gave enhanced boiler life while having little practical impact on real world (as opposed to theoretical) performance.

Tom

 

Seem to recall reading that it will havea 28XX boiler, at least to begin with.

 

Perhaps now it's a watered-down County, it should be given the name of a Metropolitan County created after 1974... County of West Midlands, County of Greater London, County of Merseyside, County of Greater Manchester...?

I'll get my coat and call a taxi!

Richard.