If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by gwr4090, Nov 15, 2007.

  1. aldfort

    aldfort Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    4,237
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Yes,
    I spoke the to Chairman only yesterday and he said it all went off very smoothly. The Q&A after the conclusion of formal business was lively but there were many very sensible questions and good discussion. You'll appreciate the directors and trustees are now firmly focussed on the winter works and the 2020 operating season.
     
    malcolm imps likes this.
  2. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,100
    Likes Received:
    57,416
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    It would be about ten grouping-era wooden carriages. It’s about nine Mark 1s, if you reckon on a median weight of around 35tons for a Mark 1.

    Ultimately though with modern day load limits, I guess the question isn’t what did the S&D sectional appendix say, but what does the WSR sectional appendix say!

    Tom
     
    Bluenosejohn and Aberdare like this.
  3. WSR_6960

    WSR_6960 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2018
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    212
    Location:
    Somerset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    S&D 7F - 12 mk. 1

    Note: The maximum load is based upon coaches loaded at 37 tonnes each.
     
    Jamessquared likes this.
  4. Dan Taylor

    Dan Taylor New Member Account Suspended

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2019
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    142
    Occupation:
    Fireman
    Location:
    Titfield
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Notice in article on Somerset county express.

    "The decision was made to terminate the long-term hire of the 44422 locomotive. WSR said ‘significant work’ would be needed to restore it, in the region of £450,000.

    But, as £142,000 had already been spent, this added to the losses"

    Yet

    Couple of points didn't it have a fairly intense overhaul a Crewe before coming to the railway.

    At the time we was led to Believe,

    "WSR has stood the cost of a heavy general overhaul for unrestricted use of the 4F for 25 years"

    Yet it needs bottom end repairs,

    Are we ruling out , Now knowing the state the track was allowed to get into, Being a factor in the issues faced by the 4F.

    Somethings really don't add up.
     
  5. Aberdare

    Aberdare New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2016
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    1,531
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Somerset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    44422 - for information.

    Prior to the 4F coming to the WSR it had lain out of service at another railway for a period of time due to the condition of the boiler, this made it unserviceable. At that time the locomotive appears not to have had a comprehensive overhaul since its original restoration, both it and the tender could be said to have been thoroughly "pre-enjoyed" (other phrases may also suit).

    The purpose of its transfer to the WSR was that in return for a gradual improvement in condition the locomotive would be available for 25 years at no cost. Firstly to enable it to operate it had to be made safe. To do this the locomotive went to LNWR Heritage at Crewe where the boiler was removed for it to receive a full overhaul. At the same time the chassis was examined whilst the boiler was out and some minor sundry works undertaken to make the locomotive operable. During this time the tender went to Minehead. Crewe was only contracted to repair the boiler and reassemble.

    Upon return to Minehead the locomotive and tender went through the usual acceptance process and further works were required to make the locomotive and tender available for limited service. These works included the replacement of superheater elements, replacement of blast pipe, overhaul of boiler fittings, replacement or tightening of various loose bolts and welding of leaky tender.

    The works on the chassis and tender did not constitute a full overhaul. The condition of the valves and pistons, cylinders, bearings, platework were known to be far from ideal and due for overhaul, which could follow in stages over the next few seasons.

    The locomotive operated for approximately 15,000 miles during 2016 and 2017. At the end of 2017 it was lifted off its wheels for the purpose of attending to axle boxes, tyre returning, big end bearings, horn alignment and spring gear. These items being the group of repairs that were top of the list of necessity.

    Following disassembly cleaning and shot blasting of the wheels revealed that the wheel castings were in exceedingly poor condition, being covered in hundreds of casting shrinkage cracks, many of which had developed in to very major, or serious, cracks. The castings themselves were very poor, being porous with large surface voids. On the driving wheel set the largest crack was in the wheel boss heading towards the axle, many of the spokes had circumferential cracks which had probably gone right through the spoke. The correct repair would have been to replace all 6 wheels at a considerable cost. It might have been possible to undertake a temporary repair on the trailing set but this would be by trial. Certainly the driving wheels were beyond saving.

    The extra cost of the wheel repairs bought the project to a stand at the time when the WSR had to watch all expenditure. Of course the outcome is now history.

    Fortunately the WSR recovered about half the cost of the boiler overhaul in free hire, but would have had to use the locomotive for the full 10 years to recover all that it would have cost to return it to the same condition as say 53808. This would have left nothing in the bank to fund the next set of repairs, including probably a new tender tank.

    Andy.
     
  6. Robin Moira White

    Robin Moira White Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2014
    Messages:
    11,247
    Likes Received:
    17,946
    Gender:
    Female
    Occupation:
    Barrister
    Location:
    Stogumber
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    A couple of shots from a signalling turn at Williton yesterday to assist with winter works, benefiting from finance from the Rail Renewal fund held by the WSRA.

    (1) Ballast being loaded.
    (2) Awaiting the return of the train from the worksite.

    Robin

    498482C0-9BF1-4A6F-A093-008C55F53727.jpeg 1E2161C3-44EC-4E27-AA8E-047E2477F939.jpeg
     
  7. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,100
    Likes Received:
    57,416
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Interesting point about the quality of the wheel castings - presumably that was a long-existing (i.e. pre-preservation) flaw?

    More generally, that post bears out the relationship between boiler and mechanical condition - something we’ve been exploring a bit in Bluebell News loco reports for the last year or so. I think too often many people see a boiler overhaul and instantly conclude “good for ten years”, without appreciating either that the mechanical condition might be a limiting factor, especially for high mileage locos, or that even a “ten year certificate” doesn’t guarantee ten years of boiler life: it could fail at any inspection before then. Mechanical condition, and annual mileage, as a constraint on loco working life between overhauls is something I think is under-appreciated by enthusiasts at large.

    Tom
     
    Forestpines, jnc, MattA and 4 others like this.
  8. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,068
    Likes Received:
    5,164
    but
    Something seems awry there.
     
  9. gwalkeriow

    gwalkeriow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,703
    Likes Received:
    1,727
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired.
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The works listed are not usually part of a boiler overhaul.
     
  10. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    What was acceptable 50 years ago (when BR steam ceased to exist) and what is acceptable now are quite different. People are less inclined to take a subjective view of such as shrinkage cracks and blowholes today. I'm aware of a certain (industrial) loco that had a hole you could get your fingers into adjacent to the crankpin. Not noticeable when the coupling rods were in place. AFAIK, that wheel hasn't been replaced and the loco is still trundling around.
     
  11. 1472

    1472 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    2,517
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    As was rather brutally illustrated to us earlier this year with the completely unexpected failure of the piston rod on the RHS of 7802 you can only rely on old metal with previously hidden defects for so long. Much more comprehensive Non Destructive Testing now has to be the routine at each overhaul - along with the replacement of the likely increasing number of parts found to be hiding defects. That doesn't mean that everything old is u/s though, just that thorough checking is needed. Had that defective (BR era) piston rod been detected previously a repair costing around £5k would have sufficed. The consequential damage caused now puts the total repair cost well into 6 figures. Nevertheless the repair is underway now.
     
    5944, jnc, RLinkinS and 2 others like this.
  12. Maunsell907

    Maunsell907 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2013
    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    1,965
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The only time I have been able to sample 88 (53808) with more than 8 on was 17/3/2006 when with 9/326/340
    we ran MD-WN non stop to time but then continuing to BL non stop we stopped for a blow up at MP173. To be
    fair I think this was the period of Polish Coal and very large lumps, and perhaps too many large lumps had been
    fed. The return journey to MD with 53809 ran to time. :)

    The point of course at issue here is whether a normal MD1 consist ( over the last two years 6/7 coaches) and
    the four coach QB set could be handled comfortably to schedule by 53808. Perhaps an all stations service
    with a large train is more difficult than the nominal non stop runs with ex Main Line specials.

    I do not have to hand any performance figures for the S&DJt 7Fs but of course 53808 has a standard
    Compound boiler. I have always thought that to maintain time from Williton to Crowcombe with
    the Stogumber stop simplistically requires 25mph on the 1/92 either side of Stogumber: with a
    12 coach MK1 consist this represents a DBHP of c.870 ( for 10 coaches c.730 ). There were
    extensive tests of Midland Compounds over the S&C which indicated a maximum DBHP of
    900 at 40mph. Allowing for the difference in coupled wheel diameter at 25 mph (assuming
    a similar front end efficiency for the 7F as per the 4P, in practice I suspect the 7F is lower )
    the 7F max DBHP would be 880.

    Based on this rather rough calculation I suggest 53808 could handle 10 coaches to time but
    unlikely 12. Even with 10 would require skilled enginmenship. But it surely has to be
    preferable to run a six coach MD1 set rather than risking mass passenger unhappiness?

    As I said previously if 53808 unavailable then 9 coaches with a Manor ( recognising this
    is also demanding ) or a diesel pilot.

    I note comments from others re load limits. There are of course load limits and running
    to schedule. The LMS (amongst others ) recognised this long ago ie special, etc.
    Also the WSR loco load linits have been discussed on this site previously and certain
    idiosyncrasies noted :)

    Michael Rowe.

    ps I noted some two years past No.3850 run to time on a damp morning with 10 coaches
    on the 10.15 MD-BL but the standard Swindon Mark 1 boiler has a higher evaporation
    rate than the Midland Compound G9AS boiler.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2019
    jnc likes this.
  13. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,185
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Surely it would not be that difficult to have the 33 discretely at the back to assist only when needed
     
    MattA likes this.
  14. As the printed timetable declares 'limited ordinary seating' for the whole MD1 duty on red timetable days, I doubt more than 8 or 9 coaches are planned to form the combined consist. From a practical point of view I don't think either ops or loco dept would wish to rely on just one specific engine being capable of working the MD1 turn each QB operating day. The combined load therefore surely needs to be suitable for 'Manor' haulage as well as the 7F.

    Additional shunts will now be required at Minehead to shorten and reform the MD1 set before and after each QB turn.

    Given that the 4-coach QB set will always be at the Taunton end of the consist, are there any train length limitations (for up trains) dictated by intermediate station platform lengths? I would imagine it is highly desirable for all of the regular service coaches to stop at a platform whenever possible. This consideration probably also supports the case for an 8 or 9 coach consist, given the 5th coach will be the front service train vehicle.

    I'm concerned at what effect 'limited ordinary seating' (ostensibly on all blue and red dates) will have on demand for the 12.35BL departure. Perhaps the planners are hoping to direct prospective ordinary passengers to an earlier or later train from BL. While this might actually only be an issue on Sundays, the printed timetable indicates limited seating on all red and blue operating dates. That could well prove detrimental if not corrected.
     
  15. The menu details for those two dates have now been deleted.
     
  16. MattA

    MattA Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2014
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    342
    Location:
    82F
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed, a similar arrangement is not unknown on some other railways.
     
  17. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,185
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Any news on the new DMU?
     
  18. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    21,064
    Likes Received:
    20,773
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Just on a detail. There is nothing 'discrete' about a Class 33 or anything else on the back. It adds extra weight with the obvious implications. Of course, this is nothing different from the dilemma of the main line. However on a (steam) heritage line the dilution of the 'product' is rather more stark. But you can only do what you can do.
     
    michaelh, 1472, Bluenosejohn and 2 others like this.
  19. howard

    howard Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2006
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    270
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired Ship's Engineer
    Location:
    Sandwich Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    That assumes that the WSR rule book allows such assistance of course. I’m not sure that the ORR are too keen on rear end assistance unless it’s properly covered by rules.
     
  20. flying scotsman123

    flying scotsman123 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,440
    Likes Received:
    17,938
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheltenham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Our rulebook (which I'm told is fairly similar to the WSR's) explicitly forbids any rear locomotive from providing any assistance unless specifically authorised, for example in the event of a failed train.
     

Share This Page