Flying Scotsman

The generator car is used on diesel tours so why not steam? This would be a very good punt for a genuine unassisted tour for which there have been very few this year.
The DB operated Pullman to the Greatest Gathering with Flying Scotsman was unassisted utilising Belmond's generator car.
This is a very good move and opens the door to further trips next year with Scotsman and maybe also Tornado and Clan Line who are also on DB's books. Extremely positive news.

 

As an illustration of how delicate the Cartazzi truck is, there was a notable incident during 4472's US tour when the engine became derailed at a roundhouse. While George Hinchcliffe was distracted elsewhere, the US railroad staff tried to rerail the engine using a ramp. Result? The rear axle and journals were badly scored, necessitating an emergency repair job which, IIRC, involved removing the wheels from the axle. To their credit, the railroad concerned took full responsibility and sent the rear wheel set away by road to get the job done overnight.

Sent from my SM-A125F using Tapatalk

 

But, unassisted steam sat in a Mk3? Is that really something to look forward to? It’s bad enough sat in a mk1, what on Earth is the attraction of sitting in a Mk3 behind a steam loco? You won’t see or hear anything?!

 

Did you mean mk1? Aren't those what most of us prefer, and lament the lack of in WCRC's current rakes?

 

You don't hear much from a Mk2 so, and with the general lack of charter rolling stock, what do you suggest?

This is a positive step forward to get Scotsman on the mainline at reasonable prices.

Having travelled on the ERS Mk3's to Derby in July, they are a lovely vehicle to travel in.

Sent from my SM-S928B using Tapatalk

 

The normal reason for the diesel behind the steam locomotive is when there is incompatibility between train loco and coaching stock hence the diesel is there to "translate" the train loco braking instructions for the use by the coaches. Where the loco and stock are compatible then the diesel - as noted - is placed at the rear both as support and to assist in shunting movements where appropriate. In the early days of 60103's latest overhaul it had no vacuum brakes fitted hence with only air brakes a translator vehicle (i.e. the diesel) was used with vacuum-braked stock to allow 60103 to haul trains.

 

Is there anything wrong with that?

 

Indeed, bigger picture and all that.
This would appear to be the only option for Scotsman on the mainline which the previous 2 pages on this forum were moaning wasn't happening..

Even if Mk1s were available out of Carnforth (which they aren't) 10A are apparently refusing to operate her.

Beggars can't be choosers at the moment.

 

I don't understand this logic. In the 50'sand 60's, enthusiastic people saved a vast emporium of stuff, because it would be tragic to lose it all. It was reckoned to be in the national interest to keep, record, maintain this segment of our nations history
50 years later, 70 or 80% of the population don't care about railways- therefore we must make the museum appeal to the 70-80%, rather than pandering to a bunch of enthusiasts who are interested.
The 70-80% still aren't interested in trains and do not visit the railway museum.
The 20-30% are disenchanted and disenfranchised and do not visit the railway museum.

Personally, I do not give a tuppenny poop for paintings, sculptures, and similar. Therefore I do not visit the national gallery. I do not expect it to chuck out a load of its gewgaws and put a 3litre Bentley in the main hall to please me, or send the Landseer stuff to Macclesfield town hall museum to make room for a coffee shop that I won't visit, nor do I begrudge the money the nation spends to maintain the facility for the (probably 20-30%) people who do like that stuff- it is in the national interest.
If I were a Bentley spotter, I might visit just to see the Bentley, but I wouldn't go off looking around the gaff and suddenly decide that what my life had been missing was a better appreciation of Stubbs's horse pictures

 

Yes and no.

If all the visits to preserved railways command a significant premium to see or travel, does this actually improve the accessibility over it spending it's time on the main line- I think it would be easy to argue that it is difficult to justify within the objectives of the science museum group.

Lots of folk will still be excluded on price as a result.

On the flip side, it needs to contribute something to it's own upkeep, and if charging a premium rate is the only way to do that then so be it.

 

I was referencing the fact you can’t lean out of the windows anymore. Even in a mk1, sitting in the same seat all day isn’t my idea of fun.

 

That misses an important point. Those groups don’t have a hard boundary. If a museum only appeals to those who are already interested, it’s audience will decline and the collection will then be at risk as there aren’t people to look after or appreciate it.

That means doing things in a way that appeals to more than just the already appreciative. And the involvement of public money increases that obligation.

The same is true of all categories of museum and gallery. Hell, I even observed it visiting the Wallace Collection recently - and that is as restricted a collection as you could hope to find.

However, it can go too far - a criticism often levelled at the Arts Council, for whom “participation” and “access” often appear to take precedence over, well, artistic quality.

My experience of the NRM is that they are keen to appeal to non-specialists, but that they also focus hard on communicating the stories behind their exhibits to develop understanding of the railways.

 

Even allowing for the fact that heritage railways charge a premium when FS visits, for the average person a trip behind the loco on a heritage line is still far more financially and geographically accessible than when it runs on the mainline.

Tom

 

It is certainly true that if you want to be able to say you and the kids have had a ride behind FS then the heritage line will be the most financially accessible option for most.
If you just want to go and see it, then a mainline trip probably makes that far more accessible to many more than those that live just those close to a Heritage Line.

 

But FS hasn’t covered that much of the network so accessibility is still a matter of how close people are to where she’s running be it main line or heritage line.

 

So the nearest i am going to get to a ride behind FS, is to go for a visit to the NYMR, at a large cost, i am sure, as everyone is milked dry.
Or buy a ticket to do the upcoming excursion from York to Newcastle and return, i doubt no change out of £275, as i have to travel to York.
I doubt very many normal people will do that from our area, however now with a tour going through the area in December, a substantial number have the opportunity to go and see her pass.
The number that come out for the excursion, will hugely dwarf, those who choose to ride behind her, and there is the conundrum.
I am sure local papers will advertise her passage, and everywhere will be packed, as a Science Museum piece, is displayed publically, that is the way it should be.
Available to all, it is up to operators to devise tours to get her across the network.

 

Not as long as the locomotive retains its novelty / premium value. When it becomes more common thus losing its novelty value a comparison with other "steam" offerings may make the premium supplement unacceptable and non-sustainable.

 

The last advertised pickup is Peterborough.

 

Unless I've missed something that doesn't make sense. How can a diesel loco translate braking instructions? If a loco has no vacuum ejector a diesel behind the tender would make no difference. As far as I know there are only three air braked locos on the main line, The Duchess, Tornado and FS, the others have a compressor for the air brake and a combind driver's brake valve. When FS had no vacuum brake I think virtually all the charter stock was dual braked, I certainly don't remember it ever having a diesel behind the tender.

 

I admit I am unfamiliar with the technical explanations but I must trust my vision when photographing the loco in action. I present 4 examples for your consideration :

a) dated 08/021/2006 first run after release from Riley's with 45407 as "brake translator"
b) dated 09/01/2006 accumulation run on normal ELR service with class 31 31466 as "brake translator"
c) dated 04/02/2006 loaded main line test run with compatible stock
d) dated 06/02/2006 first revenue run on main line with compatible stock

I was advised that the "brake translator" was required because of incompatibility between the loco (air-brake fitted only) and the coaching stock; if other technical requirements meant the use of an assisting loco I accept my error given that I was told incorrect information.