Tornado

And that is the easiest excuse every given, hindsight ehhhh, if it had worked out of the box for 50 years without trouble, would people have found something else to complain about, yes is the answer, because the british are the EXPERTS on it.

 

I would say that is absolute twaddle - there was nothing but praise for the achievements of the A1SLT before the boiler problems emerged, and I think that what is uppermost in most people's mind is whether whatever modifications have been made will cure the problems. I personally don't give a damn where the boiler was made, I just want to see the engine free of problems. As I've said before, I'd be a lot happier if I was told what the problems were and why the changes might be expected to cure them. The work is is all but complete now, so there must be a theory about what was wrong and what needed to be done. I can't see any reason why that can't be shared now. After that it's a question of waiting to see whether further mods are needed.

I'm not an A1 covenanter (we already had an A2 and I can't really see the difference) but I would certainly consider supporting the P2 - but not till I'm reassured about its boiler, which will presumably incorporate the lessons from this one.

 

Thank you...........

 

I wish you had said all of the above earlier. I'm in complete agreement about the potential P2 on the cards. However, there is nothing to suggest the fixes being made won't work, and that we won't get a reliable boiler out of the one already existing. If the fixes work, then doubtless they would be applied to the second boiler, which is the trust's top priority before a P2 project is formally announced in any event.

 

I've had a similar experience with the trust during the earlier stages of the project when I responded to a request for information regarding tolerances for the fitting of the tyres in a Railway World article.

I duly sent a copy from the papers I had from the Institute Of Loco Engineers telling them exactly the information they asked for written by a Doncaster engineer, and did I get a thank you or even an acknowledgment - no not a thing . . . . . .

 

The trust says the boiler is in commonality with 60163, but if you look at archive pictures, who else thinks that the P2 boiler is much larger?
Unless I'm seeing it wrong, the firebox looks longer

 

Again....., if you read the thread and stand up and take attention, it is almost certainly classed as commercially sensitive information, and as such we will never find out, dont expect to see a video titled "how we rebuilt tornados boiler in 90 days", it wont happen. And when people stop bleating about it, we can then move on.....

Im waiting with baited breath for a copy of "6100 royal scot, where the money was wasted", probably wont get to see that either, that would be more interesting....

 

The firebox size is the same, 50 foot of grate space. The original A1 boilers were in fact little different from the P2 boilers they were derived from. The difference in overall heating surface between the two classes is about 6 foot, give or take, in the firebox.

 

Tornado the boiler was reunited with the frames today.

 

See HERE

 

Terrific news

 

Wow, that's why all the secrecy, they've given them a new one under warranty

 

^^^^^^ :rofl:

 

Steve from GWR: That's the way to start an urban myth.:gossip:

 

No - its just a coat of paint! - That should start another 260 pages!

Having attended a presentation tonight including a q & a session with one of Mr Elliott's fellow technical directors, when I found out that I was involved (as a teenager) with his father in preservation forty three years ago - sheesh! - I am quite happy that this project could not be in better hands.

A description of how the boiler was designed - how it has been used, basically 2,000edhp output every outing, and cruising mile after mile in the seventies - hardly an easy life; comments from Peter Townsend the former Top Shed head honcho about how A1s were regulars for stay renewal, comparison with other top flight locos doing similar main line work, with complete cycles between operations, and brief comments on work done by the builders to attempt to provide a remedy to the problems encountered so far, I get the feeling of talented and skilled people doing what they can with a project that started as a blank sheet of paper and has been as well managed as it could be, all things considered.

These people do not have the resources of a Doncaster works or a fleet of forty or so similar locos piling in statistical information. They have one - they have set up a brilliantly conceived and marketed scheme funded by a dedicated group of supporters to operate and sustain it - and that that scheme has got them through this hiccup speaks volumes.

The loco has performed brilliantly, but has shown that it does have an achilles heel.

Now can we leave them alone to see if their work together with their suppliers has improved the beast?

 

Excelent post Sir
But may I just ask is the paint the right colour...... runs for cover

Regards Pete

 

Thank you Frank for that post. It's great to see the boiler on let's see the brunswick beauty emerge in due course.

A lot of covenators have been waiting for this livery - I have to wait a little longer for my favourite livery (express passenger blue), but hey, I'm content with my lot and seeing 60163 steam again will be quite enough for me.

 

Or they have a wash and wear pair now! Hehe, they could pretend they have an everlasting boiler :lol: that would be sand in the eye for the naysayers!

 

Brilliant news. Can't wait to see her back. Hope to see her at the Mid Hants in October. Might be able to have my first ride behind her.

 

Great news. Can't wait to see her back in action.