BR Standard class 6 No. 72010 'Hengist' and Clan Discussion Thread

Gav, check your PMs. rather than clutter up this thread with repeated info and general natter.

Like I said, if anyone out there wants to see the state of play check out the excellent web site
www.72010-hengist.org It is a little out-of-date now but, following the EGM, I would expect that to be rectified.

 

I am pleased to advise folk that following the EGM on Saturday, the project is to continue with an elected Council of Management in charge.
A full press release will be issued later this week and it will be put on the Project website for all to see.

 

That's great news.

 

One thing I would like to ask is whether it would be possible to put a shareholder's form up on the website for those interested to print off? Also I feel the website is not one of the clearest in terms of giving information as to how to donate to/assist the project. Whilst its currently possible to email the relevant board members, it surely wouldn't do any harm to have a page with all this information available to hand? Otherwise, congratulations on moving this project forward after the recent difficulties. Now a full board has been elected, it'll hopefully spread the workload for all concerned. I hope to get involved financially fairly soon.

 

I am glad that this project is about to get a boost, from what has been said. Like others have said I am not in a position to contribute at the moment (student, already donating to other causes...) but wish it every success and hope to see it completed at some point in the future.

My Great Grandfather worked around Carlisle on BR in the 50s (he had a career on the railway from 1919-1962/3) and my Grandad says that he always said that there was nothing wrong with the Clans except for a tendency to overload them.

 

Sorry if I've missed it, but has Hengist got a new home yet?

Dave

 

I also think they shouldn't have been used south of the border as much as they were, where their comparatively light weight was of no advantage. I would have thought that wheel-slipping aside (they were Pacifics after all), the Clans would have been almost ideal for the West Highland line, or maybe trains between Glasgow and Stranraer, or even medium-length inter-city expresses between Glasgow and Edinburgh. Only one ever traversed the aforementioned West Highland line to Fort William, 72001 Clan Cameron for a reunion of the Clan itself.

 

Not yet..................but watch this space!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Don't forget that the 242 batch were destined for the S&D area which is reputed to be similar to Stranraer - Carlisle run. The Clans were also well used over Settle - Carlisle IRC.
Hope this engine will dispel doubts and ignorance about their quality and usefulness.

 

Thanks!

Re the Stranraer - Carlisle route - 'The Port Road', I have got the Cinerail South West Scotland dvd which has a speeded up run from Stranraer to Dumfries but filmed from the rear brake coach, and the amount of curvature on that line was amazing, given that the curvature of the Peak Forest route caused flexing problems for the Brits I would have thought the same might have applied to the Clans.

I did see one at Sheffield Midland once, can't remember which though.

Cheers
Dave

 

get it built then. haha only joking. glad to see things are going in the right direction. Now we will race you to see which loco will be built first. we should have the rolling chassis done in 18 months at the latest.

on a more technical note, what size driving wheels will you have, are there any of the same size around. I take it youll need to make a brand new pattern?
cheers Gav

 

6ft 2 inch /14 inch crank pin radius. as far as i know none of this size have been cast in preservation so its a new pattern.
Nearest 'Job share' size would be a GWR hawksworth County at 6ft 3 inch /15 inch crank pin radius....
dont know whether they would be prepared to save a bob or two by settling for a 6ft2 /6ft 2.5 producing a 'compromise' pattern which could be machined both ways. ? the crank pin is fairly critical to them as the 30inch stroke is pretty much standard gwr....

 

The driving wheels are the same size as the Brits - 6ft 2in - I was of the impression they were more or less identical wheelsets, given both the Brits and Clans share the same wheelbase?

 

Im also forgetting that theres a couple of P2'S under consideration that need 6ft 2 inch wheels with a 13 inch Crank radius.... (as used on v2, a2/3, B1 ?)

So heres a question: Is using the exact historical pattern for these 3 kinds (6mt, GWR county, P2) of newbuild/rebuild locomotives of paramount importance ?
, or, if its possible, could/should a single set of patterns be produced which, by different machining/finishing be acceptable to all three be considered...

Whilst i am on the cross component thing, P2 2007 will need a set of 19.75 x 26 inch outside cylinders mounting BR Caprotti valves designing, the nearest reference point being those mounted on a 'Caprotti' five.
Hengist will need 19.5 x 28 inch outside cylinders and whilst not specifically mentioned in lot 242 it is entirely likely that post 71000 any further Brits/Clans would have been 'Caprottified' (is that a word ? it is now) is there scope for a common set of components here also ?

 

I suppose that's up to membership. There the ones paying for the project so if you were to make short cuts you would have to vote. What the likes of people on this forum would say is of little importance. No matter what you do the loco Will not be original. Just a representation.

One last thing. Will it be built for mainline in the future or is it only ever for preserved lines.

 

Like most things concerning Hengist at the moment thats up for review by the management council and ultimately the Membership
In fact theres never been a better time to throw your 2 penneth worth in and potentially make a difference (shameless plug)

What i would say is it has to be built it the quality standards required for mainline running in any event. The decision to go mainline doesnt have to made yet as long as provision is made for the subsequent fitting of dual braking, relevant electronics etc ... oh and a decent sized tender

To my mind the extra support it should attract as a potential mainliner has to be worth the extra eventual cost.

Yours is an interesting project Gav and seems to have garnered a lot of public support, ironic when the LMS 5XP's we're one of the locos that the Clans we're intended to replace...

Take it your not using the original 'MR' axlebox spec. for your little speedster then. and the boiler -not tempted by the 'Tubewall' ?

 

Must have been this one, fotted at Rotherham 24 March 1963. It was on a special; Leeds - Tyseley - Crewe (?) which was supposed to have a King for the return, but the last had gone a month before (the special was rescheduled from February (?)). We did have the unusual combination of a GW Hall and the Clan for part of the journey (memory fading a bit!).

​

 

Got it in 1 Sean, if you want to have a say on the way forward, you have to be a member. Preferably one who will manage to attend the AGM in September when major decisions will be taken.
All aspects are being reviewed between now and then. The results will be available to members only.
This is not a shameless plug, just a simple statement.

 

Im not entirely sure about spec ill find out a week on sat when were at svr gala raising money. but with regards members, yes we do have a fair bit of support, but it seems to be because many people say they have a soft spot for the "baby scots". if you look at where many of our members live its mainly around the areas where patriots ran. so if you think of it in that way you could say because there were only 10 clans and they were mainly far up north not many people remember them, so maybe you could target the younger generation as they dont really have as much loyalty to locos?

does your membership run into the hundreds?

 

I believe that the County's wheels are already made.