6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010/2011/2012

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

I think they are doing necessary work to re-apply for 10 year certificate.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Hang on chaps, back up a bit.

The locomotive was released from Southall and had to be worked extremely hard to get any real performance out of it. There were clearly problems with it. That, surely, is not in dispute? There's video footage on Youtube showing the engine struggling with seven BR MK1s. For a Royal Scot, it should perform like - well, a Royal Scot!

If we measure the locomotive by its sister in preservation, then whatever has been done to Royal Scot previously clearly was not good enough in any way. It was not fit for purpose, and certainly not mainline worthy!

That we are even questioning what Crewe is having to do to that engine, after all the antics with Flying Scotsman's overhaul at Southall, and its subsquent overhaul at the NRM, and what little we'd seen of Royal Scot since her initial release, this MUST - absolutely MUST tell us that the work undertaken by Southall was less than satisfactory. How many engineering groups do you know would do this, and I quote:

Now you tell me that this particular part of Scotsman's previous overhaul at Southall was satisfactory? The alarm bells have been ringing with Royal Scot ever since she had those first few poor test runs at the WSR.

Frankly, if Crewe says the boiler has to come out, I believe them. You just don't know what other horrors are waiting under there.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Here Here. Well said that man!

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

I was just thinking, the work on 6100 is going to end up costing as much as keeping the Vulcan Bomber airworthy!

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

and that is what some of us have been saying for ages, that something is seriously wrong with the project management at Southal when 6100 was being overhauled there, a lot of money has been spent, but on what? because it clearly wasnt spent on the engine, either that or someone haas been taken for a ride by someone

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Hang on chaps, back up a bit.

The locomotive was released from Southall and had to be worked extremely hard to get any real performance out of it. There were clearly problems with it. That, surely, is not in dispute? There's video footage on Youtube showing the engine struggling with seven BR MK1s. For a Royal Scot, it should perform like - well, a Royal Scot!

If we measure the locomotive by its sister in preservation, then whatever has been done to Royal Scot previously clearly was not good enough in any way. It was not fit for purpose, and certainly not mainline worthy!

That we are even questioning what Crewe is having to do to that engine, after all the antics with Flying Scotsman's overhaul at Southall, and its subsquent overhaul at the NRM, and what little we'd seen of Royal Scot since her initial release, this MUST - absolutely MUST tell us that the work undertaken by Southall was less than satisfactory. How many engineering groups do you know would do this, and I quote:


Flying Scotsman is fitted with air braking equipment for its carriages – the locomotive itself has a direct, steam operated brake. But when the air brake components were installed, the brake rigging on the tender was in the way. So someone, somewhere, simply cut it – disabling the hand-operated brakes on the tender wheels required when parking.
Now you tell me that this particular part of Scotsman's previous overhaul at Southall was satisfactory? The alarm bells have been ringing with Royal Scot ever since she had those first few poor test runs at the WSR.

Hi all
Yet again people talking crap again on this web site, the way people speak that the loco was finished when leaving Southall , well yet again it was not finished, and keep on about flying Scotsman’s air brakes as well, it’s just crazy if you want to know who fitted the air brakes to flying Scotsman ask Kim mullion god rest his soul, some people talk and have good constructive questions ,but some others have axes to grind about peoples work, if you want a little t chit chat my numbers below FISH7373 SOUTHALL 81C FITTER

mr k w fisher
project engineer
1972 t/stock AIT
northfields depot

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

If you'd care to explain why the Yorkshire Post reported the cutting of the tender brakes back in 2009 as part of Scotsman's protracted overhaul at the NRM, I'm all ears.

No axe to grind aside from making sure, firmly, that we remember the facts of the matter. Fact - The Yorkshire Post reported in 2009 that Scotsman's tender braking system had been cut to fit the air braking. Fact - Royal Scot WAS reported in the railway press - Steam Railway/Heritage Railway/The Railway Magazine, and online as being "complete" on leaving Southall and on her way to the WSR for running in. A Mainline trial date was booked, never met, and the locomotive has done little else since.

If you'd like to set the record straight, then by all means state it. Those are the facts as I understand them.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

I wouldn't rely on any form of media to report 'facts'.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

......

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

For someone who has defended 60163 against all detractors, I'm surprised you're so keen to dish the dirt on other projects.
That things are not as they should be with 6100 is without doubt but the causes are open to speculation until someone directly involved gives a full statement as to what has gone on. I think we'll be waiting a long while before that happens.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Having been the victim of media "facts" in the past, I couldn't agree with you more.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Ah, but that is not what I said. The facts of the matter are that royal scot and flying Scotsman were reported on in this fashion - a distinct difference to saying "these are facts".

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

sac MARTIN the fact is again the loco was NOT FINISHED CREW FINSHED OFF LOCO that is the facts not what the press say and Yorkshire pudding papers says, some one lost a loco in court remember and that’s a fact, FISH7373 SOUTHALL 81C FITTER

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Go easy guys, typed words are cheap but the damage they do can be immense.

Let's just let the people charged with getting 6100 into an operable condition get on with the work.

Regards,

Dan

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

I am no boilersmith, but as I understand it, the "10 year ticket" is the maximum between full external and internal boiler inspections by the insurance company inspectors (although it can be lengthened to 11 or even 12 in a few cases, subject to tube renewal and inpsection). In order to do these, full access is necessary to the inside and outside of the boiler. That means all tubes out, but for narrow firebox locos, it also means lifting the boiler to inspect the lower part of the outside of the firebox. Any repair to this area 9foundation ring for example) requires a boiler lift.

There seems to have been a suggestion that 6100's boiler is coming off to "check the valve gear". 3 cylinder locos don't usually need this pretty major step to access the middle engine. I suspect that this is where there has been a mis-understanding. The boiler is probably coming off to allow external inspection, and this is to get a new ticket because so much of the old ticket has already gone by. The impression I have had is that the loco has far from been worked on continuously due to other priorities for both the owners and engineers. The details of change of ownership will almost certainly have delayed further work also.

Steven

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Whilst you can argue that it is necessary to lift the boiler to get the mythical 10 year ticket, this also requires it to be gutted, as well. The costs involved in doing all this are not inconsiderable and, even though it has stood idle for a long time, the economics of it don't really stack up unless there is known work to do to the boiler that requires such action. Better to get 5/7 years of running in first and get something back in the kitty.
That is, unless money is of no object, of course.......

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

There's no dirt. Only that which has been reported - and this you cannot deny, what has been written - what is known, does not reflect well on Southall.

I find your remark, when only a few pages back the bandwagoners were making spurious claims against Crewe for "creaming" on this project, to be rather one sided.

All we know is that which has been reported in the railway press and elsewhere. No one has made any kind of claims which have not been reported elsewhere, in this thread, nor has anyone from Southall (no matter how loudly they shout on the internet) explained or rebutted any of the claims that are there in the public domain.

So there's no dirt slinging here - only a desire to firmly remind people that making suggestions that Crewe are "creaming" off this project, without evidence to the contrary, is entirely unreasonable, whereas the reputation of Southall is somewhat different.

That I agree with entirely.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

sac martin royal scot was not completed but a kit of parts on leaving southall for crew, crew finished royal scot off not southall, and you have to ask the VAB who passed out flying scotsman about the hand brake . FISH7373 SOUTHALL 81C FITTER

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Why? - Were the Vehicle Acceptance Body the ones who decided to disable the tender brakes as a means to an end? I thought their role was just to inspect the vehicle's compliance with mandatory standards.

The locomotive and train would still have had a safe working braking system even without the tender brakes - but the decision to cut through them was hardly an elegant solution to the job in hand, whoever took it.

 

Re: 6100 Royal Scot..Progress 2010.

Well Bongo was proved right.