Bluebell Motive Power

Fairly nice day out on the line yesterday (pics to follow), was there a reason Baxter was in steam on shed but didn't appear to be doing much (possibly meant for Ardingly shuttle but didn't happen for whatever reason) ?, 92212 brewing up for Sunday, 55 cold outside and 34059 being worked on.

The two P's, H & C all seemed to perform well enough, though one of 178/592 appeared to show a dislike for lineside vegetation.

 

On Saturday, Baxter did all the carriage shunting at Sheffield Park, which simplifies life a bit for everyone else! (I was firing 263 on Saturday morning, and we just had to run up the Newick and draw our carriages back into the station; no faffing about in and out of the carriage shed sidings We had a couple of lineside fires to attend to on our second trip. I'd confidently assert they were started by one of the Chatham engines... Fortunately nothing too serious I don't think, and we were back on time by later in the day as far as I can see.

In other loco news, the boiler of 847 went into the frames mid week, cab roof and smokebox are on etc. A cursory view of things suggests that the following still need to happen:

- Blast pipe to be fitted
- Main steam pipes to be fitted
- Superheater header and superheater tubes to be fitted
- Chimney to be fitted
- Dome cover to be fitted
- Boiler backhead fittings to be fitted (gauge glasses, lubricator, brakes, regulator etc)
- Cab windows to be fitted
- Brick arch to be cast
- Valve setting and other "fettling" tasks
- Final painting and lining

So getting close (though no doubt I have missed a few things).

The Prairie has had a washout and had a warming fire yesterday ready for service this week. (Entirely personal side note: Evil thing! Why do Western engines always fill the cab with smoke when they are first lit up? Southern engines don't do that!)

Tom

 

I was on 323 Sunday and the carriage shunting meant lots of waiting around, still the loco was lovely and warm by the time we joined 263 for its 2nd train of the day and it ran and steamed beautifully. I can confidently assert that it was a green Chatham engine that caused the lineside fires on Sunday!

 

A quick update on the "Keep up the Pressure" appeal, which as reached £39,000 after about three weeks.

You can donate online at www.justgiving.com/kutp or text "KUTP59 £10" to 70070 to donate £10. You can donate £1, £2, £3, £4, £5 or £10 and GiftAid your donation. Normal operator text charges apply.

Also, a firebox backplate for Blackmore Vail has just been delivered to the railway, to go with the thermic syphons already in stock. There is a photo here: http://www.bulleidsociety.org/News/Latest_News.html Meanwhile, Archie continues to be stripped ready for a boiler lift, which I believe should take place in September.

Meanwhile, a rather scrappy mobile phone picture from of 847 with boiler and cab in place. The blastpipe in the foreground is 847's and the wheels on the right from 541.



Tom

 

I forgot to ask last week, what's the set of frames in the running/storage shed, 73082 ?.

 

I think 84030's frames are in the running shed as well.

Tom

 

Al

Tom calculated in another thread ( cannot remember which one) that is was possbile to accomodate the train within the 1 1/4 hour service train intervals , although it would be very tight, with only one train ( whether service train or Charter) allowed North of Kingscote.

A member of the S&T wrote in Bluebell News a couple of years ago, that based on service train intervals of 1 hour it would not be possible to accomodate charters when 2 service trains were running.

Paul

 

My calculation was that:

- assuming gauging on NR is OK
- assuming any incoming / outgoing service can wait in EG station for a path on Network Rail (so you don't have the problem of having to ensure that a tight path on NR matches a tight path on the Bluebell)

Then you have about 36 minutes to get an incoming train off NR, onto the Bluebell and down to Kingscote to cross an up Bluebell service. For an outgoing service to NR, you've basically got the same time to get the service from Kingscote out onto Network Rail and the token back (by road) to Kingscote to allow the next Bluebell service train to follow.

So, 36 minutes and I reckon it would take around 30 minutes to do all the necessary moves. So it is technically feasible, but doesn't have to go too far wrong to start throwing out the timetable. There are also certain points in the day when it isn't possible at all (basically when the Golden Arrow or Wealden rambler is occupying the path on the Bluebell).

Of course, it might be possible to rejig the Bluebell service a bit, though that isn't completely straightforward now that we are no longer our own self-contained line, but have certain expectations at least that we will connect at EG at our published times.

On a one train day, there is bags of time.

I'm sure the Bluebell managment have done their sums right! But on a 75 minute service (our normal two train day) it is tight. On an hourly service it isn't possible, but then neither is an hourly service any more, at least not with only two trains

Tom

 

Edit: Tom answered my question while I was posting.

 

(Deleted - duplicate post)

 

Thinking about this a bit more: We had an incoming charter midweek during the EG opening festival (the class 66 diesel charter), when as far as I can remember, we were running a normal service 2. So clearly it is possible, but I believe it is very tight.

Tom

 

Tom

It was a special timetable departures from SP of service trains 9:15, 11:00, 12:30, 1:40, 2:50, 3:45 and 5:00 and EG 10:15, 12:05, 1:26, 2:45, 4:00, 4:41 and 6:10.
Charter arrived between 1st and 2nd departures from EG, and departed from HK between the last 2 departures from SP.

It was reported on the Bluebell Yahoo group that one of service trains was terminated at Kingscote, since the charter was late leaving HK and any passengers for EG went by Taxi.

Paul

 

Ah, thanks. So it was a bit more relaxed, especially with an extra 30 minutes gap where the charter was scheduled to arrive - couldn't remember if it was a normal or a special timetable.

Tom

 

Two updates about a couple of Bluebell projects that are not quite so much in the limelight:

84030 - latest newsletter available via: http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/loco_news/oh_84030.html There is continued production of smaller components and the working relationship with the 82045 group is continuing, with more joint procurement of components.

P class 27: http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/loco_news/oh_27.html#latest

Meanwhile, work to lift Sir Archie's boiler continues - photos (from John Sandys) here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bluebellrailway/9568703911/in/set-72157635182767275

I believe the current plan is for the boiler lift to take place in September, using a hired-in crane, which will also be used to lift the frames of 27 from her wheels.

Tom

 

27 & 84030 links do not seem to work.

 

Can anyone explain why the bluebell's own 9f isn't being earmarked for an early return, i was under the impression that work needed was limited to boiler work possibly stay work ? she didnt run for very long when she returned to steam, so assuming that everything was done correctly should be an easy and in steam terms cheep job

 

The 9F is estimated to require about 12 - 18 months work ( But if repairs were required the current fleet are required it would take longer).
The long term plan calls for only 1 of the largest locos in service at one time - 9F, 34059 , or 21C123. If 34059 had not have firebox problems that would have been the loco, and will be once the repairs are carried out.

Which locos are overhauled as always depends on funding. Some owning groups and Bluebell groups/funds are better at generating funds than others.

 

Working ok for me, but the .co.uk website sometimes has little shows of petulance, so it may have been down earlier this arvo. Anyway, both links are fine now.

Tom