Tyseley Single Wheeler.

So why did you post it on the Bloomer thread? I look forward to reading of the far reaching consequences which concern you so much - but in a more appropriate thread please. Ray.

 

Well, whatever prompted the question in this thread's title, I do not know. But the answer is clearly a categorical "no".

I shall refrain from adding my future dismal expectations to that.

My apologies to those who are bored with this subject, and have felt the need to reply with deft shafts of wit about "boiler-aching" and "brick walls", but then many of the subjects on here would bore me. However, I have no compulsion to say so on those threads: it would be a pointless and fatuous waste of time.

I've learned a lot from these two Bloomer threads, probably mostly because I neglected to sign my name. (Hadn't then seen Rule L, and most folk seemed to be using engine numbers.) Certainly I've learned much more than I'd have got from any phone-call.

For which, many thanks.

Harry Jack

 

So - in this year, has anything happened about the McConnell engine at Tyseley ? I'm looking forward soon to a visit there.

Karl B.

 

Another year has gone by with (apparently) no progress at all.

What a waste of time and effort and money that was.

 

Plenty of Barry wrecks have waited longer, and had no progress last year (in fact probably in reverse as weather takes it's toll).
Its safe in a heated workshop waiting for the day.

 

Surprised there's anything left of that axe, how long it's been grinding...

 

Just looking at the page on the Tyseley website for a reminder of how handsome the Bloomer will look when done. Completely understand the argument for priorities (particularly given the work done on the mainline by Tyseley locomotive works) but what a machine 670 will be when complete.

It's one of those projects, were I selling enough books to pack in the day job, I'd dearly love to support further than the occasional donation thrown in a bucket sort of thing. I know our artist would love to illustrate something LNWR for a children's book one day.

I see it says on the web page "simmering in the background" - can we still send donations in specifically for the Bloomer?

 

"I know our artist would love to illustrate something LNWR for a children's book one day."

Sounds good! Just so long as your artist doesn't paint a Bloomer in bright red (that's just mythology) or put a daft number on the chimney front, such as 607 (as in a very inaccurate painting by Hamilton Ellis) or 670 as at Tyseley (maybe some day).

 

Any monies that were raised / donated so far have been spent on sourcing materials and parts for 670.

If anyone has another 100k, we can get it finished and running......

 

LMAO

The Melter

 

Harry, the funny thing is that you never said anything about 670 being a daft number when you did the drawings for the number plates and the chimney numbers. Very strange....
Bob

 

Out of interest, what needs to be done specifically for it to steam? From the layman's view it looks very complete. I ask not to stir trouble but out of genuine interest and curiosity.

 

SACM thanks for asking. It needs in no order of merit the following parts:-
Expansion links
Reversing rod and assembly of reversing shaft and levers
Final fitting of driving axleboxes and wheelset
Assembly of connecting rods and valve motion
Main steam pipes and blastpipe assembly
Regulator rod
Patterns and castings for feed check valves, one injector and feed pipework
Boiler casing and insulation including the large brass casings at each end of the firebox
Brass safety valve casing (2 off)
Chimney
Various details around the smokebox such as door hinges and handles, lubricator cups and handrails
Cylinder drain cocks and linkage
Brass beadings for the driving splashers
Sand pipes
Brake gear
Buffer beam, buffers and draw gear

Plus the inevitable list of minor bits, nuts and bolts, paint etc We do have a lot of bits and pieces in store as well as daft numbers and plates designed by one H Jack esq.

Regards
Bob

 

Not being that familiar with the the LNWR: Were the original locos coal or coke fired? Did they have injectors (I see one is on the "to do" list) or mechanical feed pumps? And for the replica, is the intention to follow the prototype as exactly as possible, or are those the sort of areas that would be open to variation in the name of practicality?

Regardless of operating practicalities, it always seems to me that the period from roughly 1845 - 1870 is very much a dark age in railway preservation: earlier than that there are a number of significant survivors (Rocket, Locomotion etc) and plentiful replicas (Planet, Firefly, Steam Elephant etc). After about 1870, there are quite large numbers of original survivors. But that period was an era of great technological change, but equally with very little in the way of survivors.

Just curious!

Tom

 

Thank you Mr Meanley for your prompt and comprehensive reply. How much would a chimney cost, just out of interest? As Tom says above, the locomotive falls into an interesting period of locomotive development and would be quite a significant part of the overall story, once steaming. Perhaps if more aesthetically (if not necessarily mechanically) complete, it could encourage further funding to follow to complete the job?

Of course, please accept that as a suggestion in the spirit intended, and in no way intended to ruffle feathers or otherwise. Tyseley's reputation is well known and well deserved, particularly for the quality and quantity of the work undertaken. I am a fervent admirer of Rood Ashton Hall in particular (despite having a well known bias for all things late and never early!)

On a side note, I find it interesting that we have plenty of original and replica locomotives from the first fifty to a hundred years of railways, but rarely if any matching coaching stock or wagons. There must be merit in producing a replica train to go with replica engines, particularly if we're talking from 1829 up to about 1880 before the size of locomotives jumped enormously (the first time around anyway).

 

A couple of very early LNWR coaches do survive, and are not as yet preserved:

http://www.cs.vintagecarriagestrust.org/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=4685

http://www.cs.vintagecarriagestrust.org/se/CarriageInfo.asp?Ref=4686

 

I quite agree. Once the Bloomer is done, there's two other types from this period I'd particularly like to see replicated. One being the Jenny Lind 2-2-2 ("the first mass-produced locomotive type" - Wikipedia), and the other being the Ramsbottom DX goods, Britain's most numerous locomotive type. (It infuriates me that most people continue to credit the Black Fives with the latter accolade!).

And SAC Martin is right - we'll need coaches to go with them too...! I really hope the pair highlighted by Bramblewick find good homes.

 

Thanks for all the comments subsequent to my last message.

Re SACM' query on chimney we do have the basic components of it and indeed Chairman Whitehouse had made a similar point some while ago, as well as offering to fund it. We have the base and the barrel but regrettably have yet to get around to the expensive bit of the copper spinnings for the cap and the metal bashing to form the saddle. By the time you have invested in the metal bashing you are probably talking circa £2k, and the safety valve casings are probably similarly expensive due to the high man hour content in forming them.

The comments about contemporary locomotives are also very pertinent. the fact that we have few if any survivors from the 1850- 60 period was one of the factors that led us to opt for a Bloomer in the first place and there is little doubt that in their day they were probably the best express loco's on the standard gauge. There is a very similar 0-4-2 in the Power House museum in Sydney.Aus. which was heavily influenced by J E McConnel and which possesses many design features from the Bloomers. It is quite shameful really that if you want to see anything remotely associated with this period of British locomotive history you have to go to the excellent Utrecht museum to get a feeling for such loco's. It is simply amazing that what they have there managed to avoid Adolf's wrecking crews and wartime scrap drives. Anyone who wants more detail on the Bloomers should get hold of Harry Jack's RCTS book on Loco's of the Southern Division of the LNWR, which does contain just about everything that is known about them.

With regard to coaches there was a plan to construct some suitable coaches which also really got derailed by the reversal of Tyseley's fortunes in the late 80's. A certain Harry Jack came up with an arrangement drawing for a 4 compartment 4 wheel LNWR composite coach body of the correct size to fit on a BR 20 ton brake van chassis (once you had removed the concrete ballast weights!), and two or three would have made an attractive train. There are photo's of very similar ex LNW coaches still in service on the Isle of Wight around the turn of the century, and I have often wondered if any of them survived amongst the large number of vehicle bodies rumoured to have survived on the island.

Bob

 

There are still a good number of coach bodies remaining in use on the Island, the majority are fairly well documented but I am not aware of any of the LNWR coaches surviving. It is always possible that one may be hidden by building additions on to the existing structure.

Gary