MHR Restorations and Overhauls

I'm sure JB had told them what to look out for. Lol . Anyway any decent engineer would suss it out in seconds I would think.

Incidentally why was 73096 allowed to run with flawed motion for so long on the mainline and who was the whistleblower who spilled the beans about it, thus ending 73096's mainline career.

 

i would hope so as to who and how etc, most likily the ROSCO who passed 73096 as fit to run on NR,did not know, or concidered it ok to run, my bet is on the later, that they did a risk assesment and decided the motion was ok at the time as to the whistle blower , someone who was concerned with the MHR who had a grudge against JB is the likily answer, plus the MHR once it sold the green train, were not going to be involved with main line running, so it suited them to have someone spill the beans .

 

One last shot of 73096 in Ropley yard with Britannia in the background. I'd hoped to take some photos of 92212 on the RAT but it was delayed by late running trains on the Big Railway

 

I am not sure serious flaw, I am sure its just because they are welded not forged…. I am sure (correct me if I'm wrong) if the welding is a modern certified weld then it would be ok… the problem with 73096 is her welded rods do not possess the correct certification.

 

14th was mentioned at the AGM but that was only a "provisional date".

 

that does sound about correct , its very telling that she ran for 7 years ,then did a second stint on the mainline, with no problems concerning her motion, most of the problem is that the paperwork to proove the welding, and that the material for other motion parts could not be guarenteed to meet main line spec but were most likily made of material that was up to spec, or exceeded it. but the necessary paperwork trail was not in place.

 

What you mean is, there was no paperwork......................... full stop.........

Anyway, be interesting to see if she does a "Bodmin" & spends some time at Southall before progressing Oop North...... and you kind of get the feeling that this will be a VSTP move, considering there's been nowt on RTT.......

 

I think we were on time leaving Alresford though (we certainly were by Alton), we weren't too badly delayed by the problems at Wimbledon, I think the 19:10 got in at 19:39 or 19:40, so we were delayed by 10 minutes, without the Belle running, the stops at Medstead & Ropley were as short as possible.
Your shot of 73096 was far better than mine last night
https://www.flickr.com/photos/timw1/15326032130/
I didn't notice the missing motion whilst mooching around the yard before the RAT, must've had my eyes closed!

 

Tied into the rumour that 73096 is destined for a further stint on the mainline, could the existing motion be materially tested NDT, steel spec analysis ect, to prove its fit and up for the job or will new components be needed?

 

That would be interesting, what with next weekend being the Steam Railmotor weekend at Southall (assuming that the rumoured date of the 14th is correct).

 

I heard a few things about the rods but I won't repeat them on here!
Even if there hadn't been a problem with the rods she would still have been withdrawn from the ML as the MHR didn't want to be involved with ML tours anymore. ML steam railtour planning and operation was certainly becoming a headache back then and the MHR managed to run some of the best Railtours in the South despite the problems that they started to encounter. I used to talk to one of the people involved with the planning of the Railtours and I certainly didn't envy their job.

 

The loco was withdrawn from mainline service once the fact that the rods were welded was discovered. If I recall correctly there wasnt much of the 7 year ticket left. Selling the green train was immaterial. The MHR continued to operate locos on the mainline after the stock was sold, Bittern.

my understanding is that weld repaired motion is not permitted on the mainline and that this is an absolute prohibition.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. So new rods will definitely be needed to resume mainline activities.

 

Maybe an exchange could be brokered with the owners of a classmate not under consideration for mainline return?

 

It's not an unsolvable problem, just adds to the cost of the overhaul.

 

is there any sign of the soutthbound working yet from Carnforth to alton bringing the coaches that are due to be coming to the MHR, and have the 2 metcams been brought up from Alresford yet?

 

Maybe not but its happened before. 71000 ran for years with an injector from 70013 when the latter was incarcerated; 5690 borrowed a cylinder end cover from 5699 in the latters Tyseley days. More recently Bulleid tenders have been known to go on loan. Guess it depends how attractive the economics are to both parties.
By the way has 73156 had a new set of motion manufactured?

 

i should imagine that 73096 will need a complete new set of motion ,now depending on time scale, she might borrow motion from another std5 if it cant be made in time but who would loan their motion ,of course it depends on who owns the engine but given the whole saga of how 73096 got onto the main line in the first place i should imagine this time round the overhaul will be very closely monitored and everything done correctly