6100 Royal Scot

Are there no such things as a fixed price quote? If extra work is needed then it is the company providing the quote that should bear the extra cost. They should have done a more thorough examination before giving a price.

 

Ok the jinty may be a bad idea, but what i mean is a loco that is a long way way down the queue. And its only a few railways that are in this situation of having loads of locos but the point a while back was made about why build new vs restore old and my point on that is that some of the newer lines such as Epping Ongar and Ecclesbourne that would like to have steam thats appropriate to the line if some of the other lines have all the engines so they have to either buy the locos that are up for sale at that time (gwr Hall at the epping ongar) or build new. And when people say that there is a loco shortage again say the xx line has 10 locos on site but needs 3 in service 3 in overhaul and then 4 sitting in the queue, then you go to mid norfolk and they have 0 steam locos based there, but im sure they would have volunteers would would help restore a loco.

Is it volunteers that have been working on the Ivatt at the ESR to give them a working loco?

 

Also by going to a railway where they dont have as many locos but really want one to call their own for xx yr period volunteers would do the work, costs of labour that places like SVR charge would be eliminated or reduced bringing the costs down to more like material only. That saves masses and masses off the price of an overhaul.

 

Yep, thats fine if you're simply contracting out an overhaul, or even part of an overhaul to an engineering company, but here we're talking about what would essentially be a running agreement which includes undertaking an overhaul in exchange for use of said loco for an agreed period of time.

 

The impact of that kind of saving would depend on the running agreement which the loco owner has with its resident railway. For example the current SVR loco agreements (currently under review) in simplest terms have meant that the loco's initial restoration to running order is at the expense of the loco owners, and that the company then funds the subsequent overhaul in respect of use of the loco throughout its ticket. In practice this has been shown to not quite work - as shown by the loco shortages of the last few years (it was fine the first time around but second and third overhauls require turnover which just isnt there in the business to keep everyone happy) - resulting in the discussions currently taking place.

However, what it does mean is that free labour is available to those loco groups already resident on the railway, once overhaul of their loco has begun, so it isn't such a golden carrot specifically for SVR based groups. I suppose it comes down to whether it is time or cost which is most pressing on the owner in question.

 

Isn't this the type of agreement currently in place with 46447 and 41313 at the East Somerset Railway, that are now owned by the IOWSR ?

 

46447 is an restore and operate for 10yr agreement, 41313 is a contract restoration for IOWSR use.

 

Is that correct, there are parties out there undertaking fixed price overhauls? Perhaps that's a misleading concept as a fixed price contract could still be subject to a number of assumptions, which if not correct mean that the extra work is priced on top e.g. you find more work is needed on the boiler once the firebox is out, or that the cylinders / frames are cracked.

 

The "projects" being banded around on here would be about as much use as a chocolate fireguard for regular economical heritage line use so they are certainly not the answer - except for "both feed firmly on the ground" schemes like 82045. The idea that a plethora of new locos will somehow operate regularly on NR shows detachment from the reality of actually doing that.

The locos already around but currently out of service are not, in general, basket cases. They are mostly quite capable of successive further repairs where the sums involved are modest compared with new construction.

 

Sorry but its just not that easy until the loco is completely dismantled, appropriate NDT testing carried out & the boiler gutted for inspection. Only then can anything like a final price be calculated & quoted for but unforeseen issues can still occur .

Owners want cost certainty; contractors (rightly) need to make a modest profit on the work to stay in business.

 

SVR loco overhauls generally benefit considerably from substantial volunteer input. Few railways are without the volunteer "subsidy" of overhaul work except perhaps Paignton, Snowdon & maybe a couple of others. Suitable facilities are also very important together with folk with sufficient experience actually on steam locomotives. There have been many "wrong turnings" which have been taken by willing, well meaning, seemingly qualified but insufficiently knowledgeable restoration teams.

 

It's near impossible to form a good view of how much work an overhaul is likely to involve until you have gone a substantial way to dismantling the loco. How would you know whether the regulator valve surfaces needs refacing, or the condition of the main steam pipe, or whether inside cylinders have a crack, or whether the glands have worn oval, or whether the frames are wasted behind the cylinders, or any of a myriad other issues, without dismantling the loco to a substantial degree? And who would pay for that disassembly - the contractor bidding for the work, or the owner wishing work to take place?

Tom

 

I'm getting the impression that many of us think Royal Scot shall be at svr for a longer period of time. Prolonged visit. I don't get that impression

 

Not that simple. If you take out the locos in service, those being worked on and those that have a stated position in the overhaul queue, there are relatively few locos that genuinely have no stated restoration future, and some of those that do not are in quite poor condition and certainly wouldn't be easy projects for some other group to take on. Taking the long view, it is surprising how quickly locos come into service, go through and out again. For example, there are five Maunsell engines on the Bluebell: a visitor who came once per year starting this year would likely see all five of them running at some point between 2015 and about ten years hence. Also on the fundraising point - I can't speak for the SVR, but on the Bluebell where the majority of locos are owned by the railway, there is a natural enough inclination to control fund raising to specific targets at any one time, rather than have a mass of individual appeals each of which progresses slowly. So no visible fundraising appeal does not mean a loco is forgotten.

Besides, working out how you truly price a "repair + run" agreement is very difficult, given that certain components have a lifespan - and therefore economic value - longer than ten years. For example, as a rule of thumb I reckon that about every third "ten yearly" overhaul of a typical heritage-line loco tends to require substantial boiler work (and possibly other major items like frames, tyres, cylinders have similar 3 - 4 overhaul life cycles), but then you maybe get a couple of fairly cheap overhauls. So it's easy to imagine someone taking on a loco with perhaps ten years' life left in the firebox or tyres, getting a relatively cheap overhaul but then handing back a loco that on the surface looks no worse, but in actual fact has had considerably value extracted out of it.

I'm not saying such things are impossible, as the close co-operation between the IoWSR and ESR has shown, or indeed the "restore + run" agreement between the Bluebell and MHR with a Bulleid carriage, but it is unrealistic to expect railways that own locomotives to subsidise running on other railways by allowing restoration of a loco that they may well be taking the long view of with regard their own needs. Private locomotive owners or owning groups may of course make a different calculation.

Tom

 

I thought this thread was about Royal Scot?....................

 

Thread drift on NatPres? Whatever next?

 

Dunno, the crystal ball's in for a service..........................

Any how's has the damn thing landed at the SVR yet?....... I'm guessing not as there's been no trumpeting of face ache links!

 

The scot is due next week. Thats the info being banded around. And to answer a question a few posts ago. 47383 is in the que. The owner is keen to get it running before he finishes on the footplate. It is hopefully coming out along with 45110 either this autumn or next.
The scot will be at the SVR a week/2 weeks after the gala. After which I am led to believe she will leave by rail, probably back to Crewe for a loaded mainline test run.

 

45110 heading for overhaul? Brilliant.