Replica builds for heritage lines.

And fairly simple as Gresley engines go. I've always quite fancied the idea of a new build V4 or two, but while a V4 would be ideal power for a line like the NYMR it would also be complex and thus costly.

 

You might say that, I couldn't possibly comment! But arguably, if a restoration was tantamount to a new build anyway, why not go the whole hog and build a D tank instead - scarcely different in price or complexity, probably more useful on the line, and unique.

I should add the above is purely a personal view and by no means represents an official viewpoint. But I can imagine in the next ten - twenty years, as a movement we might need to start considering those sorts of questions. Different railways may of course arrive at different answers.

Tom

 

Not if you are picking up the maintenance bills and other running costs. You want something that will deliver the mileages between renewals and repairs that the modified Rio Turbio 2-8-2 did.

 

The Ffestiniog has adopted two different approaches recently with two different 'historic' locos.
Welsh Pony (built 1867) - Full restoration of the original loco albeit requiring new frames, new boiler & new cylinders. The original frames, boiler & cylinders will be kept safe somewhere, not scrapped.
Earl of Merioneth (built 1979) - Will be withdrawn and kept safe somewhere, replaced by a new loco.

 

The L&Y ones were considered a success (the Hughes ones) and survived quite well. Certainly they were by far the most successful of the railmotors. Handsome too (like all Horwich products).
We do of course now have a steam railmotor, courtesy of the trailblazing GWS (who partially initiated all this newbuild mania). I think more would have limited use: if it is worth steaming anything it is probably worth running three or four carriages at least. And apart from enthusiasts people would rather see something which looks more like their idea of a steam loco.
A Kitson built steam railmotor very similar to the Horwich ones (albeit to 3'6" gauge) is preserved in Australia http://www.pichirichirailway.org.au...ys-smc-class-commonwealth-railways-njab1.html

 

Which has experienced what, exactly? Poor implementation gives rise to poor results. The development of the Bure Valley locomotives gives some indications as to what might be achieved. It is interesting that other countries can and have successfully trialled worthwhile developments and yet the UK experience is to say the best, woeful.

 

Unfortunately I think the Drummond 4-6-0s needed a bit more than just the draughting sorted out, with the possible exception of the vaguely serviceable T14s, which had the dubious distinction of not being rebuilt into superior 2-cylinder machines as soon as reasonably practical and surviving to nationalisation. But once you'd addressed the poor firebox proportions, tortuous steam circuit and questionable valve events, thus producing something that would steam reliably and run well without consuming the week's coal supply in a single day .... would it really be a Drummond 4-6-0?

If more Drummond is required then give me a 700 (very appropriate for the Mid Hants) or a D15 any day, but both in superheated form.

 

The word 'complex' seems to follow the V4s around, but compared to a K3, are they really that complex? Ok, there's a trailing truck, but that's not necessarily a bad thing on a sharply curved line with a 50% tender first running, might help preserve the flanges a bit on the trailing drivers and be kinder to the p-way.

 

A pair of A8 tanks for the Moors would be nice!

Sawdust.

 

And we come back to the "restore what we have first" point. Well last time I checked there are a lot of Locos owned by individuals and the answer is quite simply, go away it's mine. So pretty difficult to restore those. And there are the ones where there are groups trying to restore ones that have already run in preservation but I don't see then making much effort (some do, im not saying all) to get out and about to get the members or donors to actually pay for the rebuild. The New build groups do happen to put a lot of effort into publicity and signing up donors as they have seen from Tornado that this is the way to go, unless your a millionaire of course.

And as for 82045 being the answer for all lines, well it isn't. It's going to be a great loco no doubt and it fits well, but not every railway would want or need one. Given a choice between a loco of their own choice or a standard 3 I'm sure the railway would look at wanting a unique engine that makes people want to visit to see that specific loco.

 

Generally they are compared to the B1 which was produced instead of the V4. Compared to the B1 they are more complex.

 

But no more complex really than the Gresley V2 which is preserved. The V4 is effectively a smaller version of Green Arrow if you look at the overall setup: conjugated valve gear, 2-6-2 setup. The complexities in the prototypes came from the materials used. High grade steels, boilers with thermic siphons.

One wonders if a 2 cylinder version of the V4 might have been the way to go for Gresley given the reasonable degree of satisfaction with the prototypes found on the GE and Scottish regions when tested, put against the increasing pressures of the second world war. Gresley however did not seem able to overcome this flaw in his character and thus the V4 was in the medium sized locomotive bracket and more complicated than it needed to be by virtue of the three cylinder setup.

There's absolutely no doubt however that the B1 was very much the locomotive the LNER needed as opposed wanted.

Back on topic, I totally agree 100% with the comment made by Gav above about the unique aspect of new builds. Every heritage line having the same new builds might defeat the purpose of visiting that line.

Do you visit the NNR just for the view, or the chance to see the GER Y14 and LNER B12? Do you visit the Bluebell for a chance to see the 9F, or the 5MT, or do you go to see their collection of SECR locomotives plus Birch Grove in steam?

It's those sort of questions that get asked and rightly so. What is a railway's unique selling point? Are locomotives a big part of that? If we did all run the same steam locomotive types, it'd definitely be boring.

 

I'd take the 700, but unsuperheated. Firstly, because then it could never have a BR livery.

Secondly, and more important, such a loco would clearly only ever be used on preserved lines, and I think for most such lines, adding a superheater to a small loco adds expense and complexity to the boiler, both in construction and maintenance, without really adding a lot in efficiency given the stop-start nature of such running. (Worth remembering that on the similar M7s, Urie superheated one member of the class but it was unpopular with shed foremen and the running department as well as being heavier, and the remainder of the class stayed as successful saturated locos to the end of their days, doing work very similar in nature to what you find on today's preserved railways).

The C class on the Bluebell is similar size and unsuperheated, and does anything asked of it over some pretty steep gradients. I don't think anyone has ever said "what this loco needs is a superheater".

Tom

 

Joe Public, who form the vast majority of visitors to heritage railways go there to ride behind steam locomotive and I dont think they are too fussy

 

You say that, but the recent Tornado and Flying Scotsman effects say otherwise. Joe Public appears to be more discerning than we give them credit for - or the media teams in charge of those locomotives is more savvy. Tornado is a steam locomotive which captured the publics imagination through the modern day social media, whereas Scotsman is an historical thing that stays strong and from there with today's social media can be made even more powerful.

We should learn lessons from the successes of both of those steam locomotives - it's entirely relevant to making any new build work in the modern day. The Patriot group have done this with some aplomb too in my opinion.

We're talking about media profile. It can be made and it can be built up to appeal to the general public.

 

Modern steam new build dont have to be to rebuild an engine that was lost when they were all scrapped. Nor does it mean that we would be faced with several of a type running on many lines being a bad thing. The prospect of new build allows for us to have a few of a type that would be useful to augment the aging steam fleet. Hopefully the idea would be that a new build engine would be reliable and efficient, doing whats needed day in day out, when tourist season means you need a steam engine that gets on with the job.

My engine of choice would be a L4. What's one of them? Simple.. an updated Thompson L1.

The medium size tank engine would be perfect for many lines. Tank engines running backwards are easier for crews on lines that cant turn round either. However, the L1 was overpowered and overstressed. By tweaking the design to use a boiler as per the K1, with same set up for cylinders your getting a reliable and tested design in tank engine format. You could run it with B1 or K1 size wheels, but the latter would give better grip and for lines doing the speed of 25mph that would be fine. Even on lines like the NYMR to Battersby, the 50mph speed would be spot on.

The design would also need to feature some other newer ideas. Roller barings would be as standard, as would a Westinghouse Pump for more accurate air brakes. Id also stick in TPWS for the likes of NYMR and NNR if required. It doesnt need to go mainline, but the capability would be there if demanded. By picking a former Eastern region design, your again plugging a gap, a nod to history is always good for the crowd with the tinted glasses.

Being me, Id also swap the smokebox door design for one more Darlington NER style, meaning appearance wise if would stand perfectly against Q6, B1, A1, A2 if ever they were alongside. They also don't have to be in black. You can adapt a livery to suit.

I have thought that this would be a welcome change and have done it for a layout I run on the exhibition circuit. A picture of the type is shown below, with more info on the conversion on RM Web.

Hope you find it interesting.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/79026-the-black-hats-workbench-project-131/page-3

 

Was only talking about superheating on Sunday. For most heritage railway operation, superheating is an unnecessary luxury. With relatively short runs and long layovers, how many locos get in to full superheat anyway?

 

In your opinion. Others do not see it as a flaw.
A V4 would be nice and whilst complex, no more complex that other three cylinder locos running on heritage lines.
I'd like to see a Robinson A5 tank. That would suit a number of our heritage lines and would be both powerful and rugged IMO.