MHR Restorations and Overhauls

Not exactly so. The three SE&CR bogies had underframes badly affected by salt water corrosion but the solebars were made from an obsolete bulb shaped section. A Chartered Engineer with good contacts made enquiries literally worldwide to get new steel of this section rolled. Eventually, he was able to get it it extruded in shortish lengths by a German concern, such lengths to be welded together. Read Nick Felton's fascinating article in Island Rail News (I.O.W.S.R's house magazine) to see just what was involved. It also helps to explain why I get so irritated by W.I.B.N. sentiments both in N.P. and elsewhere!

I would have thought that it is highly desirable for any "new build" underframe to be comstructed as far in accordance with contemporary specifications as possible which, therefore, would not include bulb section steel.

PH

 

i suspect it depends on how authentic you want to be, but the idea of a batch based on BR horsebox underframes using MK1 componants makes most sence as there should be good stocks of spares apart from the wheels, which i imagine wont be the right size

 

Ask Ian Johnson in the carriage department, he is well informed and there on Tuesdays and Thursdays. He is the man who was the major player in the restoration of Bullied Brake S4211

Regards
Chris.

 

This certainly sounds like a lot of hard work, and inspires admiration. But what got it going in the first place? Wasn't it someone asking 'Wouldn't it be nice if..'?

 

As far as I am aware the impetus was pure hard need for the seating capacity of these vehicles.

PH

 

... and I was just pointing out that "wagon" parts would not be as suitable as those from NPCS for the reasons I gave.
Quite a few 6 wheel carriage bodies have been put on reclaimed underframes from BGZ's and at least one ex LNWR CCT.
Ray.

 

It might be useful to point out at this point that the LNERCA has had bulb angle fabricated using a readily available bulb flat to renew both solebars on the Gresley underframe that was modified for eventual use under ECJS 189, so there is more than one way around the problem of obsolete bulb angle sections used in pre mk1 underframes.

Sawdust.

 

how did you fabricate it? weld or rivet the flat sides together ?

 

This is doubtful territory for me as I have absolutely no expertise. All I can say is that, based on Nick Felton's article already referred to, various bulb angle sections currently available were examined but not found sufficiently similar to the section used by the S.E.& C.R. around 1911.

PH

 

Paul, various bulb flats are still made, they are used in ship and bridge building. The bulb angle was fabricated by welding a second flat bar to the top of the bulb flat. This was done with a cnc welder by a fabrication company with offshore oil and gas experience and the process independently audited by our project certification body.

This will probably be the only underframe ever to have TATA rolled into the solebars, thus recording another chapter in the history of British steel making.

Sawdust .

 

I believe this was an option considered.

PH.

 

I think this is the TATA steel in question.
At Newbridge 18-12-15



They even managed to get the lettering the right way up for a change.

 

I've only just picked up on this conversation. All three of our SECR vehicles had corroded underframes to an extent that required that they be withdrawn from traffic. The corrosion was not just in the solebars but also in the headstocks and other components. We think that this corrosion started due use for 17 years on Ryde Pier and simply continued quietly in subsequent use. Similar vintage SECR underframes on mainland based vehicles are not, as far as I am aware, corroded to the same extent. We concluded that we needed to replace the solebars and that doing so to the original design would be both the correct engineering solution, as it eliminated any need for redesign, and the correct historical solution, as it enables the vehicles to continue to be to true to their SECR origins.

I did look at welding strip to bulb flat to make bulb angle, as has been done by the LNERCA but concluded that the proportions of the bulb were not correct for our application. We therefore went down the path of obtaining the correct section steel. As it was not possible to get this rolled we used the hot extrusion route and have had enough steel made for all three of our SECR vehicles.

In engineering it is not unusual for mote than one solution to be found to a problem and I congratulate the LNERCA on finding their way through this difficult conundrum.

Two of our underframes are away for rebuilding at the moment and we hope to get the first of these back under its body and into traffic next year.

Coming back to the real question here - no I would not advocate the use of bulb angle, or any other special shape, for underframes for vehicles like 7719. Adapting existing passenger rated 4 wheel underframes is going to be the most cost effective and a necessary compromise given that the body comes without an underframe of any kind. Building new underframes to the original drawings would be historically better but but may be uneconomic.

Nick Felton

 

How many spare passenger rated 4 wheel underframes are there likily to be availible ? most railways may be reluctant to loose some pmv, ccts etc, if things like castings can be ordered in bulk and enough steel ordered if railways can combine orders for kits of parts won't that bring the cost down to an even better price?

 

The IOWSR is however contemplating building new wooden underframes for our 1860s Oldbury coaches, it is likely that they would be constructed as a batch of around seven or eight to reduce costs.

 

Pacers?

 

With the Urie group statng their intention to restore 499 to LSWR condition, it is good that the beginnings of a pre-grouping train - albeit not necessarily LSWR - are coming together. Mind you, an S15 with a mere 4 or 5 four-wheelers in tow is hardly going to need to work hard!

 

Rather see something like an elderly 2-4-0 tender engine at the head

 

I am afraid you are sickening for W.I.B.N. again.

PH

 

I agree with you here, Paul. The best chance of something with less "oomph" than an S15 to be paired with these old coaches would be if the Avon Valley line were to release the ex-Maldon LSWR boiler for a new-build project. Like any new build, it wouldn't be cheap but with an extant boiler, not totally pie in the sky. I believe that it would be suitable for either a T1 0-4-4T or a "Jubilee" 0-4-2. Others who are more knowledgeable may correct me here and of course, whoever on the Avon Valley owns the said boiler may have other ideas, but it does come into the realms of the possible rather than W.I.B.N, given what the Bluebell has achieved with another Maldon boiler.