6201, her new lease of life.

And those people have the spare capacity for the job, and the steaming fees would cover the economic costs of the job? I've not noticed Mandy tradesmen, organ repairers for example, working on that kind of jam tomorrow model.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Every thread has to have a WC angle and somebody upthread kindly obliged as usual by suggesting capacity to take 6201 on now the MN is proven.
EDIT: it was @RalphW at post #358.

 

The loco wasn't steam tight on its trial runs, admittedly. However, if you think those leaks were big, your concept of big is in serious doubt. And what do you base the lacklustre performance claim on? Just because it din't go roaring by at 90 mph doesn't mean to say thee were problems with it.

 

It wasn't exactly overloaded but was wheezing up the bank sounding distinctly off-beat, leaking a lot of steam from the RH cylinder (markedly worse on the second run than the first a month before). When did the ticket start ticking? Still no public debut scheduled, or at least publicised...

 

So they're coming up a learning curve..... as long as nowt gets damaged and the end result is another team capable of attaining the highest standards (and although I wouldn't want to see the adage "you learn more from your mistakes" taken too far), in this instance, I'm rather sanguine.

 

Come on, this isn't some group of newcomers, this is WCRC who've been operating Tangmere and several other 3-cylinder types for yonks...

 

Fair point, though I'd be interested to learn the full assessment of any issues before drawing too many conclusions. There are simply too many variables (well, for a pleb like me, at any rate!) to second guess likely causes of shortcomings.

 

With railtour season coming to a close, there is no rush to bring her into operation, I am sure they will let her out again on a test run in the fullness of time.

A reliable, class8 loco is what is needed, and I am sure WCRC are working diligently towards that goal, if they are learning lessons along the way, great, rather that than a mainline failure, or poor performance.

Let her out on railtour duty when she is a close to perfect as they can get, and it will be to acclaim from everybody.

That's the way I would do it............

 

The most accurate point across many threads and an eloquent expression of why there is no point berating folk for expressing opinions on NP no matter how strong the divergence of views may be.

 

Fascinating though this stuff about 35018 may (or may not) be, there's already a thread dedicated to the loco. It really doesn't belong in the 6201 fund-raising thread. ;-)

 

I agree completely, back on subject please!!!!

 

This would be fine if it was a grown up opinion. Sadly it is too full of ill informed over-exaggeration to qualify as a grown up fact based opinion, and can only be presumed to be something of a grudging commentary with agenda. As Steve has said in a recent post, the apparent steam leaks would have little effect on the MEP in the relevant cylinder and hence its power output.

 

I was disagreeing with your contention that because a guy makes adverse judgement he must automatically also hold a grudge. This type of response seems uniquely to be generated when there is a WC connection, which is becoming increasingly bizarre.

 

There is nothing at all bizarre about it. Perhaps you might stop to consider that 'This type of response seems uniquely to be generated when there is a WC connection' may be because the majority of this ill informed commentary is directed at WCR, as in this instance. Moreover one has to ask what the hell has performance on 35018's trial run got to do with crowd funding for 6201? More focus on all counts please.

 

It really is utterly bizarre to me that the only conclusion you can reach for a negative remark is that the person expressing the opinion must have a grudge. I highly doubt this judgement is made in any other context on NP and there is no evidence that grudges are held against the firm or its employees as motive for less than positive remarks and I challenge anyone to offer definitive proof. Perception is not the same as fact even when commonly held.
From where I stand negative remarks about WC appear infrequent, invariably mild, never personalised or defamatory and never contravene forum rules as far as I know. They are merely expressions of opinion which certain folk seem to find more disagreeable than for any other topic of discussion. Admittedly the numbers on both sides are relatively small but it does seem to me that the defensive vituperation is wholly disproportionate to the points being made which are deemed negative. No criticism of WC, or other for that matter, actually has any impact, outcome or consequence and it seems absurd to deduce individuals are waging some sort of campaign with a basis in grievance. In any case the firm is well enough placed to respond/repudiate/debunk as it sees fit; that it rarely does tells me how significantly it regards the glass half empty ramblings of a few NP denziens.

 

I would imagine that the fact that they invariably come from the same sources over and over and over again, to such an extent that regular readers can sense them coming posts in advance may explain why to many its very clear that there is obvious under currents to certain posters posts, plus a lot of people have long memories and remember previous spats.....

 

Once again that is pure preception, which is of course your truth, supposition and conjecture. There is not a shred of evidence other than circumstantial, adopted to fit a particular narrative. If you would care to elaborate on what truth and facts these 'spats' revealed, I for one should be much obliged to hear them. If you are not prepared to state what you believe, kindly desist from the cowardly insinuations.

 

Whatever, final word on the point, this seems to be a recurring theme that you are experiencing over multiple threads and you are protesting loudly in each case..... ever wondered whether it might just be you?

Anyway this has sod all to do with 6201 as strangely WCR has managed to infiltrate another thread, I wonder how - Cheerio!

 

Are you suggesting that a member is being subjected to a concerted attempt to discredit them in a personalised way? Surely thats trolling? :-o
As it happens, the only thing I do wonder is what vested interests you and your ardent little bunch are trying to protect in taking such offence at anything vaguely negative about WC.
As to being off thread, the leader of the gang @RalphW brought WC into it which I thought a little odd from someone ostensibly keen to avoid WC as a discussion topic. Ooh, another conspiracy theory for you.

 

Please give it a rest, it's jolly boring.
I came on this thread hoping for some chink of light of good news about that magnificent Stanier beauty. If you want to talk about an unrelated matter please take it elsewhere.