West Somerset Railway General Discussion

As a Shareholder I would ask if using a track basher only results in any bashed track being a small extra over cost to repair over and above the routine repairs required from track friendly locos. If not the labour/materials cost of attending PW repairs will far outweigh any benefit of using a Valley tank and in the interests of helping the fare box to meet the overheads they should be banned apart from Gala days etc. Things like carriage sheds which reduce opex and capex repair costs as well as providing a better experience in terms of paintwork/appearance for customers should surely be higher up the priority list than being able to run 'any' locomotive.

 

No I don't think this is a "large" locomotive, merely a rather unsatisfactory type for passenger service over a line of twenty or so miles. Stroudley's system of counterbalancing reduces the amount of stress on the axleboxes and thus minimises wear. The arrangement requires very large balance weights and with any machine having small wheels and heavy motion parts it is difficult to achieve a satisfactory arrangement of these weights in the available space. Much shaking about of the passengers results.

So why does a Stroudley A1x with it's designers counterbalancing show no tendency to give passengers a good shaking, unlike the same designer's E1 or the G.W.R. 0-6-2T? Simple. It was designed as a lightweight with its own separate standards from the rest of Stroudley's designs of which every other passenger type had much larger wheels to arrange the balance weights in. The lighter motion requires less balancing.

I fear you may anticipate a fair number of complaints.

PH

 

How does the track repair bill as a result of running the 0-6-2 compare to 3850?

How do the running and overhaul costs of the two compare?

Even if 6695 is more costly than 3850 (which I doubt), it will surely be less than external short term hires.

No matter how shiny the coaches, I seem to recall much outpouring of grief from all sides when there were no choo-choos to pull them a few years back.

On the trips I've had on the WSR behind 5600 class tanks I have been impressed by their command of the job - and didn't spill my tea either, which trust me I would remember!

Victor and Vulcan had a reputation for shuttling in certain hands (that spilt the tea and the cider). I'm told the trick with them was to drive them on a long cutoff and light regulator.

As to the track upgrade, I suspect a lot of this will need doing anyway, and it looks better to fundraise for it under the auspices of an upgrade.

 

I have always had great respect for Mr. Stroudley. A product of the flowering of Scottish Victorian engineering disciplines (although he was born in Oxford) and thanks to the late H.J.Cambell Cornwall (I am pleased to own one of his personally owned books) we have a fine engineering biography to read.

If I may quote wrt to the 'Terriers' ( Mr Cambell Cornwall was referring to their original A1 form not the later A1X rebuilds but the praise still applies) " They were specifically designed for metropolitan traffic, but having gained a tremendous reputation in that field, moved on to become perhaps the most efficient locomotive for for light country branch-line work ever constructed"

When we had a 'Terrier' on the WSR running Gala Minehead to Blue Anchor three coach shuttles the A1X was extended. Not surprisingly at a later Gala a Beattie 0-4-2 tank managed such a working with consummate ease (as indeed its larger boiler etc would suggest) 'Horses for courses'. Mr Stroudley's "masterpieces " have scant relevance to the WSR. (On a personal note I have always regarded his C Class singles as his 'masterpiece' )

I would say to you and 'Burminster' that increasingly if we on the WSR are to maintain a steam hauled service we will have to take whatever motive power is available unless we are able to purchase further locos (Class 4 or above ). Hence I suggest a permanent way that will accept whatever is available. (as some consolation there is as an offset wrt to large locos, the marketing allure they may inspire.)

Conventional wisdom has always suggested 50% owned, 50% 'hired in' is ideal, but perhaps the economics are changing ? (But that assumes the capital is available and that is an appropriate use of said scarce capital, let alone that any suitable locos are available for purchase.)

I am not saying that carriage sheds etc are not desirable I am merely assuming that the availability of a steam fleet is a prime requirement. I believe this to be the case for a significant percentage 0f our passengers and for the overwhelming number of our volunteers.

Michael Rowe

 

I’m sure.

Historical parallels:

USA/UK 7.12.1941
WSR 8.2.2018

Robin

 

Any Stephenson valve gear loco will rock back forth if pulled up too tight when running too slow - it’s a consequence of the way the lead increases as the cut off shortens. At high speed that is desireable, as it provides cushioning of the piston at the end of its stroke. However, short cut off at low speed results in too much lead steam which goes beyond cushioning the piston and tries to force it backwards, which ends up giving the loco a good shaking. The answer is longer cut off and less regulator. It’s a quite different phenomenon than the shaking on a 56xx caused by the way the balancing is set out.

Tom

 

Breaking my silence....I look forward into seeing a quart being poured into a pint pot.

 

The unexpected I presume!

 

Not that parallel.

Robin

 

Did not the three 'Bagnalls' built for SCOW have Walschaerts valve gear ?

Michael Rowe

 

Ah yes, I was thinking of a different loco. (The point remains about Stephenson valve gear locos though!)

Tom

 

IMHO 100% ownership plus the odd carriage shed or two ought to be the aim. Quite a few railways have been going for nearly half a century now.

PH

 

Vulcan and Victor have Walschaerts!
Not all Stephenson link locos are arranged so that lead increases as cut off is shortened. You can arrange it so that maximum lead is in full gear. MW 1210 'Sir Berkeley' is one such loco. (Don't ask me to name any more, though!)

 

Is there any way of improving the balancing? Aren't there some 8fs that had improved balancing to allow improved running at speed?


Chris

 

As excellent as the journal is it has the disadvantage of being quarterly with a lead time of, I guess, one month, its contents will be up to four months out of date. At least if a PDF version was made available we wouldn't have to wait quite so long.

 

That would seem to be something of a hyperbolic comparison, unless you genuinely are expecting an armed invasion resulting in several thousand deaths.

 

Far too great hyperbole, of course. It was more Churchill's view of events that I had in mind.

Robin

 

You could try taking it down to Kwik Fit.

Seriously though.
Coach wheelsets used to be put on a wheel balancer with weights added at indicated points. ( I used to do this at BREL York)
Fairly sure that something similar would happen with loco wheelsets.

 

Those are the ones with a star on the cab side. The details of the work done to improve the balancing are in A J Powell's book Living With London Midland Locomotives.

 

Judging by the way the London government has annoyed so many countries and reduced our armed forces' capabilities to the extent that we can no longer defend ourselves then I will have to say yes.