Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Nice day yesterday, many thanks to @Jamessquared for the info. We got lucky with the weather as was largely dry whilst filming in the morning then the weather turned for the afternoon but we were safely on board the 1:30 for a nice round trip by then! Photos and a video...



https://www.flickr.com/photos/alts1985/albums/72157693442760771

 

@alts1985 Great vid Ashley. There was a point with the vintage set where LSWR 1520 passed the signal post (and could almost have been two 4-wheelers from the solebar up) where I was reminded of any number of old photos of the Isle of Wight Central, which was known for extremely non-standard trains of 4w stock. It's a massive credit to the Bluebell's C&W team that a sight from a century ago and more can be so beautifully evoked.

PW can be proud that their handiwork north of the tunnel even looks superb in a telephoto shot and it only looked to be raining outside the tunnel for once!

Looking at the goods set (a heritage feature I particularly appreciate wherever it's to be found) it raises a question in my mind: Did any of the regional breweries have their own P.O wagons?

Of longer lasting Kent & Sussex brewers, I can think of at least Beasley's, Shepherd Neame, Fremlin's, King & Barnes, Harveys and Tamplins .... surely one of 'em had wagons in their own house livery? Big boys Charrington, Courage, Truman and Watneys who played in the same sandpit definitely did. To my mind, the smell of a stack of wooden beer casks is as evocative of a bygone era as that of a steam loco (so's the smell of chickens and pigeon crates, I s'pose ... but let's not go there!).

 

At 4:10 that video suggests a rail joint in need of attention. Someone from the PW department have a look?

 

I don't know about the others, but I know Harveys never had a private siding. I suppose the local breweries trade was so scattered, but in one small area, that sending consignments by rail rather than direct to pubs on drays just wouldnt be cost effective.
And you're so right about smells- the gateway to memory. Wooden beer casks...mmm! Add in spilt milk (from churns), Jeyes fluid and horse droppings- all part of the long gone station atmosphere. At least we still have coal smoke, hot oil and that slightly milky smell of steam to conjure the past with.

 

That set (Victorian 4 wheelers and LSWR brake) is certainly continuing in service throughout the Easter holidays, i.e. the next week and a half. The vintage sets tend to get rotated according to maintenance, so I am sure will be in traffic again at various points through the year.

Tom

 

Oh the luxury of being able to rotate the sets according to maintenance, that is almost decadent I might be a tad jealous.

 

And that is even with the Mets out of service for repairs!

Steve B

 

Thanks for the kind comment! That vintage set is certainly immaculate!

 

The first bogie vehicle is 494 - LSWR Corridor Third (a former camping coach) and the two at the far end are a box van and the LSWR Road Van.

David R

 

3687 is definately on the radar, but is awaiting a slot in the main works so that the final structural repairs and the roof can be completed. A small amount of work on the doors and interior is ongoing in B road in the old shed, but this area is not suitable for any major work.

The expectation is that the team that worked on 3188 will finish off 3687 once it is in the main works. As always there are many competing (and equally deserving) causes for the limited resources (this is a case of space and manpower rather than fundraising) available - I for one am glad to see that the Mets are now receiving attention and would place them as higher priority for space than 3687, but everyone will have their own ideas.

David R

 

Of more interest to me was when coupling 65 up to the goods (at about 5.50). The guard/shunter left the screw coupling slack. I've always been taught to never leave a screw coupling slack. It was in the BR General appendix that the coupling should be taut. However, that doesn't mean it is in the Bluebell rules and regulations, though.

 

If the train consists of loose-coupled wagons, does it make much difference whether the coupling between the loco and first wagon is tight or not?

 

The problem with a slack scerew coupling is that if stiff may not drop down as the train buffers up. In the worse case scenario because it remains straight it might rise off the draw hook and lead to a division. If it was a choice of loco screw or wagon 3 link/instanter I would use the latter

 

Two reasons. 1) the snatch on a loose screw coupling can strip the threads and 2) loose screw couplings can come uncoupled. This has happened to me personally and I have witnessed it happen to someone else. If the coupling is stiff in the joints for any reason (lack of lubrication, damage, etc) it may not sag and can act as a strut, coming off the adjacent coupling, one reason why RCH type couplings have an over-rider lug on them but there are a lot of couplings out there with no over-rider lug.

Although it is the norm to use the loco coupling the BR General appendix states that, "When coupling a locomotive to an unfitted vehicle, the vehicle coupling must be used." This is for the reasons outlined above. Unfitted vehicles always have link couplings. (Or did have in the days when they were dragged around the railways of this land.)
Back to the Bluebell video, the wagon being coupled to had vac pipes so I am left wondering why they weren't coupled up. Perhaps it was through pipe only and no fitted head? There appears to be no colour identification to say which.

 

Looking at the video again the screw coupling on the waggon is demonstraiting what a stif couplimg looks like

 

Sounds like your describing a sex act.

 

You know those powders they gave you in the army - well they should be working now.

 

I agree about the screw coupling, they are not designed to cope with snatch loadings whereas three link couplings and instanters are.

 

Thanks for the several explanations. However, even if the coupling between the loco and the first wagon is screwed tight, could it not still experience a snatch when the next coupling along goes tight? Is it not also important for the driver of a loose-coupled train to start off gently?

 

When the screw coupling is tightened the loadings are also shared with the buffing gear. I have spent many an hour shunting loose coupled wagons, the difference between the Loco screw being tight or slack is amazing. When tight very little of the snatch and shock of the 3 links is transmitted directly back to the shunting engine, it does make quite a difference.

The skill of the driver does make a great difference.