Ebor Flyer - A1ST and Tornado: 14/04/18

However those slow lines don't sit there empty just waiting for something to sit down on the fasts do they!

The reason there are 4 tracks is because 2 can't cope - and expecting anything like a normal service to be able to be run with one of them out of commission is rather delusional.

Depending on where the incident occurred you may well have had a load of trains behind Tornado which would have all had to be reversed 'bang' road under caution due to the lack of reversible signalling until they could get to the nearest crossover - a process that is not quick.

 

Just wondering who yesterday's footplate crew were on Tornado ?

 

Have to agree, its best to let the A1 trust get on with what they have to do, As regards further 90 mph running, that's up to DBC , A1 trust, and network rail to decide, it has to be remembered that anything mechanical can let go,

 

It's the latest line in protective clothing don't you know.

 

Paul Major, Driver; Dave Proctor, Fireman; Don Clarke TI.

 

Well its worked fine for 10 years at 75mph. If the additional stress has unmasked a defective/fatigued part it shouldnt be an issue, but if its going to happen recurrently at higher load then back to 75mph is not such a loss, but probably best to be prudent here. Perhaps Gresley and his valve gear deserves more credit than some give it today for his ingenuity, but we all know the tales of Mallards Big End, there are limits of steel. Green Arrow only kept running as a York man kept a big end under his bed as they tried to keep a V2 going until the end of steam! So we know they failed a lot, what about A1s Walschaerts- has it been used to such a degree as on Tornado at sustained running or are there records of issues(lets face it, the network was a lot slower post WW2)...There is a lot of heat and stress in a middle cylinder, and A1s were a faithful steed, but not known for high speed running. On a service train over Ribblehead at lower speed Tornado was still fantastic, its not a great loss at 90mph other than all the hard work .

 

Sorry but they did not "fail a lot." As for the big end, that problem was largely eliminated post war with design changes and more accurate frame alignment. IMO what happened yesterday is much the same as what happens with modern traction. Diesels throwing a rod, electrics shedding a cardan shaft or bringing down the overhead. Failures happen and it's only because it was steam, and particularly Tornado, that such a fuss is being made

 

I think you're wrong. Agreed that s**t happens BUT what is remembered is how the recovery from disaster is handled. From what I read there is no panic from any of the parties involved, the A1ST has kept passengers fully informed, the train has been rescued and taken to Peterborough where passengers have options and the locomotive has been removed to a location where a full examination can take place. This immediate response will go well with the operating authorities and I venture to suggest that 60163 will rise again and continue with its tour programme. As Bob Meanley has said many times "following the rules, accepting and dealing with problems as they arise and always being professional in your actions will always lead to continued support from the railway industry"; the A1ST will no doubt be following this guidance.

 

I think whats obvious here is the shock and surprise element. Had Bittern chucked its motion all over the ECML in a fit of pique at being asked to do 90MPH with a full load again we would all have been upset of course, but secretly I don't suppose anyone would have been in the least bit surprised.

Tornado is different*, Ok its its steam, an old blueprint, but built with modern techniques, modern materials, a project designed for 100MPH steam up and down a modern main line. In so doing its had an aura built up round it, - this is the future for modern steam.

Its not the shock that a steam engine broke down, its the shock that Tornado - the steam dream - broke down. In a very public dramatic manner to boot. The future for steam failed.

But hey haven't steam engines always failed? In all seriousness would you design a power unit with tons of metal, some of it very long, flying round at near supersonic speeds when pushed? With a 21st century technology hat on -you wouldn't, you would look at it and say "at some point a part of that is going to break and when it does it will be with a bang" Always has in the past, and there is nothing to say it won't in the future, its an inherent risk of the technology. The Tornado dream had blinkered that.

So now we know, have realised, that Tornado is not invincible (and actually thats a major hurdle overcome) what about its future on the railway system? The railway system is a big complicated sprawling thing, some of it very old, some of it very modern, but all of it loaded with stuff that can go wrong. If it can go wrong it will and it does on a daily basis, sometimes it's a major issue, sometimes not, but there is always one. At the outset resilience wasn't a design feature of the system, and in truth its something we are still bad at today, because resilience costs, it costs even more to retrofit.

So what do you do? the system copes, it does what it can, and yesterday it did it pretty well. As it happens the incident occurred at a place where there was a degree of inherent resiliency in the form of additional lines, a rescue tug arrived promptly, the system was flexible enough to wrong way work it to get attached, and the whole thing was resolved pretty quickly. In all seriousness, I and I bet most of you, have been involved in worse and bigger snafus on the M25.

In the annuls of the working railway system, its yesterdays chip wrappers, noise, replaced by whatever todays major problem is and the knowledge there will be another tomorrow. In the minds of strange steam people its the end of a dream. In the real world, no-one will try it again this year, but they will next year, and it will be on a place that actually has the most natural resiliency, The busy ECML.

And so the lesson from todays Sunday sermon is this. *Tornado is a fantastic piece of engineering, but at the end of the day its just another steam engine with all the foibles they contain, it briefly broke the railway, ok fine the railway is going to break again, probably on Monday in the rush hour. Now that is a pile of real angst.

 

The use of Flying Scotsman to launch the Tweedbank line achieved a great deal of positive publicity for The Railway.

There are many other occasions where a steam loco has done good for the Railway!

 

I'm no expert but it strikes me that a spot of expectations management might be in order. Clearly there were expectations that the train would hit 90, maybe several times, maybe for a fair proportion of the journey. Whereas maybe what is required to run to that excellent path is the freedom to run at 80 much of the way and go a bit higher than that down the hills and if necessary for out of course delays. I wonder if Tornado had cruised at 80 all day yesterday doing just what was needed to hit the schedule whether that would have been seen as somehow a bit disappointing. But isn't that really what NR need to have the confidence to program a 75mph path?

 

A1s not known for high speed running! I suggest you read P Semmens book, Bill Hoole Engineman Extraordinary. I'm afraid it's this sort of armchair analysis that adds nothing. Just wait for the official report

 

I never suggested that there would be no delays but someone had overdramatised the consequences of this failure on other traffic and the fact that the following Edinburgh train was only delayed by 30 minutes suggests that it wasn't anywhere near as bad as he was suggesting.

 

The full reports of why Gresleys big ends failed are available, and oft quoted books by trainspotters are incorrect. Its all in the nrm archives what was modified, as suggested by the LMS(!). and without change the V2s wouldnt have been the 'engines that won the war,' indeed by 1941 they were failing all the time, though of course they weren't designed for 20 coach specials . And anyone who likes Bulleids PAcifics will know all about middle cylinders. Somehow, the A4s were the best the country ever made, somehow Gresley's valve gear trumped supposedly better designs. I'd favour an A4 on the road over an A1, or a Castle a Duchess or a Merchant Navy, but surely this is personal and they are all amazing machines! Perhaps it was the streamlining!

 

That's what puzzles me! The original A1s were built in the immediate post-war era, quite possibly out of crap steel, and with only the precision of engineering tolerances available at the time (and I'd imagine that of 40s/50s steam locomotives was not quite on the same level as that of the 1st-generation jet fighters being produced at the same time) - yet they gained a reputation for reliability, and could be called upon to pick up their skirts and run like the wind... so, having scrapped the lot of 'em, we build a new one, to standards of precision engineering and fine tolerances that I dare say the original builders could hardly have dreamed of, with all the benefits of modern metallurgy etc... and this happens?! MrKnowwun is right about the feeling of shock and surprise.

 

It`s interesting how many posts that occur at a railway forum and particular at facebook when something wrong happens to a steam locomotive in contrast to if something great and pleasant. By the latter it often turn out be thumbs up and some pictures maybe. But if something wrong happens it`s "miles" with speculations,pictures,videos, and quarrel before any conclusion. 90mph was achieved, and no one gets hurt when the failure occurred . Isn't that the most important then?
I have looked through many posts including facebook and can`t find many who praise the Tornado team to handle this situation professional. That`s very sad and regrettable I think.

Knut

 

All that needs to be said is here I think. Let's just wait and see

https://www.a1steam.com/2018/04/14/the-ebor-flyer-update/

 

They weren't running on preserved lines and being lifted onto road transporters because they were needed elsewhere.
I think you either run on the main line and stay on the railway or run as a preserved railway engine at 25-30mph.
Then it does not matter if you move location by road.

 

The event was hyped, sold, its failure is drama, its news, its natural to jump up and down, we are humans. I have to say you are however wrong abut the comments on here, it is notable how many comments there are praising how this situation was handled, not just the Tornado team, both back room and on the ground, but everyone in the rail industry at that moment got stuck in to resolve it quickly and safely.