LSWR T3 563

Perhaps that's so (and I've no basis for more than speculation either way), but I don't think it neccessarily precludes @Hermod's constructive suggestion, which could surely be dovetailed into any wider funding and restoration strategy.

In 563's case, we'll just have to wait for the official assessment and if isn't immediately feasible until another bare minimum (for want of a better term) is achieved and the loco's running gear is brought sufficiently up to scratch to get it raising some of it's own restoration funding in a few years, it doesn't render the concept any less valid.

I still reckon the notion's worthy of further investigation, as it could well represent a fair chunk of regular and interest free income - from a new market - for projects, besides providing more than a few ancilliary opportunities for the railway - keep in mind "Job No.1" in that area is always to get 'em to come in the first place!

Imagine major components being manufactured several years earlier than might otherwise be the case ... without dipping into reserves, which I'd imagine would be better used anywhere as a longstop to ensure the frontline locos and stock (and therefore the timetable) keeps on rolling.

If it's got legs, more than one lovely old loco in need of a heart transplant, on any of our lines, could benefit. If it can be made to work, bearing in mind the way peer-to-peer connections form on Facebook and the like, with captioned photos of happy punters appearing independently across social media, that could be a step-change in publicising a line to the wider world. The question of where tomorrow's volunteers are going to be found is a perennial comcern ..... well, there'd be a few through this route, whether signed up on the day, or down the line, or when a person who visited as a sprog excited by an unforgettable day out grows up ..... and if they want to come back for a real driving experience at a few hundred quid a pop, well ... does anyone have a problem with that?

If playing driver with the family proves very popular, why not keep a slot or two open for auction at advertised times on predetermined days (there's always someone with more money than sense out there ..... imagine two or three of 'em jacking up bids to embarrassingly high levels!), perhaps as an additional feature of galas etc. That ought to bring local news wallahs out when they want to run a summer "good news story" ..... more free publicity! I wonder if you'd get away with marketing it as "educational"? .... for gift aid purposes!

...... that, or continue with business as usual, not looking beyond the already proven fundraising and advertising models, which would continue to be indispensable anyway and (though no-one's likely to admit it) waiting expectantly for extremely rich and particularly well-disposed legators to fall off their perches!

 

Surely as it ran in the late 50's it should be OK?

 

To be honest, we are trying to establish the reason why!

Our thoughts are that obviously the Boiler was put through a different shop and the bottom was just put through under different interpretations of what the minimum requirement was.

The strip down isn’t complete but so far the bottom end looks in very good condition but the investigation has also not yet concluded.

 

To put some numbers on the firefree stopgap steam battery.
A cylindrical steam container within the present T3 boiler outline can contain 7 m3.
Henschel sold this size of fireless locomotives before WW2 and quoted 317 tons moved 14 km before needing 20 minutes refill going from 2 to 19 bar.
If using 100 bar same volume container mass goes up but still within T3 total mass and distance trebless.
No fire risk and less insurance.Whats not to like?

 

all of it

 

I can’t think of anything I would like less than the T3 not having a fire in its belly and becoming something historically inaccurate, frankly.

It was never a fireless - what advantage does that actually get us? You still need a source of steam!

See what the report says - work on facts, not fiction - and hopefully, bring her back to steam.

 

Strange.
I like looking at full rigged sailing ships and it will not make me more happy if they carry cargoes of opium.slaves and arms.
I like the smell of coal from steam locomotives,but I do know what coal smoke contains.It is not healthy.
Flying historic aircrafts are not armed either and those needing lead in petrol will not fly much longer.

 

What an utterly ridiculous thing to say.

It is clearly not the same thing at all.

Such a comparison is utterly crass and rather inflammatory.

Given my family’s Caribbean (and slave) roots, I will choose on this occasion to not take that as a slight generally but will warn you on your use of that comparison.

 

the comparison only works if the sails are furled and there's an electric motor powering the ship. 563 might as well be stuffed and mounted as having a steam generator or reservoir fitted to replace the boiler. Hardly in the spirit of it's gift by the NRM to alter it just as a way to ride behind it,

 

I could not agree more. Well said.

 

It only needs a new firebox potentially, its hardly beyond engineering possibility.

 

I would hate to see it turn into a theme park ride for the sake of £100000 on the boiler. And by the time the equipment is fitted, I suspect you would save very little.

 

Why not just light oily rags in the smokebox and push it with another loco?

 

I'd agree it's not the same as having the fully restored loco in service Simon, but that's rather the point ... and if we kidnap the genie from the other thread, there's no issue to be addressed. Maybe, if we're fortunate, the report will show 563's boiler has life left in it and there's no issue to be addressed.

It's entirely possible I've misconstrued @Hermod's intent myself, but with that caveat, the sole aim of what I've been banging on about is to accomplish precisely the full restoration we all want to see, fully funded and in the shortest possible time. It's also entirely possible some practical consideration rules the whole idea out, which is fair enough .... but eternal knee-jerk blanket opposition just to kill any possible debate with one salvo doesn't seem anything close to constructive .... which, be assured, is all either @Hermod and myself were trying to be.

Perhaps I've not been sufficiently clear ..... it's emphatically not suggested as an alternative to restoration, or some cheap bodge, but solely a means of getting it doing something useful to address the funding issue, which will be there whether the loco is being used to reduce the time it takes to raise the neccessary money or not. Nothing more.

The notion is supplying enough steam for effect, not traction and the loco would, in reality, be used 'dead' to give the impression of double-heading .... it isn't actually doing anything beyond contributing to it's own fundraising kitty by charging for folk to enjoy travelling on the footplate and perhaps sounding the whistle, then courtesy of social media, publicising the line to all their 'followers'. As soon as a boiler can be afforded and fitted, of course the loco should be fully completed and properly enter service "without an overdraft" ..... and if the idea had been successful, move the steam gennie to the next one in need of a new boiler.

This doesn't add a day to the time it'd take to afford the boiler anyway, it's merely intended to help ensure more effective and expeditious fundraising, which is otherwise bound to be an issue unless the railway were to be fortunate enough to benefit from some very welcome donation, which solves the matter, dig into reserves, which I wouldn't imagine is 'Option A', or commit to a bank loan .... with years of paying it back. If it can be arranged at 0% interest, again the matter is solved.

 

Re the boiler and general condition of the loco - see my posts 215 and 331 of 3rd and 6th April 2017 respectively.

So far as the boiler is concerned there is pictorial evidence it had a re-tube in May 1948, despite A B Macleod's specification only being

A B Macleod's notes survive and have been published, and I have previously quoted them.

2 years previously a start was made on restoring LBSCR Terrier "Boxhill" to original condition, which involved preparing a number of new drawings at Brighton for replacement parts - which drawings survive at the NRM. As an ex- LBSCR man, A B Macleod would have been quite aware of what was going on at Brighton with "Boxhill" which was a very thorough job.

A B Macleod also had 'form' in the preservation of ex SR W13 "Ryde", one of the original Beyer Peacock 2-4-0T locos supplied for the opening of the IWR. The restoration of "Ryde" was apparently quite a well thought out affair, with parts of earlier withdrawn Beyer Peacock IWR locos being retrieved and stored for future use on "Ryde" many years previously from the time A B Macleod was in charge of the Isle of Wight system.

The "cosmetic" restoration of "Ryde" was a well planned affair with everything already retrieved to restore her to near enough original condition. There was an IWR chimney to hand to replace the later Drummond chimney etc. Why would Ryde Works keep an old IWR chimney when both "Ryde" and "Wroxall" had been provided with newly cast Drummond chimneys a few years before they were both withdrawn?

So, I can see a pattern here, with A B Macleod's 'on the record actions', and behind the scenes much more going on than his archive discloses. For 563, basically all Macleod stated was 'complete externally' with new whistles and pipework for same and a new Adams type stovepipe chimney, and a repaint.

I do not know why the boiler received a re-tube, and I have yet to find any contemporaneous report that 563 steamed into Waterloo for the 100 centenary in 1948 resplendent in it's still wet paint on 14th June 1948.

Obviously there were old LSWR hands at Eastleigh who might have done far more work than Macleod's specification, and the stores raided for remaining T3 parts, and Macleod might well have pulled a few strings here and there behind the scenes.

The timescale of removing 563 from the scrap line dump to the Waterloo centenary was however very short (just 5 weeks), and nothing like the time taken to restore Terrier "Boxhill" during 1946/7 or for that matter ex IWR SR W13 "Ryde" some 12 years previous to that of 563.

There is a pic of the T3 at Brighton prior to being transferred to Tweedmouth in 1958 and the tender flaring is red. On the trip to York there is a pic of the tender being on a flat wagon whereas another tender was part of the consist. Mallard was also part of the consist, but "Boxhill" is also on a well wagon whereas 563 the loco (not tender) was part of the consist.

This may suggest some issues with the tender?

Cheers,

Julian

 

The tender isn't great, but its not beyond repair. That report is being complied at the moment.

Just for the record, the SRT will not be entertaining any sort of Steam generator or fake return to steam. This is going to be the real deal or nothing. The SRT are optimistic at this stage in the game and have employed the Flour Mill to be extensive in their investigation.

 

It does amuse me how people on here can make completely off the wall suggestions like that, then others start having a serious discussion as though there’s a chance it might happen.

 

It is because old UK technology is just as important as football and that is more important than life or death.

 

But to be fair this forum is all about old uk technology. If we were interested in modern technology we’d be on a modern trains forum.

Anyway back on topic, good to hear things are looking hopeful so far. I’ll await further news with interest.

 

True, there have been a few down the years (only a couple of which have come from yours truly) .... in point of fact, the entire notion of preserving a working railway in the first place was one of them.

Ever wondered where the heritage movement would be if no-one ever entertained wierd and whacky ideas, or stuck their head over the parapet? .... and to pick up on the old/modern technology aspect .... the kit may be old tech (which is really the whole point), but irritatingly enough, modern technology is useful when it comes to connecting our collective obsession to the wider world ... or even us lot to each other, for that matter.