Flying Scotsman in Devon and Cornwall with Steam Dreams

Thanks for the explanation.

Stef.

 

My footage of Flying Scotsman and her historic first venture into Cornwall over Brunel's Royal Albert Bridge. Brunel would have been proud of this moment. Enjoy.

 

A expected, Flying Scotsman at the rear. <BJ>

 

As matter of interest, what would be a reasonable load for FS to haul up the banks unassisted in today's weather conditions (without being unduly mollycoddled)? How would this compare with what the Castles did as a matter of routine in BR days?

 

1Z75 17:00 Plymouth to Par running RT at Saltash. Both steam locos at the front. <BJ>

 

Spot on. And adhesion was a real problem today.
A

 

That explains the move from Laira... thx

 

You cannot compare today's conditions and those of 60 years ago and it's pointless to do so. The railway is completely different. a) the leaf-fall of today from what is a very overgrown main line is much, much higher and b) something a lot of people forget, a Castle driver 60 years ago could, and did, easily request assistance at various points en-route if such rail head conditions were encountered so assistance could be matched to the conditions almost in real time. Locos were available to pilot as required at short notice. Same all over the network.
Any HST driver will tell you of the fun and games to be had driving through Cornwall and Devon on damp days in October and November.... Doesn't matter how much power you have, if you can't put it down you aint going nowhere, and some days are truly dreadful.

 

Add to that 60103 is a Pacific and can't 'sit back' on it's rear drivers like 4-6-0s can so will have more adhesion problems.

 

If ever there was a justification for GWR to build no more Pacific’s, it was wrestling with FS yesterday. FS was designed for the LNER. Relatively flat and straight and high speed. Certainly not meant for West Devon and the Royal Duchy.
A

 

I have memories of Scotsman attempting the banks at the P&DSR when it was a guest there many years ago.

Tender first was even slower. <BJ>

 

Adhesion is far more complicated. Consider this example if you will. Two types of traction were observed at a traction change over point. On the line where this phenomenon was observed the electrification ended and so for the trains to continue the electric locomotive with an adhesive weight of some 80 tons were exchanged with locomotives of the Pacific type which had an adhesive weight of around 56 tons. The trains were heavy but the Pacifics were observed to start in a clean manner with good adhesion. The electrics, which were at the time new, on the other hand always slipped.

A sensitive, easily controllable regulator is beneficial and you can argue about where it should be placed with reference to the superheater. Tyre profile condition has a bearing on matters. So does locomotive weight distribution. When the A3 was weighed after overhaul it was found to have 7 tons less adhesive weight than it ought to have had - the bogie and rear truck however were another matter. Some designs were difficult, the B17 being one example. It was found that the weights could be set correctly and the engine sent on a run. On return it was weighed again and the axle loadings had moved substantially. This peculiarity was felt to be a factor contributing to the ride quality of the class but in this case appeared not to have a negative impact on the adhesion qualities. The total adhesive weight was probably much the same but the CCE would probably not be impressed if he were to find out. On the otherhand the disappearance of 10% and more of the designed adhesive weight is not very good for power delivery if it goes unnoticed and uncorrected.

Then you have the very thorny issue of rail head condition. 46229 made the point well. Though we all know of sanding gear and the problems caused when the apparatus fails for whatever reason, we need to understand the changes that have come about on the network over the last 60 odd years and the difficulties these are creating.

 

Presumably such an arrangement would see 60103 remain on the rear thereby restricting the train speed to 45 mph (for steam locomotives worked in reverse) and the 47 needing to haul 12 coaches (450 tons) + 60103 (circa 150 tons) giving 600 ton loading; IIRC there is a limit over Cornish routes that are well below 600 tons.

 

Doesn't this suggest that better management of lineside growth would pay dividends in terms of timely running, let alone avoiding all those "cancelled because of leaves on the line" services ?

 

My video of 60103 Flying Scotsman and 44871 climbing Hemerdon. Filmed at two locations.

 

Excellent sequences. Heavy train. The 47 sounded a bit rough working it's socks off on the back!!

 

Not a great deal of footage on the no-diesel day. Hope Ryan doesn't mind me linking this. One of the few sequences showing 60103+44871 on Rattery. Excellent as always.

 

Has it left exeter yet?