V2 4771 green arrow to return?

The P2 is at the cylinder stage now albeit going into manufacture, unfortunately a joint order is not a runner.
Surely LNER fans will stay with this proven new build group where the locos are widely used and accessible rather than put their funds into the NRM whose restoration expertise is open to question and who would be rather protective of their asset and limit its exposure.
If the Tornado episode had happened to a NRM loco then I would suggest it would still be static in York, and arguably rightly so.

 

Wrong. This LNER fan, and countless others I’ll wager, can’t wait to see 4771 back in action. It’s not a question of “either/or” where the V2 and P2 are concerned, nor who does the construction/overhaul, we just want to see and hear them in action.

 

In what way do the NRM limit the exposure to their locomotives? Flying Scotsman, for example, has been seen on the mainline and heritage lines everywhere from the South Coast to Scotland; I'd wager that if you wanted to travel behind her or see her in operation, it is probably easier for a larger number of people than just about any other mainline registered or heritage loco: for the vast majority of the population if you bide your time, she will probably be running close to where you live in not too long.

Equally, considering that the NRM has an educational remit, I'd suggest that the opportunity to operate an NRM-owned loco and get to understand the quirks and foibles is also relatively easily available: I've had a day firing two of their locos in the last 24 months and I am sure I am not unique in that.

That's not meant as a dig at the A1 Trust, or any other locomotive owner. But to say that the NRM limit the exposure of their locomotives, operational or otherwise, is nonsense.

Tom

 

This is the most sensible post on this thread, I am quite sure the trust funding model, based around LNER loco's would do a good job in raising the money quick enough.
They have an excellent working relationship with a foundry, and importantly, a council, already committed to Wessoe Road, would see job creation and retention as a easy justification to throw money at the project, After all the loco would be 20 mins from Shildon, and 45 mins from York at any time.

 

What’s all this talk about the V2 utilising the P2 monobloc?? Only if the NRM aren’t fussed about the conversion to poppet gear presumably? Or are we talking about using the Doncaster P2 one ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yes, that certainly seems a strange proposition! My thoughts on the V2 entering the A1SLT stable certainly didn't stretch that far. I'm sure the two share a certain degree of similarity, but I'm told that using fabrication doesn't generally reduce in cost with multiple production runs in the way casting might. Given the P2's monobloc is to be fabricated (I believe) then there would be little benefit in producing an identical part for an engine for which it would be unsuitable.

 

Indeed that's my thinking too, Quicksliver. Considering that the A1SLT were/are looking into the possibilities of fabricating a new monobloc cylinder block for P.o.W.. In turn leading to the possibilities of doing something similar for Green Arrow, adapting the fabrication process for walschaert valve gear rather than the poppet gear of the first P2.

 

Don't forget though, that as Anthony Coulls has said previously, the monobloc casting on Green Arrow may yet be repairable. Only removal from the locomotive will reveal the extent of what's required, be it repairs or replacement. It may not cost as much as a wholesale replacement yet, although it obviously will still be a costly item to repair.

Richard.

 

That's certainly a valid point, and a caveat to all of the above thoughts. It certainly doesn't (to my mind at least) detract from the other reasons that the Trust would be suitable guardians for 4771.

 

I think though the P2 cylinders bore are 21in diam 26in stroke and V2 is 19.5in diam and 26in surley they couldent copycat the P2 cylinder block pattern.

 

Could it be used by one of the several NRM cafes to serve afternoon tea on ?

 

Maybe, maybe not. The V2 was repaired after it's middle big end strap failed near Malton in 2005, so who is to say that would not happen today.

Peter

 

There is possibly another issue that could count against Green Arrow being returned to steam anytime soon and that's her getting confused with Flying Scotsmen by the general public; thus, if they were going to steam another choice loco then select something that's quite quite different from Scotsman.

 

Paint her in LNER green instead of BR Green, or Vice Versa...

 

Just rename her ‘Not the Flying Scotsman’


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

My photo of Green Arrow on the day of her last steaming.
Which I think was 13/03/2008
Newbridge NYMR

 

I’ve seen so much rubbish written on the V2 in the last week that adding to the overall froth and disarray seems counterintuitive.

However I am glad to see some sensible posts on here from the usual suspects.

The bottom line is that we can’t do anything until 2021 in reality - all this is, is confirming that she’s not being ruled out from a return to steam.

That in itself is good news.

So we shouldn’t get too wound up over specifics.

P2 and V2 designs share driving wheel diameter and not a lot else of the big components. It’s in the smaller items - like non ferrous fittings - that there’s overlap.

Green Arrow does, however, have some A3 parts on it - prior to Scotsman’s ownership and probably when it was first preserved, that was what was available.

I think any ideas about green arrow being mistaken for flying Scotsman are probably missing the point. The lesson has been learned. PR is king - and the NRM in how they’re selling Scotsman are doing a great job with their partners in running it.

 

One of the wonderful things about this forum is the way that people who have no direct in involvement in a particular project other than from the armchair can, on the basis of no evidence but pure conjecture, decide the future of said project as to where it goes and who will be responsible for it and its future operation.

Maybe it's just me, but I find it rather strange.

 

The other point I would make is that there has been much blithe talk of fabricated cylinder blocks, before one has successfully been produced. The NYMR had a go at making (a single cylinder) one for 76079 and abandoned it in favour of a casting, partly I think because the cumulative welding stresses were causing distortion. There must be a real risk that a much larger and more complex monobloc 3-cylinder fabrication will present real problems in this way. Personally, I think it is premature to speculate along these lines till we see how 2007's turns out.

 

One of the reasons the A1 lot decided against building an A4-alike with the P2.