4079 Pendennis Castle

The other point with Lancasters is effectively you can have the best of both worlds: the BBMF one in flight, albeit with extensive replacement of original material and certain modern modifications: but S-Sugar at Hendon that is effectively as close in condition to a World War II time capsule as you will get.

Tom

 

It's always a compromise though isn't it? Look at 6233, or 46100 they've both had various mods to fit in with today's railways. How authentic do you want to be?

 

Indeed, and you also have Just Jane which sits in the middle, being a 'working' example that still retains a lot of original material and without the modern compromises. (Obviously this is going to change to some extent as it gets brought up to airworthy condition, but that's another story.)

Which is really the point I was getting at when I said ideally you'd have more than one example preserved.​

 

Not sure that this is entirely fair. Didcot is superb, and manages to put on a good show for the enthusiast and Joe Public without destroying the Engine Shed ambience.

Carnforth, Steamport, Ashford and Dinting are far more typical of the way things have gone.

 

Bear in mind over the years the railways themselves on a semi regular bases modified many a loco. A prime case that highlights that is Flying Scotsman. As when first outshopped from Doncaster [as the third A1] she was 13' 5" tall. As were both 1470/1471 and most of the early A1s, later machines were built from scratch to the newer composite loading gauge [13'1"] . The early locos, were later cut down to 13' 1" to allow them to operate more easily over the North British lines in Scotland, even in OO model form you can see the difference in heights when you compare the Hornby 1470 Great Northern and 4472 Flying Scotsman. The cab, dome,safety valves and chimney on Great Northern are noticeably taller. So where do you draw the line? As all steam locomotives and a fair few "classic" diesels [i.e the Deltics, Westerns and class 40 whistlers] are all obsolete equipment as far as "mainline" operations are concerned.

Reading through many a thread here many folk complain most bitterly when they see locos like Pendennis Castle, Duchess of Sutherland or Flying Scotsman shuffling up and down at 25mph on this or that Heritage line. Then complain even more bitterly that such modifications as cut down cab/dome/chimney etc are fitted to allow such locos to run at "high speed" on the mainline.........

 

But is it the same people complaining, or different ones?

 

A mixture of both........

 

As an enthusiast, I feel I have to relish and appreciate what can be achieved and recognise that however much I might dream, it 'ain't' going to be 1955 again.
Take Lode Star - seems there are moaner's that she's stuffed & mounted, if she came out and needed to be modified in anyway, this wouldn't do and if she couldn't run on the mainline then 25mph won't do either.

 

Aaaaand it's not as if any locomotive modded for main line work can't be retro-modded in the future for gawd's sake.......

Cheerz,

Alan

 

... and in so doing they often changed the aesthetics of the locos in question. It's all subjective, of course, but I think the original A1s were better proportioned than the A3s. Deeley smokebox doors and chimneys looked dreadful on Johnson locomotives. And Cock O' The North was not enhanced by the A4-style wedge.

Flattening a King or a Duchess is a small price to pay to have it on the main line, but it's lovely to look at these locos with their correct proportions.

 

Surely the real cause of the moaning is that Network Rail keep messing about with track and clearances on the mainline, with complete disregard for the principal purpose of the railway-a place to run old steam locomotives at 70mph. If the great and good could simply remember this and stop worrying about the odd commuter who falls between the train and the platform edge, or installing wires everywhere so that clean, efficient electric MU's can operate.
No sense of Priorities

 

You jest, but main line clearances have been under pressure in recent years in order to fit ever larger containers on freight trains, so I really don’t understand why NR have gradually reduced clearances over the years; it hardly seems the best strategy, at least on core routes.
The natural end state of the current situation is that every generation of train has to be smaller than the previous one. Hence we end up with narrow-bodied things like Voyagers and Pendolinos (made worse by the tilt profile) and trains like the class 345 which have stupidly low ceilings. And all during an era in which people have generally got bigger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Different clearances.
The containers are limited by the top corners, so that's all about arched bridges, platform canopies and the like. Overall height - clearance under the wires - is rarely a problem because the corners are the limiting factor. Similarly an ISO container is only 8 feet wide, so horizontal width isn't an issue, and neither really is platform clearance.
In general NR has been working to increase clearances, but there's the specific problem with platform clearances needing to be reduced for passenger safety, and of course overhead electrification puts an increased pressure on height. There's an interesting (but very long and technical) official document on gauges linked from my loading gauge study below, which is worth skimming for an understanding of some of the complexities.

 

Funnily enough I boarded an HST earlier today and was amazed at the size of the gap between the coach and the platform (the platform was curved which didn't help). Now I'm not one for upholding the nanny state mentality, but even I could see that it's not really 'ok' in this day and age.

Going back to 4079, I have just read that GWS are officially pulling out of mainline running. I think it's fair to say that they've had a fair go at it over the years.

 

I imagine that Accessibility regulations are leading to wider platforms. The tram-train clearances at Rotherham are miniscule. I wonder if steam is allowed through Rotherham Central?

 

Sad news but not really surprising. With the increasing costs and regulatory burdens I suspect that, in the long term, the best hope of keeping main line steam going lies with those groups which focus their resources on it completely, e.g. the A1SLT, Tyseley or Icons of Steam. The days when heritage railways like the SVR or MHR were able to dabble in main-line charter operations seem like a very long time ago now, and I don't think they are ever coming back.

First and foremost, Didcot need to prioritise the maintenance and operation of their own site. Pulling out of main-line running is no doubt a painful decision but I suspect it will prove to be the right one for them in the long term.

 

Bahamas.

 

The SVR stopped getting involved in mainline running because it just diverted scarce resources away from their core business.