If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

West Somerset Railway General Discussion

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by gwr4090, Nov 15, 2007.

  1. nick813

    nick813 Well-Known Member Loco Owner

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2010
    Messages:
    1,503
    Likes Received:
    1,503
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    poole dorset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Updates thanks to WSR.Org

    http://www.wsr.org.uk/news.htm#1932
     
  2. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,185
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    What was the misunderstanding around Thornbury Castle?
     
  3. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,185
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I understand that in GWR terms the Somerset & Dorset was a 'blue' route but could accommodate BR & LMS Class 5's, Bullied Pacifics & (only just) 9F's

    How much of the classification is weight & how much is loading gauge?
     
  4. marshall5

    marshall5 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,375
    Likes Received:
    3,981
    Location:
    i.o.m
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    AFAIK the GWR colour system only referred to axle loading.
    Ray
     
  5. weltrol

    weltrol Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,784
    Likes Received:
    658
    The 9F's were actually 'blue' route engines....
     
    michaelh likes this.
  6. flying scotsman123

    flying scotsman123 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,440
    Likes Received:
    17,937
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheltenham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Much better and cheaper to use 9fs than little 56xx and 94xx tank engines then... :)
     
    Matt37401, MellishR, 35B and 3 others like this.
  7. ruddingtonrsh56

    ruddingtonrsh56 Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,470
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nottinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Would you have objected so strongly if upgrading the maximum axle loading of the route meant the railway kept and operated locos like 9466 and 6695? Although they have a higher axle loading it is conceivable that they would have smaller appetites for fuel than, for example, a Manor or a 7F. It’s not just a case of the bigger the engine the higher the axle load. 9466 has a higher axle load than a Bulleid Light Pacific, yet we all know which you would prefer to see running a heritage railway service.
    Also on a note of cost of overhaul as has been mentioned, wear and tear on a bigger loco working well within its capacity is likely to be less than that on a smaller loco working flat out each day. It would not surprise me if the larger loco cost less to overhaul, especially if it was well maintained. It may also spend less time out of traffic for routine maintenance and cost the railway less that way. I do not think it is as simple a case as ‘Big engines use more fuel and therefore cost more’. I imagine many more factors come into play to affect the cost of operating a loco over a given period of time and I suspect many railways will be aware of that
     
  8. flying scotsman123

    flying scotsman123 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    10,440
    Likes Received:
    17,937
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cheltenham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Absolutely, yet Paul consistently dismisses all of these points as "excuses" for running big engines, and never actually engages in the points raised in a meaningful way.
     
  9. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,185
    Likes Received:
    7,226
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed, BUT I gather that the total weight on some of the bridges was very close to the limit
     
  10. paulhitch

    paulhitch Guest

    Because excuses is what they are. Post No. 22620 by@aldfort, who has actually fired over the W.S.R. and seems not to "buy" the argument that bigger locomotives save money deserves study as it puts the position very well.
     
  11. 1472

    1472 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    2,517
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Paul's argument attempts a binary choice between "big" locos & "sensible sized ones". But you cannot classify GW (and other) locos in that way if your criteria include axle load (route availability) & fuel economy in particular. Take a 28xx/2884 class tender loco which is BR class 8 & to most eyes this would be seen as a "big" loco. Yet this type is a blue route availability one & as perhaps Aberdare might confirm was the most economical of the whole fleet per mile run when a comparison was done some years ago.
     
  12. Aberdare

    Aberdare New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2016
    Messages:
    158
    Likes Received:
    1,531
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Somerset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Indeed in my day 3850 did consume the least amount of coal per mile for similar work. This is not based upon fireman's opinion but records of coal loaded into the tender over long periods. Why this should have been the case I cannot say for sure but I suspect that at 25mph the locomotive is able to work at shorter cut offs for a given load due to its smaller wheels. On a heritage railway it's working nearer to it's designed optimum speed than a Hall or a Manor. Unfortunately a 38xx is not designed for working passenger trains on a twisting secondary main line, the ride at line speed for the passengers was less than good and tyre flange wear was horrendous, approx 40,000 miles between tyre turning. The latter due to running tender first half the time.

    Close to 3850 for ecconomy was 4160 due to the 2 row superheater fitted to this locomotive, the only 5101 class loco so fitted remaining in existance. This locomotive is possibly the all round optimum GWR designed machine for working 7 coach trains on the WSR. If the train sets could be restricted to 5 or 6 then by far away a 45/55xx would be the optimum machine. In the early days of the WSR the decision to buy 3 45/55xx's from Woodham's yard had a lot to commend it, unfortunately the cost of restoration could not be met in those days.

    As for the worst locomotive for eating coal a Bullied pacific wins hands down, they were the clear winners! Not because of any deficiency in the design but because the locomotive was working at a speed and load that it was not designed for, on a stop start duty.

    Although a 38xx is a blue route engine they were prohibited from the Minehead branch, when they reached the terminus the 45 foot turntable was too short to get them pointing the right direction for the return journey. A 1930's drawing exists showing plans for a 65 foot turntable almost in the current location, indicating that there was an intention to eventually operate larger engines than would fit on the existing table, or even on a 55 foot table.

    Andy.
     
  13. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    2,944
    Likes Received:
    6,303
    Well it all depends doesnt it...the line, gradients, curves, train weights duty cycles and a million other factors will determine what is the most economic loco type(s). I think Hitch's point fairly consistently is that it is his view that too few railways really pay attention to this equation. I think he is largely correct, and it is to the detriment of the industry. However, to qualify that slightly, there is the issue of what is available in terms of which locos a given line can call upon, and which they can raise money for. It seems to me though that paying more attention to trying to use types which fit the line one is trying to run will do no one any harm.

    Btw...having seen what happened to a 9Fs tyres after use over the WSR I dont think that type is suited to the curves at all. Scratch it from the list even though it costs no more to run than a standard 4 and will pull everything and the kitchen sink if you need it to, or shuffle round on two lumps of coal pulling three coaches.

    Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk
     
    paulhitch likes this.
  14. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2007
    Messages:
    4,440
    Likes Received:
    6,546
    Bath's 60' turntable could accomodate Bullied Pacifics and 9Fs but "only just", otherwise they were fine on the S&D. Most, if not all, outside cylinder GW types were prohibited due to width as were LMS "Jubilees". Axle loading does not seem to have been as issue as shown by the passage of a Schools class loco on a special in the mid fifties. Also 94XX and 56XX locos were permitted over the route.

    Peter
     
  15. aldfort

    aldfort Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    4,237
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The axle loading is denoted by a colour (red, blue etc) The power classification is denoted by a number often with a letter following e.g.7F
    Hence when people say Red route they are indicating the line is suitable from a loading point of view for locomotives that have the heaviest axle loadings. Axle loading and power classifications do not go hand in hand.
    Aberdare's post offers a great insight and I'm sure Michael will be along sooner or later to explain about grate areas and heating areas and piston areas and swept volume and their relationship to power classification.
     
  16. aldfort

    aldfort Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,923
    Likes Received:
    4,237
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Cardiff
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    As it says in the minutes I misunderstood something that Jon had said to me and then mis-reported that to the trustees. Lead to all sorts of dramatic headlines in the Steam Beano. Entirely my fault but Jon, generous fellow that he is, has forgiven me.
     
  17. Matt37401

    Matt37401 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    15,327
    Likes Received:
    11,664
    Occupation:
    Nosy aren’t you?
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    But isn't every other railway doing it wrong compared to the Isle of Wight? I'd love to see what W24 could do on a Pickering-Whitby, then again I'd love to see what 92203 could do between Smallbrook Junction and Haven Street...:cool::cool:
     
  18. gwalkeriow

    gwalkeriow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,703
    Likes Received:
    1,727
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired.
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I think that Pauls thinking is very much horses for courses. W24 would do fine between Pickering and Whitby provided it had air braked stock and that the load was inline with its OP power classification and 92203 would do fine between Smallbrook and Havenstreet provided it was fitted with air brakes although it would be a bit of overkill for seven 4- wheelers.
     
  19. misspentyouth62

    misspentyouth62 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2017
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    1,739
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    34D, now flexible
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I know they don't have copper-tops but I've always felt that an optimum class for most UK heritage lines would be a 76xxx standard mogul. Shame there isn't more of them to be had but I'm also keen to see how SVR's 3MT Tank performs when that's ready to run?
     
  20. AnthonyTrains2017

    AnthonyTrains2017 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2014
    Messages:
    2,237
    Likes Received:
    918
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Hopefully my picture made it in there
     

Share This Page