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.

Current and Proposed New-Builds

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by aron33, Aug 15, 2017.

  1. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You can't have the top one. It's not like any other GW loco.:)
     
    Jamessquared likes this.
  2. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,439
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You make my point for me :)

    Tom
     
  3. LesterBrown

    LesterBrown Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2009
    Messages:
    995
    Likes Received:
    761
    Location:
    Devon
    ...and then there's the version with a high elliptical roof Churchward cab, one of which had an extra axle beneath the bunker (2-4-2T).
     
    Last edited: Apr 22, 2020
  4. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,439
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Talking of 2-4-2T locos, this is my suggestion for a new build for the post COVID-19 world - social isolation of passengers ensured by each train transporting precisely one passenger at a time. (Driver and fireman must be close family members but on the Bluebell we have multiple opportunities for that).

    [​IMG]

    Tom
     
  5. Ploughman

    Ploughman Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    5,806
    Likes Received:
    2,649
    Occupation:
    Ex a lot of things.
    Location:
    Near where the 3 Ridings meet
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    All look the same to me, so must be GWR:):)
     
    Paulthehitch likes this.
  6. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,987
    Likes Received:
    5,084
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I don't think you could lean very hard on those buffers!
     
  7. Monkey Magic

    Monkey Magic Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2018
    Messages:
    3,498
    Likes Received:
    6,845
    Location:
    Here, there, everywhere
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    I think this is better. The ultimate driver experience loco.

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    11,930
    Likes Received:
    10,088
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    That was my immediate first thought. Fortunately, it doesn't seem to have been blessed with a drawhook at this end.
     
    LMS2968 and Jamessquared like this.
  9. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,439
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I think there probably was a draw hook, but it was under the coal bunker and the problem with coupling to another vehicle was finding a long enough rubber band ...

    (for more on the loco, see here: http://haylingbillyheritage.org/category/engines/sharp-stewart/)

    Tom
     
  10. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,439
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Wrong thread - this is the new build thread. You can call that one a restoration ... :)

    Tom
     
    andrewshimmin and 5944 like this.
  11. Richard Roper

    Richard Roper Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,310
    Likes Received:
    1,355
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Librarian
    Location:
    Just up the road from 56E Sowerby Bridge
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Probably one of the most bizarre British locos I've seen, apart from the VERY early machinery and later well-known experiments... But what a lovely machine it is!
    Thank You for sharing Tom!

    Richard.
     
    andrewshimmin and Jamessquared like this.
  12. Hunslet589

    Hunslet589 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2017
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    204
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Conventional wisdom has it that there had been a "breakdown in communication" between the loco drawing office and the civils such that the loco dept was unaware that the process of working to a 22ton limit on the GW main lines had been ongoing for some years - until it was almost completed. It was (it is alleged) only when the two groups met during the king design process, with the loco guys expecting to have an argument about the proposed axle loading, that it came to light and they where told it would not be a problem... On a select few routes at least.
     
  13. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,439
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    At which point, said loco guys went back to the drawing office and said "well, if the civils accepted 22 tons without a fight, lets just make it 25 and not tell them" - allegedly ;)

    Tom
     
    BrightonBaltic and andrewshimmin like this.
  14. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,069
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    It does, and I agree about keeping options open.

    However: reducing the saddle height to position the boiler a bit lower is fairly easy, but what do you do at the other end? Do you accept a small reduction in ashpan space? Does the footplate need to be a bit lower?
     
  15. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,069
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    That makes more sense than the LBSC one. If it doesn't need to pull anything, why bother with coupled wheels?
     
    BrightonBaltic likes this.
  16. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,439
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Financially made perhaps less sense for their respective shareholders though. Drummond got to build an entirely new loco at a cost of £1,535 - to put that in context, it was slightly more than the LSWR was paying for an M7 at the same period.Whereas Stroudley took a life-expired Sharp Stewart tank engine and really made very minimal modification!

    Tom
     
    andrewshimmin likes this.
  17. Jon Pegler

    Jon Pegler New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2014
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    30
    Gender:
    Male
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    All the opponents of the County project who condemn the use of an 8F firebox seem quite happy with a 4700 with a reduced boiler height and narrower cylinders. Double standards, I think
     
  18. LMS2968

    LMS2968 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,987
    Likes Received:
    5,084
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Lecturer retired: Archivist of Stanier Mogul Fund
    Location:
    Wigan
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    ALL the opponents? You've asked them all?
     
  19. mdewell

    mdewell Well-Known Member Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    2,564
    Occupation:
    UK & Ireland Heritage Railways Webmaster
    Location:
    Ruabon, Wrexham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I haven't seen any comments about that (although there may well have been when the project was first being promoted). We are only talking about 2" lower, so I expect a minor adjustment of the boiler supports at the firebox end would be easy enough to acheive and the slight reduction in ashpan depth and firehole acceptable. I doubt a lower footplate would be required.
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2020
  20. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    That's what Pole says, but to my mind it doesn't hold water. The policy change (around 1898) had board level approval and must have been agreed between Inglis and Churchward And the change was by no means "almost completed". Yes, there were few bridges left to upgrade on the London to Plymouth line (four according to Pole) but by 1938 only 522 miles of GWR route was cleared for the Kings, as opposed to 1280 miles at the lower limit. That Collett didn't know about a policy change Churchward and Inglis had put in place when he was just a draughtsman in the drawing office is perhaps unsurprising, if disappointing.

    This business of future proofing infrastructure is one of the classic engineer via accountant battles. The engineer would like (for example) to do every tunnel and bridge repair to the continental structure gauge, because s/he knows that his/her successor will bless him when there are few enough structures left to change that they can finish off the rest in a affordable sized project, whereas there's not the slightest chance approval would be given to a project to upgrade the whole line at once. The accountant will never agree to spending loads of extra money on something that may not give a return for decades. Pole bemoans that one viaduct which had been upgraded to 22 tons had been replaced again before the extra capacity had been used, but if the policy hadn't been in place the Kings couldn't have been introduced.

    Does anyone here know what the situation is on the WR now for weight limits?
     
    BrightonBaltic and jnc like this.

Share This Page