Bure Valley Railway

It's definitely wider - about three inches each side and I think shaped a little higher to match. BVR 8 has been coal fired for some time and remains so - it has always been a capable engine on coal. The modifications are expected to stop it shuttling the train now it has balanced flyweights, and it is expected to "breathe" more easily and efficiently with the improvements to valve gear and steam circuit. The big hope is that it will have more punch with a heavy train. BVR 7 after early improvements in 2002 went from a power output of around 35hp to around 80hp! It's hoped BVR 8 will touch 90hp.

 

Quite a few people have said the same.

 

BVR 8 John Of Gaunt on loaded test run at Hautbois loop, Saturday 18th January. It's showing real improvements in the quality of ride, and also the power available. Sign up to BVR Supporters on FB for more pics and videos.

 

If the BVR are in the market for a new loco, this should be ready in a couple of years.



Posted by The Steam Channel. A 15" gauge UP 9000, currently being constructed in the US. You might need a bigger turntable though...

 

Out of curiosity, how did you measure that?

Tom

 

Full instrumentation. See the Steam Loco Design website.

 

Ian Gaylor who led Steam Locomotive Design was a driver at BVR until last year. His site explains quite a lot about the development of BVR 9 and 6 with the new cylinders. The recent work by CME Bob King has been to try and improve things without the expense of new cylinders and also take into account all that was learnt from Ian and the BVR engineers. I have seen the cylinder diagrams which were taken in 2002 and the more recent ones, (hugely improved) but I'm not sure of the technicalities of measurements. I know the recent tests a year ago were done with a lap top in the cab and at constant speed of 18mph.

 

The new valve gear and cylinder improvements on No.7 Spitfire have been wholly successful. However on test in January 2019 it was felt that not enough steam is available for power when notched up. At 30% there is very little "pull" and the cylinder diagrams show that. The steam chest area is only 688 cubic cm compared with 5886 cubic cm on 6 & 9 (new cylinders). This is felt to be the problem. As the steam chest can't be enlarged, Bob King's idea was to extend the steam chest area into the steam feed pipe with a high capacity type of plenum chamber. This is being trialled on No.8 and results are looking good. On a six coach test train last week 8 accelerated away at 30% with no problem which neither it or 7 would do before. The photos show the pipe before welding and compared with the old one.

 

Latest news from BVR is that a brand new boiler has been ordered from North Bay Engineering. When delivered this can be dropped into any of the locos needing boiler work to get them back into service quickly. The locos are worked hard on BVR and this takes it's toll on the boilers. It appears the Welsh coal over the last three years has been particularly aggressive in the firebox area and has accelerated wastage. This has required some major welding around washout bosses, fusible plug areas and stays. This has prompted the decision to go for a new boiler and possibly two. These will be clones of the present ones but with minor improvements such as better sighting of some of the washout plugs - where you can get at them!

 

It's really good to see these positive developments on the BVR. A lovely little railway which is always worth a visit.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

 

As most people will know by now, the Bure Valley Railway is closed like every other heritage line. The stock is mothballed and the staff furloughed. The model shop is still open for online business which provides some much needed income. Currently the railway is battling the insurance company which has refused to pay out anything. This is despite a £36,000 per year premium specially set up to cope with "any infectious disease within 25 miles." The insurance company says the railway is closed as a result of the government and not the virus. Reports have featured in the Sunday Times and local radio and TV and manager Andrew Barnes is fighting every inch of the way. Whatever happens, the railway will not be re-opening in the near future as we all wait to see how the next weeks and months go.

 

It would be good if they could get the tender engines from the waveneney valley railway going from bresingham to use on that line as braingham don’t use them any more

 

Would the Pacifics from Bressingham really be suitable for the BVR? They are a lot smaller than the BVR’s fleet of ZBs. I seem to recall when the BVR first opened the locomotives on loan from the RHDR were not perfectly suited to the BVR’s slightly more hilly terrain (well hilly when compared to Romney Marsh).

 

I can not say that from my dealings with insurance companies on buildings, contents and car insurance I am not in the least surprised by their position. Good luck in your efforts to fight it, but the fact it was a government imposed lockdown obviously makes them believe they have a strong case to avoid what I am sure most of us feel would be classed as an infectious disease within 25 miles. I am of course assuming there are cases in that radius to you.

 

When I was there last year Bressingham said they were restoring one of them for use.
Marvellous engines, remind me of my first and unforgettable steam encounter: Black Prince at the Liverpool Garden Festival. I was in my pushchair...
I think both of the Waveney pacifics have visited the BVR in the past.
But the BVR has a superb fleet of their own.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

 

The Financial Conduct Authority (which regulates insurance companies) accepts most policies do not cover pandemics, and it sees no grounds to intervene https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/...ing-sme-business-interruption-coronavirus.pdf

Association of British Insurers guidance is at https://www.abi.org.uk/products-and-issues/topics-and-issues/coronavirus-hub/business-insurance/

I don't know details of their policy but an infectious disease within 25 miles hasn't directly caused the railway to shut (not the 'proximate cause'). The Coronavirus Act 2020 has.

Patrick
(Chartered Insurance Broker, non-practising)

P.S. Post Magazine https://www.postonline.co.uk/claims...-devil-is-in-the-detail-for-hiscox-and-others

 

In the nicest possible way, it’s that sort of wriggling that makes people intensely dislike insurance companies.

 

You'll see my professional title is broker (though not a specialist in this class), my career was arguing for insureds against insurers. The BVR may or may not have a case under its policy, but it will be covered by the law (Insurance Act 2015 and common law precedent on proximate cause).

The UK's facing something like a £500 billion drop in GDP, governments are printing money to counter it. All UK insurance premiums are around £300 billion. No insurance market could ever cover the consequential costs of a government mandated shutdown (pandemic or otherwise), the market would go bust.

Patrick

 

From a practical rather than a legal perspective this is one of those very tricky situations. It is not in the interests of anyone for the insurance market to go bust, on the other hand, in the event that it is reasonable that a payout should be expected based on insurance, it is better that the insurer goes bust to pay out that insurance than the insured....that is after all the purpose of the insurance, to shift risk from the insured to the insurer, for a fee. If in exceptional circumstances the government steps in to provide help to the insured thus preventing them from going bust instead of the insurer, that seems reasonable but perhaps should be explicit. The insurance industry needs to be wary of washing their hands too easily, if business interruption insurance is seen as not worth the paper on which it is written, why would anyone bother with it in future? The argument that government legislation rather than infectious disease is the proximate cause of closure, would seem to me to be an example where, in that case, insurance against infectious disease is rendered entirely useless, since it is unlikely to ever apply. Does that open the door for claims of miss-selling?

 

I agree, it is immoral to claim to accept responsibility for a risk and then not honour that promise. I find the position of Hiscox as immoral as that of the holiday firms who refuse to pay cash refunds - these are the rules, you are obliged to follow them. If they are untenable (and I agree they might be), then it is for the insurers to seek relief from government, not to duck their responsibilites - though I'd very quickly also expect the price of insurance to rise, or the exclusions (as they are on my travel policy) to be made very clear that pandemic risk is not covered.

I suspect (and @D1039 may correct me on this) that as the policy in question here is a commercial policy, the protections you or I would enjoy against miss-selling will not apply as they exist under consumer law.