Welshpool and Llanfair Light Railway

The story was that they were built left hand drive and converted to right hand drive when rebuilt by the GWR with new boilers and standard GW boiler fittings. Exactly how true that is I am not now sure, but it is certainly conceivable. It makes it easy for the fireman to take the edge off the driver's enthusiasm though

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

 

Was the alteration done at Swindon or Oswestry?

 

Oswestry.
Ray.

 

The Resita suffered repeated fractures of the motion and Klein Lindner gear despite crack testing. Not nice!

 

Well, the issue of left or right hand drive can be solved in different ways.
The Swedish std gauge S2 1307 tank engine (2-6-4 Adriatic) was sold to a Danish heritage organisation.
Right hand drive is compulsory in Denmark, while left hand drive was standard with the Swedish State railways.
The innovative solution in Denmark was to define the bunker end as the front end of the loco, and voila the loco was right hand driven!
https://www.svenska-lok.se/damp_solo.php?s=19&lokid=3899

By the way, 15 years ago I had a footplate pass on the Earl, and was fascinated by the location of the reverser. It worked like a charm, a day I will never forget.
I also remember a day on our railway in Mariefred on loco No. 2, with only a screw brake on the firemans side. I was driver with a non-qualified assistant. I worked on the right, fire man side. Conveniently firing, operating the regulator and brake. While my assistant only operated the reverser. It worked very well, but that was 45 years ago. Now our operating rules are a bit more well defined.

 

Was the issue with that particular Resita or all the Resitas fitted with the Klein Lidner axles?

 

Others would have to answer this. She seemed to have a lot of issues with workmanship and material quality. Not exactly Beyer Peacock class.

 

Must admit I've never actually seen it working. I know a few of the Welshpool loco crew and they never had a good word to say about it. Sounds like it was just very rough around the edges. It didn't ride well and was just generally not a nice machine to drive or fire.

There were multiple major failures the last one being the shearing off of one of the cranks in 2013. I think that was on one of the plain axles. Before that it had failed with stay problems in 2010 I think. They decided to give the thing a good going over at that point, the firebox was completely re-stayed and motion overhauled. One of the cylinders was found to be out of alignment as well. They also tried to make it a bit more comfortable with a new cab.

Even before that both KL axles were replaced after one broke. This damaged the motion so some bits were robbed off the other loco. That was 2008ish.

I think more than anything though there was a change in management. So the loss of face from getting rid is significantly less.

The W&L only uses one engine in steam a lot of the year. So it can get by with small fleet and mostly only volunteer labour. Of course if one loco is taking up all the resources it makes things more difficult.

Tim

 

I had one brush with the Resita. Really badly manufactured I think would be the best way to describe it. No reflection on the WLLR who tried hard with it, but low quality components. It was a rough ride, worse even than 699 and that was very bouncy. Starting away smoothly on the Resita was a challenge as the regulator was quite "sudden" sort of all or nothing and a little awkward in action, being curiously stiff at points but loose at other points....I think a consequence of the control linkage geometry. It also shut itself if the handle was let go of. Not very nice. Only a Yugoslav copy of a USA tank has ever been as unpleasant overall in my own experience.

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

 

Another version of the disputed gradient profile (copied from The Welshpool & Llanfair Light Railway by Ralph Cartwright & Ralph Russell) included in this blog:

https://fifteenflatout.wordpress.com/page/2/

 

Thanks - an interesting read.

I'll put a link too the gradient profile in the relevant thread.

Tom

 

Of all the Welsh narrow gauge lines I always though the WLLR to be the toughest.

The Resita locos aren’t the first to struggle on the line. For example Monarch’s experience was by all accounts unhappy.

 

Regarding Monarch it depends very much on who you talk to. Not all crews are equal and most certainly not at the time the engine was working on the line.

The visit of Zillertal to the WLLR drew some crews from the past to investigate the engine. Some of these could remember Monarch and the crew situation at the time, it was the mainstay of the fleet for a while. There were some more widely experienced and these crews could get on very well with the engine, others without the depth of experience hence lacked the adaptability required to obtain a satisfactory performance. Crew training was not then what it is now and the less experienced who struggled loudly blamed the engine. And the volume of these complaints continues to colour opinion to this day.

Those who could get the engine to perform found it to ride very well too, and it was evidently rather sprightly. The exhaust system should have been addressed but this never happened and ought to have been done. Crews will forgive all manner of things but not an engine that won't steam for them. There is a small group I believe that looks after the engine and given that it was built in 1953 and is fairly new by steam locomotive standards I also think that the engine should be given another chance on the line.

 

Thank you. I always wanted to know more about why Monarch struggled and why it had such a reputation. I would really like to see it in steam again because it is such a unique loco.

 

This machine never ran over Golfa summit so crews never had to deal with the unsolvable problem, namely the long boiler barrel allied with the limited water space over the firebox crown. It is very easy to get romantic about machines which fail.

 

I am aware of this issue but during the period of the engine's use in the hands of a capable crew it was not a failure, so the failure lay elsewhere.

As to the boiler being an unsolvable problem. That all depends on what you are prepared to do.

 

During the rebuilding of the WHR, there was a lot of speculation that double Fairlies wouldn't be able to work the full length of line, because of the risk of uncovering the fireboxes. Experience has shown that it hasn't been a problem. Saying that I don't know if Golfa bank is steeper than those on the WHR.

 

There is a approximately one mile of I in 29.33 including multiple check railed reverse curves . The gradient is uncompensated for curvature. Water level has to be maintained as once over the summit it is steep downhill

 

Absolutely, it really depends who you speak too about her.

You also have to remember that she didn’t operate to Welshpool, but only as far as Sylfaen in the 70’s. She never ran with full super heat, because the elements weren’t complete at the time, so many were blanked off.
In addition, the Original chimney was replaced by the stovepipe currently fitted and the effects of draughting on that were not known or addressed at the time.

With a long thin boiler, there has always been concern on how she would perform going “over the top” of the Golfa and drop down in to Sylfaen because of keeping enough water in the boiler above the firebox. This has never been tested however, so remains an unknown.

She was also never fitted with Vacuum brakes (it is why she was stopped back in the 70’s to await fitment - which never happened) which precluded her running to Welshpool anyway.

The fact she is fitted with a marine firebox is deemed less than ideal, as it restricts the air to the fire bed, and with high ash coal in particular, it can cause poor performance and make servicing the loco more awkward. There are of course modifications that could be made to make this easier.

Without doubt she would make a very interesting and unique loco

 

The fireboxes are in the middle of a double engine so that wasn't really the issue. A bigger concern is priming out of the downhill end regulator. Double engines worked the WHR in pre-preservation days too.

I'd be more concerned about operating an L&B tank engine up there. That really does have a long thin boiler.

Tim