Current and Proposed New-Builds

Working with older buildings, I also become somewhat tired of the misuse of the word 'restore'. When the new ex-London immigrants speak of how "we are restoring an 18th century cottage", and I want to ask if that is just removing the electricity and the indoor-plumbing, or whether they want to fill in some of the windows and scrape the plaster off the internal walls as well.
What they actually doing is further modernising an old house, which is the opposite of restoration.

 

Couldn't agree with you more.
I don't mind people modernising many of the less historically important old houses to keep them habitable in modern conditions, but I just wish they didn't pretend it was restoration!

RPSI, FfRS, TRPS, RERPS, RHDRA, WLLRPC

 

Saw a program where a lady had taken a beautiful Manor house with oak paneling inside and painted the paneling white and plastered all the walls so it was full of straight clean lines. I nearly cried.

 

RPSI, FfRS, TRPS, RERPS, RHDRA, WLLRPC

 

Shocking.
Pat

 

If a modernist interior is your bag, why the hell buy such a building in the first place?

In historic terms, however, is that better or worse than the Tudor (and earlier) edifices (not forgetting the odd complete village) levelled to make way for Georgian Palladian neo-classic piles? When all's said and done, no buildings (with the possible exception of the pyramids) were built to last forever ..... though certain depressing examples of totalitarian hubris from the 1930/40s look set to give it a go and the Hoover Dam stands a fair chance of outlasting the species which built it!

 

The B17 Trust says the GER tender will be restored cosmetically at first, but eventually to be used on Heritage lines where water capacity isn't an issue, and the two LNER tenders will make best use of the parts to restore one to main line status with some spares being available from the other.

 

The frames of the Holden F5 are coming together at Tyseley, some photos have been posted on the trust's website: https://www.holdenf5.co.uk/news/

 

Good news.
I know all of these things are purely personal, but for me, the probable reappearance of two lost classes of pre-grouping branch tank loco is the highlight of the new build movement.

 

I know what you mean and until/unless someone has a crack at a W&U tram loco (either flavour, I'm not fussy!), it'll likely stay that way.

 

Wasn't someone at the Nene Valley building a W&U lookalike?
Ray.

 

That was utilising Cockerill 1626. Not sure what the current state of the project is.

 

Last I heard on that was the owner is awaiting approval on a modification he wants to make to the boiler(?) so he'll be able to drive it from both ends? I think that's what it may have been? But even that was some 3 or so years ago.

 

Rome was not built in a day...

 

Is there any chance that you could update the forum on progress please?

Thanks

Keith

 

There are still serious erosion problems, specifically those accelerated by pollution from ICE exhausts, which naturally are more noticeable where heavy traffic is in close proximity to antiquities, such as the Colesseum and C.S.Angelo than the better protected sites like the Forum of Trajan and ..... Oh, sorry ..... you meant the tram conversion!

 

Certainly. As I think I have mentioned elsewhere, a wealth of GER / LNER plans of the original tram locomotives which do not appear to have been available to the previous owner (whose plan it was to rebuild the loco) are now available from the NRM and also from the GER Society. These show how the regulator and reverser were worked from each end of the original locomotives and thought is being given on how these arrangements can be adapted, given that 1626 has a vertical boiler and the GER tram locomotives did not.

The larger issue however appears to be braking. As built, 1626 has a steam locomotive brake and a handbrake applied from a single position on the locomotive. The ambition is to provide vacuum and air automatic train brakes, operable from either end of the locomotive. An air pump (believed to be from Sweden) and air reservoirs (believed to be from an 08) are already present on the locomotive. There have been suggestions that the pump will be too large for the capacity of the boiler, apparently grounded in part on experiences with other Cockerill tram locos which visited the NVR in the past.

To the best of my knowledge all but two of the Cockerill tram locomotives currently in the UK have the "renforcée" type of boiler which has a higher working pressure. The two exceptions are 1626 and sister locomotive 1625 "Lucie" on the NYMR, which operate at the lower working pressure of 10kg / cm2. The best way to assess whether the doubts expressed to me about the capacity of 1626's boiler are grounded is to see what 1625 can do with the same type of boiler. 1625 has only recently been returned to service and I have not had a chance to visit the NYMR since then to see how she performs.

A further suggestion which has been made to me is that the locomotive brake should be converted from steam to air: I understand that this is a legal requirement in Belgium and two British locomotives there (an Avonside 0-4-0 formerly at the NVR and an Austerity 0-6-0) have been successfully converted from steam to air locomotive braking. I am also looking to see how DSB 0-6-0T number 656 is having vacuum automatic brakes fitted in addition to the original air brake during the current overhaul at Wansford.

I understand that one of the Cockerill tram locomotives active on the Continent has been fitted with air train brakes and that the pump is "hidden" in a compartment created in the water tank. A fabricated steel tank (not the original) is on 1626, having been fitted by the former owner. Apart from questions of whether it will be possible to fit the wooden cabin over that tank (1626 will be 8" wider than the original GER locomotives), this has led to consideration of whether the tank is of the appropriate capacity and hence to the overall expected weight of the locomotive once the rebuild is complete. Detailed attention has not yet been given to the lubrication system, although I inherited a variety of mechanical lubricators when I took over the locomotive.

In short, I now know better how much I did not know when I took over 1626. No doubt I will discover other things which I do not currently have answers for as planning progresses. It is however certain that cutting metal without having settled a complete and detailed plan to complete the rebuild could well be an expensive mistake. The only piece of metalwork which I have felt justified in having done so far was the casting of brass worksplates by Procast in place of the single cracked iron original, which was also used as a pattern for the worksplates which are now on 1625.

 

Thank you @Cullen for your detailed update, I hope you will continue to update the forum on future progress. Good luck with the project

Keith

 

Thank you for your good wishes - I will need them! It has certainly been an education so far, not least in that I can now tell a Y6 apart from a J70 at a glance, even with the full skirting on. Bearing in mind the different features of the two classes and also of Cockerill tram locomotives, perhaps the best description of 1626 when the rebuild is eventually complete will be a Y70/1...

 

Let’s hope 2021 will be the year 6880 steams, 72010 has some driving wheels cast, 5551’s boiler is complete and 789 becomes a rolling chassis.