MHR steam galas March & Sept 2009

I guess the core plug is ok in the other cylinder and seeing that water wasnt being carried over , that was never going to be an issue .

Could have been alot worse though , so as much as its a shame to see the standard gone for a while , thank god it happened were it did . a couple track pannels down the line and that cyclinder could have come down onto someones car/head and any linesiders that were by the road.

 

The fact the right hand side cylinder didn't have a core plug fallen out! I've just got back from the gala now been at the mhr since 5am friday morning on footplate friday and today (sunday). I was lineside saturday literally minutes after the incident and watched her been towed back and i was almost physically sick considering as you may have guessed she is my favourite loco as well as shedding a few tears when I saw the extent of the damage when I got back on shed. As for the cylinder been repaired this is most definately out of the question as I estimate a good 20-30 pieces are scattered around lineside averaging around 5inches long. This is probably the best that this situation could have turnt out as no-one got hurt for a start, the debris could have easily have derailed the loco and train causing god knows how much more damage with the potential for the train down the embankment and with that there would almost certianly have been deaths or serious injurys at the very least. Also from looking at the motion I think we're lucky and no rods have been damaged apart from obviously the piston rod and perhaps the valve spindle however the extent will not be known until inspected further by more qualified staff. also I've heard rumours that linesiders have taken videos and that it may have already been put on youtube however I cant seem to find anything, it would be interesting to see if this is the case
However we have not seen the last of 73096....
Can we get back on topic of the gala until further news is posted on the website officially?
I had a great time on 41312 and 34007 on the friday and 34007 all of today

 

If she was running as I understand it - She must have come pretty much to a grinding halt?? And the 33 also failing isn't good news either...

 

Why was 33208 used rather than 33053, as i was under the understanding that she was to be withdrawn for a full overhaul, thats why they brought 33053 in. She has been tired for some time and really needs some TLC.

 

I overheard someone at the MHR today saying he was on the train when 73096 expired, and it came to a halt within 100-200 yards of the cylinder going. How true that is I don't know, it's just what I heard.

 

Real shame about 73096 and good luck to all those who will have a hand in its future, I have enjoyed that engine both at the Mid Hants and on the Main Line the last few years. I had a good time at the Gala today, weather was superb although the timetable did end up half hour or so late so I had to go and miss the last few trains. My pictures...

http://ashleysmith355.fotopic.net/c1667865.html

 

The driver dropped the handle straight away and she came to a stand in about 150 yards.

 

The absence of the Standard was certainly a much talked about topic today, and her presence was very much missed.

On a lighter note, here are a few snaps of mine from the event:


The Met Tank and 38585 stand in the sunshine at Ropley


More of the Met tank. It gave some varying performances throughout the day, but it most certainly looks stunning in my oppinion.


Nellie in the fading light at Alton


41312 eases into Alton with what will most likely be her final revenue earning service before major overhaul.


The old guard and the newbie meet at Alton. The Ivatt may well be out for some time, Nellie looks set to stay for a little while.

I have to say that myself and my partner had a wonderful time today. The staff were polite and helpful, the stations, stock and locos were immaculate and the timetable was rather intensive. Despite the lack of 73096 today was one of my best experiences on the line. Kudos are deserved for everyone that was involved.

 

Because 33053 failed as said before. Please read the posts.

We do not want those videos on Youtube, in fact I am thinking that we shouldn't be discussing this as it is a public forum, until the website says something offical.

 

I had a really good time on the MHR this weekend, being there both Sat and Sun. Thanks to everyone who made it possible and my condolences to the railway on the accident to the Standard 5. The one good thing that came out of the incident was the speed with which the MHR volunteers responded to it as well as the complete lack of injuries. Very fortunate.

Is there going to be an appeal to get 73096 running again? I would imagine that it will take some £50k or so to replace the cylinder and the motion parts that have been damaged.

Regards

 

Why not? This is topical, and of interest to people in the railway fraternity. Many of us have learnt a little from this incident, and the discussions have been generally well mannered and interesting. Sticking your head in the sand and refusing to allow comment just sparks rumours. In my mind, the Mid Hants have been superb over this incident, they've let the public know whats happened, through their website, and this continues to be updated. Maybe you should take a look...
Daniel

 

[quote="Swan Age
I would think that a year minimum would be the case, certainly this season is over for 73096 i would think. It really all depends on what options if any, are available for repairing the existing cylinder block. Although in my honest opinion, looking at the pics it would seem almost certainly that a new block will be required.

Looking at the specs for the new build clan cylinders they are 19.5inch diameter by 28 inch stroke, compared to a standard 5, 19inch diameter by 28 inch stroke. Do they share a common basic casting? or are they totally different?

If they were the same basic casting then a joint collaboration with the Hengist group would make sense to both parties. After all they have already provided a replacement smokebox door for 73096 a few years back.[/quote]

I believe (and I'm going purely on memory for this) that the complete range of BR Standards was done with only three sizes of cylinder blocks as cast. They were then machined as appropriate for each type of engine. It may well be that the pattern for 'Hengist' will suit 73096.

Regards

 

Armchair speculators without portfolio...
Frankly,I only read 'official' findings, not those scratched on the back of a fag packet without authority.

Like you hear on soundtracks of YouTube of some railway event,where a 'know-all' giving the next person a running commentary of the understandings of the particular engine in view.Just shut up and stopping ruining the poor persons soundtack with this bleating.

 

I was at the railway on Saturday and it was really well handled by the railway and staff as a whole. A replacement bus service was implemented between Ropley and Medstead using a vintage bus as well. Although what happened to 73096 is a big blow, in my eyes the railway have come out of the event with a lot of credit so I say well done to all involved.
My photos of the day are now on my fotopic site including the failure of D6593.

Regards,

Paul

 

With respect it isn't a "stupid idea" it's simply a standard piece of foundry practice and when I did my six month stint in the foundry (not in a railway foundry) during my apprenticeship it could be seen being carried out pretty well everyday.

The cylinder block for 73096 is essentially two cylinders on top of each other, one for the piston the other for the piston valve. In order to cast this two cores would be required, one to create the 'hole' for the piston the other for the valve. It is necessary to locate the cores accurately so, as the cylinders are open ended, the core will have locating lugs on them. Generally these lugs would, I imagine, coincide with the passages between the piston and valve voids but clearly in this design there was at least one other locating lug required which created an unwanted hole in the casting. This hole would be later 'filled' with a 'core plug'. In the workshop I worked in this was a circular hole in the casting with a fine pitch screw thread machined into it and there was a corresponding thread on the core plug. There may have been different practices elsewhere.

I think that it has to be remembered that 73096 is quite elderly now (although there are engines that are a lot older of course) and as it gets older problems are going to emerge that the designers wouldn't have seen as a significant issue. If a core plug went during 'steam days' a loco simply went into works and the repair was made. No big deal, in and out in a few weeks. But it is a big deal in preservation because of the much more limited means that preservationists have.

I suspect that when this matter is investigated it will be seen that it is simply metal fatigue that has caused this problem. That the screw thread has failed and that is because of the age of the engine.

Regards

 

Are we not referring to a core plug from the piston head?

 

I'm not sure. I have assumed (dangerous things assumptions) that as the pistons heads are not so unlike 'buckets' (as it where) that they wouldn't need to have cores in order to cast them. Perhaps I'm wrong.

Cheers

 

Indeed I'll echo it's a greast shame for the Mid Hants and my thoughts are with them. Loosing a engine like that at the start of the season is nightmare.

 

My Dad and I had a great day yesterday photting, well done Mid-Hants for putting on a great show despite the sad loss of the Std5.