Flying Scotsman

The NRM seem to have a habit of blaming everyone else for their unpopular decisions. See HST prototype, the Deltic group, etc...

Could they also be worried that the sight of it in apple green will make the trespass problems even worse every time it goes for a trundle?

I'm sure someone has already pointed out that it's hybrid preservation era livery/deflectors/chimney combination is arguably just as historic as whatever it looked like in service. Even better, you could put the cowcatcher, bell and headlamp on it from it's american tour...

 

I can fathom it, the livery makes no difference as it can’t celebrate its 100th year by being put back into its 1922 A1 condition. What we have is an A3 with the rear part of the frames probably being all that’s left of the original. If it can’t be returned to how it looked then logic suggests that the next best is to display it as it was finally modified.

 

Just to remind casual readers that working locomotives have their components almost entirely replaced at major overhauls and in the LNER's case the frames were regularly replaced and repaired to the extent that most of the Gresley A1s/A10s and then A3s had 3/4 of their frames renewed over their lifetimes.

The originality of components for continuously working locomotives is not an indication of corporate identity; it never has been, outside of enthusiast circles.

That might be true for any other time in its life, but this is its centenary. Not ordinary circumstances. No one is asking for a return to 1922 condition, incidentally; most are asking for a return to a single chimney format (by far its best known format in working service and in preservation), and for apple green livery to be applied (again, its best known format).

We don't have to like it, but we should acknowledge that it's true. Flying Scotsman is known the world over as 4472, not 60103.

 

How long did the original wheels last?

 

If you were going to build one you would have problems running it, as built the engines were a little too high for the modern network and the engines had to be reduced in height as a result of the creation of the LNER, the GNR loading gauge was a little more generous than that to be found on the lines of some of the constituent companies. You wouldn't want the fuel bill for the short travel valve gear fitted engines either. That being said, the originals could perform well and the elimination of the broad valve rings and the introduction of the Knorr type was felt to make a major contribution towards reducing the fuel consumption. Given the results of leakage tests there is little reason not to believe that this was not the case.

You wouldn't want the original frame design either so with this in view, amongst so many other details, you would end up with an engine which looked like a typical A3 of the 1930s. Strange that!

 

I have no idea: the ones on it may be the originals or not. The tyres are definitely not original. Steam locomotives get used, they wear out, parts are replaced. Here, we are debating the aesthetics of the locomotive, of which in this case the livery has great meaning in its history. Anyone arguing it doesn't matter is possibly not understanding its history, I'm afraid. Sorry!

 

Possibly worth adding that we're having this debate on the anniversary of Gresley's death.

 

They are probably not the original. Parts get swapped around, look at the motion on a preserved locomotive. Boilers get cycled around through the pool with batches of new boilers being built as required. Throughout the working life of a locomotive the machine is maintained in a satisfactory working condition and things change. Heavy repairs, light repairs, and more change the individual locomotive and sometimes the whole class is subjected to change because new ideas are introduced.

If we look at the construction of 2007 it gives details of the design and construction and projected service life of the cranked axle. I wonder when the cranked axle was renewed on Flying Scotsman because these also have a limited life.

If you have a machine and you are using it it will change. Even if you are not using it it will still deteriorate. The preservation movement took many years to develop to the point where it had the facilities to fully look after the needs of its engines. In the earlier days some locomotives benefited from being attended to in BR works and when this facility disappeared groups had to find other ways of keeping their charges running but the majority of our engines have a fairly easy life. But some decisions do come back to bite us with respect to choices made when preservation was not so well equipped as it is now.

Engines that have more expected of them need more attention and a part of this attention means that even with the best of intentions when it comes to retaining the original fabric we are are forced to replace things. Locomotives always change, some more than others but they all change.

 

Perhaps it could be rebuilt into its 1940s form to remove those issues

Tom

 

My preference would be to keep it as it is and put all the money required to convert Scotsman back to single chimney towards a new cylinder block for a certain V2. That also looks fantastic in either shade of green and would also perform better than a 'detuned' Scotsman.

 

Maybe I could take it a stage or two further! That would upset some people. But I do like the two original prototypes not only for their appearance but for what they began.

 

Yet every single Scotsman trip sells out despite the 25% premium on the ticket price. The public don't care what shade of green it is or number it carries, they just want to be pulled by Flying Scotsman.
And that BTW is a great thing as it keeps the public interest in steam locomotives. Flying Scotsman is the single biggest advert for railway preservation we have, it breaks down barriers, therefore the priority should be to keep it in the best running order as possible. The livery and number does not matter.

 

A new block for the V2 would be far more costly than a blastpipe and associated work. You could always ask Howco for a quote.

 

My tongue was firmly in my cheek with that comment! However, my point was that if there is money available for a new blast pipe and single chimney for Scotsman it would be better spent on resurrecting the V2.
I can't understand the logic of spending £ altering an already running loco. Why not spend money towards getting another loco back into usable condition?
Unfortunately I doubt there is money for either, hence why nothing has happened.

 

The status of FS is interesting and perhaps unique. None of the current collection of components identified as 60103 can completely accurately portray the loco as it was between 1923 and 1963 without the addition of new material or the permanent alteration of the current material. I agree that to those of us of a certain age it is best known as 4472 with a single chimney though we need to remember that this image was created in 1963 to represent how it typically looked pre-nationalisation. You know better than many that the post 1963 4472 isnt strictly historically accurate for many reasons.

For the current generation the 2 best known images of FS are as 4472 with double chimney and deflectors or as 60103. Creating a single chimney 4472 would only give us a facsimile of the post 1963 version in any case, would be very expensive for little actual gain, Riley reckons it wouldnt perform and as @acorb has said above, the public are falling over themselves to ride behind or see 60103 anyway.

 

Performance of FS is somewhat irrelevant as she is these days an elegant Smoke Generator with a recognisable nameplate, invariably shoved around the network by a box - a single chimney would at least give you an audible chuff chuff noise to go with, and in any case its the number of blast pipe orifices, not chimney outlets that is the key to 'performance'
In WIBN land in the process of restoring 4771 /60800 you could arrange for a chimney swap with FS ... oh but then you would have to fit the V2 with smoke deflectors because apparently they would be 'neccessary'

 

Last month I attended the funeral of a former member of a choir in which I sing who was also a train enthusiast with a particular penchant for the LNER, especially Gresley pacifics. The order of service had a picture of Flying Scotsman on the front cover and I was quite surprised to note that it was a preservtion-era picture of it as 60103. The funeral directors had downloaded it from the internet apparently and I was surprised. on being told this, that they had not ended up with an image of it as 4472 as one would have thought these were more numerous.

My former friend lived within about ten miles of Paddock Wood. Such a shame he didn't live to see Scotsman make its first ever run to Kent last month. Incidentally, at his insistence, I have inherited his model railway and am now the proud owner of (amongst other things ) two models of Flying Scotsman, both in LNER livery!

 

People have stated that they would fund the change. Their money and so their choice. You want something else funded? Then you raise the finance, your choice.

 

The digital age allows for far easier uploading and posting of images and anyone with a smartphone can easily take thousands of images. The balance of images tells us much about the development and use of technology and the ease of making images public. The history of the locomotive stretches back well before the digital age. The images available reflect the ease of a process and cannot be taken as an indicator of the popularity of the subject in question.

 

Are they going to fund the process to put her back to double chimney once the novelty has worn off????