Mid Hants Railway Operational Matters

Is running The Jacobite heavy on the loco compared with other jobs?

 

I believe so, its steeply graded and has a lot of relatively tight curves- very heavy on tyre wear in particular.

Chris

 

Found this, if it helps ....

https://www.flickr.com/photos/loose_grip_99/1542831715/

 

Thought that the main aim was to eventually get 31806 mainline working to and from on the Wareham - Swanage service if the DMU services run and prove successful in 2023. Not a problem for the MHR as it has separate track and a platform at Alton.
http://swanagemoguls.com/faq/
"Swanage Railway now has a main line connection to Wareham and is developing its trial service. Although only DMU services are in plan at the moment, there is an aspiration that in the future we will run steam services to Wareham and possibly beyond."
Top and tailed with a 33 diesel if some Mk1 carriages are mainline certified?
It's size means it is limited for mainline tours with long trains, but will be good if it can run with some DCEs in 2023 and maybe some galas at other railways if the SR has enough locos.

 

I notice that sometimes the Bluebell uses to run trains of different lengths sometimes with a small loco.
So with 506, the Ivatt, the Canadian Pacific and perhaps a rented loco perhaps enough locos for the MHS to run a steam timetable, with some slack for any potential loco problems?

 

Thanks gents. I wasn't sure if it would be allowed to be towed that fast without a load more tests

 

PM Jacobite is only 6 coaches on a Saturday, load 7 Sunday to Friday with trains passing at Arisaig.

 

Ah! It's been a while since I've been up there - it used to pass at Glenfinnan.

 

I believe it was said in the Swanage Magazine that the ORR want a few years of operation before considering steam.

 

PM train AO and 76017 is vac only .

 

At the moment. WCRC have got the ex Steam Dreams VO Mk2 set back now, so a vacuum braked afternoon train could be a possibility.

Or WCRC are planning on restarting charters on the Cambrian!

 

I think 62005 is the only loco to have been re-tyred several times in preservation ownership - and that has occurred since it has effectively spent 90%+ of its time running on the West Highland line.

 

Those timings are seemingly now nonexistent.

 

I'm afraid I disagree with the idea that rebuilding 80150 will only cost 'a bit more.' This was one of the Barry Ten, an engine which got left in Barry because it was so dire - the bill for a rebuild/restoration is going to be multiple millions and take at least a decade.

Another user put that the frame problems on 45379 have largely been cured and provided it can be removed from Margate I'd have thought getting another ticket would be relatively quick - 2/3 years at most unless something horrible is found dismantling - and that risk goes for any overhaul.

 

I'm sorry, but multiple millions for the restoration of 80150 is just nonsense and is pure speculation on your part. It bears no resemblance to the six -figure sum estimated in a recent report on the locomotive in discussion with engineering professionals.

I know the loco better than most and there is good material there for a full restoration. The tanks are in reasonable condition, particularly the sides and bases, most of the wasted areas being the tops and where the tanks join the cabsides, all of which are easily weldable. A new bunker could be an option as could repair of the existing one which appears structurally sound. The frames are in excellent condition at the front end with wastage only under the cab area.

We have quite a lot of parts collected or manufactured already, particularly cab fittings and are aware of the boiler issues and the thin tyres which can all be overcome. The patch on the inner firebox was clearly considered adequate by Eastleigh Works for the loco's only general overhaul in October 1962 when it received a boiler swap (from 80137), presumably with the patch already in place. Modern welding techniques should be able to eliminate it.

Smokeboxes are considered more or less a consumable item these days (we already have a new door and ring) and if necessary, replacement boiler barrel sections have featured in several Standard 4 Tank restorations already. This has all been done before, many times.

With the spiralling cost and scarcity of coal, the value of BR Standard 4s of all three types is not to be underestimated, the tanks being particularly economical as they are not dragging a tender around. We would do well to look after the survivors, as we will surely need them.

 

5407 and 44871 also....

 

Nothing like as many times as 62005, which is on its 4th set of new tyres now (I think - could be +/-1!).

 

Had a quick online look at 75079, which is said to be an excellent fit for the MHR, even though it has a tender, the overhaul target completion date is 2024, but for some reason fundraising is not going well?
https://justgiving.com/campaign/watercressline-75079
"£120 raised of £180,000 target"

 

I don't know what the full fund-raising situation is, but as the tender tank is now complete, i would imagine the true amount overall is greater than what that post portrays, but it does highlight that the fundraising needs to be of a higher priority, as the likes of 75078, and 800150 are much needed engines, that being owned by the railway already means that there can be no hidden disasters further along the road, where hidden majority shareholders suddenly break cover and the railway loses an engine it can't afford to lose, that must never happen again, if the railway doesn't own it, or have a cast iron agreement with the owners, then it shouldn't be on the line, let alone money be put into it, if the future isn't signed down for the full ten years of its next ticket.

 

Now that the MHR has seemingly been burned by the 76017, situation, the chances of them completing the overhaul of 34105 must have now gone from slim to zero.