Bulleid Pacifics - Past or Present

A very interesting, appealing and informative read. The money side of things is a refreshing attitude. It won't be long until they can bid for a franchise, they'll have the motive power for it

 

I know it’s the wrong end of the country but I could totally see their Light Pacifics working TPE mk5 sets

 

A lack of engine release roads at Liverpool Lime Street would scupper that idea...

 

Top and Tail?

 

Shunt release with an M7

 

Has 30053 been gauged yet?

 

Still in bits, undergoing periodic overhaul, although much has been achieved and 'the end is in sight' I believe.
I know several people connected with the loco and they hope 30053 can get a new main line ticket in due course.
However, the cost of fitting main line equipment [TPWS, OTMR, GSM-R, etc.] is substantial so I suspect Drummond Locos Ltd would appreciate any financial help possible.

 

One wonders what sort of main line work would be offered to an M7.

 

I suspect the thought - if genuine - might be around top-n-tailing Swanage to Wareham services. But I suspect cold financial reality would bite for such limited use: if you amortised the cost over the number of passengers likely to use that service over, say, a ten year period (not to mention the expense of having two steam locos on every train) it would become one of the most expensive per-passenger mile steam operations in the country.

Tom

 

Agreed, I don’t think some people appreciate the huge resources in time, money and manpower in keeping a loco on the mainline. For the Swanage it would be a diversion of scarce resources from their core operation

 

A bit like the Wareham shuttle itself perhaps. It will be interesting to see whether it is overall adding to the SR or taking away.
I had my tongue in cheek regarding the M7. Be lovely to see, but….

 

Just last night we put on an old 8mm family film from about 1961 and here is an M7 plus three passing below Corfe Castle.

 

A few years back a number of Bulleid owners all clubbed together to order a batch of new fireboxes for their locos.

Given the number of Bulleid's now in the hands of SLL and with 3 under various forms of restoration, is there the future possibility of batch ordering components for those locos, as well as potential spares or replacements for the operational locos or would it still prove to be too uneconomically viable by themselves (or without the help of other Bulleid owners again)?

 

There is, I believe, the Bulleid Pacific Locomotive Association which is used to link up the various owners/groups and they have batch ordered some items.
As Boscastle has found out following the theft last year, even small "simple" items are costing a lot more than expected and it is proving very difficult to find suppliers. As for forgings, the situation is worse...

 

Now that Southern Locomotives Ltd have a fleet of 6 Bulleid Light Pacifics (34010 Sidmouth, 34028 Eddystone, 34053 Sir Keith Park, 34058 Sir Frederick Pile, 34070 Manston and 34072 257 Squadron) and are planning to swap boilers between locomotives, might it be worthwhile to actually build a new "Spare" BB/WC boiler?

 

Inner fireboxes already have been produced en masse.

A whole boiler is a different issue. Firstly, you have to look at what actually wears out on boilers, and what doesn't. Typically inner fireboxes, outer firebox sides and back plate and tube plate; front tube plate, plus the flues and tubes. That's a lot, but not everything: for example, the dome, various flanges, barrel etc rarely get replaced. Also, the replaceable parts tend to get done at different times preserving the overall structure of the boiler: they don't all wear out at the same rate.

So constructing a new boiler would tie up a lot of capital and end up replacing parts that don't actually need replacing.

The flip side is then what is the benefit? Typically it's said to "enable a boiler swap and get a loco back in traffic quicker". But that ignores the mechanical side of the overhaul. In preservation service, modern locos typically do 50,000 - 80,000 miles or so in ten years; and at the end of that time are likely to need a significant mechanical overhaul anyway. So there is little advantage having. boiler "ready to go" if the mechanical side of the loco itself needs a considerable overhaul. It is very unlikely that a loco could come into the works, swap boiler and go straight back out again - or at least if you did, your second period in traffic would be plagued with niggling mechanical faults.

So I don't particularly see the benefit of constructing a spare boiler even for classes with numerous of the same type preserved. I suspect it would end up tiring up lots of capital without significantly speeding up overhauls.

Tom

 

I disagree. Provided that there is the organisation and the funding needed to keep all those engines in traffic I think having a spare boiler could be very useful.

The boiler repairs are typically the rate determining step of an overhaul. There is no doubt that the mechs part requires to be done also, but this could in most cases be completed within a 12 month. Having a spare boiler with a fleet of six engines, means a minimum of 6 years to overhaul the boiler.

whether there is the work to justify this number of WC/BB is another matter.

 

When we (and I mean royal we - I was very much in a minority in thinking about it!) were scoping out the potential for having a second MN for MNLPS a few years back, the major advantage we saw was the ability to have an engineering team and volunteers always having something to work on - when '28 was in service, there was arguably less for those more engineering led and interested to do. The real worry at the time being maintaining volunteers and skill sets. So an argument for a second boiler to work on without the rest of the loco, to me, doesn't hold much water anymore.

(Of course, the second engine stuff is by now all by the by sort of stuff as those sort of ideas and potential plans were made pre pandemic and pre today's global situation - the aim of the game is retaining what you have and adapting ton rapidly changing economic circumstances).

 

I don't disagree yet isn't this what Carnforth have done for Tangmere using a second 'spare' boiler from unrestored 249 Squadron?

Changing direction somewhat - does anyone have an up-to-date view as to what's currently happening with Tangmere?

 

As I was trying to allude to above (but failing!) the business case for a spare boiler is dependent on the operation and its size.