Tornado

Then do us all a favour and respectfully give it a rest. You’re not showing any respect to those people you mention.

 

Now I am confused. If it’s not a man made happening what can it be? Everything about the boiler and frames is man made unless it’s been dropped or in a crash.

 

Iam only supposing now, but what happens to the inner fabric of each heating/ cooling down cycle of a boiler, where do those stresses go? i would assume they are held in check by the internal construction, stays tubes etc, does a welded firebox react differently to a riveted copper box, if you were to remove the tubes on a welded boiler, whilst you are overhauling it, can parts become misaligned because the metal has had chance to move?

 

Do not feed the troll...

 

You can also give it a rest as the first anyone ever says anything remotely critical of Tornado and A1 group and you immediately lambast them for having an opinion.

Now wait for the PR spin no I don't response...

 

60163 has done so much for the preservation movement already, and it seems anybody with a gripe is taken seriously.

People should remember that when they glory in possible problems, and then in one case, refuse to divulge details, that IMHO, makes them look like a grade 1 helmet.

If you are so sure, share it, or if not, stop playing the childish games, and lets hope for a resolution, and back to the mainline asap.

That is what is really required, not the sniping.... or jealous crack....

 

Given the context I think you’re aiming at the wrong person here and I would like to point out that I am at least consistent (it’s not just the A1 Trust - I strongly believe we need to be less confrontational on open forums towards other members of our industry).

But hey, you be you. By all means take it out on me if it makes you feel better.

What a childish and cowardly thing to do there though, putting your own words in white to make it difficult to read.

Poor behaviour being shown by a lot of people who should know better quite frankly.

 

I haven't mentioned anyone, think you are making assumptions.

 

Rarely do I laugh out loud while reading a post on Nat Pres.
Well said that man

 

John, you’ve come into a thread, made a lot of vague but critical posts, left it to others to share what they know, because at the heart of this you are a coward.

If you had any respect for the people involved, you wouldn’t have spent two days on the internet complaining about them without actually explaining what you’re complaining about.

Turning around and saying you’re not mentioning names “out of respect” when you have done nothing but be disrespectful is a bit like turning up at a restaurant, complaining about the food, and then saying “but I didn’t mention it was the chef”.

Honestly? Stuff like this reflects badly on railway enthusiasts as a group. It’s also bloody wearisome.

 

An excellent response!

 

Entirely agree

 

Holy cow, you are one irritating individual.
Pat

 

I think its wrong to dwell on individuals and how they may come across, Clearly the reports are not going away, its easy, either say, " yes there is an issue, and this is it, we are doing z, then y to sort it out, Going from whats been hinted at, it would appear its something that possibly isn't down to human error, but possibly not fully understanding the effect long term effect heating and cooling cycles might have on an welded steel boiler, I did ask the question and hoped someone might come forward, with either a explanation, or to conferm how a welded steel firebox reacts differently to an copper one, @S.A.C. Martin can you with your experience of 35028 shed some light, do you do anything different on boiler management because your engine has a steel box.

 

I want everyone to bear in mind that I am not the chief engineer for the MNLPS: I am the treasurer, and as such any views I hold may or may not be correct. I will check with our CE later on in case I need to revise anything.

One thing I believe I can say with our current overhaul (which is in the public domain) is that we have been made aware of changes to the chemical treatment of water in London which will change our approach going forward. We already had water treatment in place but this too is being revised in future once the overhaul is complete.

We have been fortunate in having at our disposal many volunteers with a keen interest in chemistry generally, and our engineering team has spent a lot of time investigating the causes of any degradation within our own boiler, which has then generally informed what we have looked to fix at Leaky Finders in the current overhaul.

We’ve had our own challenges throughout, and we are not alone in the industry in perhaps being surprised by the levels of degradation from water use (particularly in the London area). Obviously, other groups are welcome to approach us to find out more, if they so wish.

It’s hard work our engineering team have done in this last year and a half that has mostly informed my frustration on this thread: there’s a huge amount of paperwork and discussion and debate to be had on virtually every decision to be made, a lot of necessary procedural things which won’t necessarily make the railway press, and a lot of things that have to happen internally before our in house press team can then report on it.

I have great sympathy for any group going through similar things, it is not easy to balance what is necessary against the desire to be as transparent as possible with our members. The committee takes everything very seriously and we go through a number of different scenarios and debates before making decisions on anything.

In short, just because something hasn’t been announced doesn’t mean it won’t or anyone is covering up: more likely there is a lot of necessary internal discussion to find a solution and get that going before any announcement.

It is really easy to come on an internet forum and bash a heritage railway group or locomotive owning group, if you don’t know how they actually work. Too easy, in my opinion: not enough thought given to what might be in place stopping any group from immediately reporting on every setback (such as potential contractual issues, insurance, inspections, internal discussions and votes).

I got into the MNLPS because I was, and remain, in awe of the professionalism of its many society members and its committee, and it is why I dedicate so much of my spare time to working hard for them behind the scenes. That, and we have a beautiful locomotive that is cherished by so many.

I am sure no.60163 will be back in due course, and again I wish the A1 Trust the very best in whatever has come their way. There are no problems, only solutions.

 

Martin, with hindsight; building 60163 with a new MN design boiler could have been a better option.
But the loco wouldn’t have looked like a A1!

 

Thank you for that very informative post, I fully agree with what you have said, there will always be some stuff that isnt going to be able to be published, but you do where you can,

 

Let’s not be silly, every locomotive design has its own set of issues that need to be identified/remembered/passed on to deal with.

 

The reason I asked is because the original design of boiler had a copper firebox, if i'm right, so obviously there were changes in the positioning of stays and type of stays i think that extensive computer work was done to come up with a plan that ensured the new design was stayed correctly As well know, each and every heat/ cooling cycle adds stresses to the boilerplate, that stress has to go somewhere, how is it relieved, ? do steel boilers need a different approach to traditional types, for example, cracking etc, those working on clan line found additional repairs were needed, modern boiler plate whilst it may be a close match, isn't the same as the old stuff used back in the 60's,

 

Water treatment is something we are looking at with 34081. It’s a dark art and the treatment we were using may not be the best for the current chemical composition of our source water.