Flying Scotsman

I’ll refer you to my book on Gresley, John, but I will point out you are conflating my points: one of which was the livery and its importance to the history of the loco, and the other was the mechanical form of a single chimney A3 not being exactly inadequate for the tasks asked of it.

 

Three new builds.......

 

Which is rather my point in how nonetheless they have been made less efficient "just because"!

Tom

 

Simon, I don’t usually disagree with you but since you’ve used the BBC documentary to further your case, I’d like to point out the following.
This was a one off trip with something like load 7? It certainly wasn’t hauling a train with a load in double figures and possibly a something on the back to perform a shunt release unlike today.

This was in 1968 which is 56 years ago and for someone who works on the big railway you must admit it’s a little bit different to how it was then.
(I know we sometimes get to see a Deltic at the Cross, but they’re not exactly commonplace there now are they?)

Let’s throw in the quality of the coal available now compared to 1968, then the broken rail and the water troughs and second tender conundrum (how many times was a second tender used on the original non stop?) the signalman preparing to loop 4472… (was delay repay a thing in 1968?)

Without wanting to decry what happened on that day I’d say it was very much at times a seat of the pants operation that only went ahead due to its then owner being on the board of Eastern Region at the time.
As Alan Peglar said at the time it was was a very sporting gesture to be allowed to do so at the time, and as I’ve said we’re 56 years on from 1968.
Regards, Matt

 

Generally I agree with the above Matt, but just picking up on one point "Let’s throw in the quality of the coal available now compared to 1968" - I think it is a misconception to think the coal was better then than now. What we get these days is generally very consistently graded so the lumps are almost all the textbook "size of a man's fist". By contrast, when you look at historic railway images, one thing that is striking is that you get a mix of everything from dust to boulders on the same tender. Read a historic firing reminiscence and there is frequent reference to the labour of "breaking the coal", something that has largely disappeared in heritage use - at least in my experience.

Where the old guys did perhaps have things easier was they got more consistency of supply, with long-term contracts to get coal from a particular area. One of the challenges of firing in a modern context is that there is rarely much consistency in supply, so what you learn about how the coal behaves one weekend may be completely changed by the following, particularly if your line is large enough that you are getting new supplies more or less weekly.

Tom

 

And worlds fastest steam-locomotive 05002 had a single chimney.
There must be a lesson somewhere here

 

Interestingly 4472 was still running with a single chimney when it executed a very similar feat to its 1968 non-stop run some 21 years later when it ran non-stop in 1989 from Parkes to Broken Hill in New South Wales. The 424 mile distance covered became a record for the longest non-stop run by a steam loco. As in 1968 it had its fair share of close calls. At one point a staff pick up was missed by the loco crew but collected by a quick thinking member in the support coach who saw what had happened. On another occasion they had a near miss with a truck on an open level crossing.

Later on it travelled across the vast arid Nullarbor Plain unaided on route to Perth, Western Australia. The intention had been for it to have diesel assistance over the Nullarbor section but come the day it was realised that the screw coupling on the front buffer beam was incompatable with the buckeye couplers on the diesel locos. The diesels could not be coupled inside the A3 as the (?)3 water "gins" had to be next to the tender and the idea of assisting from the rear was unheard of out there. Consequentially it was hastily arranged for a supply of additional coal to be sent forward to Cook, the half way point, where an extended servicing stop took place.

As in 1968 the total load involved was relatively light and well within the capabilities of what was by then a fairly run down loco. Certainly having a double chimney would have made no difference as the issues were about organisation rather than the locos ability. All credit to the organisers involved.

Peter

 

I'm not sure that morale, or moral for that matter, come into it. One loco had a fairly small boiler with a double chimney and the other had a larger boiler with a single chimney. As both acheived a very similar speed of about 125 mph, significantly higher than any other recorded steam maximum, it suggests to me is that both locos reached what was about the upper limit possible for a reciprocating steam locomotive.

Peter

 

Is there really much point in saying double chimney versus single chimney? We should all know that there's much more to it than that, and that what happens on the way to the chimney is if anything more important than the chimney itself.

 

That is not proven and you know it. I assume you've posted it out of mischief.

 

Best not to make accusations isn't it? If it is an attempt at trolling its best to ignore it, and if its not then the accusation is in itself inflammatory.

Of course we may note the inherently flakey nature of railway speed records. I really don't think there's much doubt about which would be faster on level track with equal trains, but that's not how we accept railway speeds.

 

Hmmm! Probably best for the speed record thread. But I reckon that answer is not at all clear cut. Particularly with my recent request to the DB museum. But I’ll save that for when I’ve finished evaluating what I receive back.

 

Just goes to show the parochial nature of many railway enthusiasts. If it's not their favourite railway/loco class/designer, it's ripe for dismissal.

 

All Locomotives need love… Even Brush Type 4’s

 

I may have even said this already on this thread - I lose track - but the thing that baffles me most about Flying Scotsman is that, with the exception of a print, all thr NRM’s Flying Scotsman merchandise is of 4472 in Apple Green. So they know it’s the most recognisable and most marketable livery.
Surely some kind of compromise can be found to see it put back to that livery (even if with smoke deflectors) without having to do excessive re-engineering?

For what it’s worth, though I’m not madly fussed about LNER green per se, I honestly don’t think BR Brunswick Green suits that many locos. It’s ok, but most of the locos that wear it look better in a different scheme. 60009 being a prime example.

 

Well said Peter, and that remains true today.

The single versus double Kylchap argument is, I feel, something of a misnomer.

We now run these locomotives at speeds lower than they would have run, on much shorter trains than they would have run, albeit with far more varying quality of fuel.

Green Arrow used virtually the same setup as Scotsman all of its career and again, hardly a slouch on the mainline.

 

Liveries are all subjective though aren’t they?

 

Rather than an accurate representing any period in the development of the Gresley A1/A3 it then becomes a meaningless hybrid. The public at large are now used to its current condition and I think the NRM will leave it as it is.

 

No John, sorry. Not true.



There’s far more meaning in this form with the LNER livery than the BR dark green.

The arguments against LNER apple green are fundamentally flawed. Much of its major achievements are post BR days, in LNER livery, being done on three different continents.

Flying Scotsman, if restored to the single chimney format, with the corridor tender and LNER apple green, then represents the best compromise for its history across its entire life. Alan Pegler’s tenure with the loco, as also William McAlpine’s, saw this loco beat the steam ban, do the non stop run again (twice actually), cross the United States twice, run non stop the furthest in Australia amongst other notable achievements.

Meaningless hybrid? Only if you don’t know the meaning of it.

 

I think you misunderstood me, I was referring to it in Apple Green in its current configuration as it was suggested . Your picture shows it in the condition of a typical A3 in the 1930s, a good compromise as you say but it’s not worth going back to that, let’s keep,it in its final most efficient state, I’m sure Sir Nigel would approve.