P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

I agree with @goldfish that the website navigation could be better to make that document more prominent. (And per @The Green Howards , no charitable issue with making it easier to navigate or maintaining an educational resources section).

But there are reasons why a site may harder than optimal to navigate:

1. Those in charge simply don't see the problem (Surprisingly common; when you work with a site all the time, you become blind to its idiosyncrasies)
2. They do see a problem, but don't have the skill to sort it out (possible)
3. They do see a problem, but the web platform makes it impossible to sort out (probably unlikely, but possible)
4. They do see a problem, but fixing it requires input from their external contractor for which they have to pay, and they simply don't see it as a worthwhile expense (quite possible, depending on the precise contractual relationship they have for managing their site)
5. They do see a problem, but don't have the capacity to sort it out in amongst the hundred and one other things they have to do (highly likely, especially in a volunteer organisation)
6. They do see a problem, but can't get backing from all the stakeholders in the organisation for sorting out the issue, because all those stakeholders think they are expert web designers but they all disagree with each other about what constitutes good design (hopefully unlikely in a small organisation, but absolutely routine in large ones)
7. They know it is a problem, they have the capacity skills and resources to fix it, but are leaving it unfixed simply to piss off a load of people on a forum ...

I suspect there are more than a few here who have inevitably jumped to conclusion 7 ...

It's a common feature of many threads here that when an organisation is perceived to be doing some things badly, people naturally assume that absolutely everything is being done badly and is evidence of rank incompetence / malign motives. Whereas even in badly-run organisations, most things they do are actually OK, and those that aren't may be for a variety of reasons, only some of which are in the control of those in charge.

If I wanted to criticise the A1 Trust, a web page with "No longer maintained" in its header isn't the hill I'd choose to die on ...

(As an aside, re point 5: For the websites I run, I suspect in common with most large organisations, we maintain what we call a "backlog" of all the issues we know about that need fixing or developing. Many of them will simply never get fixed because we only have limited resources, and each time they rise up the priority order, they get pushed down by new issues deemed to be more important. A significant part of my job is simply managing the priority order of the backlog).

Tom

 

Over time, we have seen people who were the driving force behind the building of Tornado leave the board, or get sidelined, and others brought in, who possibly did not have the knowledge, or drive to keep the momentum going, either by mistake, or by some people wishing to solidify their own position, in every organisations, there will be internal politics and power struggles, its nothing new,
I will agree that it looks like the board has effectively contracted out the A1 to West Coast/ Ian Riley, but where does that leave the P2, If the trust were to announce a P2 project engineer who has been tasked with finishing the project and it was someone well known, and experienced that would go a long way to restoring some credibility, I would think the saga of Tornado's overhaul, has highlighted the lack of engineering knowledge in those running the Trust decisions made, that are questionable, that clearly were the wrong decision,

 

I've previously commented on trust for the A1SLT. That point remains, and is why while I'm with you on (5) being my bet, this may be more significant than you allow. As a piece of communications, it sends a message (rightly or wrongly) that some of the core engineering of the project is of low priority. With other issues, that becomes significant - and, also with experience around backlog management, is why I have seen trivial things made into "you will fix this NOW" incidents by organisations.

 

Thank You for a clear update on poppet valve gears.
Franklin B sounds like a good solution for having three cylinders driving unto second driver axle as on P2.

 

Thank You for an explanation of the newer knowledge that gives hope for succes even if it is not following the shining light from Chapelon

 

And, I fear, are just reducing their credibility by making 2 and 2 equal 22 and demonstrating ignorance of the issues.

Maintaining a big website, as Tom will tell you, can be a major challenge for all sorts of reasons. Volunteer organisations are the worst. The major struggle I have with one I maintain is that no ******* will write anything so I have to write everything myself. So if I don't understand the topic well enough to write about it it doesn't get written up.

Everyone one will agree that someone should give me the content, but noone puts their damn hand up. And for each individual there are higher priorities. Many competent people simply aren't capable of or strongly dislike writing technical content for a general audience. A shortage of that skill does not indicate organisational incompetence.

'No longer maintained' is basically a sign that yes, this is important to keep, but no we aren't able to update it right now. The simplest alternative is deleting it. I can easily imagine how the knockers would react to that.

 

So they've passed the A1 to WCR, the P2 is moribund. What are they doing?
I agree the display isn't important, but there are quite a few things I would think are important that they aren't doing...

As I said above, the state of the website, but the deafening absence of anything else is more concerning.

 

The magazines of various societies (not necessarily railways either) can be the same; eventually the magazine either gets padded out with lots of photos, gets very thin or just has the same few people writing for it.

It's certainly starting to give me bad vibes, that's for sure: so when Rail 200 has passed - then what? Also - who'll be paying Network Rail for the re-signalling and the turnout to join DLW 2 to the Big Railway?

 

If that were the only issue, you'd be right... but if a busy railway maintaining track and running locos and so forth was late, that would be understandable, but they have passed over tornado, don't seem to running railtours, aren't doing anything on the P2, aren't maintaining the website. What are they doing?

A bit of honest retrenchment wouldn't go amiss.
What is the latest news item for each project? Last I can see are autumn

 

Its existing, the 1/2m quoted was to take a branch back to the old DLW, from an area north of the new works, that has just been built, the siding the are now going to utilise for connection, splits just north of Skerne Bridge, on google earth.

 

Boiler due in APril according to TCC in tornado thread. Exciting! Im guessing here that they have gone with the same design as the A1 then, with no major changes in the design...?

 

No, both new boilers are to an improved design of firebox, that least that was the case at the time of order we were told. Wider water space, different staying, so slightly smaller grate.
They should be identical, longer length to suit the P2 being accommodated by a longer smoke box.

 

Thanks, I'll look that up.

ETA: Just done so, it's quite easy to see the scar left from the lifted tracks on the satellite view, isn't it?

 

Reading the press release on the website is interesting. Published on 24 March, it says there "will be" an update meeting in "mid-march".

I wonder if
(a) this meeting has happened
(b) when it was due to happen? (I'd call 24 March just about mid-march, but if were writing at the start of March, I'd say 20th would probably be my cut-off for defining something as "mid" March)
(c) assuming Mid March would be say 10 - 20 March, then it's either been delayed or given an unexpected result.

Clearly allowing for website update timescales and the fact the boiler has been delayed by Covid (still...), we can't expect an immediate response, but I wonder if this new world of better communication will mean the covenantors will get some good news in the near future...

 

To be fair to the trust and put more of this conversation into the context James and Jim have been getting at, they have only just passed over Tornado (on that note, has it actually been officially handed over yet and have the trust completely backed off from it?) and they have used the time between then and last week (?) to release a well overdue communication. Obviously the contents of that hasn't pleased everyone here, but I can't help but feel like the same people would be bemoaning its absence if it didn't exist altogether too.

To me, if Tornado is passed, running and ready to work it makes perfect sense to hand it over to an organisation that can manage it day-to-day where it can start earning money and free up resources in the trust. We know that the trust has been stretching its resources to ready Tornado for a finish line that constantly seemed be moving backwards. I would interpret the fact that the Communication Chord has been released within days of the loco getting back on the mainline, suggests that some of those resources are now being freed up to do their day job, instead of fire fighting to get the breadwinner back in a position to recommence raising funds.

We're not talking about a busy railway with a busy railway's worth of volunteers and paid staff. It's a small trust with probably the correct amount of manpower to get the 'normal' job done. They are not alone in the private or heritage sector in pulling people off of other work when it's hit the fan.

 

Has anyone got a drawing or photo of a continuous camshaft and its cam follower/roller for the Franklin 'B' gear (as opposed to the'stepped' camshaft type) that they could post on here to get a better understand of the proposed set-up for 2007?

 

Those tracks are still in place, as are the points, thats what makes the connection an easy one, compared to the one for Hopetown

 

Ah, right - I thought they'd been lifted! Must get new goggles...

 

This might be what you are looking for:

US2441199A.pdf This is the drive system.

US2441156A.pdf This shows the valve arrangement.

This is the 'B+1' version: US2518024A.pdf

There's also a C version: US2518403A.pdf

If I view the above in Google, I get a black screen, for some reason. If so, just try another browser.

 

It's probably because the links you posted are insecure (i.e. http://) rather than secure (https://) so it's gone into protection mode. Firefox says "I'm not downloading this because it's not a secure link, but..."