GCR Black 5 No 45491

It's quite some feat to have completed the boiler and tested it , before fitting it in the frames for final assembly since the photo taken on the 1st March..............

Suspect the placement of the boiler in the frames etc is more a tidying up exercise with the added bonus cladding and pipework can be finished...

Happy to be proven wrong mind....

 

Not cladding until the hydraulic and steam tests are completed. although I notice in the photo that the firebox cladding has been added.

 

If you have done a lot of boiler work and / or mechanical work that might have caused things to move round a bit, it wouldn't seem unusual to me to reunite boiler and frames to check alignment and allow initial checking of cladding and pipework, before removing the boiler again for final assembly and testing.

(Even something as small as if you have re-rivetted the lower firebox sides, will it still fit between the frames - not a given with a large boiler if the stay heads protrude a bit more than previously. The time to find that out isn't when the boiler ticket is ticking).

It helps to have your own cranes, of course!

Tom

 

45491 is ex-Barry and never steamed . This is new cladding being made and trial fitted.

 

Yes, I know; it's how I'd do it too. The point being made was that the hydraulic test cannot be done with the cladding sheets in place. Having the tubes in helps too!

 

I may be wrong, but I thought that the cladding had been largely completed a few years ago prior to the nearly-finished boiler having to have the newly-fitted tubes removed for unexpected tubeplate replacement (due to a paperwork issue with the previous tubeplate, if memory serves me correctly... must be immensely frustrating for all involved). That being so, once the tubeplate was in it could have all gone together relatively quickly, but like others above I suspect that it's untubed and will come off again. A first steam test in preservation is normally something to be shouted about, so I strongly suspect is still a while off.

 

45491 Latest Steam railway magazine reports the owners have been given notice to remove it from the GCR.

 

That's a shame, I have seen in a number of times in the shed at Loughborough over the years and was hoping to see it run there one day.

I expect it will find a new home pretty quick, there's a few lines who I'm sure would love a freshly restored Black 5 which is near completion to add to their fleet.

Chris

 

It'll be interesting to see where it ends up. I heard a rumour years ago that someone at the NYMR wanted a Black 5 but in the end he went another route. More recently there was another rumour that someone associated with the NYMR was considering buying 76079; whoever it was might be better thinking of this one (if it is for sale) as it mostly seems to need reassembly to get a working engine - might be a better buy, and Grosmont showed with 80136 and 92134 that they are very good at reassembling nearly finished engines.

 

Without any of us knowing the circumstances, it's a great shame. Black 5s are an intrinsic part of the latter days of the erstwhile GC main line. 45231 has left, and now 45491 has to leave.

 

When the loco arrived at the GCR back in 2011, I recall the loco was 'close to returning to steam'... For the last 15 years it always seems to have been reported as around 18 months from steaming.

I can understand, after all this time, it has been given it's marching orders to be honest...

 

And yet we've been waiting far longer than that for 'Boscastle' which has been pending or under overhaul for 25 years now.
On the face of it, 45491 is ideal for the GCR so it does seem strange, if what is reported is true.

 

Maybe it's a Trump-like negotiating position being adopted b the GCR management!

 

Certainly seems one of those engines that has been close to steaming for over a decade. Can it really be that close to steaming if the GCR is evicting it?

 

On that basis, has someone been over-optimistically reporting for some time and the other party has got fed up/has something they want to do with that space?

Given how useful a black 5 is, and how much facility[1] the GC has allowed them, that's quite the write-off.

I wonder how definite that report is?

[1] ie the intangible benefits of other teams being around for security, ad-hoc help, loan of tea/[whatever the railway equivalent of a 10mm spanner is], advice, stream of visitors past the collection tin etc.

 

It was still in the shed at Loughborough today.

 

I noted that latest Trackside magazine has a piece from the owner of 45491 who is looking for a new home but will consider scrapping as last resort to protect his funds held in trust for his family.

 

"If you don't take my engine in I'll scrap it" is hardly a good way to start a negotiation. I think my response to an owner with that attitude would be "go on then".
(Of course, I've no idea if any of what has been reported is accurate or not.)