SVR General Discussion

I'm curious about the comment that the class 20 was idling. If so, haven't you just added about 75 tons to the consist (the equivalent of two modern bogie carriages)? In that case, you'd have thought the steam loco would be working significantly harder than it would without the diesel at all!

It seems odd. If you are going to put a diesel in to reduce the workload on the steam loco, surely said diesel has to actually be doing a significant part of the work?

FWIW, and this was 8 years ago, my memory of firing Flying Scotsman on the Bluebell (8 coach train being worked up a 1 in 75 gradient through a tunnel) is that I can't remember seeing any significant sparks from the chimney. Of course, all sorts of things (such as the coal, and the condition of the loco) may be different now.

Tom

 

The post on the SVR diesels page said that FS had been worked harder through the tunnel to build confidence in it's ability to work the train without assistance on the open line. As confidence built the amount of assistance by the 20 was gradually reduced to the point where it was largely idling on the last trip. That was very much not the case on the first trip.

 

First teian diesel basically did the majority, then same train they did a bit of a test in the tunnel climbing to Kidder to see if there was sparks (20 did nothing, FS was worked well). No obvious sparks.

Next trip FS did more. Then last trip did it all. They wanted to try take the 20 off for the last trip, but various issues meant it couldn’t happen.

 

I wouldn't want to be the one who makes the decision, a wrong one and it can alienate the landowners and farmers, a big claim against the railway will also mean higher ongoing insurance costs or exclusions on cover. I worked for a specialist rural insurance company for 30 years that did a lot of research on farm fires identifying the main risks in prolonged dry weather being Spring when the previous year's dead growth wasn't yet covered by the new season's green and later when arable crops had dried off ready for harvesting (i e about now). A wheat field fire at this time of year is frightening, it will spread faster than anyone can outrun it.

 

Totally agree. Not running 75069 today is a very good decision I think. Not so convinced by not running 77 but there we are. I guess the ultimate thing is that we have to protect the FS services so we must do what we can

 

For what it's worth, my 2 pence is the operational decisions made by the SVR are perfectly reasonable and, given the parched lineside and surrounding areas, are most likely the correct ones. I can understand the trepidation in allowing further steam out given the locos available (7714 hasn't ventured further than Bridgnorth for 6 months for example).

I do think the communication should have been better and we gain nothing by being secretive. People are much more likely to be disgruntled about feeling misled than they are about well explained diesel involvement.​

 

7714 back to double heading with the 20 tomorrow on N1.

 

Newly manufactured coolant header tank seam weld has failed …returning to manufacturer on Monday .

 

I fully agree Martin and it is a shame that the triumph of reconnecting the railway in double quick time, using the incredible cooperation of the mainline industry, has become drowned out here by niggles about the FS event. I do get the disappointment and yes there are lessons but clearly there has also been onging careful review in the light of experience gained with FS which has allowed the 20 to be dropped.