P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

As I understand it from reading on here the boiler on Tornado is its original, refurbished. The asymmetric boiler currently being discussed is new.

 

It's only different by five stays though, not a huge difference. As for the reason.......

 

Are you quite sure it's "only 5 stays"?

 

I was talking about the asymmetry!

 

Only on NatPres could people get obsessed about an asymmetrically-placed firehole. It's as bad as Ian "Hubnut" Seabrook's obsession with windscreen wipers on motor cars.

If it makes no difference to its performance in service, then what's the problem?

 

Firstly, I don’t believe the firehole door is asymmetrically placed (that really would be a turn up for the books!). Rather, it is the staying pattern that is asymmetric.

Given that (1) the stays are an integral part of the safe and reliable functioning of the boiler (2) different types have different physical properties and (3) this is a new boiler, not an old one that has had some stay holes drilled out, then that difference is notable. It may in the end not make a difference to the reliability of the boiler, but it is clearly a curious situation and the logic behind it (if there is logic, rather than a cock up) would be interesting to know.

Tom

 

The firehole ring is a very solid stay and flexible stays within two or three pitches serves no purpose.
My guess is that there was not enough simple stay material at hand and to get the job done five flexibles were put in to the left of firehole.

 

Is the pattern of Stay installation a hangover from original design or from new design with more emphasis on siting of stays dictated by new stress analysis?

Rather than a Rule of Thumb method as may have been used back then?

 

The fire hole door is central. Look at the flap catch and then upwards. Remember that the actual fire hole ring is rectangular on Meinigen boilers and the LNER style door is bolted over this.

 

Being close by, thought yesterday would be an ideal opportunity for a few pics and see what the plans are next.
Drove down to a deserted DLW, then realised that it was the 2nd week of the month, not the 1st or 3rd......
Try again next week.

 

Deleted

 

More likely they miscalculated the number of flexibles required (manufactured outside?) and used normal stays instead, away from the corners where flexibles are less needed.

 

Probably the most plausible explanation so far ….

 

Yes, they thought that we wouldn't notice:

MEININGEN 0 NAT PRES RIVET COUNTERS 1

 

Or, just maybe, it could be based on experience with the other boiler. Has anyone compared a photo of the boiler on Tornado as its currently configured? I note that the mix of stays on this boiler is significantly different from Tornado's boiler when it was first constructed.

 

Look up thread to my earlier post….. #4153