60163 Tornado temporarily withdrawn.

Re: 60163 Tornado broken. Again...

Thanks for your feedback Mark, I'm sure its better for everyone that the problem is sorted now rather than soldiering on until the boiler has to come off.

How common are broken stays on locos without the hollow telltales? Are boilers full of them when lifted for overhaul?

 

Re: 60163 Tornado broken. Again...

Thanks Mark for official word, always good to quash the speculation early.

 

Re: 60163 Tornado broken. Again...

Thanks for the official post.

Looking forward to riding behind this superb loco again soon.

Jim S

 

New update on a1 website

http://www.a1steam.com/index.php?op...tornado-update&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=123

 

Thanks for that link. It makes very interesting reading. Well worth a visit folks. IMHO.

 

very good of the trust to publish that, at least the boiler is sound and its just down to normal wear and tear, and its only because it has these type of stays that the failed stays were seen, how many engines could have been running with simular defects, but were not able to be spotted because they were fitted with the normal british type which doesnt have the same fail safe that the continental types do ?

 

It will be interesting to see how Tornados boiler fairs in the next few years comapred with a tradition riveted boiler and firebox.

Jim S

 

I suppose if the stays had been screw threaded and then welded the problem may not have occured, from what I heard the stays a only welded.

 

Have you read what the A1 trust have said. The loco has done over 60 steaming cycles (basically from cold to in steam) since it's been built. To have only broken a few stays over that time look pretty good to me. How the stays are fitted shouldn't matter, even screwed and beaded stays are rigid. I don't think there is much wrong from what I've read.

 

Malcolm. Spot on in asking all here to read what the A1 Trust have written. That answers my questions and concerns, and should do for others too.

Maybe it's whinging Pomm syndrome! (wink)!

(As long as we don't get whinging Aus syndrome if Mark doesn't win at Silverstone today!).,

 

The statement is very interesting - there will have been a quite a few occasions over the years where heritage line locos have done 200 days in steam over 18 months (depending on the 18 months in question, of course!) but these will only have been achieved with long spells of daily use, so the loco is not being steamed from cold each day. The total of steamings from cold underlines the extra strains that locos used only for a day or two at a time are subject to, which is mainly those on use on mainline tours.

Steven

 

60 steaming cycles is abit of a joke. I went on the Shakespeare Express today and talking to the lads from Tyseley, they reckon that Rood Ashton Hall has done almost 300 steaming cycles since it was rebuilt in 1998 without any signs of broken stays. Some of the copper stays and the crown stays are still the BR originals and still in good order apparently. When you consider that this is only steamed once a week for the Shakespeare Express and other main line tours it has done far more cold starts than Tornado has. It seems like they may have a problem with the A1 boiler that is going to require loads of repairs in the years to come. I don't think that there have ever been many types of proper British boilers that have had things like this happen this quickly. I'll bet the NRM are glad they didn't buy one of these boilers for Scotsman.

Bill

 

I wonder if Geoff Courtney will eat humble pie in Heritage Railway! He's always been critical of the NRM in this matter.

Steaming cycles can't be the only criterion here, I think it's a cases of statistics being used to mask an underlying problem The original A1s may have have fewer steaming cycles between shop cycles but they did a lot more work and boiled a lot more water. Fluctuations in boiler pressure in the case of operation must have an effect too and there must have been a lot of that in a BR steaming cycle that would typically have lasted a week or more.

 

I doubt it.

But related to his constant berating of the NRM, it is interesting to see that the A4 boiler that he claims should have been repaired for Scotsman, now owned by JH is having a new firebox fitted at Crewe.

So it would have been no cheaper to have repaired this boiler than the original, more authentic A3 one that the NRM decided to proceed with repairing, unless of course he was suggesting that the NRM bodge the job, with a below par repair for cheapness!

Anyway back on topic re:60163. New copper firebox on the shopping list next overhaul?

 

300 cycles in 12 years equates to 25 cycles a year, just over a third of the cycles that Tornados boiler has done so far. Yes Rood Ashton has done more cold starts than Tornado, but over 12 years, so how can you call Tornados total so far a joke?

How many times has Rood Ashton been steamed since Tornado first steamed? Nice of you to speculate that Tornados boiler is problematic and will require loads of repairs later.

Dave B

 

Based on the evidence from..........................?

 

since I haven't spent 13 years building a loco from scratch and another 2 years running it and maintaining it. Since I wasn't present at the examinations or testing, so obviously haven't got the fainted idea what is really happening, I shouldn't participate in idea and possibly harmful gossip and fingerpointing. But since other people are, I might as well ...

I think, just like for Clan Line, this was caused by the loco going downhill too much. They never did that in BR service, they always went uphill. That is the problem.

From now on, Tornado should only run on lines planned by M.C. Escher

 

The A1SLT website might be up-beat about it, but in reality I think they have a big problem on their hands and are deeply worried. One broken stay could be passed off as 'one of those things', but half a dozen or so broken and up to a dozen being changed doesn't inspire confidence. Having sorted this out, then one or more breaks only a few days later, then serious questions have to be asked. Absence of information as to in which area of the firebox the broken stays are/were doesn't help matters either.

In the road steam vehicle world (traction engines, etc.), despite their intermittent use or cycling, broken stays are to all intents and purposes virtually unheard of.

It has to be remembered that when a stay breaks its load is imposed on the others surrounding it. It is like a nuclear chain reaction, when one goes others can follow under the increased load. Taken further this could result in a firebox collapse, or even at the extreme, a boiler explosion.

I believe the Bulleid 'Pacifics' despite their steel welded fireboxes still have the 'old-fashioned' screwed firebox stays (open to correction on this point), but am not aware of them giving serious problems, despite them being a lot older than Tornado's one. Can it be that the current EU-inspired boiler code for new construction should be called into question? Do we really have this sort of problem with our old-fashioned riveted boilers with screwed stays?

One other thought. How many boilers has Meiningen designed and built? Not aware that they did any in the 1945 to 1989 period. Repaire, not doubt many, but new construction.....?

I'll hazard a guess that Tornado is going to be out of action for a while, and would not even rule out a return of its boiler to Meiningen for rectification as a possibility. There will be a big-time loss of face all round if the latter has to happen.

Additional thought. Has Meiningen designed any new boilers in the 1945 to 1989 period?