The Pride of Swindon 5043 to Carlisle via the S & C -16th October

Let's be honest - the real skill is keeping a fire going in them. Wider fireboxes are more forgiving because the horsepower needed from each square foot of grate is not so critical as those narrow "between the frames" products of Swindon that were designed on the calorific content of good Welsh steam coal which is now almost impossible to buy or to replicate.

That's not a criticism - the locos saw out their working lives long before the supply ceased - so the design was a success - but in today's world only a few seem to have mastered the art of keeping their fires bright with what is available today, or getting a suitable fuel to keep them that way.

That's not to say that other designs will burn anything - just look at 6233 and 60019 last month. Feed any firebox rubbish and it will turn black.

 

I put a lot of iffy performances during the BR preservation era down to Crew unfamiliarity, BR usually allocated crews from the nearest depot with steam competency, but a Castle or Hall is still an alien thing to someone from Carlisle or Warrington who was used to Brittania's or Scots, if a driver is competant on a Deltic it doesn't mean he is on a Western and the same is true with Steam, the West Coast crews today spend a lot more time with the types than BR men in the 70's and 80's and get to know better how they respond.

 

David 1984
I am not going to be drawn into a discussion about this as I am sure you are unable to remember much about the 70s and 80s preservation.
I would just say this.When steam went to Marylebone the traction inspectors and crews used to find out before the engines entered their patch what they were getting.I had great admiration for the crews there and at least two were exceptional drivers indeed.One in particular was very handy with small engines and he could make them perform as well as the 7s or 8s.We had about 6 years when steam ran from Marylebone a period that will never be repeated.

 

Maybe not, but we are now seeing steam out of other London termini on a much more frequent basis than when Marylebone was the only London station that saw steam.

 

Oh yes, TBirdF, how I agree with you about A2 BP. What an asset she would be on the mainline now. More the pity that there is never any news about her future, last I saw was a crazy rumour that NELPG were going to take her over again like before.

Dreammms---

 

That's a bit discriminatory and dismissive of anyone under the age of 30 frankly, it's easy enough to listen to people's accounts, read books and come across other information of years passed to know how certain events happened, in any case 5029's and 6024's in the 90's were definetly within my memory and thw crews had something less than much Swindon machine experience, it's all very well reading about the traction and trying to understand it's differences but that's no substitute for practical experience.

Dismiss the younger generation out of hand at your peril, certainly the right way to go about the steam movement ending within 20 years.

 

well said David 1984, I personally know a few firemen from west coast that have exellant knowledge of maintaining and runnning western engines and other regions loco,s cuz their in their twenties and thirties and not former B.R, does this mean that they shouldn,t be doing this and keeping steam on the mainline palace gates,
Their are a handfull of people under the age of 35 that have spent more time with steam than some of the ex B.R crews from the 70, 80s.
Bill.

 

Well, Mr. Notley's respected commentary is in the Beano. I think this gets my vote for Nat Pres tour of the year...

 

Mike Notley calculated 2030 edhp on the last mile to Ais Gill summit southbound. Incredible performance! I don't know if a King has ever produced such a figure, yet alone any other Castle. I wonder what the actual hp produced was? I'd guess around 2,200. As I see it, 5043 has re-written history. The cylinders did not beat the boiler, which is what is often said of the Castles. Also, I doubt if a Kylchap double blastpipe/chimney would make the loco steam any better than the Swindon double blastpipe. Sam Ell really did transform the Castles by his front end modifications. Perhaps 5043 should be described as a Collett/Ell locomotive.

That run has got to be the Nat Pres tour of the year. Brilliant stuff!

 

Performance wise I agree, but what about the Up Bristolian when FGW, NR and VT got together to give us a true 1950's style run?
Or the Chiltern Centenary Express, when NR made it possible for 9600 to run right through to Chinnor?
Time for a few plaudits to go to Network Rail and the modern TOC's for helping to make GWR 175 such a memorable event.:clap2:

 

Talking of Nat Pres tour of the year........ http://railways.national-preservati...of-2010-Your-Nominations.?p=379320#post379320

 

Oh, you always have to complicate things! :+) But, you have a point, maybe the Brizzy has it, as it was not only top engine performance/enginemanship, but top notch planning & control too...

 

IIRC MrN pronounced 2120 edhp for 6024 one night on Hatton coming back from Paddington in October 2002. 475 tons from a standing start at Leamington and over the top of Hatton at around 56mph. driver Churchill and fireman A Meanley. This was at the time believed to be the highest edhp calculated/logged for a King I believe.

 

You're only jealous. ;-)

 

Interesting. So if 5043 has produced only 90 edhp less, it shows just how good a Castle it is. I can't help but think that if 6024 was to be given the full Tyseley front-end overhall treatment, perhaps it could produce an output even higher (if the fireman could keep up).

I told an ex-Worcester steam driver about 5043's S&C trip. He was interested to hear that she was worked on 50% cut off with full regulator on that final mile. He couldn't recall Castles ever being worked that hard on the Worcester to Paddington run. The hardest part of the whole run was Campden bank, even on that they weren't worked anywhere near as hard as 5043 was on the S&C. The difference in performance between original single and final double chimneyed locos wasn't obvious on the Worcester to Paddington run.

 

Without doubt 5043 performed superbly on the return run. However, although it is very good fun, discussing a difference of 90 EDHP is meaningless. Calculations of EDHP produce results with relative errors that are at least 10% and possibly as high as 50%. Does anybody know which algorithm Notley uses? Time to restore a dynamometer car!

 

I'd suggest that the quality of 5043's performance has a more than a fair bit to do with the fact that it was being driven in a propper cut-off, and wasn't just another case of the old '30% and blame it on the coal' sketch. In any case, full marks to both of the crew... maybe the old adage that the harder you drive Western engines, the better they perform, might finally get through!

Or maybe Churchward-Collett/Ell??

 

Or maybe a superb bit of engineering and restoration by a group of people who weren't even born when the final double chimney Castles appeared.

 

From what i've heard 5043 was driven in around 30/35% for most of that run, only gradually being dropped down to 50% for the latter parts of the climb to Ais gill.....
It might work up and down didcot or a short distance private railway but I dont think anyone in their right mind would ever try driving any engine in that sort of cut off mile after mile at high speed, it would be just about unsustainable for any boiler or fireman...

 

I'm no expert, but I too would have thought that 50% cut off and full regulator might be unsustainable for mile after mile. However, if you watch the videos, I think I'm coprrect in saying that 5043 appears to blow off from the safety valves more strongly as the summit is aproached. Also, I think it was said that both injectors were working, so maybe we can assume the water level in the boiler was being maintained? Maybe Bob Meanley would be kind enough to let us know about the condition of the loco at that steaming rate? I've read in different publications that the cylinders etc. of Castles were more powerful than the boiler. I think the tractive effort is 31.625 from memory. That's a high figure (altough theoretical) for a loco with a relatively small boiler. However, I think that 5043 with its double chimney and high superheat boiler, produced sufficient steam for the cylinders not to beat the boiler. If my assumptions are correct, 5043 has re-written the history book regarding Castles. Tremendous for this to be achieved in 2010!