Potential New Builds

Ahem...Donald and Douglas are based on the Caledonian Railway's '812' class of which there is one left...!

 

The 80xxx tanks are as close as you're going to get to the perfect steam loco! The difference in fuel consumption between that and a 3MT will be minimal, and largely influenced by the proficiency of the crew.

The justification for a new build is that you want to do it. I'm not convinced by the financial arguments. Rebuilding 45428, including an almost new boiler, new tender tank, full mechanical, etc. came in at £600k. I'd suggest that's about 1/3 - 1/4 of what it would cost to build a new one, and the end result won't be much different. Restoration is always going to be cheaper, and there's plenty of locos out there already. The "cut and paste" GWR projects are slightly different, as they're more a case of trying to do something with existing parts, that no one had any realistic interest in.

Practically every heritage line could be operated adequately by an Austerity tank. If you want a standard heritage loco, it already exists. The only people that won't like it are enthusiasts!

 

I remember firing one on six coach SVR passenger services in the early seventies. All I can say is thank God we then ran only to Hampton Loade!

 

To us anoraks, yes. To kids and families, highly unlikely. The MHR appear to have done an interesting job on their own "Douglas" from an Austerity tank. It got me wondering, what has roughly the same coupled wheelbase and Austerity? A Highland 0-6-4T banker? A MSWJR Galloping Alice (now that would be interesting)?

 

The Swindon and Cricklade have eventual aspirations for a galloping Alice: http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/4080619.Galloping_Alice_to_take_to_the_tracks/

The austerity wheelbase severely limits the new-build locomotives that could be drawn from it as it is so short. Only other Industrials would really be viable (not knocking Industrials, guys!).

Further googling has thrown the official page of the Alice project up: http://gallopinggertie.webs.com/

Hasn't been updated for some time though, I imagine that it is either on the back burner due to the recession, or the detailed 'behind the scenes' work is going on (otherwise known as 'now where the hell did they put those drawings?')

 

You may onto something there. Perhaps stretching into McIntosh territory: http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/1407/type18lichtblauw.jpg

 

That's a fine looking engine! What's the story behind it? I assume as you've mentioned it, it is a McIntosh loco?

Pre-grouping 4-4-0s would probably be the easiest to do as batches, if you could get a few groups together to work out the economies of scale. The boiler being the obvious major component that could be bought in a batch as opposed to separate one-offs. Example: Stirling 4-4-0s. Same basic design, used on two different railways (G&SWR and SER).

Another one - the Cambrian 4-4-0s and the Furness Railway K2s are the same engine design, with different aesthetic differences such as style of the splashers, chimney, and similar.

Further, an example of one of the many Sharp Stewart 4-4-0s survives in Holland:



Taken from here.

I do think if you found a pre-grouping design, made by one builder, that was used by several different railways, enough groups of people could be found to order the major components of the largely similar engines together.

Just one man's opinion anyway.

 

Going off this: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/in...30304__hl__mcintosh__fromsearch__1#entry30304 :

"Such was the success of the Caley 'Dunalistair IIs' that the Belgian government obtained plans for these locomotives for the Belgian State Railways. On 19th March 1898 five locomotives were ordered from Neilson Reid & Co, Glasgow. Only minor alterations were made to the original prototype - one alteration was right hand drive to suit Belgian practice. The Belgian 'Dunalistairs' entered service in Caley blue with black and white lining and maroon frames. As prrof of their worth a total of 245 slightly enlarged 'Dunalistairs' were subsequently built in Belgium... In this works photograph of Neilson Reaid & Co, the handsome lines of this Belgian 'Dunalistair II' No 2414 are clearly seen. The St Rollox foreman painter James Jeffrey was sent to Neilson Reid & Co to line out and decorate the loco with gilt scrolls in the Caledonian fashion"

Mentioning the FR 4-4-0s made me look out the RMWeb topic you posted about it and the Dunalister designs in Europe.

 

Has anyone mentioned the BR Standard Class 3 mogul yet? I know only 20 were originally built but quite a lot of patterns must now exist along with the knowledge of how to put it together. Perhaps the biggest problem is finding somewhere, for, say, five to ten years, to build it.

 

Don't Aus have some strict rules about taking their locos that means they continue to stand unloved? IoW have ideas on a Beyer Peacock 2-4-0T: http://www.australiansteam.com/1042.htm. Theres this which to my eyes looks like a LSW G6: http://www.australiansteam.com/1076.htm

 

Presumably the patterns which Brian Oldford is making for 82045 could be utilised for a 77xx? That said the tank version is probably more suitable for preserved lines which do not need larger coal/water capacity and which need locos running in revers for 50% of the time.

 

The Aussies have very strict rules on historically important artefacts leaving the country - otherwise I'm sure there would be another ROD over here by now! I don't believe there are any rules and regs on them staying in an unloved state, however! Merely they have lots of engines preserved but a smaller enthusiast fraternity.

Secondly, wow! Presumably of the exact same class as 'Galloping Alice'? I know the MSWJR locos were intended for export originally.

Regarding 82045 - as has been said a lot of the ground work will have been done for a 3mt Mogul if anyone wants one. I don't know about the cab referred to. I do know that 82045 will carry the chimney off one of the 77s - 77017 I believe (which was the one that ended up on the SR in '67?)

I am surprised that no-one (including myself) has really considered the Standards as being viable new-build options in bulk on this thread. The 2, 3 and 4mt tanks would cover most duties on a preserved railway - 4mt moguls and 4-6-0s for the longer lines. They're good designs, easy to use, solid and simple - and with the amount preserved a very large amount of castings and patterns are available.

 

" Regarding 82045 - as has been said a lot of the ground work will have been done for a 3mt Mogul if anyone wants one. I don't know about the cab referred to. I do know that 82045 will carry the chimney off one of the 77s - 77017 I believe (which was the one that ended up on the SR in '67?)"

Not strictly correct Jamie. The chimney in question is from 77014 and has been found to be cracked. 82045 will have a new one in due course.

However the one from 77014 does make a very good "begging bowl" and can be seen alongside 82045`s chassis!

Regards Barbara

 

My mistake! I was close though

 

I don't mean it like that. Its just they are just collecting dust just now and if they were allowed to leave under the ownership of a group/ individual who has the funds and time to restore one. According to one of the steam mags, Andrew Goodman has made public his interest in bringing one of the RODS back from the land of Oz which are just the same as every loco exported there but are identical to one we already have and served in the war. There are a number of beautiful Victorian designs there like the 2-6-0 posted above that wouldn't look out of place here.

 

Sorry, didn't mean to cause any offence. A lot of the Australian engines would be very nice and not look out of place over here. It is a shame that we can't have some when many are not being very well kept. That being said I can fully appreciate the Australians desire to hold onto their heritage.

 

With the mogul, the 2-4-0 the IoW have their eyes on and the 0-6-0 I have taken a shine to, theres a few of them in the country so its not like one would be removing a unique loco.

 

Same with the ROD, but their laws are the major stumbling block.