Flying Scotsman

I thought at one time the NRM had a policy of not allowing large-wheeled engines to be transported by road, but I might be mistaken.

As far as "Scotsman" is concerned, perhaps the answer now is that once it is fixed, it travels by rail only. I guess that will not suit the non-national network connected heritage lines though.

Presumably the A1 Trust people must be happy with Tornado being transported by road.

 

I believe the A1 Trust try to minimise any tranfers by road transport - it's not been off the rails very often since its visits to the GCR IIRC?

 

I don't think the A1 trust are that very keen on transport by road. Remember though the A1 is relatively new so its running gear will be in a better state.

 

If you look at old films of the overhaul of steam locos at Crewe, you will note that they seemed only to lift the loco with the boiler in place, presumably to add rigidity. I suspect they were mainly concerned about twisting of the frames rather than cracking. Cracking happened all the time on the road of course. There is a story that the frames of a B17 collapsed into the pit at Doncaster on lifting the boiler.

 

I think you are wrong. Firstly, loco boilers are not rigidly fixed to the frames. The back end (firebox) is held in such a way that allows the boiler to freely expand and contract. Secondly, locomotive frames are designed so that they can be lifted as a unit without the boiler being in place.
Crewe Works worked to a system when overhauling locos and, yes, the boiler was put back in the frames before the wheels were refitted. Hence you see many views of the frames and boiler being lifted as a unit to be re-wheeled.

 

I was under the impression that the road transfers policy of the A1 Trust was a matter of principle, not down to possible damage. The idea being she is a mainline locomotive through and through, and only travels over rail. The GCR have been the exception, not the rule, although I think the sadly aborted trip to the Bluebell for their 50th would have been another exception.

 

I think were all jumping the gun at bit here.

IIRC, the NRM hasn't said that road travel is the cause of the damage, so let's get a sense of perspective before rumours start flying again. All we actually have here is a molehill, easily fixable and will be in due course, but we seem to be faced with a mountain right now, starting to drag 60163 into the mud with it too. I'm sure Riley and the NRM will find what caused this and tell Joe Public in due course, so until then let's stop pretending we know.

(Mod style comment over )

 

As a general rule, I think the aversion to road transport is down to the abnormal loads it can place upon the locomotive's springs. 92212, for example, seems to have arrived at the SVR with several broken springs.

 

It is possible but the fact that there is a sliding expansion joint at the firebox end does not negate the stiffness which the boiler adds to the frames. I don't think they waggle around. Other than a one piece cast bed, I am trying to think of an image of loco frames being lifted on their own - pics of Datong (China) and Swindon come to mind aside from Crewe - and they all seem to show the boiler and frame being lifted as a unit to wheel the loco.

 

I don't believe anyone is 'dragging' 60163 into the mud.' One of the benefits of this forum is the range of knowledge and thought that is aired on many subjects. The discussion on the latest problem with 4472 has been very informative and from how I see it, nobody is pointing a finger with spurious accusations. People are bound to speculate on the cause - take that away and this forum would be almost empty.
If it gets silly, slanderous or out of hand the Mods will do their excellent job as they always have.

 

RE: 92212
She arrived at the SVR with one broken spring, and another two have broken scince she arrived acording to MHR Loco shed staff.

 

Enlighten me. How can 92212 break 2 more springs by being shunted around the yard at Bridgnorth at slow speed?

 

I would have thought that any slight weakness of the springs is exacerbated by the loading and unloading along ramps and travelling over our potholed roads on a trailer, how much damage does they do to our cars which are designed for 'modern' roads?

 

quite easily actually. 6695 broke a spring once, it was changed. The loco was shunted off shed and put up the sidings and in that time broke another spring.
Springs only have so many deflections and will break in the end. Generally speaking a well made, to drawing locomotive spring can withstand 40,000+ deflections in its lifespan.
What has emerged in recent years is the number of springs that have been manufactured incorrectly causing early breakages and difficulties setting weights on an engine. This leads to un even weights across the locomotive that causes some springs to take more weight than they are designed to. This in turn leads to higher axle weights and increased wear.
It is quite a black art springing and weighing.

 

Scotsman chassis on low loader.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/nationalrailwaymuseum/5229201816/in/pool-960835@N24/

 

As will be the visit to Llangollen.

 

Quite. Earlier this year I measured the leaves on a newly-arrived refurbished spring against the drawing (which before anyone asks, was also provided to the refurbishers); only 4 of the leaves actually matched the length specified on the drawing.

 

I guess the boiler would add stiffness along the length, which would help prevent flexing when lifting from the ends.... but I'd have thought that would mostly been taken care-of by horn-stays and plates.

Did works put the boiler on the frames early purely for space and assembly-line efficiency? Together they take up a lot less ground-space, but remain big enough for a team of people to work on without getting in each-others way.


Are cracks unusual - or are they signs of age/active life, and this is unfortunately just something which was missed originally or fell off the to-do list?

 

Chatting to Peter Townend on Sunday about the original A1s produced an interesting comment. In his opinion the roller-fitted A1s rode better than the plain bearing locos - normally I would have expected additional unsprung weight (such as the cannon boxes) to adversely affect the ride (the automotive industry has always tried to keep the unsprung weight to a minimum) - does anyone have any views on this?

Foxy

 

Surely the axle boxes, being fitted to the frames are sprung weight. It is only items fitted to the hub , such as wheels, brakes and wheel bearings (fitted to the hub on a car) that count as unsprung weight in the automotive industry..