New builds - how many will ever really work?

I'm less sure about that. There is a big difference in cost between restoring an engine that has maybe 50,000 or 60,000 miles in ten years up and down a preserved line; and one which has had 1,000,000 plus in its first life, and then perhaps two or three additional ten year cycles of 50,000 or 60,000. This can be seen in many heritage locos today on their second or third preservation-era overhaul, which are requiring ever more extensive work, to the extent of major frame renewals and huge sections of boiler plate being replaced. Were heritage lines better capitalised (and , depending on your point of view, less sentimental / not taking due care of their custodianship of historic artefacts), a lot of what are today done as repairs would actually just be wholesale replacements.

On the whole, you'd be doing the same repairs aftersay 50,000 miles of running regardless of whether the loco was new or old - bearings would be worn, cylinders would need reboring/reliing, tyres would need turning and so on. There will also come a point before to long when the playing field will be levelled with boilers because I cannot see that arsenical copper will continue to be available. Its production is now restricted to third world countries with lower H & S standards and they will catch up eventually, so there will come a point where everything has to have all-steel boilers and the fireboxes on these can only be expected to have a working life of ca. 10 years with regular use.

 

I would think a 77000 a likely sequel to 82045. Has anybody done any costings, if there is an 82045 duplicate how much cheaper would it be? Also how close is the GWR large prairie boiler to that needed for 82045?

 

The boiler/firebox unit for the above mentioned Standards appears to be a Swindon No 4 boiler, but with the barrel shortened and a dome added. Haresnape in "Ivatt and Riddles Locomotives" mentions that the same (firebox) flanging blocks were used as for the Swindon boiler, so I think it is a reasonable assumption that the firebox dimensions are the same.
Mr Oldford will correct me if I am wrong, but I think the 82045 people did consider adapting a large prairie boiler, but discarded that notion in favour of a newly built boiler/firebox. The copper sheet for the inner firebox has been in hand for some time, since back in the "slump", when copper prices were relatively low

Whilst duplicating major parts now would be great in an ideal world, financially it is not possible. However the patterns which have either been made new for 82045 parts production, or in some cases are already in existance via BSLOG will surely make a "77" possible, as ever given loadsa money

A small batch production of a modern Standard design as discussed here, or even say GW Panniers, is what the Heritage movement will eventually want for day to day service, rather than the more esoteric types under consideration. Eventually this will come down to a collaborative venture in the Heritage movement.

 

It is true that Swindon used the flanging plates for a No. 4 boiler and the firebox outer dimensions are similar. However, the boiler for a Std 3 is dimensionly different in length, diameters and plate thicknesses. The firebox throatplate is different to accomodate the smaller boiler diameter and the tube layout is totally different.

 

Hmm - Wikipedia suggests that it was a Swindon No 2 boiler shortened by 5 13/16 in and a dome added. Well, I guess it depends whether you trust that source of info.

 

Following Lplus's post I have re-checked some information. He is, indeed, correct in stating that a shortened version of a No 2 boiler was used on the Standard 3s, albeit, with some detail differences and made of a different steel.
The RCTS book Standard Steam Locomotives Vol 3 states No 4 boiler. This is not the first bit of mis-information in this book about the Standard 3 tanks.

 

I believe Lplus to be correct. I.e the Std 3 boiler being derived from a Swindon No2.

Getting back on-topic: -
I think it is fair to say the majority of poster believe 82045 "will really work".

 

My list of who Will and won't hasn't changed. I still believe most new builds Will succeed eventually. Even Hengist which many people lost faith with because of there issues. But the new guys do look to be turning the corner. And for the first time ever I saw the sandringham guys and g5 chaps at barrow hill with the latter very much past the half way point.

So projects to achieve
82045
45551
72010
6880
2999
County.
Standard 2 tank.
4709
G5
Atlantic
Bloomer. Eventually


projects Im unsure about
f5
Claude Hamilton
GCR 567
Lnwr king George

ones to fail. (hope you prove me wrong)
J39
L1 southern
L1 tank
v3
Other Facebook ones like the great bear thing and the one that started to build a new a2.

Of course I can be wrong about any of these groups so good luck to them all.

Gavin.

 

An interesting idea. But I do wonder how many people would take the trouble to visit railways all over the country if they were running essentially identical engines.

One of the attractions of a railway like the Bluebell, for instance is the diverse range of motive power they have.

 

Only enthusiasts - Joe Public wouldn't be bothered.

 

Hengist is indeed progressing extremely well. From the commercial team raising the funds, the build team putting tenders out for casting the combined frame stretchers and the management making all the critical decisions. All this and a growing membership base which is vital for any build project to succeed.

There are also the teams working tirelessly behind the scenes fine tuning the build plan and also ensuring that all components, processes and quality control are fully documented in line with VAB requirements. Sounds like a lot of paper pushing but it is all required to build and run a steam locomotive in the 21st century and essential for mainline running.

For the newer 'Facebook builds' take heed, you'll spend as much time with a pen in your hand as a spanner and as long in front of a computer as you will in front of drawings!

Look out for some very exciting press releases this year!

Dave

 

I think the Facebook new builds have been deleted!

 

Originally posted by Mausell Mann

"I think the Facebook new builds have been deleted!"

Something to do with the shortage of copper for the boilers?

Keith

 

F5 should benefit enormously from the Epping & Ongar cominto operation.
Why the Bloomer is not proceeding seems to be quite a secretive matter.
I expect GCR 567 will do well as it seems to enjoy the asupport of a line it fits like a glove: just as L&B schemes do well.
B17 'Sandringham' group will be at Railfest York8,9 and 10 June as will the group for a LNWR George.
(Hengist is right in saying there is an enormous amount of background work involved before any cut metal appears. The trust for the George the Fifth was set up in January and gift aiding has been applied for so the 'shop' is now open).
I am absoluterly nothing to do with LNER tanks, but just supposing V3 was brilliantly organised, would somebody like NYMR be willing to allow such a project to be promoted amongst its membership? - this must be a pretty important factor in helping to make a group credible completely irrespective of whether there is space on the railway itself for the erection work to take place there. (in reality a 'site' almost anywhere would do for the early stages).

 

Not that secretive, I remember this came up before and it's just not high on the list of priorities at the minute. Understandable given the depth of Tysley's operation, year on year. I'd love to see it run, the Bloomer is one of those elegant locomotives which deserves to be seen in steam.

I'd love to do a children's book on the class, and donate a percentage of the proceeds towards the locomotive's completion, but I'm an unknown quantity at the moment where my first book isn't out until the 5th May and it may or may not sell. Who knows! If I ever make it big, there's a list of about forty or so good causes in preservation I'd like to help out.

Stepping off the soapbox (!), I think we're going to have a wonderful next decade or so with the various new builds coming into operation. Just think - an A1, a Saint, a Patriot, a Bloomer, a Night Owl, a Clan, a 3MT, a 2MT, a Brighton Atlantic...who could have predicted the depth of feeling and enthusiasm to recreate all of these lost classes? I think it's a wonderful thing, and the next step it seems, logically, is to create matching new build coaches to run with them, both for preserved railways and the mainline.

The dream of seeing one day an A4 running with an articulated streamlined Gresley set, and a beavertail observation coach behind it on the GCR, can't be an impossibility...can it?

 

Unless the loco happens to be a celebrity locomotive and then Joe Public can be very interested indeed.

 

The Frames for the Holden F5 have been cut. Holden F5 Locomotive Trust.
A big step forward for the project.