Bluebell Motive Power

I couldn't agree more - but coal (and loco hire hire for that matter) are a "Cost of Sale". In Railway terms, they vary based on the number of train miles run. In effect, infrastructure costs do not - a bridge doesn't need renewing because the timetable for the last 5 years has covered 150 days and 30,000 train miles instead of 100 and 20.000 - it probably needs renewing because it is 75 years old and getting very rusty! Look at some lines, and there are massive steel and iron structures living out the last days of their lives and they will cost a fortune to renew. Others may have no such problem - ironically, the smaller, branch lines could be saved by the fact that they don't have expensive infrastructure that could need renewing, if a lesser standard of construction of embankments or cuttings doesn't do for them! Probably 2/3 at least of a Railway's costs don't vary directly with train mileage.

Infrastructure renewal costs are likely to be more significant to survival as a single threat than whether a loco can run the service on 2 tonnes of coal a day or 2.5 - but the cost of 0.5 tonnes per day over several years may dictate how much infrastructure repair can be afforded!

I would agree that many in the heritage railway "business" do not realise the difference size of locos and the size of their firebox can make to running costs and hence even the actual value of the loco. A few years back the owners of one large freight loco put it up for sale at the price just paid for a mainline equipped Class 4 but got no takers.

As for whether the public recognise different locos - they may, if we bother to tell them. Railways and loco owners may need to develop the sport of unique "brand" that has underpinned Tornado's success if they are to justify using larger locos that cost more to steam, or simply accept that they have to increase traffic to the position where such machines are justified. If the volunteer work-force prefer quieter trains and a less taxing operation, that could be a real challenge! However, it is worth remembering that a "Gricers' Club" carrying 25,000 passengers per annum (to pay the coal bill) and contributing around £2 million to the local economy is far less likely to gain local authority backing to avoid closure when the infrastructure horrors strike than a major local tourist attraction that carries 150,000 passengers and contributes £20 million to the local economy.

None of this is simple - this is "joined up" business planning - and the real question is how well our movement is likely to be able to this to meet the challenges of staying alive!

(And this is probably all little to do with the Bluebell except their increase in business since opening to East Grinstead may ironically make bigger engines more necessary and sustainable!)

Steven

 

Pace PH, but Beachy Head is not that big!

Our big engine requirement is basically defined by what we need to reliably take our heaviest normal load up a 1:55 gradient, having already spent a lot of the previous nine miles climbing mostly at 1:75. Currently that is six coaches - about 210 tons tare, but potentially within the next few years that might rise to seven coaches - say 245 tons tare. (And remember - we are building Beachy Head to last fifty or more years, so the platform extensions at SP to bring the line up to seven coach capacity are highly likely to have occurred well before Beachy Head starts to show significant wear).

Note the word reliably. What we need is not the smallest possible loco fresh from overhaul on dry rails that could nonetheless work a 245 ton train over that gradient with a crack crew, but rather, the smallest possible loco that could work that load day-in, day-out, with any crew, even when the loco is a bit run down, with poor coal and everything else conspiring against.

We don't want to develop a reputation for poor timekeeping while crews stop for a blow-up halfway to Imberhorne Lane. Moreover, we have quite strict instructions about not blowing off etc in East Grinstead - which actually means, ideally, clearing the summit with pressure below the red line and some water space to keep everything quiet in EG. In other words, if the loco is right at its absolute limit on the red line as you go up the last stretch of 1:55 simply to get to the top, it's probably working too hard - you'll struggle to keep it quiet in EG. Given all that, a class 4 isn't too big. Certainly that haulage requirement is well beyond a class 3 with 16sq ft of grate, such as the small prairie.

Tom

 

I don't disagree with your core argument, but I think, if only at a subconscious level, people are able to distinguish between the shiny brightly coloured loco covered in polished metal with a memorable name when compared to the efficient dull black loco covered in dirt. Wasn't it Chris Columbus (the film director, not the explorer) who swapped the Bulleid for a Hall for the Harry Potter films, on the basis that the Hall 'looked' more traditional and less modern. It's a similar argument here.

The Atlantic follows that model in a way that I suspect that a black standard won't, and the argument that justifies enthusiasts doing something different coincides with building a loco that fits closer to the 'Gordon the blue engine', 'James the red engine' approach that non-enthusiasts like.

Simon

 

Just born out of the pure curiosity of a "BIG" Bulleid fan and not from being a Harry Potter film fan. Actually I would have to be paid to watch one, apologies to their followers, but just "not my cup of tea".
Which of the Bulleid locomotive designs were first in the "limelight" for starring in the film/s.
A Merchant Navy, original or rebuilt, a West Country or Battle of Britain, original or rebuilt version.
Or, tongue in cheek, was it to be a "Coffee Pot", Bulleid's brilliant "Austerity" Class Q1 0-6-0.
Now if had been a Q1 most of the film goers would have thought they were watching a Doctor Who movie, which I have been a fan of, off & on, and not a Harry Potter movie.

 

It was going to be Taw Valley which doesn't look like your 'typical' traditional steam locomotive.

 

Not traditional - but it would still have looked great in that red livery (runs for cover)!!

 

Yeah it would, it would look great, but it's about appealing to people without an interest in railways but Harry Potter. I think they made the right choice for their audience.

 

Personally, I'm still not sold on it

http://www.flickr.com/photos/748028...KLq-dSc8Dr-dPobBo-br2ob8-dRo2yF-ekPqJz-ekV69N

 

Plenty of pictures of it around the inter tubes…

Images

Simon

 

There is hardly a word of this I would disagree with. I would only observe that I understand business is quite good at other tourist railways and one should not assume, for good or ill, that extending to East Grinstead is the only reason for the increase. Absence of Olympics may be another.

Ah yes! It seems I need to say that I have no animus against the H2 to avoid vitriolic comments from a certain quarter. In fact I "like" it more than any of the other newbuilds/rebuilds. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant thought. I would be just as opposed to money and effort being diverted into any other project to recreate a large wheeled express locomotive that will never do more than 25m.p.h. up and down a tourist railway.

 

Update on the overhaul of Maunsell Q class 541:

http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/loco_news/lwg_541.html (scroll down)

A couple of points for the nerds. Firstly the tender is, I believe, the last surviving tender from one of the "Woolworth" Mogul kits, ordered by the Government as a measure to maintain employment in armaments works after the First World War, and eventually bought by the Southern Railway at knock-down prices. As such, it has the SECR right hand drive, so left hand handbrake on the tender, even though the Q class itself is left hand drive.

Secondly, the boiler - not visible in the photo, but seen up close it clearly shows the repairs to damage sustained during the Second World War caused as a result of being struck by a bomb (while attached to 542) while at Ashford works.

Edit: this earlier photo shows the wartime repairs clearly: http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/loco_news/12/boiler_robf4348h.jpg

Tom

 

i dont think the H2 Atlantic will have any of the problems perceived by some. they had an excellent reputation years ago. so far as 'new builds' are concerned they are one of the few ex-LBSCR classes that the NRM had virtually a full set of drawings for. there is quite a bit more to the loco than the boiler that isnt new such as the ex-LBSCR tender chassis and wheelsets.

re the extension i am reminded of the fact that the Talyllyn Railway expended considerable effort and expense reducing the gradient of the Wharf - Pendre gradient in preservation days. perhaps one day someone will decide to reduce the Bluebell extension profile to the original formation, thereby reducing that formidable gradient!

cheers,
julian

 

Given the landfill tax implications, I think reducing the formidable gradient could only be achieved at even more formidable expense!

Can't remember the figures now, but I seem to recall that even in 2012, the £25 per ton cost to remove the waste would have gone up to something like £96 per ton once the tax was added, and that tax rate was increasing by £8 per ton per year... So I can't imagine too many people on the railway would consider it sound business to shut our connection to London for a year or two just so we could pay the Government £5million or so in tax from our diminished revenue! There are better things to spend that sort of money on - like a couple of new build L class baltic tanks to haul the trains up the steep gradients

Tom

 

Could you have a banking locomotive running between Kingscote and East Grinstead?

 

An

And New build a Z class for the gig? What a lovely thought, but you folks who know about this stuff, would it create nasty regs/safety issues?
Presumably the banker would have to couple on at Kingscote and run back separately while the train engine was running round. Would there be big operational challenges with tokens and things? I'm ignorant of this practical stuff.

 

Wouldn't be allowed as a banker under the rules / signaling - it could go up attached to the rear, but would have to run all the way to East Grinstead and come back attached to the train, i.e. it couldn't just drop off at the top of the hill and run back. So operationally it would be a lot of faff and would potentially lead to a lot of delay at Kingscote if you were crossing trains there, quite apart from any considerations of rostering (for example, which days would you need it). So not a massively practical proposition...

Tom

 

Photos (from John Sandys, not me) of the Q and S15 in the workshop, showing a different angle from what is normally available.

Start here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bluebellrailway/9624256930/in/set-72157635290885148 and next five photos.

Tom

 

It would appear then from all I've gathered on this matter, that my initial concerns about the imberhorne cutting's steeper gradient profile have come true...

Effectively a large portion of the railway's treasured smaller sized steam engines have been made inadequate for general purpose/usage, sidelined for the now necessity of bigger engines. Terriers, Ps, along with some others... It would seem that, steam locomotives once able to run on their own happily with a good sized train, now seem unfit as a result of the issues the extension's gradient present.

True the increasing size and thereby weight of the coach sets as a result of the increase in passengers is a major factor too. But the clearly repercussions as a result of the steep gradients to East Grinstead can't be ignored either, as the subject of that incline and issues with climbing it seem to crop up far too often for my liking.

As a result of this consequence, part of me can't help but think that this may change the spirit and image of the Bluebell Railway in a big way, not necessarily in a totally bad way mind you, but not absolutely in good way either...