P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

On a lighter Note / Chuff were these locomotives the first (1934) in Britain to be fited with a double chimney ( Kyllchap or otherwise) ?

 

Webb fitted one of his Jubilee class compounds, 1502 Black Prince, with a double chimney in 1897, so no. There might have been earlier examples.

 

I wonder if they might be tempted to fit a Lempor rather than a Kylchap system? After all what is one more small change?

 

Whilst the A1 people has managed to pay off many of thier creditors earlier than expected the begging bowl is out again. This time to pay for the tender.

It begs the question why start building another engine when the one you've got still owes money.

 

Why not? If they have a design and manufacturing team available why not set them to work? They clearly have a good marketing team, so compared to most new-builds they are in a good position.

 

Don't know about you, but I am running out of time rapidly, as, I suspect, are many other contributors to this forum.

40 years ago, I would never have believed that I would ever see an A1, let alone see the likes of "Duke of Gloucester" restored and working again - but a P2?? - for me, it can't come soon enough.

The A1 team have demonstrated a sound financial basis for their operation, I'm sure that they know what they are doing.

Cheers

Alan

 

"Don't know about you, but I am running out of time rapidly, as, I suspect, are many other contributors to this forum" - Ain't that the case!! I couldn't have put it better. I wanted to see an A1 while I was still around and am no less keen to see what a P2 can do as well. Instead of dripping and moaning and wringing my hands in faux concern I am actively working my butt off to help complete the financing of No. 60163 as well as doing all I can for No. 2007. All I can say to the armchair 'enthusiasts' out there is "put up or shut up!". Am I the only one who would be thrilled to see No. 2001 and No. 2007 go head to head in road trials? Can you imagine the spectacle?

And yes, there is a sound business case for starting the next project before finishing financing the first. The A1SLT didn't wait until now to start work on the support coach, did they, so the pattern had already been set. When you have a good design and engineering team already in place and the premises and facilities to conduct the work in, letting them stand idle would be crazy!

Foxy

 

Actually, I think there is a lot of sound business logic (well, as sound as you get when the core business is "running a steam locomotive" )

If you own one loco, then you have periods of up to 10 years in traffic when (hopefully) you are generating significant income and (equally hopefully) not making much use of your engineering resource. And then the loco comes out of traffic, your major cash generation mechanism dries up, but your need to spend cash skyrockets - and meanwhile, much of your core engineering team may have dispersed.

If you have two or more locos, then hopefully you can organise things such that your enginering resource is utilised at a fairly constant rate, and your cash generation is fairly constant, since the locos in service (generating cash) balance those under overhaul (using engineering resource and cash).

Look at the people who are most successful in operating on the mainline - Ian Riley, Tyesley etc - and don't they all have several locos in the fleet? (And I accept that the MNLPS are the exception that proves the rule).

In a loco owning group, the skills needed are diverse - finance, marketing, operating, engineering etc - but will also be used to different extents at different times in the lifecycle of construction - operating - overhaul. So having multiple projects helps make the orgainsation as a whole more resilient.

Tom

 

Tom, I couldn't have put it better. Also, given the aim of having three boilers common to both locos will help speed the turnaround during overhauls.

Foxy

 

The question is will confidence and fundraising for the P2 be sufficiently good to buck the trend of Chassis before Boiler ?
If So then Boiler no 2 could be available for 'trial ' on Tornado whilst its own boiler is undergoing its 10 year overhaul, with ideally the complete 2nd locomotive available by the time the next decade comes around.
With potentially different valve gear to 60163 the exhaust dimensions of 2007 may not be identical to 60163 but given the Kylchap fan club that exists, the historical pertinence and the contemporary Kylchap/Caprotti example of 71000 i dont think its at all likely that any other exhaust system will be considered.

 

On hearing that the A1 trust has finally confirmed their plans to re-create a Gresley P2, I found this thread via google. My first awareness of Cock O' The North was in a cigarette card set belonging to my grandfather, and which I believe my mother still has.

I see that that some are against this, for reasons good or bad, but for me it would be amazing to have the opportunity in the 21st century to see, and maybe travel behind, such a steam age icon. I will almost certainly become a covenantor.

Reading the thread, I found the discussion on the three cylinder exhaust beat very interesting, it is something I had never thought of. If I understand it correctly the general consensus is as follows:

- The centre crank on Gresley locos is offset by 117/123 degrees, to compensate for the middle cylinder being at a different angle to the others. This ensures six evenly spaced power strokes per revolution, something I would not have thought of but obvious now it has been pointed out.

- If the piston strokes are evenly spaced, then the inlet and exhaust events must be also?

- Any real or perceived irregularity of the beat must therefore be due to the imbalance between forward and backwords piston strokes and/or differences between the exhaust passages, unless I am missing something?

Earlier someone posted that 4771 had a very regular beat. Could that be anything to do with the monobloc cylinder casting, which I believe incorporated streamlined passages. What about the modified V2s with the outside steam pipes? Was there a difference in the exhaust beat? I have travelled behind 4771 and 60886, but as I said earlier I never thought to listen.

I am sure I read somewhere that the P2s also had a monobloc casting? If so would the P2s also have had a regular beat? And would the A1 trust be able to replicate this with fabricated cylinders? Or would the P2 beat be irregular, and should they go for that instead?

Does getting the exhaust beat right matter? Lempor has now been mooted and surely that would also afect the sound? Is the sound as important as the appearance, even though few if any people would remember?

Sorry for a long, rambling first post, but I had these questions, and I thought I'd just ask.

Dave

 

Ramble on ! I have that cigarette card as a screen saver and i think i got it off goggle images, incorrect valve gear !
Smoke stack lighting is als0 a great idea -a big luminous white plume dashing along will look great of an evening.

 

That's interesting, I never noticed the valve gear but it is years since I have seen it. I'll have to see if I can find it and have another look. I can only remember one other of the uk locos featured, and that was the turbomotive.

I am rubbish at thinking up forum pseudonyms. I cribbed this one from the old blues song by Howlin' Wolf, it just sprung to mind for some reason. If I remember rightly it was inspired by his memories of sparks flying from the night-time steam hauled trains in the American Midwest in the thirties.

 

Nothing wrong with taking inspiration from Howlin' Wolf.

 

Exactly, Green Arrow doesn't sound like a V2 at all

Dave (another one)

 

Nothing to do with the mono bloc casting but pretty much everything to do with valve settings. I've heard it said that Bill Harvey was a wizard at setting up 4771 so it ran with a very even beat so I assume he passed on bios knowledge to others.

 

Don't know about you P2 lot , but my aim is to live long enough to see an L1 with a copper boiler.

Bob.

 

Complete with tin whistle ....

 

But which class of L1?

 

My questioning the business case is, in part, based upon my concern about the amount of work there is for engines of this capacity. If, as is hoped, we are to see FS back in action before too many years that will spread the jam even more thinly.
At present, I have yet to be convinced that there is enough profitable work for all these circa class 8 machines. As steam rail tour costs rise there is the clear an present danger that fewer punters will pay for a seat, rare mileage or unusual itinerary etc excepted.
The fickle market of steam rail tour operation can turn a small fortune into an even smaller fortune very quickly.
As has been argued elsewhere by others far more eloquent than I the line-side photters get the best view but contribute little if anything to the running costs.
Your argument in favour of fleet operation rather than a single machine has no little merit. Perhaps better to link up with the likes of MNLPS then, rather than continue to plow their own furrow.