Bluebell Motive Power

That would be quite interesting as something not seen, probably by anyone in living memory, we are all well aware of examples in Southern and BR colours.

 

Yes 499 should look quite splendid....still they need to weld the frame replacement sections on yet!

 

You'd certainly have to be the best part of 90! According to Bradley, 499 was painted out of LSWR livery in January 1925 (and 506 in December 1924). The early form is also interesting: no smoke deflectors, stovepipe chimney, Drummond cab etc - quite unlike the Maunsell ones that are more familiar in preservation.

There's an interesting photo in Bradley that goes in the "prototype for everything category": No 505 in early SR days, still in LSWR livery with an LSWR lettered tender, but somewhat clumsily directly below it, the loco number in Southern style (but without the E-prefix); and a standard SR cast cab side number. It stayed that way from October 1924 (when it underwent minor repairs, and had the livery changes detailed) until May 1926 (when it had a general, and a repaint at the same time). The last of them in SR livery was 509, repainted in June 1926.

Tom

 

From the Bluebell newsletter:

With reference the three boilers now off site: The first two are 34059 and 73082. The third boiler that has gone (to another site, not Crewe) is a spare SECR "H class" boiler that will be fitted to No. 65. I assume the fourth boiler referred to, which will be overhauled in-house, is from 80151.

Details of how to donate can be found here: http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/trust/appeal/kutp_donate.html

Tom

 

The spare H class boiler has gone to The Floor Mill according to the Bluebell yahoo group.

 

It's a while into the future, but does anyone know if there's any plan to use the black five in the period between Christmas & New Year? I'm due to be spending Christmas with in-laws in Sussex, and would like to have a ride if 45231 is in use.

Thanks

 

I think these were also used to rebuild LCDR "R" & "RI" classes as well as one of the Kirtley 0-6-0 classes. Now one of those would really be a sensible new build project! (he says, stirring furiously)

PH

 

I think using it on No 65 will result in getting an engine into service quicker though! (adding baffles to stirred water...)

I suppose if 592's tender develops a leak, we could always scrap the tender and put a saddle tank and bunker on the engine and recreate an S class! The lighter total weight and greater adhesion for the same power and TE would probably give you an extra coach or so on the acceptable loading...

Tom

 

Isn

Not, I suspect, as as sensible as having a spare boiler for an existing loco is.

 

Only a leg pull on my part (as Tom appreciates) but had I known of the existence of this boiler during a certain other thread on Bluebell loco. matters, I would have suggested a newbuild R1 or B.2 rather than a C2x as a "sensible" project for a 25m.p.h. tourist railway. The advantages of having a common boiler design shared between two or three dis-similar looking machines are obvious.

PH (who hopes that he hasn't raised the Devil!)

 

What do you mean 'develops'! ;-)

Duncan

 

Paul, you're almost suggesting a new build! Is everything ok?

 

I don't want to dampen enthusiasm, but apart from first fixing 506 (which is having 1/3 frames replaced) 499 needs the same, and there is the small matter of the bit that goes on top of the frames to make the steam.....still I think that the plan is for 499 and 506 to run together in around 4 or 5 years. I can't wait!

 

Yes Simon, quite okay thank you. I have absolutely nothing against newbuilds as such. IMHO though, only a couple of them are appropriate for the work they will be doing.

Paul

 

AFAIK, the spare boilers on the railway are:

- 4 P class boilers for three locos
- 3 H class boilers for two locos (H and O1)
- 2 C class boilers for one loco

That's not to say they are all in great condition - at the last overhaul, the C class had the better of the two boilers available, and the people overhauling P class No. 27 are talking about the likely need for a new boiler. Whether that ultimately turns out to be true, it shows that the condition of the two P tank boilers not currently in service can't be brilliant. 323 had extensive boiler work at its last overhaul, with new firebox half sides amongst other repairs.

Tom

 

As a Urie Society member and contributer Simon, I can confirm that it may be around 2020 before they both steam together.

Thats the plan anyway though anything could happen in the meantime.

Regards
Chris:

 

Chris:

 

Where did all the spare boilers come from ??

 

Ashford, I'd assume

More seriously, I suspect you would have to do a lot of sleuthing through the archives to find out exactly when they came and on what terms. Don't forget the Bluebell has owned two of its P tanks for more than fifty years, so you are potentially going back a long way in history, to a time when such things as spare parts were considerably easier to obtain. In the case of 263, 592 and 65, that would be further complicated by the fact that none of those three locos has been owned by the Bluebell for most of their preserved lives. (263 transferred ownership to the Bluebell Trust within the last few years; 592 and 65 are still owned independently). I seem to recall in the case of the spare boiler for 592, it had been a stationary boiler at Ashford and was picked up some years ago as that plant ran down, but I might be wrong. The current tender of 592 is also a spare: the original had bent frames and a wasted tank, and was broken up some years ago, but with all the significant components recovered.

Tom