'The Capital Christmas Express'. 23rd November

It was a good development that Nigel Dobbing was induced to provide some information about this tour before it ran. I am very sorry that the tour ended badly. I hope that tour companies, and locomotive owners and operators realise that there is nothing to lose and much to gain by providing information. I fear, however, that it will be a long time before WCRC adopt such an approach.

 

After a disagreement with someone on how far split pins should be open, I tried to find a definitive answer. And failed. The British Standards handbook only gives details of lengths & diameters for varying sizes of bolt/pin. The only conclusion was that it was subjective and probably based on who you learned from during your training. The only definite thing I turned up was a requirement to fully open and bend back on screw couplings. I generally open the legs to an inclusive angle of about 30°

 

Seems to me that for all the side arguments about speed,distance,third rail etc, there is little dissent here to the proposition that this was an event with a finite probability of a serious outcome (ie fatalities) in which the outcome in safety terms turned out to be benign. Presumably that puts it automatically into a particular category for preliminary investigation.

Although clearly not the same as this in mechanical terms, an incident with 34057 at Hook described in Bert Hooker's book rang a bell with me in terms of what might have happened but did not. In both cases, several holes in the swiss cheese lined up but mercifully not all.

 

I was always taught 45 degrees was the correct angle.

 

If their is a RAIB investigation the announcement may take a few weeks to be prepared/ The notification that an investigation is taking place of a road vehicle falling onto the track on 26 October has only just been announced. The final report into an incident may take 6 months to a year.

 

A little unfair methinks; looking at the video of the return passing Winchfield the sound from the loco as it passed is one that I - albeit as a linesider - have never heard from a Bulleid on the main -line (including travelling behind them during their final months in 1967) and was so loud hence my curiosity asto whether the crew had also heard it ? I also noted it best to wait for the official report before speculating too much so I think your final comment to be uncalled for !.

 

Question for Spamcan 81 or anyone else that knows the answer.
Where the crankpins and fastenings on the unrebuilt Spamcans modified and/or renewed during the 1950s for some reason?

 

30° is the general rule on the big railway

 

Fred, if you've ever been on the footplate of a steam loco on the main line, you will know that it can be avery noisy place and noises from outside can be drowned out completely. I know, I have been lucky enough to be there and I can vouch for the levels of noise. For anyone who wasn't on the footplate at the time to say what the crew should have heard and done is the comment that's uncalled for.

 

One or two members have just about had an organism () about this incident. I've a shilling says that when it's been fully investigated (and FULLY it will be) it turns out to be an unforeseen mechanical failure. Any machinery can suffer, I once had a con rod make a bid for freedom on a 290 Cummins diesel engine (it succeeded, Ventilated the block very well ), but there was no indication it was going to happen, the vehicle was well maintained, all lubrication working correctly, just catastrophic mechanical failure. I'm not saying it wasn't a serious incident, it was, but failures occur, there is a process to investigate such incidents but there can be no 100% guarantee there will be no more incidents.
Modern rail vehicles suffer failures every day.

 

Thanks for that and to the others, my experience is power stations, presses and automotive where the usual rule was to bend at least one of the legs 90 degrees. I usually bend both away and round the nut so that it can not turn anyway. So anyone who has had to take down any of my efforts on smaller gauge locos is probably cursing me right now.

Obviously the split pin is there as a locking device.
This image gives the idea.
http://86.43.94.97/moodlecp9a/mod/g...LL&sortkey=FIRSTNAME&sortorder=asc&offset=160

 

I would think all preserved railways that run Bulleids would need to know what happen on 34067.

 

Sounds like a steam engine with a clank. That's all there is no way of telling what wag going to happen next. I would the support crew new what was making that clank. But it was nothing that would cause the need to fail the engine.

 

Deleted.

 

I must admit that, listening to that video, I heard nothing that would make me prick my ears up. Steam locos without some form of knock are few and far between. You tend to pay attention when you get a sudden change of noise.

 

The big end looks different as well, 34067 has a plain cap whereas 34007 has what looks like 4 nuts or bolts on the cap.

 

I think I read the type of big end fastening on Tangmere is of the original type. That fitted to Wadebridge is a BR type fastening as applied to the BR Standards and modified/unmodified Bulleid Pacific's.

Sent from my IdeaTabA2109A using Tapatalk