34046 Braunton

Many of the so called problems were due in part to unfamiliarity of staff with what was a fairly radical design. As time went on and with a number of modifications the matter improved. As for coal consumption, the rebuilds were not a great improvement. As for the reasoning behind the rebuilding programme, it's a complex issue but Riddles was a Crewe man and I'll wager there was at least a modicum of "not invented here" involved. The originals were/are a doddle to prep and dispose and whilst I'll agree that attention to anything inside the oil bath was a bit of a headache, neither is it exactly easy to attend to the middle engine of a conventional three cylinder design. As for quoting Tangmere's failure as "hardly a ringing endorsement," the same could be said of other locos that have failed out on the line in the preservation era but to take such incidents in isolation does not paint the full picture. You'd hardly judge the Scots based on 46115's problems, of which there have been more than with 34067 by the way.

 

Kettle and pot. You use some good performances in preservation era to justify the performance of the entire class, and when I balance that with the observation that 34067 has had more than one failure I am taking incidents in isolation? Agreed the unrebuilts improved with time as various modifications were made, but my point was that they were, and are difficult to maintain, and that was a big motivator in the decision to rebuild. As to preparation, well your moving the argument again. I agree that they are easier to prepare, and that that was one of the objectives that Bulleids had, and was successfully achieved. I can quite see what he wanted to achieve, and applaud the intent. In getting there though he created a bunch of other problems that the operating authorities didn't appreciate. The Spamcans take more effort and expense to achieve a similar result as the rebuilts, and both are less successful than a great many other designs. The overwhelming weight of evidence supports this view.

 

I think if I was Ian Riley I would be inserting that brake valve somewhere where the manufacturer would find it difficult to remove..There is nothing worse than trying to complete a job, and you only need one part, and when you get it, it doesn't work - winds me up no end at work!

 

Crikey gentleman - this escalated quickly..!

 

One of these days someone will attempt to restore a Merchant Navy to as built, it will be interesting to see wether the whole oil bath caboodle can be executed better as there have surely been some developments since the 40's (in heat resistant plastics , chain drives transmissions, flexible seals, lubricants) such that the middle engine is truly a maintenece free sealed unit and the timing remains true. Then all you need is to maintain the reverser well and apart from the Boiler pressuRe 'twill be as God/OVSB intended... and it will look nice in bright green or even blue.

( im getting better , a whole post without mentioning the possibilities of 2-8-2' s or poppet valves.... doh)

Looks like Tornados picked up another Braunton turn (9th july)

 

I don't think this is entirely fair. Riddles allowed the Leader project to continue for more than two years after nationalisation, with Bulleid delaying his departure to Ireland so that he could continue to work on it. He wouldn't have done that if he hadn't been prepared to give Bulleid's radical ideas a chance (even though, with hindsight, it is clear that the Leader design was fundamentally flawed).

Anyway, my only experience of working with a Bulleid was having to clean 34007 at the MHR. All I can say is that the lack of a running plate makes cleaning difficult because it forces you to use a ladder for the high-up sections - and the further towards the front of the engine you get, the fewer holes or handrails there are that you can tie the ladder to! In fairness, though, I expect cleaners may encounter similar problems with 6229 when she returns to steam...

 

On the subject of the spam can and its design, has one ever actually been put through a carriage wash ( or its modern equivalent) as the design intended ?( presumably this would flood the footplate with coal slurry and require the motion to be re oiled and dressed)
At least when cleaning a 'can' you can leave the ' black' roof - it always makes me cringe when i see cleaners stood on the handrail or a' cheval on the boiler...

although the Lms erm BR Standards team werent a big fan of Bulleid theres a lot of Bulleid thinking in a standard pacific, (in some instances misplaced) as for Riddles - hadnt he gone by 1956 and the rebuilds werent done until 1957 (Bond)... but for costs they might have all gone Caprotti...

 

Please can the moderators move all of this off-topic stuff to its own topic?

 

I believe its all just a bit of banter....

 

Its not just this is it, Mr Hoskings has 70000 now encountering unforeseen problems, 46100 sat square wheeled at Crewe for 2 years and Braunton being fettled for the mainline for approaching 2 years - now thats a run of bad luck.

 

And that surely means the 9th of July is unlikely too.

 

Is that solid gen or informed guesswork? It would make sense, especially since Tornado's trip to Scarborough the following Saturday has now been postponed to October.

 

According to A1 Steam Trust website - http://www.a1steam.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=148

 

Not aware of a Flat Top going through a washer but that's not to say it didn't happen. As for leaving a black roof, our guys have been known get up top and clean that too. Pennorth of tar and all that.

 

Didn't know the Flat Tops black top was tar! You learn a lot on this Forum.

 

You may jest but at some stage prior to 34081's restoration commencing some bright spark painted the outside surface of the top of the tender tank with bitumen. That was a fun job to remove.

 

It really must be difficult to be Mr. Hoskins right now. Having 70000 in a Tourist Railway Gala getting into a collusion. Shocking and it is having a ripple affect in the charter schedule and will more so in the following weeks.

I know this is not a 70000 topic but having Braunton available for charter work would make a difference. Hope this happens soon. 70013 is doing the Devonian in place of 34046 as well now.

 

Was the tourist railway collusion intended to sideline it from the main line, do you think? For my own part I believe that accidents occasionally happen regardless and I'm sure there have been incidents on the main line - didn't 61264 go into the buffers once? The proportion of incidents/accidents on the main line is probably statistically similar to that on the tourist lines if one takes into account the differing levels of intensity of use.