35011 General Steam Navigation

I do get the impression that with the current age, condition and location of 35011 this project could be her last chance at returning to steam. I do pray the team is successful because I'd hate for it to be stripped for parts and sent for scraps.

 

Would this be the first unrebuilt Bulleid pacific in preservation?

 

Gav, are you sure that you asked that question?

Cheers,

Alan

 

100% sure!

The way i see it we have quite a few "Original" BPs
But as of yet not a single un-rebuilt (un rebuilt suggests it was built then re built then un re built)

;-)

 

OVSB referred to them as "Altered":

http://www.southern-locomotives.co.uk/News/news.html

(Scroll down to the recent section by Sean Day-Lewis)

 

Please no! - the WSR is just fine as it is and these pacifics together with WCs & BoBs are simply far too large for anything like regular heritage line use. They are impractical, have difficult forward & non existent rearward vision, require a large quantity of coal across the grate to get a fire even started, are hot to work on and awkward to oil up. They are also far to big in the wheel for 25mph max running resulting in late running from slow starts away from frequent intermediate stations.

The WSR did have Braunton but saw that it would be too large for regular service & moved it on to the Hoskin stable where it is able to perform under more appropriate conditions on NR.

 

I have for a long time thought railway history is inconsistent in the names it gives locomotives by designer.

Gresley P2 Mikados were rebuilt by Thompson and known as Thompson Pacifics, not rebuilt Gresley Mikados. So why are Bulleid Pacifics, rebuilt almost as drastically and along similar more conventional lines, known as rebuilt Bulleid Pacifics and not Jarvis Pacifics?

The lack of consistency seems to be down to making sure the name Bulleid is remembered despite him not having any influence on the rebuilding for which Riddles was in charge with Jarvis overseeing the re-designs.

 

I think that you will find agreement amongst most SVR loco men that they are simply too big for the job & most would recognise the reasons I put forward for their unsuitability in daily use.

That view is I know shared by many WSR locomen also. Can't speak for the other lines.

 

Indeed though that experienced and astute body of Bulleid experts at SLL made sure that their fleet did not include a MN for very good reasons by selling Port Line onwards!

 

Port Line was used for a while on the Bluebell but moved on as apparently too big and expensive to run...

Have to say I agree with @1472 here: having fired both original and rebuilt WC/BB pacifics, I can't say they are especially pleasant: you are in for a hot and heavy day at the very least (maybe I just wasn't a very good fireman). Cost wise, clearly they cost more than a similarly powerful narrow-firebox loco to light up, though I doubt you use much more coal once out on the road, so in coal at least, a light pacific probably isn't massively more expensive than any other large loco, particularly if you can arrange long periods of consecutive days of operation. I suspect the real cost in running them is in the comparative maintenance costs, though.

Certainly from a purely personal viewpoint, if I had a heavy train to shift, I'd take an S15 over a Bulleid pacific any day - even in winter or rain! The marketeers may of course perceive value in having at least one big named flagship loco on a line, and the originals are clearly iconic for Southern lines, so I suspect there will always be a future for WC/BBs on preserved lines: I'm not convinced about MNs and were I in a position of power in a motive power department, I certainly wouldn't be rushing to take on an unrestored one. The fact that Clan Line regularly shifts 500-odd tons of Belmond Pullman at mainline speeds around the Surrey Hills without apparent difficulty demonstrates that no preserved line is going to get close to finding the limits of such a loco.

All the above is personal opinion...

Tom

 

All true to varying extents, whilst I seem to recall that SVR trials with 34053's coal consumption over the course of a year suggested that after filling the firebox, it used little more coal than a 45xx class, or something to that effect. However, the trade-off is higher maintenance and overhaul costs, and a hot day out for the crew.

The future for some of the MNs probably lies with the mainline scene, provided it survives the 2018 national timetable cliff (and any other unplanned issues that arise- ahem!). So of the current line up:

Heritage line- 35005, 35006

Mainline- 35018, 35027, 35028

Proposed return/backburner projects- 35009, 35010, 35011, 35022

Uncertain- 35025

NRM- 35029

 

35005 received a lottery grant to pay for overhaul though didnt it?? So i suppose the covered cost meant its worth doing rather than get loads of your own money to restore a standard tank?

Going back to the people wanting to un-rebuild 35011 is your intention to send it mainline?

 

At this stage finding temporary home for 35011 is all we want to do not dreaming about mainline running or what colour its going to be.

So can I ask for every one to keep a lookout for an industrial site or building in the Southwest that we can store GSN for 18 months whilst we get the support group and trust set up.

 

You best bet for trying to find a proper home for 35011 is to contact every single heritage railway or storage facility big enough in the area. I found this picture of 35022 Holland-America line which in the description says 35022 boiler is going to be used on 35027 Port Line due to her having an "irreparable firebox", https://www.flickr.com/photos/66203188@N03/6036350352.
Also can anyone tell me that 35025 does have a boiler as there are no pictures of it at Sellindge with a boiler?

 

I know at least 2 drivers who refer to them as such, both being fans of the original design! The "improvements" made the drivers prep much more arduous than the original design.

 

The boiler is opposite the frames on the other side of the roadway.

You can just about see it on Google earth
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Hope+Farm/@51.1094135,1.0237502,19z/data=!4m2!3m1!1s0x47dec41e464022e5:0xc14f7dac29678e56