6100 Royal Scot

I'd love to know what the independent inspection said. Shame that the RM doesn't reach the bookstands here...

 

You can always subsribe to RM digitally... www.zinio.com (I get my copy of RM emailed to me every month).

 

Could someone summarise what the RM says about this independent inspection?

 

A Quick summary (quoting from RM April 2010, p58) says :


- 6100 will be in steam by Easter
- 1/4 inch mis-alignment of one Hornplate, with some adjustments made elsewhere (unstated) to compensate "without establishing the cause", dates from approx 2 years ago.
- 3 Manganese liners have cracks and need replacement
- Small Crack on a driving wheel where the balance weight is attached
- Issue with blastpipe flange costing £6000
- No short term cashflow issue at Bressingham as insurance payout for damage on the way to WSR has been recieved.

This is from the digital copy, which is often distributed before the printed copy and occasionally contains articles / editorial content that may be changed or removed from the printed editions.

 

Why doesn't everyone quit sniping and wait for an OFFICIAL announcement?
Probably a few days before she commences her mainline trial runs.
Yes I understand that there have been problems with the overhaul, and hopefully lessons will be learned by everyone in our industry.
Some of the posts in this thread have been way out of order and it is likely a sign of the low esteem that this forum is held in by those at the sharp end of the heritage engineering industry, that no one of consequence has bothered to come on here and rebut some of the posts.

 

Typically most of thsoe who make the sniping remarks are those who hide behind false ID"s such as ex LNER engines!

Hopefully once 6100 is back on the mainline this whole saga will be forgotten and contributions from the National lottery funds are still forthcoming to other projects and of course owners and volunteers are still keen to get engines back into steam despite the lack of support from steam enthusiasts.
It would be interesting to know how many enthusiasts who will no doubt be at the line side taking pictures have donated to this worthy cause. For the record I have made severel donations.

Jim S

 

Because this is Nat.Pres. A few members love it, throw in a few dodgy remarks, a couple of personal insults, a bit of unfounded speculation. That's it, blue touch paper has been lit, stand back and watch developments. You've only got to look at some of the things that were said when 6115 suffered the failure.
The mature sensible members find some of the things said on here are appalling.

 

at last something factual that no one can say is spin or biased one way or the other , as i read it a hornplate being mis-aligned wasnt corrected , and i would guess that in turn have damaged the liners , i wonder did that cause the crack in the spoke because of vibration? or was it known about and not fixed ? the point i am making is one part not put back on properly might have cause a lot more problems , in the car industry i can remember being told this, measure twice, fit once and its just as important in any engineering job, after all its always best to get things done properly from the start

 

Thanks SaltyDog, that's the news I've been longing to hear. If you stumble across any details of where or when, please pass them on. At one time, the plan was for 6100 to move to Tyseley for the tests. Do know whether that's still the plan or will they be run from Crewe? I suppose the most likely test route from Crewe is out to Chester and back. From Tysley, I'd guess a run to Stratford, to start with.

TIA

 

Sorry if I've been misunderstood. What I was trying to say in my original post was...... wait for an official announcement, probably a few days before she commences her mainline trial runs.
Poor grammar on my part.
As for where the runs will take place, I'm just as much in the dark as the rest of you.

 

1. That's a very generous interpretation of some of the posts we see on here if I may say so. Far from showing people care, I feel that some posts are designed to do nothing more than stir up trouble.
2. Do we know for fact that 4472 and 6100 have been the most expensive? There are a number of projects that have never had the costs made public - e.g. 60019, 34046, 46115 and 45699 to name but four - so I don't think we can say with any certainty which has been the most expensive.

Rgds
Ian

 

One of the reasons people are interested is that it is only possible to learn from mistakes if their existence is admitted, the reasons why they came about are understood and the appropriate corrective action is applied. In other words, transparency is needed, particularly where public money is invoved, both in the form of lottery grants and donations. As no-one will even admit to mistakes when they patently are present, people will try to dig to find out what they are.

 

The only people who need to learn from the mistakes made are the people who supplied the funding and the professional engineers at the sharp end of the project, the rest of us will just have to live in hope.
And why should said people come on here and wear the proverbial hair shirt just to give the nay sayers more ammunition?
If you are genuinely interested in the engines well being maybe you should be hoping that after all the tribulations she will turn out to be one of the mainlines star performers in the future.

 

Martin,
I think it's the fact that the four examples I quoted haven't drawn on the public purse that has kept them free, almost, from the speculation and allegations surrounding 4472 and 6100. That didn't stop Bongo/Impala/whoever he is now from having a go at 60019 though. I doubt neither David Smith nor Jeremy Hosking would air their dirty washing in public if things didn't go smoothly with their projects and we are unlikely to ever know how much their various locos have cost them.
Regarding Southall, I see 60019 is to move from MHR to the West London base so Jeremy must have some faith in the ability of the personnel there.
It's a pity that all has not run smooth with 4472 and 6100 but all the surmising and allegations posted here are unlikely ever to get to the root of what's gone awry. We should be thankful that there are those who are dedicated enough to see the projects through to completion in spite of the adversity along the way.

Rgds
Ian

 

You guys on here dont give up do you!!

I worked on a project in Singapore that ran late. On another forum a person started to ask why the job was late and what was happening, ending up by claiming he was a shareholder with the Client and had a right to know. Well the answer is he had no right to know from me. He should have gone to the Client company and got the official answers and there was no way I would have told him anything.

This is the same. The locomotive is in the official care of an organisation that is doing the work. There is no way they should make public the problems they may or may not have, no way they should discuss the scope of work required, no way they should tell anyone about the stare of the locomotive before they have reached agreement with the owners.

Everything else - and a lot of the nods and winks here - is nothing more than speculation.

I do not like to say this but as "fans" you do not own the locomotie, you have absolutely no say in how it is maintained, where it runs and least of all what colour it is painted!

If you want to have a say then get involved, buy shares, do work etc.

Yes, it is obvious that this whole saga is a mess. Yes, there are lessons to be learnt. But the endless speculation from people who have no involvement with the project and have no idea how an engineering job is actually done in the 21st Century is doing no good at all.

If you all care about the locomotive so much, stop bitching and do something constructive to sort the mess out.

McC

 

Imagine what controversy there would be today if someone suggested taking a Bulleid Pacific, cutting it in half across the middle and restoring it for display only ?, yet look how many MN's have been restored since and no one would argue 35029 is a discredit to the NRM would they ?

5 years from now when it's running 20 trips a year and the newspapers are discussing the return of the golden days with 4472, 60163, 6100 and 3 A4's to pick from...all of which the public will instantly associate to... will be still be moaning ? (maybe about the colour ?) and the HLF will be able to sit back and take credit for making a at least a part contribution to making it happen.

 

hear hear, some good sentiments there.

 

If its is a move to WCRC's southall base then i dont see it meaning anything - the personnel involved in the restorations of 4472 and 6100 are not those of WCRC and when loco's based there like Tangmere need work they go to Carnforth.

Chris