If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

7027 Thornbury Castle

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by svrhunt, Jan 18, 2015.

  1. Mr Valentine

    Mr Valentine Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2018
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    815
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Titfield
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Sensical or not, the intention is clear:

    Feb 2020:

    "We needed to ensure the cylinders met Network Rail’s most recent loading gauge specifications for main line running"


    May 2021:

    "Understandably, many of these sections are no longer available and so, renovation for mainline use involves a detailed and thorough assessment of each and every component."


    Even the latest press release says...

    "There will always be a few surprises which won’t be discovered until work starts, but early indications suggest that the boiler will need:

    • A repositioning of the boiler supports at the side of the firebox to comply with the 47 and NR Loading Gauge"


    I wouldn't underestimate the naivety of these people.
     
    ross likes this.
  2. pmh_74

    pmh_74 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,217
    Likes Received:
    1,456
    I don’t know JJP or his circumstances but did he sell it due to the cost of rebuilding it, or due to its unsuitability for the WSR (the line he is mainly associated with)? If the latter then, assuming he came to acquire it, leaving it where it is, under the care of those already well into its rebuild, would seem eminently sensible. And allowing others to buy shares in it may go some way to allaying any fears of a repeat performance under new, private ownership. The devil would be in the detail of course, and the GCR has past experience of a majority shareholder forcing a loco sale after restoration.

    Anyway, a prolonged spell in limbo would be better than having its useful parts scattered to the four winds. And I say that as someone with no particular interest in GWR Castles.

    I also suspect that there would be plenty of people willing to contribute to its restoration under new ownership, who would not contribute a penny towards purchasing it to the benefit of the previous owner, especially after this.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  3. RAB3L

    RAB3L Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2013
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    190
    As someone who re-stayed 6106 back in the 80's over about eighteen months, I can only agree. I removed all the steel side stays, made new ones (in Monel) and even made new stay nuts, along with four rows of crown stays. It has not worked since its boiler certificate expired.

    As for 4709, why is it any more likely to run on the mainline than 6023 and 2999? If I had paid good money for the latter two to be restored, I would not be happy. Why not use the No. 1 boiler available, if they are in a hurry and take their time to build the No. 7? If it's not going on the mainline, it won't need the No. 7 anyway.

    Also, why is a copper firebox suddenly a problem? Doesn't 45551 have a copper firebox? Just another attempt to justify their actions.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2022
  4. MrPerfection

    MrPerfection New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2007
    Messages:
    61
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not sure how Michael Gregory can feel anything when he’s dead! That’s according to the CEO of the GWS but can’t find his obituary!
     
  5. marshall5

    marshall5 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    Messages:
    2,376
    Likes Received:
    3,981
    Location:
    i.o.m
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Sounds to me that the 4709 group are just trying to justify the unjustifiable.
    Ray.
     
    ross, Gareth, green five and 2 others like this.
  6. Matt78

    Matt78 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,637
    Likes Received:
    3,272
    Occupation:
    Solicitor
    Location:
    South Wales
    A real shame that locos such as 6106 and 1363 are not higher up the priority list (if there is one). Having been able to work with the similar 1369 this year, I have no doubt that 1363 would be a very useful loco both at Didcot and away from home, and would be of interest to the public and enthusiasts.
     
  7. Sidmouth

    Sidmouth Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    9,635
    Likes Received:
    8,303
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alderan !
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The one good that may come of this is the event to cannibalisation of loco's at Didcot as I sense this has brought the matter to the head .

    one facebook post suggests 4709 group think this is all a storm in a tea cup and will blow over (hence my thought that all need to keep up the pressure)
     
    ross, D7076, Gareth and 1 other person like this.
  8. Lord Belborough

    Lord Belborough New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2022
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    138
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    1363 is in the early stage of restoration. Just need to see King George (not Thomas) in steam and then 1363 will receive much more attention.
     
    Johnme101 and Matt78 like this.
  9. Swan Age

    Swan Age Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    260
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    21C101 in the South West
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I'm sure with the help of their Client Journalist friends at Trackside Magazine helping to justify the 4709 groups intentions in subsequent issues they will hope the furore will die down.
    Indeed a prolonged spell of pressure will be needed.
     
    Hirn, Matt37401 and green five like this.
  10. Great Western

    Great Western Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    174
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Or work until it’s first “to difficult / we’ve lost interest” failure then never steam again.
     
    Gareth and green five like this.
  11. Sidmouth

    Sidmouth Resident of Nat Pres Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2005
    Messages:
    9,635
    Likes Received:
    8,303
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Alderan !
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Unlike other organisers i ran two events with 1363 in black to raise money for its overhaul . That was in 2008
     
    Chris86 likes this.
  12. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Might he have sold it to help pay for 9466?
     
    pmh_74 likes this.
  13. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    3,596
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    There have been rumours of a forthcoming announcement of plans to build a Dean single at Didcot ..... I hope that's not why 1363 is being dismantled!
     
  14. 30854

    30854 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2017
    Messages:
    12,172
    Likes Received:
    11,493
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Brighton&Hove
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Don't be daft. They'll be increasing 7027's driver diameter to build that, leaving the spare coupled wheels for Churchward's unrealised express 4-10-0 .... which'll them immediately be walled up in Box Tunnel.
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2022
  15. Lord Belborough

    Lord Belborough New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2022
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    138
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Berkshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    1363 has a good loyal following and will fit in well with 1340 at sharing branch line duties in due course. Other rumour is very wide of the mark - think 7 foot wide :)
     
  16. D1002

    D1002 Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    8,659
    Likes Received:
    6,415
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Enfield
    Two members of the protagonists side by side:
    E3F34FB6-1D4F-4D12-ABA8-A0C9E1399A80.png
     
    MikeParkin65 likes this.
  17. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,068
    Likes Received:
    5,165
    There have been apprently conflicting messages about 4709 going on the main line. If it is only ever to run at Didcot and on heritage lines, a significant amount of the design effort will have been wasted. But possibly the intention is for it to run on NR under the auspices of an outfit with the necessary expertise and resources rather than the GWS. That is perfectly possible in principle, as for example with SNG being operated by LSL.
     
  18. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,052
    Likes Received:
    4,665
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    There's been a very considerable changing of the guard at Didcot in recent years. At the moment the top priorities seem to be infrastructure. Rebuilding Heyford station on site is well under way, major refurbishment of the water tank is in progress, there are noises about having to replace the shed roof in the not too distant future, they've got planning for a decent access ramp, and are in the early days of plans for a new visitor centre. Whilst I believe preparatory research work has been done for a Dean Single, and has been going on for a good number of years, I wouldn't expect to see metal cut soon.
     
  19. Major Midget

    Major Midget New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2019
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    One of the Sondes
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    As already said, 4700s were nominally limited to 60mph back in the day, but of course they didn't have speedos fitted, and I suspect that while running their fast freights and summer Saturday passengers that 60mph was easily surpassed. I don't personally see any limiting below that though as previously suggested, if 48151 can get around on it's 4ft8" wheels at 45 to 50mph, I doubt 4709 will fall into the same category as the 8F.

    Last I knew (aka - current impression), 4709 was to be mainline capable, with modifications like pitching the boiler a few inches lower and the modified cylinder blocks so that it could be fitted for mainline running. Whether the plan is to still attempt mainline running immediately, I don't know. I suspect if it was to be achieved, it would have to be through an agreement with VT or LSL or so. I'd be more concerned about route availability than speed restrictions in any case, as with all WR designs, even with some of the reasonable design modifications to 4709. I must stress 'reasonable' in my view is to find a compromise between having a 4700 to it's in service design and one that can fulfill duties on the mainline. A No.8 boiler isn't much a reasonable compromise so much as a bodge to get things done faster.


    Also, points about 4709 being not popular enough are a waste of digital server space. It's popular enough to have got this far throughout the last decade, even if it has a head-start from the donated wheelsets. It will be completed within the next decade I imagine, and it fills one of the last holes in major GWR types from 1910 onward. But after the 4700, Saint, Grange, County and other County, I would suggest limiting the new build addiction, and focusing on medium to smaller locos from the Armstrong-Dean era if you must (partial to a Bulldog, Aberdare or Metro Tank myself). There aren't any major holes otherwise from the Churchward-Hawksworth eras, unless someone is suitably insane to make The Great Bear II.

    Bringing up the GWS home fleet feels like a bit of a non-issue in the 4709-7027 situation. I don't know how well Didcot loco group is doing for manpower (I believe progress on 7202 slowed to a crawl because the heavy freight mob has basically ceased to exist), and I doubt any clique issues would help that matter on the other projects (1363, 3650, 1014 + 1466 and 4709 offsite). Certainly as @Jimc has mentioned, there is increased focus on infrastructure, my Didcot correspondent is only too happy to tell me his progress on Heyford.

    But I don't see the same income flowing in to restore 5900 or 6106 as opposed to recreating an extinct class (it would likely be 6998 over 5900 anyway). Didcot is always going to feel like a mausoleum since the days of being able to pick your engine to fire up are long gone, to paraphrase Mr. James (I think it was you), so most of the home fleet will always either be inaccessible in the works or lined up dead on shed. It's more realistic to just cycle through some of the locomotives that are suitable to bring in hire fees (6023 and 4144 being the most recent examples), and smaller locomotives that are better suited to operation on the demo and branch lines. I'm inclined to say that even in a timeline without 1014, 4709, 3840 and any future comers, the majority of the GWS fleet would be in the same position.


    Getting back to 7027, I'm of the opinion that the best course of action for those leading 4709 would be to offer 7027 for sale at it's purchase price + at least a 5 figure sum towards the boiler of 4709, which should be a No.7. That should be an opportunity to see if there really is enough support out there for the 8th castle to sink or swim. Should it sink, best case would be for 7027 to end up in the same situation as 5227, boiler-less but receiving attention from a new owner nonetheless. I can't say I'm enthused at the prospect of having a No.8 fitted 4709 and another large new-build commitment to a Star, even if the pieces are there for it. Additionally, some of the excuses and statements from 4709 group are tone deaf, and that doesn't help the justification for their case, nor their image.

    Enough rambling from me though, I should take a break and not get too hyper-focused on this one situation.
     
  20. RAB3L

    RAB3L Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2013
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    190
    I'm not sure about 5900 but 6106 wouldn't need a great deal of money. It had had a new firebox fitted not long before withdrawal - the original side stays were 1/2". The only reason it was re-stayed was that it had been left too long with water inside and the stays had corroded away at the copper end. However 4144 always gets priority because it is privately owned (or was) whereas 6106 is society owned; the owner at Didcot always pays for the overhaul (or loses a share in ownership). 6106 was also overhauled to BR running standard at its last overhaul.
     
    green five likes this.

Share This Page