73096

Thanks - I thought I remembered seeing some pictures of this. Is 34027 Cylinder actually now on the frames? And will these need hydraulically tested again later on?

 

The statement given by the mhr website says it is a core plug, as that is the most official statement so far it is no good for people to keep coming on here and speculating that it was due to the loco hydaulicing, as there is no evidence that would suggest this. What more proof do you need than the core plug not been there? Saying this I haven't read the latest steam beano but I'd be interested to see there take on things

 

Yes I can just imagine...

EXCLUSIVE: MID HANTS LOCO IN EXPLOSION DISASTER.

 

That is exactly the statement we don't need. There is clear evidence that it was caused by the core plug, and none to suggest hydralicing. This is what I have been told by various MPD staff, who more often than not, know what they are talking about. However, before we get into this, let's wait for a official report.

 

It would be half right - I'm pretty sure it resembled an explosion, and I'm pretty sure it is seen as a disaster.

This thread is starting to resemble a 9/11 conspiracy

 

I heard very little green men from 45698 did it. :smt016

 

I get the faint impression he was joking...

 

I get the faint impression he was joking...[/quote:1y5b0qi4]

I must admit , i had that small idea he was as well ](*,) ( come on ralph , lighten up)

But on a serious note . Not only have you ( everyone who wants to suggest its hydrolicking) had the driver of the standard at the time come on here and say his basicly gone and looked and picked the coreplug up off the ground AND the fact that the MHR website is ( i would expect) not going to put up fake information to try and steer people away from the correct conlusion but i really dont see how much more proof you lot need ....

I dont understand what went on before anyone of you want to go and say im another childish expert but i do know that id trust the drivers knolegde and also most of the MPD at Ropley

 

HYDRAULICING

 

Does anyone know whether the H.M.R.I. are involved in the official investigation?

 

No need for them to be, this is just a mechanical failure, whatever the cause.

Oh, and they've been rebranded as the RSSB. We simply can't have anything being called "Her Majesty's..." in Trotsky, sorry Brown's Britain. It might sound patriotic!

 

You will have the Mods after you Edward for being political. [-X [-X

Regards
Chris

 

I would have thought that they would have been informed if nothing else.

 

I thought that was washing insects out of your hair with a hose.

 

I have been watching this thread with amazement. I am not the greatest fan of the Mid Hants railway and am certainly not an apologist for them HOWEVER:

We have had the railways explanation on here and on their website, subject to the railways official investigation.

We have heard the drivers explanation.

So why do we have all these self proclaimed armchair experts giving their view of what they think has happened.

Do these people realise that they could leave themselves open to a defamation action if they imply that the driver did something or made a mistake and it was later proved he did not.

Speaking as someone with experience of stripping down reciprocating engines (not steam engines I will readily admit) which have sustained damage due to liquid ingress into the induction tract " with water there is usually evidence in the form of rust stains in the induction tracts and cylinder swept volumes to support the fact.None of the published photos show any such evidence. In addition rods and cranks usually bear the brunt of such action as the weakest items usually sustain the most damage. Solid items such as cylinder blocks usually only sustain secondary damage such as a rod puncturing the block.

Given the nature of the damage I have no problem in accepting that it was caused by a core plug working loose, as stated.

Therefore may I respectfully suggest that these so called experts leave the issues to the railway and their insurers who will examine the real evidence and come to a reasoned conclusion and leave the poor driver in peace.

What there is to be gained by this pointless, idle speculation I fail to see, in fact the only result could be to damage the reputation of the preservation movement and the professionalism of the people involved therein.

 

I agree about the not specualting. I would like to point out that because it is a steam engine there will be water around as the engine warms up or cools down, so rust marks in the passageways does not mean that it is a fault, unlike other types of reciprocating engine.

 

PACIFIC POWER - Thank you for that .

 

End of the day, you're entitled to your own opinion. Its your own problem if your wrong!

 

I am not going to post a view on what has happened here. However, if someone has got some decent footage of the incident, with good quality sound, anyone with any sort of footplate experience should be able to tell you if that loco had "got hold of the water." In defence of some of the people doing the speculating above, I can assure you that they are far from being armchair experts, and have substantial experience in both the operation & repair of locos.

Meantime, I am inclined to agree with the sentiment that it's the MHR's problem to sort out internally. I think they would have been far better off just issuing a statement to the effect of the incident being under investigation.

When they've investigated, then publish a conclusive report, just in case there is a need to modify other locos.

 

I haven't been keeping up with this thread, but is this imbecile on the forum?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XtE185fGlY