Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by buseng, Dec 3, 2014.
Mainline ticket expires 2018 according to UK Steam info.
Tarps "can" be worse than nothing on occasions. You just need a small leak letting water in that isn't noticed (easy to happen to something that isn't touched) and then corrosion can occur, un noticed and often accelerated due to the moisture not evaporating / being trapped.
Also, I would think that the general fare paying public would rather see a line of (albeit tired) locos than a line of ugly tarps.
The recent extended periods of maintenance haven't reset the clock then?
Apologies for thread drift.
The other 'Red' engine (31874) was actually turned out very nicely in black a year or so before departure.
Surely it makes more sense to concentrate the limited resources of any preserved line on locos and rolling stock that are operational, or undergoing restoration than those with no certain future.
Grasping at straws here, I think. Surely it is better to have some localised corrosion than every potential source of corrosion exposed. Most locos are so covered with oil and grease that they are reasonably well protected, adding a little more and applying a tarp would make a big difference. The worst thing that is done is leaving locos with their boiler lagging on. Once it gets wet it stays wet and in contact with the boilers outer surfaces for years on end. If you are going to store a loco in the loco for any length of time, remove the boiler lagging!
Or change to the more modern lagging materials (foil sealed) that do not trap water as much as the older style lagging.
I beg to disagree.. It was black.. But imho it wasn't a Picasso, still a bit better than nowt.
It makes sense to the railway undoubtedly, my comment was more to do with the owner getting something back in poor shape and my surprise that any agreement between owners and railway doesn't contain some sort of clause regarding return condition.
Any loco out of ticket has to stored in the open, there is no covered accomodation at Ropley, JB of all people was well aware of that, i believe that its down to the owners to provide tarps, if they want to cover up their engines?
Now back to 73096, this engine will need extensive restoration, it wont be a fast turn round, and what about the motion? the boiler will need a full retube even if its in good condition internally the use of treated water should have reduced the work needed, but dont expect to see 73096 at the head of any tour next year
UK Steam suggests 73096 may be moved from Southall to Carnforth today, Fri 19th.
Something activated here today:
As far as I was aware it was not fit to be moved ie stripped down partly
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
you can not beleve anything that somes from the railway beano, its strange, isnt it, the owner is reported to say something, to the efect that she will be restored down south, i think its likily that west coast dont like loco resroration taking place at southall, its a MPD/ staging point, with major work taking place at Carnforth, this move must mean that 35018 cant be far off. i think they work on one out, one in,
Trailing load 715 tons?? Is 73096 made of depleted uranium??!!
ok everyone whos at a preserved railway with mainline access, run out see whats missing that going to be one hell of a dead engine move, how many make up 715 tons, 8 or 9? and how many desiels, 3?
It's RTT's way of demonstrating it's a slow accelerating movement therefore needs longer section times.
it's one of those "don't believe everything RTT tells you".
Isn't 715 a default figure on RTT for moves like this in much the same way as steam runs are shown as diesel hauled?
So its a more of a dont path me up the BH of anything instruction , because i will not be able to stop in time
Brief stop at Rugby and an hour at Crewe in platform 12. Personally I would say it's 34067, and the Crewe stop is for water. It's been a couple of weeks since she's been at 10A, she must be due to return shortly
Any word yet as to whats being moved in this path?
Separate names with a comma.