Another possible GWS newbuild 4-2-2 Dean Single

Cant see a thread for this
Link here Didcot Railway Centre | News | Latest News

 

I'd heard about this on the grapevine a good while ago.

It's obviously a completely heart over head choice - the engine would be of only limited use on limited lines, and if it were to go mainline the loading would have to be miniscule.

The arguments for filling a historical gap are compelling, but possibly flawed. The GWS of the future is going to have to be very careful to do right by its visitors and emphasise that some of its collection is replica whilst other parts are original.

Finally, whilst they have made clear that this is very much a thought for the future, they must remind themselves that they already have three newbuilds on the go - admittedly two are quite well advanced, so by the time this gets underway they will most likely be completed. There is the usual discussion about whether this matters - the people who want a County mayn't necessarily be bothered with a Single, and vice versa. But there must be a skills base at Didcot that will be spread thinner and thinner by these new projects. And what of other locos in the collection? Bearing in mind the GWS has examples of many locos that are represented elsewhere - Manor, Halls, Prairies etc., I suppose there is a case for leaving these engines static and widening the collection.

But me, personally? Can't wait

 

Definitely a 'missing link' in the GWR story. Will watch this one with interest. I saw the Midland 'Spinner' operating at Rainhill in 1980; I suspect that this one would be very similar to see 'in action' - it just ran without fuss, with very little to be seen moving.

Mark

 

i'd like to see more "turn of the century" locos built....so few remain and so much lost.

 

Nice idea, but how about seeing a few of the existing GWR projects such as 6880*, 2999, 1014 etc finished before embarking on another one ?, it helps no one to have a load of unfinished assortment of parts laying around the country, taking funds from each other with none seemingly in sight of the finishing line, yes that's a harsh assesment, but I'd rather see a few actually finished first before considering others, rather than many all at once with a great chance of many floundering.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not against a Dean Single, but I'm of the opinion that now isn't the right time to embark on such a project.

*Yes I know 6880 is Llangollen rather than Didcot, but non the less it's a GWR new build.

 

To be fair, projects require different skills at different times in their gestation. So for several years, even if this project gets off the ground, there will be a period of collecting drawings, doing research, doing drawings, assembling a funding infrastructure etc. Those are not especially costly things to do (at least not when set against the cost of actually "doing metalwork"). Moreover, they require different skills to those involved in the actual construction. So provided they don't start on actual construction in a major way while the other new builds are still unfinished, I don't see too much danger of spreading available workshop skills to thinly.

So I see this announcement more along the lines of starting to think about and plan what will be the next project for after the Saint, County etc are finished, rather than something that will be serious competition from the same pool of skills while those projects are still unfinished. But if you don't have a long term plan of what you want to see achieved, the risk is that you build up a set of skills in the construction of, say, the Saint and suddenly it is finished and the project team disperses for want of work and motivation. I suspect if you looked at any of the well organised preservation societies in the country, they could tell you not only what they are working on now, but also what the next couple of projects in the pipeline are, so that any necessary planning can be done.

Jamie's point about "GWS of the future is going to have to be very careful to do right by its visitors and emphasise that some of its collection is replica whilst other parts are original" is an interesting one, and one that will probably increasingly have to be faced by many heritage lines. It's not just locos though: for example, how does the SVR distinguish between, say, Bridgnorth (old) and Kidderminster (new, looking old) stations? But I don't see it as an insurmountable problem (or possibly even a problem many visitors care about). It is also an issue that has already been overcome in other heritage attractions. If you walk round, say, the Shuttleworth Collection, or the Fleet Air Arm museum, some aeroplanes are "originals" and some are "replicas". But they are labelled as such, and I don't see too many visitors feeling disappointed because the FAA displays, for example, a replica rather than a "real" Sopwith Pup...

Tom

 

With regards to the finish somthing before starting another new one, why does this only happen with new builds? If for instance I was to say I was going to restore a gwr 2-8-0 no one would turn around to me and say dont do that finish restoring another one first. I dont see anyone saying to the guys who are taking on the task of 44901 to go and get the colne valley ones finished first? I dont see the difference my self where as others do.

Gav

 

Ah ha another excellent idea. Just need an 8f boiler, Hall frames, B17 firebox 9f front cab sheet, 28xx cylinder block, turbomotive lubricator, Class 37 buffers and a dog called Bob!

 

I wonder how much work will be needed to turn a Hall into a Dean single! :tongue:
I suppose it is a bit of a gap in the operational loco fleet, although you could argue that Planet fills that niche, or even Tysley's Bloomer when that's finished. (I do not intend to re-open that debate btw)
On a somewhat philosophical point, couldn't you say that all new builds (or butcher builds) are head over heart decisions while other locos are rusting away or under threat of being scrapped?

 

If you read the release it makes the comparison with the Railmotor project which is listed as:
research commenced c) 1986
planning started 1991
project launch 1998
in steam 2011.
So if you apply the same timetable that would be aiming to be in steam about 2038.
In practice of course the Dean SIngle would be a much more complex project than the railmotor. One only has to consider the amount of fighting^h^h^h^h discussion over what spec it should be in: there were at least three utterly different styles of boiler used on the class at different times for instance.
Hope I'm still alive to see it. I think you'd have to be a pretty sad excuse for a rail enthusiast not to feel some sort of excitement at the prospect of City of Truro coming off the front of a light train to be replaced by a Dean Single...

As for heart over head: if steam locomotive running in the 21st C full stop is not heart over head then what is?

 

Far more useful on site at Didcot than a 47xx. I have already emailed Mr Croucher. The most beautful engine ever to grace the rails

 

But for so many reasons the 47xx is important... Well to me anyway!

But completely agree with the beautiful engine comment.. Such an elegant locomotive.

 

The difference with that is restorations have many of the bigger parts (boiler, wheels, frames etc) to start with, and overhauls have pretty much a complete set of parts, while it's true many of the "new builds" are also using existing parts, so share that in common with restorations, a Dean Single would almost certainly have to be 99% from scratch as it shares virtually no parts with anything that still exists.

I would love a Dean Single in the flesh, but I do worry we are spreading money and volunteers for new builds a bit too thinly currently, it would be a tragedy if some schemes got as far as say the Frames, Wheels and a few other major components, other to wind up due to money drying up and no one working on them.

 

Oh, I agree a 47 is a lovely thing, just that a Dean Single would be more economical on site. The 47 needs to be out pulling trains on a decent length of railway, the Dean will accompany some of the GWS collection of coaches just nicely.

 

What power class is the single? I mean would it happily pull say 4/5 coaches on a nice flat line like gwsr?

 

Possibly hard to say until its built how powerful it would be - there is a photo on the Didcot Facebook page of one hauling 8 carriages (some look to be 6 wheelers rather than bogies), but those would have been wooden bodies rather than heavier Mark 1's. That's plenty for Didcot where its usually 2 bogie coaches or a few Dean era carriages. How it would play on a heritage line would be different, but for those lines with heritage stock it may be viable (which might spur a bit more carriage restoration - well we can hope anyway).

I agree that this is a good idea, and with the preparation time, its not going to significantly overlap with 2999 and 1014 in terms of actual engineering. Again the issue of the existing fleet will be raised but with 1363, 4144, 7202 and 4079 already well advanced and 1466 being lined up next, its not the case that the new builds are overpowering everything else. As was also pointed out at the AGM - raising money for maintenance rather than a "project" is very hard, but if you have a few novelties that can bring in some hire fees then that can help fund the existing stock.

If I won the Euromillions this would have been my pet project (well that and funding a rebuild of the Dreadnought carriage!) so I'm happy to see it getting serious consideration at least.

 

I hope that my first comment has not been construed as negative. I considered some of the negative points, but finished with "can't wait!" - I'd love it! The argument that it would be a useful loco for the Didcot site too is one that I had not considered, so my comment that it's heart over head was mistaken. Incidentally, I appreciate that the whole preservation movement is heart over head, but I meant that this is heart over head in comparison to something like 82045. Except I was wrong.

Definitely something I'd consider supporting (especially as 82045 should be finished by the time they start asking for funds...!)

Someone noted these locos were seen in various guises. For the record:

1) Dean round-topped firebox and Dean smokebox
2) Churchward belpaire firebox, parallel boiler and drum smokebox
3) Churchward taper boiler

To me, and I think the majority, there's only one option out of that lot: 1.

Just off to dig Lord of the Isles out...

 

Oh, I don't know - the GWR lot seem to like cut and shut jobs so I'm sure they'd be able to cannibalise the Midland Spinner and Stirling Single given half a chance.

 

Ah yes, the Hornby/Bachmann 'wish list'...

But will it have a copper boiler, like the J39 is intended to? Is the Farcebook page set up? Is the paint scheme already decided?

(Gets coat...)

Mark

PS - that WAS intended to be 'tongue in cheek' - as I said before, this is a very interesting 'missing link'