Bluebell Motive Power

As I recall (been a while since I looked on depth) they are a spare boiler for the C class (in fact the one it originally arrived with, but which now needs a new firebox); and two P class boilers (nominally No. 27's and a spare, though in practice the three P tanks have had various boiler swaps since arrival at the Bluebell, so exactly which two these originally were I'm not sure). Neither boiler is in good condition, which is probably the major block to restoring No. 27.

Tom

 

Thanks. Wandering around at both Sheffield Park and Horsted Keynes reminded me just how huge the Bluebell's loco collection is even though things like spare boilers are counted!

 

31 resident steam engines (including 84030 and Beachy Head, but not including long-term visitors like the 9F), plus one other steam engine (Stamford) away on long-term loan. In addition there is one petrol engined loco; one Bluebell-owned diesel shunter (plus a second on long-term hire) and a third mainline diesel currently on short-term hire.

Of the steam engines, 9 (or 11, if you include 84030 and Beachy Head) are unique survivors of their type - 3, 65, 263, 592, B473, 541, 9017, 488 and 27505.

Tom

 

Just finished a web album of slide scans from a photo charter we had with 32473 back on 14th October 2005. Here's the web link for those interested;

https://picasaweb.google.com/105454327852537837128/E4No32473PhotoCharter14102005#

Cheers

 

Would it be safe to say that the Bluebell have the largest collection of unique locos outside the National Collection? One of the advantages of the line starting up as early as it did (although a shame a Billington K mogul and 80154 weren't saved as was hoped).

 

My Dad and I did hear a rumour once that when the last K Class was withdrawn for scrapping the shed guys tried to hide it at the back of the shed in the hope the Bluebell would be able to save the loco. Unfortunately the shed foreman discovered the loco and sent it immediately to the scrap yard. Can Tom or anyone confirm this rumour please?

 

I've just finished some slide scans from October 2003 when 60800 visited the line, here's the link to my web gallery for those interested.

https://picasaweb.google.com/105454...0800GreenArrowToTheBluebellRailwayOctober2003

Cheers

 

Well Guys, I thought I'd reiterate a post a few pages back regarding the whole light engines and trains being able to take more passengers than a MK1 set, as seen in my nice little video here..

[video=youtube;5KxHCKlRk14]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KxHCKlRk14[/video]

Nathan

 

How long is 3205 visiting for? Its mentioned on the Bluebell Facebook page that she'll be in steam for the War Weekend.

 

Dan - Looks like she will be in action both days of the "Southern at War" weekend and then will be the service engine the following week and into the following weekend.

Tom

 

Many thanks once again Tom. Will go down one of those weekends.

 

As mentioned elsewhere, B473 has been stopped with firebox problems, repairs to which will require the boiler to come out unfortunately. In other news, 847's boiler has passed its hydraulic test and will shortly be steam tested.

Also this from the email newsletter:

Very encouraging that increased revenue has already filtered down, and long may it continue.

 

I don't think that is 100% confirmed yet, though likely. The engine was being prepared on Saturday for a detailed examination (involving taking out the firebars and a very thorough sweep of the firebox inside to remove soot etc) so that the cracks can be properly inspected before a final decision about how to effect a repair is made.

Also on the loco front, 592 is finally going back together - the long delay was due to a component that had been sent for repair off-site taking longer than expected to return.

Talking to one of the workshop staff on Sunday, there is a general optimism for the medium term - say 4 - 5 years from now - when we should have four large engines in service (32424; 847; 34059; 73082) all in the first third or so of their boiler tickets and all of which will be mechanically in very good condition (32424 will be new; the others will have had very thorough overhauls to "as new" condition). The shaky period is looking to be how we get from now to that point, where the fleet is very thin and also probably under-powered for the demands that are now being made to pull longer trains.

Tom

 

[quote="Jamessquared, The shaky period is looking to be how we get from now to that point, where the fleet is very thin and also probably under-powered for the demands that are now being made to pull longer trains.
Tom[/quote]

I think the problem time is really now until such time as the Q and S15 have both come into service. Until then we really are relying far too heavily on the smaller engines, the U boat and a hired engine. The two rebuilt Maunsell engines will really help take the load. The rebuilt Class 5 will really be the replacement for the U which has only got a couple of years left to go, if it makes it to the end of its ticket. I have so little faith in the Bulleid that I won't count it as being particularly useful, until it has actually completed a 10 year ticket without spending more time in the workshop than out. Hopefully something of useful size and reliable nature will be next in the workshop after the class 5.

Daniel

 

Tom

What about 928 ? Subject to funding £ 150k plus, that might be ready in 4- 5 years.

Paul

 

Hang on a minute, I thought the policy of using small engines was absolutely perfect for the Bluebell's needs?

 

Not quite. The old version of the loco policy called for four big engines. The new version (as approved at the last AGM) calls for five, with big defined as class 3-5 (and there are a few additional nuances if we ever got to our ideal position).

So even pre-East Grinstead, the strategy called for four large engines. All that looks like changing is that we might reach that point within say five years.

Of course, the elephant in the room is that we are now in East Grinstead, and right at the moment that is leading us to need bigger trains - two six coach equivalents on a normal day (seven would be nice, but the platforms at SP aren't long enough, even if we had the motive power available) even now, before the peak season (plus dining trains), whereas last year for most of the summer we ran typically a five coach and a four coach set, and only went to six coaches for the summer holidays, galas, bank holidays and Santa season. We also have gradients of 1:55 now, steeper than before. The impact of those changes is that typically we need two big engines in traffic every weekend; whereas last year we really needed one big and one medium. We can use the "wooden set" to give 6 coach seating capacity within the power range of the H class, but that puts additional strain on the C&W, as those coaches need more frequent routine maintenance; in addition it provides a delicate balancing act to ensure that, when the H class is free for traffic, it co-incides with the times when the wooden set arre available for traffic - not easy when the routine maintenance demands have different cycles.

So my comment about the fleet being underpowered really reflects a reality whereby the loco requirement has gone up a bit in terms of how many servicable large locos we need, coupled with the fact that over the last four or five years, the overall power of the fleet has declined as large locos have been replaced by medium sized ones. The positive news is that it looks like the extra passenger numbers are translating to increased revenue for repairs, though inevitably there is a lag - even with the decision to send Camelot's boiler away, it is unlikely she will be in actual revenue service much before next summer.

Tom

 

The four locos I gave (and I could have added 541 as well, though mechanically that likely won't be in absolute tip-top condition when back in service) are all well on their way, so probably the only uncertainty in a 4-5 year timescale is 32424, which is very much funding-dependent.

With regards Stowe, I think a lot depends on decisions about the boiler, and how that will be progressed. I'd imagine that as soon as 847 is done, the Maunsell Soc will be able to look at overhauling Stowe from a mechanical point of view, to the same high standard. So the timescale probably depends on what happens to the boiler (and specifically, whether it is outsourced, like Camelot, or done in-house); and also available workshop space.

There is also a consideration of balance between large and medium locos. Ironically (given the situation of the last couple of years) we actually look like we might be OK for big locos about five years from now, whereas we may be short of medium locos in the same timeframe - 592 theoretically ends its "10-yearly" in 2017 and B473 a few years after, assuming both last that long. So the exact timeframe for Stowe probably depends at least in part on which smaller locos go into the works. Unless we get more space, we can only really work on two big or four small locos simultaneously (or a combination between those extremes) in the main workshop if the boilers are also done in house.

Tom

 

Surely the prospect of opening to East Grinstead didn't come as a surprise to the operating department? Didn't it know that it would need a greater quantity of larger engines?

 

Go back to the start of this thread.