Bluebell Motive Power

Good strong points, you've got me there, in hindsight on this occasion, I perhaps let my fantasies and hopes overtake commonsense and realism, though I suspect its a common symptom for us enthusiasts...! Your absolutely right, first and for most it has to make financial sense, because at the end of the day, for the railway to continue and prosper, it's got to put bread on the table (to use an old expression.) Though saying that, considering the railway has mentioned this potential extension project several times before, and even secured three spans of the former Tewkesbury and Malvern Railway bridge, surely that must give a sign at least that railway strongly considers it to have good merits to persue it, doesn't it? But I digress, I don't know much of the goings on of the internal affairs of the Bluebell line, I'm sorry to say I've yet to visit...

Agreed, I fully understand that Stepney's next overhaul is not going to be for the faint hearted, I dred to think what the final cost will be... I take the railway will consider looking in to grant funding though, right? Certainly if there was ever an engine more historically significant and deserving for a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund, it's Stepney. Also, on the subject of eye-watering expenses for such a small engine with minimal usage for future traffic needs... where would you say the Adams Radial Tank No.488 fits into all this? Is it's restoration potentially even more extensive and expensive then Stepney's?

 

we dont actually know what STEPNEY's condition is other than it needs a new cylinder block. all the patterns were made some years ago and 2 sets cast - one sold to the spa valley railway. so the new cylinder block is available. the wheel pattern is also available - FENCHURCH having a new wheel some years ago. the design for a new boiler exists with the IOWSR who have had 2 new boilers built in recent years for FRESHWATER and NEWPORT. the horns might be loose but that's not uncommon and easily rectified. dont forget STEPNEY has seen far more years out of service on the Bluebell than in service! it is a complete loco unlike a Barry wreck. it is world famous thanks to the Rev W. Awdry.

there was a strongly held view that PRINCE on the FR was latterly useless, and they even sold PALMERSTON off! now both pull trains, and there is an appeal to restore WELSH PONY, despite it being (like PRINCE and PALMERSTON) unsuitable for the FR's ordinary traffic requirements.

STEPNEY was the first steam loco on a standard gauge steam railway! perhaps an appeal like STEAM RAILWAY's appeal for a new boiler for DOLGOCH is appropriate? the basis for the STEAM RAILWAY appeal for DOLGOCH was that she was the first loco to run on a preserved railway in 1951. STEPNEY has the same claim for the standard gauge!

what price do you put on steam preservation? (thinking of a certain famous LNER loco!) we do these things and support them regardless of how an accountant would view them because we love them !

cheers,
julian

 

News is 847 is in use today on the staff dinner train, so hopefully she comes through that and can crack on with Santa duties come the weekend

 

I'm sure any photographers out there will enjoy the spectacle on Freshfield Bank this weekend with Giants of Steam Santa Specials...

Not my video, but here she is on a loaded trip to East Grinstead:



Tom

 

Well, I would say that we ought to have a representative selection of engines that retain genuine consumable parts from the pre-preservation era; in practice, these will be engines that will never steam again. Fortunately, institutions such as the NRM can cater for this need, so I would argue that preserved railways need not worry too much about consumable parts.

I don't believe, however, that parts such as the main frames can be considered consumable by any stretch! Yes, there are examples of engines having their frames swapped or replaced in service but this was relatively unusual.

 

Oh, and on a less academic note - nice to see the S15 back in steam, well done to everyone who worked on her!

 

I agree, and indeed my favourite option for 'Boxhill' would be to have her swapped with 'Columbine' at Kensington so that the Terrier could have a spot of the limelight while the 2-2-2 was allowed the dignity of being reunited with her tender. That said, if the lifetime of a ticket could be eked out of 'Boxhill' without significantly affecting her originality then it would buy time for funds to be raised to allow 'Stepney' to be rebuilt.

 

Although I see that 9F 92212 went back to the MHR with at least one more broken spring?, what does that tell us I wonder , and will the S15 have the same problem?

Chris:

 

It tells me that you are having yet another dig at the Bluebell.

 

I haven't heard that the springs for the S15 have been replaced by ones hewn from pure diamond so the likelihood is that they are made of a more breakable material, much like those on the 9F. I would regard such a measure as much unnecessary expense personally as a broken spring would be cheaper to fix / replace than it would cost to make an unbreakable one.

 

No it is not a dig but a hard fact.

See the latest Loco department report on the MHR website for details Steve, you might learn something instead of jumping to conclusions.

Never tet the facts get in the way of a chance to slag someone off on Nat/Pres.

Chris:

 

Interesting read, though I don't suppose anyone knows any more details about how the sping broke, do they? Though it could be a case of that it just happened end of, mechanical issues can happen, especially when a steam loco's involved... Temperamental and all that...

 

Ah I see, apologize, I was a little unsure of myself after I had post that info, thanks for the correction.

 

As do I... though in my case, the first time...

 

There are indeed two spans - photo (not mine) here: http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/pic2/wn/2013d/viaduct_sections_johns_8oct13h.jpg

It will be a while before we go to Ardingly, but it is nice to have the bridge sections in place. One significant modification that will be needed is for the ends to be squared off. As built, the original bridge crossed the road on a skew, whereas on the Bluebell it will be perpendicular, so the ends of each span will need modification.

Interesting to think that the bridge will be younger than any of our locos...

Tom