BR Standard class 6 No. 72010 'Hengist' and Clan Discussion Thread

My term of dodgy quality was erroneous really. The QC of metals in the '40-'60s was almost as good as nowadays probably, remembering the specs. for motion steel etc. Pre-war there were so many specs. that people got confused so products were more standardised, + after the war there was less steel about!
I accept that liners were fitted to make up for boring-out, but certainly some cylinder liners, I am lead to understand, were fitted from new. Perhaps this was a way of overcoming difficulties in manufacture, I don't know.

 

So sorry dont have the exact reason to hand but all the larger standards had cylinder liners from new. Indeed one of the teething troubles with the Britts was the liners moving and thus going out of alignment with the ports ...

 

The 70s, 72s, 77s, 82s and 92s all had cast steel cylinders, hence the need for cylinder liners from new. Also, according to records, 76000-24 and 76100-114 were fitted with cast steel cylinders and cast iron liners. (Can someone from the Mid-Hants verify that this is so on 76017.)

Steve, where is it documented about the cylinder liners being fitted to 76079 from new?

 

I don't know, is the simple answer. My comments were based on the fact that I looked at the cylinder of 76079 during an earlier overhaul at Bury. It wa a very porous casting in the bore. I commented on this to Ian Riley and he told me that this was why it had had a liner from new. Only the RHS (from memory).

 

Thanks Steve. By the way, is this the cylinder that is being replaced?

 

Ian has commented to me that it the flaw in the cylinder existed from new. Somewhat at odds with what has been said earlier in this thread (or is it the 82045 one?), my understanding was that the 76XXX cylinders did differ from other classes and hence when a flaw was found in what I believe was the last one assembled at Horwich, the pattern had already been disposed of. Of course, this could apply if any other types that did have the same cylinder had already completed production.

Steven

 

The cylinders for the 76s, 77s and 82s had the same external design dimensions. Where they differed was that the cylinders for most of the 76s were made of cast iron to a Doncaster drawing and the cylinders for the remaining 76s, 77s and 82s were made of steel to a Swindon drawing and cast iron liners fitted. 76099 was the last 76XXX built at Horwich not 76079. It is quite feasable that a cylinder on 76079 had a flaw in it and a liner was then fitted. However, one has to ask the question as to why another cylinder was not fitted instead. It is very intriguing, but this is digressing away from what this thread is all about i.e. 72010 Hengist.

 

Staying off-topic (as it probably doesn't warrant a new one) if the cylinder was otherwise OK and the porosity confined to the bore, it would make sense to line it, rather than melt it down. It has lasted long enough to justify that decision. With regard to disposing of the pattern at such an early date, I can't see that being the case. Locos were going to possibly require new cylinders for a number of years in the future.

 

I wonder if there could be a use for a new thread for metal works?
It could help folk who are looking for castings, forgings etc in the future, who knows, that include Hengist !!!! (see back to main topic already!)

 

I have a Hengist/ castings question: is there an existing pattern for BR Std class 6/7/8 wheel or will one have to be created - presumably from the original drawings, or can a wheel borrowed from 71000,70000 or 70013 be used....

 

"Taw Valley" had a new cylinder cast a few years ago at Cerdic Foundry, who I think are in Chard, Somerset.

Just in case anyone is interested, here is a link to an image of the Taw Valley casting in 2007:

http://svr-online.org.uk/gallery/viewphoto.asp?f=20070716_92312.jpg

 

If you have a read of 72010,s website it will tell you exactly what is planned to make the cylinder pattern, do the castings and machining.

In answer to class8mikardo's question about the driving wheels, a pattern will need to be made. The original wheel drawing is available.

 

No I havn't read their website, I was just trying to add something to the ongoing discussion.

 

Hi 46118, i dont think that Std tank was having a dig. The website is very informative though, give it a browse next time youve got a few hours...

 

.........while you are at it, I have started a 'Hengist Group' on this forum for anyone who is interested enough to be a member of Hengist Project, or considering joining, to share thoughts directly about the project. Off this thread, so it won't get hijacked, but still open to others to chip in if they wish. If you think it's a good idea sign up, if not tell me why please, it's just an idea for communication between members really.

 

Well I have to say I am bit shocked by the latest letter to come in the post today. I hope the project will continue after the EGM.

 

Sorry, you seem a bit vague. If you know something that is not public knowledge it is better to keep quiet altogether.

 

I think Green Five might be alluding to the proposed intended livery of 72010 when it is completed. I think that this has divided many of the supporters because Clans never carried BR diesel blue livery with a white rabbit badge. It could be an interesting selling point though.

 

..........surely it would have to be an Ancient Brit chariot with horses!!............not a rabbit!!!!

 

So is any one actually going to say what the problem is. Is it because you still have no where to build the locomotive. Ie no shed to put it in.