If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

BR1F TENDERS

Discussion in 'Heritage Railways & Centres in the UK' started by rickd, Jan 6, 2012.

  1. rickd

    rickd New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Newcastle
    Can anyone please let me know if there is any restored loco's currently using a BR1F tender. If so which locos?
     
    rickd, Jan 6, 2012
    #1
  2. std tank

    std tank Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,927
    Likes Received:
    1,070
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    9F 92212.
     
    std tank, Jan 6, 2012
    #2
  3. ADB968008

    ADB968008 Guest

    92212 at mid hants.
     
    ADB968008, Jan 6, 2012
    #3
  4. OldChap

    OldChap Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2007
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    150
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    OldChap, Jan 7, 2012
    #4
  5. Martin Perry

    Martin Perry Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2006
    Messages:
    16,551
    Likes Received:
    7,897
    Location:
    1012 / 60158
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Didn't the tender currently behind 71000 start (preserved) life as a BR1F before being modified?
     
    Martin Perry, Jan 8, 2012
    #5
  6. std tank

    std tank Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    3,927
    Likes Received:
    1,070
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Liverpool
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    71000's tender was originally a BR1C, ex 92134.
     
    std tank, Jan 8, 2012
    #6
  7. Harleyman

    Harleyman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    4
    I was a shareholder (and occasional working member) on 92212 and it has always been my understanding that one of the reasons for obtaining 92085's tender was that it was the sole remaining 1F.
     
    Harleyman, Jan 8, 2012
    #7
  8. 73129

    73129 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,547
    Likes Received:
    1,183
    Location:
    Winchester
    I’m surprised Jeremy hasn’t wanted to swap tenders over with 70000 Britannia and 92212. Surely a BR1F tender would be more useful for main line running than the current tender behind 70000 Britannia. If 92212 was to acquire the current tender behind 70000 Britannia this would help with tender first running on preserved lines.
     
    73129, Jan 8, 2012
    #8
  9. Dan Hamblin

    Dan Hamblin Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,549
    Likes Received:
    190
    Occupation:
    Rolling Stock Engineer
    Location:
    Kent
    The Britannias that did have the larger tender needed a modification done to the rear of the cab. The BR1 tender does not have a fall plate, whereas the high sided variants (1C, 1F etc) do, therefore the rear cab framework on the early batch Britannias was removed to accommodate the fall plate.

    So if that were to happen then both locomotives would need their cabs altered. Not accurate for 70000, but I did wonder whether it would be possible for it to temporarily appear as one of the later Britannias towards the end of its ticket i.e when 92212 is under overhaul.

    Regards,

    Dan
     
    Dan Hamblin, Jan 8, 2012
    #9
  10. Harleyman

    Harleyman New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2009
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    4
    I can vouch for the fact that 92212's tender will have a slightly higher water capacity than it had as new, since I was the bod who removed the scoop pipe inside it!

    As most of you who followed 92212's progress in preservation will know, it was restored to main line standards in the first place and this was one modification which was thought worthwhile for that purpose.
     
    Harleyman, Jan 8, 2012
    #10

Share This Page