Bulleid Pacifics - Past or Present

Has it arrived at it's destination? Rumoured to be Carnforth.

 

All the current wind behind the MN Fleet...

Obviously the revenue stream of Weymouth, Swanage is starting to be noticed...
bodes well for the future

 

First anyone will know will be when it does its test runs , depending on the amount of damage done by the open air storage it could be a lot quicker than some think possible 12-18 months after all it needed only the boiler work when it left Ropley unles its going to carnforth to be stripped down, but that makes no sence, if IR is the owner it would have gone to bury if it was going to be taken apart ,

 

Yeah, she was pretty well advanced in her restoration at Ropley before she left for Portland.

This made me wonder why when the proposed plan by IR was first mentioned last year. 35009 was to be restored first using parts from 35018! It just didnt make sense as 35009 is a 100% ex Barry kit of parts.

If 35018 has gone to West Coast Railways works at Carnforth for completion of restoration, then I for one wish them all the best.

It will be great to see the prototype rebuilt MN storming the mainline in a few years time with all its small detail differences to the rest of the MN fleet and how ironic that the MHR have 35005 now, which started its preservation career at Carnforth.

 

I do wonder actually if Ian Riley may have bought 35018 but has been sent to Carnforth because of the backlog of work at Bury at the moment. Not too sure but could be a possibility especially as once 45699 and then 5690 soon after there won't be much for the Carnforth team to do so work can resume on 35018.

 

I was reading the recent book Haynes brought out on the Original Bulleid Pacifics and one thing caught my eye was that the writer said in the preserved loco section that 34073 had been purchased and the owner intended to run her on the mainline.

Is there any truth to this as I thought she was still at Bury. I think SR or someone suggested that someone may have bought her a little while ago but not sure how much truth there is. I hope it is true although she's probably the Bulleid who's in the worst condition.

 

Can't comment on general relative condition, but she's probably the most incomplete. Tender, ashpan, rods, non ferrous bits and a substantial amount of the valve gear missing to say the least (may be a few items in store somewhere, but as a former spares donor, pretty unlikely). I suppose boiler and bottom end will ultimately tell if she's in worst condition.
Does anyone know if there was any outstanding mechanical reason for her withdrawal?

 

Not sure on her withdrawl other than it was June 1964. The book does say she was used for spares on other locos including 34067. It said the owner was going to restore her in their own workshops. As you say the boiler and bottom end will decide how bad she is.

 

Someone has stripped a lot off it then, because when it left Barry it was one of the more complete ones, and in fact I had heard it still had a lot of parts still on it when it was at Ropley. One of the reasons it was moved to Bury.

It was the engine that the Port line group wanted to purchase, but some sort of mix up occurred and they got 34072 instead, which was not as good.

Withdrawn due to shopping proposal rejected. Excess to traffic requirements.

 

If by 'complete' you mean had most of her airsmoothed casing in tact, yes she did, although i doubt any of it was salvageable by that point. And she had it all stripped off before she left Barry anyway.

Since she's been at Bury, I've had a few looks around her (Bulleids are my favourite locos) - afterall, i did say "probably the most incomplete" so there may well be major parts still on her, or in storage, that i didn't see - but to my [untrained?] eye there's not much now. Smokebox has completely rusted through in places, you can climb into the firebox through where the ashpan once was, little remains of the external pipework, to say but a few.
Hopefully someone involved with her can comment on what there is and isn't.

But judging by what you said, she was the better out of '72 and '73, so there's still hope for anyone willing to splash out for her now.

 

From memory the former owner of 34073 had a considerable list of parts made for 34073.

 

I wonder if those parts are still with her or if they moved on with Tangmere?

 

The confusion may be that at some point as I recall 34073 was assessed as a possible mainliner in the future, and passed. I'm not sure what that entails, I am quoting a memory of mine read in a mag yonks ago, so we're talking pretty iffy territory!Regarding the fact that she left Barry reasonably complete but isn't now - am I right in thinking that she donated a great deal of inner gubbins to Tangmere after the latter met with an incident?

 

I seem to recall it was a combination lever failure at or near Derby, with one piece piercing the oilbath bottom and allowing several gallons of oil to drain onto the mainline. Not one of 34067's finest moments, but she grew into a fine machine after that. 34070 has recently suffered a similar incident, but at least that was at low speed and didn't pierce the oilbath. However, the combination lever blanks made for 34073 were machined and used to repair 34067.

 

.... wasn't it near Rugby IIRC?

 

Now you mention it, it was. I remember thinking at the time 'funny how 34067 has disgraced itself at Rugby, near where 35022 disgraced itself on test back in the 1950s'. The latter was noted as leaking oil all over the rollers, so they rarely got an accurate reading at the test plant, and this was one of the final straws in prompting the decision to rebuild.

 

And I seem to remember reading that she had a fair amount of inner motion. As I said though, we're talking my vague memory of an article in a railway magazine, so that's two marks against what I'm saying!

 

It would be good to have an update not only on 34073 (A buyer was interested about 9-10 months ago with a view to main line certification, according to Railway Mag, then all has gone quiet) but also on the other five Bulleids either at Bury or associated with Ian Riley. 34046, according to one source (Last month's Railway Mag, I think) , should be ready for main line testing in May, but again, finding any corroboration for this (or any further info) has been impossible. It is still booked on a Cathedrals Express from Alresford to Ely in June. Then we have 35018 leaving Portland, probably for Carnforth rather than Bury, and 35027 booked for the 2014 ACE commemorative railtour (which suggests that 35009, a more suitable engine bearing in mind its years at Salisbury and Exmouth Junction sheds, won't be ready - or am I reading too much into that??)

Obviously, it's up to Ian Riley and his associates to inform or not inform as they see fit, and I for one do not wish to criticise a setup which has been hugely beneficial to the main line steam movement. If delicate negotiations are continuing on 34073's future, I can fully understand the silence on this front. However, I'm still hoping that in view of how many little snippets appear in the media relating to these Bulleids, to be then followed by a long silence that we won't be left in the dark for too much longer. I guess that most of us that have posted on this particular thread are fans of the Bulleids, and we're all itching to hear more news of further main-line certified examples to keep Clan Line and Tangmere company.