Bulleid Pacifics - Past or Present

Fair enough - though I maintain the question I asked is/was a valid one! Citing the painting in my signature, I really would love to see an unrebuilt MN in BR blue...

 

Comments in the separate 35027 thread suggest that 35022 is going to Ian Riley's works some time this year for investigation and evaluation, though it's not clear what is to be investigated and evaluated. It strikes me that if anyone has the wherewithal to "un-rebuild" a Merchant Navy loco, it's young Mr Hosking. Yes, I'm flagrantly speculating ahead of the facts, but it looks to me more like a serious proposition than anything else that's been mooted before.

 

Interesting idea, and with him having 35027 overhauled, surely there isn't the desire (or even the main-line work available?) to justify 35022 being restored as well - even if the pair of locos operate through tickets on rotation. I can understand if the second boiler was restored for 35027 after expiry of the one going on the loco this time round, but if the *chassis* of 35022 is being evaluated.... hmmm.

 

35027 is complete and with 6000gal tender but with worn out firebox, 35022 incomplete but with 'economicly restorable' boiler. If you wanted to make a PR move and get more publicity I suppose you could argue that 35022 chassis/boiler could be overhauld and then married up to all 35027 bits to steam another ex-barry loco, this may generate more intrest from the press and enthusiasts world.

I suppose that this would, in some ways gain some more interest that 'just' overhauling 35027 again.

Maybe 35027 days as an active locomotive are on hold until the day when the 2 boilers are steamable.

 

35027's tender no 3116 is a 5,000 gallon type and has been running behind 34046 on the West Somerset Railway for the last few years. It will soon be leaving Williton to rejoin 35027 at Bury. 34046's new built tender is a BR 5,250 gallon type and should be ready to run very soon.

David

 

Hard economics suggest that it may very well be simply a case of 'mix and match' between 35022 and 35027, possibly to give the former a chance of steaming in preservation. However, as suggested earlier, unless a group is seriously set on going down the 'unrebuilding' route, then it is only generous (and wealthy) patrons such as Mr. Hosking who have the wherewithall to achieve such an ambitious project. We all need a Mr. Valentine with a blank cheque in this business...

 

given that both engines are stripped down, to wheels, and frames , if the same ammount of work is needed on both sets of frames and running gear, then use what ever set is in best condition swopping boilers is nothing new, your just carrying on from Br days on that one , the only reason i can see is if 35022 just happens to have better wheelsets and tyres then its worth changing these over to me it makes sence to use what ever set of parts is in better condition , who knows it if the frames of 35022 are in better condition, the engine that steams first could well be 35022, now wont that be one for the books

 

Given the fact that one has previously been restored and the other is in ex-Barry condition, I do not understand your thinking. However, the fact that the boilers will be swapped has been in the public domain for some time and is a sensible idea.

 

but you are overlooking several things here, whilst 35027s frames and running gear have been previously restored it was done when standards were not so strict , and therefore that bottom end might actually be very worn, , it could be that 35022 might in its ex scrapyard condition be in better condition from a base to start from . and then to use the parts from 35027 to complete the restoration one very useful point would be the market value in having another so far un restored merchant on the main line , one that a lot of people said would never get to run again might be better than 35027 having a second innings .

but then what would you do with 35027, , i suppose you could do a retro before and after job, but in reverse that would be something special, you ran an engine first in its rebuilt state then for its second restoration re launch its been put back as original build

 

I would sincerely hope that Port Line was restored to the standards that were required on the Eastleigh drawings. As far as I know these have not changed. What has changed is the huge amount of paperwork that is neccessary when restoring or overhauling a loco these days, especially one that is to work on the big railway.

 

Even in the 1980s, there were basic standard practices to observe and comply with, having been established by over a century of precedent; the locomotives still had to be insured, and as such, every effort must have been made to minimise the development of serious issues when in service. As far as I can tell, the only major thing that has changed since then is the amount of paperwork now needed to certify a locomotive, both on heritage lines and on Network Rail.

 

The bottom end of the loco was done either at Blunsden or Swindon, wasnt it? were the wheels lifted and boxes done? plus it has run for 10 years since, so the running gear is bound to be showing signs of wear, many of the early restorations from barry only had the boxes re metalled mostly because they were probally still in fair condition it was this that i was refering to so this time round they could need the axles turning etc, what if the axles on 35022 were better, or had better tyre profiles , which would you use? infact given that which ever engine comes out first will carry 35022,s boiler and possibly other parts if its 35027, how much will be the 35027 that last steamed?

 

The convention is that an engine takes its number from its frames, is it not? So it doesn't matter which set of wheels or boiler is used.

 

Martin , you do go on a bit.

Regards
Chris:

 

The whole thing seems to have been given an overhaul at Blunsdon/Swindon judging by photographic evidence, with the frames lifted off the wheels. The axleboxes were in all probability re-metalled, see http://southernlocomotivesltdphotogallery.fotopic.net/c1746487.html for details of 35027's open-air restoration. NickT is in a better position than me to comment if any of the axleboxes needed complete renewal, as he has direct access to the men at the top (and what's more, I wasn't even around then)...

 

'Fraid he's on his hols this week, but will try to shed some light in due course.

 

Port Line was reputed to be in good condition when it was purchased from Barry, however the reality proved rather different and the bottom end needed a complete overhaul. The axles and main bearings got the full treatment.

 

Thanks for that confirmation, Nick.