Bulleid Pacifics - Past or Present

Is there any indication yet of what caused the dramatic-looking motion failure on Manston ?

David

 

Time certainly flies! it's hard to believe that Eddystone was returned to traffic so long ago. Looks like a visit to Swanage is called for soon - it would be good to have another run behind her before she goes out of ticket. I hope you're right and that SLL will not leave her out of action for as long as 34072.

By the way, on a Bulleid-related theme, it has all gone quiet with 34046 since the announcement of a move to Bury for all the main line gadgetry to be installed. Does anyone have an update? The first scheduled main line run is now only less than 3 months away.

 

I think she's still at Bury.

A shame 34028 is withdrawn next year but hopefully she'll have the chance to be paired up with 34053 when she returns to steam this year (I presume for 34053).

 

This SSL production line is just made up in your head at the moment.
Nothing is set in stone and nothing is actually decided at the moment.

 

The list was intended to be mere speculation as to the possible developments over the next few years, but I apologise if this wasn't clear from the outset. Naturally, it all depends on whether the Swanage Railway still wants these locomotives, or whether things move to a stage where there are too many for Swanage to hire, in which case one or two may have to be hired out elsewhere, which was probably at the heart of the disagreement reported in the railway press last year. Regardless of this, SLL's stated aim is to restore and maintain the locomotives in its care. As a shareholder in SLL, I naturally hope all future policy considered by the board will continue to take this into account. Finally, all observations expressed during my last three posts are my own, and by no means represent the official view of Southern Locomotives Ltd.

 

Will 34028 be pulled to the front of the Overhaul queue? With work that has been done in previous years and the sound nature of the loco and of course anything that requires doing before her ticket runs out?

 

Depends on the plan going forward. I think I'll wait for the next AGM when it'll probably arise as a topic for discussion. I think it is a safe bet that 34072 will be the next Bulleid going into the works, particularly as SLL have made several statements to this effect over the last two years, and that it is already in position. I'm sure its just a question of time, money and demand before 34028 enters a second period of service in preservation.

 

With 34072 going in next for overhaul (And just beginning) and with SKP almost done. Once 34070 comes out after the mishap and with 34010 on the sidelines? Could this be achievable? Of course it may be possible that 34028 might get an extension on her ticket?

 

You have 3 question marks in your message and yet I'm at a loss as to what question you are actually asking. Could you perhaps rephrase your message so we know what you're talking about?


Keith

 

I think 34007 is wondering whether it would be possible for 34028 to go into the works once 34053 and 34070 leave, and work has started on 34072. To put it another way, could SLL do two overhauls in parallel, and what'll happen to 34010? However, we musn't forget 80078.

 

Thanks Bulleid Pacific. I am glad you read the post how it was meant. I did forget 80078 however. As I understand it 34010 won't be going in for another year or 2 to be started on? So does this give the opportunity to get 80078 overhauled and possibly 34072?
Surely this leaves Eddystone and 34010 next in line beside each other to be overhauled? Obviously this will all depend on cash flow and manpower.

 

Reading the latest issue of the Railway Herald no.300, i see that the MHR are to launch an appeal to return 35005 to steam.

Its also interesting to note that the boiler may go to LNWR Crewe for repairs and could be overhauled on a pay as you go basis, if the project goes ahead.

Also in the newly published MHRPS 5 year plan i see that 34058 is listed under the 2012 project section. This begs the question, have the MHRPS bought into this locomotive as per 34007?

 

I was led to believe 34058 is still owned by Mike. I also hear mike is helping out with the construction of 34007 tender. On the topic of MHR bulleids I see the driving wheels of 34105 are being cleaned up and in the centre of the driving wheels the year date 1949 can clearly be seen.

 

Cheers, thanks for that. I also thought that Mike still retained 34058, but the inclusion of the loco in the MHRPS 5year plan had me wondering.

 

It does make good sense to included 34058 into the five year plan. Just ashame 34016 isn't part of the plan. Maybe someone with deep pockets could buy her from JB and keep her on MHR metals.

 

Which is highly unlikely Lee though we can but dream.

Regards
Chris

 

Why the fuss about 34016 Lee? Everyone knows that a newly restored, never run in Preservation loco; is better than one that has done one or two stints.

 

Just ashame to see another Bulleid leave the MHR. I always live in hope that someone will buy her off JB and keep her on the railway. I know a lot of people don't like Bulleids but there's some think about a Bulleid storming up Medstead bank to me and I remember traveling behind her in the early days of the MHR. But alas she will be leaving the MHR with in the next few years for a new home.

 

Find myself in full agreement.

"Bodder`s" has had her moment in MHR history and its time for a fresh representative of the rebuilt light pacific to fill that void.

It is sad that 34016 will move elsewhere, but at least the MHR have not lost an example of the rebuilt light pacific design which is good.

 

Looking on the MHR web site this afternoon there is an appeal out to overhaul 35005 CP


Can Pac Appeal! Help return our Merchant Navy to steam! | Watercress Line