Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by aron33, Aug 15, 2017.
Spare boilers? or boilers removed from recently dismantled locoimotives? Perhaps I should have said that if there was a spare apprpriate boiler available We would have 'Lady of Legend', and still have 'Maindy Hall',2861 and 2873.
We might still have had all those locos, but some of them would have been dumped and rusting away with minimal chance of ever being restored. I am glad that the limited resources have been / are being used to recreate lost classes.
The change of plan to give 4709 a real no.7 boiler instead of a disguised no.1 seems good to me, although the greater available power will make little difference for 25 mph operation on reserved lines.
Personally I would have preferred to see a working Star rather than one more Castle but it's no big deal, and such a plan could still be revived in future. There is even (at present) some main line work for Class 5 locos.
Whilst I am prepared to accept Your views, and do not wish to get into an argument about things, It would appear to Me that in Your view if there is more than one member of a class of locomotive in existance then there is one locomotive and a complete set of spare parts.
If there is little use or demand for said loco. and or insufficient financially backed sentiment - then isnt that a very sensible stance to take... ?
Assuming that the lack of potential use and insufficient financial backing continues into the future.
It seems likely that some people will always lament some of the decisions that were taken over the Barry Ten. I myself lament the use of the 8F boiler for the County, not because there was ever much prospect of the whole 8F being restored but because in the end so little of that boiler is actually being used, yet it limits the working pressure and thus the nominal TE to far below that of the original Counties, which was intended to be about the same as that of the Castles.
But we are where we are. There's an awful lot to be grateful for with many new build projects.
Yes the LNER Garratt could even yield a running set of parts for an 02 maybe. It would be popular and attract lots of money. It would need, though, lots, and lots, and lots of money. Can't help thinking an original 06 would have been better!
Will ask the NYMR if they'd be interested, and if it would fit in the expansive Grosmont shed. Be a hell of a site up the tunnel though!
Reality check? On this thread?
A beautiful thought/idea! The biggest problem [other than the possible weight issue] would be fitting the Beast into the headshunt at Pickering on arrival and the need to runround..........
Silver linings - without selling off 92245's boiler i wouldnt have the excuse to rebuild it as a 2-8-2 with a clan boiler on when my Euromillions happens...
Nope .... sorry ..... it was decided and you're not reopening that argument now. It's a Swindonised W1, with water tube boiler, in Stroudley's improved engine green, carrying the most fawning 'palace' moniker possible. That's all the important bits already sorted.
Ooh ... that's a nice jacket, guys .... is it for me? .... that stitching looks really strong ..... aren't the sleeves a bit long? ..... how am I meant to take it off? .... where are you taking me? ..... oooh, look, the whole room's a futon ..... why are there mattresses on the walls too? ...... wibble!
So the Garratt has lots of pro's
1) It is the most powerful locomotive the UK ever made- bound to have a £ollowing
2)Gresley and Beyer legacy; if made in 5 years in time for its dramatic £irst appearance at the S&D 100th/200th?
£) A possible home, shades of it's former home, but with a much longer run around.
4) Potential to save £s was the monobloc shared with other Gresley Monsters?
5) Interesting mainline potential, light axle loading ideal £or tourist lines like West Highland, S&C SSE, maybe, and of course Tin Bath tours including the West Silkstone Dodworth old ground.
6) A name already £or the loco- Herbert William Garratt - designer of arguably the finest British locomotives worldwide, still in service(just) today and likely to bring the worldwide curtain down on steam!
Not the most powerful. The highest tractive effort, yes, but not the most powerful.
Strange the LNER never tried it on the Coronation. As the 'most powerful', it should have destroyed the six hour timing!
Perhaps down to HNG's recorded dislike of bendy engines? Might it also have brought up the sort of questions, over the integrity at speed of bearings and connecting components, which were later raised concerning attempts on the sound barrier with the 9Fs?
The highest officially recorded Garratt speed of which I'm aware was a pre-war proving run between Paris (Nord) and Calais of a class 231-132 BT machine, destined for service in Algeria. From memory, it reached 86mph. These (perhaps overly) innovative machines were fitted with electrically actuated Cossart valve gear, which didn't take kindly to the patchy maintenance of WWII, and the whole class was OOS by the early 1950s.
Photo of the test loco at Paris Nord here:
Was it even the highest TE of any loco built in the UK or only the highest of those that ran here?
Given the international nature of Beyer Peacock's output, would restricting that discussion to 4'-81/2" gauge (for starters, at least) be sensible? The only continents not to see Garratts were N.America* and Antarctica!
*unless anyone knows differently, natch!
Apparently ALCO took up a licence but couldn't find any takers.
And then there is :
New builds and it's gone onto the one off LNER Garratt.
To quote Graham Chapman "stop this, it's getting silly!"
Let’s just wait and see what’s in Hornby or Bachmanns catalogue for next year and see what someone comes up with
If we are going to have a double engine, wouldn't a Sturrock 0-6-0 with steam tender be both more realistic in size and infinitely more interesting to see in the flesh?
As close as we'll get I guess ...
Separate names with a comma.