Flying Scotsman

Apart from Steam loco Tenders 3 or 4 axle non bogie vehicles must be non existent in contemporary rolling stock.
Bit of a tangent, but does the Vintage trains GUV function as support coach as well ? or just water carrier ?
if its the latter a shorter modern tanker would be more effective and could be concealed in 'old style' coach body well enough.
Looking forward i hope a suitable sustainable alternative to coal is found, but all the signs indicate that such fuels burn quicker, fly up the chimney faster which means less range / carrying more volume of it for the same mileage.
Re configuring tenders to carry more solid fuel and less water may mean the additional water carrier becomes a must...

 

My understanding is that it is just a water carrier. I believe the support coach is usually positioned immediately behind the GUV

 

Dont suppose that there are any 6 wheel milk tankers in a fit state for NR use

 

Though I am not writing about these losses I am aware that they exist. Rather I am looking into the awareness and application of a test carried out along the lines of those conducted in the October of 1999 on the Ferrocarril Austral Fueguino based on techniques used by the SNCF. I am not going to suggest that the leakage on the locomotives that preservationists use is as high as that experienced in these tests (47% of the water evaporated was wasted, which means that a great deal of the fuel consumed was wasted too) but it might be as well to remember that the movement is increasingly coming under the microscope of the movement of the moment. If we desire to have a long term future we should pay attention to every detail that we can and not blindly assume that those who might oppose us are, or will remain, ignorant.

 

That doesn't really answer my question. It's treated differently because it's considered different; but why is it considered different? What is the essential difference between a second tender, which a loco could run without, and VT's GUV? Come to that, why can a 6-wheel tender run on the main line at 75 mph when (presumably?) a 6-wheel coach wouldn't be allowed at all nowadays?

 

Springing/suspension type, tare weight, coupling types, gauge clearance, wheel diameter, will it interact with signalling equipment in any manner...loads of things go into the assessments into whether a piece of rolling stock goes mainline or not.

 

I'd imagine it's purely related to whether the unit is deemed to be part of the locomotive or part of the train from a vehicle approval perspective. If the 2nd tender was deemed part of the train, then for positioning moves, light engine moves for turning etc, it would have to be hauled, even if the loco was running in reverse, leading to the potential sight of a tender - loco - tender formation (!), whereas if it is classified as part of the locomotive it can be propelled. I have a vague recollection that the 2nd tender, when it was being originally rebuilt for FS, was fitted with a brake valve in the corridor end so that for tender first workings there was a set of eyes somewhat closer to the stopping point! I would imagine that the couplings between the two tenders are such that they are reinforced with safety chains, and the water connections are semi-permanently made when in 2 tender form (screw threads rather than quick release couplings).

 

I think it is treated differently because it is different. As I said, I suspect that it could be altered to run as an independent vehicle but that has not happened, at least not yet. I have no idea what plans, if any, the current owners have for this tender. I can only try to explain how it has been used in the past.

If anyone is interested, this is the last time that I came across the second tender in use. It was on a York to Stratford-upon-Avon trip in May 2011. It went back to Southall the following week and I suspect that it was not used after that. It certainly did not come back to York with the loco on its next visit in December 2011.

Peter

 

Quick thread drift...I apologise profusely, but I have to get this off my chest!

To this day, that portrayal of DoZ by Bittern gives me great pleasure and great annoyance. The font for the number "2" on the front of the loco was fundamentally wrong. Literally everything else was glorious, especially the colour of the wheelsets.



There's a part of me that wants to see a proper "de-tuned" A4 Pacific one day on the mainline, with full valances, garter blue and a single chimney. I personally think their garter blue incarnations (including without the valances) was when the A4s looked at their best.

 

Nearly there, but double chimney, obviously.

 

That really is a beautiful sight! Great photograph, thanks for sharing it with us.

 

Very nice but even better on teak stock.
4464 'Bittern' Severn Valley Railway 26-03-2012 by KING COBRA 92, on Flickr

 

Agreed!

 

Was a good day was that.

 

Oh to see such a formation on the 4 track section in the Vale of York. Better still a pair one with an Apple Green A1/A3 [Flying Scotsman] and the other with a Blue'un as per those photos.....!

 

60019 Bittern running as 4492 Dominion of NZ seen passing Deepcut with the Dorset Coast Express. https://www.flickr.com/photos/79185888@N04/50980159162/in/album-72157689231320494/

 

That's my euromillions project. Recreate a full LNER streamliner.

 

It’s my current modeling project. Loco and observation car done.

 

Yes...thanks to your organisation

 

Gold or yellow transfers used?

lovely photo that!