Flying Scotsman

Things seem to have been missed - cracked hornblocks, new motionbrackets required, new stretchers required, and I think there was a frame crack and a new axlebox mentioned.

It would not be gramatically incorrect as you were making the statement without consulting anyone else, therefore you cannot assume that anyone else may agree with you - you can only speak for yourself.


Keith

 

Sorry, but I was speaking globally and therefore It would be grammatically incorrect as it is first person singular, not third person plural.

 

I think you will find 'we' is first person plural

 

Quite right, my mistake!

 

:mmph: Hell's teeth, they are arguing about grammar now. :frusty:

:focus:

 

Unless it is the Royal "we" and then it's first person singular.

 

Sorry Martin but some of the comments in this thread have been downright scandalous, uninformed and beyond insulting, yet on this subject, everything seems to carry on normally.

The fact that we have an engineering outfit where faults like this didn't get under the wire is something for which we should be thankful. That's not worship that's competence.

The fact that on initial assessment so much work was not found is another matter. But who did the assessment and to what extent were ultrasonics and other methods of testing used in that process? Many cracks are simply not visible to the naked eye, and neither you, nor I know the circumstances of how these were found once the frames arrived at Buckley Wells.

York's shops are not likely to have the full resources of Riley's which has grown and developed its expertise to address the full restoration market on a private enterprise basis. York's workshops are there primarily to support the museum, not to perform full main line restorations all from their own resources.

I don't think any of us knew the state of Scotsman when bought - but I did have nothing to do with a certain promoter's events after visiting their first show at Lyme Park. That was enough for me - in 1985

 

In an earlier life, I ran an NDT workshops. With old equipment, it is generally a question of 'search and ye shall find.' Forging laps, porosity and laminations are pretty much endemic in old metal. The hard bit is making a decision on whether it is fit for purpose, or not. As an example, you have a half-inch plate that has a lamination running down the middle, effectively making it two quarter-inch plates. Is it fit for purpose? If the applied forces are at right angles to the lamination, its scrap. If, on the other hand, the applied forces are in line with the lamination, it makes no real difference. It takes a brave person to give it a tick, though. I've known 100 year old axles scrapped because someone has suddenly found a forging lap that has been there from new and isn't growing. That's erring on the side of caution and the right thing to do in todays world but those axles were probably fit for purpose. Fatigue cracks are an entirely different matter, though, and any evidence of those makes it terminal.
With regards to 4472, I've no idea what was found so can't comment on the why and wherefore.

 

Martin - please read what I wrote, not what you would like me to have written. I'm so sorry that you think we should not have opinions or post on forums; perhaps you would like to tell me what forums are for if not for discussion. And no - I do not know it all, but I have been in the preservation world for over forty five years, so I don't think I'm completely ignorant or barred from commenting, so I don't propose to stop anytime soon. And if you are suggesting that I am Stalytax - well - I'm sure we frequent the same Buffet there, but we are most definitely NOT one and the same - hence why I offered him a lift last year for the Glasgow Tornado if he had needed it.

I did not say the NRM workshops were not fit for purpose - I said that they have a different role to a commercial shops, and that is why, when work goes beyond their expertise or capacity, they contract it out, a totally different statement from that which you ascribe to me.

None of us know the calibre of the "pre works" estimating - but I am quite sure that "hit it" and see if it is OK is not going to pass muster in today's over regulated world, but with machinery, some of which goes back eighty years you may get some very nasty surprises. You should have seen the firebox on the coal tank - down to Kit Kat wrapper it was in places, similarly the frames around the cylinders. Did the HLF allow cutting out and a new segment - no - it had to be stick welded back to original thickness to preserve the original metal. Now that WAS a waste of time and money.

As to whether Scotsman represents a "waste" of taxpayers money - well where do you want to start on that one? Cutty Sark £50+m and it won't even sail? Unmade beds in the Tate? No - Scotsman doesn't even come close.

I would agree with Oakfield - there will need to be a post mortem to make sure we never go down this road again - but a witch hunt - No! And nor should we forget that Scotsman was bought in competition, by public subscription. Lets look at some other high profile private ownerships and how long we might have to wait to see them run - 6100, 60532 for instance

No - I'll stick with Steve Davis and team thank you.

 

The moderators of this forum do an excellent job, and it's thanks to them that unlike other forums, this forum doesn't gag its members, and when a member does get out of control they are spoken to - I think this forum has the right balance & we should be proud of that.

On the subject of FS, the very basic fact is FS hasn't had a proper overhaul for a very long time & hence surely most people would expect the worse & plan accordingly. I am no expert & I'm not pretending to be, but I would expect FS to have been stripped down to bare metal, just like you would with any metallic object that is being restored, and then checked for any problem using all available & reasonable methods - surely these cracks etc, if they existed then (making sure I cover all angles), would have been discovered. Given that in this case we're talking about a national treasure that is using public money to effectively restore it, I would have thought that this basic premise would have been followed. As far as my understanding goes, and that's all it is, the NRM isn't a specialist in such huge restorations, not to mainline standard anyway, whereas the likes of Riley's, WCRC, Crewe etc are & have proven track records (no pun intended). Unless anybody files a FOI then I'm quite certain we'll never know the facts, but what we do know is that Riley's have found all of these extra, previously unreported issues & are thankfully fixing them, and hopefully due to their proven expertise & knowledge FS should come out of all this in a superb condition. Again, in my opinion, the root cause of all the rumours and distrust is the NRM's extraordinary lack of communication with the outside world, dare I say we all live in the Internet age, whereas it would appear the NRM doesn't; they've tried a little, but unlike other restorations & new builds who provide weekly updates with lots of details & pictures, the updates on FS have been virtually non-existent, hence we've been left to guess, and we all know where that has led.

In all honesty, all I care about now is that FS gets back to where it belongs, looking as good as it did in the photo I have from 25 or so years ago when it was at Steamtown. All the facts & finger pointing can wait until after it's back on the mainline & having successfully pulled the Olympic torch train on June 20th.

Is there any chance this thread can now return to updates on FS & has any body got any updates on how she's getting on, confirmed or unconfirmed. Thanks.

NB. It's taken me so long to write this that I missed Franks latest post - I have another example of wasted money. It's been recently commented on that we can spend £45m on a Titian for the nation, the 11th or 12th such painting (can't remember the exact details), something that very few people will see or for that matter want to see, but we can't use that money on the dozen or so other projects such as The Vulcan that is historically important to this country & many more people will see & get pleasure out of seeing. Spending a measly £2m on something as important as the Scotsman is most definitely not a waste of money.

 

Frank, I've always admired how you get your point across without sounding to agressive. Thankyou for sharing your point and I will be in complete agreement with you on it all. Steve Davis' team have done well to keep the project afloat.
thanks Frank
Matt

 

Could of built a new a3 for same price in the same time....haha (obviously joking) would prefer to see taff vale railway no 28 returned to steam and put back in south wales! With no mainline steam locomotive based in South Wales when we consider it was where the first loco hauled train ran it is a great shame for the people of South Wales who are defiantly missing out! Get it on the Gwili with their set of taff vale coaches that would be true preservation...

Just an opinion

 

In the NRM's defence, it should be remembered that Tony Marchington spent a lot of money on Scotsman's 1990s overhaul, which included realignment of the frames. Now, it became obvious when the NRM acquired 4472 that she hadn't been as well maintained as she should have been during her subsequent period in operation, but I don't think anyone anticipated that she would need anything like as much work as she has turned out to, hence the original timescale of a year! Obviously, you can't know for certain how much work an engine needs until you strip it down but, given the money spent on the previous overhaul, I don't think it was unreasonable of the NRM to expect that she would not need as much work as she did last time. As has been said many times, we don't know the facts but my guess is that, the more problems were discovered with the engine, the more thorough the investigations became; and if the frames were one of the first areas to be dealth with, then that might explain why problems were missed in those early stages. I emphasise again, though, that this is just speculation on my part!

 

Thank you for correcting me - I wasn't aware of the extent of the 90's overhaul. It does indeed go some way to explain the assumptions made.

 

Cant help but agree with KB on this but Hindsight is a marvellous thing. It may have been difficult to justify sending FS straight off to Crewe or Bury when they have the kind of Facility at York that some Railways can only dream of. Like everything else these facilities have to justify their existence.
Some faults are only apparent if you actively look for them. Its funny how Main dealers always find more things wrong with your car than the Local garage...