LSL Ltd / Icons of Steam fleet

How are air brakes integrated into those locomotives which did not originally have them, in terms of the control mechanisms? Having 'cabbed' 35028, 6233 and others at Shalford, I don't recall seeing any extraneous equipment other than TPWS.

 

Again I am sure @Steve is the man for this but a proportional valve (I think), takes care of all of this in a under cab or inner frame area.

 

The MNLPS website has a piece on how it was done for Clan Line. Basically, big old Westinghouse air brake valve in the cab (quite noticeable) from a 37 or similar, and an air-to-vacuum proportional valve to control the vacuum/steam brakes on the loco when an air application is made. The air-to-vacuum proportional valve just lets in enough air to overwhelm the vacuum ejector until the correct proportional vacuum is reached.

Some locos, like 6233, have had a full air brake conversion, so the air-to-vacuum valve and vacuum system as a whole is only for use when hauling vacuum braked trains. Tornado was built that way.

 

Right! So does that mean 35028, 6233 etc no longer have/use the main brake ejector control thing?

 

I can only describe 60019 and Tornado, but the other air braked locos are similar. Basically the vacuum brake cylinders on loco and tender have been replaced with air brake cylinders (well built that way in Torandos case). The controls are from a class 37, and there is a straight air brake for the loco and tender (together) and train air brake. The braking system is therefore very like that of a mainline diesel. Air pumps (compressors) are required to maintain the air pressure.

A vacuum ejector is provided for operating such trains, but the control of the brake is via the air system through a Air / Vacuum valve (just as on a dual brake diesel) so the old combined ejector / brake handle isnt fitted. I cant now remember what the arrangement was on 35028 only having driven it the once.

 

Is there any way of slaving air into the existing vacuum brake ejector, for authenticity's sake? I presume that the big cylinders on top of Bulleid tenders are vacuum 'reservoirs'?

 

The cylinders on a Bullied tender are for the TIA water treatment

I don't know if they are used for that purpose these days

 

There is no reason why you couldnt replace the cylinders with air cylinders in the same position. I have a feeling this has been done on Braunton, but I am far from certain.

 

They are indeed vacuum reservoirs. TIA treatment was characterised by a rectangular tank on the right-hand of the tender, which on some MNs required the reservoirs to be arranged in a pyramid prior to rebuilding. Some extra piping was visible on the rear of these tenders next to the right hand ladders which provided steam heat for the TIA system to work.

In 1956, BR introduced a simple soluble briquette treatment system, and the circular feeder for this can be seen in 35029's tender. I suspect water treatment regimes on heritage railways mean that the system is no longer used. See also the SEMG site for the various tender fittings.

 

35028 is a vacuum braked loco that is capable of working an air braked train.
60163 is an air braked loco that is capable of working a vacuum braked train.
Both have a vacuum ejector, but Clan Line requires it to be live and in use to operate an air braked train. On Tornado the Vacuum ejector will be off/isolated.

 

Adding to the mix, 44871/45407 are steam braked locos with both an air pump and an ejector. The air pump has to be working when working a vac braked train on Network Rail because the TPWS & AWS operate on the air system but can be isolated when operating on a heritage railway.. The vacuum ejector has to be on when working an air braked train because the vacuum controls the Deeley valve which applies the loco steam brake.

 

It's fortunate that nowadays a driver has to sign for the particular kind of locomotive, rather than as in the old days being expected to drive a kind never seen before.

 

Is that the case with steam on the mainline? (Genuine question: I don't know the answer).

At least in my little corner of preserved line running, the assumption is that when you qualify as a driver / fireman, you can drive / fire any steam loco on the railway, though visiting engines would generally come with an owners' rep on hand to explain / supervise any oddities in preparation or operation.

Tom

 

O no they're not. They're vacuum reservoirs. The TIA was a box shaped container.

Edit : Bulleid Pacific beat me to it.

 

Not normally, Tom, but, as when visiting heritage railways, most locos have a support crew in attendance who will advise about any anomalies or quirks that the loco may possess. Given the costs involved in putting a loco out on the main line it is only natural that owners will make sure that operators will look after their locos but this is done in a very low key manner and you do not sign for individual locos, or classes for that matter - very different to diesel and electric traction and it was always like that.

Peter James

 

Its been said on NP, by folk that should know, all steam drivers are deemed competent for all steam traction operated by that TOC. I take this to mean irrespective of their experience with a particular type of loco.
More recently it was suggested northern based drivers would naturally have limited experience of rebuilt Bulleids. Is it significant? An experienced driver will generally have the aptitude and diligence to acquire any knowledge to fill gaps before undertaking a booked turn. A traction inspector is always on hand too?
On a heritage line my experience is that best practice is usually applied by organising MICs for visiting uncommon types, comprising practical sessions backed by simple written theoretical test.

 

A good few years ago now what was then RES organised some training runs from Bristol to allow steam crews to get some experience with GWR locos

 

Presumably they only needed to drive one class of them... seeing as they all look the same!

Oh look, there's my coat...

James

 

There are times on this forum when having a FB-style 'HAHA' reaction button in addition to the 'like' one would be useful!

 

Whilst this may be how it works in practice, wasn't it said that the infamous incident which wrecked 'Blue Peter' was at least in part due to the unfamiliarity of the driver on that occasion?
(Note, I don't know, I am asking the question as memory on this is hazy. So apologies if I have remembered that incorrectly.)
The point being, that just because that is the system, doesn't necessarily mean it is a foolproof one.