MHR Restorations and Overhauls

Nah, the Worth Valley's closer - same effect................. err hang on why bother with either when we already have the gradients.

 

Oh and we dont?! Look mate when you have a 28 toying with load 9 over on your railway! Anyway our railways bigger! And how many real ale pubs do you have on the platforms at each end of your line? Tch

 

And?........................ you only have a brief bump, we have a 1:60 from standing starts, and I'd like to see what a 28 would actually do on our metals, which would give it a proper work out.

 

I wouldnt exactly call the climbs to Foley Park or Country Park brief bumps in fact a few years ago the crew on D821 got caught out on the climb out of Highley, ended up having to set back and run at it! Never known that before! And it had about 8 on!

 

I had exactly the same with 925 a couple of years ago, put the timetable well out!

Anyway, we all know the GWSR has the best gradients.

 

None?

 

Precisely! I think we've got one really rough bit out of Winchcombe at 1:150! No nasty expensive wear on brakes and less maintenance.

 

probably just as well given the rough ride the passengers get behind that 2-8-0T of yours! Man, that must be wearing your coaches out quickly!

 

It is a bit rough isn't it!

 

From North Norfolk Railway website:

"It is with regret that we have to announce that 34007 Wadebridge will not be attending out Grand Steam Gala this weekend. 34007 became stranded on the M3 Motorway earlier today, Thursday, due to an accident combined with road works and closures which blocked the road for an extended period.


This delay would have meant that the locomotive would not have been able to arrive with us in Sheringham until Friday evening, at the earliest; the work required to gradually warm the boiler and get it into steam would have resulted in the engine not being available until at least Saturday afternoon, all factors considered, the decision was made that 34007 was to turn around and head back home to the Mid Hants Railway."

 

a bit! So uncomfortable to ride behind that I made a point of riding at the rear of the train on the return and there still was a degree of discomfort. I don't know what Joe Public make of it!

 

According to some prat on Facebook and I qoute ' just the 1 visitor then, thats not good enough' I mean what do some of these people want?

 

Tell you what, we'll think about bringing '57 down if you have a count up of your serviceable coaching stock to see if there's enough there to make her notice

 

Worst loco I've ever been on for comfort was a 56xx. No idea what it was like as a passenger, but from the footplate there was a distinct fore and aft motion, which must have been felt on the front of the train. The dogs danglies for power and acceleration, but certainly not a good passenger loco! I think we were careful as far as possible not to roster it for dining trains. By contrast, most big two-outside-cylinder locos (moguls, S15 etc) tend to waggle about a lot at the front, but it doesn't transfer back to the train.

I think I am right in saying that when first built, the 56xx class had the inside crank and the outside coupling rod pin on the same side 180° out of phase (which is conventional) but they tended to knock the axle boxes about and needed shopping at relatively short intervals. They were then changed to put the coupling rod pins in phase with the cranks (which was the Stroudley design, interestingly enough) which lengthened the lifetime of the axle boxes but at the expense of introducing a big fore-and-aft movement. Interestingly, when Maunsell converted the Stroudley E1s into the E1Rs and used them on passenger trains on the ND&CJR, they quickly got complaints from passengers about rough riding and they were quickly converted to have the more conventional disposition of cranks and coupling rods.

Tom

 

I think it's to do with unbalanced masses.....balancing not important on a freight loco I guess. I wonder how they fare at Paignton

 

All this talk of long

Longer trains have been operated on the MHR in the past. Who remembers the big Jubilee Gala in 2002 which featured 6024, 34016 and 92212 hauling a nine coach formation (the ML set) over the banks? Some impressive performances from both 6024 and 92212 which made it look easy. I had hoped that the MHR would repeat this event before the ML set left but sadly it wasn't repeated. Also the RAT used to be 7 carriages I think.

 

If I recall correctly it's due to the signalling at Alton. You can run trains into Alton longer than 6 carriages as long as you don't want to run around.
You're correct, the RAT used to be 7 and had to be reduced, although we have on occasions run 7 top & tailed.

 

I think WD 600 Gordon was rarely used for the same reason on the Limited at the SVR the oscallation made things rather intresting for those dining.

 

Not surprising given its only a ruddy box.

As for your bumps

I wouldn't exactly call them steep.

 

Hydralics have better torque at rail level for some reaso, I cant remember why. So it was a suprise it struggled. Ok I know our hills aren't as steep as yours but it's still a decent test of enginemanship to take load 8/9 from Kiddy to Bridgo.