P2 Locomotive Company and related matters

Probably well before then. From the Locomotive Magazine August 1916.

 

Shouldn't it have been born on st David's day really ?

 

There's a short clip on YouTube of the rolling taking place:



Foxy

 

BBC Look North - cutting the frames:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-27503995

Foxy

 

James May has been asked to make another part as well. The um Slacking Cock Flange. Ooh err.

 

No one seems to have noticed the slight error in the announcement on the P2SLC website about the cutting of the frames.

"On Wednesday, 21st May, the frames of P2 No. 2007 Cock o' the North were cut at Tata Steel Scunthorpe"

Is that a Typo or has there been a descreet merger with the Doncaster project ?

 

Whoops - I never spotted that! P2 Webmaster notified .............

 

He's a busy chap at the moment - BloodhoundSSC have had him making bits for them as well

 

As one of the many punters who contributed financially to the A1 project (which I am still to travel behind incidentally), living in the north where, to say the least, A1 railtours actually originating in our area are practically non existant and likely to become more so, given the present (enforced ?) policy of the 'A1 S.L.T.' to run a restricted number of main line operations.
This therefore begs the question, is there any intension of involving WCRC in the early stages of the P2 build, to ensure that ALL options are open to them regarding main line operations, or, are they to follow the path chosen for the A1 ? and yes, I am considering a contribution to the P2 but would feel more inclined, if this question is answered first.

Forgive me if this has been covered elsware on the forum.

Andy

 

Given the number of hoops the A1SLT had to jump though to get No. 60163 on the mainline (NoBos, NR certification, main line data collection and approval, etc.) and the work with the regulatory bodies to keep her there (DBS, NR, etc.) why would WCRC need to be involved from the outset? If it is good enough when completed for NR it should be good enough for anyone, no? By the time No. 2007 is finished the big railway may be a very different environment (especially in terms of signalling, TOCs and 'fitness to run') into which modern machines such as Tornado and Prince of Wales will be a better fit than many much older Class 8 locomotives - I think this was the logic behind building new steam for the main line, wasn't it?

Foxy

 

Quite so. There is an interesting article in this week's RailwayHerald about the roll out of ERTMS with some mention of how it might affect the charter business.

Dave

 

Graham that is a very dangerous position to take; what is the point in antagonising WCRC? It is not about noBos, certification it is about people and one in particular.
You are right the big railway may be a different place in 21xx when 2007 is complete - DBS may have quit operating steam by them. Still there will be room in the shed at Barrow Hill for 60163 and 2007.
You guys really do need to make some effort to build bridges with people.
Barry

 

Whilst I cannot pick fault with any of your post, the basis of mine is that the A1SLT is (at the moment) restricted to one TOC thereby limiting the number of mainline forays, but if WCRC were involved at an early stage (as a matter of courtesy) to keep them 'on side' this may open up another avenue to mainline operations. I may have mis interpreted, but it sounds as if you are happy to accept the current amount of operations undertaken by Tornado, all i am trying to establish is, is this going to be the same for the P2 ?
Sorry I did not make it clear at the outset.

Andy

 

I see there has been a nice update on the P2SLC website with a picture of a load of new patterns having been made and some new CAD drawings in the 'Building 2007' section. Plus in the latest mikado messenger where there is an interesting piece about Gresleys Chime whistles. All good stuff.

 

If I remember correctly, WCRC blacklisted Tornado because the A1 trust were not prepared to allow them to dictate which contractors they could and could not use. What has happened since then to make people think that the trust would, or should, be prepared to tolerate such interference now?

Seems better in my view to leave the ball in the WCRC court when it comes to building bridges, and if necessary remain independent from them. Far better in the long run to have competition in the market and not let WCRC become too dominant, even if Tornado is a little under-utilised in the short term. I am sure the trust will know what they are doing, and have their future options mapped out.

 

The current situation is hurting Tornado a great deal more than it's hurting WCRC, if anything it guarantees more use of their own locos, so when it comes to building bridges the ball is well and truly in the Trust's court.

As for the future, ultimately they are reliant on other people to operate their loco on the mainline and provide the rolling stock - DBS have already allowed WCRC to dominate the steam charter market and there's nothing to think they will do anything but reduce their involvement further unfortunately.

Chris

 

I am not taking a 'position' in this WRCR debate which has been held, at length, elsewhere, I am interested in building a P2 and am happy to wait and see what the 'big railway' looks like in five to seven years time... again, a fully certified, modern locomotive should be acceptable to any TOC.

These are the patterns which are a whole lot more interesting than a stale conversation about 'balls'!



Foxy

 

Wow! The whole polystyrene patterns thing has really changed the game: you get your drawings done, you press a button and presto! Not good for the pattern makers, but they were somewhat of a dying breed... And it makes it easy to 'show' progress very early in the game, too.

Noel

 

One might think so, but evidently WCRC think differently.

 

Quoting David Elliott, "The cost of polystyrene patterns versus traditional wood varies according the the complexity of the casting. For simple shapes that can be made from a single pattern piece expanded polystyrene is typically 40-50% of the cost of a wooden pattern, however as the casting becomes more complex cores are required (for example to form hollows and voids) which require separate moulds (known as core boxes) and these add significantly to the cost.. Because the pattern is left in the moulding sand to be evaporated by the incoming molten metal, cores are generally not required. For a typical cast iron cylinder block, the cost of a set of polystyrene patterns will be 20% of equivalent wood."

Although they are useful in many circumstances the patterns for the wheels of No. 2007 will be made the traditional way (since the pattern will be re-used and modified to provide all eight driving wheels), although the Trust already has patterns for the smaller wheels in stock. Given that David has created the new P2 in CAD, lifting components off the programme to produce patterns is relatively straight forward.

Foxy