RTC 2024

A bad day all round. The trouble is, of course, that steam haulage takes another battering in the eyes of many people who see it merely as a nuisance barely to be tolerated on the main line. The fact that it was allowed to run as a genuinely steam-powered train is surprising (rather than just a 'figurehead') and throws into question NR's fire risk assessment methodology. I have no idea if the diesel assistance driver was instructed to give significant assistance but I would guess not. In the absence of other instructions, I imagine 44871's crew would have worked it as normal. All this means that the fires caused should not be used to blame steam per se as a danger to the railway, but more that greater and more focused attention should be paid to the combination of motive power and fire risk. A 'Black Five' will have been working harder than, say a 'Merchant Navy' on the run today and may well have presented a greater risk of sparks as a result. However, I imagine the assessment process doesn't try to distinguish between different steam types/powers, which is fair enough given how borderline the risk would be overall. So, although I suspect any blame lies with NR today, any word that gets round saying that a steam train has caused huge cumulative delays will not enamour it to the general public.

 

The 47 was definitely doing all of the work from Basingstoke onwards from what I have seen, it's a surprise it still caused some fires.

 

Also confirming that 47826 departed Swanage about 5 minutes ago without 44871.

 

I can think of 2 reasonable (in my view) reasons beyond just a knee jerk order from NR for not taking the 5 but I am sure there are many others.

Firstly operationally you would either have to drag it backwards all the way from Swanage to London (and it would need to work the ECS back to Southall after the trip) and the owners may not be willing to have the loco be dragged backwards for that long or alternative for it not to be dragged back the whole way there would need to be sufficient time for the diesel to run round at Southampton for the 5 to then be led from the front. Running around at Southampton would also then require a second diesel (and additional driver) to collect the ECS from Victoria unless it the train terminates at Clapham instead. If you go diesel back the whole way dragging is not an issue and even if you need a second diesel to collect the ECS with no steam loco to drive presumably that driver can head directly to Southall to go get the second diesel.

Second option is if there is an issue with the loco that currently makes it particularly susceptible to setting fires - thinking if the spark arresting system was no longer working for some reason.

Edit - water might be an issue as well if dragged backwards the whole way since presumably watering at the planned stop would not be an option as the loco would be at the rear, depends how much it would use being dragged.

 

44871 was doing all the work at Egham and lasted up until the Winchfield water stop, when the first fire came out. The crew were then advised to have the 47 do all the work from thereon. If it still started fires after that, NR clearly don't want any steam engines on their metals, dragged by diesel or otherwise.

 

Don't post on here very often but we did the Cathedrals Express on Saturday and were told there was a nationwide Amber Warning out on NR from last Thursday. The box on the back allowed some decent steam haulage on the outward as there had been overnight dew and the trackside was lush and green. After a fairly hot afternoon we were shoved hard from close to Caerleon all the way up the Marches. our diesel driver's view was the steam crew should do little up front if the trackside looks dry and vegetation brown. Personally I'm surprised the 5 was allowed out after temperatures hit 29/30. Got a feeling that as soon as the Met Office call an Amber Warning NR follow suit.

 

That's what I suspected

 

Train, was/is terminating at Clapham Junction, (or Clapham as it said on the board on P2 at Swanage, handy for 10A I guess).
Much discussion about route back as talk of line closure at Christchurch.

 

Seems to be trains running through Christchurch now

 

From the amount of coal still in tender at Swanage I don't think it was worked very hard at all
The work was done by the 47 a bad day for steamer's today plus when the 47 pulled out of Swanage it was dangling a pipe of the front of the 47

 

Lost a lot more time outside Bournemouth and now 45 late there.

 

A couple yes although the tour seems to have been in P2 at Bournemouth for 30 minutes so far.

So glad I had a prior commitment this morning and could not steward from Basingstoke as asked.

 

Still at Bournemouth when I looked a few minutes ago. Quite a few folks have wandered up to Romsey Station and have gone away disappointed. Not a good situation for those on the train. Cheers, Neil

 

1Z93 held at Bournemouth awaiting an ambulance for an ill passenger.

 

Yes, I saw the large amount of coal still in the tender on the web cam when the 5 reversed out of Swanage.

97 late away from Bournemouth. I wonder if a path can be found for it to return via Winchester- it's still a hot and muggy evening and from all the comments about the stuffiness of the stock a quicker return could be in everyone on boards interest.

 

If the report you had about a nationwide amber alert on NR from nearly a week ago was correct (and I think it was also mentioned on the Vintage trains thread), then I imagine 'who pays for what' could be an interesting discussion.

Bryan B

 

Harmans Cross today. Inbound to Swanage

 

Direct was the plan so the 47 does not have to run round at Southampton.