Swanage Railway General Discussion

Perhaps a suitably rigorous examination took place at an intermediate stage, say 7 years, followed by a retube which provided for another 5 years use before more extensive work fell due? A boiler inspector may decide, perhaps, satisfactory visibility could be accomplished without a lift, maybe due to the nature of the Bulleid boiler design?

 

The requirement is an inspection every 14 months. After 10 of these a strip down is required. Hence "12 years" is sometimes possible. It depends though on whether you stretch every period and how amenable your inspector is to that approach.

 

There is no law that says a boiler has to be stripped for a major inspection every ten years. It is the owners written scheme that sets out the examination requirements and frequency so, legally it is their decision. The caveat is that the scheme has to be approved by the competent person appointed by the owner. The owner usually gets the competent person to write the scheme and most competent persons will default to the recommendations given in the guidance issued by the ORR which suggests that no boiler should go more than ten years without a thorough examination of all parts.
I don't think the Traction engine world abides by this but happy to be told I'm wrong. The industrial world certainly doesn't.

 

True enough, but splitting hairs really given that as it has been custom and practice to strip the boiler every 10 years it would be difficult to persuade a competent person to agree to a written scheme that didn't include such a provision, and unlikely an insurer would agree to cover such a scheme. It is a while since I read the ORR guidance or the Pressure Systems Regs, but it is quite possible that the ORR guidance effectively carries the force of law, and it would certainly require a significant and robust evidence chain to deviate from.

I know you werent suggesting it, but it could be argued that the number of near misses indicate that the traction engine world is not a good model to follow and these days it would be surprising if any traction engine is seeing as many steamings annually as many railway locos do. In the industrial world in fairness the water is very carefully controlled at all times and the boiler is being bounced along a set of rails. Many of us will have seen the excellent state of boilers that have been fed on RO water. However, it doesnt take too many doses of indifferent water quality to erode this advantage (literally), so I think I would be nervous of not stripping a boiler every ten years. That said the stripping need not, and does not always require, all the flues out, but access to the regulator, the J pipe / steam pipe and testing of the thickness of barrel are minimums, as is access to the foundation ring (which usually, but not always means lifting the boiler) The foundation ring is of course fairly vulnerable to problems and difficult to check. Most industrial boilers avoid this feature I think?

 

All true. I'm just trying to dispel the myth about '10 year tickets'. Fourteen months isn't cast in tablets of stone, either. You can extend this with agreement of the competent person. it's something I occasionally go for when convenient. You can only do it once in each period, though.

 

My memory of the situation with 257 Squadron was that it was inspected annually and that the competent person was happy to extend its use twice beyond the nominal 'ten year' point. Intermediate mechanical overhauls had extended the working life of the engine and the condition of the boiler was such that it was deemed to be fit to continue in use beyond the nominal 10 year point. However, when the engine reached the point of requiring a further mechanical overhaul the boiler was also showing signs of needing work beyond that of just extending its usable life and therefore it was withdrawn for a full overhaul.
My understanding was/is that the ten year requirement came form guidance (based on BR instructions of the 1970s) but did not have the force of law, so long as a satisfactory system is in place. In more recent years the onus has passed to the responsible body to have a fit system rather than depending on the guidance that was generated with little experience of 'heritage era' type operation and usage of locomotives. Many locomotives require work that demands a full overhaul before reaching the ten year point and some, rare though it may be, can have an extended period before both mechanical and boiler overhauls coincide. Happy to be corrected if my memory is faulty or new guidance has superceded that of a few years ago.

 

I am not certain where the "ten" year requirement has its historical roots, but most of the written standards surrounding the maintenance of locomotive boilers seem to have their roots in the London Midland Region Chief Mechanical and Electrical Engineers Instructions Relative to Boilers, British Railways Board 1959. More often known as the "Red Book" on account of the original cover and for the sake of not needing a class of water after speaking its name!

Basically as Steve and I were trying to point out earlier in the thread, there is no single answer, and no single document. The governing legislation is the Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000, but they don't tell you much of direct relevance you have to reference other documentation. To give another example, if the tubes need replacing then they need to conform to a BS EN standard. The legislation wont tell which one, but if you just used any old drawn tube and there was an accident you may have committed a criminal negligence. The right BS EN standard is quoted in RSP6 (an older ORR guidance document), but one would need to ensure that it had not been updated. Think of it this way, the legislation says you must prove the boiler is sound before you use it. The guidance documents tell you how to do this based on accumulated knowledge. Standards tell you how to do something, a repair for example welding. The guidance and standards provide you with support to demonstrate you complied with the law. I dont need to undertake extensive destructive testing of drawn tube batches, I can simply buy ones that conform to a standard and that is my duty of compliance discharged in regard of the tubes (providing I buy from a reputable source and obtain certificates of conformity). I then pass the criminal responsibility for a failure on to the tube supplier.

 

257 Squadron has made an in steam appearance in the station area, although I have no idea what any plans for it may be. As can be seen it is still missing some casing.

 

I don't know if its a sign I becoming more and more negative as I get older, but I becoming convinced we won't see Squadron in service this year at all. It just seems to be the Swanage version of FS at the moment.

 

Pics on SLL Facebook page shows amongst other things 34072 over the pit having the springs adjusted.

 

South Western Railway have just announced £5 returns from Weymouth to Corfe on Summer Saturdays. 10.38 from Weymouth. Then 3 Corfe Wareham returns before returning to Weymouth 15.45.
Thin edge of the wedge?

 

Very interesting development, and could well be the thin end of the wedge.

I’ve always thought SWR running services in is a more sensible option, and maybe DCC are getting fed up with the delays - having put so much money into to the project.

The Swanage railway charged £15 return Wareham to Swanage last summer. If SWR can do it for £5, then it will be interesting to see what happens.

 

http://www.swanagerailway.co.uk/events/detail/summersaturdayspecial

 

Pretty short notice bearing in mind starts tomorrow!
Be nice if SWR did more offers, SWT were great for that first thing I have seen SWR do since they took over the franchise and all of us in Dorset saw our service deteriorate.

 

It does seem short notice. SWR staff were briefed last Thursday

 

We are still in the trial period, let's give everything a go, and support, before we are all start jumping to conclusion. The important thing, regardless of operator , is Swanage being connected to national rail.

 

Well I think top marks to South Western Railway and Swanage Railway for an innovative idea - lets see how it works out

David R

 

For those of us using public transport it’s totally great!
The paths to Swanage from Waterloo were part of an application to the ORR 2 yrs ago
Salisbury to Weymouth took place and was v successful but Swanage did not.
Last year the Waterloo block stopped any Summer Saturday fun!
This SWR development is v v welcome- by myself at least!
Exeter to Corfe with one change!!
Ray Mason

 

P'haps with the fat end being "The next train at this platform is the 07:13 fast service to London Waterloo, calling at Corfe Castle, Wareham, Poole, Bournemouth, Christchurch, Southampton Central, Basingstoke, Woking and London Waterloo only"?

Rock on! ☺