Tornado

My apologies as to some extent my original post was not clear.

Tornado's boiler is a prototype of sorts, and simply doesn't have the same manpower or facilities available to it to facilitate a turnaround as quick as 7 days to fully mechanically overhaul it, or outshop it in under twelve days.

So in that sense, I do feel - IF we acknowledge the boiler as a prototype in itself, and not just a modern interpretation of the original Peppercorn boiler - that the work being done on Tornado is justified, but also not comparable to what could be done in the days of steam as the facilities available to 60163 are not anywhere near as extensive as to that shown in the video.

None taken, my apologies for not being clear enough!

 

Also Tornado is not having a major lower end rebiuld like that Jube is, as far as we know the only issues with Tornado at the moment are with the boiler, which in all likelyhood have suffered far more thermic cycles. Infact if you look at the way Tornado has been used, you probably couldn't have a worse senario for stressing the boiler with thermic cycles. If it was used any more it would be kept in light steam between workings, any less and obviously less cycles.
Jim

 

They have taken the opportunity to rebore the cylinders, which may be linked to issues surrounding their lubrication.

Regards,

Dan

 

On the mileage 'Tornado@ has completed I have no problem with a full 'valve & pinion' exam, including a re-bore.

 

V & P exam, yes. A rebore at 30,000, no. But the reasons for this are well known and the right course of action.

 

This has been my beef all along, however if the Tornado Trust, and their apologists on here want to keep heads firmly 'buried in the sand', then that’s their problem – more fool them I say. Are they really going to keep throwing
Circ. 50K at the problem every few years?

Of course if they would like to put up some real information, we're all willing to listen, however all we’ve heard so far doesn’t add up to a simple engineer like me.

PS - I’m off to Italy in the morning so you can have a rant all you like when I’m away, however have a real deep think about what’s going on, and lets have some proper discussion over this problem, others have said this discussion seams to not be coming to any conclusion, and this IMHO is due to the lack of FACTS presented by the Trust, all we seem to be fed is the same SPIN over and over, it's like a 'stuck' record.

 

The 'stuck record' is the obsession that everything has to be a conspiracy needing to be exposed. At stake here is the loco's and DLM's reputation - they have good reason to be careful what they say given the potential ramifications.

Chris

 

^ What Chris said. Frankly - and I hope you'll forgive an "apologist" - but to read this thread, you'd sometimes think a conspiracy of Da Vinci style proportions was taking place behind the scenes...!

It's by no means so simple as "it shouldn't happen" when you are dealing with a prototype boiler, that I am confident of having read all of the extremely helpful sources listed here.

 

Why? The A1 did have a cylinder lubrication issue quite early on but given the kind of mileage that steam locomotives can achieve between rebores why infer that what is taking place at the locomotive's current mileage should be accepted as normal?

 

I am speaking here only about the cylinders etc. and if you ask many people actively involved in main-line steam operation you will find that a rebore @ 30k miles is not uncommon.

 

That may be true of engines designed in the 1920s and 30s. There is no excuse for it, in the normal way of things, with an engine built 80 and more years later.

 

You say this, based on what facts? Tornado is the first steam locomotive, built to run on the British mainline, since the 1960s. There's simply no precedent for her existence in many ways. It's learning and re-learning engineering within a class.

Give 60163 some credit - working out of the box first time for two years near-continuous work, for a locomotive class that hasn't been seen or used in forty years, is not bad at all!

Rather than "excuse it", perhaps understand that not everything in life can be perfect all the time. Let the trust get on with bringing her back to full health and give them a break from the conspiracy theories.

Besides, it's not as if this is anything near the level of the Royal Scot saga...need I say more!!! :behindsofa:

 

The problems with 60163 are purely because no-one has had the chance to operate an A1 since the 1960s? That's a new interpretation of events isn't it?! Are you saying that everything to do with the A1 is so different from every other steam engine that it's been impossible to copy other successful mainline outfits?

 

How many of the current fleet of operational steam locomotives have fully capable and knowledgeable teams, have the advantage, of the workings of the originals, and the fixes of said engines, available to them in print, and in the voice or experience, for all to read, hear and interpret as they wish? In contrast, how many of these groups are going into uncharted territory with what is essentially a prototype boiler?

No matter which way you look at it, building and running a new steam locomotive, of which no class members exist to learn from (accepting Blue Peter, although to some extent with the different regulator type, it's not entirely the same), can only be based on whatever literature is available of the Peppercorn A1s. This is a different scenario to running a Bulleid, for example, because others exist in preservation to compare and contrast to, and further (for the most part) their service life worked out most of their problems (of which, a few parallels have been made, Bulleid boiler to Tornado's), with changes in routine maintenance and parts not uncommon.

I challenge we will see similar teething troubles in the Clan, the Atlantic, and various other locomotive groups - not because the groups are incompetent with regards maintenance (far from it), or that the locomotive is poorly made (again, far from it), but simply because without a direct frame of reference to hand, running one of these engines is like starting from zero hour for the classes all over again. You learn as you live with the engine.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing - first hand experience and extensive knowledge is another. Being able to compare and work with other groups who own similar machines - extremely valuable. I would imagine that's why so many Bulleid Pacifics have worked in preservation, to some extent - the knowledge base, experience and literature is ongoing for the people who own and work with these engines.

Ten years time, I doubt we'll see this as anything other than a blip on a good service record.

 

I wholeheartedly agree - everybody is going through a massive learning curve at the moment & what is learned & documented from tornado's teething troubles can only benefit all the groups striving to bring their dreams to reality, just let the trust get on with bringing Tornado back to full health so that she may give many thousands of people the joy of seeing or riding behind her for many years to come,

BTW I for one am looking forward to seeing the Standard 3 & 6 turning wheels in anger & bringing pleasure to many, maybe we'll see the Tornado effect repeated on many heritage lines & boy do some of them need it.

 

This is a very interesting debate about the A1s firebox issues, especially the references to the thermic cycles.

As a point of interest Sir Cecil A Cochrane was fitted with a totally new all welded boiler in the mid 1990s. This was as far as I know the first brand new welded steel boiler fitted to a standard guage steam engine in preservation. It has been running with this boiler for pretty much the last 15 years, there hasn't been a single stay replacement or heavy repair in this time (bar the normal retube). I understand that this boiler is smaller, however it has rarely been warmed through the day before and therefore has surely done more thermic cycles in the last 15 years than the A1 has done in the last 2 and a half years.

 

There are plenty of engines now of which only one of a type now exist - 828 on the Strathspey, 42968 on the SVR, the T9 at Bodmin. All of these fall into exactly the same category as the justification you have used for the problems with the A1. When 828 returned to steam in 1993 no-one involved with it had worked on an 812 class in LMS or BR days. Yet it managed to work competently for 9 years before too many tubes failed in the boiler to make it worthwhile extending its ticket into its tenth year. Now it's back in traffic with what you, obsessively would call, a prototype boiler (because it's been modified after its life on BR and there isn't a similar type of boiler left in existence). If it had any problems the owners and operators would admit to it.

I don't find using this justification for the A1 a good enough excuse for what's happened to it. There have been problems with it, at times they've owned up to it. You can't make excuses for what's happened to it because it's the only one of its type.

 

If you're all going to keep on beating this thing to death, please can you at least use the correct teminology. There is no such thing as a 'thermic cycle'.

There are THERMAL CYCLES, and there are THERMIC SYPHONS, but there are no "thermic cycles"!!!

 

A fair point Neil, but I challenge the boiler in 828 is not significantly different from the setup and materials of an original 812 boiler, compared to the difference between Tornado's boiler and an original A1 Boiler.

I'm not the only one to use the word "prototype" with regards the boiler, I might add - and that is certainly what it is, if the Trust intend to make another, surely? (As of course, has been reported with regards the P2 feasibility study).

I'm not sure it's making an excuse so much as accepting the circumstances, and crucially, that these things happen. C'est la vie.

My apologies sheff if at any time I've misquoted that too, more than likely guilty of it once or twice!

 

What you say in that statement is nonsense. The Clan and 82045's boilers are being built to proven designs that have been built and used on British Railways. What about Scotsman's new firebox, do you expect there will be problems with that?