Welsh Mountaineer, 4th August

Sorry to hear that yesterday's Welsh Mountaineer did not reach Blaenau Ffestniog.

45231 worked two Welsh Mountaineers in 2009. It stalled on the first, on 5 August, and had to divide its train. On the second, on 26 August, two coaches were detached at Llandudno Junction, leaving five for Blaenau.

I was on the train on 26 August, and photos of the trip may be of interest:

https://andrewstransport.smugmug.co...-2009/20527388_bvvD2d#!i=1625813364&k=CfnCHS7

Cheers

Andrew N

 

This is the comment that I made. ''It was a West Coast crew. Do we really need to know any more?'' Why you answered in such a strange way confounds me.

I don't believe it necessary to name names. The crews at Hemerdon and Betws-y-Coed would have tried everything possible to keep their trains on the move. It's bad enough that the trains stopped at all without the names of the drivers being made common knowledge before all the facts are known. <BJ>

 

I would much to prefer to hear from someone closely involved with the running of this train before making more than just a passing comment. And that passing comment is to express a bit of surprise that with the history of that stretch of line as reported in this thread the Black 5 did attempt the climb with 6 cars. But, there may have been reasons for that and/or the subsequent stalling that we cannot know about from the warm comfort of our armchairs.

 

Hi, I took the original comment ''It was a West Coast crew. Do we really need to know any more?'' as a negative "It was a WC crew - what do you expect" - I suspect perhaps you did not mean it like that?

 

Further, by the way, I completely agree we don't necessarily need to know footplate crew names although they are often disclosed on here and other sites. I also agree that the last thing the crews would have wanted was a stall and subsequent significant disruption to other traffic and disappointed passengers. This industry needs to be more defensive about its' planning and if one coach less means higher prices for a reliable service that NR will trust, that is probably the cost of being in this business in 2015.

I and others have made the point before that the last few years may well have been the Indian Summer for steam traction on the mainline. My plan is to take as many trips as possible over the next months as I am not convinced the 2016-17-18 railway will want steam getting in the way of a very congested network. For me there's no point not going on trips now because they are becoming more expensive and having some savings in two years time with no trips to go on - but as always that's a personal decision based on my circumstances.

 

For once there was little doubt why she stalled, it was a coach too many, Bill Andrews would tell you that. The sound from the chimney told the story, speed fell so quickly as she hit the curves with the check rails, just like 80079, and there was absolutely no chance of restarting on the curves.

 

I can see that my comment has been misunderstood.

To make it clear I should have said: ''It was a West Coast crew. Do we really need to know who the driver was?''. <BJ>

 

This is a classic case of where innocent comments are misinterpreted, and arguments begin.

 

Quite agree it is disgraceful how people misinterpret on here.
I have now found out who the driver was by elimination but will keep it to myself until September 19
The Official site for International Talk Like A Pirate Day - September 19

 

It doesn't need innocent comments misinterpreted or otherwise for arguments to start on Nat Pres.

 

Having sat up at Glencruitten watching the performance of 45407 on that day and reading this thread I would agree Al. It was the checkrailed curves that certainly did it for 45407 - you could hear the squealing flanges a mile away. It certainly wasn't a shortage of steam - the loco blew off as soon as it stopped. The gradient profiles certainly don't tell us everything.

 

What was he wearing?

 

Sorry if I misread your comment . No offence meant . Steve

 

No offence taken Steve. Thanks for your reply. <BJ>

 

It seems once again as with all discussions regarding WCRC there is flip flopping going on with posters being keen to blame WCRC management but not the crew - the simple fact is unless I have missed something we have no idea what happened on the footplate, was she steaming well - no idea, was there any other circumstances (flange greaser etc) - no idea?

Ultimately the responsibility if a train sets out overloaded will lie with the driver to a degree (however was it overloaded? - some circumstantial evidence on here but little else?)

I suppose what I am saying is that we are just seeing the arguments from WB etc repeated on here with little to no details.

 

45231 made it home safely though.

 

Someone above quoted a maximum gradient of 1 in 36.

Black 5 = 125 tons
6 coaches at, say, 38 tons each including passengers = 228 tons

So a gross weight of, say, 353 tons. On a 1 in 36 gradient that gives a gravitational pull down the hill of 353 * 2240/36 = 22,000lbf, against a peak theoretical TE of 25,500lbf. That's before you take into account the rolling resistance of the train, or the extra curve / flange resistance; nor allow for the drop-off in TE as soon as you start moving at quicker than zero speed. Put simply, with those figures, if the train stalled on the steepest part of the climb it would not be possible to restart it - as indeed seems to have been the case

So I think the evidence that it was overloaded is more than circumstantial, assuming that gradient figure of 1 in 36 is correct (*). Even if the loco was blowing off through the valves, a highly experienced driver on the regulator and perfect railhead conditions, simple physics says that there was insufficient traction to get a train of that weight up a hill that steep using a Black 5. With a suitable allowance for prudence, it would seem 5 would be the maximum on that gradient for a Black 5 and even that would require considerable skill.

I wonder how many more instances of trains stalling on steep hills there have to be to shake the operators out of their denial about the laws of physics when it comes to acceptable train weights?

(*) When the gradients are that steep, even small variations in the actual gradient make a big difference. For example, the same calculation on a 1 in 40 gives a gravitational load of 19,800lbf, which might just about be within the bounds of the possible, but probably not the prudential.

Tom

 

Ultimately she stalled last time in perfect conditions with an experienced driver, Bill Andrews, and the loco in good health, so why did anyone think it would do any better this time.