Discussion in 'What's Going on' started by pete12000, Jul 12, 2017.
Blooming heck Richard thats good compared to some we've seen today lol
Yes, Henry, it's a cracker, and I didn't even have to stray from my armchair to get it!
It will be interesting to read @1020 Shireman report especially if he was able to speak to the crew at Carlisle. But on the face of it, a 5XP plus 12 in poor weather conditions produced a fairly predictable result. Over Shap and the S and C, the loco timed the train on the level and downhill and lost around 1.5 mins per 100 feet of climbing, say roughly the difference between 36mph and 25mph average on the climbs. Over Shap they start with a time window of about 30 mins to the following train and despite being 4 late out of the loop and dropping another 7 up to Shap they made it. Over Ais Gill, the loss of 22 mins proved crucial because......
if you try to sandwich the train between the 1745 and 1803 trains from Clitheroe, it is fairly predictable you are going to get stopped at Whalley and then you will struggle with that load. On Shap it's vital to get a decent run at it ; same with Wilpshire.
Let's hope they have some 7P/8P power available for these very demanding conditions.
On the Shap section 45690 actually held up nothing hence it wasn't looped
+1 for that assessment, surprised the owner sanctioned such a flogging for 45690. Obviously no 7 or 8 available / suitable. In such circumstances a loco assisting would be perfectly understandable.
Pleased to see that the lateness of the CME coming south allowed NR to find a FL path that regained all bar 20 minutes by London. At times there is something to be said for modern traction and clearly this London CME model of operation works well and does allow for some recovery if things go wrong on the steam leg, whatever the reason. That said, down south, the margins are much tighter.
It's been said before, for slogging a heavy load up hills a black five it better suited than a Jub but of course the former is limited to 60 on the racing stretches. Ultimately the advertised strategy of class 7 and 8s forming the pool is the right one but when the deadline arrives, as is so often the case, the intentions cannot be fulfilled for whatever reason. An assisting loco would have been a fair and reasonable precaution even without the benefit of hindsight.
Is it known why 46233 is not being used?
Was having tubes replaced at Butterley 5 days ago.
What an awesome sight and sound climbing Shap! How thrilling to see a team with confidence in their loco so they'll let her go a bit beyond normal loading and a crew able to get the most out of her. Just like it used to be back in the day. What a difference to the "show pony" approach!
But from the same TOC! Hence my curiosity as to how they make the decision.
The loading reflects the number of seats sold.
Assisting loco? WCRC have never double-headed their trains, no doubt because of the cost. Only 45699 is available, and that would have to be brought across from York. 48151 is a 50mph goods engine banned from the WCML AFAIK as it is much too slow. 46115 seems to have finished, 35018 is not ready. Hence solo 45690 recreating the days when Newton Heath Jubilees regularly worked comparable loads unassisted between Manchester and Scotland.
OK 12 is a good load for a Jube but if I had been in charge of 5690 on Shap I would have been very happy with the progress made, on the long drag who knows, horrible conditions, wind affecting the train and probably tricky rail conditions which may have affected a bigger loco also, maybe doing as much as conditions allow without provoking slipping.
A CME starting in London was double headed due to the load on the 18th February 2012 see http://www.uksteam.info/tours/t12/t0218a.htm
48151 has been over Shap when it stood in for 46115 on the 14th June 2014 ( I was on this trip) see http://www.uksteam.info/tours/t14/t0614d.htm
Totally agree it was actually a creditable performance in the circumstances but then that is the point, the circumstances ought not to have arisen?
Surely the TOC and charter operator have sufficient communication to know motive power and hence max loading? Over selling perhaps then?
Or maybe 46233 was a last minute drop out?
Would they not have had a Tebay banker over Shap on that load? Not sure myself so puuting it out there for better insight.
Ta, I had forgotten the Black 5s on 18 Feb 2012, even though I photographed them leaving Carnforth:
Even so, I cannot recall two WCRC locos double heading.
If any of those were the case, why didn't they put a box on the back? After all...they have been accused of doing just that before in similar scenarios!
In among the wibble, well done to the crew and to Chris Beet for turning her out in a condition capable of such a grand performance
Not always as there are Eric Bruton photos of these workings (in British Steam 1948 - 1955, Ian Allan 1976) showing eg 45706 passing Tebay for Shap with load 13 and no banker. AN
As said up thread, an assisting loco would have been entirely justified. My assumption is that RTC tells TOC it has agreed the loco. TOC then specifies max loading and RTC sells tickets accordingly. If they had already sold 10 coaches worth of tickets, the TOC would have had to know in order to provide a sufficient rake. So all the information was in place.
We do not know what the operational considerations taken account of by the TOC were but presumably a favourable risk assessment was made. Loads have been subject to formally published guidance, which is of course only that. The facts speak for themselves, a loco in good order with a capable crew was not able to keep time over the route with the given load. That is not a criticism, although I do not like to see such deeds of daring do despite their obvious visual and aural impression because it is essentially a vintage machine being worked at its limit. Obviously the owner makes that call and has to deal with the consequences. The other issue that could be a problem is if delays are subject to "please explain" and the root cause points at overloaded loco. That will not help the steam charter sector.
It will be intetesting to see whether the situation is repeated.
Perhaps if 44932 was fit it may have been added, who knows. The positive determination to run diesel free is admirable and perhaps some of the complaints have been heeded, which is equally commendable.
The crux is entirely as Andrew N describes, no single unit of suitable motive power available. It has been ever thus and it seems unlikely supply will meet demand any time soon.
Separate names with a comma.