If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Replica builds for heritage lines.

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by 50044 Exeter, Apr 25, 2016.

  1. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    1,027
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The L1 may share some components with the K1 as well, but I was told that the outside cylinders of the A1 are common to both designs and some wheels are as well, these being among the expensive patterns.

    I think it is hoped that 80136 will remain on the NYMR once its initial 10yr agreement is up, but we shall have to see. I for one hope that it does.
     
  2. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    2,208
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Children's Author, Railway Writer, Film Maker
    Location:
    Sidcup, Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Not sure about the outside cylinders.

    The bogie wheels are the same on both, certainly, as it was Thompson's standard design developed to be used on the B1, the L1 and then what would have formed his A1 class, and is standard across his A2 sub classes.
     
  3. MarkinDurham

    MarkinDurham Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    1,689
    Likes Received:
    421
    Location:
    Durham
    Load 5 was the limit for unassisted locomotives on that line. Not 100% certain about Whitby-Saltburn, but I believe it was the same.
     
    The Black Hat likes this.
  4. The Black Hat

    The Black Hat Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    692
    Likes Received:
    198
    Occupation:
    Defender of the Faith
    Location:
    51F
    Well I was aware of some of those details, which is why when the Tornado group announced that they were to do the V1 tank, I thought it would have been better to do L1. Its obvious that with the V4 being done they hope to use the parts of that to do the V1 tank as well in much the same fashion. Shame as I think that the aim is to obviously build the missing designs of the Eastern region, but they are jumping on the Gresley versions as his is a name they hope to use to get people interested, as its more likely they will have heard of that designer, which is understandable.

    Its a shame though as the L1 design has features that would make it far more versatile and useful for preserved engines over the V1, especially, if as mentioned earlier certain design issues were tweaked to give you a more balanced machine.

    *V1 could be V3 tank - cant remember which one Tornado announced but they are fairly similar.
     
  5. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    2,208
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Children's Author, Railway Writer, Film Maker
    Location:
    Sidcup, Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You see, I also previously thought the L1 tank would be better: but Andrew Hardy swayed me last year when we had a discussion on the merits of building a new tank engine.

    The V3 locomotive is more compact whilst having similar tractive effort, it would also be unique - there is no other conjugated valve gear 2-6-2T design anywhere in the world - and it has parts standard with the V4 locomotive, as it happens, so it does make sense to build a V3 and a V4 with parts shared.

    I have no doubt that Gresley designs have more commercial appeal than a Thompson design. Whilst I would love to see an A2/3 - which has parts common to Tornado and Prince of Wales (you can basically build a Thompson A2/2 or A2/3 from all of the standard parts from both, given the lineage of the designs) it is unlikely to garner the support a Gresley design has.

    That last sentence may be an understatement.
     
  6. Richard Roper

    Richard Roper Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    62
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Librarian
    Location:
    Halifax
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Would a V1 / V3 have less maintenance costs than a cement mixer (L1)? - Although the cement mixers were flogged hard on the local services from King's Cross, admittedly, a flogging they wouldn't be submitted to nowadays - But the problems they had may still manifest themselves and become a nuisance when vibration sets in.
    E.S. Beavor shed some light on the L1s in "Steam was my calling", citing leaking tanks and the associated rot caused by this as being a large part of the problem.

    I don't know much of the history of the V1 / V3 class, but haven't come across any negative comments about them in any of the books I've read...

    Richard.
     
  7. andalfi1

    andalfi1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Messages:
    771
    Likes Received:
    316
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Haworth
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I would guess it's the middle cylinder, is it the same as the Patriot ? ( I would also guess that it's probably due to damage to the external mounting seats, rather than any problem with the cylinder or valve bores) ?
     
  8. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    3,530
    Likes Received:
    1,027
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    But that was true of all locos, including the B1s Standard 4 tanks and Black 5s that now take 7 coaches day in and day out. So I think that in practice an L1 would be expected to take 7 nowadays.
     
  9. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,026
    Likes Received:
    2,164
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Let's shoot that argument down. An L1 punches at 32,080 lbf whilst a V3 can only muster 24,916 lbf. The V3 may be a better looking loco but the NYMR needs locos with 28,000 lbf plus for its heaviest trains.
    As far as the NYMR is concerned, the locos will have to work far harder than they would have been expected to in BR days. The max unassisted load over the Moors was 5 coaches; now its often 8.
    A big point in favour of the L1 is that it is a 2 cylinder loco. That gives it a big advantage when it comes to starting. Gresley locos may have their followers but, I'm not a fan when it comes to sitting in the driving seat.
     
  10. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    2,208
    Likes Received:
    1,601
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Children's Author, Railway Writer, Film Maker
    Location:
    Sidcup, Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I have no idea why I thought the L1 had 28,000lb tractive effort.

    Am very happy to be shot down - I am probably first in the queue for a Thompson L1 new build...
     
  11. class8mikado

    class8mikado Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,099
    Likes Received:
    394
    Occupation:
    Print Estimator/ Font of all knowledge (useful, or
    Location:
    Bingley W.Yorks.
    Don't think there's much about the L1 that couldn't be put right if a little more generosity was designed into its construction along the lines of what Spirit of Sandringham are doing for B17, but for running at less than 25mph perhaps even this would be unnecessary. Bit of a big beast for most Heritage lines -a marquee loco.
     
  12. The Black Hat

    The Black Hat Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2010
    Messages:
    692
    Likes Received:
    198
    Occupation:
    Defender of the Faith
    Location:
    51F
    Id say that over all the L1 is better looking, more so, if like me you swap the GN Gresley style smokebox door over for a more NER/Darlington design. The smoke box doors in later LNE build often take their cue from engines they evolve from. Gresley always had his like his GN machines, but Thompson here oddly left the door like the V3, as the L1 was essencially an attempt to build a bigger powerful improved engine of that design. Theres also an element of where the design team for it was largely based. I think Darlington had a greater say over engines like D49/J39/B17/B1 where as Gresley with his racehorses were all Doncaster and the pre-grouping design and appearances followed. Personally, I like Thompsons design on the B1, and that it follows onto A1 and A2 by Peppercorn. The K1s 62008 and 62011 also I think look better with the more LN Group standard 'face' to the front.

    However, my subtle interest of doors aside - I also think L1 has the merit and the power to be exactly what preservation needs. Its medium in size and the elements of overpower in its design can be worked out. Its motion is also external making maintenance easier than a 3 cylinder engine, and the power can also be well applied to get underway. The water capacity and coal load would also massively help on railways where the time and facilities to refuel were mainly more on shed, after a round trip. The added advantage of the L1 as a new build would be to incorporate new elements to make maintenance easier, like better rocking grates, access to the engine etc. while also incorporating elements to make operation easier too, like sanders, cab to shore radio, and OTMR/TPWS if needed.

    Like I said above, what you essentially want it a new build L4. Taking the next stage and role in the sequence. Its an L1 but improved to be reliable. Not to be the latest new build that seeks to be centre stage and grab headlines but a new engine for railways that will become operational in the future and run frequently throughout the season. An engine that can be modern and reliable and just be a regular performer alongside some of the other engines that are run and might need longer to fix or take time to overhaul. I wouldn't also build one. Id build several as then multiple railways/benefactors/projects can all pitch in to share and reduce the costs of building an engine. Instead of the casts for building one, you build 4 or 5 so that in the end, everyone helps everyone to get a reliable new build that can just run on the railway and be of use, rather than some massive express engine that stays mainline and for preservation is much less useful overall.
     
  13. class8mikado

    class8mikado Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,099
    Likes Received:
    394
    Occupation:
    Print Estimator/ Font of all knowledge (useful, or
    Location:
    Bingley W.Yorks.
    Like the sound of all that, but much easier, and more beneficial to the several Railways that already have them, to tool up for some new build Standard 4 Tanks...
     
  14. Gav106

    Gav106 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,313
    Likes Received:
    597
    Location:
    Nantwich, Cheshire
    I really really don't buy this in the slightest. More standard 4s are not an answer at all. And while new builds are a nice to have there surely is never a time where a restoration of say a 51XX would be more expensive than building brand new. Even replacing certain components it would never be more beneficial. If we are to address the real problem its money.

    Locos dont get paid enough to cover future overhauls. And some groups are very poor at fundraising and try to make short cuts when they know more work is required. Take Lizzie for example.
     
    andalfi1, Shed9C and Jamessquared like this.
  15. 1472

    1472 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,266
    Likes Received:
    925
    Probably the only sensible post for several pages. The movement already has plenty of existing locomotives well capable of giving further service without incurring the eye watering cost and sheer effort of a new build. The issue of insufficient income to cover future overhauls is real enough but is not solved by new builds.
     
    johnofwessex likes this.
  16. class8mikado

    class8mikado Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,099
    Likes Received:
    394
    Occupation:
    Print Estimator/ Font of all knowledge (useful, or
    Location:
    Bingley W.Yorks.
    Fair enough, but I still don't buy why a new build Patriot is a good idea and surely it would have been cheaper (and with a similar end product) to buy a certain jubilee and reboiler it... but no one would fund that would they. . The supply of GWR tank engines is not inexhaustible but the desire to resurrect one of them is perhaps. In terms of what you get for your money in the long run a new build is an increasingly attractive option. Boring though it is to some the standard ..4 tank is non regional and universally praised.
     
  17. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    12,567
    Likes Received:
    12,683
    Location:
    21C102
    Given that there are substantially complete Std 4 tanks that are awaiting restoration, where would the additional money come for a new build?

    The attractiveness of new builds for otherwise unpreserved locos is the prospect of resurrecting a sight not seen for the last fifty or more years. Remove that attraction and you are back to scarcity of funds, at which point a new build of a type that already has fifteen preserved examples looks a pretty ropey idea.

    Tom
     
    35B and MellishR like this.
  18. Steve

    Steve Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Messages:
    8,026
    Likes Received:
    2,164
    Occupation:
    Gentleman of leisure, nowadays
    Location:
    Near Leeds
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    But, as the subject of this thread is about new build replicas, the vast majority of other posts are far more to the pointand sensible than GAV106's. We are allowed to talk about pipe dreams, you know, whether in the pub or on here.
    Now back to the L1 new build........Or should it be an L1/1, (note to Black Hat, not an L4)
     
    Rosedale and Gav106 like this.
  19. Gav106

    Gav106 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,313
    Likes Received:
    597
    Location:
    Nantwich, Cheshire
    I never said it was a good idea. As i will always say, new builds are a nice to have. Nothing more nothing less. If enough people want to see one to fill a missing gap then there is a good chance one will end up being built.
    And over 1100 members and raising £427,000 last financial year (not many newbuilds can say they attract that degree of income) obviously means that for this specific class there is enough support. And when we launched in 2008 what jubilees were available to purchase to do what you mention?

    Unfortunately there are a lot of new build groups that don't have the level of support to complete their projects and probably will never be completed. And how a standard 4 would manage to attract enough money to be built... Look at the standard 4s out there at the moment and while they are a great engine the current groups are hardly flush with money to keep them in service for the long term never mind building new.

    Surely there actually is enough locos out there for most if not all the heritage lines. The problem might be that some of the Railways happen to have too many of the locos and they sit in the queue for years and years never getting a chance to Steam again. Isn't there a couple of standard 4s that haven't yet been restored, one at the mid hants and one at the bluebell? Are they anywhere near the front of the queue? Is there a chance they will be at the front even in 10yrs time? If not then now about moving them on to lines that want locos? I'm sure places like the Ecclesbourne etc etc would love a loco of that size in the future (purely guessing and it was the first heritage line that came to my head) and because these lines dont have what you would call a mainline loco their supporters would probably be able to fundraise quite well.
     
  20. Gav106

    Gav106 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,313
    Likes Received:
    597
    Location:
    Nantwich, Cheshire
    I have no problem with someone wanting to build a L1 tank, in fact it would be something i would enjoy seeing. Same as i would love to see a Fowler 2-6-4t. And if you want to talk pipe dreams I'm always coming up with crazy schemes and ideas, ask anyone in the project and they will tell you that.
    But I'm also not going to pretend that newbuilds are the future. In i honestly believe that this is the only opportunity to build new, while people who remember them and have money to pay for them can pay for them.
     
    LMS2968 likes this.

Share This Page