Flying Scotsman back on the mainline - 2016

[colin penfold]

Received an email today from the Railway Touring Company with the following text. This is amazing considering the pessimistic outlook that has dominated over the last couple of years. No connection with RT Co other than as a previous passenger.

 

Flying Scotsman No. 60103 back in action in 2016.

 

We are pleased to confirm that we have a number of dates lined up in 2016 for steam hauled journeys using the newly renovated steam locomotive No. 60103 'Flying Scotsman'.

 

These dates are now available to view and book online on our website and include the following:

 

Yorkshireman Saturday 4th June -  steam hauled from London Victoria to York, via St Albans, Luton, Kettering, Bedford and Melton Mowbray.  This train will then be diesel hauled back to London.

 

For full details of this tour and to place a booking please use the link below:

http://www.railwaytouring.net/uk-day-trips/the-yorkshireman-1

 

The Waverleys Sundays 10th and 17th July, 7th, 14th and 21st August and 4th & 11th September - steam hauled from York to Carlisle  and return via Leeds, Shipley, Keighley and Skipton.

 

For full details of this tour and to place a booking on any of the dates available please use the link below:

http://www.railwaytouring.net/uk-day-trips/the-Waverley

 

We anticipate there will be a high level of interest in these tours and so recommend that you book quickly to avoid disappointment.

[rogerzilla]

Also http://www.nrm.org.uk/flyingscotsman/scotsman-season.aspx

 

I think tickets for the inaugural run are restricted...I know someone who's going.  It's not very pretty in late BR guise, though, is it?  Watch "4472" on BBC iPlayer and see it as it should be, from the 1968 non-stop excursion.

[Dava]

Why do l have this notion that Scotsman will encounter technical problems and 60163 Tornado will do the honours on these trains? Or that there will be lots of diesel assistance from the rear?

 

Dava

[rab]

Why do l have this notion that Scotsman will encounter technical problems and 60163 Tornado will do the honours on these trains? Or that there will be lots of diesel assistance from the rear?

Dava

Past experience???

[durham light infantry]

Past experience???

 

There are a lot of good people working and volunteering at the NRM who are outside the decision making process, yet have to bear the brunt of negative attitudes like this.

 

Mike

[TheSignalEngineer]

There is running in planned on the East Lancs plus some trips on the NYMR and a test via Ais Gill and Shap I believe, so if there is anything wrong it should show up in these.

[johnd]

Hasn't I Riley at Bury being doing the overhaul along with the NRM, when did you hear of any of his engines ( 2 Black 5's ) failing. If anybody can get an engine right isn't he the one. Also providing ongoing support for a period of time I believe !

[The Bigbee Line]

Linda and I have booked for a january trip from Manchester to Carlisle.

 

Maybe I'm the evergreen optomist, but you have to have a little faith.

 

I might open a thread for all those that want to scorn things...............

[Dava]

Naturally one hopes Scotsman completes every one of the 25 main line runs and the preserved line outings planned from Jan-Sept 2016. This is an ambitious schedule for a newly overhauled loco which has undergone major rebuilding work with some aspects never previously attempted in preservation (see the technical reports commissioned by the NRM on earlier stages of the troubled rebuild project).

 

I am neither scornful nor negative, simply realistic. Substitutions of main line locos happen routinely, 70000 being a current example. Let's see what happens!

 

Dava

[The Stationmaster]

Naturally one hopes Scotsman completes every one of the 25 main line runs and the preserved line outings planned from Jan-Sept 2016. This is an ambitious schedule for a newly overhauled loco which has undergone major rebuilding work with some aspects never previously attempted in preservation (see the technical reports commissioned by the NRM on earlier stages of the troubled rebuild project).

 

I am neither scornful nor negative, simply realistic. Substitutions of main line locos happen routinely, 70000 being a current example. Let's see what happens!

 

Dava

I think with any steam engine problems can arise but as Signal Engineer has already pointed out anything coming out of the work should have shown up on the early runs and these will also allow for any adjustment etc which might be needed once the engine is running on the mainline (which is rather different from running on a  preserved railway).  Rileys seem on past performance to be thoroughly capable of doing the sort of work the engine has needed and they will continue to look after it once it is operational (although it is not clear to me who will be the responsible operator).

 

And Rileys will have a  rep on the footplate which will be useful and important when crews who are unfamiliar with the engine are driving and firing it.

 

It realIy is quite a big programme for the early stages of an engine's return to operation but properly managed, and in particular with the warming and cooling cycles plus lubrication carefully looked after, there ought no to be problems.

[TheSignalEngineer]

On this occasion FS has probably had its best going-over since it had a General repair at Doncaster in 1962

[rogerzilla]

Some of the previous "overhauls" have been rather shoddy, which explains why this one is costing about the same as building a new one from scratch (actually, I think Tornado was rather cheaper).  What I don't understand is why the NRM is prepared to do this for the Scotsman when they have said that Mallard probably won't run again because they don't want to turn it into Trigger's broom, which is pretty much what they're having to do to the Scotsman; it won't be very original in terms of parts, even compared to its BR days.  Presumably the current (as opposed to a previous) world record holder is special.

 

This paper explains some of the cost over-run.

 

http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/about_us/smg/corporate/~/~/media/33CDC07ED88345BEA5412F91D8742D45.ashx

[APOLLO]

Interesting report above. I thought this bit of interest

 

The challenge of using general industrial subcontractors is that, because they have no

background in the application, they would expect to be given clear, precise and unambiguous

instructions. Statements such as “both sides [of the outer firebox] to have new half sides up to a

distance of 2 – 3 ft”, quoted in Chapter 8, would be totally inappropriate. Contractors would be

looking for proper engineering drawings, in CAD formats that can be readily translated into CAM

(computer-aided manufacturing) files, correctly toleranced, with unambiguous material, surface

finish and heat treatment specifications (all preferably in SI units).

This would require a type of professional engineering expertise that, currently, the NRM does

not possess. It would involve measuring and analysing the component to be replaced and the

loads it would have to carry, recreating it as a CAD file, possibly redesigning some of the internal

details to be compatible with modern manufacturing techniques, checking by finite-element

analysis that it could carry the loads and, finally, producing a detailed component specification

to be sent to potential subcontractors

 

I often wonder how, over 90 years ago, the engineers and artisans at Doncaster (as well as Crewe, Swindon, Darlington etc etc) were able to manufacture great locomotives such as Flying Scotsman, and many, many more locomotives without  modern methods and practices such as those mentioned above. Skilled and dedicated people indeed.

 

Don't get me wrong. There are still skilled and dedicated people (Riley's, Israel Newton's etc) - but our "modern" way of doing things (above) is just so completely different. perhaps better, I don't know, but certainly different.

 

Anyhow - It will be great to see the old girl running again. Hopefully now she'll last another 90 years.

 

Brit15

[johnd]

Interesting report above. I thought this bit of interest

 

The challenge of using general industrial subcontractors is that, because they have no

background in the application, they would expect to be given clear, precise and unambiguous

instructions. Statements such as “both sides [of the outer firebox] to have new half sides up to a

distance of 2 – 3 ft”, quoted in Chapter 8, would be totally inappropriate. Contractors would be

looking for proper engineering drawings, in CAD formats that can be readily translated into CAM

(computer-aided manufacturing) files, correctly toleranced, with unambiguous material, surface

finish and heat treatment specifications (all preferably in SI units).

This would require a type of professional engineering expertise that, currently, the NRM does

not possess. It would involve measuring and analysing the component to be replaced and the

loads it would have to carry, recreating it as a CAD file, possibly redesigning some of the internal

details to be compatible with modern manufacturing techniques, checking by finite-element

analysis that it could carry the loads and, finally, producing a detailed component specification

to be sent to potential subcontractors

 

I often wonder how, over 90 years ago, the engineers and artisans at Doncaster (as well as Crewe, Swindon, Darlington etc etc) were able to manufacture great locomotives such as Flying Scotsman, and many, many more locomotives without modern methods and practices such as those mentioned above. Skilled and dedicated people indeed.

 

Don't get me wrong. There are still skilled and dedicated people (Riley's, Israel Newton's etc) - but our "modern" way of doing things (above) is just so completely different. perhaps better, I don't know, but certainly different.

 

Anyhow - It will be great to see the old girl running again. Hopefully now she'll last another 90 years.

 

Brit15

The new ways aren't necessarily the best especially relating to older technology as its now called! At least the older methods have been proven by time even if they seem over engineered by to days standards, I wonder if today's engineering will still be around in 100 years. Edited November 11, 2015 by johnd

[RJS1977]

Some of the previous "overhauls" have been rather shoddy, which explains why this one is costing about the same as building a new one from scratch (actually, I think Tornado was rather cheaper).  What I don't understand is why the NRM is prepared to do this for the Scotsman when they have said that Mallard probably won't run again because they don't want to turn it into Trigger's broom, which is pretty much what they're having to do to the Scotsman; it won't be very original in terms of parts, even compared to its BR days.  Presumably the current (as opposed to a previous) world record holder is special.

 

This paper explains some of the cost over-run.

 

http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/about_us/smg/corporate/~/~/media/33CDC07ED88345BEA5412F91D8742D45.ashx

 

I understood the reason the NRM ruled out running Mallard for the foreseeable future was more because there are/were other A4s out and running so it made more sense for them to spend money on a loco that wasn't already represented on the main line.

 

Despite the size of the NRM's collection, when you sit down and work out how many locos are (a) powerful enough to pull main line charters and (b) not already represented by other examples of the class on the main line, there aren't that many to choose from, especially given that 9Fs are banned from NR,ruling out Evening Star. 

[Reorte]

I often wonder how, over 90 years ago, the engineers and artisans at Doncaster (as well as Crewe, Swindon, Darlington etc etc) were able to manufacture great locomotives such as Flying Scotsman, and many, many more locomotives without  modern methods and practices such as those mentioned above. Skilled and dedicated people indeed.

Possibly because there was a lot of in-house knowledge not written down, by people routinely building locomotives, so they knew exactly what they meant even if the wording is pretty imprecise by current definitions. And of course if you're a contractor you don't want to manufacture something then get told by the customer that it wasn't what they actually ordered.

[rogerzilla]

There was also a lot of standardisation and spare parts, so they would often replace rather than repair.  Boilers, for instance, were just swapped out most of the time, meaning the locomotive could be returned to traffic quickly, and the removed boilers were repaired at leisure.  If I remember correctly, engines for overhaul were only in the big works like Swindon for a couple of weeks, rather than somewhere netween 3 and 25 years in preservation.

 

It may amuse you to know that the GWR managed to re-gauge the track from Paddington to Bristol in a weekend, including the logistical nightmare of moving all old broad gauge stock off the network to avoid it becoming stranded; in 2015 it is taking Swindon Council a whole year to reconfigure one miserable roundabout.

Edited November 11, 2015 by rogerzilla

[jjb1970]

Skills change over time. We lose skills but we also gain skills. Whilst the skills needed to keep steam locomotives in good order may be in short supply it is also true that modern engineering works to tolerances, repeatability and quality standards that would have been considered as impossible to achieve in the steam locomotive era.

I do understand the contractors position on info, it is indeed (as Reorte has said) as much about making sure the client cannot claim you haven't provided what you were contracted to make. There is a recurring issue in that many companies want "A", but order "B" then blame the supplier for supplying what they were contracted to supply rather than being able to mind read.

[RJS1977]

 

It may amuse you to know that the GWR managed to re-gauge the track from Paddington to Bristol in a weekend, including the logistical nightmare of moving all old broad gauge stock off the network to avoid it becoming stranded; in 2015 it is taking Swindon Council a whole year to reconfigure one miserable roundabout.

 

Wasn't it just Exeter(?)-Penzance (plus branches) which were re-gauged over a weekend? Much of the main line from Paddington was mixed gauge by that time and the broad gauge rail could be removed at leisure. However your point still stands. 

[mow]

Yesterday Ian Riley posted some photographs of the engine being gauged by Balfour Beatty on The Works forum.

[rab]

Yesterday Ian Riley posted some photographs of the engine being gauged by Balfour Beatty on The Works forum.

So will it be OO, EM or P4???

[Guest]

The NYMR have just posted this photo via twitter:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CTo9MTLW4AEbNkO.jpg

 

Regards,
Matt

[The Stationmaster]

Wasn't it just Exeter(?)-Penzance (plus branches) which were re-gauged over a weekend? Much of the main line from Paddington was mixed gauge by that time and the broad gauge rail could be removed at leisure. However your point still stands. 

It was indeed Exeter - Penzance and quite a lot of it was mixed gauge anyway but it was still a major task drawing in labour from all over the GWR (so conceivably my great grandfather might well have been one of those involved - history isn't really far away when you look at it like that).  Interestingly there were actually some overspends and certain S&T dept folk had to go back for retrospective authority to cover work they had done which had not been budgetted for, those Victorians weren't always as clever as history would like us to think.

 

However as a gauge conversion job it was definitely not the big one - that was South Wales, and it was a far bigger undertaking but it is almost always forgotten.

[Guest]

Latest News post:
http://www.nrm.org.uk/flyingscotsman/see/photos.aspx

[DCB]

NRM and the Preservation movement ought to give consideration to suitable locomotives for future mainline running.  A trick has been missed here, a replica A3 should have been built at less than the cost of the Flying Scotsman rebuild with A4 boiler Cylinders internal streamlining etc for running and  the "Old" one kept as a static exhibit like Livingstone Thompson of the FR, built out of scrap components.  The replica could even have had a season in Blue Livery as "Gordon the Big Engine"

 

But A3s are heavy brutes, Big and wide and high. As is Tornado and we all know what happened to the mechanically almost identical "Blue Peter." What is needed is something sure footed, speedy 75 mph min and yet with no gauging problems. Add in Famous and Charismatic and different and you have Caledonian 903 "Cardean" ideally in superheated form. 

 

A smooth running Inside cylinder 4-6-0, under 20 t axle loading, regularly timed at 80mph in service, 5000 gallon tender  very low cab and boiler mountings to Caley loading gauge probably the most famous loco of its day.  A real Scottish Icon.  A replica should be able to haul a good load under most weather conditions and would certainly be more distinctive than yet another big Black/ Green/ Red Pacific and should be cheaper to build and run.

 

It could even spend some spare time shuttling between Aviemore and Grantown on Spey qlong with 828 when the Srrathspey railway is extended.

 

Just a thought. (Oh and the Scottish Parliament might chip in a bob or two)