Coal for Heritage Railways

[John M]

11 hours ago, AMJ said:

With the talk about boiling the kettle using electricity just got me thinking...

 

How about a modern gas or electric powered steam generator at the depot and then this could be used to "fill" a fire less locomotive.  Bet that for most railways the loco would last long enough for the journey and could be refreshed upon returning to the depot.

 

There is a story about Bulleid describing a  fireless system  to a group of workers while taking an evening stroll around Inchacore Works in the early 1950s.

 

Bulleid is supposed to have sketched out the concept possibly on the back of a cigarette package with a propelling pencil when asked by a group of workers about his intentions for new steam locomotives.

 

Not sure if a fireless locomotive is a practical proposition for a main line locomotive with a high demand for steam.

[Steamport Southport]

On 23/06/2019 at 21:36, rogerzilla said:

In Egypt, a country not blessed with much coal or wood, they used to burn mummies in steam engines (I'm not making this up*).   There's a possible solution - we just need to create a huge embalming industry and wait 3,000 years until the "fuel" is matured nicely.

 

*the artists' pigment "Mummy Brown" was also made from ground-up mummies. 

 

We used to import them for fertiliser.

 

They were animals though rather than humans. Mostly cats. I did a degree course on it....

 

http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/wml/collections/antiquities/ancient-egypt/item-456390.aspx

 

 

 

Jason

[faulcon1]

Have you read this article. This railway had a problem with coal firing but not smoke but sparks. So they've fitted one of their locos to burn light oil namely diesel. https://puffingbilly.com.au/news/workshop-blog/would-you-rather/

[Right Away]

"Heritage" should mean heritage and all that goes with it. Many would be alarmed at the prospect of preserved steam locomotives or any other prime mover for that matter if it failed to represent authentically the condition in which it was operated back in the day.

 

Edited July 14, 2019 by Right Away
Grammar correction, still reeling from the F1 at Silverstone!

[cctransuk]

6 hours ago, faulcon1 said:

Have you read this article. This railway had a problem with coal firing but not smoke but sparks. So they've fitted one of their locos to burn light oil namely diesel. https://puffingbilly.com.au/news/workshop-blog/would-you-rather/

 

It is worth pointing out, though, that I seem to recall that the FR / WHR reverted to coal-firing for at least some locos.

 

I can't recall why - but there must have been a good reason.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood,

[brack]

Price of oil vs coal at the time?

 

I'm waiting for someone to tell puffing Billy that diesel is now the most evil thing in the world...

[cctransuk]

2 hours ago, Right Away said:

"Heritage" should mean heritage and all that goes with it. Many would be alarmed at the prospect of preserved steam locomotives or any other prime mover for that matter if it failed to represent authentically the condition in which it was operated back in the day.

 

 

Nothing stays the same - there is no law that says that 'heritage' railways have to operate exactly as they did, back in the 'bad old days'.

 

Would that include lagging the boilers with asbestos, so that the workshop staff develop asbestosis? ....that the driver and fireman have to go home to a tin bath in front of the fire?

 

The past is the past, thank goodness; the 'heritage' lines produce a recognisable facsimile of what we experienced, but they make no pretence at bringing back the wholly authentic past.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Steamport Southport]

One of the narrow gauge enthusiasts will know more. But I believe they switched to oil in the 1960s due to fire risk and cost.

 

They developed a system that negated that risk in the 1980s with Linda. Then it reverted back to oil firing due to rising coal prices.  I think they are now all coal fired again.

 

https://www.festipedia.org.uk/wiki/Ffestiniog_Goes_Back_To_Coal

 

 

 

Jason

 

[009 micro modeller]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

One of the narrow gauge enthusiasts will know more. But I believe they switched to oil in the 1960s due to fire risk and cost.

 

They developed a system that negated that risk in the 1980s with Linda. Then it reverted back to oil firing due to rising coal prices.  I think they are now all coal fired again.

 

https://www.festipedia.org.uk/wiki/Ffestiniog_Goes_Back_To_Coal

 

 

 

Jason

 

 

Pretty sure all are coal-fired again now - I think when they were converted it was cheaper to burn oil but coal has since become more cost-effective again. Didn’t they have to paint the smokeboxes silver at one point? Something to do with the different temperatures involved in oil firing although I don’t quite understand the specifics of it.

[Zomboid]

13 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

The past is the past, thank goodness; the 'heritage' lines produce a recognisable facsimile of what we experienced, but they make no pretence at bringing back the wholly authentic past

"Step back in time to the golden age of steam" - reality is an industrial shunter with some BR mk1s on a route that saw neither when it was part of the national network. Not that there's anything wrong with that as it is, but there probably is some pretence of authenticity in a lot of the publicity for heritage operations.

 

Anyway, the past is gone. You can pick any number of holes in the way things are done now in terms of historical accuracy (was there ever a loco workshop at Grosmont or Ropley? Kidderminster Town station is an entirely new construction, part of the "authentic" Ffestiniog railway is under water, etc etc), but it's all necessary to keep it going. And if it comes to it, oil fired steam engines are a better attraction than static steam engines.

[AMJ]

The oil used initially by the FR was recycled old engine oil cleaned and mixed with diesel.  

 

Unlike internal combustion engines if oil firing was to return the waste oil from the food industry (after cleaning) could be used as could bio diesel.  Many cars say that you shouldn't use bio diesel.   New smell a loco with a hint of chip shop!

 

Coal has gone up recently by 10%.

[Titan]

Unfortunately used cooking oil is in such demand that it now has a high value. So much so that we are now importing it to keep up with demand.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48828490

[Joseph_Pestell]

Perhaps, if suitable coal is unavailable, the preservation railways will adopt the Kitmaster solution. Push the loco along with a powered coach or van.

[Steamport Southport]

1 hour ago, Zomboid said:

"Step back in time to the golden age of steam" - reality is an industrial shunter with some BR mk1s on a route that saw neither when it was part of the national network. Not that there's anything wrong with that as it is, but there probably is some pretence of authenticity in a lot of the publicity for heritage operations.

 

Anyway, the past is gone. You can pick any number of holes in the way things are done now in terms of historical accuracy (was there ever a loco workshop at Grosmont or Ropley? Kidderminster Town station is an entirely new construction, part of the "authentic" Ffestiniog railway is under water, etc etc), but it's all necessary to keep it going. And if it comes to it, oil fired steam engines are a better attraction than static steam engines.

 

Very few heritage railways use industrials for passenger services now. They are mostly confined to railways that was industrial such as the Middleton and Ribble, or are used for freight demonstrations like at the East Lancs, K&WVR and WSR.

 

 

Jason

[cctransuk]

5 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Very few heritage railways use industrials for passenger services now. They are mostly confined to railways that was industrial such as the Middleton and Ribble, or are used for freight demonstrations like at the East Lancs, K&WVR and WSR.

 

 

Jason

 

That's stretching a point, I'd say.

 

The Bodmin & Wenford, an otherwise excellent railway, is using a 'J94' industrial on passenger work at present.

 

I'm sure that there are sound technical reasons why a mainline loco was / is not available, but an industrial on the prestige (and not cheap) evening dining special was a bit of a disappointment.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[PatB]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

Perhaps, if suitable coal is unavailable, the preservation railways will adopt the Kitmaster solution. Push the loco along with a powered coach or van.

Well, funnily enough, over on the Silly Uses for Old Pacers thread....

[Steamport Southport]

54 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

That's stretching a point, I'd say.

 

The Bodmin & Wenford, an otherwise excellent railway, is using a 'J94' industrial on passenger work at present.

 

I'm sure that there are sound technical reasons why a mainline loco was / is not available, but an industrial on the prestige (and not cheap) evening dining special was a bit of a disappointment.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Is a J94 or Austerity really an industrial though? I thought they were built for MOS/WD work. Only a few of the later ones were built for industrial use.

 

Is one a lesser engine than a Terrier, which is only a small locomotive and less powerful than most industrials? Yet because it has a railway company livery everyone seems to think they are "proper" engines.

 

But I did say mostly. I visit approximately twenty different heritage railways a year and I can't even remember the last time I was hauled by any industrial. I'm more likely to get a DMU.

 

 

 

Jason

[009 micro modeller]

Sometimes the trains are hauled by locos which only worked freight or express trains in service, arguably even less suitable for a preserved branch line than an industrial or diesel shunter. But it’s preserving a heritage atmosphere and allowing the stock that does survive (often used because more suitable main line locos are not available) to be demonstrated in working order.

[cctransuk]

53 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Is a J94 or Austerity really an industrial though? I thought they were built for MOS/WD work. Only a few of the later ones were built for industrial use.

 

Is one a lesser engine than a Terrier, which is only a small locomotive and less powerful than most industrials? Yet because it has a railway company livery everyone seems to think they are "proper" engines.

 

But I did say mostly. I visit approximately twenty different heritage railways a year and I can't even remember the last time I was hauled by any industrial. I'm more likely to get a DMU.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Jason,

 

I think it is completely correct to describe the Austerity / J94 as an industrial locomotive - even if it is one that had been purchased by BR.

 

The design was developed from the Hunslet 50550, which was an industrial design. The Austerity / J94 was used overwhelmingly for the same duties as industrial locos, even when owned by the WD and subsequently BR.

 

It was not conceived as, or widely used as, a passenger loco, and it undoubtedly looks out of place on coaching stock.

 

That is not to say it should not be preserved - far from it - but it does give the impression of being a 'last resort' when used on timetabled passenger trains.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Reorte]

18 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Nothing stays the same - there is no law that says that 'heritage' railways have to operate exactly as they did, back in the 'bad old days'.

 

Would that include lagging the boilers with asbestos, so that the workshop staff develop asbestosis? ....that the driver and fireman have to go home to a tin bath in front of the fire?

 

The past is the past, thank goodness; the 'heritage' lines produce a recognisable facsimile of what we experienced, but they make no pretence at bringing back the wholly authentic past.

 

All a bit one extreme or the other - some stuff from the past it's good to leave there even for preservation / heritage (other changes make me rather unhappy about the 'bad current days') but it's not a great argument for suggesting that other differences are therefore OK. It would be a sad, pointless change indeed if heritage railways couldn't burn coal; the non-power generating uses of coal in the UK must be so negligable by now that there's nothing to be gained by trying to eliminate them, and rather more lost.

[cctransuk]

13 minutes ago, Reorte said:

 

All a bit one extreme or the other - some stuff from the past it's good to leave there even for preservation / heritage (other changes make me rather unhappy about the 'bad current days') but it's not a great argument for suggesting that other differences are therefore OK. It would be a sad, pointless change indeed if heritage railways couldn't burn coal; the non-power generating uses of coal in the UK must be so negligable by now that there's nothing to be gained by trying to eliminate them, and rather more lost.

 

At no point was I making the case for conversion from coal to oil-fired steam locos.

 

I was merely pointing out that the 'Puffing Billy' seemed to be following a path previously trodden by the FR / WHR, from which they subsequently turned back.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[PatB]

Given that oil firing predates the building of the vast majority of operational locomotives on heritage lines, I'm not sure that objections on heritage/authenticity grounds have much in the way of legs ;-).

[cctransuk]

5 hours ago, PatB said:

Given that oil firing predates the building of the vast majority of operational locomotives on heritage lines, I'm not sure that objections on heritage/authenticity grounds have much in the way of legs ;-).

 

...... provided that the locos in question were / had been oil fired at some time in their operational lives.

 

Otherwise, it's a fairly tenuous 'what if' in terms of authenticity.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Reorte]

Might also be OK if it's "restoring" something that's such a wreck that it's effectively being pretty much completely rebuilt anyway. Might've got away with it on Duke of Gloucester, since it was altered in some significant ways anyway (glad they didn't though).

[Zomboid]

"Authenticity" isn't really the point. The fact is that it's 2019, and heritage railways exist in this era. If coal becomes unavailable/ unaffordable because it's not being used for much else, then they'll have to adapt. I'm more into diesels, but I'd sooner see oil fired steam than no steam, which may be the reality that we're going to face in the medium term.

 

No matter what publicity might say, they are essentially railway Disneylands. The NRM has a heritage/ conservation remit, the rest are tourist attractions which have to survive however they can.