4472, Or How Not To Overhaul A Steam Loco

[coachmann]

It is probably a good time for the NRM to change its attitude to preservation. It could put the A3 cylinders and other knackered artifacts from Scotsman on display so that people could pop along to York to wallow in nostalgia.

 

In the meantime, the various components could be sent off in various directions for use as 'patterns' to build brand new parts. The new locomotive could carry genuine Flying Scotsman nameplates and 90% of the universe would be glad to see and hear it at work, leaving the other 10% to sit at home stewing...

[micklner]

Obviously there's a lot of statement of fact and apportioning 'blame' in there but I think it's worth considering what the alternatives would be if it had been sold to an alternative private domestic or overseas bidder; would restoration be any further forward or cost any less? If it had been the latter with it going overseas I honestly think there would be greater outcry if it were abandoned as a lost cause. At best it would probably ended up stuffed and mounted somewhere if it wasn't in the hands of a body with a definite commitment to restore it.

 

Things aren't perfect but the alternatives would have probably been worse.

 

I havent gone through all the pages on this thread BUT If it had been bought privately perhaps a full control of the ludricous spending would have happened. They may have even had a proper survey done before buying as well.

Huge amounts of public money have been spent on a worn out Loco which should have been retire gracefully and a replica aka Tornado at a saving built and the remainder gone on another Loco type such as a P2 or many other "missing" loco types.

Why hasnt the Restoreing company been sued for the abject failure of their repairs or any action been taken against the supervisiors at the NRMwho have allowed this sad saga to go on for so long ?

The saddest thing after all this if Scotsman finally works again? how long before she fails once more?

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

... Churchward built the first Pacific in this country, and by all accounts it was not as poor a locomotive has been described in the popular media. It is a shame that it was broken up to be turned into a castle, as there's evidence that with careful and specific changes to the locomotive, such as the radial truck, it would have proven to be a prototype for an excellent class of GW Pacifics. Well ahead of the GNR, NER, LNER or the later LMS and SR Pacifics in this country....

Very dubious argument. The engineering chief decided against it at the time, and he had an experienced staff to advise him. You know more than all of them? The evidence is what counts, scrapping wouldn't have happened if it had shown real promise.

... Peppercorn's A1 Pacific is arguably the best Pacific locomotive class which has ever run in the United Kingdom. You only have to compare reliability in terms of shopping for repairs, and fuel consumption, and annual mileages to conclude that in a purely objective sense...

Yup, and the reason for this is that he went back to the development path that Doncaster had been on under Gresley's leadership, and from which Thompson had foolishly deviated. War and austerity conditions is no time to be making vanity experiments to prove one's own theories. Stick to the established development path that the engineering team - who have quite enough on their plate - know well.

... Riddles Pacifics were adequate for the tasks they were built for, and we all know the story of 71000 - arguably the best Pacific locomotive in the country (though sadly in dire straits at the moment)...

'Adequate': the Britannias just about, but they exhibited a fairly alarming series of defects in service which are well chronicled. The Clans and DoG both had significant and well known troubles in service: at that late stage in steam development there was enough science to not have run into such problems. 1/3 is a poor design record.

... It is never as simple as "Gresley good, Thompson bad" or "Raven bad, Churchward mediocre"...

And I am not making that argument: the reason for citing those names is that they were all engineering team leaders with locomotive successes to their credit. Notice I referred earlier to Doncaster having finally got the chassis detail design right? ; it's about engineering teams as led from the guy in the chair. He has a big influence: and dragging a team into the unknown typically reaps trouble. That's how Riddles screwed up BTW: he wouldn't go to Doncaster (which by then had thirty years pacific design experience) for his big engine designs. Notice how of all the regions the Brits were then deployed in, the one that made it work best (on the data of mileage, availability and all the rest) and consequently well liked by the crews was ER? This is not a coincidence; that's experience telling.

... So why was not a single (A3) other than 4472 preserved? It can't have been all down to the lack of a northern Barry Scrapyard, surely?...

That is the explanation. The people working where there had been the most dire financial pressure in private ownership had got lean, mean and efficient. We are moving on, chop, chop, chop, no sentiment.

[Guest Belgian]

I havent gone through all the pages on this thread BUT If it had been bought privately perhaps a full control of the ludricous spending would have happened. They may have even had a proper survey done before buying as well.

Huge amounts of public money have been spent on a worn out Loco which should have been retire gracefully and a replica aka Tornado at a saving built and the remainder gone on another Loco type such as a P2 or many other "missing" loco types.

Why hasnt the Restoreing company been sued for the abject failure of their repairs or any action been taken against the supervisiors at the NRMwho have allowed this sad saga to go on for so long ?

The saddest thing after all this if Scotsman finally works again? how long before she fails once more?

What?!!! Look at what the privateers did do - two of them went bankrupt and those that tried to overhaul the engine left it almost completely knackered. They didn't control the 'ludicrous spending' - the NRM is no worse than them and it does at least have access to (potentially) unlimited money and won't go bust trying to put right all the wrongs the privateers did. The NRM may not be perfect (and the Report shows how imperfect it was in this instance) but it's a hell of a lot better than those who went before.

 

JE

[Guest Belgian]

. . . in the class A3, we had a class arguably with as high if not higher a profile as the GW Castles - there are eight in preservation - or the Bulleid Pacifics - there are 31 of those in preservation - and clearly much loved by those who spotted them.

 

So why was not a single one other than 4472 preserved? It can't have been all down to the lack of a northern Barry Scrapyard, surely?

 

I think it was at least 90% down to the lack of a northern Barry Scrapyard, Simon. If you look at the locomotives 'saved' before the deadline of 11th August 1968 only two Bulleids were saved privately (Clan Line and Blackmore Vale) and no other Southern types other than those on the Bluebell or in the National Collection (which included Winston Churchill as an example of a Bulleid, and that was only added retrospectively because of its association with the Great Man). After that cut-off the only survivors were those at Barry and it took some time before even those became 'rescues'. The National Collection was pretty well balanced between the various companies and at that time it was thought that would be 'it'. Without the Barry locos the LNER might have been second only to the GWR as even only a few LMS engines had gone into private preservation before the Barry phenomenon began. It was mostly full of Bulleid Pacifics, Maunsell S15s and various Standard designs - and lots of identical GWR ones (ducks and runs) since they are all the same!!! - plus a few LMS ones.

 

More seriously, Dai Woodham bid for locomotives from the railways closest to him, the LNER being the only one which didn't fill that requirement. Sadly, the Eastern was also the most efficient at disposing of/dismantling its own engines.

 

JE

[Bernard Lamb]

Wearing my QA hat what I find most disturbing about the whole sorry issue is the complete lack of any procedures being in place.

They should not need to be written for this particular job, they should exist as on going essential documents for the running of any organization.

It is very hard to apportion any blame when what people should be doing is not clearly identified.

There clearly was no audit system in place. If there had been then many of the problems highlighted in the report would have been nipped in the bud.

A fundamental point such as checking the qualifications of any person to do the work assigned to them for example does not seem to have happened.

Never cut metal without a proper drawing is a vital clause in any procedure. By proper I mean clearly draw in an accepted perspective, toleranced and with full material specifications. Again totally ignored.

I do take issue with certain points in the report.

People with the righh skill set but very little experience in a particular field are capable of doing a first class job if they are given the correct facilities and leadership.

I have seen a good few apprentices who could have done most of the work and they would certainly have queried the lack of drawings and instructions.

Bernard

[micklner]

Belgian.

 

Yes, but I am not talking about the past.

If it had bought by a company who knew what they were doing AND with proper finance up front no problem. Chances are no such a company would have touched her.

Nothing excuses the way the NRM have spent ludricous amounts of money on a Loco which is very far from original.They cant even manage paint her in the correct livery!!

But the truth (ignoring emotion and hype) is shes knackered and needs to retire as I already said and a replica built. We now could have a new Diamond Jubilee running to celebrate HM The Queens anniversary .

By the time they have cut out more and more metal how much is left of the original loco anyway ?? I have read the Footplate and the Cab Roof is all that remains from the original build. Not much nostalgia in that I am afraid.

[coachmann]

A chap at the NRM drew up the list of locos to be preserved. For Alan Peglar to buy Flying Scotsman when he did must indicate that an A3 was not on the list. Perhaps the NRM man considered Scotsman was nothing without the benefit GWR ideas whereas the V2 and A4 were the result of fine-tuning... As for a Lord Nelson......a dud if ever there was one.

[Guest Belgian]

A chap at the NRM drew up the list of locos to be preserved. For Alan Peglar to buy Flying Scotsman when he did must indicate that an A3 was not on the list. Perhaps the NRM man considered Scotsman was nothing without the benefit GWR ideas whereas the V2 and A4 were the result of fine-tuning... As for a Lord Nelson......a dud if ever there was one.

. . . but a significant dud!!!

[S.A.C Martin]

Very dubious argument. The engineering chief decided against it at the time, and he had an experienced staff to advise him. You know more than all of them? The evidence is what counts, scrapping wouldn't have happened if it had shown real promise.

 

Engineers have since weighed up The Great Bear's service record, its design and the potential it had. Cutting up The Great Bear was not done under Churchward, otherwise the decision to develop it further might have gone the other way. I can only comment based on that I've read, but many GW writers feel Churchward's Pacific had potential.

 

Yup, and the reason for this is that he went back to the development path that Doncaster had been on under Gresley's leadership, and from which Thompson had foolishly deviated. War and austerity conditions is no time to be making vanity experiments to prove one's own theories. Stick to the established development path that the engineering team - who have quite enough on their plate - know well.

 

Peppercorn had the benefit of Thompson's Pacifics proving the theory behind the combination of the three separate sets of valve gear, the 50sq foot grate and the double kylchap, together with hopper ashpans, rocker grates, electric lighting and various other components besides that Gresley had not worked on particularly. The double kylchap is a case in point: it was fitted to four of the A4s and one A3, with improvements to the steaming of all, along with the rebuilt W1 under Gresley. No other locomotives received this under Gresley despite it being a known improvement. Thompson used it across his Pacific classes without exception. These were proven arrangements by Gresley, and he used it. Much as he did throughout his locomotive classes.

 

Granted, none of them perfect - but are we really decrying Thompson as a locomotive engineer for making the most of what was available to him? The principles were sound - they are, no more and no less the same as that Peppercorn gave us in his A1 and A2 - but the details are certainly different. The Peppercorn A1 is a refined A1/1; and to argue that they threw away all of the design development of Thompson's A1/1 and the rest of his Pacifics, and made the Peppercorn A1 and A2 from taking ideas from Gresley's range of Pacifics is absurd. They did not. The A1s are a case in point: they used the same 250lb boiler, same 50ft grate, same 6ft 8in wheelset and wheelbase, same smokebox dimensions along with the same kylchap arrangement. Same sets of three walschaerts valve gear, arranged differently, and the bogie returned to behind the cylinder. Not much change in the ingredients, but the recipe gives us an omelet instead of a scrambled egg, if you'll pardon the allusion.

 

But we're heading dangerously into Gresley VS Thompson territory again, and I fear we'll have to agree to disagree on that point.

 

'Adequate': the Britannias just about, but they exhibited a fairly alarming series of defects in service which are well chronicled. The Clans and DoG both had significant and well known troubles in service: at that late stage in steam development there was enough science to not have run into such problems. 1/3 is a poor design record.

 

There's quite a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest more was expected of the Clans - 6MTs - than they were capable of. Given they were supposed to fill a gap between the 7MT and the 5MT, one could argue quite proficiently that, whatever the merits or problems of the design, they were "one class too many". The Britannias asserted themselves and were decent performers. Their defects in service are no less alarming than the Bulleids which suffered similar problems with axles.

 

And I am not making that argument: the reason for citing those names is that they were all engineering team leaders with locomotive successes to their credit. Notice I referred earlier to Doncaster having finally got the chassis detail design right? ; it's about engineering teams as led from the guy in the chair. He has a big influence: and dragging a team into the unknown typically reaps trouble. That's how Riddles screwed up BTW: he wouldn't go to Doncaster (which by then had thirty years pacific design experience) for his big engine designs. Notice how of all the regions the Brits were then deployed in, the one that made it work best (on the data of mileage, availability and all the rest) and consequently well liked by the crews was ER? This is not a coincidence; that's experience telling.

 

Can't disagree with that, except for the caveat that with time and experimentation, comes success. That's the point I was trying to make, though I don't appear to have done so very well.

 

That is the explanation. The people working where there had been the most dire financial pressure in private ownership had got lean, mean and efficient. We are moving on, chop, chop, chop, no sentiment.

 

Again, no disagreement from me there.

[4630]

What?!!! Look at what the privateers did do - two of them went bankrupt and those that tried to overhaul the engine left it almost completely knackered. They didn't control the 'ludicrous spending' - the NRM is no worse than them and it does at least have access to (potentially) unlimited money and won't go bust trying to put right all the wrongs the privateers did. The NRM may not be perfect (and the Report shows how imperfect it was in this instance) but it's a hell of a lot better than those who went before.

 

JE

 

I for one hope that In addition to the engineering effort required on 4472, adequate financial control is also exercised in future on any work carried out. The NRM doesn't have access to 'unlimited money' (potentially or otherwise). If the NRM can't carry out competent engineering project management of this nature and exercise financial control, then they shouldn't have custody of any locomotive.

 

In any event, it is supposed to be a National Railway Museum; not the '4472 Railway Museum' that just happens to have a collection of other assorted locomotives, rolling stock and railway artefacts.

[slilley]

This report should be read by anyone who is involved in the business of locomotive restoration. There are lessons to be learnt for us all in how restoration should be planned and executed.It would appear that several factors have all come together at the same time to create the situation we have now. I know people want to get on and get their fingers dirty with their loco, but take stock, think for a moment first before you take the plunge and plan what you are going to do. One of these factors has the "pressure" to get the loco in traffic. It will be ready when it is ready would appear to be a wise motto.

 

Simon

[PhilH]

This report should be read by anyone who is involved in the business of locomotive restoration. There are lessons to be learnt for us all in how restoration should be planned and executed.It would appear that several factors have all come together at the same time to create the situation we have now. I know people want to get on and get their fingers dirty with their loco, but take stock, think for a moment first before you take the plunge and plan what you are going to do. One of these factors has the "pressure" to get the loco in traffic. It will be ready when it is ready would appear to be a wise motto.

 

Simon

 

No railway contemplating a major restoration can afford to go about it in the way that the NRM appears to have done with respect to this thing. We do plan, we do do our homework and by and large we do a good job, so most of us in the business of loco restoration have long ago mostly learnt any lessons that might be evident in this report.

 

Mind you there are still some duds around, a certain modified West Country springs to mind.

[JeremyC]

Reading this report as a professional [marine] engineer it's fairly damming of the NRM, but I'd say that a number of companies in the private/heritage sector don't come out of it very well either.

 

A lot of the problems seem to originate

1. From the 'politics' of the NRM being expected to buy and run the locomotive for 'the people'. When that happens common sense seems to depart, the trouble being the often maligned public sector is left to pick up the pieces stemming from the 'political' decision.

2. Lack of expertise in the NRM in handling such a complex project. One of the troubles is that, against what the press would have you believe, when it comes to professionals the public sector has diffculty retaining them due to poor pay levels .

 

My view is that a proper engineering assessment should have been prepared upon strip down to decide the extent of repairs needed, especially in view of the much known problems during the Marchington period of ownership.

 

Perhaps if a recognized specialist, such as Ian Riley or Bob Meanley had been approached at the start then the direction of the overhaul could have been managed in a proper fashion from the start, at a saving of much Public money. In fact it would have probably been cheaper to have contracted out the work to Riley's or Tyesley..

 

 

In fact this has turned into a job typical of anything carried out in the Public sector. Poor research, assessment, implementation, management, and quality of work leading to waste, over-run, undue expense etc. etc.

While oOld Harry 666sAs initial comments are valid I cannot agree with his final one, after all it was private owners who got the FS into the poor state it was in at the time of purchase by the NRM. The public sector has many faults, but my own experience is that the faults mentioned are just as common in the private sector except the press isn't as enthusiastic in exposing them. A friend of mine is involved with a public sector asset that was run by the private sector for a number of years. This asset was returned to the public sector and has since cost huge sums of money to bring up to safe standards. Strangely enough inspection bodies who had accepted its condition under the private sector suddenly found major faults once it was returned the public sector [similarities with this report].

 

I hope some of my comments aren't seen by the mods as being political and they're not intended to be, nor do I want to divert this thread away from the original subject, but if possible I claim 'right of reply'.

 

Jeremy

[Chubber]

"The working atmosphere was one of being very “unionist” in approach. There was no sense of urgency and a sense of entrenched laziness. Tackling this problem was always going to be difficult and I was going to need support from Senior Management.” Page 26...

 

Sounds much like the alleged reputation of staff in many large publicly funded organisations, and how different to the bustle and energy I've seen in volunteer staff preservation workshops, whatever their lack of corporate experience and ability....

 

Doug

[phil-b259]

I havent gone through all the pages on this thread BUT If it had been bought privately perhaps a full control of the ludricous spending would have happened. They may have even had a proper survey done before buying as well.

 

 

I would point out the sale was done by sealed bids - no chance for negociation on price, and perhaps more importantly no idea as to what any other biders may have offered. Equally on a sealed bid auction you carn't ask the seller for more time, when it ends, it ends. Again a proper survey would have been nice but as a bidder you cannot force the seller to agee to such a thing - in any case a survey was done by a upposedly professional body which terned out to be pretty worthless in light of the problems found over the past few years. Thus while scraping was allways an unlikley outcome, the NRM was not to know whether there was a rich American / Canadian / Austrailan ready to stump up the money and ship her out of the UK permenantly. Given the hype around the loco the critism of the NRM would have been imense, something the report acknowledges.

[micklner]

I would point out the sale was done by sealed bids - no chance for negociation on price, and perhaps more importantly no idea as to what any other biders may have offered. Equally on a sealed bid auction you carn't ask the seller for more time, when it ends, it ends. Again a proper survey would have been nice but as a bidder you cannot force the seller to agee to such a thing - in any case a survey was done by a upposedly professional body which terned out to be pretty worthless in light of the problems found over the past few years. Thus while scraping was allways an unlikley outcome, the NRM was not to know whether there was a rich American / Canadian / Austrailan ready to stump up the money and ship her out of the UK permenantly. Given the hype around the loco the critism of the NRM would have been imense, something the report acknowledges.

 

 

 

Yes I am aware it was sealed bids.

How may people from the general taxpaying public, after a few days IF the Loco went abroad would have been bothered in the slightest ?? I wonder?

 

If a rich person from abroad had bought who knows who the bids were from?? why would they have want it anyway? I doubt if there is much interest in her abroad , looking at the condition of the two A4 that have just returned in a har.dly pristine condition, is anything to go by. Both times she went abroad ended in financial failure .

 

If it had gone abroad it would have been running by now too or retired !!

[scots region]

I might make myself unpopular with this post, but there does seem to be support for the construction of a brand new Gresley pacific, I'd argue we should just rebuild the one we've got, all parts brand new, Tornado in everything but name. Granted cost alone will probably prevent it, but part of me does support a different solution, a replica Gresley A1, it can be no other "4470 Great Northern". As a good colleague here has pointed out there is a heritage gap with the lack of Thompson pacific, all arguments aside, I would support an A1/1 as well. But training wheels before Tour de France.

 

The newer more mechanically sound Great Northern 2.0 can then take over from Scotsman, whilst the latter enjoys rest in the great hall, only being steamed for big public events and photo ops with her new cousin.

 

Okay you may begin laughing.......... now

 

Yours

ScR

[Foo]

Why hasnt the Restoreing company been sued for the abject failure of their repairs

 

Probably because it's a 'cottage' industry. Sue a heritage railway cottage industry and they run out of money, locos are sold and lines close.... Don't think that'd make the NRM a very popular organization anymore eh? Then money would dry up and they'd be up a creek without a paddle.

[APOLLO]

How is it that many very small yet, obviously knowledgeable, skilled and competent teams have rebuilt FROM THE SCRAPHEAP numerous fine steam locomotives, some of which run on the main line today, yet our national "organisation" of so called experts spend £millions and achive NOTHING with an iconic locomotive that was in "decent" order when purchased (i.e not a rusting heap).

 

I have just read, and I cannot believe that report - mega expensive work done, THEN they do fracture checks ?. Frames out of true, etc etc, what's their engineering experience ?, probably built an MTK white metal OO kit. !!

 

Brit15

[PhilH]

 

 

Probably because it's a 'cottage' industry. Sue a heritage railway cottage industry and they run out of money, locos are sold and lines close.... Don't think that'd make the NRM a very popular organization anymore eh? Then money would dry up and they'd be up a creek without a paddle.

 

I don't think you are in touch with what goes on currently- given the vast amounts of money involved, given the levels of expertise and experience amassed by restoration teams it's hardly a cottage industry these days. It's big business and heavy but precision engineering.

[scots region]

How is it that many very small yet, obviously knowledgeable, skilled and competent teams have rebuilt FROM THE SCRAPHEAP numerous fine steam locomotives, some of which run on the main line today, yet our national "organisation" of so called experts spend £millions and achive NOTHING with an iconic locomotive that was in "decent" order when purchased (i.e not a rusting heap).

 

I have just read, and I cannot believe that report - mega expensive work done, THEN they do fracture checks ?. Frames out of true, etc etc, what's their engineering experience ?, probably built an MTK white metal OO kit. !!

 

Brit15

 

Apollo that is simply far too unfair, the document puts out many reason for why the mistakes were made. I would point out that the speedy return of the Barry locomotives had as much to do with how the proprietor chose to condemn the machines as it did with the efforts of the volunteers, to say nothing of the large of spare parts available to them from the same source. Yes mismanagement occurred and its good that those mistakes are being acknowledged, attacks on the NRM will not bring Scotsman back any faster.

[PhilH]

 

 

Apollo that is simply far too unfair, the document puts out many reason for why the mistakes were made. I would point out that the speedy return of the Barry locomotives had as much to do with how the proprietor chose to condemn the machines as it did with the efforts of the volunteers, to say nothing of the large of spare parts available to them from the same source. Yes mismanagement occurred and its good that those mistakes are being acknowledged, attacks on the NRM will not bring Scotsman back any faster.

 

How have these mistakes been acknowledged by the NRM? Yes the report has been published, and..........???

[scots region]

How have these mistakes been acknowledged by the NRM? Yes the report has been published, and..........???

 

The NRM is obviously aware of the report, so logically steps should be taken.

[Bon Accord]

I've passed on this report to a few friends of mine who are both chartered mechanical engineers and steam enthusiasts (rail and road), and their reaction was quite predictable, echoing much of what has been said here, specifically about the ongoing saga regarding the frames/stretchers.

I don't wish to go over old ground, but I would hope that the silver lining will be that 4472 shall be in excellent mechanical fettle upon completion of overhaul, fit for a few more years work and hopefully good for another 10 years after the next heavy general.

By that point (100 years on from the original 1472) it would surely be an appropriate time to retire the loco to the museum.

The report is damning in many ways, but we should remember that what's done is done and hopefully lessons have been learnt, so perhaps we should give the NRM the benefit of the doubt and try to refrain from being too reactionary.

The NRM didn't need to release this report, but it's to their credit that they did so.