FraserClarke

We loaded the last our Welsh coal into the tubs in the Didcot coal stage yesterday - so about 4-5 ton left. With limited running in March, that might just get us to Easter; though I suspect that long weekend may see us onto the next lot, which is Polish...

We've saved a big lump of Welsh for the museum! 

Here are few views of the driver's position in a large prairie.  As you can see, the view forward is not too bad (by steam engine standards), but the view going backwards is non-existant!

The seat is on rear wall of the cab, so the regulator, brake, ejector etc are out of reach. Best place to perch when running backwards is on the reverser rack - view out the back, and controls easily to right hand. 

2 hours ago, pheaton said:

the fact is nowadays to survive reliably you need to employ professionals in certain areas...and thats when you become a defacto business

Yep - I think where there can be big differences in implementation is understanding *why* you are a business.  I suspect the railways with long term success remember they are business *because* they want to be a heritage railway, not the other way around! 

You see something very similar in the modern academic world, where universities need to be effective businesses to survive - but if they start treating the teaching and research side as the means to a commercial end, then they have rather missed the point! 

That though is the difference between leadership and management; both are necessary, complimentary, and quite different -- but often confused!

On 02/10/2023 at 12:22, hclewis said:

 

I haven't been able to find a contact address for the GWS to make my query.

I'm sure there is a specific address, but I can't find it... email info@didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk and I'm sure they will put you in touch with the right person... 

14 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

while working on Mail Rail I did once overhear a passenger saying they thought the doors were going to close automatically

I had someone on a footplate experience who seemed genuinely shocked that the injectors were not automatic...   I'd never thought about it before -- but he was quite right; why on earth would anyone with the slightest bit of common sense design a system where the "failsafe condition" is that it might try to scald you to death before it blows you up... 

16 hours ago, Dava said:

This is rather different from the denizens of Didcot which don’t get out much any more.

I'm not sure what you would say is acceptable, but in between 2020 and this year;

2999:  SVR (twice), NYMR, MHR, ELR, WSR
4079: SVR, MHR, GWSR
4144: KESR (twice I think), CPR (all year this year)

That is quite a lot of 'getting out' isn't it?

I do think Didcot are trying to find the right balance between sending engines out to be seen and used on heritage railways, and maintaining enough on site to both operate (hence the focus over the past five years on overhauling small engines) and keep the feeling of a mainline steam shed with a big engine rumbling past you in a yard -- not something you can see or experience at many heritage railways. 

17 hours ago, Morello Cherry said:

I would caution here that not all restorations are the same and the numbers are a bit context free. A restoration is 'how long is a piece of string'. What are the ETAs for the restoration

My point was more the fraction of the total fleet in steam, but you're completely correct that not all overhauls are equal. As someone pointed out 7202 has been under overhaul for longer than it was in service!   A better way of looking at it though might be that Didcot has brought an engine into steam on average once every 18 months over the last 10-15 years. One of those (2999) was a 'new build'.  I don't think that is a bad record for a mostly volunteer organisation?  Didcot has a few paid staff, but far less I think than somewhere like the SVR.

9 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

In the latter case it would obviously be much less of a bargain if I didn't get it until June.

I'm pretty sure it runs until end of February the following year (i.e. a card issued in June will be valid until 28 Feb 2024).

However, given there are a good number of railways where you save the entire cost of the card in a single visit -- I'd say it was a massive bargain even if you got it in December! 

Presumably you'll also hope to volunteer for more than one year? And next year you'd get the full 365 days... 

3 hours ago, Phil Bullock said:

I know the SVR best so let’s look at that…

 

...

 

Currently steamable are 5/22 although that should increase very soon with the return of 7812.

An interesting analysis!  A comparison for Didcot is that there are also currently 5 streamable locomotives

4079

2999 (new build)

4144

1340 (Trojan)

2409 (King George, a kind of new build/conversion)

Two recently out of ticket, and at least looking at overhaul;

6023

SRM (a new build)

Four - Seven under active overhaul/ construction, depending on how you count

1466

1363

3650

7202

1014 (county - new build)

4709 (new build, but not being done at Didcot)

5227 (parts donor - now privately owned, but owner is working on it with an intention to restore it)

Three where an overhaul is planned once there is space in the works (including firefly, but that's also dependent on being able to do some pretty significant work in the broad gauge track)

A further 12 are on static display, and realistically quite a way down any overhaul queue - despite what we might like. 

So the Didcot fleet has pretty comparable statistics to the SVR. 5/29 steamable, 2 recently withdrawn, 1 soon to return. ~5 under active overhaul or construction... 

The view that Didcot is obsessed with new builds and just leaves everything else in the shed doesn't really hold up to the numbers... 

7 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

.  A recent example of the woolly thinking has been the purchase of an operational industrial tank loco to operate services when it would have been better to restore one of the smaller GWR locos to operation

I assume you mean King George? -- that was bought (non operational) nearly ten years ago with the specific purpose of making a 'Thomas' for hiring out.  The business case changed in the intervening time, and Thomas isn't viewed as viable any more (due to licensing costs). So it's now 'King George' (original name from before didcot days) and making the best of it.  It certainly wasn't bought as an operational industrial tank loco recently... 

37 minutes ago, toby_tl10 said:

The update is here.

https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2023/03/future-clear-for-steam-locomotive-7027-thornbury-castle.html

 

Thornbury Castle will be cannibalised, dismembered by the 4709 Group to build a 47XX with a small No. 1 boiler.

 

I originally wanted to say 4709 will not be a 47XX just as 9351 is not a 43XX, but after a bit of reading it's not 100% unprototypical. Apparently 4700 existed with a small boiler between May 1919 and May 1921.

 

So it presents the 4709 Group with the perfect opportunity to recreate 4700 as it was during that time. I'm sure everyone has extremely fond memories of that particular locomotive during those 2 years. Absolutely no one remembers the class of 9 locomotives with large No. 7 boilers from May 1921 all the way up to May 1964. And there is absolutely no photograph that illustrates those 9 locomotives with large boilers during those 40 years. What an amazing idea!

I think you've picked up the wrong end of the stick there.   7027's boiler is a standard 8 as used on Castles.  The std 8 is much closer to a std 7 than a std 1.  You're quite right the early 4700 prototype used a smaller standard 1 boiler for a few years, and indeed I understand that was the original plan for 4709 (there is a std 1 boiler sat a didcot) -- but I guess the project felt it would be better use a bigger boiler to better represent the next 44 years of their lives; presumably for the same reasons you list...

It's a shame no-one stood up and was willing to make an offer for restoring 7027 as a castle -- but I guess the reality is there just weren't people willing to make the commitment...

2 hours ago, Invicta Informant said:

Not a bad idea in itself. I was thinking perhaps the formation of a National Trust or English Heritage style federated organisation to manage a number of railways. With membership to said organisation offering limited free tickets and/or discounted rates of travel to the railways that are part of it.

It doesn't "manage a number of railways" - but the Heritage Railway Association (www.hra.uk.com) already exists and provides overarching lobbying, guidance, and support for most heritage railways in the UK.  You can join as private individual (for a bit more than NT/EH membership), and get a priv card to visit member railways at a reduced rate... (though this is mainly intended as an in-kind benefit for active volunteers I think)

7 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

Pete Waterman, or his trust, does indeed own 18000 and he was a Didcot last year to discuss its condition and what should be done about it but I haven't heard what, if any, decisions were arrived at.  There are many who consider it is rapidly becoming an eyesore.  

My understanding (which may be wrong!) is that the meeting has had a positive outcome. They did I believe agree a plan to fund at least cosmetic restoration work on 18000, and that has now started. 

There is I think a subtlety that although 18000 is on display at Didcot, it's not necessarily easy for GWS to spend money or do work on it, as it doesn't belong to the society.  It presumably comes down to the details of the agreement, which I have no clue about. 

Anyway, it seems there is now a way and will to help it, and hopefully it will start looking better soon! 

I always really want to like the Caledonian sleeper -- but I just don't.  I get it once or twice a year when I need to be in Edinburgh early, but can't leave 'daan sarf' before tea time.  It's always fun getting on -- but I never actually sleep!!   It leaves too late and gets in too early -- it would be "better" if it took more time.  The trouble with the 'travelling hotel' image is that no-one would book a hotel which gave you a check in time of 10 pm and a check out of 7 am... 

The Highland sleeper makes more sense in terms of journey time, but I suspect is even less economically viable than the Lowland. 

On 26/09/2022 at 18:06, toby_tl10 said:

After previously distancing themselves from the 4709 group, the GWS now speaks on behalf of them. How funny :p

 

When the GWS says it has no plans to use the frames for a new Star, does it speak for itself only or does it speak for the 4709 group as well?

The whole thing hasn't been presented well - but I don't think there is any attempt to deceive people.  I'll try to explain my understanding to the situation - as a working volunteer at Didcot and GWS member of short standing (i.e. I'm basing this off the statements and chatting to a few people, but I don't have much of the history of the organisation or any involvement with the management,  so I might be misunderstanding some bits!).  This is just my understanding of course.  

The GWS has many different project groups, 4709 being one. These groups are given a good degree of autonomy, and whilst GWS is an umbrella organisation, the project groups are responsible for their own day-to-day running.  As I understand it the discussion to buy Thornbury was between the then owner (who it seems was looking to 'disinvest' from the on-going restoration project with some rapidity) and a few key members of the 4709 group.  I imagine they (4709) may have felt the need to act quickly to secure what they saw as a good opportunity to progress their project. The offer to buy from 4709 wasn't known to the wider GWS organisation before it was announced, and hence the August statement saying "GWS doesn't know anything about this".

Since then, there has of course a lot of discussion (internally and externally) as to what it actually means, where are the funds coming from, what the ownership would be, is this a good thing to do from a wider viewpoint than just the 4709 project, etc. I believe there has been a lot of 'feedback' from within GWS/Didcot that the 4709/7027 plan is not supported by many of the members.  It seems the outcome of these discussions is that the GWS board now believes it does have responsibility and authority over this purchase, and has decided to take the route of offering Thornbury for onward sale to a 'viable group' for restoration if one can be formed.   Let's hope one can - but Thornbury is a big job and will likely need an experienced group with a proper funding stream to do it.  If it doesn't look like that is going to happen, then I guess the boiler goes to 4709 and the frames... ??

If in the future a group wanted to propose building a Star within the GWS, that would I imagine need to get approval from the GWS board and be set up as a specific project. 

I am quite sure the GWS AGM in two weeks will have many questions about this all! 

52 minutes ago, Phil Bullock said:

Yes but does this include the boiler? I suspect not…. But hope to be proved wrong.

I believe it does. The statement refers to offers "for all or parts of 7027", so I would assume that includes the boiler if a group can get together enough funding. 

The GWS board have announced they are open to viable offers to buy 7027 for at least the next six months.  In any event, the GWS has no plans to use the frames to build a star.

https://didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk/article.php/523/7027-thornbury-castle-26-sep-22

(re: earlier statements on who actually offered-to-buy/is-buying/bought/will-own 7027,  I think the various 'senior stakeholders' within GWS/4709-project have been working to understand all the details and implications over the past six weeks; something which I suspect is best done properly rather than quickly.)

One thing everyone seems to miss is that 4709 is NOT being built at Didcot!! It has been based at Llangollen, 'leaky finders', and now I believe Tysley.  It's being done by a separate group from those working at Didcot. 

I'm a volunteer at Didcot, but a relatively new one with little knowledge of any grander schemes of things.  On my count though, the Didcot teams have released 9 locomotives to traffic in the past 15 years -- several on 2nd or 3rd tickets. One of those was the long standing ambition to recreate a Saint, one was contracted out, but the others all overhauls of existing locos in the classic sense.  I don't know how that compares to other organisations, but an overhaul rate of one loco every 20 months doesn't seem too bad?!?  There have also numerous excellent carriage and wagon overhauls which get very little limelight. 

I think the seemingly popular tale that didcot does nothing but cut-and-shut new builds doesn't really match up with the reality of what has been returned to steam in the last 15 years... 

Regarding Thornbury Castle; seeing the engine sold must be heartbreaking for those who've put so much effort into her restoration over the past few years ☹️.  I personally hope the relevant people will be able to find a way ahead which avoids sacrificing 7027 for 4709. 

No idea.  I was discussing the other day whilst driving past that it seems unlikely it is kept open just for occasional railtour use.  Presumably there is some other use for the route, but none of my local family seem to know what it might be, or ever see trains on the line. I'm not up there very often these days, but whenever I look the track bed always seems to be well maintained -- though RUST is a very accurate description of the railhead!

I notice the line down to Rosyth from Inverkeithing is marked OOU, which given the substantial size of some of the trees in the four-foot I would definitely agree with! 

17 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

The compressed coal dust stuff got some now politically incorrect names in BR days. 

I'm sticking with the name my daughter came up with when she saw our first lot a few months ago;

"Daddy, why have you got chicken nugget coal??"

I think we might as well use chicken nuggets to be fair... 

On 04/06/2022 at 16:35, melmerby said:

What about Alloa to Dunfermline?

 

Even the signals each end are still operational.

It's used once a year -- usually by Flying Scotsman, though Mayflower is deputising this year...

https://www.srps.org.uk/railtours/rt-220617.htm

I can thoroughly recommend volunteering too!  I'm fortunate to have a job and family that allow me to do ~2 days per month. I've found that easily enough to get involved in several aspects of my local railway (Didcot Railway Centre in my case). It took - like I think many things - a little while to figure out how the organisation worked, but 90% of people were immediately helpful, and the other 10% are just the other 10%  ;-) 

It is fantastic fun, and on a purely selfish level I find it very rewarding to do something practical.    It is also - particular when operating - the only time when I genuinely don't think about my real job for a whole eight hours!!  

I had the "pleasure" of firing a couple of engines with these nuggets at Didcot a few weeks ago (I don't know if it's exactly the same as the GWSR stuff).  Certainly very different to Welsh!! Seems to need a pretty constant blast through it to generate any heat from it; and then when it does burn, it goes pretty damn quick without building much of a bed. We also found we used a lot more of the ovoids than we would on Welsh. It's pretty friable, and a lot of it ended up in the ash pan! 

I'm very much a novice fireman, so I'm sure others will do better -- but definitely a learning curve to coming up for everyone! 

Abingdon and District Model Railway Club are pleased to confirm that we are planning to hold our Abrail exhibition back in Abingdon and Witney college (OX14 1GG) on Saturday 19th March 2022. Doors will be open 10 am – 4:30 pm.  Tickets are £10 on the door, or £9 purchased in advance. Accompanied children go free.

As you will appreciate, CoVID has made things more complicated to organise, and we’re still waiting to confirm some details. 

We have a good selection of layouts this year, ranging from the large and impressive Old Elms Road to the ever popular interactive ‘Sodor Island’. We are also honoured this year to have a debut layout, in the form of Margam Moor, an extensive but intricate model of a south Wales iron and steel works. 

4mm layouts

• Old Elms Road Large – BR(W) layout set in the late 50s/early 60s
• Margam Moor (debut!) – Large model of the Port Talbot combined iron and steelworks
• Reunited Biscuits – A ‘broken biscuits’ repair factory set in the industrial North.
• A Remote Depot – Modern image ballast loading facility, with a fleet of radio controlled vehicles
• New Walmington Pier – Depicting a small Edwardian pier tramway with a working carousel.
• Buckleigh – A quintessential GWR branch line station based on Cadeleigh
• Inselbahn Langeoog – A modern day ferry terminal railway in Northern Germany 
• Burton Bradstock – A fictional BR(W) branch line terminus in Dorset in the 1950s
• Leicester Belgrave Road – ADRMC’s large representation of a station in the steam and diesel crossover
• Sodor Island – A Thomas themed layout where kids (and adults) can drive the trains!

7mm layouts

• Wood Street – Inspired by shunting yards found in many towns and cities until the ’70s
• Afon Adit – Modern day Welsh gold mining!
• Loch Watif – Modern day narrow gauge in the West Highlands of Scotland. 

Others

• Lego city, Abingdon – A freelance lego layout
• Upperton – N-gauge – A fictional location south west of Salisbury set in the 1960s. 

We are still confirming details with a few layouts, and we expect ~15 layouts in total.

Confirmed traders are:

• JB’s Model World – Specialised stock storage boxes
• NC Butler – Paints and scenic accessories
• Neil Cresswell Model Railways – New and second hand models
• Sunningwell Command Control – DCC expertise
• Isinglass Models – 3d kits and scale drawings
• Brunswick railways – Tools and scenic accessories
• Kevin’s trains – New and second hand models

We are still confirming details with a few traders, and we expect ~10 traders.

On 15/02/2022 at 13:40, highpeakman said:

I seem to remember that the reason the telescopes originally needed to spaced out well along the line was that they obtained more detailed "pictures" with muliple antennas spaced apart (Long Base line). I understand, but am open to correction, that this has long been superceded by using antennas now spaced apart internationally (Very Long Baseline?).

Yes, the telescope is an interferometer, which combines the data from multiple telescopes; the resolution you get being equivalent to the separation of the telescopes (further apart == higher resolution).  The counter being that the field of view / sensitivity you get is inversely propotional to the separation (further apart == smaller field of view / lower sensitivity).  So really you want both telescopes close together, and far apart.  The advantage of building the telescope on the long straight formation was that the telescopes could be moved, changing the separation to adapt the combination of resolution and sensitivity for different observations.    VLBI over many countries does the same thing, but gives very high resolution on very small / bright targets.  Same idea, different implementation.  But like comparing HS2 with local services

I've no idea if the telescope was a driver in closing the line; seems unlikely to me unless someone else was looking for a reason...