I travelled on that tour, and I do think the cowcatcher was especially requested. I think on each of my few visits to Mudgee loco there was maybe one engine fitted with a CC. 3081 may have been a ring-in, having travelled across from Dubbo or Narrabri-Werris Creek. There were two unfenced lines north of Mudgee, Coolah and Gwabegar that may have required a CC. although there are no notes about CC in the Working Timetable for that era. 32 class were also allowed on both lines and I did not ever see a 32 class fitted with a CC. So I think you may be correct a6et, maybe the times I saw the CC fitted engine was a fluke?

Neill

I travelled on that tour, and I do think the cowcatcher was especially requested. I think on each of my few visits to Mudgee loco there was maybe one engine fitted with a CC. 3081 may have been a ring-in, having travelled across from Dubbo or Narrabri-Werris Creek. There were two unfenced lines north of Mudgee, Coolah and Gwabegar that may have required a CC. although there are no notes about CC in the Working Timetable for that era. 32 class were also allowed on both lines and I did not ever see a 32 class fitted with a CC. So I think you may be correct a6et, maybe the times I saw the CC fitted engine was a fluke?

Neill

Neil,  IIRC in one of the Byways books that dealt with the Narrabri & Moree depots, there are quite a few photo's showing CC's on engines out there, likewise many of the 30T's had a lovely variety of tenders as well, from what I have gleaned CC's were quite common on 32's on the BH line, as mentioned also the cross country lines had long distances of unfenced lines and they could have been common there, but it seems to also have been for the lighter type loco's up to the 32's, don't know for sure but I doubt that any of the SGoods engine would have had them even on those lines.

When at Enfield and where many of the loco's that were prepared for special trains, there was strict notices put out regarding the engine type, often specific engines themselves along with the prep condition of how they looked, along with specific engine numbers were requested as well. often caused issues with engine control though.  I doubt also that it was a fluke, as I said I do recollect seeing photo's of 3081 with CC, I also tend to think it worked in combo with 3387 on a Northern Tour Merriwa? not sure if it had the CC at the time or not.

 Once out into the regions was not as easy as few cleaners were employed at depots and unless an extra was needed such as the double 32's on the Wallangarra tour, as only one 32 was available at Armidale 3233 another was sent from Eveleigh 3390, while 90 was very clean it paled into significance when compared to 3233, very strange.

The Gwabegar line was unfenced in its entirety, and kangaroos where hazards as were wombats that were hard and caused issues, no CC's were found on engines working there either.  The mail to  Coona, was 30T, so was there enough room between the cc and carriage when running TF to Coona?  Coupling up to hooks would have been dangerous and extreme care needed.

On reflection I think the CC were not a popular addition to locos, probably for safety reasons that you mention. NSWGR did have those two metal bars that came down close to the track in front of the leading wheels, many railways that had CC did not have these. As an aside I missed getting a shot of the last train to run down the street of Millmerran Qld when the CC of the engine struck level crossing timbers and required the attention of fitters from Toowoomba before it could proceed.

On reflection I think the CC were not a popular addition to locos, probably for safety reasons that you mention. NSWGR did have those two metal bars that came down close to the track in front of the leading wheels, many railways that had CC did not have these. As an aside I missed getting a shot of the last train to run down the street of Millmerran Qld when the CC of the engine struck level crossing timbers and required the attention of fitters from Toowoomba before it could proceed.

From what I remember of the steam CC's they seemed to stick out slightly past the buffers, giving little space when needing to couple up hook to hook.  My memories of being shown how to couple up to Pax carriages with hooks that were not terminal cars, meaning they had the short walkway section on the end with a hooked tender was a very unpleasant experience, & no better with the carriage having an auto with D link.

You had to stop short of the set, make sure there was no hinderances on the ground such as coal, loose ballast etc. go between and set the jaw open with the Auto/Dlink, or with the screw types unwind it to allow slack, wave your engine onto the carriages and fully suppress the buffers,, then go back and get the link over the hook. On Terminal cars, you went in holding the screw coupling up and called   "ease up"  the engine came back onto the buffers and as you dropped the link over the hook, yelled stop., always making sure the drop link on the tender was dropped over, then couple air hoses and ensured the screw was tight so that when the brakes were released, and the cars sagged back the buffers were just touching.

I would imagine if engines had CC's and on double heading, trying to couple up would not have been pleasant as they were all hook types.

I can also still remember the impact on a large cow we hit out past Forbes on a 49cl, I am surprised we did not derail owing to the bounce and rolling effect that took place, the cow was sent to the side and part stuck under the small cc on the 49.  All the diesels had a small minimal outer flair on the bottom of each end, and a bit more clearance from rail height.

Regarding cowcatchers on Mudgee 30ts. I quickly checked my note book and found that 3081T fitted with a cowcatcher ran the Mudgee connection off The Rattler (Central West Express for younger viewers) on 10-9-1965. Somewhere I have a picture of it climbing up to Marrangaroo.
Neill (who is very glad he carried a note book back then)

Neil

Had my keyboard die on me, so had to replace with temporary one, until replacement of the other one arrives, so unable to reply to you sooner.

After my post. I had an inkling that one 30Ts did have a cow catcher later in life, I was unsure of its number but I saw photo's of the engine with the CC when it was working a tour train at the time in one of my book collection.  Some of the tours had engines specially done up for them

The allocation of 30t's for Mudgee services from what I saw were 01, 11, 75, 90, there was one other so will track it down.

I was sure I had seen 3001 with a cowcatcher before and went back to look at the following film:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ope592DWceQ

This is "Doubleheaders".  3001 features in this film on a special in February 1965 with 3387, and with cowcatcher fitted.

Fast forward to 12'45".

Transport heritage NSW just posted a video showing the boiler having it's hydrostatic test
https://www.facebook.com/TransportHeritageNSW/videos/416427202309441/

The reconditioned boiler has been fitted
https://www.facebook.com/TransportHeritageNSW/videos/locomotive-3001-fitted-with-reconditioned-boiler/461353694541545/?__so__=permalink&__rv__=related_videos

As soon as the boiler goes on, it starts to look like a loco. . . a huge morale boost for the people doing the work.

At least the boiler fitted straight in the frame.

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

. . . . finances and availability permitting.

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

No need for Spare boilers anymore, treat your water and they will last a long long time.

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

No need for Spare boilers anymore, treat your water and they will last a long long time.

From memory, I think you've said that before. Again I will make the following points.

Water treatment is only half of the equation. Heating and cooling, expansion and contraction, the acidity and environment of the firebox all mean a boiler's life in the frames is finite.

You can certainly manage a boiler carefully and it will last you much longer, but sooner or later you will need to either repair the boiler or replace it with a spare/new build. That is why in most cases boilers are lifted every ten years.

After that amount of time in service, many boilers will need retubing, extensive firebox repairs, possible replacement of the tubeplates and at least examination if not replacement of the barrel. All of this takes a considerable period of time, and in some cases is less cost-effective than building a new boiler. As such it reduces the overhaul turnaround time to have spare boilers available.

Any operating organisation should have a long term goal of having more boilers than engines available. Fortunately, THNSW has some spare boilers for some classes and will hopefully work towards having more usable 38 class boilers than the number of 38's it operates.

Could this be one of the quickest nsw steam locomotive restorations/overhauls
Were there any other restorations/overhauls that were quicker than this one

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

No need for Spare boilers anymore, treat your water and they will last a long long time.

From memory, I think you've said that before. Again I will make the following points.

Water treatment is only half of the equation. Heating and cooling, expansion and contraction, the acidity and environment of the firebox all mean a boiler's life in the frames is finite.

You can certainly manage a boiler carefully and it will last you much longer, but sooner or later you will need to either repair the boiler or replace it with a spare/new build. That is why in most cases boilers are lifted every ten years.

After that amount of time in service, many boilers will need retubing, extensive firebox repairs, possible replacement of the tubeplates and at least examination if not replacement of the barrel. All of this takes a considerable period of time, and in some cases is less cost-effective than building a new boiler. As such it reduces the overhaul turnaround time to have spare boilers available.

Any operating organisation should have a long term goal of having more boilers than engines available. Fortunately, THNSW has some spare boilers for some classes and will hopefully work towards having more usable 38 class boilers than the number of 38's it operates.

Water quality is the equal of treatment, the better the quality the less need for other treatments. In steam days, all water tanks had treatment plants of one kind or another and depending on the location and general water conditions also made the decisions as to what was used.  The NSWGR had laboratories and they would receive samples for testing, I related a case on a 59cl heading to Goulburn where the person responsible for adding the tannin treatment in to the main tank at Moss Vale, failed to do so for the week, an remembered on the Saturday that we worked the train, where he added a the 6 day supply in one hit, we primed badly up Exeter and took samples in a billy it was the colour of deep burgundy wine. We got permission to empty half the water from the tender and refill at Tallong.  Too much treatment does not work real well.

The LVR's trip south last year also had issues with water from one location owing to the amount of mud in it, and had big problems until the gradually cleared the muddied water and got cleaner water as they proceeded back to Branxton.

Overall in these days, under normal conditions the general water supplies are treated well enough to outweigh any of the old types of treatments, however I would suggest in this age also that the hard water areas still exist that will affect steam loco's some classes moreso than others.

I have been advocating the concept for ages now regarding the need for spare boilers and perhaps spare loco's to expect the tours and the like that will be put up with the RTS of 3801 it will end up being flogged, in the amount of trips it will be expected and will do.  There is the opportunity to get the 3 capable 38's back into service, it should be a priority by the Transport heritage authority heads to work towards this on an ongoing basis. There is primarily only 2 engines available for the work and that is 3526 and 3801, plus LVR's 59cl.  Once 01 is back in service then fix the German Boiler, once its fixed, go to one of the other 38's, and then have the 3 in operating condition with a boiler spare and readily able to be swapped around.

Same with the 3x36cl get them all back into operating condition especially as to the fact of there being spare boilers around the state.

Same with the 3x36cl get them all back into operating condition especially as to the fact of there being spare boilers around the state.

Only two of them will be able to be made operational as 3609 is now static at Junee
3616 seems like a good contender for restoration though

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

No need for Spare boilers anymore, treat your water and they will last a long long time.

Water treatment is only half of the equation. Heating and cooling, expansion and contraction, the acidity and environment of the firebox all mean a boiler's life in the frames is finite.

After that amount of time in service, many boilers will need retubing, extensive firebox repairs, possible replacement of the tubeplates and at least examination if not replacement of the barrel. All of this takes a considerable period of time, and in some cases is less cost-effective than building a new boiler. As such it reduces the overhaul turnaround time to have spare boilers available.

Any operating organisation should have a long term goal of having more boilers than engines available. Fortunately, THNSW has some spare boilers for some classes and will hopefully work towards having more usable 38 class boilers than the number of 38's it operates.

What you say has certainly been the case in the past, but it need NOT be anymore.

Tubes, Firebox, tubeplates deteriorate as a result of corrosion, this can be Eliminated by Chemical Treatment.
Scale built up can cause thermal cracking, Scale built up can be eliminated through Chemical Treatment.

I my Professional capacity recently I assisted removing tubes from a Boiler which has been in Daily service for 19 years.  There was not Deterioration on the tubes or any anything else on the Waterside, removal was only necessary because of tube plate cracks caused by over expanded tubes (during Installation many years ago)

Back in steam days when the VR first started using All Steel Boilers No treatment was used, Tubes would only 3 months before replacement became Necessary (as a result of corrosion).  The VR then starting using Chemical Water treatment this did help a lot but didn't eliminate the problem entirely.

The preservation era has seen many operators take it a step further and introduce better treatment regimes and regular water testing to successfully Eliminate Corrosion and scale build up.

Lastly The SNCF in France has such an effectice Feed Water treatment regime, Many Boiler Shops were Closed.

Same with the 3x36cl get them all back into operating condition especially as to the fact of there being spare boilers around the state.

Only two of them will be able to be made operational as 3609 is now static at Junee
3616 seems like a good contender for restoration though

Because its currently static at Junee that prevents it from being restored in the future?

Yes 3616 would be a good contender for operational work, certainly 42 needs a full overhaul and going over, especially with the frames.  A great engine to work on as well.

Overall I don't see any reason why 3609 should be the engine as static exhibition at Junee, what's the problem with one the 30T's that sit on plinths in non descript parks that are open to vandalism being used for that purpose at Junee.  Any one of the dead 30T's would represent Junee and its steam heritage quite well.

I don't understand why they moved it either
Apparently under the original plan it was going to be plinthed outside the roundhouse, that was abandoned very early on
The reason we can't restore it is for the same reason we can't restore one of the oil burning 59s at goulburn, there aren't enough facilities for a full overhaul and the money will be hard to get

I don't understand why they moved it either
Apparently under the original plan it was going to be plinthed outside the roundhouse, that was abandoned very early on
The reason we can't restore it is for the same reason we can't restore one of the oil burning 59s at goulburn, there aren't enough facilities for a full overhaul and the money will be hard to get

If its stored in the roundhouse at Junee it would be a much better situation that being outside in the weather. While a shelter could be built around it similar to the snotty nosed T at BX, it will still

.................. 'snotty nosed T at BX' .......... ????
Sorry but some of us only speak English?

.................. 'snotty nosed T at BX' .......... ????
Sorry but some of us only speak English?

Snotty nose, is a reference to Saturated locomotives as they very readily primed,  T is the old pre 1924 classification for 50cl.  Few enginemen would refer to loco's that were pre 1924 classes by other than those classes, T, TF K, 30cl were tankers, snotty nosed or supers, 32 P class 35's were more commonly just called Nannies, 36 pigs. The T, TF & K's were as a group referred Freighters.

Every depot in the state had short acronyms for them, was part and parcel of filling out loco log books and other areas BX is Bathurst, DBO = Dubbo, PKS = Parkes, OGE Orange, BMD, Broadmeadow, ENF= Enfield. PTW = Port Waratah GLB = Goulburn, PTK Port Kembla, and so on.  Old habits die hard.

Some on RP, need to learn English.

.................. 'snotty nosed T at BX' .......... ????
Sorry but some of us only speak English?

Snotty nose, is a reference to Saturated locomotives as they very readily primed,  T is the old pre 1924 classification for 50cl.  Few enginemen would refer to loco's that were pre 1924 classes by other than those classes, T, TF K, 30cl were tankers, snotty nosed or supers, 32 P class 35's were more commonly just called Nannies, 36 pigs. The T, TF & K's were as a group referred Freighters.

Every depot in the state had short acronyms for them, was part and parcel of filling out loco log books and other areas BX is Bathurst, DBO = Dubbo, PKS = Parkes, OGE Orange, BMD, Broadmeadow, ENF= Enfield. PTW = Port Waratah GLB = Goulburn, PTK Port Kembla, and so on.  Old habits die hard.

Some on RP, need to learn English.

Some here on RP need to learn to write English too.

• We do not all live in NSW.
• We were not in NSW in 1924
• We were not all enginemen in NSW either before or after 1924
• You go on to lecture us about the fairly obvious (even to me) 3-letter acronyms BMD - Broadmeadow, ENF - Enfield etc. I didn't recognise 'BX'as a 3-letter acronym!

Snotty nose, is a reference to Saturated locomotives as they very readily primed,  T is the old pre 1924 classification for 50cl.  Few enginemen would refer to loco's that were pre 1924 classes by other than those classes, T, TF K, 30cl were tankers, snotty nosed or supers, 32 P class 35's were more commonly just called Nannies, 36 pigs. The T, TF & K's were as a group referred Freighters.

Every depot in the state had short acronyms for them, was part and parcel of filling out loco log books and other areas BX is Bathurst, DBO = Dubbo, PKS = Parkes, OGE Orange, BMD, Broadmeadow, ENF= Enfield. PTW = Port Waratah GLB = Goulburn, PTK Port Kembla, and so on.  Old habits die hard.

Some on RP, need to learn English.

What you wrote is a little bit of English and a lot of jargon which could come only from the local knowledge of a particular clique, so I'd suggest you avoid coming the raw prawn when someone puts up a completely sensible question.

And that shows why you should always have spare boilers ready to go

No need for Spare boilers anymore, treat your water and they will last a long long time.

Water treatment is only half of the equation. Heating and cooling, expansion and contraction, the acidity and environment of the firebox all mean a boiler's life in the frames is finite.

After that amount of time in service, many boilers will need retubing, extensive firebox repairs, possible replacement of the tubeplates and at least examination if not replacement of the barrel. All of this takes a considerable period of time, and in some cases is less cost-effective than building a new boiler. As such it reduces the overhaul turnaround time to have spare boilers available.

Any operating organisation should have a long term goal of having more boilers than engines available. Fortunately, THNSW has some spare boilers for some classes and will hopefully work towards having more usable 38 class boilers than the number of 38's it operates.

What you say has certainly been the case in the past, but it need NOT be anymore.

Tubes, Firebox, tubeplates deteriorate as a result of corrosion, this can be Eliminated by Chemical Treatment.
Scale built up can cause thermal cracking, Scale built up can be eliminated through Chemical Treatment.

I my Professional capacity recently I assisted removing tubes from a Boiler which has been in Daily service for 19 years.  There was not Deterioration on the tubes or any anything else on the Waterside, removal was only necessary because of tube plate cracks caused by over expanded tubes (during Installation many years ago)

Back in steam days when the VR first started using All Steel Boilers No treatment was used, Tubes would only 3 months before replacement became Necessary (as a result of corrosion).  The VR then starting using Chemical Water treatment this did help a lot but didn't eliminate the problem entirely.

The preservation era has seen many operators take it a step further and introduce better treatment regimes and regular water testing to successfully Eliminate Corrosion and scale build up.

Lastly The SNCF in France has such an effectice Feed Water treatment regime, Many Boiler Shops were Closed.

A boiler in daily service for 19 years obviously hasn't been through that many heating and cooling cycles.

Again you miss the point. Boiler water treatment is hardly ever going to be perfect. Yet you can have perfect water treatment and a boiler, particularly a firebox, will still deteriorate. Heritage locos naturally go through many heating and cooling cycles from sporadic operation. No amount of careful treatment and washouts prevents the corrosive effects of fuels and combustion.

I've volunteered at a heritage railway with a boiler water treatment plant more advanced than a modern drinking water facility. They still have their own boiler shop, they still have to rebuild boilers every ten years or so and they will go on doing so as long as they continue operating conventional coal-fired steam.

What you seem to be implying is actually dangerous.

Let's not take boilers out of the frames or apart at overhaul = they can't be fully inspected or repaired, particularly narrow firebox types.

We don't need to be doing boiler rebuilds = loss of skills for when we eventually do (and yes we will!)