My opinion, Yes! and based on the fact that I had worked enough garratt's in my time also performing load tests as driver delegate on more than enough trains to be qualified to state the facts regarding them.

No doubt all true, however your experience goes back to the era when the 60 class were in regular service. Are you perfectly certain that the requirements in this instance are exactly the same as in your time?

I could not say that they are exactly the same as in my time, thing is though every load testing that I had performed on Goods trains, with the last being in the 80's with 81cl, the very same conditions that I put forward were what we had to abide by.  That also included tests with the converted 45cl along with other working including passenger and the XPT, 42220 converted model on Xpt scheduling prior to introduction on the North.

They aren't the same as your day, thats what i'm trying to get across to you.

I would also believe that there would be a different criteria for load testing in todays railways and operations, for steam there is also the likelihood of some stringent tests for the specific locomotive that was in question. Take the example of 3801's tests, this is probably the first time that a loco had the water spray to test it for adhesion, I have never seen nor heard of such a test in the past, but knowing how 01 was back in the 60's with it being prone to slipping as well as other members of the class, & 3812 comes to my immediate memory, its a darn good idea though. The aspect in tests were that the loco used was the candidate and covered all other loco's in that class, that were of the same type, exception being light and heavy for Garratt's, in 01's test the other night while it had the tonneage, it still was a small load size wise though.

Every loco that does a test up Cowan, Steam or Diesel or Electric, has the water sprayers put on. The CM's did, The QBX's did, 6029 did and as you pointed out, 3801 did. This practice has been around for a while now. My argument at the time 6029 did the test was that the sprayers were installed right infront of the Driving wheels and not the front truck. The leading truck conditions the rail head before the driving wheels get to that bit of rail. We kept the sprayers where the authorities wanted them and passed on the first trip.

The aspect also what Lowndes has said regarding 6029 hauling a 1200tonne load from Rhodes to Thornleigh is interesting as he said it was without assistance. That load is pretty much double the load that a heavy Garratt would haul on that same grade, but they could haul 685 tonnes from Hornsby to BMD, having worked several through services on Garratt's over that grade, one being on 6017, another on 6032, with both loads being full and a combination of loaded and empty vehicles which made them close to full length. from Denistone to Epping and the from the Epping dip through Cheltenham and Beecroft we were at a crawl, when we reached Pennant Hills the grade eases and a welcome easing even with a stocker and good coal, we were down to around 185psi and 3/4 water in the primary static water gauge, which was a good result. Interesting is that there was no info about that train either, if the load test done on Cowan bank as was spoken on, that load and test would not normally have been sufficient to cover a test on the down though. For me a question on what he said is did that train have a diesel on the back and working with the Garratt haven't seen anything on that train anywhere even here on RP, as I would believe if it existed then there would have been a few camera hounds out there to record the event.

The trip up to Thornleigh was a decision made on the fly at Nth Strathfield by the Driver and Fireman on 6029 at the time. It wasnt advertised and it wasnt part of any official testing. It was a transfer train from Moss Vale to Hawkesbury River for the actual load test. No Diesels on the back of the train, they were on the front of the train and were told to shut off at Rhodes.

Bevan Wall was out at Beecroft that day. No one knew about what was going to happen up there, not even the crew. Infact the fireman didnt want to do it leaving Moss Vale to save on coal. At Nth Strathfield it was a 'F*%# It, hold my beer' moment.

So, based on what you have said in the last bit, which you have ignored your wonderous previous statement that said 6029 had a load of 1200tonnes from Rhodes to Thornleigh by itself the previous day, if it was a success then why go to Hawkesbury river for a test the following morning?

And where did the load mysteriously appear at North Strathfield, when they made a decision on the fly? No one knew what was to happen! gee that's a wonderful indictment on how things run these days.

Actually having a trial trip, before the official trial makes sense. Time is then available to deal with unexpected issues that could cause failure in the official trial. A second official trial takes expenditure, time, and resources better used elsewhere. Then there is the attractive thought, 'just what can this thing do?'.  After thousands of person-hours over years, this is a very human emotion.  The risk would be low as the diesels could easily be switched in once more and the team was very experienced in rebuilding, operating, and testing steam locos.

My memories of steam in service were that crews were very experienced at making decisions on the fly, it really was a necessary skill. How the job was officially done and what happened in practice were not necessarily the same.

You make sense Safeworking. I agree, one of the reasons why we just decided to tell the diesels to stop powering. a6et wont be able to comprehend this tho.

Jumping back a bit, was there any on train footage? I noticed a small bit on the thnsw release, was there a bit more anywhere?

My opinion, Yes! and based on the fact that I had worked enough garratt's in my time also performing load tests as driver delegate on more than enough trains to be qualified to state the facts regarding them.

No doubt all true, however your experience goes back to the era when the 60 class were in regular service. Are you perfectly certain that the requirements in this instance are exactly the same as in your time?

I could not say that they are exactly the same as in my time, thing is though every load testing that I had performed on Goods trains, with the last being in the 80's with 81cl, the very same conditions that I put forward were what we had to abide by.  That also included tests with the converted 45cl along with other working including passenger and the XPT, 42220 converted model on Xpt scheduling prior to introduction on the North.

They aren't the same as your day, thats what i'm trying to get across to you.

I would also believe that there would be a different criteria for load testing in todays railways and operations, for steam there is also the likelihood of some stringent tests for the specific locomotive that was in question. Take the example of 3801's tests, this is probably the first time that a loco had the water spray to test it for adhesion, I have never seen nor heard of such a test in the past, but knowing how 01 was back in the 60's with it being prone to slipping as well as other members of the class, & 3812 comes to my immediate memory, its a darn good idea though. The aspect in tests were that the loco used was the candidate and covered all other loco's in that class, that were of the same type, exception being light and heavy for Garratt's, in 01's test the other night while it had the tonneage, it still was a small load size wise though.

Every loco that does a test up Cowan, Steam or Diesel or Electric, has the water sprayers put on. The CM's did, The QBX's did, 6029 did and as you pointed out, 3801 did. This practice has been around for a while now. My argument at the time 6029 did the test was that the sprayers were installed right infront of the Driving wheels and not the front truck. The leading truck conditions the rail head before the driving wheels get to that bit of rail. We kept the sprayers where the authorities wanted them and passed on the first trip.

The aspect also what Lowndes has said regarding 6029 hauling a 1200tonne load from Rhodes to Thornleigh is interesting as he said it was without assistance. That load is pretty much double the load that a heavy Garratt would haul on that same grade, but they could haul 685 tonnes from Hornsby to BMD, having worked several through services on Garratt's over that grade, one being on 6017, another on 6032, with both loads being full and a combination of loaded and empty vehicles which made them close to full length. from Denistone to Epping and the from the Epping dip through Cheltenham and Beecroft we were at a crawl, when we reached Pennant Hills the grade eases and a welcome easing even with a stocker and good coal, we were down to around 185psi and 3/4 water in the primary static water gauge, which was a good result. Interesting is that there was no info about that train either, if the load test done on Cowan bank as was spoken on, that load and test would not normally have been sufficient to cover a test on the down though. For me a question on what he said is did that train have a diesel on the back and working with the Garratt haven't seen anything on that train anywhere even here on RP, as I would believe if it existed then there would have been a few camera hounds out there to record the event.

The trip up to Thornleigh was a decision made on the fly at Nth Strathfield by the Driver and Fireman on 6029 at the time. It wasnt advertised and it wasnt part of any official testing. It was a transfer train from Moss Vale to Hawkesbury River for the actual load test. No Diesels on the back of the train, they were on the front of the train and were told to shut off at Rhodes.

Bevan Wall was out at Beecroft that day. No one knew about what was going to happen up there, not even the crew. Infact the fireman didnt want to do it leaving Moss Vale to save on coal. At Nth Strathfield it was a 'F*%# It, hold my beer' moment.

So, based on what you have said in the last bit, which you have ignored your wonderous previous statement that said 6029 had a load of 1200tonnes from Rhodes to Thornleigh by itself the previous day, if it was a success then why go to Hawkesbury river for a test the following morning?

And where did the load mysteriously appear at North Strathfield, when they made a decision on the fly? No one knew what was to happen! gee that's a wonderful indictment on how things run these days.

Actually having a trial trip, before the official trial makes sense. Time is then available to deal with unexpected issues that could cause failure in the official trial. A second official trial takes expenditure, time, and resources better used elsewhere. Then there is the attractive thought, 'just what can this thing do?'.  After thousands of person-hours over years, this is a very human emotion.  The risk would be low as the diesels could easily be switched in once more and the team was very experienced in rebuilding, operating, and testing steam locos.

My memories of steam in service were that crews were very experienced at making decisions on the fly, it really was a necessary skill. How the job was officially done and what happened in practice were not necessarily the same.

You make sense Safeworking. I agree, one of the reasons why we just decided to tell the diesels to stop powering. a6et wont be able to comprehend this tho.

You make a statement that says 6029 hauled a 1200 tonne train from Rhodes to Thornleigh by itself.  You make no mention of diesels, now you say you (we) decided to tell the diesels to stop powering, what's next in the mish mash of what happened?

What's hard to comprehend is what in blazes you are talking about regarding the ever changing elements of a test train on Cowan bank.

Lowndes
Just to set the record straight, I have more than a few ex enginemen as friends, some not long off the job, and all are more than glad to be away from it.  Thing is, like myself they all loved the actual aspect of driving trains, however, as private enterprises took over, there are very few of them that would go back even if the opportunity came up, the primary reason being the way the railways are run in these days of privatisation.

Of several of them they also want to see such working as steam tours and the like, & I am no different in that area, others also want the aspect of steam and heritage operations to continue for their grandkids, mostly their children have grown up and most wont have a bar of working on the railways as they have witnessed what their fathers had to endure, which has gotten worse over time.

Like many of them, I don't go near the railways anymore unless its to use a pass and travel somewhere by rail.  My only real interest as such in the railways is very limited and I do not go to watch heritage operations, for the primary reason that having worked on steam and both volounter working on steam in the 80's having stepped off the footplate then, I have no desire to get back on to them.  So for me, whatever the status of doing tests on steam and how they are done these days, I have less desire than ever after talking to some men who worked on tours in recent years and the internal issues that was part of the politics that were intergral parts of these operations.

So, I am glad to see 6029 working again also 3526, 3801, & hopefully one day a pig back working, but as I said its there for my grandkids to see, and I wont be worried if I see any of them again.

So happy testing for the RHRR no matter how its done.

Lowndes
Just to set the record straight, I have more than a few ex enginemen as friends, some not long off the job, and all are more than glad to be away from it.  Thing is, like myself they all loved the actual aspect of driving trains, however, as private enterprises took over, there are very few of them that would go back even if the opportunity came up, the primary reason being the way the railways are run in these days of privatisation.

Of several of them they also want to see such working as steam tours and the like, & I am no different in that area, others also want the aspect of steam and heritage operations to continue for their grandkids, mostly their children have grown up and most wont have a bar of working on the railways as they have witnessed what their fathers had to endure, which has gotten worse over time.

Like many of them, I don't go near the railways anymore unless its to use a pass and travel somewhere by rail.  My only real interest as such in the railways is very limited and I do not go to watch heritage operations, for the primary reason that having worked on steam and both volounter working on steam in the 80's having stepped off the footplate then, I have no desire to get back on to them.  So for me, whatever the status of doing tests on steam and how they are done these days, I have less desire than ever after talking to some men who worked on tours in recent years and the internal issues that was part of the politics that were intergral parts of these operations.

So, I am glad to see 6029 working again also 3526, 3801, & hopefully one day a pig back working, but as I said its there for my grandkids to see, and I wont be worried if I see any of them again.

So happy testing for the RHRR no matter how its done.

I dont care, i'm done with you.

Lowndes
Just to set the record straight, I have more than a few ex enginemen as friends, some not long off the job, and all are more than glad to be away from it.  Thing is, like myself they all loved the actual aspect of driving trains, however, as private enterprises took over, there are very few of them that would go back even if the opportunity came up, the primary reason being the way the railways are run in these days of privatisation.

Of several of them they also want to see such working as steam tours and the like, & I am no different in that area, others also want the aspect of steam and heritage operations to continue for their grandkids, mostly their children have grown up and most wont have a bar of working on the railways as they have witnessed what their fathers had to endure, which has gotten worse over time.

Like many of them, I don't go near the railways anymore unless its to use a pass and travel somewhere by rail.  My only real interest as such in the railways is very limited and I do not go to watch heritage operations, for the primary reason that having worked on steam and both volounter working on steam in the 80's having stepped off the footplate then, I have no desire to get back on to them.  So for me, whatever the status of doing tests on steam and how they are done these days, I have less desire than ever after talking to some men who worked on tours in recent years and the internal issues that was part of the politics that were intergral parts of these operations.

So, I am glad to see 6029 working again also 3526, 3801, & hopefully one day a pig back working, but as I said its there for my grandkids to see, and I wont be worried if I see any of them again.

So happy testing for the RHRR no matter how its done.

I dont care, i'm done with you.

We are on the same page.

Jumping back a bit, was there any on train footage? I noticed a small bit on the thnsw release, was there a bit more anywhere?

The footage might get released once the loco gets certified. All the paperwork is being filled out now.

At the risk of 'confusing' people, when 6029 did the Adhesion test, a Gro-Pro was setup in the cab to help the Test Engineer. This footage was so that he could fill out all his paperwork. He had to take notes and being a steam locomotive and not a diesel, it was easier for him to re-watch afterwards. The video of this is on youtube, but was kindly asked not to put it up until everything had been sorted.


https://youtu.be/mAhi6vjh9X8

At the risk of 'confusing' people, when 6029 did the Adhesion test, a Gro-Pro was setup in the cab to help the Test Engineer.

My father did a lot of loco testing during the 40's and 50's. If we had a time machine to now put him on the test run of 6029, he'd see the Go-Pro and wonder whether he was on a space ship!

At the risk of 'confusing' people, when 6029 did the Adhesion test, a Gro-Pro was setup in the cab to help the Test Engineer.

My father did a lot of loco testing during the 40's and 50's. If we had a time machine to now put him on the test run of 6029, he'd see the Go-Pro and wonder whether he was on a space ship!

Just a query.  When ATO is introduced to the suburban network, will heritage steam and diesel locomotives also be fitted with in-cab signalling?  As I understand it, lineside signalling will be removed.

A few observations from the discussions regarding load trials particularly the one involving 6029.
Out of curiosity I tracked down what I believe to be the Video referenced in discussion of 6029 Hauling 1200 Tons the day before it's official trial back in 2016.  



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf2s0oOk5j8&t=111s

After watching a couple of times and working out what the exact load was (including diesels) I can only get 994 not 1200 Tonnes.
I will also add using examples such as this are not a true picture of the Locomotives Capability as The train was already moving when the diesels were told to "Shut Off", starting such of a load from a standing start on such a grade would be an entirely different matter.

I would also believe that there would be a different criteria for load testing in todays railways and operations, for steam there is also the likelihood of some stringent tests for the specific locomotive that was in question. Take the example of 3801's tests, this is probably the first time that a loco had the water spray to test it for adhesion, I have never seen nor heard of such a test in the past, but knowing how 01 was back in the 60's with it being prone to slipping as well as other members of the class, & 3812 comes to my immediate memory, its a darn good idea though. The aspect in tests were that the loco used was the candidate and covered all other loco's in that class, that were of the same type, exception being light and heavy for Garratt's, in 01's test the other night while it had the tonneage, it still was a small load size wise though.

Every loco that does a test up Cowan, Steam or Diesel or Electric, has the water sprayers put on. The CM's did, The QBX's did, 6029 did and as you pointed out, 3801 did. This practice has been around for a while now. My argument at the time 6029 did the test was that the sprayers were installed right infront of the Driving wheels and not the front truck. The leading truck conditions the rail head before the driving wheels get to that bit of rail. We kept the sprayers where the authorities wanted them and passed on the first trip.

I seem to recall from various video productions (Fotoz and Bevan Wall) 3265 had the water spray test performed back in 2009. The sprays appeared to be located in front of the leading truck.

A short video has just been published by THNSW showing 3801 and 3642 double heading for signal and clearance testing
Nice to see both in operation together on what could be one of the final services 3642 may run before a major overhaul

https://www.facebook.com/NSWRailMuseum/videos/900426733804744/

Rumour: 3801 will be out in August on the main south.

ss

ssaunders, I hardly think so  while this dreaded pandemic is still lurking around like a bad smell..

But saying that, had a great time last 2 weeks ago to go and see the old girl when the NSW Rail Museum was re-opened to the public on 5th July. I know I didn't video much like I would liked to seeing that 3801 was only there in light steam.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaGRORXWF9I

Cheers,

Apparently several boiler issues have been found in 3801, today will be it's last day on display at Thirlmere before entering the roundhouse

Apparently several boiler issues have been found in 3801, today will be it's last day on display at Thirlmere before entering the roundhouse

Source please or just keep quiet.

From comments made by THNSW on their official page

Unfortunately we have discovered some issues with the locomotive's boiler requiring further investigation. Once we know more we'll provide an update.

The engine is being taken off display to allow our fleet maintenance team to undertake some investigation works to the engine's boiler.

From comments made by THNSW on their official page

Unfortunately we have discovered some issues with the locomotive's boiler requiring further investigation. Once we know more we'll provide an update.

The engine is being taken off display to allow our fleet maintenance team to undertake some investigation works to the engine's boiler.

What. A couple of comments on the THNSW Facebook page?

From comments made by THNSW on their official page

Unfortunately we have discovered some issues with the locomotive's boiler requiring further investigation. Once we know more we'll provide an update.

The engine is being taken off display to allow our fleet maintenance team to undertake some investigation works to the engine's boiler.

What. A couple of comments on the THNSW Facebook page?

These were posted by THNSW themselves

Apparently several boiler issues have been found in 3801, today will be it's last day on display at Thirlmere before entering the roundhouse

I thought it was just a small minor issue? If it's several issues, is there an word or implication if said issues are serious or not? Just that 3801 recently given the clear, now for these to come up?

If the issues are severe, is it possible to replace the current boiler with the second, new welded one that was kept in storage?

Hope to hear from you as soon as possible.

Apparently several boiler issues have been found in 3801, today will be it's last day on display at Thirlmere before entering the roundhouse

If the issues are severe, is it possible to replace the current boiler with the second, new welded one that was kept in storage?

I highly doubt that they are that severe, the german built boiler would need to be completely rebuilt to work on a 38

When I last visited Thirlmere I asked one of the staff about the state of all 38 class boilers, the response was not good
3801 has the best boiler of all 4 boilers remaining, 3820 has the next best boiler, surprisingly 3813 has the next best boiler and 3830 apparently has the worst 38 class boiler
The german boiler is barely even able to be called a 38 class boiler

Apparently several boiler issues have been found in 3801, today will be it's last day on display at Thirlmere before entering the roundhouse

If the issues are severe, is it possible to replace the current boiler with the second, new welded one that was kept in storage?

I highly doubt that they are that severe, the german built boiler would need to be completely rebuilt to work on a 38

When I last visited Thirlmere I asked one of the staff about the state of all 38 class boilers, the response was not good
3801 has the best boiler of all 4 boilers remaining, 3820 has the next best boiler, surprisingly 3813 has the next best boiler and 3830 apparently has the worst 38 class boiler
The german boiler is barely even able to be called a 38 class boiler

I thought the second boiler that was built was kept as a spare for 3801? Not the first one. In that case, they only have one boiler, which is currently used?

At first, one said it was just a minor problem, now other ares saying there are several. It would be a tragedy if 3801 would need repairs after all the years it took to get her running again.

Sorry, but being paranoid about this after all the effort, was hoping to see her running again after the virus is dealt with. Hope you understand where I am coming from.

On a different note, unrelated, Is 3830's boiler really in such a horrible condition? For some time, I wondered if THNSW could buy 3830 from MAAS since the latter has no interest in doing anything about it.

I thought the second boiler that was built was kept as a spare for 3801? Not the first one. In that case, they only have one boiler, which is currently used?

There is a massive earlier thread on all the comings and goings about 3801's boiler. All of your questions have been covered in it. It's good to see your interest in it, but I don't think we'd like to go through it all again.

3830 has been discussed extensively on this thread and on others, all that I know is that it was given a boiler certificate in 2013 that was revoked weeks later, one consistent theory I hear is that someone decided to acid clean the boiler which caused large amounts of pitting to the boiler barrel
Both 3265 and 3830 are on long term loan to THNSW, any works must be approved and financed by the PHM, unfortunately the PHM have all their money focused on the new Parramatta museum and the refurbish of the Ultimo site, not even small touch up repairs can be conducted to 3830 (as shown in the picture) but oddly enough can be conducted to 3265

All steam locomotives will have some problems throughout their whole life, 6029 broke down at Revesby a few years ago due to problems far worse that what 3801 has and it still remains in service

The whole debacle relating to the treatment of 3801 and 3830 is a rail museum's nightmare but does not compare in any way to the ignorance shown to the items at Broadmeadow or to the absolutely horrific treatment that 5711 has been given over the past 40 years


THNSW, formerly the NSWRTM, have come a long way since their eviction from Enfield in many ways but not in some ways

https://www.flickr.com/photos/188796207@N07/50161494873/in/dateposted/

All steam locomotives will have some problems throughout their whole life, 6029 broke down at Revesby a few years ago due to problems far worse that what 3801 has and it still remains in service

The whole debacle relating to the treatment of 3801 and 3830 is a rail museum's nightmare but does not compare in any way to the ignorance shown to the items at Broadmeadow or to the absolutely horrific treatment that 5711 has been given over the past 40 years

Or Dorrigo, but I digress.

I never knew 6029 had worse problems than 3801 is having right now. Btw, how do you know the extent of 3801's issues? It's never been stated anywhere recently.