3801 Boiler Update

 
  lsrailfan Chief Commissioner

Location: Somewhere you're not
From what I have observed with all the loco's currently & previously in operation, & that does not include LVR's 5367 either, the method of fireing is certainly very much in contradiction to how they were in regular service, I prinarilly include the 30T, 32 & 35classes, I have spotted the other classes including the pig, 38's & 59's as well.

Each of these engines are fitted with slopping grates/firebox & should be fired with a bank & with the old non Butterfly door engines use the door as the inside baffle, this allows best steaming abilities with correct amount of air for combustion, what I have mostly seen is they fire them all but flat & close the door completely.

Any thought that firing that way would be saving money is a fallacy as they are not being worked very hard either, the other thing is ho light the blower is which is another problem as the more even distribution of draft over the fire also provides for better combustion.

I guess more is known these days, then from old sods like myself & others who never set foot on any of them but also wonder why those like me dropped out of membership in the early days, & see no change to the why & reasons behind it,
Interesting views.  
We've always found it unecessary to run 3016 with a bank- With sensible driving It runs quite happily on a 3-3-3 pattern (3 in the middle front, 3 in the middle back, 3 across the back in the corners).  Ive had many a run up the 1 in 40 of the Molonglo gorge with the locomotive steaming against the injector and sitting on 150-155.  The front damper is normally open, the back one shut and the door adjusted to suit.  Certainly shutting the door and producing clouds of black smoke is something not really encouraged either- Just a waste of fuel and a choked fire.

I've also found 3265 will run on the above method, however theres less in reserve so the back corners tend to be filled up a little more.

3642 is nearly always done with a bank and the door left open at all times to prevent the bank being pulled.  I did fire it flat on the run from Werris Creek to Narrabri last year as it seemed perfectly happy.  A half bank was put in it at Boggabri to give a little extra 'push'.
More recently we did the shuttles up Tumulla.  She steamed quite magnificantly, sitting on 185-190 against the squirt, with the bank being left to burn down over the last 2 km
Duffy
From the videos I have seen of 3642 on Tumulla, she certainly was puffing up a storm, with FL220 providing very little assistance at the rear

Kind Regards

Sponsored advertisement

  M636C Minister for Railways


The 36 boilers at Canberra have never been tested by ARHS.  One is stencilled "Repaired but not tested and is most likely ex workshops.  The other was probably last used as a static boiler as it has a non-standard smokebox attached.  Both were purchased privately by ARHS members but are not counted as society assets.

Not sure about 3616 having bigger valves than 3642.  3642 is fitted with 12 inch trick ported valves. What I think you're probably refering to is 3616s modified front end arrangements (Giesl Ejector).

I don't know how you can judge 3526s performance on the basis of how much smoke it was producing.  This could simply be put down to the crew operating the locomotive on the day you observed. Also dreadful that photographs were spoiled.  Perhaps the museum can put an additional check box in its reassessments in future covering presenting the locomotive for better photos?

When the engine was withdrawn in 2012 it was performing much the same as it had done for the past 7-8 years, if not better.  The issue lay with the locomotives tender tank and the limit of wearoperation being reached on the driving wheels.

The 422s are still owned by CFCLA.  Its up to them as to what colour the locomotives are painted.
Duffy

On reflection, I may have seen the replacement Garratt boiler being steam tested.
Wishful thinking about the 36 boiler.

I understood that the standard 36 class cylinders had ten inch valves and single ports, and that 3616 was the first fitted with twelve inch trick ported valves at the time it was fitted with the Giesl Ejector. I don't know which other 36 class had these cylinders. I think the original cylinders were cast iron and the later design cast steel. But I did say "more powerful than most of the class"....

I was not commenting on 3526's performance in general but its performance on a particular occasion. I recall the class in general running passenger and freight on the short north, but the class as a whole seem to have underachieved compared to the 32 and 36 classes, although not as badly as the 34 class. I think they looked better as built, although lowering the running board improved access to the valve gear.

I note that you haven't addressed my specific point regarding restoring 3616 (or 3609). It would be nice to see one in a colour they actually operated in (lined black), nor have you addressed returning 5910 to service....

M636C
  a6et Minister for Railways

Duffy Wrote
Interesting views.  
We've always found it unecessary to run 3016 with a bank- With sensible driving It runs quite happily on a 3-3-3 pattern (3 in the middle front, 3 in the middle back, 3 across the back in the corners).  Ive had many a run up the 1 in 40 of the Molonglo gorge with the locomotive steaming against the injector and sitting on 150-155.  The front damper is normally open, the back one shut and the door adjusted to suit.  Certainly shutting the door and producing clouds of black smoke is something not really encouraged either- Just a waste of fuel and a choked fire.

I've also found 3265 will run on the above method, however theres less in reserve so the back corners tend to be filled up a little more.


With the 30t as well as tank engines, a similar principle of firing was carried out, the difference being the bank which was built up to the bottom lip of the firehole with the door left in a similar position to the inside baffle of the 36, 38 & 59cl, working heavy, the draft would pull the coal to at least the middle of the firebox, using this method the door was opened fully at each firing cycle & the top of the bank knocked off, the draft taking it towards the front of the box, rather than the 3 cycle, only 2 were used insted, drop the door back to the half position (baffle equivelant) & fill the bank up to a point where you did not see the fire at all.  Rest time.

A similar pattern was done with the 32cl as well as the 35cl, a flat fire on a 35 & you were doomed until the bank was built up, they pulled a fire more readilly than a 36cl

Running full loads meant you were working against the injector for the majority of time also, steam pressure had to be sitting close to the 160 mark at all times as well.

3642 is nearly always done with a bank and the door left open at all times to prevent the bank being pulled.  I did fire it flat on the run from Werris Creek to Narrabri last year as it seemed perfectly happy.  A half bank was put in it at Boggabri to give a little extra 'push'.
I would find it unusual for a pig to work ok, much akin to a 35cl with a flat fire, although the grade & working even the short stint up the grade from there which is where the maximum loads are set for, really is not that big either, putting half a bank on to give the little extra push highlights what I have said.  Its much easier & the engine would hold itself in better stead, if the bank was kept full, up to the baffle, & knock the top off it prior to the next firing cycle, again the difference is, the load of the train, as well 36cl were not permitted to run on the NW line until heavy rerailing took place,

More recently we did the shuttles up Tumulla.  She steamed quite magnificantly, sitting on 185-190 against the squirt, with the bank being left to burn down over the last 2 km.
What load was behind it up Tumulla, I can only assume that by allowing the bank to burn down for the last 2 K's mean it was as far as it was going, & it would run in affect LE back to Georges or BX, basically a dead engine.

  a6et Minister for Railways


The 36 boilers at Canberra have never been tested by ARHS.  One is stencilled "Repaired but not tested and is most likely ex workshops.  The other was probably last used as a static boiler as it has a non-standard smokebox attached.  Both were purchased privately by ARHS members but are not counted as society assets.

Not sure about 3616 having bigger valves than 3642.  3642 is fitted with 12 inch trick ported valves. What I think you're probably refering to is 3616s modified front end arrangements (Giesl Ejector).

I don't know how you can judge 3526s performance on the basis of how much smoke it was producing.  This could simply be put down to the crew operating the locomotive on the day you observed. Also dreadful that photographs were spoiled.  Perhaps the museum can put an additional check box in its reassessments in future covering presenting the locomotive for better photos?

When the engine was withdrawn in 2012 it was performing much the same as it had done for the past 7-8 years, if not better.  The issue lay with the locomotives tender tank and the limit of wearoperation being reached on the driving wheels.

The 422s are still owned by CFCLA.  Its up to them as to what colour the locomotives are painted.
On reflection, I may have seen the replacement Garratt boiler being steam tested.
Wishful thinking about the 36 boiler.

I understood that the standard 36 class cylinders had ten inch valves and single ports, and that 3616 was the first fitted with twelve inch trick ported valves at the time it was fitted with the Giesl Ejector. I don't know which other 36 class had these cylinders. I think the original cylinders were cast iron and the later design cast steel. But I did say "more powerful than most of the class"....

I was not commenting on 3526's performance in general but its performance on a particular occasion. I recall the class in general running passenger and freight on the short north, but the class as a whole seem to have underachieved compared to the 32 and 36 classes, although not as badly as the 34 class. I think they looked better as built, although lowering the running board improved access to the valve gear.

I note that you haven't addressed my specific point regarding restoring 3616 (or 3609). It would be nice to see one in a colour they actually operated in (lined black), nor have you addressed returning 5910 to service....

M636C
M636C
M

There were several 36cl that were fitted with the steel cylinders, likewise they were fitted with the RHS smokebox damper that was fitted to 3616,  from memory there were at least 6 of them, I can reccolect 3641 & 62 which was used for various tests in 65 being onather.  Both engines were much better in regard to pulling power than a lot of the others, but not as good as 16, which also had good steaming qualities.  From my experience on all of them 51 & 64 were the pick, wonderful steamers & only ones that you could be sure that you would not be walking into the tender by time you reached Moss Vale, in fact coal was well in reach without a long stretch.

I find what you say regarding the 35cl on the north a bit bemussing but then again it depended on the trains they worked.  A notice was given to BMD Chargemens office as well as on North Control board to avoid rostering 35cl on trains to/from Gosford on trains that were rostered for Eveliegh crews, more especially the afternoon pick up 228a from Honeysuckle for whatever reason, some had it that they had difficulty with them especially as firemen were not familiar with them, & that was not much better for Enfield men either, especially after 67, when to get one was very rare.

What made it hard on some loco's was loosing touch with them, at Enfield we were luckier (is such a word could be used in this case) to get them more often north of Gosford then Eveliegh men would, likewise we were more frequently working 36cl on the south than Eveliegh were, with the only trains that became normal was the Saturday/Sunday Loop line trains & 31 mixed.

Talk to any BMD or Werris Creek men & ask them what they prefered a pig or nanny, & the nanny always won out, while the Pig had the 200Psi BP, rather than the 180 of the Nanny, which also had slightly less TE, they would haul the same trains & loads without losing time & as they were free-er rolling engines they made the most of undulating terrain & down hill runs.  Most WCK Drivers would comment that a 35 when dropping down Whittingham bank on a down passenger/mail could coast past Whittingham box, an adavantage if running early, but on a pig, they steamed down Whittingham bank & along the flat, never shutting the regulator until ready for the station turnouts.

As for 36cl boilers there were 6 or 8 brand new boilers that sat outside Chullora workshops for years, never used on any loco's nor on stationary boilers either.  When they were found, they were donated to Thirlmere, so providing 09 & 16 has not been pillfered of too much equipment, & should the frames be ok, then there should be enough available for them.

I do not have one photo of a green pig in my collection as they look off.  If they were going to paint it green then why not the green they were painted in as Round Boilered types?
  Duffy Chief Commissioner

Location: ACT

The 36 boilers at Canberra have never been tested by ARHS.  One is stencilled "Repaired but not tested and is most likely ex workshops.  The other was probably last used as a static boiler as it has a non-standard smokebox attached.  Both were purchased privately by ARHS members but are not counted as society assets.

Not sure about 3616 having bigger valves than 3642.  3642 is fitted with 12 inch trick ported valves. What I think you're probably refering to is 3616s modified front end arrangements (Giesl Ejector).

I don't know how you can judge 3526s performance on the basis of how much smoke it was producing.  This could simply be put down to the crew operating the locomotive on the day you observed. Also dreadful that photographs were spoiled.  Perhaps the museum can put an additional check box in its reassessments in future covering presenting the locomotive for better photos?

When the engine was withdrawn in 2012 it was performing much the same as it had done for the past 7-8 years, if not better.  The issue lay with the locomotives tender tank and the limit of wearoperation being reached on the driving wheels.

The 422s are still owned by CFCLA.  Its up to them as to what colour the locomotives are painted.
I was not commenting on 3526's performance in general but its performance on a particular occasion. I recall the class in general running passenger and freight on the short north, but the class as a whole seem to have underachieved compared to the 32 and 36 classes, although not as badly as the 34 class. I think they looked better as built, although lowering the running board improved access to the valve gear.

I note that you haven't addressed my specific point regarding restoring 3616 (or 3609). It would be nice to see one in a colour they actually operated in (lined black), nor have you addressed returning 5910 to service....

M636C
M636C
Never had a bad day on 3526.  Can recall it taking a 5 or 6 car Rail and Sail down the coast whilst the 36 was out of action and it did just as good a job, abiet a little harder work on the grades which is to be expected with a slightly less powerful engine.

Sure haven't- Not sure why I have to?  My personal opinion is that Id like to see 3001 or maybe one of the standard goods restored next to serve on the loopline.  Beyond 3526, I don't know what THNSWs locomotive plans are.  Sooner or later, 3801 will run again and then there'll be a stud of 45 mainline locomotives at Thirlmere to maintain.  More than enough.
The colour debate is age old and really doesn't need to be covered again.  Yep, Belpaire 36's never ran in green etc etc and sure, Id even like to see it in black with red and straw lining. But its satisfying enough that the engine performs exceptionally and is a pleasure to work.
  apw5910 Chief Commissioner

Location: Location: Location.

Yep, Belpaire 36's never ran in green etc etc and sure, Id even like to see it in black with red and straw lining.
Duffy
Tell that to 3642 Smile It'll have been working wearing green longer than black soon, if it hasn't already. Btw, didn't it appear in black with lining for a short time (in preservation) sometime in the nineties?
  a6et Minister for Railways


Yep, Belpaire 36's never ran in green etc etc and sure, Id even like to see it in black with red and straw lining.Tell that to 3642 Smile It'll have been working wearing green longer than black soon, if it hasn't already. Btw, didn't it appear in black with lining for a short time (in preservation) sometime in the nineties?
apw5910
3643 was painted in a red & straw lined black as being the first 36cl to receive a Belpair boiler.  I understand that 3642 was also painted in a similar colour when it worked a tour train to SA.

Tour trains & operations have wierd histories when it comes to colour schemes.
  Aussielgb Locomotive Fireman

Location: Gulmarrad Station
3801 and 3830 were 2 completely different restorations.

3801 was assessed by State Rail as a Bi-Centenary project. Subsequently it would be a State Government funded restoration. Before this was done ownership of the locomotive needed to be established. To prevent funds being used on other projects a location was needed so to restore the locomotive. A facility had been set up at the State Dockyard Newcastle by the Hunter Valley Training Company to train out of work apprentices who had lost their job in the Newcastle area. Kevin Harper was contacted and the tender was offered to him for restoration. His reply was 'all or nothing'. 3801 was taken from Thirlmere to Newcastle and the restoration done.

One of the biggest concerns determining the whole project was the restoration of the boiler. Several options were looked at including using another 38 boiler, a new boiler, or repairing the old one. Of the 3 38's 01,13, 20 3801 had the best boiler although the inner firebox was beyond use. 3813's boiler at Clyde was also inspected and 3820 was internally inspected. 3830 could not be touched as it belonged to the Museum of Applied Arts and Science (Powerhouse Museum) 3820 had already been decided would remain untouched as it would represent a 38 class in ex service condition.

The only option then available would be to restore 01's (3819's) boiler. This would include the replacement of the inner firebox, repairs or replacement of the rear firebox plate (backhead) repair or replace the front tube plate and other minor repairs as required. It soon became apparent, after extensive investigation, that no one wanted the job of producing a new backhead for 01 because of the complex shape needed, so repairing the rear corners was the only option. A new inner firebox was manufactures although when drilled was drill wrong for the stay holes when fitted. It being slightly different in size and shape. 01' boiler was tested to 245 PSI however the boiler inspector after some arguments with HVTC management lowered the pressure. His reasoning being that 3801 would draw the public and also in consideration to the longevity of the boiler, which turned out to be a wise decision.

3801 although being a Bi-Centenary project had it restoration completion date brought forward with Mr David Hills retirement in 1986 from State Rail. As 3801 was a State Government asset it was decided to appoint an independent organisation to run and maintain the locomotive. To achieve this a 20 year lease was issued so that if this organisation (3801 Limited) failed in this period the locomotive was not lost as the governments asset. 3801 Limited was set up and would be based in the Large Erecting Shop at Eveleigh. 3801 after her restoration would return to the RTM for a six month period under 3801 Limited for crew and maintenance training arriving as planned at the large erecting shop on 1 July 1987 and operating from here for the duration of the lease period.

At the end of this period 3801 would be returned to the State Government (State Rail) as a condition of the lease. Being the agreed life expectancy of the boiler. 3801 then fell under the control of the Office of Rail Heritage and was returned to their base at Thirlmere which became Trainworks. The ORH as a result of the initial investigation of 3801 and other State Rail assets then took control of much of the Thirlmere collection. The operation and Accredited are of Trainworks being the RTM and so 3801 and several other locomotives not recognised as part of 'Core Collection' and operational locomotives then became part of the 'Legends of Steam'. 3820 being recognised as the representative of a 38 class, 3801 to remain operational as long as possible.

Again when it became time for 3801 to undergo a further restoration the same process occurred. It was taken from Thirlmere for an independent assessment. It was then returned to Thirlmere before going to Chullora for the restoration. Being isolated it as in the 1980's can be easily established what funds are spent on the locomotive and no allocated funds can be spent on anything or any other exhibits. This way 3801 remains a State Government asset, under the control of Trainworks and operated by the RTM.

3830 was a very different story. Again 30 was taken from Thirlmere and moved to the LES. As the Powerhouse was a representative in 3801 Limited it was decided 30 would be restored and operated under 3801's Accreditation. It was also so 30 could be used for 3801 Limited trips if 01 was not available through maintenance or other State Rail commitments. Subsequently 30 was towed to the LES, partly stripped and sent to the asbestos building in the carriage works. Returning to the LES 30 was completely dismantled. Some parts went to the Powerhouse workshop, while others were sub contracted for replacement or repair. The powerhouse worked on the principle that the locomotive had to be restored using as much as possible of the original locomotive and so unlike 3801 which was restored for operation 30 was restore to be as original as possible.

Most of the boiler work for 30 was done at the LES or sub contracted and so was mainly 'cut and shut' old plate cut out and new plate added and welded in. When it came time to assemble the boiler, particularly the riveting of stays etc that boiler was relocated to the HVTC workshop now located in the old SMR workshop at East Greta. The boiler could be riveted hear without worrying about noise, most of the work being done by Powerhouse Museum volunteers.

As with 3801 the firebox threaded stays were commercially made, however with 3801 the boiler inspector failed almost 2/3's of these as they were not a good fit and custom stays were made and individually fitted. Having all the stays made for 30 they were all fitted and sealed as best as possible. Of course the Powerhouse claim to fame was that 30 would run at 245 PSI although her boiler was in nowhere near the condition of 01's after restoration. To increase the life of 30 the Powerhouse Museum limited the number of times 30 could be used and so it was always a concern how long 30's boiler would last.

Like 01 the tender was sent to the HVTC for restoration. As with 01 a new tank was manufactured the same as 01 being fully welded. Again 30 had to be as original as possible and so unlike 01 needed to represent a riveted tender. Subsequently the rivet heads were welded on the outside of the new tank. This was first looked at for 01 but because of the shortened restoration time and cost (about $3-5 a rivet head) it was decided that 01 would have the flat sided welded tender.

With 30's restoration almost complete all components were returned to the LES and final assembly completed. Trialing out of the LES before returning Light Engine to the HVTC for her official handover and return to service. 3830 completed its limited running but their were always problems. Attention then turned to 3265 which had also come from Thirlmere with 30.

At the same time changes in the Powerhouse took place and the focus of operating exhibits like 30 became second to the core reason of the museum. Several of the museums operation exhibits have been removed from the museum and come under the operation control of other groups, 3830 and 3265, as well as some tram exhibits being included. The ORH putting in the final funding to complete the restoration of 3265 and so the reason it has seen considerable more running than 3830 ever did.

3830 like 3801 would now no doubt need a full restoration of the boiler or a new one given that 30's original restoration was no where near the standards of 3801. Most of the staff from the HVTC who restored 3801 leaving the company after completion of 3801 and before the relocation to the SMR workshop. As 3801 was a SRA/State Government restoration in the 1980's it had to be completed on time and on budget to justify the restoration. Of course no one really knows the cost of the restoration but as Mr David Hill said in his launch speech her restoration was done in the 'Grand tradition of the great railway foreign Order' which she was. 3801 giving over 22 years reliable service and that alone is testament to the quality of the restoration undertaken.

It is interesting reading the reports on both 38's especially with 01 and the delays in the boiler allowing further items and parts to be restored that would not have been done. One needs to ask the question of what this includes as one would think that the restoration would include everything on the locomotive needed for it to be operational. As for the secrecy of the project, as it is a State Government restoration they need to be able to justify the costs involved and what has been done by there representatives the ORH, Trainworks and THNSW. With 30 we believed they had her ready for trial and then the boiler failed for unknown reasons.

As the Powerhouse Museum core activity and restructure is not the operation of exhibits it will be interesting to see if any funds are allocated to the restoration to service or static restoration of 3830. If the latter being the case the question then being where will 30 eventually be located as 3820 is recognised as the representative for a 38 class because it is still in original ex service condition, this being the reason 20 will (without a special reason) never return to operational service. It can be noted that as ORH put in significant funds to complete the restoration of 3265 and she was then not subjected to the limited running that 30 was by the Powerhouse.

Regards

Greg.
  Marrickville Mauler Beginner

3643 was painted in a red & straw lined black as being the first 36cl to receive a Belpair boiler. I understand that 3642 was also painted in a similar colour when it worked a tour train to SA.
a6et

Yes, 3642 was in lined black for the Pirinari Whyalla in 1972 to mark the opening of the railway line in October that year (by Billy McMahon). I saw it as a year 6 student with special permission to be late for school to see it come through Warrimoo accompanied by 3801)

Not sure how many other tours 3642 worked in this livery ? Part of a trip to Merriwa on federal election day December 1972 I think would have been another one given the dates

3642 of course was selected for the Whyalla trip on the basis of the association that the Commonwealth Railways C class were basically 36 class with big tenders, which stayed with round topped boilers (while the 36s were almost all receiving Belpaires, the Cs were being replaced by diesels, unsurprisingly in view of the long arid stretches they operated in, and unfortunately all being scrapped)


There was a very good article in the RTM's Roundhouse magazine regarding the Whyalla trip shortly afterward. I gave my copy away some time ago, but here are a few things from memory:
3642 took a very large train, at least for the times in Australia (somewhere over 700 tons) by itself from Port Augusta into Whyalla (this was before standard gauge into Adelaide of course)
At an official reception Commonwealth Railways Commissioner K.A.Smith discussed his own history with the 36 class while he was with the NSWGR - think this was in context of valve testing including with a view to the 38 class?
On the way home 3642 experienced difficulties leading to 3801 handling a substantial part of the return journey by itself
  M636C Minister for Railways

3830 like 3801 would now no doubt need a full restoration of the boiler or a new one given that 30's original restoration was no where near the standards of 3801.

It is interesting reading the reports on both 38's especially with 01 and the delays in the boiler allowing further items and parts to be restored that would not have been done. One needs to ask the question of what this includes as one would think that the restoration would include everything on the locomotive needed for it to be operational.

With 30 we believed they had her ready for trial and then the boiler failed for unknown reasons.


Regards

Greg.
Aussielgb

The reason 3830's boiler failed are known but not revealed to the public.

If as you imply it was a pre-existing defect it suggests that more rigourous inspection might have revealed it earlier.

I would assume that 3801 would have had all necessary mechanical attention to the chassis while awaiting the new boiler. When that became a debacle I guess they looked to see what else could be done to make use of the extended availability of access to the chassis.

Perhaps the removed 3801 boiler should be further restored for use on 3830, or even put back on 3801....?

M636C
  NSWGR 3827 Deputy Commissioner

Location: South of the Border
3830 like 3801 would now no doubt need a full restoration of the boiler or a new one given that 30's original restoration was no where near the standards of 3801.

It is interesting reading the reports on both 38's especially with 01 and the delays in the boiler allowing further items and parts to be restored that would not have been done. One needs to ask the question of what this includes as one would think that the restoration would include everything on the locomotive needed for it to be operational.

With 30 we believed they had her ready for trial and then the boiler failed for unknown reasons.


Regards

Greg.

The reason 3830's boiler failed are known but not revealed to the public.

If as you imply it was a pre-existing defect it suggests that more rigourous inspection might have revealed it earlier.

M636C
A good Water treatment regime would have prevented it happening in the first place.
  michaelgreenhill Administrator That's Numberwang!

Location: Melbourne
A good Water treatment regime would have prevented it happening in the first place.
NSWGR 3827
Assuming the problem was caused by poor water quality... As has been said, the reasons are known but not publicised: unless you'd like to change that...?
  a6et Minister for Railways

From what I have observed with all the loco's currently & previously in operation, & that does not include LVR's 5367 either, the method of fireing is certainly very much in contradiction to how they were in regular service, I prinarilly include the 30T, 32 & 35classes, I have spotted the other classes including the pig, 38's & 59's as well.

Each of these engines are fitted with slopping grates/firebox & should be fired with a bank & with the old non Butterfly door engines use the door as the inside baffle, this allows best steaming abilities with correct amount of air for combustion, what I have mostly seen is they fire them all but flat & close the door completely.

Any thought that firing that way would be saving money is a fallacy as they are not being worked very hard either, the other thing is ho light the blower is which is another problem as the more even distribution of draft over the fire also provides for better combustion.

I guess more is known these days, then from old sods like myself & others who never set foot on any of them but also wonder why those like me dropped out of membership in the early days, & see no change to the why & reasons behind it,
Interesting views.  
We've always found it unecessary to run 3016 with a bank- With sensible driving It runs quite happily on a 3-3-3 pattern (3 in the middle front, 3 in the middle back, 3 across the back in the corners).  Ive had many a run up the 1 in 40 of the Molonglo gorge with the locomotive steaming against the injector and sitting on 150-155.  The front damper is normally open, the back one shut and the door adjusted to suit.  Certainly shutting the door and producing clouds of black smoke is something not really encouraged either- Just a waste of fuel and a choked fire.

I've also found 3265 will run on the above method, however theres less in reserve so the back corners tend to be filled up a little more.

3642 is nearly always done with a bank and the door left open at all times to prevent the bank being pulled.  I did fire it flat on the run from Werris Creek to Narrabri last year as it seemed perfectly happy.  A half bank was put in it at Boggabri to give a little extra 'push'.
More recently we did the shuttles up Tumulla.  She steamed quite magnificantly, sitting on 185-190 against the squirt, with the bank being left to burn down over the last 2 km
From the videos I have seen of 3642 on Tumulla, she certainly was puffing up a storm, with FL220 providing very little assistance at the rear

Kind Regards
lsrailfan
Sounds can be decieving, & as I watched the Bevan Wall video of it on Tumulla bank, at first I thought it was doing ok, but the speed up the grade certainly showed that the pig was getting good assistance for the diesel in the rear.  As the train got up to Tumulla itself, it was easy to pick up the steady beat was doing it easy & the speed testified to that. When the diesel came past I would think it was sitting in at least 6 T/N going by the engine revs & noise levels. Certainly in the distance the pigs exhaust beat was more prominent than the diesel.

In one part of the video there is a clip of it from the cab, interesting to see how it was fired & a very small bank, which had me wondering also there did not look to be too great a draft either & when the video panned over onto the main gauges, it was then realised how hard the engine was really working,  The wobbly bouncing podging gauge looked to be setting around 4 on the gauge, very much down on what it would be on a load close to full.

For a pig to be working on such a grade with full passenger load, it would be doing the speed of app 20 - 24 MPH, whic is likely to have been the speed of the train, also the podgers gauge would have been up around the 5 mark, on a goods train down to around 12-15 MPH it would registered around the 6, which was pretty well standard.

From what I have heard the cost of coal is very expensive & the use of a diesel while helping in the case of loco failure also is a big help in getting the costs down with less coal consumption, including of cause water.
  Bevan Wall Deputy Commissioner

A good Water treatment regime would have prevented it happening in the first place.
Assuming the problem was caused by poor water quality... As has been said, the reasons are known but not publicised: unless you'd like to change that...?
michaelgreenhill
I know that this thread is dealing with 3801, and the fact that it is now discussing 3830 indicates that we are going off topic, but I would would just like to repeat a question I raised in the 3830 repairs thread (link below) back in December 2013.

In preparation for that year's Maitland Steamfest 3830 had been "reassembled" and was ready to go. Apparently a highly qualified, experienced and independent boiler inspector had certified the boiler, the safety valves had been set, sealed and tagged. A couple of weeks later the same inspector found the boiler in such poor shape that the certificate was immediately cancelled. Is this correct?
To the best of my knowledge there has not been an official explanation as to what happened in that period of time to cause the boiler certificate to be cancelled. I have heard explanations as to what happened from a number of well placed people within the steam preservation community in NSW. However, because this information is not official, in my opinion it has to be viewed as a rumour no matter how credible the sources are, and for that reason I will not repeat it here.
An official explanation would at least provide an assurance that "lessons have been learned" and that a similar "maintenance mistake", if indeed that is what was the cause, will not reoccur.

The link to the original 3830 thread is: https://www.railpage.com.au/f-t11373832-0-asc-s75.htm

BW
  Duffy Chief Commissioner

Location: ACT
4 or 5 notch on the back. Might have been higher when the 44 was on the back.

The loco was fired with the fact that we werent going beyond the top of Tumulla before changing ends and being pulled back to Bathurst. Had we kept firing, we would have had a very hot engine with a lot of fuel still in the box that would have screamed its head off all the way back to Bathurst. Waste of coal, waste of water.

The loco was comfortable on 4, 4.5, plenty of action on the fire, no need to push her.
  a6et Minister for Railways

4 or 5 notch on the back. Might have been higher when the 44 was on the back.

The loco was fired with the fact that we werent going beyond the top of Tumulla before changing ends and being pulled back to Bathurst. Had we kept firing, we would have had a very hot engine with a lot of fuel still in the box that would have screamed its head off all the way back to Bathurst. Waste of coal, waste of water.

The loco was comfortable on 4, 4.5, plenty of action on the fire, no need to push her.
Duffy
The point being that for a pig on that sort of grade its not working that hard, the engine on the back was a 422 not 44.  Likewise the size of the bank in the firebox was quite short, & with the benefit of a lighter load not a lot of chances the fire could have been pulled, but that's how it is these days.  I am not putting down the working just making a comparison to how it performed to regular heavy load working.

I also mentioned at the end of the of the day fuel costs are important especially the cost of coal a reason for the diesel & simple means to be pulled back to BX certainly does not require the fire to be held at full working pressure.
  NSWGR 3827 Deputy Commissioner

Location: South of the Border
A good Water treatment regime would have prevented it happening in the first place.
Assuming the problem was caused by poor water quality... As has been said, the reasons are known but not publicised: unless you'd like to change that...?
michaelgreenhill
I do not know the reasons but I would like to add that Water Quality is irrelevant, even if you have good quality water with no treatment you will end up with corrosion.
  a6et Minister for Railways

A good Water treatment regime would have prevented it happening in the first place.
Assuming the problem was caused by poor water quality... As has been said, the reasons are known but not publicised: unless you'd like to change that...?
I do not know the reasons but I would like to add that Water Quality is irrelevant, even if you have good quality water with no treatment you will end up with corrosion.
NSWGR 3827
Water quality is very relevant in regard to corrosion.  In areas that had poor water quality their locomotives had to have wash outs on a more regular basis, sometimes they received warm water washouts if the DLE considered a full cold water washout was not needed.

Surely in this day & age & I include the time of 30's operation, water quality in itself should not be a problem, as there are far more additives that can be used on the loco's to prevent problems when compared to how it was done in regular service days, when water treatment equipment was fitted to water tanks, also added treatment was put in daily, likewise 36cl on the Short South in the 60's had boxes welded onto the coal backead for brickets & the fireman had to put set numbers in at Bargo on the Down, & that was in addition to Tanin being added to the water tanks.
  Duffy Chief Commissioner

Location: ACT
ARHS and THNSW Thirlmere both have water treatment regimes that are reviewed every so often and altered as neccesary.
  NSWGR 3827 Deputy Commissioner

Location: South of the Border
A good Water treatment regime would have prevented it happening in the first place.
Assuming the problem was caused by poor water quality... As has been said, the reasons are known but not publicised: unless you'd like to change that...?
I do not know the reasons but I would like to add that Water Quality is irrelevant, even if you have good quality water with no treatment you will end up with corrosion.
Water quality is very relevant in regard to corrosion.  In areas that had poor water quality their locomotives had to have wash outs on a more regular basis, sometimes they received warm water washouts if the DLE considered a full cold water washout was not needed.

Surely in this day & age & I include the time of 30's operation, water quality in itself should not be a problem, as there are far more additives that can be used on the loco's to prevent problems when compared to how it was done in regular service days, when water treatment equipment was fitted to water tanks, also added treatment was put in daily, likewise 36cl on the Short South in the 60's had boxes welded onto the coal backead for brickets & the fireman had to put set numbers in at Bargo on the Down, & that was in addition to Tanin being added to the water tanks.
a6et
The point I was making, was that you can be using the most pure water possible but still end up with corrosion, I know of 2 operators of Steam locomotives that could not be using better Water but still chemically treat it, to Eliminate corrosion.
Have a look at this video for a better explantion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRs72Qqd-Dc&index=14&list=FLJt1vXWZxX2FreHIYyFG-yg
Poor Water Quality will accelerate Corrosion and can cause problems like Foaming and Scaling, Scale potentially hiding major problems occurring under that scale.
  petan Chief Commissioner

Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
NSWGR 3827 wrote;The point I was making, was that you can be using the most pure water possible but still end up with corrosion, I know of 2 operators of Steam locomotives that could not be using better Water but still chemically treat it, to Eliminate corrosion.
Have a look at this video for a better explanation  
Poor Water Quality will accelerate Corrosion and can cause problems like Foaming and Scaling, Scale potentially hiding major problems occurring under that scale.

My reply;
Thanks for that video link as he explained quite a few other boiler matters about which I had been curious for many years. Quite a useful show and tell especially when he had actual examples Smile
  Factory_Fill Deputy Commissioner

Location: Melbourne VIC
Its seems we have good news.

A release from THNSW today has revealed that a way forward for both 3801 and 3830 has been determined and that both will be on the tracks within 2 years.

The Way Forward for Two Much Loved Steam Locomotives 11 September, 2015 Two iconic 38-Class locomotives will return to steam over the next two years following an announcement today outlining the way forward for locomotives 3801 and 3830. “Returning these historic locomotives to service is a major engineering, conservation and operational task, demonstrating our commitment to the community benefit of our steam heritage,” said Transport Heritage NSW CEO, Andrew Killingsworth. “Built in the 1940s, both locomotives were the pinnacle of the NSW Railways steam fleet and are a lasting tribute to Australian engineering at the time.” “Steam trains remind us of a romantic era of rail travel – today they are the star attraction at our community events across Sydney and regional NSW.” Management of the 3801 project was transferred to Transport Heritage NSW (THNSW) in February 2015 after the locomotive’s new boiler was returned to Australia. “As the new project managers, we undertook a thorough assessment of the 3801 overhaul project including both the original boiler and the new German made boiler. “Now this assessment is complete, we are pleased to announce plans to have locomotive 3801 back on the tracks in the second half of 2017.” “We are also delighted to be announcing a new partnership with the Museum of Applied Arts & Sciences (MAAS) that will see locomotive 3830 returned to heritage service in the second half of next year.” This new partnership between THNSW and MAAS will see THNSW provide significant funding to overhaul locomotive 3830 at Thirlmere whilst respecting the conservation imperatives of MAAS. “The Museum looks forward to working with Transport Heritage NSW to balance the ongoing care and preservation of this important locomotive with opportunities for the people of NSW to experience the wonder of steam travel,” said MAAS Director, Rose Hiscock. A new project page has been established to provide regular updates as well as information on the planned works to restore locomotive 3801 at the THNSW website: http://www.transportheritagensw.com.au
THNSW
  vk2amv Locomotive Fireman

Fantastic news it is indeed.

However I find it a bit of a joke that after all this, the course of action is to use just fix up the original boiler and the new boiler that all the money was spent on will not be used.

Not meaning to detract from the good news in saying that however.
  apw5910 Chief Commissioner

Location: Location: Location.
Anyone care to guess what "using a novel repair
approach that doesn’t require the removal of the locomotive’s boiler from the locomotive
frame" for 3830's boiler really means?
  a6et Minister for Railways

Fantastic news it is indeed.

However I find it a bit of a joke that after all this, the course of action is to use just fix up the original boiler and the new boiler that all the money was spent on will not be used.

Not meaning to detract from the good news in saying that however.
vk2amv
A bit of a joke?  I actually find the whole issue a dead set joke, & I think so called answers actually raise more questions than it answers, especially in regard to the old boiler, & why on earth is there a need to do so much work on the new one for it to be just a spare.

Also, on the frequently asked questions link there is the news where 3830 with the oldest boiler built will be repaired & be back in service in the 2nd half of 2016, whereas 01 after having a new boiler built for it, will now have the old stuffed one repaired but not back in service for 12 months later.

Perhaps when the new spare boiler is ok'd for use, it could be placed on show for potential Oz boiler makers to have a look at it, & be able to work out potentially how much they could build new ones to similar standards if need be.

Surelly now the cost of going to Germany for the new boiler, & how much its cost the tax payers of NSW as against building locally, or even trying China, is shown up as a financial disaster. The cost of the boiler which is only spare now, along with the cost of repairs to the original stuffed one, which will last how long? along with the cost of transport back to Germany & then here again, must be seen for what is "shambles"

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.