RPSI

postitnote

Of all the steam engines available to the RPSI or soon to be available, what are the relative merits of each one in terms of reliablility, size and top speed etc?

flyingsnail

postitnote wrote: »

Of all the steam engines available to the RPSI or soon to be available, what are the relative merits of each one in terms of reliablility, size and top speed etc?

No: 4
4 is the most modern steam engine having been built in 1947. It has good pulling power and can easily haul 9 coach trains on the Santa trips. Has a relatively low axle weight and good route availability. Has the added bonus of being a tank so it does not need to be turned at the end of a journey.

No: 461
Is probably the slowest of the lot being a goods engine but has a low axle weight and great route availability (I don't think there is anywhere it can't go). It will pull pretty much whatever you put behind it just won't do it fast.

No:85
Mainline express passenger engine. Has a higher axle weight and thus some restrictions on where it can go.


No:171
I don't have any direct experience with this loco but it was built as an express passenger loco, I believe it is slightly lighter than 85 but I don't know what the route availability is like.

Captain Chaos

Can any of them get up to the Cravens 75mph limit, I suspect No.85 can get close enough. Is there a special limit overall for steam haulage with todays H&S rules, or can they run up to line speed if the stock allows for it.

Losty Dublin

postitnote wrote: »

Of all the steam engines available to the RPSI or soon to be available, what are the relative merits of each one in terms of reliablility, size and top speed etc?

171, 85 and 131 were all built as fast express engines for the GNR's Dublin-Belfast services. Due to weight constraints on the Boyne Viaduct these engines were slightly smaller than what was ideally required and thus were limited to a 4-4-0 wheel arrangement. As the weight of the engine rests on less wheels, their axle loading are a little heavier which limits their availability in service, 85 especially so.

In theory they are capable of fast speeds but ideally hauling slightly lighter trains; anecdotes speak of all three engines reaching speeds of over 90MPH when in service. Given that 85 is only recently back in traffic and 171 and 131 are still to return, it's too early to say how reliable they will be.

4 was one of a fleet of engines built for the NCC in 1947. As it is newer than the GNR engines it is more powerful yet lighter and more capable and a little more economic to run as well. When in service they were nicknamed Jeeps because they could do anywhere and do any duty asked of same. For the RPSI it has been sent all over the country. In service she is able for over 70MPH with a full load. She is very reliable and has returned to traffic quickly after her last stand down due to her good health.

461 is a powerful engine which was built for the DSER to work freight and stopping passenger trains. Given the nature of freight trains and the lines it was worked on, it has a better ability to haul heavier trains but at lower speeds to those previously mentioned. She can get over 60MPH but for comfort you are looking at about 40MPH which has limited her to shorter trips and unsuitable for busy mainline traffic or long distance trips. She is a bit temperamental (Especially when in reverse gear.) but has settled down after a shaky start, and dare I say it, she looks the part.

186 is a small yet plucky 0-6-0 engine. Like 461 she was built to haul freight and comes with a lower in service speed of about 50MPH, though she can do far more than that when asked. Due to her smaller size she worked mainly on the Belfast excursions which are slightly lighter and generally slower lines than the Dublin trains. Given that the other 5 engines are far more powerful, younger and faster than her you can forget about seeing her in traffic for a long time.

postitnote

Thanks both for your informative responses.

It hadn't occurred to me the before the benefits of a Tank engine until I had a wee read up on them.

So ideally, you would want to be using 85 or 171 on Enterprise duties for their speed and ability to turn them at each end and No 4 for everything else?

I grew up near the Belfast-Bangor railway line and always loved the thundering past of the steam specials on the old jointed track.
I'd always miss the train on the way to Bangor, but would go up and sit on a farmer's crossing gate and wait for what seemed hours for it to return.

Certainly 171 was a visitor to the line as I found a double exposed photograph just yesterday in the folks attic from 1992 or 93 i'd guess.

GM228

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Can any of them get up to the Cravens 75mph limit, I suspect No.85 can get close enough. Is there a special limit overall for steam haulage with todays H&S rules, or can they run up to line speed if the stock allows for it.

All steam engines are limited to a max 60mph.

GM228

flyingsnail

Captain Chaos wrote: »

Can any of them get up to the Cravens 75mph limit, I suspect No.85 can get close enough. Is there a special limit overall for steam haulage with todays H&S rules, or can they run up to line speed if the stock allows for it.

Steam is limited to 60 but the cravens have retained 75 for working with diesel.

flyingsnail

postitnote wrote: »

Thanks both for your informative responses.

It hadn't occurred to me the before the benefits of a Tank engine until I had a wee read up on them.

So ideally, you would want to be using 85 or 171 on Enterprise duties for their speed and ability to turn them at each end and No 4 for everything else?

I grew up near the Belfast-Bangor railway line and always loved the thundering past of the steam specials on the old jointed track.
I'd always miss the train on the way to Bangor, but would go up and sit on a farmer's crossing gate and wait for what seemed hours for it to return.

Certainly 171 was a visitor to the line as I found a double exposed photograph just yesterday in the folks attic from 1992 or 93 i'd guess.

Ideally you would run 85,461,171 to places where they can turn and there is a couple of those, there are turntables at Connolly, Inchicore, Mullingar and Rosslare (there are other turntables on the network but they are not serviceable) along with triangles that you can turn on at Limerick Junction and Kilkenny. They can run backwards but it is much slower.

end of the road

Losty Dublin wrote: »

171, 85 and 131 were all built as fast express engines for the GNR's Dublin-Belfast services. Due to weight constraints on the Boyne Viaduct these engines were slightly smaller than what was ideally required and thus were limited to a 4-4-0 wheel arrangement. As the weight of the engine rests on less wheels, their axle loading are a little heavier which limits their availability in service, 85 especially so.

In theory they are capable of fast speeds but ideally hauling slightly lighter trains; anecdotes speak of all three engines reaching speeds of over 90MPH when in service. Given that 85 is only recently back in traffic and 171 and 131 are still to return, it's too early to say how reliable they will be.

4 was one of a fleet of engines built for the NCC in 1947. As it is newer than the GNR engines it is more powerful yet lighter and more capable and a little more economic to run as well. When in service they were nicknamed Jeeps because they could do anywhere and do any duty asked of same. For the RPSI it has been sent all over the country. In service she is able for over 70MPH with a full load. She is very reliable and has returned to traffic quickly after her last stand down due to her good health.

461 is a powerful engine which was built for the DSER to work freight and stopping passenger trains. Given the nature of freight trains and the lines it was worked on, it has a better ability to haul heavier trains but at lower speeds to those previously mentioned. She can get over 60MPH but for comfort you are looking at about 40MPH which has limited her to shorter trips and unsuitable for busy mainline traffic or long distance trips. She is a bit temperamental (Especially when in reverse gear.) but has settled down after a shaky start, and dare I say it, she looks the part.

186 is a small yet plucky 0-6-0 engine. Like 461 she was built to haul freight and comes with a lower in service speed of about 50MPH, though she can do far more than that when asked. Due to her smaller size she worked mainly on the Belfast excursions which are slightly lighter and generally slower lines than the Dublin trains. Given that the other 5 engines are far more powerful, younger and faster than her you can forget about seeing her in traffic for a long time.

so she may return one day? just a case of not being needed in traffic at the moment and will take a lot longer to overhall?

flyingsnail

end of the road wrote: »

so she may return one day? just a case of not being needed in traffic at the moment and will take a lot longer to overhall?

AFAIK 186 does need some boiler work but nothing insurmountable, if it was brought back into service now it would be surplus to requirements. More likely you will see it back out as the current crop of locos come to the end of their 10 year.

Losty Dublin

end of the road wrote: »

so she may return one day? just a case of not being needed in traffic at the moment and will take a lot longer to overhall?

Given that five engines ahead of here are superior operationally and with fresh boiler certs you are looking at a long lay off for 186. I can't see her in traffic again until close to 2025, when motive power options will be limited as the current fleet come off their tickets.

GM228

flyingsnail wrote: »

Ideally you would run 85,461,171 to places where they can turn and there is a couple of those, there are turntables at Connolly, Inchicore, Mullingar and Rosslare (there are other turntables on the network but they are not serviceable) along with triangles that you can turn on at Limerick Junction and Kilkenny. They can run backwards but it is much slower.

Turntable at Tralee is also serviceable, just currently blocked by 12 stored LY/LP wagons which are currently un-moveable.

Indeed running backwards is slower, tender first is 40mph or bunker first is 50mph.

GM228

GM228

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Given that five engines ahead of here are superior operationally and with fresh boiler certs you are looking at a long lay off for 186. I can't see her in traffic again until close to 2025, when motive power options will be limited as the current fleet come off their tickets.

From the RPSIs Operations Officer Mervyn Darragh in 2013-

"Unfortunately 186 is not a big, express locomotive and due to her lower top speed it is most unlikely she will reappear on the modern railway where finding train schedules for the locomotive is becoming ever more difficult.”

Also the same reason why 27 and 184 will never steam again.

GM228

savagethegoat

Rather than condemn three locos to never steaming again, perhaps a branch line operation should be their future. Three locos overhauled in turn could supply the needs of a Heritage branch line almost indefinitely. It could also use the wooden bodied coaches banned from the mainline.

flyingsnail

savagethegoat wrote: »

Rather than condemn three locos to never steaming again, perhaps a branch line operation should be their future. Three locos overhauled in turn could supply the needs of a Heritage branch line almost indefinitely. It could also use the wooden bodied coaches banned from the mainline.

Now all we need is somebody to start a branchline
FYI There are plans to return the Dublin based heritage set to service.

GM228

flyingsnail wrote: »

Now all we need is somebody to start a branchline
FYI There are plans to return the Dublin based heritage set to service.

Indeed but it's going to be a good few years before thr heritage set returns!

GM228

Salmon Leap

Just noticed that the Dublin Santa Specials have been re-scheduled Dublin - Greystones this year. I always just assumed that they ran to Maynooth because there would be less congestion on the line. Anyone know why this has changed?

flyingsnail

Salmon Leap wrote: »

Just noticed that the Dublin Santa Specials have been re-scheduled Dublin - Greystones this year. I always just assumed that they ran to Maynooth because there would be less congestion on the line. Anyone know why this has changed?

It is because of the ongoing track works at grand canal docks, Trains coming from Maynooth used to arrive into Pearse Station and offload passengers and then proceed to either the running loop or sidings to run around, this also gave the onboard team time to clean the train and for Santa to get ready ect without any passengers on board. This is no longer possible in grand canal because of the works, by going Pearse – Greystones – Pearse the passengers can still be offloaded at Pearse and the train can then do the run around and other jobs at Connolly.

Salmon Leap

Thanks for the rapid answer ☺ So when these works are completed will the trips (2016)revert back to the Maynooth line? Sorry about this, I am not familiar with what is happening at GCD.

flyingsnail

I don’t know, off the top of my head the running loop will still be there so that may be an option but there will be no run around facilities in the yard. It also depends on how things fit around the new IE timetable.

goingnowhere

No run around any more in Pearse unless you use the platform, which isn't acceptable given the frequency of traffic

flyingsnail

goingnowhere wrote: »

No run around any more in Pearse unless you use the platform, which isn't acceptable given the frequency of traffic

Are you talking about now or when the works are complete

GM228

flyingsnail wrote: »

I don’t know, off the top of my head the running loop will still be there so that may be an option but there will be no run around facilities in the yard. It also depends on how things fit around the new IE timetable.

The loop is still there but in use as the down main line now and there is no run around facility off the loop at the GCD end anymore.

To run round in Pearse when coming from Greystones would involve the light engine running to Tara Street, then back to Pearse siding and then back onto the train, the train would also have to arrive onto the down platform blocking all down trains for the time involved in the run around (down trains can no longer continue in the down direction when using the up platform during the works).

They are running to/from Greystones and empty to/from Connolly to enable the run around.

GM228

goingnowhere

Currently, no run around.

Post re-signalling, multiple options, but the centre platform GCD would be the most practical

Though the question really should be, is it acceptable to run steam trains through the busiest section of the rail network. Each year there are delays at Maynooth and Pearse due to shunting of the RPSI stock

Be a lot better to run Docklands - M3 Parkway and keep out of the way of Connolly (and Maynooth) entirely

sporty56

Advantage now is that patrons can go to Pearse by rail(additional IE revenue) before heading to North Pole - not an option at Docklands and not really a great place for parking

Losty Dublin

goingnowhere wrote: »

Currently, no run around.

Post re-signalling, multiple options, but the centre platform GCD would be the most practical

Though the question really should be, is it acceptable to run steam trains through the busiest section of the rail network. Each year there are delays at Maynooth and Pearse due to shunting of the RPSI stock

Be a lot better to run Docklands - M3 Parkway and keep out of the way of Connolly (and Maynooth) entirely

There is no loop on the platforms at Docklands. The runaround would require a propelling manoeuvre out of the statio, for the consist to be run around whilst on a severe gradient and for a propel back into the station. Possible by all means but not for the feint hearted shunters! The alternative would be for a standby loco to shunt the set up to release the steam engine but this would be time consuming.

Strictly speaking in both cases a propel and shunt requires that all RPSI personnel are to be off the train and this has been the case on more than one occasion on tours. Given the short time between trips, the onboard crews would be under serious pressure to service their trains if this is adhered to.

GM228

Losty Dublin wrote: »

There is no loop on the platforms at Docklands.

1. The runaround would require a propelling manoeuvre out of the statio, for the consist to be run around whilst on a severe gradient and for a propel back into the station. Possible by all means but not for the feint hearted shunters!

2. The alternative would be for a standby loco to shunt the set up to release the steam engine but this would be time consuming.

Both options are not possible/permitted in Docklands.

Also as per my previous post there is run around facilities still in Pearse but it is time consuming and blocks down trains if running around when coming from the Bray direction.

GM228