denis M
Part of the e-furniture
Posts: 300
|
Post by denis M on Jan 17, 2017 22:37:08 GMT
Simon,
I do not want to get involved with this debate but I do find it interesting and feel that you paint a bad picture of some boiler testers. Not all are like you portray, some have common sense.
What I do feel is wrong is your statement that all certificates you have done are legitimate, I beg to differ as we were presented with one that has no indication as to which Federation it was done under, no boiler volume on it, no bar litres, expiry date is shown as 12/08/2019 and you have signed it off showing a date of examination and date of certificate as 10/08/2019, I know that you pre date then but ??.
Also as far as I am aware the person who's owns the boiler was never a member of C.M.E.S or our society.
We had to do a full test in this case.
Regards Denis M
|
|
smallbrother
Elder Statesman
Errors aplenty, progress slow, but progress nonetheless!
Posts: 2,269
|
Post by smallbrother on Jan 17, 2017 22:54:17 GMT
That was just one very sad and misinformed individual Julian. To be honest I had put him out of my mind. There are so many good people in many clubs I suppose you are bound to encounter the opposite at some time.
Pete.
|
|
|
Post by Jim Woods on Jan 17, 2017 23:57:58 GMT
like Hayden and a few others, I have been following this thread with interest. I am, for my sins, both a boiler inspector and convenor of the boiler committee for my club. under the AMBSC code all clubs run with in OZ and NZ, the qualifications needed to inspect new build or retest boilers is clear. having said that, we have a somewhat over zealous secretary, ex "government employee" who latched onto one clause that said we had to have tertiary/ university education to be an inspector and had us all fired for a while till they figured out all the boilers would stop running soon and thus no income for the club outside of subs. So it only takes one "sad and misinformed individual", as pete says to cock it up. In NZ, some clubs are getting quite small now with many loco's being bought in or not built by the owner. Finding people with the required hands-on quals is getting hard. since the 70's, engineering has been hard hit buy the neo-liberal economic thinking that has infested the western world and this has indirectly lead to a drop off in the trades being in model engineering. some might argue too, that this also leads to a leadership vacuum within the hobby with those at the top making the rules having no regard to "real Life" or empathy for the builder of a work of art. So what do we do? I would think that what Simon is doing could be an answer and fully support this kind of thinking. let's keep the cowboys and bureaucrats out of the boiler side of things and try to let common sense and sound engineering lead.
Jim
|
|
|
Post by simonhudson on Jan 18, 2017 0:24:54 GMT
Hi Denis, Thanks for bringing that one to my attention so publicly! . It appears I've made a couple of mistakes on it!! I will address them individually. The bar litres and volume. To my knowledge, I have on 3 of 4 occasions left that box blank, trusting to the new owner to fill it in, having forgotten to take note of the litres going in. Each time I've done that I have explained to the owner that they should let me know how much water it holds and I would calculate the bar litres for them. Im sorry, but I do not see this as a safety critical issue. I just don't. I could have guessed, (trust me,.... many do!),..... but I decided to get the owner to do it for a more accurate job. Not crossing out the right association, federation at the top of the form. Well a 4 year copper certificate dated 08/2019 would have been done back in 2015. That was right back when I first started and was getting used to the complicated form. Truthfully I only noticed those three options tucked away right up the top there after I'd done about 50 certificates,...... I pointed it out to the other club inspectors for the three societies that I'm involved with and only one of them had noticed it! One in every three certificates we see come into TSW omits it, and again,..... not related in the slightest to whether the boiler is safe or not,...... so honestly,..... who cares!!? The 'N' or 'S' prefix further down the form tells you precisely the same thing anyway! The dates,.... yeh, again,.... I've automatically written the expiry dates where the test date is before too. I've tested over 300 boilers now so I do cock up on the forms every now and again. Not so much these days now that I know the forms backwards, but if all you say is true, (and this is the first I've heard of it) then I've done a bad job on filling out that certificate. Importantly, the boiler would still be completely safe though, and the important info on it was right by the sounds of it!? Let me say now however that I think it particularly ironic that you start your post by stating that 'not all are like I portray and some have common sense' and then proceed immediately to pedantically pick away at obvious, simple and benign mistakes to the point that you clearly declared here and at the time to the owner that the certificate was 'not legitimate'!!? Indeed, fake!! The way in which you've clearly dealt with a mistake or two on a certificate is precisely what I would expect from the kind of inspector seeking to demonstrate how good he is at the expense of another. It's a great shame to me that no phone call was made to ask, verify, or indeed tell me that I'd made a mistake on the form. It's a great shame to me that you've diminished my credibility in front of someone who's boiler I legitimately and competently tested. If I were similarly minded, I am quite sure that I could find certificates written by your society with mistakes on them, but I wouldn't dream of treating them as anything other than legitimate and honestly produced certificates that contain mistakes. Indeed TSW sold a locomotive today with a current certificate issued by a Manchester society that had the 'carried forward expiration date' filled in on the bottom part of the form instead of the top where it should be, and no written scheme number on it. I used common sense and I added them! I would argue Denis that your actions, and attitude in this instance were cynical and counter productive to the confidence in the NAMES scheme in front of this 'owner', as much as they appear to have been insulting and disengenuous to myself as the inspector. You certainly didn't have to do a full test. You chose to based upon either a lack of common sense, or indeed a cynical, damaging desire to satisfy some distasteful need that I will never understand. My apologies for being extremely forthright here, but I hope between my criticism you will be able to see my point! Simon
|
|
|
Post by manofkent on Jan 18, 2017 7:57:32 GMT
This thread started with correspondence about a fake certificate, forum member huttcourt seemed to be criticised unfairly as it turned out. I have met this gentleman and he is a good decent chap with lots of lovely locos I wish I could afford. Now Simon is defending himself - and doing so very well in my opinion. We need the Simons of this day, and if I could afford it I would happily buy one of his locos with his boiler certificate. Denis M has a good point though that if he had any concerns about the boiler certificate then a retest is best. I wouldn't expect a boiler inspector to do otherwise. Best to be safe.
In another life I was once finance director on a board that seemed hell bent on destroying itself. It was like one member would light a fire and others would (metaphorically) pour petrol on it. The business was good and profitable - arguably despite those board members. This thread is beginning to feel the same.
So a plea: can we avoid trying to damage what is in my opinion a good system of boiler regulation. The fake boiler certificates are the real problem and deserves our vigilance. Simon and his business are one of the good guys.
Thanks for reading this
John
|
|
|
Post by simonhudson on Jan 18, 2017 8:42:09 GMT
Thanks John for your support and kind words.
I do agree that if there are 'concerns' about a boiler then a retest should be conducted. But concerns about a certificate are not the same thing as concerns about the boiler. It is possible for a certificate to cause concerns about the boiler of course. Perhaps it could be for a steel boiler but written out for 4 years on the hydraulic. Perhaps it could state a hydraulic pressure insufficient for the stated working pressure. I can imagine several scenarios where a certificate may present in such a way to give concern for the boiler's safety and therefore prompt a retest. Simple, obviously benign things like putting the date of a certificate as if it were written 4 years in the future don't cause 'concern',....... because it doesn't take a brain surgeon to make the mental leap necessary to know that I'm probably not a time traveler!!
I looked up that certificate, and interestingly it was a brand new, naked boiler for a GWR Metro with both a builders stamp and prior test stamp of a 250psi test for a 125psi wp, (with no paperwork) and therefore my subsequent shell test and certificate at 200psi for a wp of 100 to bring it back into the system. It was a very tidy and neatly built copper silver soldered boiler.
I stand by my assertion that Denis, and his colleagues acted in a divisive way there that did significantly more harm than good.
Simon
|
|
|
Post by steamcoal on Jan 18, 2017 10:30:10 GMT
Chaps, Just out of interest...how many of you have bought , sold or even looked at the commercial seller listing? Bet there are a few of you.
Looking back through the archive of even Station Road Steam to 2001 shows maybe 600 plus example of all facets of model engineering, from some of the worst examples to the very best you will ever see. Shouldn't we really at least acknowledge the people like Mike Palmer, Simon and other purveyors (lets try to forget the fringe traders ) who have the fortitude to take on what is escentially a hobby and offer assistance and professional guidance towards the un-initiated live steam hobbiest.
Here we are berating a commercial entity, ok it may be at odds with some peoples interpretation of the hobby is over the last 100 years, but where are outsiders going to get the opportunity to take up a lifelong hobby if we are not granted knowlege and guidance, if its not forthcomming freely from the MES? Putting aside the boiler testing issue, is it not far more beneficial that 600 plus examples of model engineering are now in the hands of those that want to persue a pastime that will last them out? I gauranteee that those within the club organisation are as eger to make a dollar on there loco sale as much as those on the outside, certificate or not. Nothing is for free but the penultimate outcome is that people are doing the hobby and that means more numbers will be there to help at the club and maybe releave the workload on the old guard, which is what they want.
Even on this forum I have had help from Julian, photos from Pete plus others scattered about. Yes I have bought locos from Simon and others plus private purchases. As a buyer all we ask for integrity and honesty we try to do the best research we can.
I would just like to say thanks to those that give us an opportunity in the hobby.
|
|
pondok
Part of the e-furniture
My 5" gauge SAR class 15F
Posts: 359
|
Post by pondok on Jan 18, 2017 14:55:03 GMT
God aint that the truth: Simon wrote: "Obviously this is a generally unsatisfactory situation, but it was more than that. We sell actually to a lot of new people to our hobby. I personally, regularly guide new people through the basics of locomotive operation and the fact is that if they present their new toy to a club with a professional (non NAMES) certificate, they suddenly find themselves faced with a lot of scary hoop jumping, locomotive disassembly, paperwork, and sadly, far too often a self important old man who's agenda is impressing them with his knowledge and power rather than easing their nerves and holding their hands into a new and now increasingly not worth it hobby!"
|
|
|
Post by steamcoal on Jan 19, 2017 9:15:17 GMT
Further to my previous, I was sitting reading a 1945 edition of the M.E at our club the other night and I was thinking about how this M.E magazine has changed over its lifetime and how this might relate to the situation we see with this conundrum of hobby v's commercialism and its place today in model engineering.
Most of you will know the history of the M.E publication, the editors and particularly the format by which it has taken since its inception at the start of last century. It has come and gone, changed its spots ,its paper size and publication frequency, even its colour, and today its also is available solely as an online edition on the web! Whao! Well some of us still like paper, thats me.
What I am getting at is that for this ubiquitious magazine to survive, love it our hate it, it has had to make changes, including the price, to remain as a viable entity in an ever crowded market. Other magazines have attempted to get in the act and some have gone digital but through all this the M.E still survivies. This seems like a similar evolution of the metal side of the hobby, the pure "if you havn't built it your not a real model engineer brigade" are a deminishing few and that is an irrifutable fact. The last bastion may be the boiler testing regime and within the club establishment this is still a valid part of the hobby, the aquired knowledge and working of a steam engine, its integral to the hobby and always will be.
What is evident obviously is the ingrained resistance to relinquishing this bastion, to those outside, maybe not through a lack of expertees but because money is invloved.
But as I reference with regard to the Model Engineer Magazine, you either adapt or slowly die. One or the other will happen and I cannot for the life of me think why hundreds of model engineers would want to jepodise there cherished pastime just because they continue to refute the logic that model engineering will continually evolve and outsiders will increasingly want to buy models and enter the hobby. You may perish the thought but it has been occuring for some time and will do more so in the future. If the clubs accept that this is the future pathway and along with the Federation (s) work with these bonafied sellers and allow boiler testing it will surely increase the participation and make the hobby a more meaningful entity with wider appeal.
Whether you are a boiler tester inside or outside the club structure it should not matter one jot, the test is well prescribed and the regulatory authority(s) need to also adapt there rules just like the hobby needs to do. Do the commercial boiler manufacturers also come in for the same criticism as the commercial loco sellers? Money is still invloved. I do not think so but can't gaurantee that either.
Must say I still like the old Model Enginner mags though, even in just black and white ones!
:-)
|
|
|
Post by john106 on Jan 19, 2017 12:33:48 GMT
The topic seems to have moved slightly away from the 'fake boiler certificate' towards the 'getting a boiler certificate'.
I am still unsure in my mind that the NAMES scheme is being used 'fairly' when clubs are set up just to issue boiler certificates. I say 'fairly' in that NAMES, and their insurer, allows the scheme because it is a good, well though out process, and is being applied BY and FOR people who have some practical understanding of what they are doing. It is also being applied at minimal cost in that all you have to be is a member of the club.
Without doubt some clubs and boiler testers are very protective of who they will allow to join, test boilers for, or even speak to!
Equally, people like Simon, who has kindly taken time to explain what he does and why, are finding ways of encouraging people to be involved in the hobby, and that is no bad thing.
So what happens when I decide to buy a steam loco, get a boiler certificate, takes it home to try but then let it sit in the garage for 6 months until I takes it down to the local club to steam. I have a loco, certificate, and no experience.
This is what being part of a club should be for, the experience and help other members can and usually will give to us still learning. But also knowing that I need a bit of watching and help to keep me enthused and safe.
John
|
|
|
Post by simonhudson on Jan 19, 2017 17:53:36 GMT
Hi John, When we get new, green owners come to SW, we usually steam the models up with them and hold their hand through a lesson on how to do things. We advise them on who their local club is and often find them the phone numbers to call,.... more often than not we know someone in the club that we can say 'talk to John, he'll see you right'. We also regularly make little films like this one for the new owners so that they can simply go to our youtube or Facebook page to refresh their memories and learn their new toy safely. We tell them all that we are only a phone call away if they need to know anything. It's not because we are nice,... (although we are!),... .... it's just good business! They are far more likely to stick with the hobby and come back for a bigger one next year if they play safe and happily with the first one! A little link to a film we made for the new owners of a 3" Plastow Burrell so you can see the kinda thing: www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsoi17_xu-4Simon
|
|
pondok
Part of the e-furniture
My 5" gauge SAR class 15F
Posts: 359
|
Post by pondok on Jan 20, 2017 10:54:44 GMT
Yes, totally hijacked thread, but very interesting topic. As with all group activities, those involved in the hobby tend to lean either to being inclusive, or not. It's a mindset and a personality thing, there is a real appeal of the exclusive gentleman's club thing to some, and for them it's important to put obstacles in the way of newcomers, hoops for them to jump through for its own sake ("I didn't get such a shoo-in when I was starting out!").
To be fair that's probably less and less the case, and I'd argue that for quite a while, the hobby broadened its appeal to the average Joe largely thanks to a minority of progressive individuals, LBSC being an obvious example. The first revolution was maybe from very wealthy gentleman's toys to the bloke, like most us us, with the lathe in the garden shed (and how beneficial was that democratisaton to everyone involved!), to quite likely, and hopefully, what we are seeing today, to the corner of the garage or living room where a purchased loco is lovingly kept or assembled, and taken to the track when real life occasionally allows the chance. Arbitrary club rules of minimum attendance at working days automatically cut out great swathes of enthusiasts that could be paying members. Any handholding with the boiler testing regime will also help those with disposable income but no time (read: working and kids at home) to stay.
Anyone who, like Simon, facilitates this transition and so helps the hobby to adapt and survive, gets my vote. Obviously without dropping safety standards, as is clearly the case here. No connection with Simon here, although I do have my dreams set on that big boy....
cheers, andy
|
|
Midland
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by Midland on Jan 23, 2017 22:28:43 GMT
Simon has been very magnanimous, and also very frank and open in all his replies. I suggest that so far as this post is concerned we comment on his business no more, and wish it every success. There are still a few issues from earlier pre Steam Workshop discussion. It seems to me that the considerable increase in miniature loco resales part due to ebay and the influx of Modelworks/Winson debacle has not been addressed by the Federations in the UK nor the Farnsworth type set up that previous threads commented upon that one particular dealer in Brum used. The Federations really need to get a grip on this. As David Goyder ('Midland' on here) is quite close to the Southern Fed heirachy he might like to comment. Cheers, Julian Hello All Yes the "Midland" has been exposed! Yes Julian, I was persuaded to write the Southern Federation newsletter and quite a fun job it is. We actually need a few more like minded model engineers to help with the work of the SF. Speaking as a committee member I should advise you and all, that the SF is not here to tell Societies what to do, we are much more a repository of information to help societies operate efficiently and safely, we do not lay down the law! We are from time to time advisory and will help any Society with questions and do it to the best of our knowledge and will advise if they need to seek more professional guidance than we can offer. See the advice on CCTV as an example. So to suggest that the SF or NAME (for that matter) should 'sort it out' is not the way and will not happen. I will bring this to the attention of the SF Committee but I think the above will suffice! Cheers David
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,901
|
Post by jma1009 on Jan 24, 2017 0:17:24 GMT
|
|
Midland
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by Midland on Jan 25, 2017 15:24:24 GMT
Julian I am speaking to you as one ME to another! Sorry Julian, you have it wrong. The Boiler Test Code (Green Book) is the product of the Model Engineering Liaison Group (MELG) made up on representatives (as listed on the front cover) 'The Midland Federation of Model Engineers', 'The Northern Association of Model Engineers', ' The 7 1/4" Gauge Society Limited' and 'The Southern Federation of Model Engineering Societies'. Note also that the last mentioned is a federation of societies not just model engineers. The copyright to the Green Book lies solely with the Model Engineering Liaison Group. So Julian your "prescriptive code" (sic) comment is fundamentally at odds with the facts. The boiler test code is administered through individual Societies, their boiler test managers and their boiler testers. The boiler test code is exactly the same for all member societies whether Northern, Midland or Southern or 7 1/4". Your comments do reflect a deep and underlying prejudice in the hobby that a society can get a “better deal” with one group or another but the integrity of this system is that it is exactly the same for all. The only variation is as it is applied by boiler testers at their societies and that seems to be where this discussion started. The fact that the MELG is chaired by Tony Wood means that matters between the MELG and the insurer are consistent. The Southern Fed "Safety Officer" listens to member societies and takes their comments to the MELG table that is part of his role and he may help with clarifying interpretation of some aspects of the Green Book and that is purely advisory. The Green Book lays down the rules; you boiler testers enforce the rules. This should be the end of this!
|
|
|
Post by GeorgeRay on Jan 25, 2017 22:00:54 GMT
Just to point out that this thread has wandered far away from its original topic of forged certificates which were being 'issued' to some purchasers. What has recently been discussed was not forged certificates but whether the green book was being followed. It would have been more sensible with hindsight to have made that the subject of a different thread since no forgery is involved. George Ray
|
|
|
Post by steamcoal on Jan 27, 2017 20:08:32 GMT
What about a MES issued certificate produced by a fringe trader, (not a ligit commercial outfit) that when the boiler was tested by the new owner for club acceptance certification it was found to have a leak in the foundation ring.
Thats what happened to the purchase I made on behalf of a friend. Unfortunately it was sold outside the U.K so pretty well we are stuck with it., build a new boiler in this case.
Forged certificate it may not be , but in my opinion its a total dud certificate.
I question how it could have been issued with a cert in the first place, be it a forgery or not. As far as I can see the cert has no evidence of tampering.
Its not a fake cert or forgerd certificate but it might as well be.
Thats what I question, the tester(s) in this case and what they are testing.
Umm?
|
|
|
Post by GeorgeRay on Jan 27, 2017 22:14:24 GMT
Paul Unfortunately although I reported this to the constabulary because no crime had been committed they were not interested. So there was nothing that I could do. Huttcourt was the offended party I believe that he complained to eBay but whether they took any action I don't know. George
|
|
|
Post by steamcoal on Jan 28, 2017 3:33:13 GMT
I will disclose that my offending loco came from Huttcourt also.
The certificate coming with the purchase is as far as I am concerned a waste of paper. Its a disaapointment and something I will never repeat again with a fringe seller, even with a Federation certificate being produced.
Its meaningless.
Thats why I would endorse the few legitimate sellers being able to test, they have there whole business reputation to stand in front of, sales, restoration and manufacturing.
Anyway the works of this loco are fine, we can just build another boiler and its a good'n.
End of my story, there is too much good coal to burn to get wound up about it.
|
|
|
Post by steamcoal on May 16, 2017 10:59:05 GMT
Just thought I would update what we found with the HuttCourt (or whatever else he calls himself these days) "LBSC Maisie"
The boiler has been disassembled for a full clean, inspection and boiler test (cleading off) and it was found to have seven (7) boiler leaks.
The owner (not me) is rather philosophical about it and luck for him his day job is....wait for it.... a radiator repairer. Its a caulked boiler so right up his alley.
As for the original boiler certificate, I guess thats in the rubbish bin by now.
We won't do that again.
|
|