North Staffordshire 0-6-2T

Tim's list is a good start for that.

 

I wonder if funding comes into the matter, you would think it would be easier to apply/get for funding if the item is in your own name?

 

Tim's list is of items he seems to want removed, nothing to say what he would want as replacements, without which the NRM would be rather empty. So come on, how would you rebalance the NRM?

 

Lots of interesting points above. A few thoughts in reply:

I'm not expecting that the either NRM preserves everything or displays everything at Shildon or York. It makes complete sense for the NRM to enter partnerships with other preservation groups to enable a wider collection to be better presented to a wider public, especially where there is strong local interest. My concern is that there is no partnership. The loco has been disposed of. The NRM has no further responsibility for its future. In the short term it is certain that the NSR loco will have a bright future at Foxfield. But none of us can predict the longer term future. What if the Foxfield falls on hard times, as the current generation of members passes on, and the donations dry up? Who can guarantee that the loco won't be disposed of, left to rot or converted to a Thomas character? Or is that in the small print. None of this is aimed at the Foxfield in particular, who are a wonderful bunch. But if the NRM are looking to dispose of more items, especially unique and precious artefacts, then there needs to be some guarantee that they will be looked after in perpetuity by whoever takes them over.

I agree that the balance of the NRM collection is poor, but not just in terms of companies. The NRM is far too biased towards locomotives at the expense of other rolling stock, signalling, trackwork, railway operation, etc.. This is where the preservation movement comes into its own. Organisations like Beamish, The Vintage Carriages Trust, Foxfield, Tanfield, Didcot and many more each tell at least one aspect of the "Story of Railways" far better than the NRM can at York or Shildon. So maybe the NRM could form real partnerships with some of these societies and promote their activities as an extension of the National Collection.

 

The thread is about items being removed form the collection. What has been said is that some items are duplicate and could be given to Trusts. There is no need to replace them,
about half the collection is not on display at any given time.

 

I'm not saying I want anything removed (except perhaps the bullet train, which is an irrelevance). Just making the point that if the NSR 0-6-2T is deemed to be a duplicate then there must be many more items which must be at risk under the same logic.

 

I think it's a no brainer that the TVR tank is better to be in Wales and the NSR tank in Staffordshire. There will be other items too. How about giving 55002 to the DPS to folw an example of yours.?

I'm not saying I want anything removed either, just it might make sense to consider other items being thinned out

 

NSR No.2 is the sixth locomotive to be de-accessioned from the National Collection whilst a seventh never actually part of the collection has passed to a new custodian. Others will follow as the very detailed review of the collection now taking place progresses. To put this in context in addition to the locomotives over seventy other items of rolling stock have been de-accessioned in the last forty years. Obviously any decision requires due deliberation and I am sure that surrounding any vehicle is available on request (FOI) should anyone have such an interest.

It is my understanding that it is a condition of transfer that should the new custodians wish to transfer ownership or dispose of one of these vehicles they must liaise with the National Railway Museum who have first call. The legal position with this is something for others to delve into but it should be noted that the furore of the LNWR Crane a few years ago could have been avoided if the then custodians had fulfilled this obligation.

Obtaining an item of rolling stock is the easy bit. The difficult part is having a plan and finance in place for its long term well being. The National Collection has grown massively since 1975 but this expansion has not been matched with increased covered / suitable accommodation and financial resources. Consequently vehicles have been loaned out or located at third party storage locations. Although the former incurs very little cost the results have on occasions been disastrous and left the NRM with either a bill to put things right or have seen the vehicle scrapped. The latter incurs costs for what is now a very stretched budget and this has nothing to do with a certain A3.

It is often the case that new custodians can offer vehicles a much better future than could the NRM with regard to long term up keep and restoration for a number of reasons.

For those that don't know the seven locomotives are:-

NORD 628 – 230 D 116 4-6-0 Built 1911 (1980 -1439) - To Nene Valley Railway, then to France.

NSR L CLASS No. 2 - 2271 0-6-2T Built 1922 (1978 – 7032) - To Foxfield Railway.

CEGB ‘EUSTACE FORTH’ 0-4-0ST RSH 7063/1942 (1978 – 7007) - To Foxfield Railway.

WD AUSTERITY DESIGN ‘RESPITE’ 0-6-0ST HE 3696/1950 (NC) - Used as source of parts for ‘IRON DUKE’ replica. Remains to Ribble Steam Railway.

CEGB DM ‘BEA CARRINGTON STATION’ 0-6-0DM RSH 7746/1954 (1980 – 7000) - To Tanfield Railway.

BR ENGLISH ELECTRIC CLASS 50 D433 – 50033 ‘GLORIOUS’ Co-Co Built 1958 (1994-7283) - To Swindon Borough Council (STEAM Museum), then to Tyseley Locomotive Works.

NCB 3’0” Gauge DHF ‘ELLINGTON COLIERY 9’ Bo-Bo HE 9227/1986 (2005 – 7600) - To Bowes Railway

 

And who's to say that the NRM has not covered such situations, your talking as though they are a bunch of amateurs rather than professional museum people. If one looks at the Foxfield are they not a registered charity and if they are doing their job right (and why would you doubt them) they will have policy's in place for disposal of historic items should it be necessary, it's the norm when setting up such charities (well it was in those that I've been involved in) but if you are in any doubt why don't you ask them it's not like it's a secret society.

 

But how do you thin out the NRM without removing items?

 

I feel that there was a lack of clarity over the disposal, but that is history really. And I feel that any concerns over the future of the NSR tank are a red herring - it is in a charitable trust now and should be protected. But the message being given out by the NRM concerns me because it suggests that certain parts of railway history aren't important whilst still happily accepting clear duplication elsewhere.

 

What are those complaining about too much NER/GNR/LNER bias (because those companies had the foresight to actually save things!) suggesting is done to tackle this? Many of the locos concerned are too early in design and aged in fabric to be hugely appealing to preserved railways and too small for the mainline, so what does the NRM do? Contact Booths?

It seems rather childish to say 'you didn't save enough of my favourites so I want you to get rid of somebody else's favourites that I am not interested in'! The NRM can't hop in the TARDIS and go back and change what was saved to satisfy the Swindon lobby (the locos wouldn't fit through the TARDIS doors for starters!)

It isn't as though there aren't more GWR loco preserved than any other Company, and some of those are being 'kit-bashed' to form designs that weren't (and in some cases that non-experts would need the difference between them and some that have survived explained with the aid of a tape measure!)

Also don't forget that the new Leicester North Museum will need populating with exhibits, and I seem to recall talk of an outstation in the south - if anything, doesn't the National Collection risk being spread too thinly over too many sites?

To restore balance, then how about partnerships where locos that are not in working order are placed on long term loan by groups or individuals to the NRM for one of its sites if the owners are struggling to afford the next overhaul, or at least while the overhaul is being 'saved up for'? This has already happened, especially with Shildon.

Steven

 

Bunch of amateurs ... no not at all. Professional museum people, yes. Which is why the de-accession of such a precious relic comes as such a surprise and makes me question their priorities.

 

I suspect it is precisely because they are professionals and not enthusiasts (who want to save everything). They have a budget and a remit to portray the history of railways. They no doubt want to do the best they can within those constraints and that may include trimming the collection. I'm happy to leave them at it.

btw, it's not necessarily a priceless relic. It's a fairly non remarkable loco not typical of NSR mainstream and as I understand it, fitted with an NCB boiler. Several locos were rejected for the National Collection for that latter reason alone (certain Scottish 4-4-0 come to mind.)

 

The NRM and the National Collection aren't exactly the same thing. There is only so much that the NRM can do and display at its two main sites, but there is no need for the National Collection to be constrained to what can be crammed into York and Shildon. And it isn't. Much of the National Collection is dispersed throughout the country, including other museums and preserved railways. There is no reason that other significant preserved locos should not become part of the National Collection without necessarily being stuffed and mounted in a museum. The National Collection could embrace artefacts that simply can't be moved (such as the Bowes Railway's incline) as well as artefacts that could be rotated between the main museums and preservation sites.

I'm happy for the NSR loco to be at Foxfield. But I would have preferred it to remain part of the National Collection. It's a unique and priceless part of our heritage.

 

None of the NSR's locos were remarkable, except perhaps the multi-cylinder 0-6-0T. The NSR was an ordinary regional railway company with ordinary engines. This example might not be the perfect representative of NSR practice, but it's all that remains.

Just about every steam loco in the museum has the boiler it was withdrawn with. Not sure how big a deal this is, unless it looks totally wrong.

 

Which is fine if they are given infinite resources, even if it went to Foxfield but was still under NRM ownership, there are still management responsibilities which I'm shure they are trying to get rid of in these times when 'cut everything' is the current government mantra. I too would like the NRM to display more at York & Shildon but whilst there is no money to build more buildings to house stuff they may well look at other solutions which we do not like.

 

And who's to say those items are not on the 'list', someone has already said a review is being undertaken & when it's complete there may be such items that go to other collections. I don't regard the North Staffs 0-6-2 as anything special, such loco's were common place with quite a few very similar examples still surviving up and down the country ( Birch Grove, Lamptons, Taff Vale). What the loco does have is a link to Staffordshire and its now come home so to speak. With such a large number of vehicles out of the public eye, I can easily see why this one was sent to the Foxfield, I wonder what's next?