Tyseley Single Wheeler.

'xactly so. Tyseley have made their position clear: they've twice taken their eye off the ball on the day job, and both times ended up in a mess, so have no intention of doing so in the near future, thus the Bloomer project is largely on ice. Because its largely on ice they are doing nothing to solicit funds for it. Well, better than than take money, stuff it in a bank account and do little or nothing with it. Its a reasonable approach.
They've also said that if another person or group of people want to take on the organisational commitment they dare not give it, so they can treat the work as part of the day job, they'll be very happy. Fair enough.
But your position, Harry/Mencken is a bit less logical. That you are disappointed that the project is on ice/halted is very understandable. But you keep making posts that to an outsider look as if they are geared to discourage any group of people from getting together to enable the project to make progress again. That seems rather contrary. Perhaps you should rethink? The time to rail against Tyseley would be if its taken out of the works and stuffed under a tarpaulin in a corner to rust, as has happened to far too many other stalled projects round the country.

 

Thanks for that, but I am certainly not "an ideal candidate" (for various reasons) and so must decline.

My work on this project was done from May 1986 until it fizzled out around 1990. I now have other work in hand which seems far more important to me.

 

That's easy, Platform 3. I have little or no interest in most of the threads. The engines that ran in "the glorious years" (to me, that's a laugh) of the 1960s, and those I remember from my childhood, seem to be well-covered here by enthusiasts for them, so there's no point in my butting in. Or trading insults or "witty" retorts.

But when (years ago) someone told me about two Bloomer threads on here, these were engines I knew about, and was interested in. So I had a look at the NP board. Of course nobody remembers them, so they are of little concern to most folk.

 

OK, if some new group were to start a proper watertight fund for this project I'd say good luck to them, and hope that their efforts would succeed.

What I don't want to see is people sending money in the belief that it is for one specific project, when it might be used for other things. Maybe I am wrong in thinking this does or might happen. And I'm not railing against Tyseley, just being careful. Way back on this (or the other, now closed) thread there were complaints about cheques sent, and the absence of any reply to Miff's question (#269 on 10th August) looks odd, to say no more.

 

So.... According to heritage railway magazine on page 12 of their latest addition this is planned to be in steam in just over 2 years. Page 12. If anyone has the heritage railway app downloaded on their phone/tablet then you should be able to read it. I think the first 12 pages are free to read.

 

If true, this is very exciting. This would be the most important and significant of all new build projects: representing a railway which is woefully underrepresented in preservation, an era which is almost forgotten, a type of loco which was once extremely common and of which I think there are no operational examples (single, at least standard gauge single).
That's much more important than an express Mikado of which there was only ever a single class of six, and which were essentially a short lived disappointment.
However, we've had our hopes raised before, so I won't be getting too excited just yet...

 

Excellent news. Hopefully just intime for GB XII

 

Any more than what is said above? Are they asking for funds?

 

Neither shall I.

Another recent magazine article contained a similarly enthusiastic forecast: see message #261 on this thread dated 7th August 2016. This produced only one very brief response from Tyseley's "Mr Vintage-Trains". I can find nothing about the subject on Tyseley's website, and can only wonder where journalists get these stories from.

At least this one doesn't repeat the persistent "vermilion livery" myth, but he repeats Col. Kitson Clark's theory that the nickname Bloomer arose because the engine "unashamedly showed all of its wheels" - which makes no sense at all in an LNWR context in 1851.

 

Similar news in this month's SR

 

And coaches too!

Am I correct in reading it as saying a donation has been received allowing completion of the work on the driving wheel set (crank axle) and that they are at last encouraging fund raising for the rest of the work?

 

Oh grow up, for Gods sake! This is surely the news you've wanted to hear for a while. As as regards where do these journalists get there stories from I should imagine someone from the top at Tyseleys and had a chat with someone at Morton's. I really can't understand some of the negativity as regards this and the T3, we're not even a week into April and 2 (pretty decent good news) stories seem to already have the doubting Thomas's twitching. Give me strength.

 

Well surely it's come about as Tyseley have just had a big meeting giving their plans for the future. And I'm guessing that this must have been discussed.

 

That's great news and I will send my small donation, once details of how to do so are published.

 

Also if as the article has stated that a donation was left in a will for the bloomer then that might be another reason Tyseley have decided to complete her. If the money was ring fenced for that specific project then it can't be spent elsewhere. So Tyseley might as well spend it rather than just sit on it.

 

So will I . Looking forward to seeing it.

 

Exciting times for TYS. Now about 4121...

 

Well hurrah and huzzah! Let's calmly await events and see what happens.

 

Some of us on Nat Pres don't do things calmly? Have you any idea how quickly the corrosive air from Gas Street Basin can corrode a peice of metal? Then of course there's all that water you have to put into the boiler to make steam...