"Preserved" steam locos that were subsequently scrapped

Why scrap the bad bits? What's wrong with a cosmetic restoration so that a railway/museum has an impressive static exhibit?


Keith

 

in a word Ellerman Lines ...well, two words. No need

 

I fail to see the logic in that statement. What's wrong with somewhere like the Swanage or Bluebell having a static loco that the public can get up close to and maybe even have their picture 'driving' the said loco? York is a fair distance from a lot of the population.

Why scrap something when you don't need to!


Keith

 

why waste money on putting together the bad bits of several locos when that money could be used by a working loco that the public could get up close too?

 

Because it's a loco with history? Isn't that what we're supposed to be preserving?

And I wouldn't see it as a waste of money - lots of railways spend money on cosmetic restorations, they obviously see merit in it. Take a look at the excellent work that the young volunteers on the NVR have done - should those locos have been scrapped instead?

Let's take 34027 for example. At the end of it's last boiler certificate, the firebox and one of the cylinders were found to be pretty well shot.

There were 3 choices:

1. The owner funds an expensive overhaul leading to a loco fit for many years of work and enjoyment by those who see her and travel behind her.
2. The owner puts it back together and leaves it as a static exhibit until he or someone in the future can afford to repair/replace the loco.
3. Scrap the loco because it's knackered and there is another BoB/WC running anyway.

Thank goodness there are people out there who will reject option 3 as a ridiculous waste and a scrapping of an historic object. You don't seem to share that opinion.

Who says that money given to loco X for a static restoration would be given to loco Y for an overhaul, if loco X was scrapped? People will give to projects that they favour - not just because all the other locos of that class have been scrapped.


Keith

 

There's a world of diference between a loco that's is out of ticket, awaiting repairs and a conglomeration of knackered bits of several locos, with any number of expensive bits missing.

 

I know nothing about that break in other than what was widely reported at the time. The timing was certainly unfortunate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I am not sure how a steel boiler (or even a conventional steel/copper) can be dismissed as "knackered" - not only has a similar sized boiler been built (for Tornado) but practically every bit of a boiler has been replaced on a number of different locos. Wheel-sets have been cast as have cylinders, so nothing irreparable involved.

Steven

 

Preserved locos that have been scrapped is a subject I find very interesting and I have in the past got part way to compiling a list of these combined with those which were in the UK and are now abroad along with those that would have been preserved in the UK but for external factors (the early Barry locos that were scrapped and locos bought for preservation in this country but didn't make it here, of which there are a small number).

I can immediately add two locos to the list of 'scrappers';

VF 1160/1886 an 18" o.4.2T which according to 'The Longmoore Military Railway' (David & Charles 1974) was placed on a pedestal outside the Woolmer guardroom in 1924 but by 1930 had been reduced to a sectioned boiler.

Vincent,R, Reeves,A & Garrett,G 'The Clagsters', a 4wVBT built on a Mk2 coach bogie for the TV programme 'Scrapheap Challenge' and scrapped soon afterwards.

JP

 

Well, even a purely cosmetic "unrebuilding" followed by display as a static exhibit would be better than leaving them to rust, IMHO.

 

Wasnt the 2-4-0 Ryde put aside for preservation at Eastliegh then broken up?

 

W13 Ryde, LSWR 0-6-0Ts 0332 & 0334 and the engine part of the Bug inspection railmotor preserved at Eastleigh were all cut up during the war.

 

To assemble a presentable object comprising of all the dead bits would take a lot of time, lot of manpower and a lot of money. Just plonking a dead boiler on twisted frames with odd wheels and cracked cylinders will result in an eyesore that will achieve nothing. To resurrect a presentable static Merchant would require a tender to be built, motion, cladding, pipework, steam fittings, blah blah blah. It would cost a huge amount of cash as the owners of 35006 and the rest will tell you. Why would a preserved railway want to lose shed space for a no hoper? Who would do this work? Who would contribute to a loco that won't ever be able to work especially when there is a load of them about all with appeals for funds. There are ten Merchants left and they don't have a good track record on preserved lines. Creating a static exhibit out of the broken bits achieves nothing and is completely ludicrous. If any of the remaining dead ones should be resurrected I guess it would be 25 as it had a huge amount of work done on it at the GCR. As to the rest? Eventually spares if there is anything worth salvaging.

 

hi martin,
the very sad story of the fate of Beyer Peacock 2-4-0T Ryde has been well documented by the IOWSR. it was cut up for scrap in april 1940, having been stored in the eastleigh paintshop for some 5 years. the other stored locos in the paintshop were all useful for spare parts and survived till after WW2. Ryde had no such use being obsolete once fellow class member Wroxall was cut up in 1933 at eastleigh.
one of the most interesting locos was LBSCR terrier 83 'Earlswood', purchased by the SR in 1932 as a source of spares and not cut up till 1949, at the same time a number of other cannobalised terriers were cut up at eastleigh.
cheers,
julian

 

See post 4: https://www.national-preservation.c...re-subsequently-scrapped.415389/#post-1045573

I don't think that is quite true. A good number of elderly locos were due to be scrapped around 1938-40 but were put in store against a possible shortage of motive power during the war, which by then was obviously impending. They were mostly cut up between about 1945-1948 when the war was over, and new Bulleid pacifics were being produced at a rapid rate to fill gaps in motive power. The Drummond Bug, Ryde and the Beyer-Peacock 0-6-0T clearly had no use as even stop-gap motive power, so weren't stored. My best guess is that they were scrapped more for patriotic reasons, i.e. during a "Spitfire drive" to show the railway was contributing. An awful lot of things from many walks of life were scrapped in the early years of the war in a fashion that was probably more psychologically reassuring than actually materially useful - for example, aluminium saucepans or iron railings.

Interestingly, not only did the carriage body of the Drummond Bug survive, but also the under frame. The carriage body was grounded at Eastleigh and became the wood yard foreman's office until the mid 1970s, whereupon it was acquired and transported away for preservation. The under frame had its middle driving wheels removed to produce a bogie wagon and was used internally within the works for transporting various large components; I believe it was finally condemned at some point in the 1950s.

Tom

 

Possibly the same people who contributed to the cosmetic restoration of Winston Churchill?

 

But again, Winston Churchill was essentially a complete loco (minus the bits pinched for 35029) in ex-service condition. A whole lot different to a pile of discarded and faulty bits needing pretty much every fitting and motion part to be made for it to make it suitable for display . Fine, assemble the parts and store the loco away against future possibilities (a la 5224) but to bring it to a form suitable for exhibition is plain daft.

 

And of course a lot of those railings were no use at all as sources of metal for war production and ended up being dumped at sea.

 

Have to say that the loss of say 35011, wouldnt be an issue for me, if the boiler, and any other usable parts were used to keep another of the class running, or to help another no hoper, isnt there one with a cracked cylinder? if 35028 had a overhauled boiler to drop straight in, wouldnt that be a better use of availible parts,