Modern traction, stuff like Sprinters, Pacers, Voyagers. In future will people want to preserve them

Thank you - that's the one I couldn't think of.

 

+1

 

And it's unfortunately that very mindset that led to us losing 10000/1...

 

I'm not 100% sure on that one. I believe you've hit the nail on the head when it comes to the "nostalgia factor" of enthusiasts, which moves on a sort of linear conveyer belt. In the 1970's enthusiasts love to work on 1950's built standard steam engines, in the 2030's (maybe even 2020's) there will be the desire by groups to preserve and run 66's. This is proven as today we are seeing 1970's/1980's era stuff being chased by enthusiasts who have already successfully saved 58's and HST vehicles. I see no reason why this won't continue. I guess the above paragraph is the only one I've written that actually answers the original poster's question!!

However that is the supply, but what of the demand? Preservation has only been going 50 odd years and there is an inherent steam bias, driven by what the public wants to see, that remains prevalent and is certainly not following the shifting linear enthusiasts attitude, and we must acknowledge this. In the late 1960's, our steam railways were being grown by directors who believed that a 5 year old standard 9 was good, but a 10 year old diesel was not what they were about. We have moved on 40 years since then, but has a 10 year old diesel (i.e. a 66) become any more acceptable to the boards of most of our preserved railways? One factor to consider, I know of many aspiring preservationists in my age group (20's), some are even preserved rly directors, and they have exactly the same "steam or nothing" approach that the boys who lived through steam have. By the way, please don't read into the above that I'm trying to say a predominantly steam model is wrong, far from it. I've always believed steam is always the top of the bill in the preserved railway world.

I have attempted to base 60 year old railcars onto several lines and have been refused on many occasions, not through the credibility of the future plan for them, but simply because they don't want any more of them, they wanted more operational steam locomotives, as that is what the business required. If railways in 2017 are turning down 60 year old first generation units as they aren't nostalgic or commercial enough, then I just can't see how a 150 is going to be accepted in 2047, they are going to hit the same wall that us diesel groups are hitting today...

Everyone has made some good points, I daresay some of mine are probably biased! I would like to think (hope) that for historical record and nostalgia that at least one example of most of the more modern types is preserved, maybe some on the odd heritage line for selected diesel days (1980's weekend anyone?) and maybe others in a static/museum environment.

I kind of agree with some others on here, what I don't really want to see is the needless preservation of 20 odd class 142's which immediately clog up all of our existing railways and then sit there to rot away. I would rather see one or two saved and then looked after. "Modern" preservation must be more targeted and selective than 1960's/1980's preservation of we're to stand a chance of retaining a good historical selection.

Sent from my HTC Desire 620 using Tapatalk

 

The really big downer on Pacers is the 4 wheel layout rather than being a bogie vehicle.
They wreck jointed track, so unless the line concerned is fully CWR then expect track renewals a lot earlier than with 1st Gen DMU's

 

Nope! - for several good reasons:
space - what do you suggest should be disposed of to make space??
market - the public want heritage - preferably steam for the majority. Only avid enthusiasts would regard the units you quote as being "heritage" and worse still they offer a very poor travel experience compared with loco hauled 1960's or earlier stock & 1st generation DMU's.
volunteers - how many folk in reality are willing to roll their sleeves up for the units you mention

Yes they may have passing historical significance but if folk feel there really is a heritage market for such units why are there no proposals to start a new "heritage rly" scheme set in a well post 1968 era rather than compromising the "brands" of the lines we are so lucky to have now?

 

There’s a genuine issue of image with sliding door stock, which shouldn’t be underestimated. However, I struggle with the idea that the latest generation should only be preserved if it goes somewhere new and different. I do however agree completely that small scale, selective, preservation is necessary, not the bulk buying that went on with 1st generation diesel locos.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

One issue is that Pacers, 150s etc are not particularly attractive internally, and are not much different to a modern train, unlike a 1st Generation DMU, which do look like a “proper train” and have the advantage of running on the traditional railway for many years.

I think a 150 and 142 could be useful on a heritage line for off peak services, and I do think a 66 should be preserved. The argument that they didn’t work with steam falls down as, on occasions, they have visited heritage railways, and preserved steam works alongside them on the main line. Also if you want to tell the story of the railways, it doesn’t stop with the end of steam, in the late 60s, or with the end of 1st generation locos/units in the 80s

 

I do think this next batch of preservation needs to be selective. To me, there was too much bulk buying of things like 31s, 37s and, in particular 50s. Another thing is that I feel that electric units such as 323s etc will go the same way as 304s did, disappear, nowhere to run or keep them.

 

Does that also apply to the 1st gen railbuses, like the AC Cars and W&M machines?

 

Or goods wagons and Victorian 4/6 wheel coaches?

 

The 50s were a peculiar madness, over a third survive; (about the same ratio as Deltics) I'd even consider them second generation machines compared to especially a 31. Electric units sadly look doomed to only ever be static or hauled exhibits, which is a shame. But after a hurried phase of steam, then a period of laissez-faire about diesels when suddenly a load of 50s got bought, then yes: more consideration needs to be applied to the next generation. Again, a shame the prototype HST set never survived.

 

Its not too late to cut up a lot more 50's.......................

 

According to Preserved Diesels, 18 Class 50 survive. How many are serviceable, or being worked on?

 

I think No2 , 19, 21 and 33 are long term projects that have run in the past. 2's owners had been well a truly shafted by a 3rd party, 33 was a runner until the Science Mueseum decided to discard it, but other than that 7,8,15,17,26,27,31,35,42,44,49 and 50 seem to be in good order, the only 2 I haven't mentioned are 29 and 30 and they're a long term job at Peak Rail, even though 30 was a runner when withdrawn. A lot of people do comment on the number of 50's preserved, but I don't think they realise how closely the various owning groups work together with each other to ensure this happens.

 

Thanks for that - a very good set of results and congrats to all concerned.

I found the new-look Preserved Diesels utterly impossible to navigate; it seems to no longer list individual locos on my machine, just a page with bare minimum facts. Is this true for anyone else or once again, is it just me?

 

'Toplight's' question has already been superseded by events. The Class 141 'Pacers' have already been in preservation for more than 15 years and at least one of them is used extensively by its host railway, winter and summer. Despite what some people would dearly like to believe passengers (ie the general public) don't run away when they see them, and during one famous summer holiday period when one stood in for a broken steam engine for a number of weeks takings at the box office hardly altered. The railway concerned has a lot of young families amongst its visitors and many times mothers are heard to say to their children 'look these are what trains were like when I was a little girl'.
Second generation traction has quite a few advantages, primarily concerning access for disabled people and those with youngsters in prams and push-chairs, running costs are very low and the technology isn't difficult to get your head round, given that it's already 30 or more years old. Used sensibly this form of traction can subsidise a predominantly-steam railway as Chris has already said or can make or break a new generation line.
Elsewhere we have the prototype HST and its coaches and the Class 56s and 58, none of which ran alongside steam, and yet all have found their place.
I am old enough to have heard people arguing that 'standard' steam locos had no place in preservation, and then that diesels should not be preserved, and now it's Class 66s and second-generation units. In the end there will be a good representation of the whole of the history of railways for others to look at in the future but this debate will crop up every six months or so and in the end it won't change the course of preservation one bit, because in the end it's largely a matter of personal choice what people invest their money in.

 

Whilst pacers are much reviled, the view from them is very good so if the track issues can be resolved then they may be a good choice for many lines in the future

 

If the Swanage to Wareham services continue to be a success, then I think it's highly likely that a couple of Sprinters might be purchased for the purpose one day.

The Swanage railway has stated that more stock would be need to expand the services in future. Also in say 10 years time when the class 117 and bubble car need more major work, it would probably make more sense to buy more modern DMUs instead should they be available.

 

Just you bloody try it pal... Although all that copper and brass on anything from Swindon would be a tad more worthwhile