7027 Thornbury Castle

As far as I can see there is no solution she's gone. The GCR don't want to get involved and the 4709 group don't want to sell their locomotive hence why most have gone silent on this and resigned to her fate, I suppose the only thing that might change things is if the GWS actually admit they have something to do with it and step in, but that's looking very unlikely, from recollection the GWS AGM is normally in the autumn, if the 47 group have any sense they will make sure she is well stripped and dispersed by then to prevent any potential banana skins.

 

Obviously the polite request would need to be accompanied by a very generous offer of cash. I am sure they would be very happy to sell if offered enough (i.e. enough to get them well on the way towards a new No.7 boiler for their project and something towards the desired Star); but it seems unlikely that such an offer will be forthcoming.

 

One of the easiest solutions proposed so far; let the 4709 group have the boiler they've purchased and let the young people continue assisting where they're useful. If this really is a game changer in terms of preservation generally, swallow the bitter pill, learn the lesson and apply the knowledge to where it can actually make a difference.

No need to trouble yourself trying to look beyond the negativity, it was a negative post in response to yet another person saying; 'someone needs to start doing the hard work, but it won't be me', while for whatever reason simultaneously trying to pin the fault on the whole spectrum of younger volunteers for not stepping up now to sort out the problem the grown-ups couldn't for 50 years.

 

To me, the ideal solution would be that the 4709 group / GWS, announce that they will now restore 7027 first, whilst continuing to work on repairing and assembling the frames of 4709, with the intension that once in traffic 7027 will be available for hire, and possible mainline use, hopefully the steaming fees, plus fund raising, will give a degree of funding to allow work to continue on the 47, with the intention that when 7027,s boiler ticket expires, the 47, will be ready to take its place, along with the proper number8 boiler.

 

I’ve no idea what the 4709 group do or don’t want (they appear to be a bunch of fantasists) but where has it been said the GCR don’t want to get involved? I’ve seen very little comment from their side one way or another. If I’ve read JJP’s piece correctly he’s had an initial conversation with them and will get back to them if he is able to secure the loco. From what I’ve seen elsewhere the team which has spent 2 years working on this loco would like to carry on, if a suitable agreement & funding was in place. As for funding, the GCR has already proved it can raise large sums for the right project (e.g. reunification). I would contribute to a GCR/DCRT led fundraising initiative. I certainly wouldn’t contribute to a GWS one, at least while they are harbouring loco butchers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And where do you propose the funding will come from? As far as I can see, the 4709 group are struggling to raise the necessary money to build one loco (hence the proposed short cut on the boiler); and your solution seems to be to double up by building / restoring two.

"once in traffic 7027 will be available for hire, and possible mainline use, hopefully the steaming fees, plus fund raising, will give a degree of funding to allow work to continue on the 47"​

Even if that scheme worked, it is probably getting on for £1m+ down the track before any of those steaming fees start to arrive: if the 4709 group could raise that sort of money, they'd be able to finish 4709 and would have no need of 7027. Not to mention the small issue that presumably the 4709 group exist because they want to see a 4709 running, not put it on the back burner for a couple of decades while they restore a Castle. If they wanted to restore a Castle, they could be doing that ...

Tom

 

I would be interested to know who actually owns 7027 right now. In fact I would be interested to know who owns the rest of the bits that comprise '4709'. GWS, GWP, or other? On Monday one of the main architects behind the project stated on Facebook that the boiler from 2861 - originally earmarked for the 47xx - is not actually owned by the GWS or GWP, but by Vale of Glamorgan Council. Far be it for me to suggest that this situation was deliberately orchestrated so that the GWS/GWP would have no control over it...

The GWS AGM is on Saturday 8th October, on Zoom. I was told by a GWS Director a few days ago that written comments always have to go through a moderator.

Members' Area | Didcot Railway Centre

 

I'm ready with a few Ks to go towards 7027, but as already said, until the 4709 group speak up and reply to those in a position to buy the loco back (JJP) it'll all be for naught.

 

JJP made a comment on FB along the lines of "the GCR have washed their hands of it, the GWS are silent and the 4709 group are ignoring me". This is after he made formal enquiries about the loco. And from another comment on FB, it appears the JJP is now in a better financial situation than he was when he initially sold the loco. Until JJP (who has the finances to at least save the loco) hears back from whoever has the loco now, there is pretty much zero point in starting any sort of group.

There's already a captive audience for forming such a group - those that signed the petition. Even if only 10% are willing to help in some way, it's a start.

Pretty much. It doesn't help that there are those on here that want to dismiss any idea of saving the loco because "it's a big task" (no way?) and "where are you going to find an engineer", "where are you going to find the money", as if these things haven't been done before in the railway preservation movement.

The same people saying "it'll be too difficult" are the same ones saying "why don't you start a society". Very odd!

 

The GCR must have had an idea it was coming up for sale so did Mr Gregory discuss with them. Would they have been interested or able to buy it themselves ? Seems to me he floated the idea of selling it in Trackside magazine perhaps just to test the water of who might be interested and the 47xx group swooped in quick and made a move. Doubtful there were any other offers on the table so it would have been either accept or decline.

 

Thanks for that, I might try and dial in. I assume there is a process for members to get items onto the agenda so I wonder if any of the various murmurings will come into the open during the process, one would hope that a simple question querying the make up of the 4709 group and their formal relationship to the GWS should get past moderation?

Interesting what you say about ownership, strange that the GWS were able to gift the boiler to the Churchward County project, albeit perhaps that with the approval of VGC. I assume that 7027 is still at the GCR, but one would assume that as she is taking up valuable shed space and no longer in the ownership of anyone associated with the railway (nor bringing in any contract income) they would be looking to get her off the premises sharpish?

 

With what legal capacity could the GCR actually stick their oar in? Obviously what remains is still on their property, but they don't own it and it would appear there is currently no contract in place to say that if X amount of work has been completed on it, it has to remain there?

Other than saying, 'if you can buy it, we'll store it', in what other ways are people expecting them to get involved?

 

The boiler and tender body currently reside on a couple of well wagons in the southern headshunt at Quorn - or that's where they were last Saturday...

 

If it is so easy these days then crack on, which role are you taking up? I've got more than enough loco stuff on the go as it is, just like 1472 has, no room for more.

And I'll repeat, some time ago I was supposed to have been heavily involved with the restoration of 7027, so no more childish 'warming the gas axe up' comments please.

Easy to flip things round and say 'no point talking to GWS/4709/GCR etc unless there is a serious group and not just an individual waiting in the wings to take it on'

Personally I feel if JJP bought it tomorrow to allow a group to be formed to purchase it he'd be stuck with it.

How many years did it take to raise the funds to overhaul a complete Pendennis??

I'd love to see 7027 saved but it needs the movement to actually save it, which apparently they are desperate to do, if here is to be believed. More action, less words. 1472 has kindly offered assistance regarding the setting up a suitable group, generous of him considering everything he has on the go. Hopefully his offer will be taken up.

 

A very unhappy tale and not one that sits well with me as a railway enthusiast and preservationist.

Although she is one of eight castles, she is a unique castle, and also totally unsuitable for a Star conversion (being one of the later batches).

There's been much hand wringing and lots of back and forth, but it looks like there's an element of "like it and lump it" now.

An incredibly disappointing end to Thornbury Castle's story and I reckon in decades to come we will look back on this as a very unhappy event for railway preservation.

 

4709,Is'nt even a wheeled chassis yet, and if past history with other engines is anything to go by, there will be a lot of reworking to have to be done, if the job is to be done properly so possibly a longer time span will happen anyway how much to finish 7027? compared to the costs involved with 4709, some costs will on the boiler be needed anyway, Then theres the PR side of it, lets assume given a clear road, and enough people to work on 7027, it could possibly steam in 3-4 years, then theres a ten year period where by the 47, can be progressed and fund raising to build it done, the real heavy expenditure is the boiler, the frames, assembling, machining cylinders etc, and getting a rolling bottom end, whilst still expensive, isnt as great as the boiler, how much harder will it be to raise the money, if your organisation has been tainted and viewed as having scrapped an engine that was restorable, where as a change of plan, and commitment to restore the Castle , would gain much needed support, which could then, be milked to ensure the survival of both engines,

 

[QUOTE

The GWS AGM is on Saturday 8th October, on Zoom. I was told by a GWS Director a few days ago that written comments always have to go through a moderator.
[/QUOTE]

Why is the 2022 GWS AGM to take place on zoom?

The use of that medium was expedient and exceptionally tolerated when covid restrictions were in place. I doubt that a remote AGM satisfies constitutional requirements or the wishes of the membership now that restrictions are no longer in place.

Or is this just a way of "going through the motions" without the inconvenience of properly fielded questions from the floor?

 

I can go and see Quee

Why is the 2022 GWS AGM to take place on zoom?

The use of that medium was expedient and exceptionally tolerated when covid restrictions were in place. I doubt that a remote AGM satisfies constitutional requirements or the wishes of the membership now that restrictions are no longer in place.

Or is this just a way of "going through the motions" without the inconvenience of properly fielded questions from the floor?[/QUOTE]
Do you think some people are worried about being asked to justify their actions?

 

Much as it’s not something I’d like to do Simon, we can give our own ‘like it or lump it’ attitude to those apparently in charge of 4709/GWS by simply not giving our time, money or goodwill regarding this project.
I know I sound awful person for saying it but there we go.
5164, 7802 and 7812 can be the next GW beneficiaries of anything spare of the above I have.