Current and Proposed New-Builds

The confusion between conservation and preservation in the minds of museum curators lacking engineering experience, has contributed to the change of strategic direction at the NRM which is so unpopular with most enthusiasts.

 

I guess that you could say that 9351 has preserved the majority of 5193 from being scrapped? It's also running with a GWR preserved tender?

I wouldn't say 60163 Tornado is a preserved engine as such but at some point in the future, (assuming it's kept in one piece!) it will become something that 'someone' is 'preserving' for future generations. 32424 has a preserved GNR boiler and as a new build, will be preserved for future generations as part of The Bluebell fleet.

 

And it's those kind of permutations that mean that I don't think the distinction is especially useful, so prefer to distinguish between items retained as part of a collection, and those owned purely for a commercial purpose. That acknowledges that, say, Tornado to be viewed through the same lens as 9351 and 35006, despite the significant differences between the three.

 

But as you are destroying historical material to do it, by the above logic it isn't "preserving" (

I don't think that's at all fair. You wouldn't expect, eg the Book of Kells to be taken out and read on a daily basis, or the suits of armour from the tower worn for jousting. It is entirely valid to say that taking an artefact out and subjecting it to wear is damaging irreplaceable material (as any replacement will be non-original).

Arguably the purpose of a national collection is to perserve, in original condition, key artefacts.

We are in the happy position in this country of having collections of other preserved engines that are modified/repaired etc to allow them to be run and enjoyed. That is distinct from the musuem purpose of the national collection.

 

I wrote nothing at all about whether the NRM policy changes were justified or not. Your allegation has no foundation.

 

Without comment on what the right policy might be, I think it's at least debateable whether the purpose of a national collection is to retain those artefacts in original condition. That is to confuse the roles of archive and museum, where the museum involves interpretation rather than mere retention.

 

No, I referred to your comment about a "confusion" between conservation and preservation.
I don't see any evidence of confusion, but a (perfectly justifiable) view other than the one which is apparently "so unpopular with most enthusiasts".
I say that is an unfair position to take.

 

But is interpretation to be pursued at risk of damage?

The Book of Kells is on display, but in controlled conditions to avoid wear that would come if it were in use.

If you use a steam engine you change it from it's condition as was - bearings get worn, fireboxes get burned, boilers get stressed.

If you are going to argue interpretation, it's worth noting that most preserved railways do not accurately preserve any specific era.

That's not to say that preserved railways are not a good thing, but it's important to be aware that every use destroys original material. Which is a luxury we have, as we have a collection of unmodified engines.

 

There are two separate questions here, and they're getting mixed up.

One is about the implications of use, where I agree with you that usage has consequences. The other is about the difference between a museum and an archive.

Many museums have archives, but many archives are not attached to museums. The role of the archive is to preserve the artefacts, so that in future people can look at what is contained and ask questions of them. A museum's role is to display and interpret it's collection.

The role of curators is to consider the balance of the two aspects of a museum's role. That is ultimately a matter of judgment.

None of the above has anything to do with preserved railways, where I would agree with the broad thrust of your comment.

 

It is a matter of judgement, I agree. But the idea that it is wrong to refuse to steam something from the national collection is well within the scope of that judgement.

 

Read the various papers and statements issued by the Science Museum Group over the last decade or so. As it happens, and it does occasionally, I largely agree with @35B 's comments.

 

I completely agree

 

You can add another 5 just on one railway in the lop left corner of Wales! Just because they aren't Standard Gauge, doesn't mean they are models, and they were built for a job of work just as much as any of the SG locos - arguably more so than the Didcot based ones.

Namely:- Earl of Merioneth (which has been around sufficiently long that it's totally worn out and has been withdrawn), David Lloyd George, Taliesin (the first loco to be built on the crowdfund model, some 19 years ahead of Tornado), Lyd and James Spooner. There are others, Tom Rolt on the Talyllyn is as much a new build as the Saint or 9351, as well as a host of Coffee Pots (whether replica or not) and other quirky new builds that are really closer to toys than useful locos.

John

 

Not to mention a replica “Rocket” (several in fact): “Sans Pareil”, Novelty”, “Locomotion”, “Steam Elephant”, a Trevethick replica, “Firefly, “Lord of the Isles” etc. but they don’t count because none of them is likely to go mainline (*) nor can they be painted in BR livery …

(*) though watch this space for one of them
…

Tom

 

and the two on the Corris...

 

Lord of the Isles?

 

I thought the distinction isn't usually applied to NG as it wasn't subject to the hard stop as on the national sg network

 

That's a very good point! We often overlook the narrow-gauge scene, but they can be more innovative than standard gauge heritage railways.

As well as new locos, a number of new carriages have been built for use on the narrow gauge. I don't think that has yet happened on British standard gauge heritage lines? If new standard gauge carriages ever do get built, what will they be? Replicas of historic designs or completely new designs?

 

My mistake - “Iron Duke”, one of those big broad gauge things, for which an Austerity bravely gave its life. (But all GWR locos look the same, so easy mistake to make …)

Tom

 

I actually missed that. My tongue in cheek response was with regard to your ‘watch this space’ comment