National Railway Museum

So is Stepney, Bluebell, Birch Grove, 9017, 75027, 80100, 2650, Sharpthorne, 592.......I could go on

Peter

 

That depends on your view of what museums are for.

But as @torgormaig says, there is an opportunity cost to taking on another loco. Yes, we could restore (or at least, for the time being, store) the D class - but you then have to say "which loco will you push back in the overhaul queue, and which will you move from undercover to outside storage?" Any de-accessioning from the NRM would likely need to go to the Bluebell Railway Trust (because of museum de-accession rules) and they already own 592, 263, 65; all but entirely own 80151 and may well soon come to own 72. That's quite a lot of responsibility; the likelihood of taking on 737 would be to further set back the overhaul of one of those.

Tom

 

Interesting take from someone in the know, thanks @Jamessquared I just prefer seeing an engine living and in steam, rather than dead.

 

Nothing beats a living engine, but a well looked after locomotive in a museum is infinitely better than something rusting under a tarpaulin in a cluttered siding...

You can't steam everything nor should you aim to.

 

The moment you steam it, you destroy originality.

There's a balance to be struck, not every engine needs to be museum-preserved as was, but equally not every engine needs to be steamed.

 

Sorry, disagree. What constitutes originality?.on the real railway, components were constantly replaced

 

Yes, but then it stopped when it entered the museum.

Yes, the original Rocket is not the original Rocket as it rolled out at Rainhill, but it's still a snapshot into early railway engineering. Imagine the work that would need to get it out, and the damage to original materials and their physical context.

To say that all engines should be repaired and steamed has to be a nonsense. Locomotion?

Thus every artefact has a degree of original and later replacement components, but that is the state it is preserved in. That is the point of museum preservation, to preserve artefacts for future generations of scholars and visitors.

We don't know what somebody of the future might want to study, which is why we don't destroy it. 1960's lubrication of axle-boxes? Clean out and re-do, and you've lost it.

 

IMO the NRM doesn't need to deaccession any more of its priceless artefacts. It could send any surplus vehicles out on loan, constantly refreshing the displays at Shildon and York, and allowing people to see engines like No 563 in a different context. But why take them out of public ownership?

If they need to make space, there's a certain Japanese railcar that has no relevance to our history.

 

Each to their own, and we all have different opinions, and I'm not for one minute suggesting that very early stuff like Locomotion is steamed, and I do get that they display early engineering.

Overall, though, I just find museum preservation a bit sterile somehow, it doesn't represent the railway as I remember it, grimy 8Fs, leaking steam, hauling rusty 16 tonners, blue Met Camm, Birmingham and Cravens dmus, class 40s, the incredible character and atmosphere of Manchester Victoria....take me back....

 

I disagree about the Shinkansen, not least because it inverts the idea that Britain gave the world railways. But the more important point is that 737 represents a part of railway history in the NRM and, for those who accuse the NRM of being ECML biased, not from an LNER constituent.

The deaccession of 563 has gone well. But it’s 2 years into running; let’s see where we are in a decade’s time before saying “it’s great”.

 

It was a great decision to deaccession 563 and we won't need to wait until it's out of ticket to continue to prove that.

 

Why was it a great decision?

 

Because now it's a runner, before it wasnt. Compare and contrast... "Here is 563, it hasn't turned a wheel in years, it's all original, it hasn't been touched since Arnold Fringe, a Nine Elms fitter lubricated it in 1945"

" yeah like big wow"
Or,

"Here is 563, it hadn't turned a wheel in years, now it's been fully restored to working order"

"What a fantastic machine, great restoration job, it looks and sounds great"

 

Personally, I don't have a problem with locos being put back into steam. I'm very much in the Coiley-Bellwood mould. My one caveat is that things should be done in the way they were, replicating what was or would have been and not using welded fabrications in place of riveted ones, for example. The skills of yesteryear should be continued. Even worse, metric fastenings instead of imperial ones.
Before anyone jumps in, it's obvious that not everyything can run at once and I'm happy for things to be rotated over what may be many years. If it's thirty or more years before 563 runs again after this ticket, so be it.
With regards to 563, that wonderful and skilfully repaired firebox would have never been seen by so many if it had not been replaced.

 

Strongly agree with the last post, if 563 is in a long overhaul queue at the end of its ticket, then it's just reverted to its static status, so nothing lost

 

Lost what, though? Once its been analysed and recorded, what then? Its not like a personal sniff-test, or anything- these things are purely academic, although I do understand where you're coming from.
But the Wainwright D? Lode Star? Gladstone? Who exactly do they benefit in their current condition? Pretty in a museum, something for tourists to photograph. Thats all.
The trouble with "preservation" in the UK is it is just too dynamic. There is a real pull to have the "stuffed and mounted", unstuffed. Like pharaohs trumpets, slthough that is probably not a great analogy, given the outcome.
Personally, I could think of no greater tribute to the Stephenson Locomotive Society than to have "Gladstone" steamed and running again, 100 years after its original preservation in 1927. Something unthinkable then.
But then in my defence, I am very, very biased
Edit- if ever found in a long overhaul queue, such engines should just resort to their former status as "museum display"

 

We don't know what is lost, as we don't know what question will be asked. That's the point.
After all, we had plenty of pictures of the Doric arch at Euston, so it's no great shakes it's demolished, right?

 

Nobody is suggesting the scrapping of anything. Come on, now.

 

The Shinkansen is a waste of space in the NRM. I assume it's only retained because "it's popular" and to avoid offending the Japanese.

I agree that the transfer of 563 has gone well, and it is much better as a working exhibit than stuffed and mounted. It didn't need to be deaccessioned to achieve this. As a national treasure, it deserves a place in the National Collection, wherever it happens to be displayed or operated.

 

I agree with you on deaccessioning, and you'll find my comments from the time if you look - I'm just delighted that things have turned out so well.

As for NRM collection policy, I stand by my views - the Shinkansen serves as a powerful reminder of the global traffic in railway ideas.