Bluebell Railway General Discussion

To do what? Like most other railways The Bluebell has too many engines awaiting overhaul already without needing another one to add to the list. Leave it where it is where its graceful lines and colourfull livery can be admired by all.

Peter

 

And, more importantly, it's stored in a nice, snug, gently heated indoor environment.

 

Where it's dead and lifeless, unlike 563 which is now doing the job it was intended to do

 

May I demur, as definitely as I politely may.

 

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"

 

How do you know it was blue? Wasn't everything in black and white back then?

 

Some were still green! There's some great footage on YouTube of Victoria then, just as it was when I was a kid in the late 60s, it's called Steam loco adventure, parts 1,2 and 3, Gandey Dancer productions, there's even one of the Bury leckies on too, near Woodlands Road

 

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.