5972

...someone said words to the effect "so long as 5972 is undercover" or so I thought and I suggested it might be better if 5972 was not undercover, all the sooner to get it back I the mainstream

Yep just read it back, that's what it was until the thread got pulled OT about CoB

 

On the subject of livery (Oh no not again!) I've been of the mind since 45699 was turned out in WCR. (Hogwarts) corporate red, that Mr.Smith may well have done it to retain claim to the livery in case of any possible counter claim by Warner Bros? Maybe the cheapest way for them to do it was to purchase the loco (5972) in 'the' livery. Only a thought, but does anybody else expect 'Galatea' to be turned out in Green any time in the near future ?

 

Hogwarts is almost certainly a trademark or something, but there's plenty of prior art for painting locomotives red. A fight between Warner Brothers and Mattell over James the Red Engine ought to provide entertainment.

However probably highly unwise to paint a Hall red and then name her, for instance, Hogweed Castle. Rowling's and publishers' lawyers would certainly be able to make a few dollars there...

 

I guess the problem is, when the idea of filming came about, the 'Hogwarts' livery applied is barely any difference to British Railway's lined red livery. Of course, the shade is slightly off, but the use of lining and even the tender crest is a blatent replica of the BR Late crest, with the 'ferret' being replaced with Hogwarts insignia.
So if Warner Bro's see an engine in red, with the BR Late Crest, I would not be surprised to hear of their lawyer's chasing up, to be smartly told where to go as the engine owners are not replicating Hogwarts livery, but that the wizard's TOC is merely a fictional variation of a pre-existing paint scheme.

 

Sadly, there is common sense and then there are corporate lawyers - witness the attempt some years back from Hit Entertainment to say that a certain Stroudley-liveried terrier was infringing the Thomas the Tank Engine copyright, until they were informed that the book copied the prototype, not the other way round!

Tom

 

This page gives an interesting summary of how 5972 became the embodiment of Hogwarts Castle: - http://thebeautyoftransport.wordpre...ess-transport-from-the-world-of-harry-potter/
It would appear that J K Rowling hardly bothered with describing the locomotive at the front of the train when it appeared in the first HP book, only subsequently intimating that it might have been a product of Crewe rather than Swindon. Indeed, it is probably the choices made by the artist who produced the cover for the first Bloomsbury edition that later influenced Chris Columbus, director of the first film in the sequence, to reject 34027 in favour of the less modern looking 5972. In which case, thanks should be given that said artist didn't base his locomotive on an A4 because the front end was easier to draw!
Cheers,

 

even I can draw an unrebuilt Bulleid

 

Nevermind any of this, has anyone been able to confirm it!

 

Confirming anything at Carnforth is like getting blood out of a stone

 

Rectangle with 5 circles underneath

 

Like GWR locos tend to be pointy with also five circles underneath.

 

Think you'll find that's those Doncaster things

 

6 isn't it?

 

Might grip better if you leave the rear one off

 

Re-reading the thread again this evening and I accept many of the very salient points about the locomotive being under cover, Mr Smith's to do with as he pleases, and similar.

Yet I feel pangs of annoyance still. This was a locomotive restored through volunteers over a long period to return to steam and work in this country again, selling it to be a mere film exhibit goes against that in my view.

Whilst I happily accept the argument for a lack of mainline running Halls, Hall locomotives are generally very useful across railway preservation, and I would challenge a working 5972 is more stimulating to the general public than to be cold and dead inside a museum (whatever museum that ends up being).

Perhaps I was too hasty in my previous post and too angry young man, but this still rests uncomfortably with me. Sorry.

 

If we're on about adhesion you must remind me to play you my recording of 5051 slipping its way up that very steep climb out of Banbury.

 

I agree with the sentiments that it's ashame, and that the Hall could have went to better use. But I believe railway heritage has passed the stage of merely preserving items, and has to be treated in similar as to how any other business gets handled. WCRC had an engine on their books which was not generating a suitable income post-filming and possibly even being a drain on resources, and so when an undisclosed sum of money is put forward by an individual or company, they should be allowed to consider it in terms of their own business case.

Now if a sale has been made to Warner Bro's, it's allowing the following to happen :

Stored in a climate controlled museum with a roof over her head,
Thousands able to go see the engine,
Money made by selling company can be poured in to other rolling stock.

Had you made any of these points back in the 70's it would be considered preservation. Why is it frowned upon now?

 

Well let's hope so anyway. If its an outdoor location that might be another issue.

Interestingly I note that, unless I'm mistaken, the relevant text that started all this seems to have fallen off the RTC website page.

 

I think the difference is that we're talking about a locomotive which will remain Hogwarts Castle for the foreseeable future when it was originally bought and restored to be used as Olton Hall, a relic of the Great Western Railway. That's not preservation but commercialism and whilst we agree on the positives of dry and safe storage in the public eye, the outcome is different.

The original intention was to restore and run it as Olton Hall, the real locomotive long before Potter came about so it sits uneasily with me that we can so easily wave goodbye to something that in railway preservation should remain thus: preserved and in the context of its history, and not just as a film prop. Particularly when fibre glass mock ups have been made elsewhere of 5972.

I guess I'm in the minority so I'll clam up now and happily agree to disagree.