Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by Kinghambranch, May 24, 2008.
Great work. Nice one ladies and gents!
Yep, it is certainly something to shout about.
I am so impressed with the 82045 group. A 3MT 2-6-2T has neither the obvious superstar glamour of Tornado nor the Edwardian elegance of Beachy Head but the friendliness and competence of the people building it have turned 82045 into a loco which I (and no doubt many others) are looking forward to seeing in steam as much as any new-build project. Well done to all concerned. I'm very much hoping I can pay a visit to the SVR at some point this year and will be keen to see the progress on this splendid little loco for myself.
100% seconded! This loco looks to be just what many lines could use .... and the regular website updates are always very much appreciated.
The latest web update is now here http://www.82045.org.uk/news/82045_news-apr18.html
All news updates from the 82045 Group are eagerly awaited, and not just by me I'm sure. However this one is especially significant as it marks a tremendously important milestone in the building of this locomotive. The update also shows just how keen the "parent" Railway is to have it in traffic. Having just re-read my OP made almost 10 years ago, I don't think I was writing complete cack. This is the way ahead.
So a ballpark figure of 2 years after 42968's boiler is finished.
82045s May update is now available. http://www.82045.org.uk/news/82045_news-may18.html
Thank you very much for the update.
I was unaware anyone was suggesting mainline use. The comment on the 82xxx's Cambrian days is interesting, as I'm one of those who didn't know they regularly handled seven car loads (or for that matter, through workings aside, that the Cambrian Coast Line ever required regular seven car trains!). I'm guessing such loadings were on the section west of Machynlleth, as expecting a class 3 to lug seven up Talerddig (where 1st gen dmus made heavy weather of the bank) seems a tad optimistic.
Loving the progress and the regular updates are always appreciated.
Also likely to be older GWR stock which is generally lighter than Mark 1's.
I don't think general 'Mainline Use', and certainly not over the Cambrian is in anybody's thoughts. If 82045 is to ever venture out onto the big railway, even if only for occasional short fund raising events, she will require certification. This will cost money. A decision has to be made fairly imminently in order to organize if the final decision is taken to finish her to Mainline Standards. It is equally possible that this idea will be set aside as a non starter because of the costs and membership views. Who, but the membership knows.
I think the article made clear that there are differing views on the possibility, and members thoughts were simply being canvased.
It is a good example of - if you want it to go mainline then pony up some cash and have a say (and quite right too). Or if you don't want it to go mainline (because, because, because) then pony up some cash and have a say.
Harsh, but with an element of truth !
New members are always very welcome and unlike elsewhere in our lives, their views count. Money makes the drivers go around, so also welcome.
The trust have raised over 1 million pounds thanks to its supporters and membership, they deserve to have a say in decisions. 82045 is being built FOR the membership, now numbering nearly 800, who have been magnificent in their continued and unstinting support. And long may it continue.
Sorry I didn't mean to sound harsh. To me it is the right way to go about it. If people want to see it at Barmouth then they should get involved, if the desire to see it remain heritage line only then they should also get involved. (For example some people will often come onto threads and say 'you don't want to be doing that' - well if they feel that way then they should also join and make their voice heard).
I'm quite sanguine either way. Just to see another lost design is enough for me. In spite of the thrust of some posts across the forum, not everything has to be a mainline certified named express loco .... or have I missed something?
I'm still half expecting comments about the newbuild G5 not being able to keep time over Shap with twelve plus thunderbird!
To add I really like the idea of members, those who have contributed having a say, it seems that often these types of decisions are made by small groups of people in rooms somewhere where no one has much of a say. It sometimes feels like ‘thanks for the money but we are the masters’. It seems to me to be a good example of best practice. However, given the fact that most railway enthusiasts can start a fight in an empty room over things like liveries, there is always the risk that giving people a say will lead to punch ups.
Firstly, I must applaud the 82045 group for their success, professionalism and openness - you've set a high standard in all of these departments and are raking the rewards that go with it.
I've not got a vote, but I seem to recall Ian Riley suggesting that he doesn't see mainline standard as anything other than the minimum for the job. Unless the inspection regime is prohibitively expensive, it's hard to disagree - so if I had a vote, it would be to preserve the option, certainly. And wouldn't a Kenny Belle as part of a SR plandampf be fun!
Agree with almost everything you say, thank you. It certainly is best practice by the Trust to consult. The last sentence suggests you haven't been at either an 82045 AGM, or on one of the Eardington or Waterloo Sunset specials. Great days out and all run in the most hospitable, convivial, friendly and civilized manner. I have not personally heard a word against the proposed out shopped livery of 82045, so maybe that's a first ! I don't expect this atmosphere of co-operation to change by simply asking for members views.
If you are an 82045 member, please contact Chris Proudfoot at the contact point given on the May update to express your views. All points of view are welcome.
Separate names with a comma.