Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Surely that would have been 15 years of so go when the thumpers were first preserved not now when the unit has arrived at its third preserved home .
It’s not as if Lavender and Mid Hants haven’t had atleast one each for many years .

 

Right and wrong.

Right in that 1305 is now a 3D. Wrong in that they were on formed as 3Ds in BR operation. The 2Hs 1119 to 1122 were purposed as 2Hs upon construction but ended up as 3Ts following augmentation with the ex 3R DTSs.

I'll get my coat

 

It took them long enough but now the Bluebell have a decent enough diesel fleet, I cannot wait for when they hold a diesel day to celebrate the return of D6570.

 

I feel it’s a bit of a pity that there is no longer a single railway that is 100% steam. Emotion ruling reason, but hey. It’s just a shame.

 

Well, actually, there is: https://www.iombusandrail.im/heritage/our-railways/isle-of-man-steam-railway/
Just sayin'
Ray,

 

It is - to me it was a unique selling point (USP) of the Bluebell but I can see the reason and logic behind it - at least all the diesels are bits of Southern kit unlike those Class 20s on the Mid-Hants

 

Yes, but that's not out of choice though, is it?!

 

My wife's coleslaw recipe starts with "Shred the Cabbage" ..........
Fortunately the vehicle in question still lurks, bogieless off the railway (just) at the back of the bus yard with little prospect of an imminent return ...... so I reckon we can still claim 100% steam!
Ray.

 

Those 20’s are considered rather useful and welcome in Hampshire, if you want to play the Southern history card, why not get rid of 75027, 9017 or 58880?
How Southern are they?

 

Some of the 75XXX class were Southern Region locos. 75027 was admittedly a Western Region loco, but was shedded for a time at Templecombe. So I think it's wholly reasonable for it to be on the Bluebell.

 

Point of order Matt - 75027 was a Templecombe loco for two and a half years in the early '60s. I know the Western had poached the S&D by then but it still felt like a Southern shed and that's good enough for me.

Peter

 

Not unless you've got rid of the little simplexy thing down at Port Erin...
Anyway, when it comes to traction purity, the Douglas Tram has trumps, surely?

 

That’s me told on that one isn’t it?

 

9017 has been on the Bluebell longer than she was ever with the GWR. She's one of us now.

 

If engines could talk I expect she would still stoutly claim to be Great Western through and through and mildly disapproving of the place she is holidaying at!

 

If the "2D" set is a thumping success (pun intended) and early morning/late afternoon passengers are being left behind, then a longer term future solution/suggestion might be to obtain one of the 3H centre cars and insert it in the middle.

There are several more 3H centres preserved (as opposed to just one 3D centre car left) and more importantly there are quite a few that are just stored and aren't really preserved to their full potential IMO.

It would increase capacity by well over 50% and would to all but the hardened rivet counter be a matching addition. The ex EMU centre cars added in their last years of working life are in complete contrast hideously out of place with the outer cars.

I obviously fully take the point that now wouldn't be appropriate for this idea. Lots of work I'm sure in the short term future getting the 2-car set properly settled in, restored and built into the "Bluebell model". And with all those extra doors and siding space required for a third vehicle, it would only made sense if the business model fully supported it.

Sent from my moto g(8) power using Tapatalk

 

Or even a 2HAP or 2EPB driving trailer as a centre car.

 

I received the latest Bluebell News the other day and someone sent a letter in saying can they hope 9017 and the NL Tank also leave. The Editor responded by saying the Dukedog was gifted and the Atlantic Group intend to overhaul it as it's a useful mid range engine, but then says the NL Tank should have stayed at Barrow Hill and should ideally return there permanently.

That last comment was of interest to me, as although it seems to have been a bit unloved since returning and seemingly not a lot of work for it, but I feel the loco has an important place in Bluebell history, as it was an early arrival in 1961, was used to demolish the original line North of Horsted Keynes and then used to help reinstate it, so I'm glad it's intended to go on display in Steamworks.

 

Both are relevant to Bluebell as part of the history of Bluebell even if not southern types.

 

What an odd letter. (Although I imagine not unusual). That's a bit like writing to the national gallery and suggest they get rid of a few Vermeers
Did they just want them gone? If they were angling for them to go somewhere else, I can understand it, but otherwise I am bemused. I would be tempted (as well as to point out the history) to ask the writer to point out the free steam loco tree that they could be replaced from...