Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by aron33, Aug 15, 2017.
Those would be the frames dumped near the Diesel shed with several small saplings growing out of it?
I wouldn't know, never been there.
Triang thought it was a good idea......
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
That Jinty is tragically owned by Derby Council, who are pleased with the way MRC look after it. Be nice as a Jinty but then the scrapyard condition stuff like the Midland Pullman coaches at MRC wouldnt have a loco to go with it.
It's not so much that they're pleased, they keep forgetting they actually own the ruddy things. Usually every so often councillors are surprised at the fact they own them, learn they don't cost all that much for them to look after (they're mostly rented out via the MRC to other lines) and simply shrug and carry on. It's also why only one jinty tends to be going at any one time despite the fact they'd be quite useful to rent out to the wider heritage market.
There's also a Sultzer in the Johnson building which is owned by the Silk Mill museum as well.
The other three Jinties are mostly kept going by slowly consuming 47564 which is used as a source of spares.
Didn’t the M&GN Society try to acquire 47564 a number of years ago?
A suitable boiler for a midland 3F replica survives and I think the owner has tried to acquire 7564 for that purpose without success.
Do Derby council realise that 47564 is slowly being consumed ? Would be an interesting case if they did sell it on and asked for all the borrowed bits back...
IIRC they also own the Caprotti 5 and decided a couple of years back ( prompted by... don't remember) that they didn't wish to sell it off.... ?
The way of local government finances these days it would not be a surprise if DCC found an offer too hard to refuse for the pair. Other LAs have sold works of art and the like to plug budget gaps and it only takes a change of personnel within a Council for new policy decisons to emerge.
73129 - It will be mine.... ( if the lotto comes in for me.)
Cultural and historical reasons. The Jinties were built during Derby's heyday as a major railway hub and builder of locomotives. The 5 that is also owned by the city is the last steam engine built by Derby Works. Same again with the Sultzer. Built in Derby therefore should stay "here".
It's likely that DCC won't sell unless there's a guarantee that they would remain somewhere in Derbyshire as their home base (the likely issue with most sales offers). For now that's the MRC because the council still retains an interest (the own the ground and the main buildings) alongside the main county council.
Got to remember the reason the pye bridge line was picked originally was because it was short, cheapish to buy and could be turned into a museum celebrating the glory, history and impact of the Midland Railway company.
I doubt they're actually short of offers or possible offers but geography gets in the way. Your only options at present would be the other two lines in Derbyshire. EVR's a bit busy with other more immediate priorities and Peak Rail tends to consume locomotives as opposed to run them.
The last Standard 5 built at Derby was 73154. Incidentally, Derby never made the boilers for any of the Standard 5s put together there.
It seems I misread the article on the engine as "the last" rather than "one of the last".
I choose to put this here:
One for the authenticity thread - look at that coal! You never see it like that now (some of those blocks must be two foot across). And if you could get it like that - would we actually want it? Lots of additional labour for the fireman there breaking coal - by contrast, what we get now generally conforms very well to the textbook ideal of “about the size of a fist”.
When firemen were real men...!
More likely - when the alternative employment was outdoors in all weathers in a field, or repetitive labour in a factory - breaking coal starts to look attractive by comparison!
And with the possible advancement to 'driver'.... I would think any railwayman, let alone a driver, would be considered a job of some prestige within the working class demographic of the day.
Perhaps their rebuilt form as 2-4-0s would be considered more useful on a preserved line (would have a name then too). A sandwich frame loco would certainly fill a gap.
Quite so. Victorian/Edwardian era locos have such an air of elegance. Would that there were more locos that could wear pre-grouping liveries.
Separate names with a comma.