Forgotten "preserved" Steam engines

No, definitely not forgotten, was talking to Chris Beet about it today.

 

I don't care what anyone says.. It looked very smart in BR lined maroon.

 

And?

Anything likely to happen with it??

 

I would think the Beet family have their hands full with their big red engine at the moment. I'd love to see 46441 steaming again, together with the other former Lancaster Green Ayre shed loco, 45025.

 

It's very subjective this word "forgotten"... It occurs to me that here are locos which have been out of the limelight for a while, or are not active in the mainstream heritage world, and there are those which really are forgotten with trees growing through them. There are very few of the latter - most have someone at least who cares for them in one way or another.

 

Very well put.

Given how successful steam restoration has been, I'd say more forgotten is the network of rotting pregrouping coaches still out there

 

My post about 46441 wasn't designed to cause a stir- however it has disappeared from the limelight in recent years? I saw a some footage of it on the S&C from a few years ago the other day which made me think- Where has it gone?

Im pleased to hear that the Beet's still have it in mind, I would be pleased to see it again (I saw it some years ago at the east lancs- very smart in red dare I say it also!)

Fingers crossed!

 

Just to clarify I am given the impression from your post that you thought the older picture is of it in it's working environment? The cut-down frames, motion and four-coupled wheels from Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway steam locomotive 34 (later GWR 252), Leeds Industrial Museum, Armley Mills. | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Infact the frameset with the wheels are shown at Armley Mills in the Black and White Photo, you can tell this from the mixed gauge track and the shed it's outside.

Wheels from Oxford, Worcester & Wolverhampton Railway steam locomotive 34 (later GWR 252), Leeds Industrial Museum, Armley Mills. 2010 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!



I went a while back and got a picture of the wheels. I couldn't see any sign of the frames although the store room was very full. There is also a bit outside where a lot of random artifacts are stored so it could be that the frames are there if they are not in another part of the store room. I have attached my images above.

The guide was very helpful when I asked if I could see the 'engine' taking the time to get the key and let me in.

Also on the subject of forgotten 'engine's' whilst not a locomotive I think the Bowes Railway is a very significant railway system which I remember seeing working rope haulage and which doesn't seem to run it's inclines any more.

 

What about what remains of 48518 .... and, of course, the ex-TCDD 8Fs 45166/70? No connection intended there, you understand, but it's all gone quiet of late.

 

No 46441 is currently ensconced in the Museum at the Ribble Steam Railway's Riversway station in Preston. (See BR Ivatt 46441 / 1950).

As the above item states, it last steamed in 2002 and does appear to currently be located on display in a part of the building where it would prove difficult even to move it outside, for example, for photographic or other exhibition purposes. (The vehicle behind it is hard-wired into a shore power supply.)

Enquiries recently made locally thereat have not revealed any positive plans for restoration to steamable condition, but, of course, such information has not come from the owner himself and the situation could very well change in the near future.

 

There was some discussion on the SVR forum about these remains a while back. I think that the Engine House would make for a very good location to display them, so close to their original stamping ground - perhaps even on a line that they once frequented! Anything's better than them being in store out of sight - or worse partly outside.

 

48518:
Wheels of 48518 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Mutilated Corpse of 48518 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

45170 is on display at Shildon
45170 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Interestingly she's evidently been involved in a heavy shunt as some point. Her buffer beam has had the outer parts chopped off and new ones welded on.
IMG_7912 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
IMG_7913 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Scars like that tell a story, like the damage Lion recived during the filming of The Titfield Thunderbolt.

 

I wonder how much exactly is to be gained by building the replica from cannibalised bits of other engines rather than having built it from new? It just seems a project widely away from the spirit of preservation. To reduce a historically significant locomotive in it's own right to a mere hulk to fufill someone's recreation fantasy just seems wrong.

 

One does have to ask if 48518 would ever have been restored to operating condition 'as is'. We are not just in a preservation game these days, we are leisure and education providers. As long as the new-build is effectively interpreted, are the parts from 48518 not telling a better story as a member of a lost class than as a rusting hulk, or even a duplicate 8F?

I'm not questioning your view, I'm not sure what my opinion is on these things, just putting forward a counter-argument.

 

Whilst I already percieved your counter arguement, I'd still argue if you're going down that route of a 'newbuild' to recreate a locomotive from a lost class that you should be doing it from scratch, rather than hotchpotching something together from bits and bobs of other locomotives (parts of which would be life expired much quicker than those of a newbuild).

If I can draw a parallel with something which happened on the Isle of Man Railway (as you may or may not know most IMR engines are built by Beyer Peacock and therefore are intercompatible) whilst you may have felt that it was unlikely that 48518 would have been restored to operating condition "as is" let us not forget that every time an engine has a bit cannibalised to restore another engine you diminish the possibility of it returning to steam (as can be seen with a couple of IMR loco's) then it's not a short step to saying "ah well there's hardly anything left of that locomotive, we might as well as scrap it to get the metal value to plough into other schemes... and lo another survivor disappears.....

This is precisely what happened to IMR No2 Derby (and nearly happened to the frames of No7 Tynwald) - the locomotive was cannibalised to such an extent the opinion was that it would never run again (read without significant investment) and therefore the management of the IMR was able to have the frames cut up within a period where the line was in government ownership and had alledgedly been 'saved' from the ravages of the scrap man.

Whilst in the Railway preservation industry agenda's might be somewhat different, it's not too hard to see how a line which is particularily focussed on one company or era might not find it too difficult to scrap items from another company or era if it doesn't meet their agenda. I think this is what has effectively happened here. OK the frames still survive, but for how long?....

Newbuilds should be that - newbuilds (ok I would concede it's ok to add parts from another member of the same class which has long vanished - I don't see that in the same league as hotchpotching a replica from the bits of other locomotives which have nothing to do with the locomotive you're recreating).

A surviving original locomotive should be respected as just that - a survivor and a valuable artifact - not a resource to be plundered. Whilst that locomotive might be 'just another 8F' there's still a finite number of 8F's in the world, they're not being mass produced any more, and furthermore it had historical significance as being the only surviving LNER produced version of the locomotive.

 

A strong counter-counter-argument! Like I said, I don't know, I'm not sure. In an ideal world, newbuilds would be newbuilds and there would be enough money sloshing around for them and engines which have been cannibalised/altered for the good of them to be restored in their own right. What's your opinion on 2999 Lady of Legend? Not cannibalised so much as radically altered?

I appreciate the point that there are only so many 8Fs in the world, but the answer to that would be that they are not in any danger. 8624, 48774, 48305, 48151 and 45160 are all fully restored and therefore pretty much safe. There are others I just can't remember them.

 

Does anyone know what's happened to the IMR and MNR stock they aquired?

How easy is it to purchase items out of the collection?

 

I'm not sure on Lady of Legend, I wouldn't really like to comment as I don't know much about it. Again I could argue it's a locomotive which already has an identity and is a representative of a class, exactly how ethical (vs cost effective) is it to convert it? I think that the one thing to consider in that case is that it's from a GWR stable and is being converted by someone with a specific GWR interest - therefore they're more likely to have the 'welfare' of the locomotive at heart. However I'd still say that it's from a finite stable and therefore I'd still think a newbuild project should be undertaken from scratch with as near as possible accuracy (if you're rebuilding a locomotive to specifically represent a member of a class - though that again brings in the issue of "where do you draw the line when it comes to including recent technological developments in the field??).

I wonder what would be the reaction if say hypothetically a totally commerically based Thomas the Tank engine Theme park wanted to build representitives of all the locomotives for the enjoyment of children and selected several notable engines to be the subject of a rebuild?.... Indeed this has happened in the past hasn't it (wasn't an austerity rebuilt as Thomas?), and as I recall the reaction was non too favourable.

Actually on the subject of this and collection X I understand the said collection has a number of IOMRly and MNRly Carriages, a couple of which are historically significant as having been early carriages fitted with electric lighting. Rumour has it that one of these may have been regauged to run on a UK based railway. I would argue that as such artifacts were built to 3ft gauge and the railway they really should be at still exists, having saved them for posterity and recognised their importance the owner of the collection should be prepared to return them (even if this was at cost) to be restored for the use of that railway. I would question the motives of a collector who closely guards such artificacts and yet is prepared to b@stardise (pardon my french but I could think of no more fitting term)them in such manner. I just hope that the rumours are just idle gossip and in time these significant artifacts might be returned to the place where they are most relevant, available for public viewing and possible restoration to running order (guess we can hope)...

I think that's the danger when a precedent is set too hack about any artifact just to fufill a personal desire. Where would you draw the line?...
Imagine if someone bought San's Pariel, Rocket, and Bradyll because they wanted to use them to build a working replica of Brunton's Mechanical Traveller?

 

The line, I think it's clear, is the intrinsic historical value of the components you are using, and the chances of them being used if you don't use them in a newbuild project. You'll note that when it was suggested 48518 be cut up to help the County project, there was no serious outcry, no serious attempt to save it, no philanthropist pulling £2million out of their pocket. If it had been, as you suggest, Sans Pareil, Rocket or Bradyll, do you think the result would have been the same?

Last surviving member of the class? Forget it. Historically important locomotive (4079, 4472)? Forget it. Whereas one of several remaining, with no 'standout' features? Maybe.

Each case should be valued on its own merits.

Various locomotives have been 'rebuilt' as Thomas, Ivor, one of the Donald and Douglas twins, etc etc., but have not drawn outrage (criticism maybe) for doing so, because the locomotives in question were not unique. Indeed Austerity STs are the most common surviving locomotive. Some may say that it is 'the thin end of the wedge' but I don't think so. As long as each case is valued on its own merits the situation will not become critical.