LNER B17 Spin-off discussion

Maybe a silly thought from me, but with two ongoing projects to build a LNER B17 ,and the very impressive success of the A1 /P2 Trust in mind, perhaps it could be better to handle these project over to the A1 trust? (and build one engine). This is not meant as any form of critisism to the two groups , but since the A1 trust seems to carry on with LNER locomotives, the B17 is also a great one with various parts already made.

Knut

 

It's an interesting view. And one I can see happening tbh.

Of the two projects you have the spirit of Sandringham which is doing ok down at Llangollen, and their fundraising is increasing year on year which is a good sign. All the CAD has been done by David Elliot of the A1 so there must be good communication between the groups, and "if" there was any merger this one you would assume would be an easy transition should there ever be a need/reason to do so.

The other Manchester united group I don't really know much about. They don't venture onto the fundraising scene very often. They do put a few images of progress on their Facebook page but it's all superficial cheap work and a lot of it is wasted money as it would have to be replaced if it were to become a working loco rather than a static model. I don't know if they are using the same CAD work either.

 

Interesting idea, not sure what reception it will receive though, from what I can see there appear to be very different groups involved (in terms of set up, funding, etc), that's apart from the proposed name for one of these new builds (recreation..??) which would I am sure raise emotive responses from those who are not followers of a certain football club.

 

If it were up to me, the two groups would get together and pool the resources they have. The tender saved by the MU group could be restored fairly quickly I'll wager despite its scrapyard origins.

SofS's group are doing very well. It's likely they will have a locomotive built. They have a GER tender frame I seem to recall.

 

Simon,

They have GER tender frames and an LNER tender - see http://www.b17steamloco.com/news-and-events/construction-progress/assets

Keith

 

Interesting! So we have two group standard tenders extant.

Personally speaking, I think the MU group needs to be better engineered. From the top down. It is admirable that they are putting together what is effectively a static display model, but if they have any sense they will stop work and ask the question: where do we want to go with this?

The SofS group seem to be switched on and judging from the professionals they have hired in to do work, I have no doubt we will see a functioning B17 in due course. When - how long's a piece of string?

Give me a lottery win tomorrow - I would buy one of the group standard tenders to put behind a Thompson B2 instead. Just two cylinders, same boiler type as a B1, only two sets of valve gear and roller bearings together with whatever else is required. Gives us another gap filled and something simpler to run. Make it Royal Sovereign and the possibilities for some very nice LNER liveries possible too together with royal train status of the original.

Makes me think we're not thinking this through - economies of scale, three tenders, most of the major cadwork done for a B17. A lot of standardisation was achieved between B17, B1, B3/3 and B2. Just a thought.

A1 trust also have the moulds for 6ft 8in LNER driving wheels - expediency might dictate their use? For anyone who wanted another B1 (unlikely given the two extant) we also have the P2's 6ft 2in moulds as wheel. Obviously any use would be hired out if possible by the owning groups.

 

' Moulds ' I am sure that you mean patterns Simon.

 

Yes - couldn’t remember the right term earlier. It’s 31 degrees where I am right now.

 

A link to a currently published picture of the "static" locomotive here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DilADSqWsAAW9Ga.jpg

Knut

 

Simon. I have said the same thing for a number of years. I even said once that why didn't they concentrate on different parts. If the MU group focused on getting the front bogie complete. Started with the frames (relatively cheap) and then moved onto getting the wheels etc etc. It would still be a great appeal and if in 5 years time neither group has progressed, or one has, and the other hasn't, then no money has been wasted as they are parts that are useful and can be combined. And if both are really successful and we end up with two then even better.

I also agree when it comes to the tenders. For me the smaller tender which is owned by the SofS group should be sold off to the Claud Hamilton group. They are based down the road in Norfolk at the Whitwell and Reepham station and they could crack on with the restoration of that tender. The money from selling it could go to the Wheel appeal for the SofS and all of the new build groups would be making progress from it. Who knows maybe a deal could be done that the Claud group get the smaller tender complete for a time that the SofS group get the loco completed. That way they could run together for a short while, while the SofS group uses the income to pay for a larger mainline tender, and the Claud gains some income from the tender hire towards its own build. Again a Win-win for all involved.

 

Yes but that's the easy option, some people don't do easy!

 

This is railway preservation where there are a lot of people who can and do start fights in an empty room over things like colours and rivets so it isn't surprising that there are two projects.

There are also two P2 projects - although the Doncaster one does not appear to have got further than having a photo of Brian Blessed giving two thumbs up.

The Man Utd project from my understanding seem to be trying to tap into the Man Utd connection and seem to have a solid relationship with the team (ie no 'cease and desist' so far from using the name).

 

Doesn't seem to have inspired many, if any, at the club though. The place is awash with money and to fund the B17 would be small change if they decided so to do.

 

Maybe if they had done it as a new build and new name, and called it Crystal Palace, then they would have found a little bit more funding!
You might even be able to call it an "icon of steam" at that point!

 

Hindsight would appear to suggest that it hasn’t been as successful tie in as was hoped, but then the counter point is the three projects with royal tie ins - Prince George, prince of Wales and spirit of sandringham. Whether it is ardent royalists who are funding these projects because of the royal connection I don’t know.

It’d be barred from Brighton.

 

Who cares!

 

I believe it has frames?

 

Rumour is he is actually an Arsenal fan.

 

My Father in Law's a Palace fan, he didn't quite understand why I was rather happy to see them stay up at my own team (WBA)'s expense, 'Stuff the Albion Geoff, your lot staying up means we get to see Blue Peter back in action, what one d'you Think Im more happy about?!'

 

Good job they didn’t name it Walsall, it’d probably have been announced with great fanfare before being quietly abandoned a few years later.