Severn Valley and 45110.

A statement posted on their website today states that 45110 is not for sale. There has been speculation, including in the latest issue of "Heritage Railway", that this loco might be sold due to the SVR's ongoing debt situation.

 

Jolly good news and glad that the record has been set straight.
Heritage Railway should report facts, not idle speculation.
But then it really doesn't come as any surprise anymore. I actually picked up a copy of the latest edition at WHSmith with the intention to purchase, flicked through and read two scurrilous headlines, which carried a veiled attack on a particular heritage railway.
This was enough to make me put it back on the shelf and walk out of the shop.

 

I don't recall reading much about a debt issue at the SVR, is this a hungover from the floods a few years ago ?, if so surely a few good operating seasons takings should take care of that ?.

In any case selling a loco to fund it in their position would be silly, you'd just be paying extra hire fee's for someone elses loco at some point in the future.

 

A quick look at the public section of the SVR Forum may lead one to the conclusion that this "news" story was based on a suggestion and subsequent debate on there - if so, confirmation that these Forums, having taken away monthly magazine's ability to be the first with news are now seen as a source for filling news pages.

Steven

 

Perhaps in other railways cases, but not in the SVR's. If 45110 left then there's plenty of other engines that could be overhauled and it's presence wouldn't be missed.

 

How many does the SVR own outright though as opposed to a third party group based there such as 4930, 7802/12 etc ?, although unlikely, there's always the risk in those cases the owners could take their toy elsewhere.

 

Not very many as I understand it. But there doesn't seem to be much of an exodus despite some engines being out of traffic for some length of time. It could happen, but if you own an out-of-ticket Black 5 you're not going to plug a gap in your loco roster overnight if someone decides to pick up their toys and walk away.

 

The locos which have left the SVR in recent years - 46521 & 6960 have left because of the length of the overhaul queue and the prospect of many years out of traffic.

 

4930 had been out of service for many years, over 20 I think, and importantly has had an active "Friends" group, which has raised around £100,000 towards the overhaul that is due to start shortly. 4930 exits the Engine House for Bridgnorth works, and so 45110 returns to be put on display.
There has been suggestions elsewhere that a "Friends" group be set up for 45110 to likewise raise some funds over time to go towards the cost of the overhaul. In the meantime a suggestion has been made that the Engine House puts on a modest photographic tribute to 45110, which does have a small place in railway history working the first leg of "1T57" in August 1968. I'm sure that somewhere there is an iconic image of 45110 about to leave Liverpool on the first leg of that end of steam special. A Bishop Treacy photograph possibly?

46118

 

Not true in the case of 6960 which was sold by the owning individual to a new owner immediately following a full overhaul at SVR expense!!

 

If that is the case then it sounds a bit cheeky but surely if a railway is paying for an overhaul it has the right to sign a contract with the owner guaranteeing said railway will be its home for a certain number of years afterwards.

 

Not true in the case of 46521 either. Again it was a case of owners prerogative and a clash of personalities. It is widely regarded 46521 would already be back in service if it had stayed.

 

"If that is the case then it sounds a bit cheeky but surely if a railway is paying for an overhaul it has the right to sign a contract with the owner guaranteeing said railway will be its home for a certain number of years afterwards. "

Not really, no. The existing Loco Agreement is basically that the SVR accepts the engine in full working order and uses it until the necessary repairs and overhaul period are reached, i.e. that the deterioration has occurred through SVR useage. In those circumstances, what the SVR-funded overhaul does is restore the status quo: that the owning group have once again an engine in full working order, and the Railway has merely made good the wear and tear due to its use of the engine. The owners are thus free to remove the engine from the SVR or remain there as they see fit. The overhauls are carried out in arrears, not advance.

If the SVR has initially paid to bring the loco up to full working order, then it has a claim on the engine throughout its working life up to the next overhaul, when the Railway has the choice of whether to overhaul at its own expense with an ongoing claim to the engine, or return it to the owner's care, at which point it foregoes such a claim.

You might consider that there are some problems with this arrangement, which is why a new agreement is currently being explored.

 

Having just looked up, 27 years in October since it was withdrawn from traffic. 45110 is only 5(?) so its wait is barely anything.

 

I stand corrected - your memory's obviously better than mine

 

Agreed, and 27 years is far too long!

However, I do now think someone needs to test the water and find out what strength of support there is for a "friends of 45110" group. If nothing else it might define the relative strength of support for GWR and LMS engines on the SVR. I make that comment with absolutely no hidden meaning.

46118

 

That is not what was widely reported at the time.

 

I'm 30 next May and can't remember 4930 running, gives it some perspective.

 

The SVR are not the only ones to have fallen foul of such an arrangement - the same thing happened with 90775 on the NYMR and might yet happen again with 34101 for which (as far as I'm aware) there isn't yet a contract covering its next period of operation following completion of the current overhaul (although I've heard tell that there is a verbal agreement).