End of the Line

The simple answer is "I don't know" but I am very aware how irrational enthusiasts can be. For example I am aware of an item of steam plant, not to do with railways, where it was put about that the boiler was "shot". When taken apart the boiler concerned was far from being "shot" but was excellent. Yet the rumour had been put about with absolutely no justification.

I have absolutely nothing "against" mainline locomotives working out their last couple of years on heritage railways but the costs involved in operating something so very much larger than needed for the service have to be factored in.

PH

 

Okay, I am happy to take your word for it but this re-enforces my view that the new build projects which are really deserving of support are those for modest sized tank locomotives.

Paul H

 

I'm sorry if I've misunderstood you but having reread three times what you've written, you seem to be suggesting that there may well have been a gricer element in what survived scrapping. The vast majority of locos scrapped at Barry succumbed to the torch between 1959 and 1965, quite a while before enthusiast groups started organising themselves and raising money to save the survivors.

 

If you look back through the history of what was bought from Barry and when it was bought, I think it's complete b********s to suggest that purchases were driven by gricerism. Most of the earlier purchases were by groups stocking up on the small and medium sized engines that were most suitable for heritage line use. Anything bigger than a class 5 was not thought to be heritage line material. It wasn't till later and the "we must save everything" movement really got under way, and the best of the smaller engines had gone, that a lot of the bigger engines were bought. Certainly, when I was involved with obtaining 80135 for the NYMR it was selected because it was felt to be the ideal engine for the line, based on the fact that it was what BR themselves used in the 1950s. We in turn obtained a copy of a mechanical survey carried out by T.G. Dentith for the SVR, and apart from drawing attention to the fact the "Bodmin" had a virtually unused set of tyres, and covering 42968 because of SVR interest, all the locos surveyed were class 4 or smaller.

 

Like a ball of string dropped from a great height, I sense a certain unravelling of a theory...

 

I have absolutely nothing "against" mainline locomotives working out their last couple of years on heritage railways but the costs involved in operating something so very much larger than needed for the service have to be factored in.

When 60007 saw out the last couple of years of its boiler certificate at the NYMR people came specially to travel behind it, and they still do, so the chances are it does cover its additional costs. The same was true of 92214 when it moved to the NYMR.

 

There were a few biguns amongst early departures. 9 of the first 40 were class 6 or above but six of those have gone main line at some point and one has yet to be restored.

 

A bit of analysis on the order things left Barry:

Taking date of leaving from here - http://www.greatwestern.org.uk/barry1.htm

I've classifed engines into "Small" (class 3 or below); "Medium" (class 4- 5) or "Large" (class 6 and over). Where a loco has two classifications I've taken the higher: for example, a Maunsell U (4P3F) I've classified as class 4, so medium; a Bulleid Light Pacific (7P5F) I've classified as class 7, so large.

I've taken the final twenty as leaving in 1988 as the site above didn't have an exact date.

The graph shows the rate at which locos left, as a percentage of all the locos of that size in the yard which ultimately escaped. From which it is clear that the small locos went first, the medium next, and the large lagged behind. For example, by 1977, 88% of all the small engines had gone, but only 56% of the medium engines and just 37% of the available large engines.



Tom

 

Slight inconsistency here! Actually the NYMR is one of the lines that can justify something a little larger.

PH.

 

Interesting effort...

considering all class 3 or below had left by 1983 I suspect your over cooking your figures.
By any stretch a GWR Prarie is not a "medium" sized loco in the same category as a Black 5... yet since 1983 - 7 have left the yard and so skewed in the figures..

How about a different grouping.. Class 4 or below, Class 5, and Class 6 and above ?
After all a Class 5 is not a class 4 and is a "good average" locomotive class on it's own.

Honestly no idea what the result would look like, but might be a bit more appropriate... there's not too many lines out there with fleets of class 2 & 3s... but proportionately a lot with class 4's... which after all are the preserved line workhorse locomotive.

 

I sense militant gricerdom being questioned and not liking it one little bit!

P.H.

 

Nothing to do with that. You have a theory that what was preserved was a result of enthusiast preference for larger locos, and the data simply doesn't support that theory. What was preserved is dominated by what went to Barry, and within that subset, the smaller locos were preferentially chosen for preservation. The large locos were predominantly last, when there was nothing else left.

Tom

 

No, simply the fact that your theory that militant gricerdom saved all the big locos either first or at all has pretty much been completely dis-proven...

edit - Tom beat me to it

 

One point however is most of the class 8's left towards the end were heavy freight 2-8-0's... not Class 8Ps.. that is a gricerdom difference.. GW 2-8-0s are the ugly ducklings of preservation.

If one takes a look at the last Barry 20... (which is a good mix of all sizes)
only 3 have actually steamed.. 34046, 5553 and 80072...
of the 2-8-0s 5 look to have been dismantled/scrapped for new builds (and 92245 hangs with a gas axe above it's boiler).


However ignoring the stats and looking at the data.. the hard facts are of the 1st 50...
if you look at everything class 5 and above... there's 22 there... so i'd say on par the balance is pretty even either way.

and whats not restored in the 1st 50.. 7027 and until recently 46447.. so again I'd say the balance is pretty even.

Looking at the list, what did people buy... well what ever they wanted.
If there was a bias, people must have been demanding Gods Wonderful Railway as 21 of them made it in the 1st 50.. 9 of which are class 5 and above

Maybe one influence is time:
The first 17 locomotives left between 1968 and 1971... only 6 were class 5 and above...
From 1972 :numbers 18-50 (32 locos)..16 were class 5 and above.. 50%...

so what ?
significance in the date ... 6000 went mainline in 1971 and maybe gave people hope on larger engines going mainline... 17 of the 1st 50 have been mainline at some point

 

IIRC a number of the earlier "large" escapees had main line futures planned for them. Reality has proved different in some cases though.

 

Where is this myth coming from that somehow a lost generation was scrapped whilst everyone saved their pennies for something too big?

Look at the dates of those scrapped at Barry. There was a batch in 1959, a batch in 1961 and a batch in 1965, with smaller numbers in other years that decade. You have to remember what was going on in the wider preservation world, because if we date 'museum' heritage railways from the Bluebell in 1960, there was nowhere for the 1959 batch to go! In 1961 they were buying terriers or P tanks not 2-6-2s. By 1965 there was only Bluebell in the south of England,no swanage, KESR, mid hants...no NYMR or KWVR either. Bluebell could not afford to buy a Brighton mogul and a midland 2p was let go as being "too big". Things only really got going from about 1970 onwards and very few locos were scrapped after then!