Mid Hants Preservation Society Gifted LBSCR Coaches

Nice photo but the W.D. 2-10-0 isn't Gordon (600) - it's one of the two that were imported from Greece one of which is now at the NYMR and the other is at the NNR. Ray.

 

It's the engine otherwise known as 90775, now at the NNR.

 

exactly my point, just restore and run them and forget the erroneous "ran on the Hayling branch" bit

 

As far as I am aware the Hayling branch never saw push pull working although such stock may have been used there at times worked normally.

Paul H

 

Hello,
Would be informative if the MHR C&W dept would create and update a blog on these coaches like the GWSR 'Steaming to Broadway' blog....with a Donate button!

Nick

 

yes, sorry, 601 used to run as "Gordon" during Thomas events just to confuse me!

 

Can anybody tell me of any heritage railway which only uses engines, and coaches on that line for day to day use which worked on the line when part on the network. The whole heritage railway is a compromise for this, as most lines preserved lines would have been a few non corridor coaches and might be one train a day with corridor coaches if some through coaches come onto the line, so they will have to "justify" nearly all the coaches and most of the engines as well. So a few LBSC coaches wont be any more out of place than most of the other coaches on the line.

 

Yes.....The Isle of Man Railway - but maybe that's a special case! Cheers, Ray.

 

To pick up on the thread a few pages back. The Mid Hants is a 50's line. What better than to paint them red or bauxite and run them with the steam crane as a breakdown set.

Genuinely, brilliant. Looking forward to riding in them behind the class 40. :0

 

All joking about Annie and Clarabel and breakdown coaches aside, I'm interested to know what use the Mid Hants envisages for these coaches? It seems only three will be restored, one of which is a brake coach and another is a full brake. So this will be a very low capacity set.

Would restoring the Ironclad not have been a better option? Then acquire a couple of other appropriate coaches to form a set. I can think of at least ten other LSWR bogie coaches in need of restoration. I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to persuade two or three of their owners to bring them to the Mid Hants, with it's impressive workshop facilities.

This would create a much more appropriate and more useful (higher capacity) set. It would also give the Mid Hants a USP. You can already travel on Brighton 4 wheelers on the IOW and at the Bluebell, but there is nowhere you can travel on an Ironclad.

 

From memory the Ironclad isn't owned by the MHR it's owened to two individuals.

 

Correct!

Sane as the Dance Hall Brake is privately owned, boy how I would love to see that in the freight rake.

 

It seems like another instance of the desirability of achieving ownership of all vehicles by each railway's operating company.

PH

 

Hello,
The SVR would have a very very short Goods train if SVR PLC Ltd owned the 813Funds wagons.
I do agree that individuals should be encouraged to become part of Trusts/charities.


Nick

 

Can be done and as the years go by it will become evident that it should have been done.

Paul H.

 

I think it's a bit of a sweeping statement to say that company owed rolling stock = good and privately owned stock = bad Paul. As long as there is communication and understanding between the company and the individual/group, it is often very beneficial for something to be restored by the owning group then run by the company. I bet the % of railway company owned stock is much lower than privately owned, and it's not as if the railway company would have bought it at the time if an individual hadn't stepped in, virtually all railways were strapped for cash at the time most of these vehicles were bought. The best arrangement I think is to have an operating contract with the railway so if the railway is servicing or restoring something it knows where it stnds, and knows work won't be wasted. If something is being run by the railway owned by an individual with no contract it is less likely it will be looked at favourable by the railway.

If the MHR really wanted to restore this ironclad, could they not just say to the individual "We'll help restore it and in return you let us run it for X amount of years?" Then everyone would know where they stood and having the coach not owned by the MHR would be an advantage as if it wasn't owned by the individual it wouldn't be there and thus no ironclad.

 

The thing is if a coach is owned by somebody who had high hopes of doing most of the work himself, and still hoping to do it but each year the coach gets more run down and will never be made running by himself, and doesn't want to sell his pride and joy against a group who is in a big enough way to have plenty of helpers to restore the coaches, and the work will get done and you look on the SVR with the work of the GWR coach group and the LNER coach group to see it isn't necessary for the railway to own the coaches for them to be restored.

 

No.