BR 9F 92214

That makes no sense at all. Buying your own loco and running it, and paying for a loco that belongs to a museum to run are two completely different things for a start. I imagine they don't just want to see 92220 in steam, they want their own loco and see the commercial opportunity to imitate an icon.
As for Bittern running as Mallard, why not? There are no plans to return Mallard to steam, possibly ever, so it may be the closest you ever get to see to the real thing in action, rather than grainy archive footage.
As mentioned above, the plaque describing the loco as the last built by BR is to be replicated, but this is because 92220 has one, so in order to copy 92220, then surely it should have it?

 

No, it shouldn't. You could rename and renumber the real evening star, but it would physically be the same engine - the last built. The plaque goes with and stays with the frames, this is a unique piece of engineering not one that can be "copied" Its fine to repaint, renumber, rename, rededicate locos in another guise (albeit slightly perverse to masquerade as one that is already extant - and you will have people viewing the same loco in two places 100 of miles part at the same time - but hey thats virtuality for you) but to copy plaques and plates that are unique achievements and attributes is wrong. The Mallard speed thing is a fine example. You could slap the valances back on Bittern, tart up the wheels with red paint, renumber and rename and say "Look this is Mallard" You can't put the "this loco did 126mph" plaque on tho because "this" loco didn't.

And as for the authentic argument, are they going to change all the serial numbers of individual components to match those of the original? No.

If this becomes common place you might as well rip any "unique" tags plates and plaques off every bit of kit because the whole thing is instantly devalued.

 

No-one looks at serial numbers, though. People look at plaques and plates because they are obvious.



I can't spot any serial numbers from here. The lack of a plaque would be evident, though.

Evening Star is probably not going to steam again for at least 15 years, probably more. There are plenty of classmates around, it can't go on the mainline, people want to see other NRM locos steamed first. Some of us might be dead by then, but now, this year, we have the opportunity to see a loco that looks pretty much identical pulling trains.

I, for one, think that is cool.

 

The problem with this locomotive masquerading lark is it seems to be driven from a solely commercial basis - I see no other valid reason.
Researchers - of all ages and descriptions - rely on photographic evidence very often for proof and particularly so for those who write books, theses and similar. I guess with the age of photoshop and computer aided facilities maybe we have now entered the age of obfuscation.

 

Why is that a problem? Engines need coal to run. Owners need money to buy coal.

 

Construction wise, there is one noticeable difference between 92214 and 92220. 92220 has an isolating element above the ejector. These were fitted to all Western Region allocated Standard locos. 92214 was fitted with one in its BR life, but it was not re-fitted during its restoration.

 

Ok accept that, in that case as you are already making up a fake plaque then it could say "This is xxxxxx running as xxxxxx the last steam ocomotive built by BR"

Then you have the look but not the deception,

Don't get me wrong, I probably will never be able to see Evening Star run, and I am perfectly happy for a sister loco to play the part, yes its cool, and my first thought was to get up there and vid the thing.

The "last loco built" plaque tho is just plain wrong on so many levels.

 

Fair point, I don't think I would have any objection to what you suggest (But I own a grand total of 0 locos so what does it matter )

 

That's not 55003 Meld, it's 55022 RSG and it's been turned out like that because the owner wanted to do it.

 

I take your point Victor. From that pic.on my desktop screen, I am unable to read the loco number anyway. But, hopefully the number change was recorded with publication of the picture.

 

In respect of image rights flippantly mentioned above, one would hope NRM, ie the state, is benefitting from the commercial venture too by allowing the private owners to exploit the iconic status of this item of UK heritage.
It seems absurd to expect that new generations will see "92220" in action and then think they must visit York or Shildon to see the real, static thing. Or is it simply for educational purposes, to immitate the last loco built?
6024 to be turned out as 6000 KGV next?

 

I hope so

 

Rings my bell...












[sorry, couldn't resist]

 

So (in the unlikely event that) if the a1slt wanted to they could call themselves Flying scotsman, stick some different smoke deflectors and nameplates on and hey presto ( they would look sufficiently alike for most punters)...

 

Will the lovely, tasteful and thoughtfully converted balcony ended wild west mutant mark 1 be running with it? Yeeeeeeha!!!!

 

I knew someone would say something along these lines.

A loco with nearly every single component identical to the other, from the exact same class, built to the same design, is a bit different to a loco from an entirely different class. It's not like the 8F is pretending to be 92220.

We've so far identified 1 thing that will be (at normal viewing difference) distinguishing the pretender from the original. There's likely others, like a slightly different injector or something, but largely they are the same.

 

I really don't understand the reaction to this one. Plenty of locomotives have masquaraded as classmates and never had this level of vitriol before. Is it simply because it is Evening Star being recreated? Plenty of people in their twenties like myself weren't alive the last time the real thing steamed. It's unlikely to ever steam again at this point so what's the big deal?

As long as it doesn't keep that identity and it is explained in reasonable terms that this is a recreation for a special event, why the aggression and vitriol?

Now the BR Mk1 balcony coach, that is something to get steamed up over...!

 

Personally I'd rather see the last built BR black-liveried steam loco in steam - i.e. 92219 the last 'proper' one. Can't get very excited about one built primarily for the enthusiast and railtour market, real or otherwise, and it's not even the last one of those either since 'Tornado' was built, so it's only real claim to fame is being a glorified fairground ride built by a normally serious transport operator.

[/stir]

 

I just had to look this up as I'd not seen it before! I think it's one of those things that's probably a very different experience to be in than out - like a Fiat Multipla. Although, it's not like the entire rake is representative of a historical prototype anyway.
(apologies for going off topic)