6233 in LMS red and wider livery debate of locomotives/stock

First post here, here goes. I am a bit subjective on liveries, I think some locos suit a certain livery more than others. Personally, I don't think Duchesses look right without the smoke deflectors, which inclines me towards liking them in BR liveries, either green or maroon, although I did quite like the blue as well!

I don't like that 8f in red at all, to me that just looks wrong, and I like 8fs in either LMS or BR condition, black 5s I tend to think BR lined black looked better than the LMS version. Some re nationalisation liveries I like, I like the pre war Southern one with the big numerals but no the Bulleid version and I also like the LNER apple green. So I think a bit of a mixture looks good in preservation, after all, you are mixing together locos and stock which wouldn't have run together at the time, adding blue diesels as well.

 

Re the earlier question f steam locos being reliverid in BR blue, other than the VoR tanks, had steam continued slightly longer, I don't think they would have, they would have been plain unlined black, as far as I would have thought. Quite a number of diesel locos retained the green livery until the early mid 70s. Also, I don't think they would have been renumbered either, Hymeks and Westerns never carried TOPS numbers

 

No didn't miss your point, it just didn't seem that relevant to me.

Also I don't think anyone has ever just moaned about the 'efforts' of others, other than say it's about the same effort to paint something right as wrong...

Comments along the lines of "but another loco/carriage/whatever was painted/modified far worse" doesn't justify anything really

And the "loco is mine so I'll paint it wrong just to annoy enthusiasts" approach seems like a lack of respect for the history of said loco, and also quite immature IMO

I await the "my mate fitted a V8 engine into his vintage Riley so the wrong colour is trivial" etc etc

 

I think that the 1980s was the era when a greater desire for authenticity became more noticeable. The Keighley & Worth Valley decided to go for a 1950s branch line look, with stations and stock all painted, as far as possible, to match that era. Obviously, there still had to be compromises as some of the locos, even if painted up in 1950s livery (early or late), would have been unlikely to appear on a short ex-Midland Railway banch in Yorkshire - notably 34092. On the main line, it was the painting of the "Beryl and Cheryl" Mk 1 set into maroon and another set of Mk 1s into chocolete & cream. I suspect the latter set was done up for GWR 150; I know the maroon set was painted by 1986 (if not earlier) as it was used on the Salisbury-Yeovil specials in October of that year, hauled by Clan Line. Mind you, at the other rend of the scale, post-steam era liveries began to appear behind steam. I have a picture of Britannia taken at Romsey in 1994 with some NSE-liveried Mark 1s in tow and also one of S15 828 at Nutfield in 1997 with three Inter City "Raspberry Ripple" liveried carriages behind the tender.

By then, however, such an inauthentic combination was seen as a bit of a turn-off at least as far as the photographic comunity was concerned. Back in the late 1970s or early 1980s, it was a different matter. I can recall photographing Leander opening up through Church Fenton station in October 1979. Totally inauthentic - LMS livery and blue and grey Mk 1s in tow, but a volcanic exhaust. It looked brilliant and at the time, I was absolutely thrilled with my picture. Likewise, a picture of 6000 King George V at Shelwick Junction, Hereford, in February 1981. The sun was out, 6000 was producing a decent exhaust and a couple of GWR lower-quadrant semaphores and the signal box added further interest to the shot. Of course, no blue & grey Mk 1s appeared until several years after the last Kings were withdrawn, but again, who cared in those days?

I'd also agree with Spamcan that travelling on the steam specials in those days were great fun, regardless of the "inauthentic" look of the train. Take the "Mancunian", on which I travelled in May 1980:- 40020 Manchester Piccadilly-Guide Bridge then 76011 and 76021 to Rotherwood sidings via Woodhead - the only occasion I ever travelled on that line or experienced Class 76 haulage. Can't remember what took us to Leeds (and Six Bells Junction can't oblige either), but I already felt it was a pretty good day out by then, even before having any steam haulage. Midland Compound 1000 and Green Arrow came on at that point to take us to Carnforth and the day was rounded off by Sir Nigel Gresley (running as 4498 at the time) taking us back via Hellifield, Blackburn and Bolton. One timer informed us that we hit 72mph between Bolton and Manchester Victoria. And being still a "young person" at the time, my ticket cost me a paltry £5!

I would challenge the most extreme livery pedant to say that he wouldn't wish to join me if I could rig up a tardis to take me back to Manchester 35 years ago and re-do a run like that.

 

And here is the said 'Mancunian' with LNER liveried 4498, blue & grey mk 1 stock and did we care? Did we hell! The sun was shining and steam was running on the mainline. Wonderful.

 

Ah, the good old days. An A4 in a condition it never ran in pre preservation hauling a blue and grey rake that it would never have hauled either. And contrary to what some people would have us believe, that scene is every bit a part of 4498's history as what went before as the loco's history did not cease when she was withdrawn by BR.

 

Thank you for sharing. Looks like Wilpshire? Anyway, happy memories!

 

Yes, it is Wilpshire John. Didn't she set some fires off on the climb to Sough later, which meant any steam had to have a diesel pilot for a few weeks after?

 

I don't remember any fires being set off by 4498, but you could be right. It was a very dry spring in 1980 and I remember that two weeks later, another train running to Manchester to move a loco for the Rainhilll 150 event required a diesel pilot. I can't remember what the steam loco was - possibly MR 1000. The SRPS somehow managed to get round the ban, running Maude and the two Caledonian coaches via the G&SWR and S&C lines all the way to Manchester that same day. That's how I recognised the location of your picture! I was standing at the same spot to see Maude pass through. Regrettably, the sun was much lower in the sky when it came through and my picture isn't a patch on yours.

 

1. In your opinion.

2. No less immature than the hissy fits thrown by those who disapprove of the slightest deviation from what they deem authentic.

3. Seen what happens in the world of street rods? V8s and fancy paint schemes abound on 50s/60s classics that must make the purists go apoplectic.

 

The shot of 4498 at Wilpshire was taken on the 3 May 1980. Maude came down from Scotland for the Rainhill cavalcade on the 17 May and the story at the time was if she had to have a diesel pilot, she wasn't going! I don't know if that's true, seems far fetched to me, but she came down under her own steam. Here she is at Langho.

 

.
Got to love that headboard. Happy days.

 

Two good photos there, Alan.

 

Thanks.

 

Not witnessed any ‘hissy fits’ so not sure what that means…

I thought the initial debate was more or less about why paint a loco wrong when it’s as easy to paint it right, and from what I remember some of the ‘excuses’ we’ve had so far are –


Owner wants to annoy enthusiasts/see what a spurious livery might look like – seems to disrespect the history of loco just acting on a whim, so not really much of a reason IMO

Mainline steam in the 70’s was so great the loco livery didn’t matter – it’s easy to see why the thrill of steam overshadowed the colour of the loco but that doesn’t mean it’s ok to deliberately paint one wrong

Loco’s have been in the wrong livery longer than the authentic one – don’t see how this makes it any more acceptable

Loco’s with all the (mostly hidden from view) modifications for mainline running aren’t authentic anyway – but they are essential modifications, an incorrect livery isn’t

Loco looks better in a spurious livery than in scrap condition – which is obvious but it would look even better in a correct livery, no excuse for painting it wrong

Joe Public wouldn't even notice the difference - so it might as well be correct then, and enthusiasts certainly notice the difference

In the world of ‘street rods’ classic cars are ‘modded’ to a great extent…


Although so far I don’t think we’ve had –


Paint is more expensive these days

A lot of people are colour blind so it doesn’t matter

The only true original paint is from when the loco left the works

Henry The Green Engine is a green Black 5 so that makes it ok...

At my local heritage railway the station cat isn’t even original…

The moon landings were faked...

Bulleid pacifics are reliable performers on the mainline…

 

This is the problem with the entire debate. The doctrinaire side comes up with all this stuff, but actually when you get down to it a right coat of paint is one which successfully protects the locomotive, and a wrong coat of paint is one that doesn't. All else is froth.

Choices of colour, well everyone has their reasons for the colours they choose. You can label reasons excuses if you like, but it doesn't make a scrap of difference. It does, however, bring an aggressive tone to the debate which is unhelpful.

 

Totally agree that paint should successfully protect a locomotive, but that still doesn't mean it's ok to paint it wrong.

If the reasons make little sense, and they shouldn't be called excuses, what should we refer to them as?

 

Do learn to spell properly.

 

Sorry, corrected my post

 

Its only those with a particular, dare I say extreme, viewpoint who think that the reasons make little sense.