48624

'Plenty of locos and items of rolling stock are or have been painted in liveries which the purists deem "inauthentic".
It is not the purists or anyone else who deems a livery inauthentic. It is inauthentic. History is set in stone, it can't be changed, except by lying, or doing something wrong ie, not as it was.

'Such "inauthentic" colour schemes exists in other branches of the heritage transport movement ' I'm not a close follower of other transport movements but, I'm not aware of any aircraft, or road vehicles that are restored incorrectly. There are plenty of Spitfires all around the world. As far as I know, they are all restored accurately. The recent mass flypast didn't have any red, pink or purple Spits. (Blue is accurate) All old Royal Blue coaches are restored correctly. Royal Blue.... oddly enough or, white for the National livery of the 70's. Why should railways be the exception? History IS set in stone and, there is nothing anyone can do about that, except by getting it wrong.

 

Spitfire equivalent of 48624?

 

What was that in aid of? Most curious!

 

Presumably the owner liked it that way! G-FIRE, at Halfpenny Green Air Show in 1983. Plenty of other photos of it in that livery on t'internet.

 

Seems bonkers to me, but I fully appreciate the effort in keeping a Spitfire in working order. I suspect it sounded rather good in the air! Is it a Mk IX Spitfire I think? My knowledge of that aircraft is non existent (don't think I've ever seen it before today) but the front end looks like a later variant.

My personal preference would be a livery representative of, or accurate to, its war service of course.

This is the thing I think we're maybe missing. I don't think anyone doesn't appreciate the efforts in keeping steam alive whether on the mainline or not. But if we're trying to keep it alive as heritage - and we're looking constantly for funding from governmental bodies for which heritage and preserving it will be key - then we should be able to reasonably try and portray such heritage as best we can.

I think William McAlpine put it best regarding his ownership of Flying Scotsman: he never saw himself as an owner, but as a custodian of of a piece of our history that would be passed on to a new generation to enjoy.

 

It's one of the Griffon engined ones: Mk XIV or later. These were introduced from 1943, I believe.

 

Spencer Flack's Mk.XIV G-FIRE unless I'm mistaken. He had a Sea Fury similarly painted and that displayed at Rainhill in 1980.

 

History is created by the second. In the case of a Terrier, at what point in its life is its history "set in stone?"
Not all Spitfires are or have been restored accurately. In another post there is a picture of one that was painted mostly red, there's a French Mk.XIX masquerading as Mk.XIV, another French MK.XIX flew with a Griffon from a Shackleton complete with contra rotating prop. Other warbird examples of non original paint schemes exist.

 

Is this authentic? G-ALGT was owned by Rolls Royce and in the 50s used for Griffon engine development work and then as a chase/high-speed/taxi/communications aircraft. Here she is in Rolls Royce housecolours.

 

Ah well, They get it wrong in other transport circles as well. History is set in stone when the object is to preserve it. If that isn't the object, then anything goes. So, that is the crux of the matter. What is the purpose of preservation and recreating history? Is it important or, will any personal interpretation of history do just as well?
Re. the blue and cream Spit. If RR painted it that way in the 50's, then it is authentic. If not, it isn't.

 

You're objecting to my viewpoint on the basis of the phraseology I use?

Good grief! I'm sorry if my use of the English language offends! That's a first on the internet and then some.

Surely you can see how utterly unfair such a response is?

No, you don't have to justify your response, but you don't have to be rude either. Perhaps you could treat me more as a human being and not something to knock and then not even give the reasons why.

I simply do not understand why people have to be unpleasant, full stop, when we're all here for the same purpose which - surely - is to discuss the subject at hand in a constructive manner. If that's no longer the case why should anyone bother justifying their world view - we'll just set up boxing rings across the country for the settling of debates instead

It would make the house of Commons more fun, that said!

 

I must say I rather like that colour scheme. The livery is of course authentic as she's owned and used for specific purposes. If restored into this livery the plane would be historically accurate for that period of her existence.

Yes, we make history every day, but if we're preserving and then restoring a locomotive, creating history rather defeats the point of restoring or preserving!

 

Sorry, Ralph, but you do. If you tell someone that they are wrong, then common courtesy at least says should explain why. "Because I say so," isn't very enlightening.

 

deleted due to constant whinging.

 

Only in your opinion do they get it wrong. The French Spit with the Shackleton engine was done that way because it was the only Griffon they could get. The alternative was keeping it grounded. The XIX posing as a XIV was done to commemorate a unit that flew XIVs when no XIV was available. Whilst I'm sure there are those who complain about such things I've met just one and you meet a lot of people at airshows and the vast majority are just happy to see these planes fly. You'd better not look at the Hunter "Miss Demeanour," one of the most popular aircraft on the display circuit yet painted like a custom car.

 

uThat nicely illustrates the extent of straying away from the point of preserving the past that rail has gone. We've long ago passed the point where newer locos have been preserved for longer than they were in service. As that process continues, will their original life, before withdrawal, become irrelevant? The KWVR liveries from the late 60's, are part of their own history. Is that as important as their BR/SR/LMS life?

Posted just after Spamcan's.
Yes, I've seen Miss Demeanour. I live near Bournemouth, where it is or, was kept. Very pretty but, gimmicky.

 

Don't worry Ralph, these perfectionists make great play about others only accepting their own opinion but they themselves refuse to accept the opinion of others if it goes against their own.

 

You are still ignoring the Set In Stone bit. (SIS) It has nothing to do with any opinion. It is either correct or, incorrect.