48624

Pot, kettle, black.

 

1. A bit rich coming from someone who presumes much in some of his posts.
2. A little bit of research would acquaint you with the exterior condition of the coach in question but to save you the bother it is in lined umber and cream with the name Botaurus - the scientific name for a bittern - writ large on the body side. A livery and name never carried in BR service I'd wager.
http://www.rail37.com/2010/Resources/NWC_March2010-2/5627A.jpg

 

There are no complaints about the mineral wagons because there's nothing to complain about, the idea behind the windcutter set was to reproduce as accurately as possible the once common site of a BR unfitted mineral train and that's what has been achieved. From my picture further back in this thread tell me how you would know they are vacuum fitted?
As for the GWR signals I think it was David Clark who funded the Swithland signalling who specified them and there was the joint line with the GW into London.

If you don't like any of this then simply stay at home looking at your books

 

I don't really feel I can agree that complaints about style of English usage would be a first on the internet. My impression is that such complaints date back at least to newsgroups in the early 1990s. I didn't use net services much before then to have an opinion on an earlier onset.

 

So what you're saying then John is that inaccuracies are ok as long as they are not noticeable or you like the look of them? Goes back to what I said earlier, many people's view of authenticity doesn't stretch beyond a coat of paint.

 

If you would care to point me in that direction, I would be happy to clarify.

It was rather late last night and I was giving you an honest answer to the best of my ability at the time.

The link is interesting. No, that wouldn't be my choice of livery. As I've said before (to you no less a number of times) I understand owner's prerogative but that does not mean I agree with it. However I will concede that the use of Botaurus is clever and no doubt the livery is Pullman inspired. There were Mk1 Pullman coaches in that livery so it's not a huge stretch perhaps, but nevertheless as you say, is inaccurate.

It would not be my choice, which I think is what was the cut of your jibe.

 

That doesn't quite follow does it?

You call someone's opinion (mine as it happens) "rubbish". Direct quote. Said person asks why you feel that way and you won't give a reasonable answer, instead refusing to accept the alternate opinion and continuing to berate that person. There's plenty of examples where I've conceded ground in this thread: you are welcome to go back and read for yourself.

Lord knows Spamcan, you do spend your time ducking and dodging, and deflecting questions and never quite giving a straight answer - and it always seems to be everyone else's but your problem. This isn't the first time we've crossed swords and it always ends with you berating me with insults rather than telling me why exactly you disagree with me. That says more about your conduct than mine quite frankly.

I'd prefer not to cross swords: I like debate and I like to question things and find out answers. It's more educative and widen's one's views. I'm actually interested in your alternate point of view and if you (and Ralph) had put it across to me I might have changed my opinion.

But how can I change my informed view if I don't know what your view actually is?

 

Fair enough Jim. I meant a first for myself but I see where you are coming from and can agree with that.

 

It stretches to lots of things, signals, telegraph poles etc. I did say as far as possible, to say as it can't be done 100% so it's not worth doing it at all is nonsense and I think you know it.

 

I missed this post but yes we do owe you a big thanks for this and I assume you did the 9F as well. 48624 was a Willesden loco for almost all it's working life and we had a former 1A fireman on the charter, he said as a return to what a typical Willesden 8F used to look like it doesn't come any better than that.
I meant to say that it was after the gunge was removed that the damage was done, the dirt on the 9F didn't do it any harm.

 

No one here has been baying for 100% accuracy. I think everyone accepts that compromises must be made to run steam engines today. However, the colour of an engine bears no relevance to it performance on the mainline so there's no practical reason why a livery cannot be correct. The livery tends to be the first thing you notice anyway, rather than the presence of a AWS box or whatever. The fact that livery is both the most obvious thing and irrelevant to running today, seem to make a convincing case that in general, by and large, there's little reason to paint a loco wrong.

Unless of course you wanted to of course

 

I don't know about John, but I'd suggest the majority of the forum would agree with that! We all know we need modern bits and bobs on mainline locos, and in some cases heritage ones as well. In addition, many coaches now have LEDs and new types of batteries. But it doesn't show, so it doesn't matter, as long as it all looks the same from the outside so to speak. I think that's a very reasonable and practical viewpoint to take.

 

Which of course is the point; the man who paid for it to be restored wanted it that colour. Sure a red 8F looks a bit odd, but at least it's a running example as opposed to a heap of rust. Unfortunately one of the downsides to the passion of heritage railway enthusiasts is that sometimes they have zero tolerance of other peoples wishes and views.

The past is dead, all we can do is enjoy the locos for what they are and give thanks if they do tie up with our expectations.

 

You are quite right there! Hence why my view was reduced to "rubbish" despite wishing to be open minded about people's views

 

I agree wholeheartedly that 100% accuracy is nigh on impossible to achieve, especially on a working exhibit. Indeed there are modifications and alterations on 34081 that would never have been seen on a flat top in BR days but nobody mentions them as they either don't know they've been made or don't know they're non standard but if we get the shade of green wrong then you can bet your bottom dollar the flak will start flying.

 

As a mater of interest ,I would say that 48624 past thro' Loughborough, not Central but Midland during its days at Willesden . There was a coal train that I think railway men called the Grove . It ran from a colliery near Ilkeston to a London Transport power station in North London .The route with the empties was WCML ,Northampton ,Mkt Harboro' ,Loughborough, Toton ,loads back the same way.Always a 1A 8F ,the wagons were bogie hoppers and wouldn't look out of place on to-days railway. Willesden only had about 20 8Fs at one time ,I say only because Wellingboro' and Toton could muster up about 60 each,so 48624 almost certainly would have took its turn on this job.

 

The power station was Stonebridge Park which, I think, supplied power to the LMR DC suburban lines out of Euston and Broad Street. Someone with more knowledge than me may be able to confirm that.

 

A number of practical reasons have been advanced in the two most salient threads. That you may not like or agree with those reasons is fair enough. However it would be nice if those who disagree could accept that opinions differ, and that it is most probably rare for a coat of paint that some consider inauthentic to be applied in a spirit of petulance or destructiveness: rather it will be for considered reasons that are valid to the decision makers.

 

Really Jim? Do enlighten us then! I'm still no further to understanding. Not for lack of asking mind! On two occasions posters have even refused to give their views.

Which I'm perfectly happy to accept but we are still non the wiser on the "authentic" side of the debate why such a livery would be applied, I'm afraid!

If it comes down to it, and it's just owners prerogative, fine but let's not pretend that the choice of livery is for commercial or historical reasons. It's certainly not for recreating the past or respecting the history of the engine.

 

I travelled very often on the DC line from an early age and still do occasionally but my memories from long ago are hazy. I seem to remember several power stations, including one at North Wembley. I think a building beside Willesden Suburban Junction, still visible on Google Earth, is or was one. If there were that many along that stretch there must have been some more further along towards Watford but I don't remember where. Anyone have better information?