LSWR T3 563

Baffled is one word for thr NRM's actions, darn right disrepectful and inconsiderate is another! My best guess id the NRM quite simply do not believe they have to explain themselves to anybody, least of all enthusiasts such as on this forum, who've no doubt put in alot and time and money to help contribute to the care of such locomotives like 563. But I digress, we can whine and bemoan on and on about what our supposed caretakers of the national collection have done, but what's done is done.

I will not speak anymore on the matter of the SR speaking up about their plans, for as some have already pointed out here, despite calls for patience some folks on here just won't have it. As for your concerns in particular 35B, I say the same once more, a little patience is just needed on this matter is all. Plus if I'm being perfectly blunt, once the locomotive is in their ownership, the SR is uner no obligation to tell you or anyone a thing if they so wished! (Which part of me would like to see, at least intially, considering the attititude some have had on this matter towards them...) But they won't, for are more then aware of many peoples' concerns over this, and will sure enough clear matters in time. When that is...? Probably when they've agreed to do by NRM instructions I'd imagine.

If anyone wants to pick grievances with someone over this affair, I'd fix your sights on the NRM for starting it in the first place.

 

Genuine question - Is sea air such an issue if an item is "looked after" be it static or operational ?, It's not exactly going to be left to rot like the residents of Barry were.

 

If you'd read my posts, you'd note that my primary beef was and is with the NRM as a public body, and subject to the standards we expect public bodies to be held to (they are also subject to such minor matters as the Freedom of Information Act, so do have obligations to explain themselves). I also fully accept that the Swanage Railway, as a private body, is under no obligation to share anything in particular.

I repeat, again, for the hard of thinking, my concern is firstly with the manner of the deaccession by the NRM, and second at the lack of any meaningful information from either NRM or SR about how 563's future is being safeguarded as a result of this transfer of ownership. I do not have a problem per se with the Swanage Railway having 563, though it has to be said that I regard the transition from museum conditions to (in the absence of any known plans for indoors exhibition) open air storage a retrograde step.

 

Amazing that everyone is demanding press releases, restoration assessments, storage plans, salt concentrations, etc etc when these internal decisions are exactly that. It has been barely a week since the announcement. Why can't you wait until you hear further news? You may even have to wait a few weeks. Put a note in your diaries to start being disgusted on here again in early May. Until then, please give it a rest.

 

Sorry, if they are internal decisions, that raises major questions about the NRM's approach which make this more, not less, serious.

If there are substantive plans, as I very much hope there were in place last week, my hope was that enough information would have been released to allay the fears about the NRM's approach.

The NRM emerges poorly from this, I hope the Swanage are not cross contaminated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Give it a rest, and wait! You do know that the railway has been running a major event this weekend, don't you?! I'm not involved in either organisation, but the instant demands and criticisms in this thread are amazing.

 

It was not my intention to make you seem antagonistic 35B, rather that you seem to suggest that the SR should be taking a share of these criticisms, when it is more then likely they can't as the time they can do so is dictated by the NRM itself.
And if I'm being honest in my observation, you don't appear to one that views the SR with that much regard, or give them the benifit of the doubt. I'm not wishing to state that is the case, it's just how your statements appear to be suggesting is all. (The per se dosen't help the case.)

As for the 'retrograde' you speak of, again that is your opinion and I respect that. This is one subject we shall always not agree on however, for I honestly prefer having a steam engine doing what it was always designed for, rather then being stuffed and mounted gathering dust, being visited by most folks that neither have that much thought for the engine's significance, nor care for this 'conservation and original material' people tend to go on about with these older engines. Metal is metal, be it from the past or today, I do not see much reasoning in gong that far to preserve something that in it's nature naturally wears out anyway.

In fact as I stated before, I wouldn't mind the Swanage Railway taking on more southern orientated engines from the national collection,have them operate in their natural 'home turf' on a southern region branchline. Get the T9 on over, heck even the other M7. They'll get for more attention and appreciation operating there then they'll ever have at the NRM.

 

There is an Ironclad coach awaiting restoration. The nature of SR though dictates use of Mk1 due to their durability to cope with SR intensive service. However with the Devon Belle now getting included as a First Class vehicle on selected service, maybe one-day the Ironclad could provide a similar service on the second set. Similar to what is offered at Embsay / Keighley using their L&Y saloons.

 

To be fair to those on here expressing strong views, last week this loco belonged to "the Nation" i.e. to all of us (not legally, but that is how the NRM described their purchase of FS). Now it belongs to a private group, and we didn't know anything about it until it happened. We now don't know what it's future is or what is planned.
It is not unlike finding out that some young chap you don't know is suddenly going out with your daughter - although you might not have a right to an opinion, it is natural to want to know his intentions...

 

I am aware, and respect their challenges-especially given the point made that the announcement timing was imposed on them.

However, I remain implacably convinced that the obligation in such matters as this is to communicate clearly at the time the arrangement is made.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

At the risk of using facts in the 'sea air' argument, I live half way between Swanage and Corfe and rarely does the humidity rise above 55%. How does that compare with other locations?

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

 

Of course should have added when it is not raining!

Sent from my SM-T700 using Tapatalk

 

You mistake me. If there is a serious plan to restore 563, I shall be delighted. At the moment there is a hint that it might be possible, which is something completely different and rather less. Unless and until such a plan is revealed, I stand by my view that a move from museum to open air is retrograde.

As regards the Swanage Railway, I regard them as a reputable preserved railway. I have no doubt of their good intentions, and I hope that they will have the means while also noting a comment up thread about the size of the membership.

My concerns about the process of this deacession relate to the terms on which it has been conducted, and what commitments are in place to ensure the future well being of 563. The NRM, sadly, does not have a great reputation in this area., which contaminates trust.

That is what should have been clear at the outset, and where clarity is overdue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well noted then, I apologise and retract my suggestions on your stance on this matter, for I meant no persoanl offence.

The lack of trust in the NRM and it's competance to care for items of the national collection is something we can certainly agree on. For while I have no issue with them handing ownership over to another as such, I would concur that as they curators of essentially 'the people's collection', they could have stated their intentions sooner and explained their reasoning. As it now stands however, they've effectively only just anounced it once the deal was signed, making it look questionable to say the least.

I feel most sorry for the SR however, for due to how the NRM have done this, it's made them look like accomplices to some sort of comspiracy when really they have done nothing wrong. They were given the offer, and who can blame them for taking it? (Even if it most likely involved the agreement that they couldn't speak much about it until the official handover, hence peoples' frustrations over it such as yourself.)

 

On a lighter note (and off this heated affair of announcement), what guise does anybody here think it should take on if and when it's restored to working order?

I realise it was withdrawn before BR time, so no BR Black (unless somebody's willing to pay...) Perhaps the standard southern green, or of course the livery it has now.

 

Now you've gone & done it................ cue paint froth arguement..........

 

Well somebody was bound to bring it up...! Might as well skip the tension and bring it up now!

 

Never actually tried that, Robin - but, whatever floats your boat.

 

I'd go with Southern Green, Purely as your more likely to find some Maunsell stock that may just about match rather than some LSWR stock which is rare to non existant.

Then again if it would spend most of it's time coupled to Mk1's it woulden't look right however painted.