Heritage Line Loco Power Requirements

And buy shares to fund extensions = much to the chagrin of PH.

 

For once I do agree with PH - I wonder why the GWSR with it's multiple landslips runs a Merchant Navy pacific.

 

I fear such a common sense response will elicit more pomposity and wim wam about a gricers way of thinking to be honest...

I apologise to the 82045 team for taking their thread further off topic!

 

Is that agreeing with 1472's post or disagreeing?

 

Here's a question for PH. If a railway is offered an operational loco at no cost to them and it falls into the too big for them category, should they say have said no? That's not hypothetical because I know of such instances.

 

Agreeing - I think

I read it as:

@1472: "I don't think 6697 has worked since"

@The Saggin' Dragon: "[No, it has] not, according to the GWS website".

Comma after the word "not" added by TJ at no extra cost Lynne Truss would be proud ...

Tom

 

Because it can.

 

And maybe, just maybe, they believe it provides greater variety, greater interest, greater spectacle, greater attraction, fires more imaginations, puts more smiles on faces, drops more jaws, and creates more memories than say a fleet of std 2/3/4's. (Not that there is anything wrong or undesirable about them either.)

And they are no doubt proud of their achievements and rightfully just want to show off!

 

[

Most "normals" would have little awareness of what sort of locomotive it is unless someone told them it was Flying Scotsman or Tornado. I would hope that vanity did not play a part in big chufferitis.

PH

 

"Normals" are potentially enthusiasts that just don't know it yet - and that goes double for "normal offspring"! It would be a shame not to inspire and educate about what was, and all that still can be.

 

First you denied having said it, now you don't. Well it was a pretty OTT thing to say for there would be ample water for a full return journey by 78019. Probably not for the Jinty but presumably no chances are taken by GCR management. As for crews "preferring" a KA, there are lots of things we prefer rather than actually need.

This expression means no more than "in my opinion".

PH

 

Agreed, but it doesn't need a big chuffer. 82045 would be more than big enough.

Paul H

 

As it happened I had a trip behind 35006 this morning. It is ludicrously overpowered for the line and the regulator basically wasn't opened there or back on the trip. As an enthusiast I found it all rather lacking. As for the 'normals'? They absolutely loved it. Turns out 'anonymous strangers' have more than one view.

 

I was normal until I went on a visit to Tyseley in 1974 and saw Flying Scotsman, Clun Castle and Kolhapur. I also found out that there were many more steam locos extant at a place called Barry. The rest, as they say....


So, we should really be talking about 82045 but this is National Preservation and this is a big steam locomotive. I love 'em. I sometimes get the feeling from some of your posts that you don't really like heritage railways but I'm sure that's not the case!

 

Ideally it should be "Thanks but it would be much better given to X who can make more use of it". However, much smaller things than locomotives which are no use to the recipient tend to get accepted. This can be from a desire not to cause offence which is commendable. If done through a mixture of W.I.B.N. and "big chufferitis" in the case of locomotives; not so commendable.

PH

 

82045 would/will be without doubt an excellent loco for just about any heritage line. Taking working big locos out of the heritage scene risks loosing some X factor. A bit like taking the dominant predator out of an ecosystem - the whole system suffers and is lesser for it. There is more to the heritage loco equation than shovel fulls of coal.

One very good thing in my book about 82045 is that it brings back a class and more variety.

 

I don't like the expression "heritage railways" very much. Take the picture (which is great) attached to your post. Beautiful job done on the loco but the scene is about as kosher as a £4 note. Its not alone. Why not be honest and call them "tourist railways". Even "preserved" is better than "heritage".

To answer your question directly, I like some of them but others I would not want to live next to!

Paul H

There is nothing very "heritage" about big locomotives on rural byways that never, or hardly ever, saw them in the day. Some can get away with it but fewer still actually need the horsepower. The place for these machines is the main line for as long as the main line will tolerate them. Every mass trespass by gricers to get photographs makes this a bit more uncertain.

Paul H

 

You had better check the web address bar thingy at the top of your screen - I think you are on the wrong forum!