44767 George Stephenson

I haven't heard that as a purchase price but I believe it would be well over that to buy and overhaul if you are paying contractors.

 

£350K was a price I heard mentioned to purchase but as you point out the work required at contractors rates would probably be double that on top if it's as tired as folk seem to think. The boiler is still "in ticket" mind, though not sure whether it is unique? I believe the only other 5MT boiler with top feed on the front ring is the one with 5491 but whether otherwise identical to 44767s I don't know. The latter has a longer chassis to accomodate the roller bearings IIRC.

 

I agree with you, there were only four named 5s and and that's how it should be, unfortunately none survived although there was a big effort to 45156 which lasted to the end.

 

I would expect a succesful investor to only purchase at rock-bottom price.

 

£1M sounds a bit over the top for an as seen price if she is in very poor condition. I can't see anyone paying that for 44767 even though she is unique.
Out of ticket BR Class 5 73096 recently purchased by the MHR cost £400,000 to buy and they estimate the overhaul will cost about the same, so she is costing about £800,000 in total.

 

I couldnt agree more. At the 'behind the scenes' event at the SVR yesterday it was eye opening to see just how much of a loco's in the overhaul queue is replaced with brand new metal. 2968 had a new section of plate frame, 75069 getting a lot of new boiler and smokebox, 4930 awaiting new cylinders. The history of steam is very much alive and ongoing. 'George Stephenson' is probably one of the most appropriate post 1968 names given to a mainline loco and links us from birth of the railways to the present day. I very much hope 4767 keeps it.

 

History did stop as far as working steam is concerned, what we have now are working museum pieces attempting to recreate as near as possible how it was. 45110 quietly dropped it's name, Biggin Hill and a good thing too. There is an educational aspect to it, a lot of the non enthusiasts still think every loco had a name.

 

Clearly that is only one interpretation of "what we have now" and owners, many and varied, will have a diverse range of motivations other than locos as "museum pieces attempting to recreate the past ...".
On balance I prefer locos to remain without nameplates if they never carried them in original service. Oddly, though, I think it would be appropriate for a Scot to be renamed "Royal British Legion" or a BoB to be given the name "Royal Air Force" by way of tribute but I can see the counter argument is it disrespects the original naming source and/or history?

 

I dunno, it's one thing to name a loco that didn't have a name (although that still feels a little weird to me) but changing the name of one that does seems to be disregarding its history.

Although that said, I don't find anything wrong with temporary changes of ID, as per 34046/30452 or 45407/45157.

I'm not really sure why there's such a fine gradation of what feels right, if I'm honest.

 

You have to be a bit careful with renaming, as long as everyone knows it's often not quite right. The real 34052 had a different tender, 34046 had one of the Four Tenders rebodied to a different design in BR days. 45157 was a short firebox engine and only ever had a domeless boiler and 45407 is a long firebox sloping throatplate loco with separate topfeed

 

Not sure that I agree with your statement that history did stop as far as working steam is concerned. In many cases on heritage railways they aren't museum pieces but locos continuing to work. The ultimate example of this is the Dartmouth Steam Railway (is that today's title?) where locos could never be considered to be preserved and those unsuited to their needs have been put up for sale. The NYMR is another line where locos work for a living and certainly arem't museum pieces. Joe Public like names (how many times have I been asked what the loco is called) and giving them one creates an identity.
Perhaps we should forget this idea of preserved steam locos in original livery and have each railway with its own house style and livery. The variety of colour would be great and the paint frothers would overspill in profusion

 

It was. Not sure what that has to do with the discussion, though.

 

I slightly disagree, a steam railway is a working museum trying to recreate the atmosphere of a bygone age. The Dartmouth railway was an exception but even they are now coming back to correct liveries and presentation (Manor in BR Black not the spurious GW livery) and even they do photo charters now. Joe Public might like names but isn't it better to let them know that loco names were the exception rather than the rule. If the heritage railways did convert to being some sort of linear steam train theme parks then I think you will find a lot of the support would dry up, the two that get my money wouldn't get anymore neither would the loco owning societies I belong to if they did the same.

 

I had assumed that was a typo

 

Not only that, most locos have had changes or additions in "preservation" to better suit them to modern day use, so cannot be strictly said to be preserved.

 

It was. Unreliable fingers, doncha know.

 

It depends a bit on how it is done, but I don't have a problem with the idea of continued history reflecting the use a locomotive - or carriage - gets today, rather than drawing a hard line at main line withdrawal. In some ways, I think it might almost be useful if a railway with a mixed collection freed itself from the absolute demands of authenticity and used a house livery reflecting the history of the railway across all of its fleet.

As for names, I have no problem with well chosen and appropriate names being used - especially where time honoured. In the diesel world, I regret 50007 reverting from Sir Edward Elgar to Hercules; on steam, I would be extremely sad to see (4)5428 lose it's name.

 

I actually joined up with the lads after the scheme had failed & we subsequently had to preserve examples of Industrial locos from the Widnes area. We were also involved with retriving 47298 from Barry.

Bob.