Steam Locomotive Restoration of the Decade 2010-2019

Pretty much this!

Owners prerogative applies but let’s not pretend they are somehow as relevant as a recreation of a genuine livery spec of an old railway company.

Would you paint the HMS Belfast in white star line colours? No? So why is this somehow acceptable under the flag of “restoration?”

If we accept the premise that we:

• restore as close as possible to an original condition
• practicalities of the above will be be limited by the intent (museum? Preserved railway use? Mainline?) - eg warning flashes on an A4 in garter blue - necessary deviation from history for H&S reasons

Then you can legitimately rank “restorations” - as this thread was leaning towards doing - by the accuracy and quality of such a restoration.

In the case of Galatea (and I apologise for somewhat picking on this loco) it’s been magnificently rebuilt and then put into an historically inauthentic livery.

Physically restored, restoration not as good as 35006 for example where an authentic livery is well applied.

This thread was about the best restorations of the last decade. How could we possibly be fair in this without paying heed to the simple fact of historical accuracy where the whole is concerned?

Nobody is counting rivets - we are trying to be fair and reasonable.

I don’t buy the “it’s an historic livery now” argument as that effectively renders every painter of every railway company that ever took pride in their work as meaningless.

Which as we can see from some basic research and photography - that railway companies took pride in their locomotives liveries.

So should we!

 

Mind you, neither Talyllyn nor Dolgoch were ever actually numbered ahead of preservation, just as neither ex-Corris loco previously bore any name. Iconoclastic lot, those early preservationists!

 

In context, "service" is pre-withdrawal from BR.

That issue applies to any "what if", and at this point I move towards @RalphW's view of "in service" - those liveries are what those locomotives wore at that time.

 

Galateas livery never existed on the Jubilees.

The Peppercorn A2s built between 1947-8 were turned out in LNER apple green liveries with 3 digit numbers as in that style.

Where Blue Peter differs is in the apple green cylinder covers and gold leaf numerals - the former was only applied to Darlington built locos of specific types in earlier years and the latter was yellow or cream gill sans for austerity measures were still in place.

 

I disagree with the Belfast analogy - the use of the White Star Line colours would not just be historically inaccurate, but a fundamental misrepresentation of what Belfast was.

But taking your broader argument, I accept that the choice of livery may - and legitimately so - influence our individual judgment of the quality of a restoration, depending on our individual subjective view of what goes to make a restoration "good". But, using your examples, I wouldn't say that @RalphW would be wrong to rank it above (say) 35006 because of the livery decisions, even if I might make a different choice.

Ultimately, though, the problem with "Galatea" is that the BR crimson is simply not a good livery. But that debate belongs elsewhere.

 

maybe we need to qualify what we want in terms of 'restoration'. Are we wanting to restore the near-accurate events from our pasts and railway history or are we wanting to simply restore an old locomotive to working order? Both could be acceptable but not necessarily to everyone.
If Galatea can be the wrong colour, have the wrong type of numbering yet still fill profitable WCR trains through the Pennines or to Scarborough, does this say that it's authenticity really doesn't matter? If on the other hand Galatea was a restoration funded by donations made on the basis of historic authenticity then I accept that some who donated may feel aggrieved.

As a question, is there a restoration from past decade that is near-perfect in terms of an accurate representation from history? I would nominate 35018 as my favourite since it has maintained it's unique-ness as first MN rebuild. I'll leave someone with better eyes and memory to tell me that the green is wrong shade though.

 

The SS Shieldhall, a former Glasgow Corporation vessel is indeed running in White Star colours at the moment...............

 

Which bit of Galatea's livery never existed on the Jubilees?

 

On the livery question (deep breath ...)

I'll take three locos from our own line, so as not to single any one else out: "Stepney', "Fenchurch" and "Bluebell".

Firstly, "Bluebell". Current livery is essentially a blue version of SE&CR livery, with the SE&CR crest replaced by a Bluebell "Floreat Vapor" crest and the name in the same block-shaded style that would otherwise say S.E.C.R. Clearly a "fictitious" livery. However, pre-preservation, "Bluebell" had about five main liveries in 50 years (SECR green, SECR Austerity green, Southern green, Southern black, BR black, with variations within those); by contrast, it has been "Bluebell blue" now for most of the last 60 years - longer than it existed pre-preservation, and far far longer than it ever existed in any "authentic" livery.

Secondly "Stepney". It is currently - and has been for most of the last 60 years - in Stroudley improved engine green, even down to the LBSCR practice of recording mileage and driver name in the cab. The current version was meticulously researched for shade and details of lining. Except ... Stepney is an A1x terrier, and would never have had that livery in that form, which basically dates from about 1912.

Then "Fenchurch". She is currently Marsh umber, and numbered 672 in the LBSCR duplicate list with correct pattern wooden number. (At that period, LBSCR locos entering the duplicate list gave up their cast numberplates to their replacement, and gained wooden number plates instead). So some accurate touches - but the loco still carries its name, completely incorrectly (should just be lettered LBSC or LB&SCR for that era); the number is a complete fabrication, since Fenchurch never entered the LBSCR duplicate list; and it never carried umber at all, having been sold (while still in Stroudley livery) to Newhaven Harbour Co. in 1902, and not returning to the fold until that company was absorbed by the Southern Railway in 1927, at which point she was painted green and numbered B636.

Of the three, I find "Bluebell", with the completely fictitious livery the least problematic, since it is not claiming to be anything other than a Bluebell corporate livery. "Stepney" I don't mind, partly through long association with that scheme; and partly because it is at least correct for the loco: it's reasonably picky to notice the change in design between A1 and A1x Terrier. (Equally though, by the same token would I support re-paining the Stirling O1 class in SER livery? No - the distinction between SER O class and SECR O1 rebuild is far too great).

By contrast, "Fenchurch" really grates on me: everything just looks wrong, on so many levels. I really hope it gets changed at the next overhaul - Newhaven Harbour Co. would suit, and be more appropriate. I think it is incumbent on us to either present historically authentic liveries. Or, if you make the argument that modern companies are just continuing to run a service, then have the courage of your convictions and have a corporate livery. Afterall, West Coast paint their class 47 maroon with yellow stripes and "West Coast Railways" branding: if you don't want to paint a steam loco in a scheme it originally had, why not go down that route? It would be more honest than trying to justify a red 8F on the grounds that the LMS painted some of its locos red...

Tom

 

A possible argument then is that she would have had gold leaf if they could have afforded it, so applying it in recent times is restoration to the way things should have been. Meanwhile the apple green could be considered an anachronism, applied after nationalisation only because the fledgling BR hadn't got around to deciding about colours.

There is plenty of scope here for differences of opinion about the relative importance and acceptability of various features. Different whistles? Air pumps proudly on show or discreetly hidden away, or absent and the locos restricted to vacuum-braked stock? Chimney, cab etc modified to fit the present smaller loading gauge? Number and nameplates changed to pretend to be another member of the class that didn't survive? Or in one notorious instance even one that did survive and is in another location?

For me, all these details matter a lot less than the basic fact of steam locos, including many that would have been scrapped fifty or more years ago but for Woodhams, now pulling trains full of happy people, especially if that's on main lines. The liveries I like best myself are the GWR and LMS express passenger ones or the similar BR versions, but I'd prefer a sky-blue-pink loco to none.

 

If narrow-gauge locos count, this would be a good choice of restoration. Around 80 years of not running

 

The whole thing. BR numbering with LMS style lining and a darker maroon BR style livery. Never happened in LMS or BR days. It is a fiction. That is factual.

I think Tom has above summed up the issues far better than I.

FWIW Tom, btw, if it were up to me a serious conversation about those locos and liveries would be had - though I will admit to a fondness for Bluebells livery in spite of it being historically inaccurate on the grounds that a lot of work and thought went into making it look authentic.

 

BR crimson is a great livery. On a Duchess, or a Princess, which actually wore it.

 

We will need to disagree!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

So, basically, you are going on about the different shades of crimson lake, LMS, BR and Carnforth. Please note that 45603, 45604, 45613, 45614, 45630, 45640, 45664, 45669, 45670, 45680, 45685, 45690, 45694, 45702 and 45720 all had LMS crimson lake livery and received BR numerals, with 45670 lasting until the beginning of 1951 before it was repainted brunswick green. Source is Townsin.

 

How many of those had a late crest emblem and other BR accoutrements?

I’d actually be all over that for a Jubilee - LMS colours and BR numbers but with the early BR branding or LMS lettering.

Because, crucially; it actually happened.

Unlike that late crest livery it is currently wearing which simply did not happen on a jubilee.

I know to many it’s a subtle thing but with the wealth of information out there, such as that you’ve presented, it’s got to be more satisfying to present something unusual that is historically correct, surely?

 

Fair.

 

You have been proved wrong on your original points, now you have resorted to clutching at straws. What is your opinion on 46233?

 

This does make me wonder whether we should also see preservation history sometimes as part of the loco’s history... For me, that’s why I liked seeing Stepney in the very early preservation black in the short last ticket, it’s representing its role as a preservation pioneer. The improved engine green might be wrong for an A1X but I love it as it’s the loco as it was in the 60s, and in the Awdry book - I cant help feeling those two things are more significant to mark than the pre-preservation career...

I can’t deny I’d love to see Fenchurch in Newhaven Harbour livery again as that’s what I knew him in during the 80s when I was growing up. I don’t know if current A1ish guise but in Improved Engine Green is more likely for the 150th to represent the closest the engine can get to as-built?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk