5593 to be restored?

It also brought down a lot of years-old undisturbed soot from the underside of bridges and tunnels!

Richard.

 

I rather like the idea, but painting your loco's in luminous green rather negates it in the first place...

 

yeah, but look at his proposed M7 replacement...

I think it was a smokescreen (so to speak), and he just fancied putting a lot of chimneys on too see what happened...

If you look at the permutations of exhausts on a 4-stroke motorcycle (where exhaust gas pressures shouldn't matter that much), you can see how seemingly insignificant differences make a big difference.

 

So how did we get from a LMS 5X to Bulleid - again?

 

Inevitable thread drift? Don't forget we still have livery debate to come yet (Can't wait for that one)

 

It's the third law of NatPres ("All threads will eventually discuss The Leader"). We are about six posts short of reaching that point ...

Tom

 

I thought that discussion was confined to the West Somerset thread! - Oh, silly me! You mean a different Leader.

Peter

 

Having just rewatched the Robson Green documentary about Flying Scotsman from 2016 on YouTube there were 2 moments that stood out, The first was when Alan Peglars daughter got slightly emotional about seeing it back in one piece.
The second was when Sir Bill said he already had one steam engine and he didn't really want another but he didn't want to see 4472 in a restaurant in America.
There are so many reasons financially that this hobby dosnt make sense but the warm feeling you get when everything goes right, you can't beat it can you?
Anyhow who wants to play golf?!

 

Ok, let me suggest it another way. A factor mentioned in VT deciding to return 5593 to action is the fact that it is more Gauge Friendly than their GW machines. So it opens up opportunities for them that none of their other locomotives do. If we are anticipating further restrictions/struggles to run mainline steam, having a more versatile tool that can run over more routes is a significant advantage. My guess is VT have looked at the cost of restoring 5593 and decided that, to support the future of their operation, it is worth the large financial investment to get it running rather than something like Rood Ashton Hall which may cost less to restore, because it opens up more opportunities for them.

I don't disregard your point about there being 3 other Jubes in action, but there were times when we've had that number of Castles, Black 5s, Halls etc running on the mainline, but I wonder if there were as many people calling for those owning groups to choose other locos to restore?

Besides, 5593 is VT's only Jubilee. To me, criticising them for restoring it when there are 3 others in operation on the mainline is a bit like criticising the Llangollen railway for restoring Pannier 7754 when we've already got numerous 5700 Panniers running elsewhere in the country. None of them are at Llangollen and if they want to restore their Pannier, good on them. Same with Tyseley. If they want to play with their own Jubilee, the fact that other people have got a Jubilee to play with shouldn't stop them.

 

It could be that having a play with 5596 has made a few people think again about the other toys they have in the box at Tyseley? But then again I do seem to recall that a few years ago Mr Meanley Jr saying in the press 5593 was the one he wanted to put through the shops next.
Could you imagine a pair of red uns on the Shakey? 5593 and Cadbury No1...

 

Their toy, their rules, no problem with that.

Comparing panniers to this sort of thing isn’t right really. Those are day in day out machines that earn money for heritage railways. VT can only make 5593 work (financially at least) with an appeal that draws off from their other appeals.

Like I said, my issue with this isn’t the engine but the timing and the clash with the multiple other appeals they have going.
However if people want to donate, great!

 

Given the connection between Tyseley and the WSR maybe some of the GWR locos might end up going south (not in American terminology I add ). That is if and when the line re-opens.

 

Unless the line has been re-upgraded to a red route only Tyseley's pannier(s) woulds be permitted to run.
Ray.

 

To upgrade to red was part of a grand plan I believe, but I am not sure how much of the line has been done.

 

Is there any evidence to prove that statement? I think it has been shown time and time again that people will donate to what interests them, so LMS fans may well donate to the 5593 appeal but not to the 5080 appeal, and vice versa for GWR fans.

Keith

 

Nothing against 5080 but with 5043 and 7029 yet another Castle is a little bit meh for me.
5593 on the other hand... I've made my feelings well known on that one

 

How long did 5596 take to restore at Tyseley? I think it had a hefty HLF grant.

Dave

 

Bahamas was a completely different proposition. A single loco owned by a self funding group. There was lottery funding and without it the loco would not be in working order now.

 

There is never any evidence that people being attracted to, and spending money towards, one heritage railway project in any way lowers the amount being received by another.

The most successful projects are raising money are always those which are well managed. Those which are not successful are those which are not well managed.

Those are the two types of heritage railway project. Everything else is almost irrelevant. Well managed groups have the working capital to achieve their goals, or know how to raise it in different ways, continuously, and then there are those content to sell a small teddy bear for a few quid and see no discernible change in their charge for decades.

I know which side of the coin I prefer - and the general public vote with their cash.

Maybe a harsh truth? But the truth, nonetheless.

 

But there isn't a limitless amount of money. People will spend what they have on the things they prefer.