Current and Proposed New-Builds

Well, it's using an existing boiler (albeit with many new bits, e.g. superheater elements), but if that makes it a restoration, then so is Beachy Head. The parallel is not exact, though: although the frames and cylinders of Betton Grange are new, many parts are not (e.g. the wheels and bogie); the motion seems to be a mix of new pieces (e.g the brackets) and old. I'm not sure its clearly either a new build, or a restoration; somewhere in the middle, although I personally think of it as a new build (with many old parts).

Noel

 

Several posters have mentioned the frequency, or not, or lack, of communications. I think this is fundamental to any project that is seeking funding from the general or interested public. Whilst I appreciate that communications are not "free", with modern electronic means, the additional costs are minimal. Whether it is only communicating to those who have actually paid, or to encourage those who might pay in the future, those communications are critical - not just an afterthought.
I'm sure that is why the A1/P2 team are so successful. Regular positive progress reports leads to regular incoming funds - which pays for regular progress.

 

Oi, hands off! I need it for the S&D and expect to make an announcement after Tuesday’s Euros...nurse!

 

I’ve said on another thread that the A1/P2’s insta feed is rather good, if my phone pings with an alert about one it’ll ping again very soon with an alert about the other, my partners in marketing and she’s said what the A1 trust do regarding social media is something other groups/railways could learn from.
In this day and age you can almost put something out in real-time just as long as you have someone with a smart phone and a 3G connection your latest bit of news can be worldwide in seconds.

 

I think frequency is entirely up to the generators of the news, and there are clearly many different approaches. But you'd think that a post to say "We finished it" would be pretty high on the list of milestones in the project, and it's not like the content wouldn't write itself. Even just a link to the GWS website would help. At the moment, it looks like they ran out money and stopped.
Given how many volunteer projects that end in that way, I would expect something there.

For the on-going ones, a quick "I ate'nt dead" post would seem a good idea where possible

 

My own view is that these (GW) projects is that they should be reffered to as something like 'assembled from parts of recently dismantled existing locomotives' rather than 'New Builds' and whilst the 'Grange' and 'County' projects are making decent headway it should be remembered that it has taken in the region of twice as long to convert an existing derelict Hall (made from Swindon 'Standardized components') into a 'Saint' as it took the A1 trust to turn 'Nothing' into the 'Next' A1. It's also worth remembering that the construction of 'Tornado' increased the numbers of existing locomotives by one.

 

To my mind they are rebuilds, and because they are contemporary they are New rebuilds... whats that going to get abbreviated to...

 

The world is up one *working* locomotive. Maindy Hall would have required a large portion of the work done regardless.

 

The GWR would have classified them as renewals, as were the Dukedogs, Manors, Granges, Stars & Bear -> Castles, 3150s-31xx etc etc, and for that matter most of the other locomotives built in the 20thC. There wasn't, as far as I can see, a distinction drawn between as new locomotives assembled from all new parts and as new locomotives assembled from a mixture of new and secondhand parts. Actually it would be interesting to know whether Swindon would use parts from the spares pool on ostensibly all new locomotives or not.

 

I think this comes down to accounting (as has previously been discussed). In capital accountancy terms, the original Pole Star was still working on the day of nationalisation.

 

Enthusiasts often seem to like lists, and like to neatly compartmentalise things into those lists - this loco is being repaired, that one restored but yonder one is a new build. But in practice there is more of a continuum. Several tender locos are running today with entirely new tenders (though maybe original wheels and axle boxes); locos under “restoration” are getting new frames, cylinders and more or less new boilers, but there are “new builds” with significant quantities of original parts ...

When No. 27 on the Bluebell is finished from its current rebuild, it will be a significantly new Loco - new frames, cylinders and probably boiler and myriad small parts - but most people will see it as the 1910 original. Whereas the GWR Saint is commonly called “new build” but in proportionate terms, likely has far more original Swindon material still incorporated!

I tend not to keep neat lists ...

Tom

 

I remember in the early days of locos being saved from Woodhams, it didn't take much to warrant something to be deemed impossible to restore. One particularly that springs to mind was B1 1264 at GCR Loughborough where it wasn't clear whether the copper firebox (and therefore the loco at this time) could be saved. My father and I supported the Thompson B1 Society in various ways at the time and forty five years later, those repairs undertaken probably fade into insignificance given the incredible things that Heritage Railways have achieved.
I also recall feeling fairly sceptical when new builds were first conceived as projects and yet now, I'm total a convert and I really don't care how much old vs new metal the loco contains as long as it looks good and continues to deliver that evolution to enable future generations to enjoy what they otherwise would miss seeing.

 

Help me, please. What sort of engineering term is 'restore'?
Pat

 

It means "put it back on the shelf in the storeroom"...

 

Obviously open to interpretation, but I think it is having something and doing whatever is needed to return it to working order or suitable for display (cosmetic restoration).
I'm not too fussed, just very pleased to see it happen!

 

Indeed yes. I recall that in the 70's, the railway press of the time made great song and dance of the fact that the owners of Princess Elisabeth had re-tubed the boiler. Something that these days is looked on as routine, even with the big locomotives like 6201......

 

And when Stepney next steams, it will probably incorporate a greater percentage of new material than either of them - perhaps No. 488 too??

 

In what way is it not?
I'd put it in the same bracket as refurbish, remake, make good. It may not refer to a specific operation, but it is a pretty descriptive term for a set of operations.

 

It seems to have become a catch-all word that covers anything from the local Scout Group flinging a couple of tins of Dulux * over a wreck to a full rebuild, which explains why the magazine writers use it so much.
(I confess that this has been boiling up in me for a while )
(* other brands are available)
Pat

 

Ok, I take that point, but it's not exactly without compare in the engineering world in needing a level of specification - how flat do you want something?