SVR General Discussion

No, generally speaking the rear panel was still lined out. That said, I've seen a photo of a County tender without it, but whether that was typical of all Hawksworth tenders, or whether it was one which just slipped through the net, I couldn't say. I think 1000 had it, but the lining on that engine wasn't typical of the period.

 

For anyone wanting an update on 2999, someone has posted this on Facebook. This isn't an official SVR comment so heed with caution etc...

"During the end of day inspection it was discovered that damage had occurred to the threaded portion which secures one of the motion pins, while the main body of the pin itself was not damaged, unfortunately due to the material and design it necessitates a replacement of the pin which we were not able to do that evening or in time for the Sunday running timetable."

 

Severn Valley Railway - Spring Steam Up 2021. - YouTube

My latest footage, enjoy

 

Bit late to this party, I know (sorry), but would have is not what the poster intended to write, so why correct him incorrectly. The correct way of writing what he intended would be would've not would of and certainly not would have. Consider yourself reported to the grammer police complaints commission.

Peter

 

The gentleman who posted that is one of the reps from Didcot.

 

There's a specific thread for pedants like us!

Edit: or ought that perhaps to be "for pedants such as we"?

 

If he had intended to use a shortened version, surely would’f would be the likely outcome and, yes, would’ve would then be the correct correction.
He has not done this, attempting instead to convert the sound of “wooduv” into the nearest approximation he could manage, that is, “would of”. Therefore the correction “would have” is correct.

Edit. A friend from the spelling complaints commision has just pointed out that, unless you are addressing Kelsey, the actor from Cheers and Frazier, grammAr is the correct spelling.

 

Nobody loves a pedant.

 

Purely as a point of interest bearing in mind some of the discussion on the gala thread. If you are involved with a visiting loco are you subject to the social media policy of the railway you are visiting as well as your own? I have no idea just something that ambled through my addled mind after a couple of large glasses of sherry!

 

Lol - I guess it depends what's written into the contract of hire between the parties concerned.

 

Their loco. Their choice I guess. It shuts down any rumour mongering in one fell swoop but then where would we be without a good rumour.

 

What a superb weekend it has been, many thanks to everyone at the SVR for making it happen.

The Severn Valley Railway during their 'Spring Steam Up' featuring 2999 'Lady Of Legend', 7714, 813, 6960 'Raveningham Hall', 2857, 34027 'Taw Valley' and 43106. Video footage below featured from the 16th & 17th April 2021.

Video Available Here

 

Cracking video. You even managed to catch me at Sterns!

 

Just back from a fantastic weekend, a lovely day Saturday watching trains at Bewdley, Arley and then settling down at Hampton Loade for the afternoon - great to see the station back open and my son was delighted the Paddock Railway was running that occupied him for three hours! Sunday we traveled on train 3 and had two great round trips. Huge thank you to everyone involved for organising the event and taking the chance back in January, I hope it has paid off we certainly had a great time, very safe throughout and so nice to be almost normal again. Video, photos to follow...

 

Some photos from the weekend... https://www.flickr.com/photos/alts1985/albums/72157719023054435

 

2999 fixed apparently and due to run tomorrow AND this weekend on The Adventurer and with 2857 and 6960 on Saturday and 43106 and 6960 on Sunday. 2857, 6960 and 43106 originate from Kidderminster (if that makes sense)

 

Is it fair to assume 2999 will still be facing south tomorrow.

 

As far as I'm aware, yes it is still facing Kidderminster.

 

Facing south on loaded test run today