Swanage Railway General Discussion

Is there room at Southall for 4 x 2-6-0s ?

 

A package deal was agreed when they moved to Swanage in 2014. My point was that any new or revised agreeement, either with Swanage or anyone else, doesn’t necessarily need to include all 3.

 

One would be useful because its already an main line registered engine, the rest, are in verious states of repair / overhaul, Swanage knew what they were getting into when they signed the agreement, to take the 3 southern moguls, if its the same as agreed on when the engines were MHR based, one has to be in working order, at the end of the deal, I think they came unstuck, with the cost of the boiler repairs needed to the boiler that was on 31874, it possibly was the worse of the lot, having been patched in BR days, boiler repairs are very expensive, even when you have your own boiler shop, which the Swanage don't have, I do think that in hind site, they might have preferred to have contracted the work out elsewhere, but politics being what they are would have never allowed it, i am of course referring to Ropley, now the railway have an chassis ready to go, but they still have a boiler to overhaul, and fund, the T3 was successful because its owned by the railway, its not going to one day leave, theres no guarantee that any of the moguls will be long term residents, especially if you signed an agreement that you now find you will struggle to fund and raise money, for what is someone elses engine, that your having to pay for weather it works or not,

 

I wasn’t supposing that they (any of them) would be working.

 

A few weeks ago when I was at York, in the Great Hall alone there was the D1, Boxhill, the Beattie, the Q1, Ellerman Lines and the SR EMU. Although the Beattie is leaving soon, from other companies, Aerolite has just gone, the L&Y class 5 and Fowler 4P are going to East Lancs, and at least one other NER loco is moving to Shildon.

The SR is still well represented in York (and will probably be better still when the Station Hall reopens and Gladstone is out on display again) and they are loaning other locos out.

That said, I really would like to see the Q1 returned to steam. She’s a perfect fit for many heritage lines.

 

Fowler 4p? Are you sure? I wasn't aware that one existed any more?

Chris

 

At the end of its last period in traffic, the Bluebell were prepared to overhaul it. However, it needs a new cylinder block and the Bluebell wanted a loan of at least 25 years to allow two periods in traffics and make replacing the block financially viable. The NRM weren’t prepared for a loan of that length, so it returned to York.

The T9 spent many years at Sheffield Park on display and under cover (even though that meant one of our locos that could otherwise have been stored undercover had to go outside, to its detriment). I’d suggest any loan of a national collection engine that puts it in a location without cover and without public access is not a good solution.

Tom

 

I love this group, you guys must think you are the only ones who think Swanage should have undercover accommodation. Like no one at Swanage has thought of it? In fact it is something that nearly everyone on the railway is ashamed about!
What you guys fail to also acknowledge is that 30120 has been stored undercover for nearly 3 years now. Or has that slipped your mind?

We will get there. Herston will happen and then I expect covering 1 & 2 at Swanage will come up. People know it needs to happen, so perhaps calm down about it and stop relentlessly bashing the railway about it. It knows.

 

That is a shame that an agreement could not be made for it to stay, I remember it steaming when I visited the Bluebell for my 10th (ish) birthday with my Grandparents!

Chris

 

Sorry it’s a Stanier 3-cylinder 4P - LMS 2-6-4T No. 2500. My mistake!

Hmmm, I can see both sides of that one.

I’ll probably get shot for saying this but I bet, if overhauled, you could stick a Cowcatcher and Bell on it at Christmas and use it on Polar Express services and half the general public wouldn’t notice the difference!

 

I think @alexl102 meant Stanier 4MT 2500. I know the L&Y 2-4-2T has been mentioned about going to Bury (there's a big empty space at the transport museum now) but I hadn't heard about 2500 moving as well.

 

Don't you believe it. WIBN infected gricers are the ones that have little idea.

 

What does that make you then Paul?

 

Neither.

 

Perhaps the NRM policy has changed so that historic working exhibits can be best displayed in the area where they were most frequently used in their working lives - subject to agreed conditions of operation and maintenance. As 563 is proving, its commitment to the LSWR through Swanage Railway makes it the best place for it to be seen and sampled. The same case arises with the LMS Class 502 EMU which has little interest beyond Merseyside hence its return to the area with a possible opportunity to operate it on the Merseyrail network once its current restoration is complete. Seen and sampled in the area where it was used in its working life - a reasonable policy methinks for a national museum.

 

Or perhaps in his confusion he is thinking about the Midland Compound 4P 4-4-0 1000 which is currently located at Barrow Hill - on display inside the roundhouse - a Midland Railway loco in a Midland Railway setting - part of the policy methinks of displaying locomotives in the location(s) where they were used during their working lives.

 

Have you ever thought about volunteering for someone like the Samaritans?

 

If we were talking about the restoration of 30120 (if only!) following another overhaul, you might be right. However, 563 is not an NRM possession, but something transferred to it's current owners following a change of NRM policy.

That change was discussed at length in the 563 thread, where the transfer out of the National Collection, it's strengths and it's weaknesses were discussed. I believe that the class 502 went through a similar process of de-accession and transfer, with the new owners being Merseyside based because of their interest and homes.

The de-accession policy has relied on voluntary groups taking on the liability for ownership, and on their being able to present these exhibits appropriately.

Swanage has done superbly in restoring 563; I and others will doubtless make the pilgrimage there to experience it at work. Well, once at least...

But one swallow does not a summer make, and the success of this restoration of 563 does not necessarily justify the policy. The class 502 is still under restoration, and it's owners' website gives no sense of when restoration may be achieved. Little if any of this is due to the NRM, but has been achieved as a result of the work of others, on something that no longer belongs to the NRM.

 

Unfortunately the 502 deteriorated considerably in open storage whilst still in the ownership of the NRM thus presenting a much greater restoration challenge to the present owners. Whilst not, yet, de-accessioned the NRM's 4F 44027 hasn't exactly fared well with the current or previous custodians either.
Ray.