NRM & Barry Scrapyard

It was at BP Baglan Bay for several years and was then moved to the Swansea Vale for restoration to be completed by around 1995.

5322 was also restored in South Wales initially, at Caerphilly.

 

Caerphilly also saw TVR 28 returned to steam, the restoration taking place in quite primitive conditions at the time! I should know - I was there! At one stage, 9642 was based in a shed at Maesteg (from memory) and came out at weekends to run brakevan shuttles. Date wise, that would have been circa 1975?

As regards Barry, the need to engage with Cambrian Transport is because they were the council's preferred bidder for the licence to operate. The (evicted) VGR are now happily settled in at Pontycymer on the Garw Valley Railway. Another new generation line in South Wales that saw the bringing-together of two societies.

 

Initially you might think that 44901 and 80150 are candidates for breaking for spares, given the number of both Black 5's and Standard tanks in preservation, however I imagine both these engines were looked at in years gone by and rejected for purchase against others in the (original) Barry yard in "better" condition. So are components on both these engines of any real use as "spares", or are they just totally clapped out, and owners of Black 5's and Standard 4's better off making new, or repairing what they have?
As "static" exhibits after cosmetic restoration however, is a different story, and with the remaining ex-GWR engines at Barry that might be the more cost effective way of having transport museum exhibits in South Wales. Certainly a better option than breaking them for yet more recreations of extinct classes projects that will need bucket-loads of cash.
Static restoration jobs should be achievable with relatively less skilled people and less money.
Maybe however there is just no interest in a decent transport museum in South Wales, and with steam engines that relate to the history of mining for coal in the valleys?.

 

As has already been said after 9642 left Hays yard it first went to BP Baglan where restoration started, when the Swansea Vale Railway got a railway shed/workshop up and running the engine moved there as nearly all the South Wales Pannier Group members were also members of the SVR this is where the majority of the overhaul was carried out.

 

At the Pontypool & Blanavon our last two Galas have been successful with the first with 5619 brining in a profit and last years breaking even with 6435, this has also helped increase the railways profile. This year with the opening of the extension to Blanavon we will be holding a GWR 175 Gala in September with a visiting GWR tender engine.

With a relatively short running line i think a main line engine running all services would be over kill and not financially viable. When the railway grows, as it is starting to so will our motive power but at the moment we are happy to hold one off events and bring in a visiting loco which keeps the enthusiast and members of the railway happy.

 

Judging by the response we had at Barry Shed when the Barry Ten (nine, eight....) were on public display at our events, I would suggest there was significant interest in seeing the locos in "scrapyard condition". A museum would be the next logical stage. Whether that interest is shared by the "powers that be" is a different issue however.

 

Was this for "The Eastern Valley Railway"? They had their name on all sorts of things at Barry in the early '70s but I don't think anything ever left Barry to go to Cwmbran.

Later edit. Oh yes it did!! there's a picture of it here

http://www.cwmbran.info/pontnewydd.htm

It wasn't steamed here though.

The loco that I recall was very quickly steamed after leaving the yard was 5322. This was done at Caerphilly. I don't think they even tubed it.

 

I don't believe it was ever steamed before arriving at Carnforth. I can remember seeing it there not long after arrival and it looked be lacking a lot of parts.

 

Wasn't 5643 the loco that was just 'taken' from Barry or have I got that one wrong?

 

Is there not a chance that having so many projects might stretch Didcots resources a little? There is only a finite amount of manpower, money and workshop space. With 4079, the King, the Saint, the County and now a 47xx. Best of luck to all the people involved in the new-builds, I just hope these new builds don't result in the likes of 7808, 1466 and 6106 being forgotten.

 

And the rest, 6697-hasn't steamed since a boiler incident well over 30 years ago, 5900, 5572, 4144, & worst of all 5051.

 

i think what the GWS is trying to do (rightly or wrongly) is to tell the complete GWR loco story. In the context of Didcot , it doesnt really matter if a loco is steamable or not so long as SOME are and most are available for display. looked at as a whole Didcit is a remarkable place and I cant understand why some people are always so negative about it.

 

I don't think anyone would take issue with telling the complete GWR story. It's the fact that the GWS (or members/groups within) seem to be acquiring locos to dismantle which may be of great use elsewhere. Projects remain unfinished, other engines will not receive the necessary attention and the public/enthusiast world/HLF will be constantly asked for more and more money for never ending appeals. New builds are all very well if everything else in your collection is restored, undercover and on a finished site...


Keith

 

The thing that riles me is the fact that this sale was completed behind the preservation movement's back. Why wern't the locos advertised for sale, as was done for the locos at Blaenavon. We have previously heard that Ian Riley attempted to purchase 44901 and gave up in the end. Now that loco would have been restored rather quickly by Ian's team. The way the whole deal was done does not seem right to me. What do others think?

 

Again, it all boils down to money. If railways/people don't continue to enquire about the availability of the remaining ex-Barry wrecks for purchase, then they would probably continue to remain on shed for many years, gathering rust/dust to the extent that very little of the original locomotive would remain if restored in their own right. In the same vein, there are two other ''Prairies' (4110, 4121 come to mind, and I can't recall them having steamed in preservation) with little restoration done to them, which says something about demand from heritage railways. From my standpoint, the experience on the smaller lines is that as much as there is a desire to have an ex-Barry GWR locomotive, the reality of the situation means that a long-term investment in an ex-GWR/BR locomotive requires a big up-front cost in purchasing the locomotive in the first place. Also there would be no return from it for the amount of time needed to restore such a locomotive, and to top that, there are no guarantees that it would bring the hordes to the line. Whilst you could argue that the locomotive could be sent out for long-term hire elsewhere, then that would defeat the object of having an ex-GWR locomotive in the first place.

The economical considerations therefore speak for themselves, and it would be silly to expect Glamorgan County Council to hold onto these locomotives indefinitely just on the off-chance that someone somewhere will one day purchase one. I cannot comment on Ian Riley's experience with the 'Black Five', but I'm sure it is still worth enquiring about: maybe there was a plan for the locomotive at the time that has since come to nothing. We must also remember that it is a County Council that we are talking about, which has other, more pressing issue to deal with than to advertise the locomotives for sale. Whatever, I therefore applaud Didcot for recycling what may have been 'basket-case' restorations, and using them to further the story of the GWR's motive power development. Just remember that Stanier himself was not averse to 'vandalism', with many historic classes of locomotives being scrapped when he transferred to the LMS, so the manipulation of unrestored locomotives for spares and parts is rather tame in comparison.