GCR fails in bid for lottery money

As more time passes, the national collection will only grow bigger, yet York can't, railway history is still ongoing.

 

Now that the anti GCR comments have stopped alt of valuable comments have been posted. Totally agree with the post above, hopefully railway history continues to be made. Rolling stock and locos need keeping under cover and accessible to the public. Stories need to be told and people need educating. I agree that the NRM has become a bit baron but there is so much stuff there that isn't displayed to its full potential. For example I went last year and 4771 was in the warehouse! Poorly lit etc.

 

Didn't know about the bluebell being double track, I see what you mean with regards cost and operational problems though. The section between Toddington and Broadway on the gwsr will be quite long when finished, as the Laverton loop is being taken out I'm told, perhaps a good place to start...

 

I wanted them to get the bid, partly to get more vehicles under cover and on display (doing something useful rather than simply stored), and partly to give leicester north more of a destination in itself.

 

I very much agree with you Corbs. An NRM "outlet" at Leicester North would have been an added draw for the GCR. Regarding the NRM main site at York, I always enjoy visiting but I feel that there is far less information regarding the exhibits than there used to be and that catering seems more important than floor space for locomotives and rolling stock. I guess that 2nd turntable in what is now the great hall should never have been removed but it has and "we are where we are."

 

Quite the opposite I would think ;-)

 

I agree the NRM has become bland, when I went last year I could only find 6 A4's, a v2 and a black A3.
Place looked like an LNER shed.

 

Rubbish.
The O4's ticket was extended to 12 years primarily because it had the boiler off and a load of stays replaced 2 years into its ticket, so it had had a full internal inspection within the normal 10 years.
I don't know how many times it was retubed but given that small tubes are a consumable it is pretty irrelevant. How many miles did the loco do in its 12 years? I don't know but it must have been in the tens of thousands.
The GCR also invested in a water treatment plant during that period, which has helped with boiler life, but you can't blame the GCR for the chemicals put into the water supply at source.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The GWSR has undoubtedly achieved a lot in a relatively short time but with the exception of Winchcombe it has all the atmosphere of a Lego train set. The Tarmac yard at Toddington, lack of shed access and plastic-windowed signal boxes up the line see to that.
The GCR's atmosphere may not be everyone's cup of tea, but at least it is firmly rooted in the steam era.
The only other line I can see potentially putting in double track is the NYMR. I believe they have considered a section to even out the passing places. Probably unlikely in the short to medium term though.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

NYMR would be a good line for double track, I'd say they could probably manage it. I take exception to you saying the gwsr has all the atmosphere of a logo trainset though, what's wrong with Toddington station? You can't complain about that, it's the most original station on the line! How does lack of shed access affect the atmosphere? There's plenty of good reasons why you can't go wandering round the loco sheds by yourselves, it's dangerous for a start, there's lots of things going on, or would you prefer little work was taken out so you could look round at everything sitting there not having stuff done to it. Also for security reasons, P&O would provably be in steam if it hadn't been for some eejits a couple of years ago stealing some of their bits and pieces. And I can't believe that the GCR hasn't got some tarmac or concrete tracks somewhere.

As for signal box windows, what's wrong with modern materials where it doesn't show? The signal boxes look perfectly fine to me, I don't even mind the crc and gotherington ones, as we established a little while ago they aren't too far off the originals.

 

Perhaps one day something might be done about those two boxes, but there were definitely rumblings about things happening on platform 2 at Winchcombe a little while ago...

 

Sorry, but for me this thread and the conversation in it is all going in the wrong direction. This bid was to create a tourist attraction that would move the NRM to a new outstation, much like Shildon has helped spread the collection to the home of the railways. Adding this to the site of a large and busy preserved steam railway was a master stroke, not an idea to be ridiculed.
The premise behind this was to create a new area for the expanding NRM collection and it will get bigger. The issues here are the fact that as the collection grows it needs somewhere to expand to. As preservation movements close down in the future you can bet that more engines will be taken into the care of the national collection overall. This bid and the approach the museum is taking is all about the future and what museum we want to have preserving our achievements into the generations ahead. By having the site at Leicester North, transport infrastructure can be easily adapted to get quick access from the M1 and south, while the site allows the chance for larger collections and bringing in engines that will soon be added to the NRMs stock list.
York is short on space, the area surrounding it is prime retail value, the NRM simply can’t afford to expand onto the area surrounding it, while the rest remains in the care of the operational network. Shildon too, while brilliant at housing an expanding collection also would need a new build to expand the collection. Rather bringing the site to a new location to the south is a better idea. All this talk of double track and the GCR is a side issue. The GCR is to become a large attraction when the two lines are merged. Having the train ride alongside a collection building brings the best of both worlds. Engines like the O4 would take pride of place, owing to its local roots; Butler Henderson would probably join it. The reasoning here is that the NRM will operate a smaller steam fleet in the future, keeping those is has in steam operational, like Cromwell, Scotsman, Truro, Rocket (Replica) and Lord Nelson. Others will be ‘plinthed’ while some are not touched and conserved, such as Mallard. While this might not be explicit policy from the NRM you can see the direction in which the thinking and the movement is heading – but none of this is communicated both by the NRM and the railway media. Rather instead the insistence is on always looking backwards with nostalgia. Most public don’t know or couldn’t care about where the engines on lines are from the public don’t moan like I do about Repton being in Whitby, instead they get their steam train ride and thats the bigger issue. They pay the money, they are happy with their day out and if they learn something that makes them like railways then the movement has achieved its aim.
This failure to get help to start NRM III the Leicester site will hurt more than the failure to start on the revamp of York. The NRM must stay focused, and must keep this project alive. Other ways can be found to bring this project to conclusion, and the NRM is appreciating the role is has to play as custodian of the past, educator of the present and protector of the future.
Enthusiast’s need to start realise and accept that they are not the dominant force behind the future of railway preservation, and have not been for sometime. All the froth about engines in places and double track is not important. The project was sound, and an important aspect of the future. Yet again this shows a wake up call is needed for enthusiasts to get behind projects such as this to ensure preservation and success for the NRM. Without us helping, the NRMs job and role gets much harder. It’s time to band together to ensure results, and not sit back expecting the NRM to do it on its own.

 

Having read the various posts about the lack of space and money to buy more land at York maybe it is time to consider another NRM venue NOT in the north of England. York and Shildon are very much in the north also the GC railway is north midlands.
An NRM facility somewhere in the south of England would be a fairer outcome. again NOT not at any 'heritage ' railway but somewhere where rail access is available. I would suggest that it was not within 50 miles of London of course as there are good facilities already in that area (Didcot, LT Covent Garden and Acton for instance).

I am sure there are many sites that could be considered.

 

What a load of tosh about the GWR, I'm sure the passengers would be thrilled with nowhere to park and loco owners with nowhere undercover to work on and store loco's, no more inauthentic than any other preserved railway who have had to build big car parks and loco shed/works to function properly in this day and age.

 

@Greenway. Sorry to have to tell you but Leicester and Nottingham are very much in the EAST Midlands, North Midlands is places like Worksop or Chesterfield.

Regards, oddsocks. (Born and bred in Leicestershire, East Midlands.)

 

Sorry to have moved you all, even so they are north of Birmingham which does not fall into the areas considered in my previous post.

 

There are concentrations of NRM vehicles at Swindon, Bodmin and Mid Hants...

 

I've said it before about the GWR boxes, nothing to stop them being replaced by more authentic models at a later date, getting them operational was the priority.