Flying Scotsman

Just interrupting the foreign grammar lesson to ask a question about FS:

Does anyone know in which years she has run in preservation, and which she has been under overhaul? In particular, has she run in traffic for at least some point of one year in each of the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s etc right up to the 2010s?

Tom

 

1960s - yes
1970s - yes
1980s - yes
1990s - yes
2000s - yes
2010s - yes

Further research would be required to list individual years though.

 

Yes it has. The longest period out of use was 2005 to 2015.

 

Thanks both - I'm less interested in the specific years, just whether it had run at some point in every decade, which it seems she has.

Tom

 

She has worked in every decade since being built in 1923. That's pretty good going. She had a pretty good mileage of around 2 million miles on withdrawal, and has probably added a decent amount since withdrawal.

Has anyone had their tickets yet? I am now anxiously checking the mail every day

 

Blimey, you must be feeling flushed to afford £450.

 

Actually I sold a few model trains to fund it....

 

Specially as the wheels have fallen off.

 

Looking up-thread, I can't help but speculate that this wonderful masculine machine has had it's running-gear reversed in a sex-change operation. Presuming that there will be a re-naming dedication sometime soon, will the name of this loco be changed to "The Flying Scotswoman"? seems only right if you are going to keep calling "him" a "she".

Cheers,

Alan

 

All locos are she, even those nominally male ...

Tom

 

Hear what you are saying Tom, but a "nominal" male?

Cheers,

Alan

 

As in, those locomotives whose name is clearly male - such as a GWR King or, indeed, Flying Scotsman. They are still all "she" ...

Tom

 

It will of course be Flying Scotsperson.

 

I suppose that it's very easy to fall into that convention, especially as it has been supported for so long; however, I tend to agree with David Wardale on the gender of a locomotive. I do believe that this has been discussed before on other threads?

Cheers,

Alan

 

Oh, Mr. K, that is so this Century!!

Cheers,

Alan

 

Actually, As it falls foul of the trades description act, and does not actually fly, it shall henceforth be known as "Scotsperson"

 

Are they female, so when they fail, you can call them a "bitch"?????

 

Getting better!! Of course, we can body swerve all of the gender/politically correct malarkey and just refer to this marvelous machine as the creation that it is, an engine, locomotive or loco., interestingly. I just came across this:

"Objects referred to as "she" by those groups tend to have the following characteristics:

• the men's lives depend on the object (i.e. if the ship sinks, they drown)
• the object tends to be put into harm's way
• the object is not fully understood and/or not fully under their control and therefore can be characterized as "fickle" by its users

As the objects are seen as both required for survival and likely to kill them, males tend to supersticiously think of the object as feminine. This allows them the hope that the object might be subject to cajoling and/or flattery as a means of increasing their odds of survival."

S'pose that the third definition above sums up our relationship with said, er, machines!!

Chow,

Alan

 

Of course, this presupposes that when "they" let "us" down, that is what they morph into in our minds. Always easier to blame "The Wife", Well, she told, sorry, asked me to do it.....

 

I speak only for myself, but I suspect many others here would agree, that sums it up nicely.