60009

Because Bittern is just there pending its place in the overhaul queue.

 

I'm going to guess/assume that you wouldn't be OK with him deciding to melt it down into razor blades? If so, both you and those you disagree with are willing to call on him to not exercise his full legal rights - and the distinction between the two positions is merely a matter of degree - over which I think it's best if we all just agree to disagree.

Noel

 

The most important thing (for me at least) is that John Cameron is happy with whatever direction his engine heads in at the end of her ticket.

 

As background, John Cameron's intentions were described in this Railway Magazine article.
https://www.railwaymagazine.co.uk/1448/cameron-a4-and-k4-are-not-for-sale-at-any-price/

He has established the Cameron Railway Trust. The Trust's Object according to the Scottish Charity Register is that "The Trustees shall hold the trust estate for the following purposes:- (i) to provide a suitable exhibition space at Balbuthie for those locomotives and other railway heritage assets transferred into the trust for their public display for educational and historical preservation purposes and to arrange for the installation of the locomotives and other railways assets; and (ii) to arrange for the public display of the locomotives, numbers 60009 and 61994 and all other assets gifted to the trust or purchased by them, in a manner compatible with their conservation and preservation for the benefit of the general public and railway historians."

According to their last published accounts the Trust has been involved in seeking the planning permission which press reports suggest has been rejected on several occasion. I do not know how Mr Cameron will proceed in the event the Balbuthie museum is completely rejected, ie whether he would then consider selling the locos or whether he would look to the Trust to continue in that role but at another location. One could speculate and express personal preferences, but it is probably pointless to do so.

 

Ok - like the proverbial 60041 - I'll rise and take the bait as I have a very deep affection for Number 9.

I would suggest that given that in this year he would of owned her for three times longer than British Rail did (2021 would be five times longer than LNER) - it would be highly unlikely that John would do that to his pride and joy - but if that's what he decides to do; then so be it - it has got nothing to do with me or any of us.

To put it another way, without his affection and ownership, there would be no memory of her post 1966 so she could of been turned into razor blades then; we should count ourselves lucky for the experiences that we have had.

 

But its stuffed right now in a shed so wheres the outrage, would be a while before it does steam again for all we know no 9 might steam again before it.who knows

 

The point is we do know, the intention is '09 WONT steam again. Thats the outrage*. We know the intention is that Bittern WILL steam again, Thats the difference.

*An outrage I don't share BTW. If there was only one A4, it would be an outrage for it to be stuffed. There are however 2 others that will be steamed in the future.

 

You didn't intend to raise it getting upset that a loco isn't intended to steam again.

Theres also no need to shout, Caps imply you are shouting, so settle down kid before you blow your pacemaker, a high blood pressure over one loco not steaming again isn't worth it.

 

No steam locomotive has ever been stuffed to my knowledge. Its a patently ridiculous phrase. Locomotives can be and have been out of use on display in museums for decades and then brought out again and steamed.

 

You seem to have plucked that quote from thin air, it doesn't exist...
But yes, the phrase "Stuffed and mounted" does imply some degree of reversibility, although "stuffed in a shed" might not mean the same thing.

 

Whatever.

 

I agree, I'm much more disappointed that the same fate is to befall 3442 though, as it means I'll probably never see a K4 in steam.

 

Posting entirely in caps is shouting, and bad netiquette. Putting an occasional word in caps is just another form of emphasis, marginally easier than bothering with bold.

 

As others have already said, It's his Engine and his decision as to where it goes, my original question was if the planned museum he has been trying to get planning permission for does not allow him to display his loco's then, whats his plan B, Bo'ness would be best, if it can accommodate it , and he wants both engines on the same site, I believe he has set up a trust that on his death, the engines will be transferred to .

 

And I might add hear a K4 working hard, a great shame for you.

 

At least I managed that, here ya go .

 

The main line market can only support a limited number of locomotives, so it's inevitable that more will be stored or under overhaul at any one time than available for service. Very often these stored locos are out of sight and/or partially dismantled. I have no objection to 60009 and 61994 being displayed in museum conditions. It gives us a chance to get up close and see the detail.

There will be new locos coming onstream to compensate for the loss of 60009 and 61994, not least the P2 and V4. Much to look forward to.

 

If he wants to stop spending money on them, I'm totally fine with that - Lord knows he's done more than most. And if 'the community' can't/won't replace the funding (other priorities, etc) , so that the loco(s) have to be plinthed; again, that's totally reasonable.

Is that the situation, though?

Noel

 

Sorry but in many peoples' eyes there is no compensation for the loss of a main line capable A4. The P2 and V4 will be welcome additions to the scene I agree but you cannot have enough working A4s in my book.