Rotting away?

There are 2 types of restorers IMO, those that are "doers" and never want to finish, and the "finishers" those that want t see the project up and running.

Chris.

 

History won't care less, see , coaches are just a means of transporting people from A to B , and its not possible to save everything, or is it cost effective, at the time when some Mk 1s were being sold on other coaches better suited to what a railway needs were availible , for some railways it was Mk 2 opens, freshly withdrawn, or others it was newer mk1 TSO's in place of compartment stock,
Railways found it more cost effective to buy something freshly withdrawn than to overhaul what it had, now that avenue has dried up, and we are seeing coaches receiving repairs now that only a few years ago would have been un thinkable, or even possible . we are where we are , many railways have found that they have no other choice now but to invest in a coach repair facility. in many ways vintage coaches bared better, they had people who valued then, even if on certain lines its only been of late that this has been, to many a MK1 was a throw away coach.

 

If you were to follow the argument that all the coaches on the list should have been saved you would have to query the wisdom of scrapping any of the Mk1s disposed of by BR. In reality, some of the vehicles on this list were bought for a second use that wasn't preservation and were scrapped when no longer needed - and that really should be applied to some of the so-called "preserved" vehicles such as the sleepers on the list as these were acquired primarily for accommodation purposes. Others were scrapped and replaced by identical better vehicles as a cheaper alternative to restoring them and who is going to say that wasn't a sensible way forward when suitable vehicles were available and time and money were in short supply. Looking at the list, apart from the sleepers there's only really one unique coach in it, the XP64 vehicle, most of the other types are represented by multiple examples - how many of each is it suggested should be saved?

 

that's just the standards...

 

For far too many years passenger rolling stock, particularly Mk1's, has been seen as 'disposable' - buy them cheap (250 quid in the early 70's as I recall) run them until they need work and/or money spending on them then scrap and replace them. Those days are gone but it is shocking to see the number of vehicles listed here https://www.rcts.org.uk/features/carriages/index.htm?id=carriages/preservationdisposals that this has happened to.
Unfortunately the preservation movement has more than its fair share of the 'hoarder' mentality who will never give up their 'treasures' and can't/won't see that the item concerned is rotting away before their very eyes. There are also the 'rosy tinted glasses brigade' who buy a vehicle tear it apart in an initial burst of enthusiasm and then drift away when the reality sets in and/or the cash runs out. I'm sure most heritage railways have these types to thank for, at least part of, their 'linear scrapyard' .
Ray.

 

800 pounds is nothing, that is just the start. If you are planning to restore something yourself like a coach (or worse a loco) it will cost you far far more just in materials alone plus tools and everything else. To restore something like a coach or loco etc you are going to have to be ready to spend, spend and spend again plus put in thousands of man hours to do the work. If you are not able or willing to do so then it probably best to stick to working on someone else's project.

 

Agreed. I would also add that the transp

Agreed. I would also add that the transport costs for moving a coach can vary between £2000 and £4000 pounds depending on how far the coach has to go though with a little planning, the costs could be kept down if the low loader has a return journey nearby.

Chris.

 

I seem to recall at least two of the lines with which I have been associated having difficulties confirming current ownership of vehicles. I think this was due to not collecting any form of "siding rent" for storage on site, and possibly having no formal "storage agreement".
As long as someone keeps paying the nominal rent, then the ownership is clear. Nowadays I don't think any line would permit a vehicle on site without a prior binding agreement.
But in the early days many vehicles seem to have just turned up with no more than a nod through from those nominally in charge, it is the legacy of those early days which could cause problems.

 

Have I missed a post or two in this thread? 'Secret group'…?

Simon

 

secret group sounds very mysterious, I imagine that's merely a facebook definition of the type of Group. I'm quite possibly in it myself, although I'm not sure which group is being referred to. As far as I'm aware Polsteam has set up Groups on Shillingstone, The Mid Hants and Polish Steam, there may be more. That's not a secret

 

I've just seen a photograph on another thread of a beautifully restored steam loco standing next to a S.R. van on which the woodwork is rotting away. If you can't be bothered (or can't afford ) to restore it I'm sure there would be plenty of takers.

Bob.

 

early mid hants memories is a closed group anyone can find it only members can see posts. Polish Steam is a Public group. I imagine you must mean Shillingstone, which I have little interest in because I'm not really sure what substance there is to the facebook and other internet goings on, it seems messy to me and I'm staying away from it.

 

I am also a member of the now closed " Early Mid Hants Memories " on Facebook. I have found Polsteam to be a very agreeably fellow.

Chris

 

he takes a bit of understanding, and has his problems and his frustration bubbles over, he is a very agreeable person and has probably done more for preservation than almost anyone on here. I think he's just frustrated he can't do it any more, we're all getting older after all.

Early MidHants Mempries is only closed in the sense that you have to apply to join, and I guess you don't get in unless you fb persona is obviously in line with the pages ethos. I've seen some current MHR members joining and not liking that some of us prefer the way we used to do it 30 years ago and I'm afraid John can be a little blunt at times in pointing out they wouldn't have a Railway but for what the likes of John (and me in a small way) did 30 +years ago.

I'm sorry if I sound like an apologist for him, I just am not comfortable when someone is obviously suffering,

 

I daresay it's a different one but as the owner of an SR van on which the woodwork is doing just that, I can only mention that if the host railway hadn't filled it almost to roof level with "stuff" then maybe there would be some hope of fixing it. As it is, it is easier to work on other vehicles and so it continues to rot. It doesn't matter though, whether I do it this year or in ten years time, the amount of work involved will be roughly the same. SR van doors in particular are a terrible design and rotting and falling off seems to be a fact of life.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I hear loud and clear what you are saying.

I hear what you are saying loud and clear. Mr Graham also has health problems that you may be or may not aware of, for that he has my sympathy.

Chris.