70013

When you read the group's FB page, it becomes apparent that H&S is behind the issue, and that one of the groups volunteers is way more qualified to do this than anybody at the NRM, the feeling that they have been given the cold shoulder is apparent.

The good thing to come out of this is they have moved en masse to the dps, and are accelerating the return to mainline use for 55015 tulyar.

Great to see that knowledge not being wasted.

 

31/12/2018 Loughborough

 

According to the Steam Railway that just arrived on the mat here, the NRM have rejected the continued custodianship of 70013 & Sir Lamiel by the 5305 Loco Association...!
The NRM are continuing to negotiate with the GCR themselves about 70013, but it hints that 777 may go back to York.
One for the "you couldn't make it up..." category??

 

That's a kick in the teeth for the 5305 Association, if 777 is headed back to York its a pity but why reject the custodians of 70013 yet talk to the host railway that does not make sence , as its not like that the same people wont be the ones who will be maintaining her, either on behalf of the railway, or 5305 Association.

 

I feel really sorry for the 5305 LA, since they have looked after Lamiel since 1978 I think? And for Cromwell it's one of my favourite locos, seriously I hope the NRM change its mind and let them both return to steam once again?

 

Indeed and just to add to the caustic mix, this is SR reporting on the NRM who they have had a massive bee in their bonnet about for the last couple of years, its almost like someone at the NRM has offended someone at SR....!

 

If it’s true the sooner the NRM is shut down and the collection dispersed the better. They were the best Railway Museum by a mile, the current jumble of exhibits and burger bars is a disgrace

 

The article doesn't read like that, to be honest. Seems that both the GC & 5305 LA put in seperate bids to maintain/run the loco but neither satisfied the NRM (due to funding concerns etc). Considering the 5305 LA seem to have been working with the NRM for 40 years, it's rather a good kick in the teeth (or lower down...) for that organisation.
The quality of their work and their operations have always impressed me, but obviously not the NRM nowadays..

 

But if there are funding concerns are the NRM not right to at least review, not doubting the great work that the 5305 group have done over the years, but in such cases its the future not the past that matters, I can just imagine the fun SR would have it they just maintained the status quo and then it went belly up due to foreseen funding issues?

Anyway I will see later when I get to read SR beyond the cover which I saw this morning on the doormat.

 

The article does quote an NRM spokesman as saying "If other organisations wish to borrow Sir Lamiel, then we would encourage them to submit a proposal which we would then tender" so a working future for 777 can't be ruled out if another heritage railway/wealthy individual/ main line operator steps forward. I do feel sorry for the 5305LA, however, considering how long it has been the custodian of this fine engine.

 

Disappointing news about the NRM ending the 777 relationship with the 5305 group.
Whatever happens, her ML future was not looking great anyway as she was out of gauge in so many places. One of the last trips I had with her suffered from gauging problems as we had to slow down to walking pace at rather a lot of stations. If she runs again she would be a very popular hire loco to heritage lines. A good source of income for the NRM surely? Hopefully some kind of agreement can be set up to return her to steam. (Can Ropley swap her for 850?).


Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

 

Very sad news.

Hope that some arrangement is found for the locos future, hopefully operational rather than becoming cold and static once more.

Chris

 

I see your point Simon, but I don't know if lack of funding is truly the problem. It's quite right that catering is important to the finances so I don't take as big a beef with that as I do with some of the other issues.

Leaving aside the general future of the museum, in this instance they have a situation where they have two locomotives that have been out earning money, and who's custodians are prepared to overhaul them. I understand that the museum has other priorities than running locomotives, but by all accounts this arrangement cost the museum nothing. They claim they're short of space at York and Shildon yet instead of renewing the deal they're floating the possibility of adding another locomotive (or two) to the hall of silent giants. I also am not privy to the financial situation, but it seems to me that they're now expecting groups to have the finances for the overhaul in the bank before considering a loan. In a group run by donations this idea is lunacy, given that people only tend to donate when they know it's going towards a particular locomotive. A better proposition would be to insist a group carry enough spare cash to fund the reassembly of the locomotive should the overhaul funds dry up. This should surely be sufficient backup.t

As for forking out money to support the NRM, that only is the answer if the organisation in question will use it in a manner that (genuinely) improves its operation. Given the NRM is currently planning on spending however many million to demolish its workshops etc then can that really be the case?

In the case of 777 and 70013 - I think they should go the same way as the T3. They already have 850 and given that 70000's future seems secure, why worry unduly about 70013 being "preserved for the nation" when the GCR and 5305LA are already doing that just fine.

 

What makes you think that hiring it to heritage railways would be a good source of income? Most of those that do end up subsidising the heritage railways operations when the sums are done.

 

I would be interested in seeing the figures for "earning money" - for whom, and how much? Agreeably if they have been adding to the NRM's and GCR's coffers then it is of course win win, but in an increasingly accountant minded world the margins may no longer be acceptable to the NRM?

It is entirely possible that recalling 777 and 70013 will allow two other exhibits to leave the Great Hall and go elsewhere on loan or under a contract of some form. It may be that it has been decided they would be better placed in York as exhibits for the time being.

Circumstances change. In this case, the museum has undergone several changes of staff at the top and the priorities of the museum will have changed.

Not everyone was happy with the T3's leaving the national collection. I was apathetic on the affair, but I can see the positives for the locomotive, particularly given it has returned to its roots, effectively, and is most definitely being cared for. There is an historical basis for the locomotive being preserved at Swanage and that consideration of the locomotive was clear in the NRM's thinking.

I am not saying the GCR/5305 Group wouldn't give them the same care and attention - I used to volunteer at the GCR and they are much loved locomotives there - but there is no historical basis for Sir Lamiel to be there other than it has been based there in preservation. 70013 was shedded in East Anglia and on the London Midland route; she has no historical links to the GCR either.

The thinking behind this may have changed, I would suggest.

 

Unless things have changed I don't think there is any suggestion that 70013 would go on display. Didn't Anthony Coulls say that it was the intention to keep it operational. If that's the case working on the basis, if it ain't broke don't fix it, I would have thought leaving it with the organisation that did such a slendid job of keeping it running for ten years would be the thing to do.

 

Don't think stuffing it was even mentioned in the SR piece, sadly not much use leaving it with the organisation that has kept it running for 10 years if they have nowhere to restore her, as hinted at in the piece. The fact that the group declined to comment suggests either there is more to this than meets the eye or negotiations are on-going, the fact that the competing bid came from essentially their landlords must make relations delicate.