North Staffordshire 0-6-2T

I'm stunned that the NRM consider the NSR 0-6-2T to be surplus to requirements. The reasons given are flimsy to say the least, and make me worry about the NRM's duty of care towards our heritage.

I can see that the museum's resources are thinly stretched, and it makes perfect sense to partner with other heritage organisations to ensure that artefacts are cared for and made accessible to the public. But this is the last surviving NSR locomotive, and as such it is a national treasure. The NRM must have a responsibility to ensure that it is properly cared for in perpetuity. I'm sure that the Foxfield Railway will provide an excellent home, but who knows in 20 or 30 years time whether they will still have the resources to look after it.

If the NRM consider this item to be a duplicate of the TVR 0-6-2T, then what about the two Ivatt Atlantics, two NER 2-4-0s, two Gresley pacifics, two Deltics, many pre-grouping 4-4-0s, countless royal train carriages and much more.

If the NRM needs to clear some floor space then it should start with the Japanese bullet train which has no relevance to our railway heritage.

We could also question why it needs a Black 5, and classes 20, 31, 37, 40 and 47 when so many examples are preserved elsewhere.

 

It will be in good hands at the Foxfield and in Staffordshire, the county of its birth, so why get so het up about it?

 

good points made by the OP but I wouldn't have a problem with this loco "going home"

 

Agree totally but I was surprised that it wasn't loaned in the same way they have 925, 4027 and many others. This was what I first thought had happened and was delighted to hear. I'm still pleased that it will one day return to steam of course, but k agree it does raise some questions about NRM policy.

 

I'm not worried about this particular loco or the Foxfield Railway (which I admire immensely). I worry about the NRM, their priorities and their (lack of) appreciation of our heritage.

 

I'm very happy to have it 'home' in Staffordshire, which is a far more appropriate location than Shildon for it, but I do agree that the NRM's decision to dispose completely is odd. Why indeed do we have so much East Coast express pedigree but so little representation of West Coast engines? Why should the NSR not be represented when a new NRM outpost will be opening not far from their territory in a few years?

 

Why should you be ? It's a little known-about policy that the NRM has subscribed to since the earliest days at York. I spoke to the late John Coiley at the NRM in 1977 regarding the possible preservation of D2 / 44002 (a scheme overtaken by the preservation of D4 / 44004 + D8 44008) and during our conversation he stated that whilst the NRM would look to preserve items of national importance, it would also support preservation of oems in the locale where their importance was most notable. This includes the Class 502 EMU trainset - local to Merseyside and now under restoration in Merseyside and under this determination the North Staffs 0-6-2 is of local value to Stoke-on-Trent and the mining industry hence its transfer to Foxfield Railway where both elements can be best demonstrated.

Much as enthusiasts wish to see exhibits at the NRM there is also strong reasons for items of local interest to be cared for within the local community - providing suitable arrangements can be made. It is not a policy that many can accept, given the local potential as exemplified by Snibston and its recent closure, but at least it is a powerful tool to say to would-be preservationists "you think it has local value - then YOU preserve it locally !". Given the scarcity of funding it seems unfair to expect the NRM to either preserve everything at the expense of display space or be selective at the expense of losing items of "local interest" that are best preserved within the area of interest.

 

If its future is safe then does it matter who actually owns it? IMO it has a far better chance of running again at the Foxfield than if it had remained at Shildon.

 

As a Foxfield member I will stay out of the specific discussion of this loco , but in terms of the NRM, unless it gets an increase in funding to allow it to continually expand the collection then tough decisions will continue to have to be made. It is of course essential that such decisions show appreciation of our heritage

Jon

 

I agree. I think the list that Tim gave earlier shows where the collection could be sensibly thinned out to the benefit of the unique items that tell the story of Railways.

The pro-East Coast bias needs sorting out anyway.

 

People need to remember that the origins of the NRM started with the LNER's York Museum, with an abvious bias to its own items! With out it City of Truro wouldn't be with us!

The other big 4 companies are much better represented in preservation and without the NRM the LNER would be represented by very little.

NSR No.2 is now pride of place at Foxfield as opposed to tucked away at the back of Shildon. The original press release states that ownership had been transferred using musuem poilcy for disposals. Unlike what is claimed by a certian journalist stirring the proverbial.

 

Just as well we didn't rely on the GWR to save things for posterity though. Scrapping LOrd Of The Isles was a crime and we wouldn't have CoT if it wasn't for the LNER. The core of the NRM harks back to the earlier York Museum and many items saved by the LNER. If you can turn the clock back and persuade other members of the Big Four to preserve a few items then we'd have a wider loco base but in the meantime we have to make do with what we've got. And how about the pro-GWR bias at "Steam"?

 

that's true but it isn't a reason for an unbalanced museum collection that gives the impression that the NER was the most important line in the universe, right down to the diesel collection as Tim says.

 

And which source are you using for evidence? Hopefully not a magazine/journalist with an anti NRM agenda.

 

Instead of sniping at the GWR as usual, why don't you address the issue?

(without Steam and it's predecessor, you wouldn't have Lode Star or the Dean Goods, which is the same argument you use to defend the NRM bias for the NER)

 

So where are all these non East Coast items coming from to "balance" the collection? Could always shut Steam I suppose and add a few GWR items to York. And which East Coast items are you going to remove in order to make room for this influx and where will they be homed?

 

Perhaps you'd like to remove your Swindon tinted glasses. The fact remains that GWR would have scrapped CoT and it was the LNER who saved it for your lot to fawn over.
Rather than bang on about ER bias at the NRM, perhaps you could come up with some suggestions as to how this "bias" could be rectified.

 

the thread is about thinning the collection by giving the NSR loco away. It's not about adding to the collection. Tim's earlier list covers some of the duplication that needs to be addressed