Should the T3 be Steamed Poll

I don't think the SRT are so stupid as to base a decision on the opinion of 50 or so anonymous nat-pres posters. The poll is just a bit of interesting fun and an opportunity for people to make their view known in a quantifiable way. Everybody gets 1 vote even those who repeat the same view over and over over 30 or more pages.

I should think the SRT will be more guided by their needs, policies, members, the NRM's guidance, available funding. their benefactors, volunteers and other supporters. Public opinion will I suppose also be part of their consideration and this pole is just a small part of public opinion. It does no harm and can only inform within the constraints of the medium.

I didn't imagine that the posters on nat Pres would have an issue with being asked their opinion. But then I guess I've been reading this forum long enough to have foreseen that some would have an opinion about being asked their opinion.

 

If deemed feasible, then i think it would have a far better future as a working engine, i do know that some material will have to be changed, and possibly a new inner firebox, as the present one has been patched, but whats good is that not that long ago the thought of restoring an engine not steamed since 1948 would have been "it's not possible" but now , nothing is impossible its a matter at what cost, rather than the actual stripping down and replacing parts .

 

I see what you're saying, but maybe the wording is misleading. I think the point is for the SRT to gauge the possible financial support for a return to steam, rather than consulting on whether people think it should be.

 

I didn't say the owners should take account of opinions in the wider community. I said we may hope that they will do so, both because testing the water would give some indication of whether the money will roll in or not, and simply as a courtesy to people with an interest.

 

I'd happily see 563 restored to working order again, though this vote thread seems a bit off to me... All this talk of whether they should get the T3 running again or not, and how exactly they go about it, it just feels like someone made up this thread because their unhappy that the NRM didn't do something like this for the fate of 563 in the first place.

Never knew so many could get so upset over not being advised over something, for it's not like so many other things in this country aren't done the same way. Not everything needs to or can be put up for a public opinion, for most the time it's a trivial or overly complex matter, and few have any interest in having to decide on such matters.

 

Is this the start of a 'clear-out' at the NRM?

 

It's a hypothetical poll on an internet forum that has no actual bearing on events, Don't over think it guys.

 

I think the problem with this sort of question is that no enthusiast is likely to answer with a "no" when asked about steaming any halfway viable loco.

At the railway where I volunteer, we have a decent sized fleet - As of today I think we've two runners, three undergoing light repairs (i.e. all back in traffic in around the next month), eight in various phases of major overhaul, and another nine in store (I think I've not forgotten any!).

As and when overhauls are finished (I think we've four engines with a realistic prospect of running in the next couple of years), and as currently running engines run out of ticket and go into store, obviously the question of what gets next space in the overhaul queue can become a little tricky.
Pretty much all the stored engines are viable projects. All bar three have steamed in preservation, but some haven't run in years (a least one hasn't had a fire in since the mid 70s).
I'm fairly sure a poll on here for any one of them would find a majority in favour of steaming it, but we haven't the time, money or space to fix all them at once - nor would we have a use for that many engines all in ticket together anyway.

In reality this means the loco's that get chosen for overhaul are usually picked because of a combination of usefulness to the line, ease of repair, funding status, and to a certain degree, if the bunch of loons that repair them like them (says he having spent the last year's worth of his spare time fixing a loco he doesn't actually like much - but at least the next one in the queue is much more appealing).

I rather hope the T3 does steam one day, but it may well be that Swanage have other priorities - if so I'm a realist, and quite understand. Meanwhile, all this poll is going to prove is the eternal truth that enthusiasts generally want to see everything and anything run...

 

Obviously, the determining factor will be the condition the T3 turns out to be in when given a thorough mechanical inspection. We know from a previous NRM CME (John Bellwood, I believe) that its boiler isn't in as bad condition as the those on the locos he identified as the two worst in the NRM collection (Crab 2700 and Agenoria, I believe, although I guess he didn't include 35029 in his survey!) but beyond that, I doubt if anyone knows much more at the moment. No. 563 was withdrawn at the end of WW2 and who knows how much attention it received during the war years? It is easy to assume that an old express loco living on borrowed time wouldn't have been a priority for Eastleigh Works during that period, but we can't be 100% sure it didn't receive some sort of overhaul. Also, when it was rescued from the sccap line and painted in LSWR livery in Eastleigh, was nothing else done at all except the fabrication of an original Adams stovepipe chimney? There are rumours that Swindon works did a little bit more than re-paint one of more engines destined for a purely static future (4073, I believe) but who knows what went on at Eastleigh when 563 was prepared for its role at Waterloo?

It is unlikely that 563 would involve the scale of work needed to restore Sidmouth to steam, but then the conservation factor doesn't apply with Sidmouth.

If, when we know more, 563 is declared to be worth restoring to working order, the Swanage Railway will have an unique flagship loco. I can think of several other lines which have a treasured pre-grouping loco which looks just right - 41708 at Barrow Hill, Calbourne on the Isle of Wight, Bodiam/32670 on the K&ESR, the J15 on the North Norfolk, or even 43924 on the K&WVR but none of these are express locos. The only other 4-4-0s not owned by a public body are Repton, Stowe (both post-grouping) and the Dukedog (not an express loco and not technically pre-grouping either)

What I'd really love to see would be the Radial Tank 488 and 563 in steam together!

 

I think there shouldn't be many issues with steaming the T3. NELPG had the engine running before during the 1990s and the engine is a fantastic machine that can take really heavy loads up to Goathland at a rate that makes it look like the bank there is flat.

Its currently in Darlington Head of Steam but I would love to see back out and given the chance to show what a T3 is capable of.

I can't think of another T3 worthy of consideration.

*Dons Spamcans requested flac jacket. Ducks for cover...*

 

... and a new smokebox door?

 

Not to sure how useful an addition to the working fleet such an engine would be- a bit of an oddity without a vintage rake, but in principle nothing wrong with steaming it, as long as any components which are close to expiring are removed and carefully preserved and then replaced, rather than worked to failure and then disposed of. This of course adds to cost but the historical value is retained ?

 

The Swanage Railway is putting together a Southern Railway rake, including some Maunsell stock. There's no reason why 563 could not be painted in SR Maunsell green livery to head a 1930-style train, although it wouldn't look as attractive as the L&SWR livery.

 

or even Southern black so what liveries would an T3 have carried from the 1930's onwards? for instance as a by then secondary engine i'm assuming lined black? or did some carry the Parsons green early livery?

 

You can add W8 & W11 on the I.O.W. to the list, especially when paired with the Ventnor West push-pull set which they often are.

Personally I get rather irritated by the concept of "originality". Everything and I do mean everything, will have had much of its material renewed long before it gets anywhere near "preservation". At its worst, "originality" can mean little more than an excuse for neglect.

PH

 

On liveries, might be wrong, as I'm not a Southern expert, but would assume the olive green with the large number on the tender (my personal choice, thought that was smart) then probably black with the Bulleid type sunshine lettering.

 

Much as I like Maunsell green, I think it would be a missed opportunity to put this loco in a non-LSWR livery. Also, it would look wrong with its original chimney and smokebox door.

 

Look wrong authenticity wise yes, but would still look handsome in the livery all the same.

 

That's why I chose my words carefully - "treasured pro-grouping loco which looks just right". I do agree that W8 and W11 with the four-wheelers look as much the part as Calbourne with the bogie stock, although I think you would agree that most people will always think of Calbourne as the IOWSR's flagship, for no other reason than more people remember the O2s than the Terriers on the island as they lasted later in service.

A new later-style chimney and smokebox door will be small change compared with the overall cost of putting 563 back into working order - if it happens! I do agree with you that the LSWR livery is so attractive that it should be a shame to paint it in SR colours (particularly wartime black). but ultimately, that's not a decision which anyone is likely to have to make for some time. Who knows? there may be enough LSWR coach bodies lying around to put together a vintage train one day, although this would be a very long-term project - the Swanage Railway has quite enough on its plate at the moment - getting everything ready for running to Wareham for starters.

 

Just out of interest, do they work in push-pull mode on the IoWSR?