Flying Scotsman

Thank you. The commonly shared view is that the A3 is superb. That doesn't mean we can't now have a constructive and respectful discussion about the future, does it?
My criticism was, that as you clearly find the debate "tiresome", why engage with it so negatively by griping about those who do wish to have a constructive debate? By the same token as your original comment, you expressing dissatisfaction with the debate is unlikely to bring about its cessation, I would respectfully suggest.

 

OK

 

Plus another.

 

I'll jump in if I may.............IMO changing the appearance won't happen. You want change 'because it doesn't look right/authentic' ?? And a fair wedge of money needed to bring that change about......because a bunch of enthusiasts want it ?? Not a chance. Discuss it all you want but the 'discussion' is just hot air.
The loco IN IT'S CURRENT FORM is a success, and it's making a shilling or two, when 'the time comes' I'll have a little bet that any money in the pot goes towards keeping the loco. in top nick.
If the loco wasn't working properly and the reason was the chimney...........then there would be a strong case for change.
If it ain't broke, don't mend it.

 

Wot 'e said.

 

But the thing about it "being broke" is not mechanical and from the many twists and turns on this thread we all know it will work with either chimney, what is broke in my eyes is the look of the locomotive which leaves a fair proportion of the general public with the negative impression of "where has 4472 gone with that nice bright livery", and this is how Alan P wished to preserve the loco and as a memorial to him this is how I feel the loco should become when the opportunity presents itself.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Well I'm glad at least we have your endorsement to discuss what may or may not be possible at some point hence.
Nobody is "demanding" anything and certainly nothing is expected for the present. We know there will be an overhaul before the centenary so the discussion is simply about whether changing the chimney to restore the 4472 guise would be possible. What is the harm in that topic?

 

So it appears I need to offer my apologies for bringing up the topic of discussion this time around.

Except, on this one occasion, I am not going to apologise.

We have an opportunity to celebrate an anniversary with the locomotive that comes literally once in a lifetime. 1923-2023 is a big deal. 2023 is less than five years away. Any plans we'd like to put in place for then have to be thought out and explored now.

Talking about it on Nat Pres is part of that process. What's achievable, what do people actually want to see, will any of us donate, give up our time, etc...

Without debate, we can't have a discussion.

In my original post I expressed hope that this was something that could happen. It wasn't a demand, it wasn't an order to do this - just could we think about this?

I am always very wary of people shouting down debate and then claiming freedom of expression. Freedom of expression comes with the responsibility to hear all sides. Just shouting down one side isn't a debate, it's authoritarian.

If you wish to take part in the debate, by all means do. All welcome, pour out a coffee, come sit and lets talk it through.

 

blinkers? Do you mean smoke deflectors?

 

No apology needed, don't let the NP usual suspects grind you down, I generally ignore them . . . .


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yes.

 

(...seeing as we now having a debate about whether we can have a debate...)

It would be interesting to see what sort of debate would be in hand on the 100th anniversary of FS first being outshopped in present guise.

Moving on, let's think about 100th anniversary for a minute - it only happens once....every...100...years. It's worth considering the best way to honour such a milestone.

Of course, this is only my 2 cents worth, which is not worth much. (1.09p actually!).

 

If your going to do something for its centenary in 2023 why not go the whole hog and back date it to its A1 condition as 1472? Just saying... Takes hat and runs for cover.

 

I have a print on my wall of FS with "4472" on the cab, "LNER" on the tender, apple green paint, single chimney and no smoke deflectors. When an uncle died I acquired a second copy of the same print, which I eventually gave to the local charity shop. Certainly some of the general public must think of the loco with that appearance but we can't tell what proportion think of it that way.

The thousands who have turned out to see it at numerous locations in the last few years (whether or not also riding behind it) have seen it looking quite different, but we don't know whether they were surprised, disappointed or confused or didn't notice at all, nor what they will expect if and when they see it again. The only way to find out what Joe Schmoe expects for its 2023 appearance would be a survey, and I can't see the NRM spending money for that, though you never know. Otherwise the NRM will do as they see fit, but any of us who have strong feelings may as well make them known to the NRM.

 

It'd please the purists... but then they'd moan it can only run on a few preserved lines because (a) it'd foul the current loading gauge and (b) it'd have a voracious appetite for coal! It'd look nice though, with its high cab, coal-rail tender and L&NER / 1472 on the tender side...

 

Not forgetting that she' be running without a name too........

 

Not any more it ain't!

Wouldn't the best option in the first instance be to let @JJG Koopmans who did so much for sorting 6023's steaming after she was retro fitted with a single chimney have a look at the matter, I would be very interested to hear his expert opinion.

This x100, in the big scheme of things does it really matter!