60009

And hope.
My own hope is that Mr Cameron keeps the ownership and hands it over to Mr Riley to use it.
Mr Riley and his men did a damn fine job with FS 'rebuilding' it and as I understand it they are contracted to look after it. If Mr Cameron has decided to retire who better than Rileys. Yes, SNG is on the horizon but you can't have too many A4's, the more the merrier.

 

All very noble I am sure, but she is at the end of her boiler ticket, who picks up the bill for the next overhaul.

Bear in mind the recent Chime magazine quoted costs of almost £1m to overhaul SNG, the chances of recouping that on mainline or heritage line require extensive running.

I know No 9 has suffered with reliability following her last overhaul, you get the feeling a thorough going over is required this time, not to decry past efforts.

I am Sure I Riley and team can do it, but how do you cut a deal, when on the face of it, a benefactor is required to fill the gap in funding???

 

We've had this debate before I think (I'm too lazy to track it down); I'm not sure there is a 'right' answer.

Start with the owner's rights - it's not a simple all/nothing. (And this doesn't apply just to locos - you could substitute 'a Michelangelo' or 'a Vermeer' and have much the same debate.) I think most would agree that the owner's moral (as opposed to legal) rights would not extend to destroying the item - melting it down into razor blades, say. But to some people, taking a dynamic artifact and making it static is almost as bad. And when the cost is that later generations will never get to see/hear it in operation (especially a sole survivor like the K)... If it were an un-touched original, in exactly the condition it was in on its last day of original service, OK, there's some value in a time capsule. But when it's been repaired and rebuilt...

Speaking of which, keeping these old machines running, over time there will be more and more new parts, and for many, the parts are starting to become pretty major - new boilers, new frames. At that point, is it really the original locomotive anyway? (Another point on which I don't think there is a right answer.) But if not, what's the point of static preservation at that point?

To me, though, the whole point of heritage rail is to allow new people to experience 'what it was like' back when these machines were in their prime, and a static display just doesn't do that. Yes, it's 'better than nothing', but if the real thing, if available, it is a superior alternative.

Noel

 

But it will still be a time capsule for mainline steam in 2020... Time capsules can exist from the point they are 'frozen', whenever that may be. I hope it is preserved with all the gubbins, just to show what was needed to operate a steam locomotive on Network Rail after the millennium.

 

To stick the old rusty bits together with body filler and give it a lick of paint?

 

Static display exhibit in Fife or continue to be a running A4 for U.o.S.A. (preferably i would like to see her steam again after another overhaul by team riley) but at least U.o.S.A still exists whichever way J.C. decides what to do on the final day of her boiler ticket.
Davo 56F

 

Again all very noble sentiments, but the question of where does the £££ to overhaul her come from????
The cost must be similar to 60007 @£1m, and that is conundrum.
Mr Cameron has obviously a great affection for No9, and I doubt he will take notice of forum's wishes.
It is HIS loco to do with whatever he sees fit, we have had a great run with her on the mainline.
If he wishes her to be local to him, in his final years, that has to be respected, we did suggest Boness is a great location to build a shed to house her and the K4 ages ago.
Has she built up much cash in a deferred maintenance budget, if so, it is not the loco money, it is Mr Cameron's to do with as he sees fit.
Would he sell her, you need to ask him, we cannot second guess his wishes.
And nobody has mentioned the support crew built up over time, what are their thoughts????

 

Well, there's ten thousand NP members. £100 each might do it.

In some ways, crowdfunding is a good test of the points @jnc is making. For me, number 9 is not in the class of a Leonardo, but nevertheless,speaking hypothetically, I'm not sure an owner should have the right to melt it down just like that. Times have changed since what happened to Ben Alder. There is a grey area in between the NRM and a rusting chunk of metal in a shed somewhere. Mr Cameron has been a great custodian and his wishes should be a prime consideration.

 

Mr Cameron is the main man and I feel sure everybody will respect his decisions.

 

I feel sure that some won’t...

Tom

 

You wouldn't think so given the lengthy discussions going on here about how his wishes could/might be circumvented. He has already made his intentions clear.

Peter

 

I haven't seen any complaints about J.H. sending Bittern to Margate.

 

If you look on the right forums you'll find some.

 

Why should we respect his decision, after all he’s only the owner who’s invested much of his hard earned cash into keeping it running over many years. That seems to be a view exclusive to the armchair enthusiast who puts nothing into our great hobby apart from his own personal opinions. Sad really

 

I’m sure if such people came up with the cash to fund an overhaul I’m sure Mr Hosking would be happy to consider it

 

It appears to be a widely held misconception that there is surplus space at Bo'ness. There is currently a limited amount of vacant ground but it is allocated for the well developed plan to build a Steam Workshop.

The K4 is presently housed in the Scottish NRM here, but accommodating 60009 in the Museum as well would mean that something would have to give amongst the current exhibits.

 

Why?Is he short of a bob or two all of a sudden? I don't suppose lack of funds is a problem in relation to Bittern's overhaul. On the other hand lack of workshop capacity is a big issue, as it would be if anyone persuaded JC to change his mind in relation to No.9

Peter

 

A very valid point, but a separate one. If nobody's willing to stump up for the work needed to keep her running safely, of course she'd have to be sidelined for the moment. But I'm not sure that question has been explored (in light of his announced plan).

Noel

 

I wasn’t thinking of Crewe, if the money is right someone would do it, I believe a certain workshop owner in the NW would jump at the chance to have a go at No9. I think JC would need some FS type assurance about its long term future but with additional trains now running in Scotland I’m sure it could spend most of its time in the country where he wants it kept.

 

With the greatest of respect to Mr Cameron, I’m sure I’ve read in recent times that the concern doesn’t lie with the desire, nor the cash to see no. 9 overhauled, but more so the concern of his own “10 year ticket”?