Are there any engines the NRM would NOT restore?

With all the talk about the same few engines all the time at the museum, namely 4472, 4468 and 6229, I was wondering if there were any engines (other than the obvious) that the NRM would definitely not support a resteaming of, and as such would make them "fair game" to anyone with a good enough plan to steam them? Obviously steaming something like the original Rocket is out of the question, and we all know about Lode Star. But there are other, smaller than the aforementioned, engines which, while only suitable for preserved line, haven't seen use in a long time.

Would the NRM, for example, entertain a proposal to steam Gladstone? Or Coppernob? Or Thundersley? Or slightly more modern engines, like 737, 245 and 82? None of those engines would be suitable for the main-line, as other inactive engines mentioned before for a steaming would be (34051 for example), but to steam them would be something rather novel.

 

As you say, it would all depend on the proposition...

 

Thundersley has been in steam in post preservation times when at Bressingham. Gladstone would be an interesting candidate as it is probably in fairly good condition and has essentially been under cover since preservation. (4)2500 has got to be a favourite choice for any Heritage Railway and (4)2700 wouldn't be far behind it. I understand that Coppernob has a technical fault commonly known as a hole in the boiler barrel. Personally, I'd love to see the Lanky radial back in steam.

 

Chris, you mention 34051.

My opinion is that if someone wanted to overhaul and operate 34051 then they would have to make a particularly good case for it, possibly more so than something like a pre-grouping 4-4-0. Yes its knackered and not particularly 'original' in the museum/conservation sense, but when you consider how many other original Bulleids are currently either in ticket or well on the way to being so I really don't think it would be a worthwhile proposition. To use a bit of a buzzword, what would 34051 steaming 'teach us' that isn't otherwise being done by 34007, 34067, 34070 et al?

Overhauling 34051 would simply dilute the work available to the present examples of the breed, dilute the NRM's resources and support crews, and would probably take away what could be a reasonable display from the museum.

 

I like this thread - everyone's answered it themselves! =D>

Personally I'd love to do 737 or the Spinner...but they'll not pull 13 coaches over Shap for loads of enthusiasts, and I'd want them in their current liveries, so there'd be little support for that... :-#

 

I wish they would consider the North Stafford tank

pretty Please.

The Melter

 

It's MINE! (says he cackling in a most unprofessional manner - well, we are human after all, despite what everyone thinks!) Brightens my day every time I look at it. As with most things, never say never, just "not now"...

 

I appreciate it is difficult for the museum to comment definitively on individual cases in such a hypothetical thread like this, but I would imagine the make-up of the collection as a whole could have a surprisingly (to the general enthusiast) significant bearing on what could get returned to steam.

For example, the NRM has an oft-quoted shortage of mundate goods 0-6-0's, and as such I would imagine they may be reluctant to release the J17 (again, purely for example purposes) for overhaul in order to avoid having little or no representation at 'HQ'. Am I reasonably accurate in this presumption?

 

I would suggest that something similar may well apply to 2500.

 

One of the GNR Atlantics would be nice . They would look far better running on a preserved line than stationary in a garden centre.

Bob.

 

the one that I would love to see running is tiny, the only surving origional braod guage loco, but that aint ever gunna get done lol

 

The J17 is currently at Barrow Hill, so unless I'm forgetting something, there isn't a "standard" goods loco at York (92220 doesn't count!).

 

At the moment... :-#

 

Isn't the Q1 at York?

 

I knew I was forgetting something!

 

I can has the Chinese monster?

Pretty please?

 

Don't worry, so was I!

 

I don't think there would be too much debate over colour on most locos in the NRM, its the few where there is a conflict between the colour they are wearing and the colour that best reflects their current condition.

It would be really good to see one or two of the less historically significant Victorian locos restored to steam. Maybe the Tennant (Lots of other NER locos preserved statically)? Or Gladstone, as someone has mentioned? (It represents a much loved type, but one that freom an engineering standpoint was a lovable quirk rather than mainstream development). Aerolite(Another oddity, and would be technically interesting - when did the last 2-cyl compound run in this country)?

Locos that should not be restored - at least, if it involves substantial replacement of parts with new ones. Hmmm. Mallard, Henry Oakley (1st Atlantic), and similar cases where it is the actual loco that is historic rather than being representative of a type. Rocket, Locomotion, etc etc.

And before anyone says this is inconsistent with my position on FS, let me point out that I regard that as an exception and I have given reasons on another thread.

(edit)
It occurs to me that despite my initial views above really a difficult decision is only required where a loco is currently 'untouched' from when it was first preserved (or nearly so, as I believe is the case with Henry Oakley, despite it having been steamed in the 70's).

The difficulty is whether disturbing its current state is justified by the - what did someone say? - 'learning value' of seeing it back in steam at the expense of no doubt having to undertake a considerable amount of replacement and repair to meet modern much stricter rules and in the process losing some 'authenticity'. So locos that have already been restored to steam multiple times - e.g. City of Truro - might as well continue to be active on some kind of rotation, since the likelihood is that they already contain a substantial amount of 'new work'.
(end edit)

 

Oh well, that blows that argument out of the water!

Got to say that surprises me though, as a Q1 hardly represents the typical development of the 0-6-0 goods engine. It has been said numerous times that it was the most common wheel arrangement on Britain's railways, and for a Q1 (a bit of an extreme example if ever there was one) to be the only representative at HQ is a bit of an omission to be honest.

 

I think there is no common or garden shunting engine either?

The trouble is, ideas of what a museum is have become much better defined since most of the locos were saved. What we really have for anything prior to the end of steam is a collection of items that were 'notable' for some reason - individual achievement, first of type, or some other reason for special regard - the commonplace just didn't get saved. The NRM cant go back and retrospectively change what was saved, so they have forever a collection skewed in favour of the glamorous and the odd.