Ten grand for a grounded body?

Now that is why I think it will be thing to preserve. I used to laugh at the preservation of a slam-door as I rode on them every day to work. Now I can't, I'm looking at the people restoring Gordon Pettit[1]. Like all nostalgia, it's the "why would anyone preserve that?" that is then unfindable later.
(also, of the modern railway experience, what else can be recreated on a 25mph 6 mile heritage line?).

[1] the loco, as far as I know the chap is not under restoration...

 

I think there is a tension between trying to preserve a railway, and trying to preserve items of significant railway interest. The danger of criticising a "Gresley and LMS coaches [on a] GW branchline pulled by a BR-rebuild of a 1944-designed SR loco" is that it is a slippery slope to saying that those individual items have no preservation value if they don't fit the whole scheme.

FWIW, in my opinion the Bluebell has, somewhat by a quirk of fate, the finest and most diverse collection of operational carriages on any heritage railway, with operational vehicles from seven different pre-grouping companies, the SR (two different generations), Pullmans, BR and a BR EMU. The one thing it lacks is any coherence... So you get to choose - do you want coherence with respect the built railway (i.e. LBSCR, with later SECR bogie carriages, Maunsells, Bulleids and Mark 1s)? In which case, no LCDR 4 wheelers, no Mets, no GNR Saloon, no LNWR Obo, no LSWR bogie brake, no 1920s Pullmans - all of which are historically valuable carriages and worth preservation in their own right.

Speaking personally, I'd quite like a bit more coherence, right up to the point you have to make the decision that e.g. the Mets have to go! On the SVR, I try to arrange visits to co-incide with the vintage stock, but I'm not too fussed whether that is GWR, LNER or LMS. It is something of a miracle that such organisations can even keep some of those vehicles running, let alone all of them.

Tom

 

Which way are you seeing the slippery slope?
My view is the preserved carriages are a good thing, or whatever age and stripe. However, the arguments advanced against Mk 1 coaches (inauthenticity and not liked by the punter), do not, to my mind, hold water. Lovely as pre-nationalisation coaches are, they are not "authentic" in themselves if run on the "wrong" railways metals, and when pulled by an engine that couldn't have run on that railway pre-nationalisation, and is wholly unlikely to have run there after, makes me fail to see how Mk1s are any "worse". They have vast amounts of preservation value, but in terms of the "attraction", will mean a lot less to the majority of the paying passengers than clean loos, convenient parking etc.

 

The argument of authenticity matters, though I'd use a less precise definition than @Jamessquared which would get the Bluebell out of most of the holes he identifies; following similar definitions, I find the LNER rake at the SVR jars but not the LMS rake. More generally, for me, the preserved Mk1 is a perfectly acceptable vehicle if well looked after, but almost invariably far less interesting than an equivalent pre-nationalisation design.

However, part of the problem is that there's a certain category of rivet and woodscrew counting gricer, found especially in Terrier country, that argues for utter authenticity* based on the alleged perfection of certain places that have been able to preserve a complete time capsule without using the Mk1. It's an argument whose spurious precision is equivalent to that in classical music, where hardline period performance advocates would flat reject the rather nice performance of Bach's St Matthew Passion that I have on in the background because it follows mid 20th century performance practice.

* - it is only fair to note that the arguments advanced can be stretched by such gricers to allow for what-if scenarios that are operationally convenient, but not where the vehicles are not to their taste.

 

The Bluebell was lucky as it got started at a time when there were still pre grouping and pre nationalisation coaches available in some quantity so they were able to grab some. The Severn Valley and Keighley did too. Almost all other railways started later when the supply had dried up, apart from one's which had gone to departmental use and were often in poor condition.

On the other hand, there were plenty of Mark 1s available in decent nick, ready to go into service. Which to buy when you need passenger carrying capability? Bit of a no brainer really.

 

Heresy time ...... Earlier MKI carriages with wood veneers can look absolutely astounding when fully restored and IMO hold their own as worthy inheritors of a long tradition. The later ones, sporting melamine (or whatever it is), like MKIIs, are completely authentic for lines recreating the 'rail blue', or later, periods. As always, horses for courses. Consider, as easy on the eye as the superb IWR 'Oldbury' restoration unquestionably is, it wouldn't exactly look right on a visit to, say, the Weardale, sandwiched between a 'Big Logo' Hoover and MKII set.

...... I'll just get my coat .....

 

I think historically many lines have operated what for want of a better word can be described as 'warm body stock' that is to say stuff that has come from the big railway is in ok condition. Generally they tend to hang around for a few years before they get shunted into a siding needing work, there is no money, no interest because they are too new, and then after about 10 years they get scrapped (because there are plenty of other examples elsewhere) and then after about 20 years there are just a handful left.

I can well remember first gen DMUs in the years after they started to be replaced by Pacers - there are far fewer now than there were to begin, likewise MK2s and Mk1s in BR, NSE, Regional Railways etc

 

A Pedant writes actually as it’s air braked you could run it behind a D400/ EE Type four, you may have a problem trying to sort out ETS though! WIBN if a Vac did boldly go a little further than Portsmouth harbour! And on that bombshell… I’ll join you!

 

I think there are several cut offs which increase desirability to the public, which represent step change in vehicle designs.

Roughly speaking:
Slam doors, opening windows - ie Mk2 or older.
Wooden paneling, 1950s interior. Compartments (MK1 or older)
Edwardian/Victorian stock*

Within those categories, I'm not sure how much you gain from having anything "special" - e. despite the different construction, I doubt your average punter can tell the difference between an LMS period 3 and a MK1.

*this does depend a bit on the line. Punters seem to prefer our Victorian vintage set over our MK1s, but you are only in them for a 50 minute round trip. I suspect that for travel over longer distances wiser punters might be less enthusiastic about the joys of riding on matchboard seats in a glorified hen hut on a 4 wheel wagon chassis.