7027 Thornbury Castle

I totally agree! Where did I say otherwise.

 

Last point first; indeed, to the point of trolling.

First point: it's akin to what in the old car movement is called a "restomod" - yes, it looks like a Mk. III Cortina but it's got a 2.9 litre V6 and a five speed gearbox from a Granada, with added cruise control. As a result, it's neither fish nor fowl.

 

I didn’t say you had.

 

So why did you ask then?

 

I wasn’t asking you personally, its a question to those who should really know better.

 

The other difference being that Restomods - like the gorgeous Singer 911s - are using old Porsches which are not in short supply, and like 2999, are being acquired specifically for this purpose rather than being restored to original condition. 4709 using a No 8 boiler off an engine currently being restored, not so much.

 

The people who most evidently "actively want to break up Thornbury Castle" are those running the 4709 project. Have they posted on this thread? Who on this thread has expressed such an opinion?

I for one have said that I would like to see both 4709 and a Star, and that personally I am not bothered about losing an incomplete Castle. But I have also acknowledged that the boiler and frames of 7027 would be a poor choice for those projects. With the person who was financing 7027's restoration having withdrawn, even if the 4709 people can be persuaded to part with it I remain dubious about its prospects. But I certainly do not "actively want" to break it up.

 

Is the plan for 6880 to go mainline then? (I wasn’t aware, but don’t follow it closely).

Tom

 

I think the argument of “the GWS seeing their mission as presenting as many types of GWR locos” would have more credibility if they recognised that GWR history consists of more than the 20 years when Charles Collett was CME.

Ultimately, not my toy box - but if that was the mission, the complete lack of any real representation from the 19th century standard gauge Wolverhampton flavour of the GWR is a rather more significant gap than yet another sub-variant of the large Churchward-inspired
20th century school of GWR design.

There is the reality of what the GWR was over a near 115 year history, and there is the stereotype we all joke about. The GWS should be the leading educators in the field - and you could argue recreating lost locomotive types is educational - yet they seem content to just pander to the stereotype.

Tom

 

The GWS Might was well stick 7027's boiler on the bottom end of 5322 for a bit then.....

Its spare, its not the right thing for the job so seems the perfectly illogical choice for the 'quick fix'......

 

Well they had a spare no.4 boiler on 5227, which would've done the job, but gave it to the Churchward County instead. Funnily enough the backplate on that one is cracked as well.

Never has a truer word been spoken!

 

According to this, yes.

https://preservedbritishsteamlocomotives.com/6880-betton-grange/

and this: http://www.6880.co.uk/adopt-a-grange/

 

But they can't remember that far back, and nostalgia is what is driving a lot of new build projects. If no-one can remember some of the more interesting possibilities there is a far lower level of interest in recreating them.

 

The GWS certainly goes wider than Collett, for example with the Saint and the Three Counties project, and trying to cover BR Western Region, for example giving a home to the empty shell of the gas-turbine loco and part of the Swindon signalling panel. And Didcot does have its small broad-gauge installation, though that seems currently neglected as has been mentioned on this thread.
But you are right that 19th century standard gauge deserves much more attention.

 

As mentioned above, the intention is for 6880 to run on the main line. The comparison was made because the driving wheels are the same size as for a 4700. So why should a 4700 not run on the main line? Why is it nonsense? Perhaps you are under the mistaken impression that a 4700 is a 2800 with a larger boiler?

 

I thought that the GWS had publicly stated that it no longer had any main line ambitions.
Ray.

 

There have been contradictory messages about main line operation of any of their locos; fitting the main-line gubbins is all too complicated and expensive, and yet their King has been modified to better fit today's loading gauge and the same seems to be intended for 4709. This is one more area where more transparency would be welcome.

 

You might be confusing 6024 and 6023? 6023 still has its original cylinders. Otherwise I agree.

 

No, 6023 had various height modifications done to fit the loading gauge.