7027 Thornbury Castle

7027, if you bother to read all of this thread which commenced as far back as 2015, will show how this has been treated as a lost cause.
It relates how Waterman was glad to see the back of it - sold at a price if a good home was found for it - which presumably he thought it was. Then it went south to JJP who seemed to do little towards its restoration, apparently some of the locos parts were subject to theft whilst in his possession. Now we come to the latest sale. Reasons are not known but health issues have been mentioned and a family member mentions that money was better spent on other interests.
All in all it seems like a jinx is on 7027. I wonder what is now original to the loco when built by BR in 1949, given its history of Tyseley, Crewe, Rowsley, Somerset/Avon and GCR? It is said that one set of name and number plates are at a school at Thornbury, Glos.
Unfortunately I do not see a future for 7027: maybe I am wrong but in the present conditions affecting the heritage movement I feel there are far more ports of call for donations.

 

Don't forget the 4709 project is not based at Didcot. Formerly at Llangollen, I believe they are now based at Tyseley. And, [turns red, looks embarrassed] I see on page 1 of this thread that I suggested that the 47 project could possibly use 7027s boiler back in 2015, although in my defence back then there seemed little prospect of it ever being used for anything else.

 

I wouldn't be quite so pessimistic - yet. In spite of the mess we're in economically as a country there are still people around with a good deal of money, some of whom may be enthusiasts but few, if any, are likely to spend their time posting on this forum. One loco sale which came seemingly out of the blue as far as most of us were concerned was 2859, which previously belonged to a group at Llangollen which also owns a small prairie (5532). The buyer was a traction engine enthusiast from Cheshire who hadn't previously been involved in steam railway locomotives but who was prepared to take on a loco which, as far as I am aware, had had little work done to it since leaving Barry and thus is probably a more challenging restoration project that 7027. Let us not forget the "Blaenavon Five"either, which were all pretty rough engines. They have all found good homes and one, 4253, isn't too far off a return to steam. Now Didcot's offer to sell 7027 has been made, let's see if anyone comes out of the woodwork. We already know that JJP has held discussions with the GWS/4709 group. My guess is that if Thornbury Castle steams again, most likely, it will either have been bought outright by an individual or else by a group where one person will have a significant majority shareholding. Some members here have expressed their willingness to contribute to buying and/or restoring it (and I'm certainly well disposed to the idea of making a donation at some point) but I'd be surprised if 7027 ends up being owned by a loco group such as those which are responsible for 35028, 45596 or 60007. Still, we shall see. I'd be very happy to be proved wrong in this assessment.

 

Steady on mate, I think 'if you bother' comes across as a bit harsh. I don't think anyone should be criticised for not reading 100 pages of what has mostly been superceded by events.

Shall we say something like "easy to forget what a hopeless case this loco used to be thought of - try the beginning of this thread to get an idea".
Personally I blame the people who stopped buying Mr Waterman's records, but as I never bought any I suppose that's hypocritical.

 

Nothing harsh intended in my comment. You use an awful lot of words instead of one. Maybe it is an age thing and I that I keep words to a minimum due a disability .

 

As my old technology teacher would say ‘it takes years to build up a reputation, but you can lose it all in seconds’

 

So its your fault then is it....

I am just living in fear of one of them clicking on your drawings of fictitious GWR locomotives link and getting ideas....

 

You mean like 9315.

Bob.

 

One would hope that genuine enthusiasts would have a bit wider vision than that though. Especially as it can be argued that the reason for the fuss is that the 4709 group were far too focussed on the opportunity to speed up their own project and missed the wider implications.

 

I'm inclined to agree. I've no idea what the management line is, however it is obvious that having a dismembered loco using up shed space and not being worked on is not a good use of resources, and that if you were in that situation and someone told you they'd bought it for parts, your response would be along the lines of "please come and get it then". But I do know, from statements they have made elsewhere, that at least some of the previous restoration team are supportive of JJP's efforts to secure the future of the loco and would like to continue the project, so I hope he succeeds. One hopes that it is then simply a case of getting the GCR management, shed staff/volunteers and the new owners around the table to thrash out how that would work. I suspect that there would be donations/share purchases/whatever forthcoming from the GCR community if it remains there, particularly given recent history, which might not be as forthcoming if it doesn't. Inevitably, the pace may not be what it was under its previous ownership but I would have thought a rolling chassis could be completed relatively quickly from where it is, even if there was then a pause to gather some funds for the next stage.

 

Someone had better tell the (Didcot based!) Heavy Freight Mob...

 

Only because available labour etc. is probably not available at Didcot. Much like the railmotor.

 

It’s a fair point, but for some people, your name has been sullied

 

Only if you got between them and the bar in the Queens Arms
(Just kidding. Those I knew in the 80's were a great and very friendly bunch)

 

What's happened to the Railmotor, seems a pretty easy win to overhaul it yet seen no indication that it will be and when I was at Didcot in the spring it didn't even seem to be on public display, 5051 was also missing in action?

 

Doesn't it need a lot of woodwork doing on the rail motor? I remember seeing some pretty rotten plywood on it some time ago, something about not high quality used?

 

That would not cost a great deal to do and being a new engine there shouldn’t be too many nasties to deal with. It’s a problem with Didcot and a lot of the heritage movement, they spend zillions on restoring a loco with no plan or funding for the future so after ten years it gets locked away and forgotten. The rail motor and its trailer are ideal vehicles for hiring out

 

Not too good for hiring out if some of the woodwork is rotting. But if that's not dealt with, those vehicles, restored at much expense and effort, are of little use to anyone.

 

It's no good now anyway as its no longer a runner.

 

Shame, as I have fond memories of filming it on the Churnet Valley Railway and at Didcot: