Mid Hants Railway Operational Matters

I thought one of the magazines said something Pre COVID or around the time 45379 was withdrawn, that 73096 was ahead of it in the overhaul queue. Plans may have changed since then I guess, but you also have 850 awaiting overhaul too as another NRM loco.

 

I would imagine that the MHR restoration queue s being revised at the moment.....

 

Rather disappointed with myself I didn’t get chance to sample 925 while it was in action, the amount of times I’d been on its footplate at York as a kid, I’d loved to have done that whilst it was in action.
What’s the John Lennon quote about ‘life is what happens when your making other plans’?

 

Posed at Alresford on Sunday evening

Final Crew by Stephen Morley, on Flickr

 

Yes - really got to like Cheltenham over the last few years. Hope it comes back soon and that the Bluebell finally get Stowe up and running. Been waiting a long time for that!

Does anyone remember Repton visiting the Mid-Hants? Autumn Gala in 2007 I think.

 

I’m still hoping to see 34058 and 80150 entering Ropley workshops at some point. Don’t forget both locos are owned by the railway. Both locos would be a great asset to the home fleet once they are restored. There’s always a lot of people asking what’s happening with 34058 when they visit the sales stand.

 

No but I remember Repton on the Kentish Venturer 25th February 1962 running at 79 mph past Headcorn through the snow and twilight. A never to be forgotten dash across the Weald of Kent. As Big Al says they were (are) superb locos

 

In light of what happened with 34105, and possibly is happening over 76017, I would think that in future, unless an engine owning group is 100 per cent behind the railway, then, i can't see that engine being overhauled, luckily the next two due to be done, are both owned by the railway, 499, the Urie group are staunchly behind the railway, so there should be no issues over 506, or 499, 73096 is now owned by the MHRPS , so hopefully, once CP, and the 75 are done, there should not be any further issues with shady owning groups, this I hope is the final episode from the old days, when no one knew for sure who really owned what,
As regards 34105, i feel the only answer now has to give Richard heather notice, either come up with proof, that you own the shares, and then either sell them to the MHRPS, or buy out the railways shareholding, and move it away from the railway, i personally think it might be better to just wash your hands of the loco, and those people, then move on, tell him to remove it from the railway.

 

They seem to be now, although many years ago there were murmurings about them considering a move to Swanage.

Not sure what the situation with 828 is? How far off completion it is, how much of its own resources the MHR (rather than ERPS) has committed to the overhaul, and what commitment the ERPS has give to keeping it at Ropley post overhaul.

 

I don't know about 828, as regards the Urie LPS, that was because certain people (you know who) told them that the railway management were going to throw them off the railway, the people, are now long since gone, as are the management at the time, and they are still here, I must admit, 828 seems to be a bit of a forgotten engine, i don't know if its shortage of volunteers, or lack of funding, I actually think it would be a good thing if there were to be a merger of the Eastleigh loco group, Urie group, and the 7F group, and some kind of programme to see the engines worked on by a combined effort, and fund raising centralised.

 

Schools on the main line anyone?

 

Does Repton do the whitby services ?

 

828 isn't forgotten, it's just that Eastleigh Railway Preservation Society is trying to rebuild the organisation and volunteer base.
The last time that it was discussed the view of the membership was that 828 should remain at Ropley and work on the MHR once repaired.

After loosing our engineer and the Company Secretary and all round administrator in the first half of 2020, it has taken some time to find all the threads, let alone pull them together in a meaningful way. Our sales team has also been depleted to the state it barely exists, so if anyone enjoys selling donated stock in the South Central area and has a large estate car or van please pm me.

It's probably as well not to speculate about combining groups without knowledge of their Constitutions/ Articles of Association.
Repairing metal is easier than repairing relationships!

https://www.facebook.com/EastleighRailwayPreservationSociety

Cheers, Neil

 

I seem to remember 45379 having some pretty significant frame repairs towards the end of its ticket, to deal with a growing crack. They cut out the whole cracked area and welded in a replacement section of plate, much as the LMS learned they had to do with them. So while other parts may be quite tired, my impression was the big issue with the frames had been sorted.

But yes, CanPac would seem to be the obvious candidate for next in service, and of course Wadebridge has done some queue jumping by going to Rileys, although the 34007 website says 2026.

 

Can someone tell me why a loco of this class is always called a "Schools" rather than a "School"? I can't think of any other class where the plural is used.

 

The slightly glib answer is that's what it says on the nameplates.

 

It’s also easier to say “Schools class” than “School class”!

Tom

 

Can someone tell me why a loco of this class is always called a "Schools" rather than a "School"? I can't think of any other class where the plural is used.

A fair question given that a number were, and remain, Colleges. Examples being Eton, Bradfield and Radley.

 

Most likely because they were named after the public schools of England, so it was right to use the plural,