If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

7027 Thornbury Castle

Dieses Thema im Forum 'Steam Traction' wurde von svrhunt gestartet, 18 Januar 2015.

  1. clinker

    clinker Member

    Registriert seit:
    8 Oktober 2016
    Beiträge:
    612
    Zustimmungen:
    372
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Ort:
    romford
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer


    In the case of the Atlantic, a GNR BOILER was aquired, that's 'All' It's aquisation and use in the Beachy Head project has not resulted in any existing locomotive ceasing to exist in it's own right, neither has anything existing been irreversibly altered or modified, It is a genuine case of using a spare component. Obviously If the 4709 project intend to use only boiler, and secure the future of the rest of 'Thornbury' then the only 'Issue' is that of 'Historical Accuracy'.

    Just as a 'What If', just give a thought of how 'You' would feel had the recent Mission Impossible film used a genuine existing locomotive.
     
    Matt37401, Paul42 und Champion Lodge gefällt dies.
  2. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    31 August 2010
    Beiträge:
    5.615
    Zustimmungen:
    9.418
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Beruf:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Ort:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    With respect Al, the G.N.R. Atlantic boiler is a special case. What is being suggested with the Night Owl is a different kettle of fish.

    The G.N.R. boiler is almost identical to the Marsh built one on the L.B.S.C.R. They used the G.N.R. Atlantic drawings as a basis for the Marsh Atlantics, after all. We have No.251 in preservation and the boiler being used for Beachy Head hasn't been massively changed from its original format.

    In fact the reality is, if you really wanted to take that boiler and put it on No.251, chances are it would fit with minimal fuss. That's why the boiler was bought for the recreation of the Marsh Atlantic in the first place: it's virtually identical.

    In any event, the G.N.R. boiler didn't come with a locomotive frames, wheelsets or tender, so it was just the boiler. There was no working relationship, there had been no prior restoration. It was a single, admittedly large, spare component that was waiting for something to do. That is massively different from the Night Owl.

    With respect, I don't think comparing the Night Owl and 7027 to the Bluebell's Atlantic is fair. Sorry.

    That's true, but it doesn't mean the ends justify the means. Which has been part of the problem with this all along really.
     
    Last edited: 6 April 2023
    Spamcan81, ghost, Matt37401 und 3 anderen gefällt dies.
  3. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Registriert seit:
    8 März 2008
    Beiträge:
    27.793
    Zustimmungen:
    64.460
    Ort:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I did start a thread on significance of locomotives, which didn't really go anywhere at the time: https://www.national-preservation.c...hats-significant-and-what-is-at-risk.1421381/ If you start from the premise that there is a hierarchy, i.e. not everything is equally significant and worthy of preservation, then I think somewhat inevitably you end up at the proposition that this particular loco is of rather marginal importance. Grade II listed rather than Grade I, in building terms, if you like.

    What I would draw attention to though is the paper on carriage significance that I listed in my original post. In it, there was a discussion about using the "at risk" category as a lever to unlock funds from funding agencies. The pithy comment was made:

    [] other issues have troubled us in compiling our draft list from the individual recommendations of our assessors. The first is the question of a vehicle being recognised as being “at risk”. Should we say that funding applications should be confined to only those historic vehicles that are “at risk”? Clearly that would be a nonsense! It would be a great incentive for those who were carefully cherishing significant historic vehicles under cover but who have no resources to restore them, to decide to put them outside in all weathers so they qualified as “at risk”!

    (My emphasis. Source: http://www.rhrp.org.uk/papers/significance.htm)
    In other words, we perhaps need to be careful what we wish for in terms of listing processes!

    It is worth noting that accredited museums do need to have, as part of their accreditation, disposals policies in place, which I believe should include disposal to other museums as the first option. The issue here though is that 7027 was not owned by a museum, but rather by a private individual. In fact, I suspect that the number of nominally preserved locos in the country that would come under that policy is actually rather small, particularly amongst those owned by heritage railways, or by groups associated with such railways, since in the majority of cases, those organisations aren't accredited museums. Inasmuch as many heritage railways have attached museums, they tend to primarily concerned with small artefacts relevant to the locale, and the major items of rolling stock are generally owned outside the museum part of the organisation.

    Tom
     
  4. Jon Lever

    Jon Lever New Member

    Registriert seit:
    21 Februar 2016
    Beiträge:
    54
    Zustimmungen:
    142
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Beruf:
    Bookseller
    Ort:
    West Dorset
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I'm assuming that this is a trick question
    but if not
    a lot sooner than if they had to fund and build a boiler from scratch and hopefully before I shuffle of this mortal coil so I can get to see and ride behind it

    Colin[/QUOTE]

    No, not a trick question. As you say there is a limited amount of skill and labour in the movement, and prioritising one project over another leads to something else being 'bumped' down the queue. Accepting that you're right and that Thornbury Castle might need another ten years' work to return to steam, if 4709 is going to take longer than ten years to be ready then the argument you use about Thornbury Castle bumping something else own the queue quite equally applies to 4709.
     
    Matt37401, S.A.C. Martin und torgormaig gefällt dies.
  5. torgormaig

    torgormaig Part of the furniture Friend

    Registriert seit:
    17 Juli 2007
    Beiträge:
    4.906
    Zustimmungen:
    7.651
    I couldn't disagree with you more Alan. The group at the Bluebell took a boiler that was headed for scrap to construct 32424 around it. No viable locomotive was destroyed in the process, let alone one that was under active restoration.

    And for what? There is something about this 4709 project to me that has white elephant written all over it. What possible use is there for such a loco in mid 21st century Britain? Its not needed on any heritage line and it certainly won't be plodding about on the national network (it would need to be a Castle to have any realistic prospect of main line accreditation:)). It seems to me that the best prospects for its use are to operate along the Didcot demonstration line. Wow! Surely a 72XX heavy 2-8-2T would be more appropriate there - now why not build one of them instead from the remains of one that already exists and has been on site for several decades?

    And a realistic timescale for this 4709? I'm more likely to see my centenary in 2051 than this project has of being complete by then.

    Peter
     
  6. std tank

    std tank Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    20 September 2005
    Beiträge:
    3.927
    Zustimmungen:
    1.070
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Beruf:
    Retired
    Ort:
    Liverpool
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Apparently, the 72XX has had quite a bit of work done on it.
     
    Chris86 gefällt dies.
  7. GWRman

    GWRman New Member

    Registriert seit:
    7 Juni 2010
    Beiträge:
    168
    Zustimmungen:
    244
    It'll be a lot longer than 10 years before anyone sees the faux 4700 in steam as well.
     
  8. misspentyouth62

    misspentyouth62 Well-Known Member

    Registriert seit:
    8 November 2017
    Beiträge:
    1.717
    Zustimmungen:
    2.221
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Ort:
    34D, now flexible
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    A question Al - do you think this approach stands for other classes where the appetite to restore the previously unrestored still proceeds within the HR movement?

    Numerous Bulleids and Black Fives 45491 / 45163 / 45293 under restoration might otherwise direct funds and resources to more New Builds? Imagine how many locos could be dispensed with if there is only an appetite for 2 or 3 of any type/class?
     
  9. 61624

    61624 Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    27 September 2006
    Beiträge:
    5.294
    Zustimmungen:
    3.599
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Again, there's no point following this argument ab absurdum - . there are very few classes where there are sufficient preserved examples to justify sacrificing one for a new build creation of something else, and even fewer classes that could be used in this way - it's a peculiarity of GWR standardisation(ish) that has brought this one example into focus. We've already seen two of the Barry 10 partly broken for spares (the Black and 9F have both lost their boilers) and the Spam Can at Carnforth may well go the same way - and there has been far less of an outcry over those.
     
  10. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Registriert seit:
    16 April 2009
    Beiträge:
    8.912
    Zustimmungen:
    5.848
    Thornbury Castle hasn't been "destroyed" either. Its boiler has been "borrowed". What will happen to the rest of it remains to be seen.
    And please don't pretend that it was "under active restoration". It had been, but the work had stopped with no short-term prospect of resumption and little prospect of resumption ever.
     
    hyboy und Greenway gefällt dies.
  11. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Registriert seit:
    30 Mai 2009
    Beiträge:
    22.590
    Zustimmungen:
    22.718
    Ort:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    You must have missed me saying that Beachy Head was not the same, just similar. The outcome will be something that doesn't exist. Ditto for the boiler of Thornbury. There is the similarity.

    Let's reflect on the fact that if the restoration of Thornbury had been moving on apace with money backed up to complete the project then we wouldn't be discussing this 4709 business.

    Too many people who haven't a financial interest in this seem to be standing on principle here. I personally have no view one way or the other and was just making an alternative remark.
     
    hyboy und Greenway gefällt dies.
  12. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Registriert seit:
    30 Mai 2009
    Beiträge:
    22.590
    Zustimmungen:
    22.718
    Ort:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    There are some that view the GWS set up as just a working museum of GWR locos with a short bit of line to play trains. Adding an extra one seems harmless if that's what they want. The highlight at Didcot is when a visiting loco appears to bring a different perspective.

    Now that IS controversial although roughly what happens!
     
  13. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Registriert seit:
    30 Mai 2009
    Beiträge:
    22.590
    Zustimmungen:
    22.718
    Ort:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Not relevant. What happens to a loco hinges on who owns it and where the money will come from to bring it back to life. Thornbury seems to have stalled so Plan B was selected by those with the power to choose. That's life.

    The next thing will be folk saying that 5972 shouldn't have been 'leased' to Warner Bros. Bets are off as to whether that loco will return especially if the price is right.
     
    hyboy gefällt dies.
  14. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    8 September 2005
    Beiträge:
    4.117
    Zustimmungen:
    4.821
    Beruf:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Ort:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    The banner at the top of the Didcot Railway Centre website says Didcot Railway Centre Living Museum of the Great Western Railway" and on the centre map the main running line is labelled "Main demonstration line". Anyone who thinks the GWS is anything else has a bit of a problem with reality. Of course it's not a full on heritage railway, and if it were there's no way the public would be able to have the freedom of access they do at Didcot. The whole point of the place is that you can wander unsupervised through a GWR shed full of GWR locomotives. If you want to go to a full on working site as opposed to a museum go to Carnforth - except you can't.
     
  15. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Registriert seit:
    16 April 2009
    Beiträge:
    8.912
    Zustimmungen:
    5.848
    This thread has been quiet for a few weeks but there is now new information from the 4709 Project / GWS. It turns out that only a deposit was paid for the boiler, so they are now appealing for the rest of the price. That suggests that the frames have still not been sold to the GWS or anyone else; or does anyone know different?
     
  16. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    8 September 2005
    Beiträge:
    4.117
    Zustimmungen:
    4.821
    Beruf:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Ort:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Its difficult to imagine why the current owner would want to sell the boiler without the frames, although I suppose half a buyer is better than none. What's your source? Can't see anything on obvious 4709 web presence.

    GWS proper has been *very* quiet about the 4709 project. Not a word in the last two GWS newsletters for instance, and very de-emphasised on the GWS website.
     
  17. pmh_74

    pmh_74 Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    28 Januar 2009
    Beiträge:
    2.423
    Zustimmungen:
    1.707
    That has been essentially my understanding for some time now, though I'm not going to divulge where I got that from.
    And what if this appeal fails to raise the rest? Does the sale of the boiler fall through?
    It also rather begs the question of why the GWS seems to have been able to determine the onward sale criteria for the whole loco, unless they were never really that serious about relinquishing the boiler (unless the re-sale raised sufficient £££ for a new one, which obviously was never going to happen). Was the whole 6-month 'pause' a charade while they figured out whether and how they would pay for the thing they've agreed to buy?
     
    ghost und 26D_M gefällt dies.
  18. Fireline

    Fireline Well-Known Member

    Registriert seit:
    11 Februar 2008
    Beiträge:
    1.301
    Zustimmungen:
    1.348
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Simple really. You buy the engine off them at Engine + Boiler price, then they hand Engine price over to the former owner....
     
  19. Mr Valentine

    Mr Valentine Member

    Registriert seit:
    9 März 2018
    Beiträge:
    238
    Zustimmungen:
    834
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Ort:
    Titfield
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I've also been told pretty much the same thing, by a reliable source. In my case, it was said that the 4709 group went ahead and placed the deposit on 7027, on the assumption that the GWS would cover the shortfall from its own General Fund. I don't know whether or not this payment has happened, although I think the implication was that it had.

    Having previously spent many years working at Didcot, none of this surprises me in the slightest.
     
    Last edited: 16 Mai 2023
  20. S.A.C. Martin

    S.A.C. Martin Part of the furniture

    Registriert seit:
    31 August 2010
    Beiträge:
    5.615
    Zustimmungen:
    9.418
    Geschlecht:
    männlich
    Beruf:
    Asset Engineer (Signalling), MNLPS Treasurer
    Ort:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    This whole saga gets more and more bonkers every time I see an update.
     
    Mrcow, clinker, Copper-capped und 5 anderen gefällt dies.

Die Seite empfehlen