6100 Royal Scot

Better to paint it Brunswick Green with a rampant cycling ferret then! \/

 

Now you're talking!! (Might be the final straw for Wardy, hopefully!)
Now, what about a green Stanier pacific to complement it?? (Oh, I forgot ... some other jughead will veto that ... irrespective of what the silent majority might appreciate!!

 

You might not agree with someones views about the paint on a loco but please refrain from abusive personal remarks.

 

Thankyou, I really gained some new knowledge from your post.
JL

 

For myself, I wouldn't necessarily consider "42296"s remarks to be all that abusive.
It is accepted that David Ward (if, indeed, that is who we are all referring to - and, please remember, "42296" has had the decency to make his inferences deliberately vague) has made some very positive contributions to the preservation movement, this over a good many years. Nevertheless, at the same time that person's ongoing dogmatic 'over my dead body' attitude has, at times, offended very, very many.
If he hadn't have 'been there', then someone else almost certainly would have been and, possibly (but only possibly) the latter might have done a far better job - whilst upsetting far fewer people in the process.
It is not the 'silent majority' who are the problem today, but the 'vociferous minority' - and that is where the term 'jughead' is, to me, a rather appropriate description proffered in respect of those few who continue to 'stick their heads in the sand'. I will leave it to others to decide who they feel those people might be, but, in my own experience, I am very conscious of the fact that I will never support the society that owns one particular main-line pacific ... merely because of the (arguably) unreasonable attitude adopted by that society's chairman.

 

That is the popular perception, and one that, like many others, I mistakenly used to subscribe to. We all put up with his antics because of the benefits, and what had supposedly been achieved before. But as you go on to mention, someone else could have done the same, although there's no guarantee that would have happened. I remember as far back as the early 80's, the recently departed SLOA manager wringing his hands in frustration on almost every trip at the autocratic and unpredictable behaviour of the person in question. This from someone who commanded two free seats on every trip for himself and his "secretary". Much of that could be forgotten in the mists of time, except that the downside in recent years has still been there with none of the benefit. We have Cromwell out and about now thank goodness, but it could have happened ten years earlier except that the aforementioned person made it his business to ensure it didn't happen. And the shennanigans that have gone on in other areas especially since he left the employ of our national rail system frankly defy belief. In particular the project to overhaul the engine that this thread is all about, and also the so-called business environment that surrounded another high profile locomotive with Scottish connections. Obviously one has to be a bit vague about the details, but suffice to say, much of the blame for the issues that have been discussed in this forum can rightly be placed at the doorstep of a very small number of individuals.

 

This person's arrogance and contempt for the paying passenger is beyond belief. I and many others booked a William Shakespeare many years ago as 46229 was the booked motive power. This was in the days when a second loco was sent light engine to Princes Risborough to cover for any failure of the train loco. On arrival at Marylebone we were a tad miffed to see 35028 on the train with 46229 in steam "on shed." It was enquired of said person as to why the locos had been swapped. It transpired that there was no technical reason for the swap but simply a certain somebody had orchestrated the change for his own wishes. The ensuing conversation showed that he couldn't care less that a large number of people were left disappointed that they weren't getting a ride behind the loco of their choice. With that attitude it doesn't no wonder projects he's involved with seldom run smooth.

 

Re: (4)6100 Royal Scot

So ... the true facts are beginning to emerge in a way that even Old Wilc*ck would be frightened to publish - no matter which camp he was in. Perhaps my own initial heartfelt sentiments were not all that abusive after all, Ms Mitchell, but maybe something more akin to the truth than the railway media has ever dared to publish even?
Now, let's not have threats of lawsuits being instituted, or even suggestions of the site administrators being close to nervous breakdowns ... for all that is mere tosh! Forums like this one really are for ALL to speak their minds, precisely as they wish to, no matter how contraversial their views might be, or how much embarrassment might be caused by such revelations. If that is not to be permitted to occur, and members are to continue to be barred merely for expressing a few home truths, then it perhaps now really is time to shut up shop ... or to seek someone of the ilk of David Frost take over the reins! Satire is good entertainment, but it also helps to put the world to rights!

 

Are we talking about the same person who wrote an article for the "Beano" many years ago that explained why it was that never, under any circumstances whatsoever it would be possible to even think about running steam specials out of Marylebone? Within a year or so it actually happened.

 

So ... the true facts are beginning to emerge in a manner in which even Old Wilc*ck would be frightened to publish and from more than one aggrieved person. Perhaps “42296’s” initial sentiments were not all that “abusive” after all, Ms Mitchell, but maybe even something more akin to the truth than the railway media has ever dared to publish?

Now, let's not have threats of lawsuits being instigated by those who are embarrassed by the afore-ascribed (almost certainly accurate) revelations, or even suggestions of site administrators being close to nervous breakdowns ... for all that is mere tosh! The ‘truth must out’ and if this particular forum is not prepared to permit ALL to have a voice, then the facts WILL almost certainly emerge elsewhere, in due course.

It has been said before, by others, and I will repeat as much one more time …forums like this one really are for ALL to speak their minds, precisely as they wish to, no matter how controversial their views might be, or how much embarrassment might be caused by such revelations. It also has not gone un-noticed that it is always the same old names that pop up time and time again to complain that they feel offended by what some of our membership occasionally say … but, nevertheless, they continue to read the postings! Need one really say any more?

If free speech is not to be permitted to occur, and members are to continue to risk being barred merely for expressing a few home truths, then it perhaps now really is time to shut up shop ... or for the rest of us to seek someone of the ilk of David Frost take over the reins! Satire is good entertainment, but the deep-seated honesty behind it also usually helps to put the world to rights!

Likewise, if the honourable subject of this current debacle feels that he has been totally wronged by what others are saying, then he should take my advice and just ignore such words. Has he done this? Well, er, actually, no! In an attempt to stave off criticism, the said gentleman has decided to write a pathetic letter to the 'readers pages' of at least one railway periodical. In providing a long list of totally irrelevant and inappropriate excuses, he has made himself out to be a laughing stock and, indeed, casting further into serious doubt his actual credibility. Despite all that has gone on before, that he still retains positions of influence in certain key organisations, honestly, does worry me considerably!

 

It was a great shame and disservice to the railway heritage movement when certain people started trying to get proprietorial about public property.

What was written in 1968 was never made public, but was always described, for over thirty years, as a loan agreement. For people in public employment to try to make that a situation of permanent obligation by the NRM was something I could never agree with.

The rigid application of steam routes, likewise, was eventually proved to be a marketing nonsense, and say what you like about Days Out - Mel broke the mould and we have never looked back for variety since - even though NR would love to put the genie back in the bottle.

So - if one ex senior BR manager holds such sway in the movement, why should others not be capable of questioning its continued existence, or if it ever actually had any merit at all

 

The best thing to do with said person is ignore him IMO, he seems to thrive on controversy and being listened to but the basic fact is away from 6100, he has no real power anymore and just serves to be of irritation with certain comments.

 

...I just wonder how long it will be before this topic is locked... To be honest it needs it now.

 

I am not planning on locking it, keep it polite, if you state something as fact make sure you support it and keep the discussion going

 

Good! There's still a lot to come out on the whole subject of 6100 and peripherals. But not from me, because I've no first hand knowledge, only that of which I've been told.

 

'Tis only a pity that some valid 'home-truths' only seem to be permitted to be publicly aired in internet forums such as this one and, furthermore, it is equally unfortunate that those that do not possess computers or even know of this site are unlikely to ever learn of some of the revelations that have surfaced!

I feel very sad for the gentleman who earlier asked for this thread to be locked, for he evidently has no basis upon which to substantiate any valid reasons why he feels that this should occur. Indeed, having examined the member profile he has supplied, dare I be so bold as to suggest that he wasn't even born when some of the issues under contention (allegedly) occurred!

It is for the readership to make up its own minds as to what it believes and for no-one else to attempt to unjustly persuade away from such beliefs. As I've already said, if that is not to be permitted to occur, and members are to continue to be barred merely for expressing a few home truths, then it perhaps now really is time to shut up shop!

Guys, "Impala", "SpamCan81" and even "T-BirdFrank" have made some very justifiable claims - which they, clearly, can fully back up with the facts - listen to them!!!

 

If only I could persuade a mate of mine to join this forum he could furnish a few more "horror stories" regarding the person in question.

 

For comparison, here are 6100, 6201 & 6233 at Crewe.