New builds?

See http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/loco_news/oh_84030.html

Tom

 

The subject of the thread is 'New builds' but we seem to be digressing slightly.

There are a few different categorisations of project I can think of:
1) New build with all major components new (e.g. Tornado)
2) New build using some second-hand components (e.g. Beachy Head)
3) Hacking-about an original engine to make something else, involving throwing some original bits away (e.g. Saint)
4) Relatively minor/trivial changes to an original engine which could easily be reversed (e.g. that pseudo-S&D Sentinel thing, or various Austerity/Thomas conversions and the like).

Then we have
5) Hacking-about an original engine to revert it to an earlier condition, involving throwing some bits away or replacing bits which were missing (e.g. Furness 20, Railmotor)
6) Relatively minor/trivial changes to an original engine to revert it to an earlier condition (e.g. the N2... various brackets moved to their GNR positions)
7) A basically faithful restoration of what survives, with minor changes/improvements in the spirit of developing the original (e.g. probably most engines on heritage lines today...?)
8 ) A completely faithful restoration using all the possible original parts or replicating them exactly if replaced. (Are there any of these, really?)

And finally:
9) Conserving whatever we have left, with no attempt to make it work. (Lode Star, say)

I would respectfully suggest that only locos in categories 1) and 2) should be classed as 'New Builds'. There are locos in categories 3), 4) and 5) which have been listed... I don't think they count!

Phil

 

So with these two categories are they real or replicas? :-#

 

I'm not being drawn into that one again... it's a separate argument!

 

Is this category aimed at the NRM? It seems to be the current thinking.

 

That might also apply to those artifacts in Steam at Swindon.

 

And any number of preservation sites that don't have the resources to use all of their stock list.

 

'Tis strange.......Seem to remember a thread about 'Dean Goods'.... 'Twas only a couple of weeks back.....

 

Butchery isn;t a term I'd associate with this project. The county is butchery, as its turned two locomotives into one incorrect one and a pile of surplus bits. With the Standard 2 Tank, the only surplus bits are the very end of the frames, which have been cut to have the entension frames added. As the loco had no tender, and the tender version's weren't seen in the south east, turning 78059 into 84030 is entirely suitable, particularly as it will look and behave exactly as the original Class 2 Tanks did.

Daniel

 

I agree with your views Daniel. There are a few more bits going off the 2-6-0 though. Cab (a new one would have been required anyway), brakeshaft and rear dragbox and dragbeam (again these would have been renewed).
Good luck to the project. I wonder whether they will fit the push/pull gear?

 

theres only two categories...real and imaginery.... if I can see it, feel it, hear it, smell it and whatever the other one is, it's real.

If I can't I've been taking too many majik mushrooms again,.

 

Its a shame all the later posts were lost as a lot of effort went into compiling that list.

 

apologies.