Nameplates back on black Dukedog

I do despair sometimes. David makes a call for the Dukedog to run without nameplates at Giants. Not an unreasonable request IMHO but all he gets is grief. One respondent suggests that if colour is so important to him he should perhaps readjust his priorities. Why? Our hobby is a broad church and what seems important to one is of no consequence to another but far too many people on here cannot accept that and seek to ridicule those whose priorities are different to their own. It's petty differences such as these that can in time lead to the major rifts which blight certain sections of the heritage railway movement. Be more tolerant of people, after all we are all in the same game.
As for the old "photographers don't contribute" chestnut, that's poppycock. In all walks of life there will be those who want owt for nowt but equally the vast majority pay their way and railway photographers are no different. I wonder how many of those who make this accusation have NEVER watched a sporting event, airshow etc. from the outside and for free?

 

Thats a valid point, but somewhat a step further than simply offering to save someone else time by removing some nameplates?

I admit my recent posting has been reflected by the state of mind i'm in, normally I would have been abit more polite but the suggestion would have been the same. The railway preservation scene is a broad church and everyone has their own little likes and dislikes, but In this case, if David really wants to see the Dukedog without its nameplates then perhaps ask Neil Glaskin if it will be running, and if there is a possibility of removing the plates for the enthusiasts. I can even supply his e-mail address if necessary!

 

As for the old "photographers don't contribute" chestnut, that's poppycock. In all walks of life there will be those who want owt for nowt but equally the vast majority pay their way and railway photographers are no different. I wonder how many of those who make this accusation have NEVER watched a sporting event, airshow etc. from the outside and for free?

Without wanting this to develop into another squabble, I would suggest that there is a difference. In this case It is the difference between accepting what is occuring at someone else's expense and wanting the event to be modified to suit the non-paying bystander.

 

You seem to have missed the point. I am not talking about the Dukedog nameplate in particular but simply life and heritage railways in general.

 

Sorry, I think we were at cross purposes; we are both making good points but are not quite listening. A perennial problem.

Personally I can see why the nameplates have gone back on. There're part of the Bluebell culture; the railway went to great lengths years ago to get them. I think though that it would be good if the time could be found, if the engine is to appear at 'Giants', to remove them for the weekend. Perhaps the railway could ask for volunteers to do it!

Regards

 

You seem to have missed the point. I am not talking about the Dukedog nameplate in particular but simply life and heritage railways in general.


With respect, I don't think I did - I as thinking more in terms of the perennial "photographers don't contribute anything" debate, with gal events in mind as its that time of year. Its one thing to go along and freeload at any gala, another to expect things to be arranged to suit the lineside photographer. In general galas are arranged to suit the paying customer and the photographers should learn to live with that.

 

Mind you that's not the most aesthetic of images: its advertised as the Bluebell line, but thelast time I was there the fields looked more as if they were filled with orange hybrid lilies... Not necessarilly what you want if you're taking your own pics of the scenery from the train...

 

Photographers aren't paying customers? You're talking nonsense I'm afraid. Many will have either lineside permits, spend money in shops and/or buffet, buy a travel ticket, make a donation, be a member of/volunteer on the railway concerned or any permutation of these. Yes there will be some who won't part with a penny but that's life I'm afraid and not a situation specific to railway photographers.

 

(SNIP)

(SNIP)

Do you know that for a fact (i.e. that SP is a nest of vipers, has an atmosphere of intolerance etc), or are you just repeating the hearsay that has in the past been aired on Nat Pres?

I'm only a relatively junior member of the Loco Department, and maybe pretty naive politically (though I don't think so), but I simply don't recognise that description. I've found the vast majority of people - both volunteer and paid workshop staff - friendliness personified; and the half-dozen or so directors and trustees that are frequently around the loco department have always been very open and approachable.

As for the Dukedog nameplate / no nameplate debate; I couldn't care less; but if - as has been stated elsewhere - the 90% general (non enthusiast) public prefer namers and non-black locos; and prioritise (as they do) riding in non-authentic vintage stock over more authentic-to-period but less interesting Mk 1s, then surely the commercial interest is best served by going down that track. And if we can do authentic in combination with heritage stock / non-black locos (as, for example, 1638 pulling the Maunsell stock) then that's surely the best result all round.

Tom

 

Well... not realy a great enjoyment to me anoying people. Normally, working for as the person behind the till at a shop... and as an ticket inspector at Swanage, you have to be diplomatic. But... it just some nameplates, it not really something to get work up about! Really winds me up.

Although the thread has now thrown up some issues about the Bluebell and possibly other railways in the relationship between those who want to recreate the past as much as possible and those who operate the line and it quite intreseting.

One point I would like to say...at Swanage we not compleatly correct as for example we installed footbridge at Corfe, we use Mark 1s (and a Pullman) on services instead of Maunsells and Ironclads, a GWR 56XX is based on the line when they never got to East Dorset, Bulleid 'pacifics' used regularlly when they were rare, station at Harmonds Cross, signal box at Swanage is bigger and in a diffrent postion to the orignal, an M7 in wartime Southern Livery when everything else is 1950's livery, etc., etc.,..... But no moans so much about that so much compared to when what the Bluebell Railway gets up to.

Has anyone asked the Bluebell operating people:
A. If the 'Dukedog' is operating at the Gala in question?
B. If the nameplates can be removed?
Then maybe some smoke maybe cleared here...

But... does it really matter!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Hi Tom

Yes maybe all our messages have become a little too strained. I would love to help more at the Bluebell and if it came to it changing the nameplates. But I am reliant on my Dad for car transport as I can't afford a car - rent, bills etc etc prevent that. Also unfortunately my Mum suffers from severe MS so our visits to the railway are very much restricted. If my Dad can get a carer in we take the opportunity to visit the Bluebell at the enthusiast galas but it's very much a day by day basis which is why my Dad and I could never commit to taking the nameplates off as one day my Mum could be fine the next she might not be and we can't get up to the railway. If the Dukedog is to work at Giants could we not come to some sort of compromise that for say Friday and Saturday the loco runs nameless then on Sunday its works with the plates. I'd be happy to e-mail Neil to ask if 9017 is running at Giants and if so would it be possible to run the loco with the without nameplates. I've got his e-mail address from the Bluebell e-mail group so let's see what happens.

In terms of if there is an anti-enthusiasts/photter element at the Bluebell, just look at what Martin Creese wrote about why only JB is the only one that's organising charters anymore. Other charter organisors have stopped doing anymore events becomes the management have made it impossible for them, surely that speaks volumes.

Cheers

 

Why cant you all find something else to moan about.

 

I wish I said that!

Isn't the weather rubbish!!!

 

The Dukedog was a GOMM (of badge fame) owned loco before being donated to the Bluebell under 'certain conditions'.
Running with the name plates on may well have been one of those conditions.

Far too much waffle without knowing the reasons.

And tom92240, you should just ignore the groucing gricers and get on with the preservation.

Got enough staff yet for the saloon over the Gala weekend?

 

What is GOMM? If there are conditions attached to the donation of 9017 to the BRPS then why the secrecy? Surely all that has to happen here is for the railway to make public the conditions, and anyway, if the conditions included that the engine should not be hired out why was it hired out to the SVR and the Llangollen?

Personally I find it difficult to believe that any conditions would preclude hiring out, simply because the concept was unknown in the 60s when the engine was donated. This is just another example of the 'smoke and mirrors' attitude that typifies the running of the railway.

 

I just have to say this about this whole nameplates thing, and it is nothing personal:

The bluebell puts nameplates on an engine- SO BLOODY WHAT????????????????

It gives charachter to an engine and lets face it, does the paying public give a toss about whether or not it has nameplates?

Lets face it, we enthusiasts only account for 2% of revenue for these railways, so unless we are prepared to pay out, we can all shut our big mouths and just get on with things!

It doesnt matter whether it is historically accurate or not, nothing can be historically accurate. This is RAILWAY PRESERVATION not LETS RE-CREATE BRITISH RAILWAYS which was a commercial failure.

Nameplates give the locomotive a personality to the public and make it more of a favorite and so it is a commercial success, unlike the other millions of engines in historically accurate liveries.

This is what makes the bluebell successful.

Now this post is nothing personal, and I don't expect posts back telling me I've got the wrong end of the stick. But stop prattling about like schoolchildren and just accept that it makes the loco more popular.

 

At the end of the day a polite request, with a few logical reasons thrown in for good measure might well result in the nameplates being removed. So far I haven't seen a single post in this thread saying that someone has actually asked the railway to remove them again.

Less typing guys and more action please.

Regards,

Dan

 

The loco was originally bought from BR by Tom Gomm - connected to the Gomm Badges company. See http://www.bluebellrailway.co.uk/bluebell/earlydays3.html, including a photo of the engine (in I believe the 1980s), numbered 3217 and carrying nameplates in - of all places - that bastion of Swindonism that is Didcot. If naming is good enough for them...

Incidentally, in the early 1970s, the Dukedog was paired with the C class tender and nicknamed the "Seadog" ("C dog" - geddit?). So much for authenticity! At the time the engine worked but the tender was knackered; whereas the C had a decent tender but the engine was knackered. So needs must produced one highly dubious hybrid out of two engines (And in the history of the Dukedog, where have I heard that before? ). It survived its pairing with that piece of Chatham ironmongery, and no doubt it will survive whatever other combinations of paint and names it happens to sport at any given moment to give enjoyment to future generations...

Tom

 

What! Never bought a GOMM BADGE from a railway shop.

In my post it says GOMM (of badge fame) can't make it any clearer.

How do you know that one of the conditions of donation wasn't that 'the conditions were not to be revealed'?
YOU DON'T.

Who said there was a condition that the loco 'was NOT to be hired out'
ANOTHER ASSUMPTION BY YOU.

Another mistake.
The loco was NOT donated in the 60s, it was only on loan until Mr Gomm passed away when his decendants donated it in the late 90s including 'CONDITIONS'.

It's actualy 'commercial confidentiality' and of course if YOU don't like the 'smoke and mirrors' attitude you are as a Bluebell member perfectly entitled to stand for election to the board and do away with it.

If you are not aware of the facts surounding something it is perhaps best not to comment.

 

I have now e-mailed the Events Organiser Neil Glasken to ask if the loco actually is due to work at Giants and whether it will be possible to remove the nameplates for the 3 days.