Fire at Mid Hants

someone has posted a video going past the shed, looks terrible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gd9gnDh7yuk

also some footage from Meridian http://www.itv.com/meridian-west/watercress-line-fire83354/

 

This has appeared on the web site:
http://www.watercressline.co.uk/News/Latest/View/215

 

I'll willingly send them a cheque, I hope that cleaning up the smoke damage to the boiler shop is not going to take too long. I would have thought that was the priority so that section is back in use quickly.

 

Articles like that do Wikipedia a disservice, and it seems a bit excessive to write a specific page on accidents on a given railway.

 

It's most likely somebody with an axe to grind toward the MHR. As far as I know there are no other railways that have a Wiki page dedicated to incidents and accidents.

 

Any details available on damage to the vehicles?
Or is it assumed all totally destroyed.

 

i got a glance inside while going past.
i would say no hope for the coaches, or the whole of the shop, apart from boiler shop. tender and shunter maybe with alot of work

 

Bugger...

 

Let's hope people rally around for the MHR just as much as they did for the SVR flood damage and NYMR Bridge and Wheels appeals.

Dave

 

Have heard that the Bluebell, Dead Forest and South Devon Railway have offered loans of bits and pieces, what a great passion we all share with such a fantastic group of people!

 

That's good to hear, out of interest would the Maunsell Locomotive Society be prepared to loan the tender from 1618 to use with 31806? I know 1618 has been out of action for years but it has been kept in the shed under cover so exposure to the elements would be at a minimum.

 

Yes, from what I've heard the Bluebell are loaning 31618's tender.

 

But will it fit?, remember 31806 started out as a "River" class.

I also understand the the Bluebell are making the wooden windows for the cab of the Black Five as well.

Well done to them and thank you.

Regards
Chris

 

I have no idea, just what I heard! It could be very very duff information though....

 

That's superb news, of course the prospect of 31806 double-heading with 31638 on either respective railways is quite mouth-watering, if some sort of arrangement can be made.ray2:

 

The fact that 31806 was built as 806 River Torridge is now irrelevant It has standard N/U class drawgear between engine and tender so any tender of these breeds will couple up . There were some 6 wheel tenders at Barry that arrived coupled to S15s so these had different drawgear.
Best not to speculate about tenders and visits just yet I think due to the ownership of this particular loco .Lets just hope that 31806 returns to service nearly as planned.

Heres one I took earlier of 31806 back in July 1989 with under restoration 76017

 

I know they have not had much rain up Parkend way, but I didn't think it was that bad!!
On a serious note, yes, we are really one big family, and it truly is heartwarming to see folks stepping up to help

 

Oh S** *t, that's not good news. However, all is not lost if drawings and metalwork can be salvaged. Just a lot of time and materials will be required to correct the situation.
IIRC the National Motorcycle Museum had a similar disaster, and have recovered well, with a lot of rebuilds carried out. I Think that I remember that a couple of the worst ones were kept - perhaps as a warning.....

 

Watch this space as you may be presently surprised about the LSWR dining car.

regards
Chris:

 

That sounds most encouraging, Chris. Nothing is impossible these days.
Glad to hear the railways are working together for everyone's benefit. There should be no problem attaching the tender from 1618 to 31806, since 1618 was (unlike 1638) a U class that was originally ordered to have been built as a River, so any mods would have been the same. But my understanding is that the U, N and Q tenders were interchangeable, but were different (in drawgear-height?) from the Schools. The tender behind the Bluebell's Q-class would thus also be an alternative, since these tenders were originally built for Us, and replaced with larger ones when the Qs were built, with the Qs taking the original U tenders. Clearly for a U in BR condition though, the larger tender is appropriate.
The rumour at the weekend was that the U-class tender was not after all a write-off, so hopefully it can be repaired in the longer term.
What none of the rumours reaching the Bluebell could agree on was the identity of the Mk.1 coach involved - the first message (from the Mid Hants itself) identified it as one of our coaches! The weekend rumours then suggested a TSO, but others the LMS inspection saloon, and even a Gresley buffet car (which is rather unlikely, since there isn't one at the Mid Hants, although that was information which again came direct from someone involved on the Mid Hants!)
Regards,
Richard