82045 The way ahead?

No complaints from me. I think the newsflow is excellent and makes the members feel more engaged in the process.

 

The latest news on 82045 is now posted at http://www.82045.org.uk/news/82045_news-oct10.html.

Thank you to all our supporters and all who responded to our appeal in the last SVR news. Donations are arriving daily and membership has had a really good boost. Remember, we are offering our members free entry into an annual draw to win a footplate ride with Tony and Chris. All lifetime members and those paying a minimum of just £5 per month by standing order will be eligible for entry into the draw.

 

Thank you for the latest newsletter.

 

Nice to see a few big bits arriving for the frames

 

Today saw Peter and Tony busying themselves seeing to the spot facing of the Flexible Stretcher Brackets whilst Colin continued his rust prevention (painting) activities. Meanwhile Richard enjoyed a respite from machining Horn Ties so he could start machining the first Pony Truck Bearing in preparation for attachment to the recently delivered "sub-frame" fabrications. Once complete, these sub-frames plus the recently ordered Smokebox Saddle will allow the final rigid Frame Stretchers to be fitted.

 

The November update is now on our website at http://www.82045.org.uk/news/82045_news-nov10.html

 

Excellent news. No disrespect to "TORNADO"; "HENGIST" or "UNKNOWN SOLDIER", but a reasonable sized tanky like 82045 is going to be of far more use to many heritage lines than the more glamorous cousins out there.

 

It's the "Unknown Warrior" actually! However, you are correct in your statement I believe, hence my original thread title "82045 The Way Ahead?" as I too believe that this really useful engine will be just that to the heritage railway movement in the years ahead. That said, I'm a member of the Patriot Group too and would be of Hengist if I could afford it! You know those muppets who say, "well, if I won the lottery I don't know how I'd spend the money.....?!"

 

I had that same conversation with someone at work. They told me i wouldn't know what to do with the 113 euro million i said it wouldn't be enough. Patriot all done another 4 standard 3 tanks for churnet gwr mhr wsr and obvious Finnish the one on svr. Hengist done. All westcountry.s done. Build a big engine shed on churnet or gwr. Or could get the line back into iron bridge. Either way im soon out of money

 

Your completely right but surely the other locos being mainline Will get more money to pay for there upkeep. Correct me if Im wrong.

 

Any idea why the website is down ?

 

It's working for me.

 

Seems to be working this morning Pesmo.

Regards,
Barbara

 

The latest news for December and a summary of progress on 82045 in 2010 can be seen at

http://www.82045.org.uk/news/82045_news-dec10.html

Best wishes to all our supporters for a Happy New Year!
_________________

 

Lovely! An ambition of mine is to see this loco at the SVR in 2011 (and of course to see it running in 20**).

 

Thanks for the update nice to see more progress

 

I find it hard to agree when people say that small, low powered tank engines are what heritage railways need. Just ask yourself this:
why do people go to the NYMR?
Answer: to see a 9f, an A4, a super D, 76079, 2 black 5s, Repton and (my personal favourite -- albeit when she's back in steam) Hartland, all on some of the finest and toughest scenery anywhere on earth. If that railway was run by engines such as their Joem, NCB no. 5 and NCB no. 29 -- not that I have anything against those locos, i personally think they're quite nice -- it wouldn't be able to meet the demands it has. Some lines need high powered locos to meet demand but all lines need them for business. Same applies to the Mid Hants, with their Bulleid pacifics, 92212 and standard 5.
Onto the likes of the Great Central and the Worth Valley. While they could easily be powered by a fleet of Jinty and Ivatt 2 tank engines with their length of line and gradients, they have huge collections of big mainline locos, and that's what the public wants to see when they go out for the day, often with the little ones, to see steam in action. When you mention steam trains, what do most people think of: an 0-4-0ST or a 3 cylindered 4-6-2 Flying Scotsman?

No disrespect intended to those building 82045 (in fact, hats off to you for building it all from scratch instead of using existing locos for spares) and those building other small engines, but generally speaking, big tender engines are preferred over the small tank engines. For example, the October 2010 ELR steam gala with 71000, 45337, 73129, 5690 and 60163 was far more of a commercial hit than their small engines gala earlier in the year with 47324, 32 and 1370. 82045 will likely be different because of its new build status, but most people are more inclined to visit a railway if the big guns are out. I'm not an expert in railway economics, but the little engines might be more economical in terms of coal and water consumption on low traffic days--when they ARE needed, but won't 60163 or 71000 generate more money in a gala or at peak times and thus more publicity?

I'm not against the smaller locos, just prefer the bigger ones for the mainstay of motive power on a railway. Have the little ones as backup and for quieter times, by all means.

This is my case. Love it or leave it, but I don't feel downsizing fleets is the way ahead

 

Enthusiasts may like big engines, but the non-enthusiast visitors (90% of railway's business) don't give a toss about the size of the loco so long as it is steam.

 

Spot on there, methinks.

 

A standard 3 is an interesting build but the preservation scene doesn't really need it, there isn't a demand for a tank engine of that power range and capacity when so many standard 4 tanks already exist. Perhaps the group would have been better off negotiating a fundraising role for 80079?