60163 Real or Replica?

Doh!

 

Spot the winking smiley?

 

Haha! It wasn't your post that caused this. It was more to with the very unfortunate mistype a few posts above...

 

Haha! It wasn't your post that caused this. It was more to with the very unfortunate mistype a few posts above...[/quote:2abbsiy1]

Ah, the 60103 typo?

 

Ah, the 60103 typo?[/quote:fl385rme]

Precisely. ](*,)

 

Anyone taking bets on how many pages this thread runs to before we all agree that we can't agree on whether it's real or a replica? ;-)
Also it may be worth taking a look at the OED.........http://www.askoxford.com/results/?view= ... type=exact

 

All members, except the first member, of a class are exact replicas (or given some modifications, eg SDJR 7Fs, close replicas) of the first original member. All are real. In my humble opinion.

Steve
(WSW)

 

Spot the ....

 

Not sure if anyone has made this point already....
Isn't Tornado an A1.1?

Sort of A1 Mk 2.

They've taken the original and altered it slightly to incorporate some modern advances.

 

Reading all the above comments about 60163 being a replica or not is undecided. But when 32424 beachy head is finished and running at the Bluebell she will be a replica and can't be described has any think else.
:-k :-k :-k :-k

 

You can argue the fact all day about any steam loco?? What is a replica and what is real? Does a Replica make it the fact an engine was re-named or re-numbered as such or carry a different boiler, but then yet carries its original cab fittings?

You could say the exact same thing for which the Bluebell are homing on in... The H2 or even this... http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/blueb ... 84030.html

 

Or as I understand it will have one or two 'original' components, does that make it an overhaul/rebuild...? :smt002

 

As in numerous previous postings on similar-veined threads in this forum, I refer to the Castle Cary (Scotland, not Somerset) accident of 1937, in which LNER A3 No.2744 Grand Parade (BR 60090) was irreparably damaged. The (reasonably intact) loco was towed to Doncaster Works, and a new loco was constructed, and given the number 2744 and named Grand Parade, receiving the name- and worksplates from the opriginal. I believe that the two Grand Parades actually stood within a few hundred metres of each other! The damaged loco was then scrapped. There is no evidence to suggest that the new 2744 or 60090 was considered to be a replica. By this token, if 60163 were to be given an original component, be it numberplate, nameplate, worksplate, whistle etc. from, say, 60134 Foxhunter, it becomes that loco, fully in keeping with LNER practice. As for changes in construction materials etc. I can't imagine that a Darlington A1 was identical to a Doncaster one - take the rivetting on the cab, for instance!

A similar situation occurred at Darlington when some of the B16's were being rebuilt, although as I am at work (!) I do not have my reference material handy.

Previous postings have suggested that Tornado should be, variously, an A1/1 or A1/2. The reason that LNER 4470 Great Northern (BR 60113) became Class A1/1 on being vindictively butchered by Thompson (ex-North Eastern, and miffed that he didn't get the CME job on formation of the LNER) was that at the time of rebuilding Great Northern was still an original Class A1, having not been reboilered etc. into Class A3, and therefore, the logical classification for the rebuild was A1/1 in keeping with LNER classification policy (although you could argue that the originals should have become A1/1 and the rebuild A1/2, as Gresley rebuilds of ex-NER B16 became B16/2, and Thompson rebuilds B16/3 whilst the originals became B16/1!) However, shortly afterwards the originals became Class A10, Flying Scotsman being one of the last to be converted to A3, (but I won't enter into that debate!) to leave A1 available for the new standard Pacifics, of which Great Northern was to have been the prototype - thank goodness Peppercorn had the design changed - I believe his staff were secretly working on this even before Thompson retired.

 

I believe this was down to accounting practices. A brand new loco would have been charged to capital account whereas the "repaired" loco was charged to current account. 2744 was of course a new loco but not according to the accounts.

 

Does that make Metropolitan No 1 real or replica then ?

It puts 4965 in an interesting category as well.. it is a real 4965 or a replica 4983 ?

 

There was an interesting article in a recent Quainton News (Buckinghamshire railway Centre) about Met 1 and whether it was built as a replacement for the original Met 1, or was a new build and just took the Met 1 number - a subtle distinction. If I remember rightly from the article the belief is that whilst it was a different class from the original Met 1, for accountancy purposes it was a repair / rebuild of the original Met 1 rather than a new build!

When I am back in the country I'll try to dig the article out (if I remember!).

 

As I see it there will in future be 3 types of loco:

1. Origonal ones which are substantially comprising of parts which existed pre 1968 (ex BR or earlier)
2. New builds which have been built to the drawings of BR or earlier companies WITHOUT COMPRIMISE to the origonal design (eg boiler with copper firebox, rivets where there should be rivets etc)
3. New builds which have substantially adapted an origonal design (or are a completely new design)

Category 1 are as close as we will get to being 100% genuine real locos (ones that can still operate)
Category 2 will be a good advert for the movement if well built and help for the future
Category 3 are a real worry - why? - because we run a real risk of creating theme park stuff where everything starts to sink into an ever more approximate representation of "real" locos & where without some boundaries the quality product which many of our steam railways currently deliver will be devalued.

 

Not necessarily. Sometimes this is the only viable means of representing something that has long been lost. Iron Duke, for example...

 

What about the "Iron Duke" broad replica which the NRM made out of bits of an Autherity 0-6-0 saddle tank? :-k

According to '1472' above, that suggests that the NRM is making "theme park stuff" :-# [retreats to moderators' bomb-proof bunker]

Richard