Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by svrhunt, Jan 18, 2015.
That can happen if they were open JCs museum
I’m sure the plan is long-mooted; I’d heard of it before and don’t follow closely. The issue, as has been pointed out by @Jimc and others, is that it is a poor plan even in purely technical terms - if you want to convert a Castle to a Star, a late model Castle isn’t a good place to start. As should be obvious to the GWS who ought to be the more aware than others of the actual constructional differences across GWR locos.
Restoration/rebuild projects always raise as many questions and differences of view as solutions.
Someone has already observed that "as we already have an Atlantic" why build Beachy Head? And the decision to construct an original Merchant Navy Pacific (that'll look like Blackmore Vale with a different number) has also raised an eyebrow or two for some. And I have also observed that "another Castle" is questionable if something else that we do not yet have is possible.
At the end of the day are there not just two factors?
1. Whether the seller and purchaser are happy with the arrangement and no other parties have been disenfranchised..
2. Whether the objective will be achieved quickly and sustain funding without it becoming another stalled project.
I think the jury is out at present.
I've said it before and I'll say it again; don't underestimate the naivety of those making major decisions. This whole thing of making sweeping statements to generate interest, and only considering the detail after the project launch has been the modus operandi for years.
At the time of the County project launch, it hadn't been established whether or not the 8F's boiler would need alterations to the foundation ring, they didn't know whether they would keep it as a 3-row or change it to a 4-row, they didn't know if they could run it a 250 psi, and I reckon it was over a decade before anyone realised that the tube layout of an 8F was different to a County. I know these things aren't game stoppers, and you can't work out every nut and bolt before the launch, but you get the gist.
As for Lady 'we'll just drop the boiler down in the frames' Legend...
3. Whether or not an action turns supporters off the project and organisations connected with it. Of course it is possible to have large single benefactor support but that is not so helpful if it turns a lot of others right off the project.
I think there's a practical difference between projects like the Atlantic or unrebuilding an MN, where change is to build or adapt surviving artefacts to a varying version of their own form, and the direction that the 4709 project is taking, which is to take something entirely different and use it to create an example of something else. That's not a question of property rights - what you say above is entirely factually correct - but of something deeper about preservation ethics.
And, to be clear, I see no conceptual difference between 5942 becoming 2999, and 7027 being used for 4907 - both raise the same challenges of principle. There are, of course, a further set of questions about how these decisions are being taken and implemented that then go into the specific projects.
Strong whiff of this with some of these replicas…
Am I right in thinking that the tender (or a significant part thereof ) in this picture has now been rebuilt to be paired with Beachy Head at Sheffield Park?
So, having read the latest Rail Advent piece, it will be interesting to see what comes of any talks between JJP & the 4709 Group... I do hope that he can re-acquire 7027 from them.
No, he's not perfect by any means, but this is the future of the Locomotive we're talking about.
Hopefully this isn't the end of 7027 as a Locomotive in its own right. If JJP buys it back, the 4709 lot then have their money for a new boiler.
Surely if JJP buys it though, the funds 4709 group get, will only replace those used by GWS / 4709 / Whoever actually paid for it, to buy 7027 in the first place? Plus perhaps a bit of profit if they decide to increase the price over what they bought it for? Can't imagine it would be enough to repay the money they paid for it, and have enough for a brand new boiler as well?
I suppose this could be the start of improving his rep after the S&D 53808 issues.
Hopefully a decent outcome happens for the Castle and 53808 now.
The castle might be the start of a change in his attitude, now he can see things from both sides.
Not looking good, he has just posted on FB, GCR washed their hands of it, nothing from those who sold it and GWS/4709 still cracking on with their plans.
Wasn't it GCR that started this ball rolling by asking the (previous) owner to remove his toys from their site? So he sold the loco.
(Apologies to GCR if I have this wrong. Obviously they could not predict where the ball/loco was going to end up.)
Where was this posted?
Edit - found it
I must admit I have not really followed this saga with any great detail and I have only read the Rail Advent article (so the facts or not).
But if the loco was sold to a private buyer by JJP, what is the input from the past or current acting GM's bearing on any of this?
What am I missing other than the man trying to "avoid a PR disaster"?
Aside from the resonance with the S&DT, there's also one with 4110. As I read JJ-P's first piece he was asking for a sale of 7027 to be held up while another bid was put together. As reported, 4110 was sold by the WSR (chair: JJ-P) while others were asking for the same thing. (From the above, that might have moved on now)
Oh dear, not good.
There was all the same blathering on about the 8F being scrapped because it was unique (to a rivet counter) but nobody stumped up the loot to buy it, let alone repair it. Got few feelings on how this saga for Thornbury Castle will ultimately end:
1) the sale was not a 'one-off' commercial transaction. 7027 has been for whatever reason allowed to be lined up for the purpsose of donating its boiler. How did the 4709 lot lay their hands on xx hundred thousands to buy at short notice? Politics between various parties and noses being cut off to spite faces?
2) like 48518 Thornbury is unique only to a few dedicated anoraks. At the end of the day its one of eight Castles. To most people there are eight Castles. That its got a left handed wotnot is irrelevant and was the pride of St Trianains shed unimportant
3) the internet wibble, like with 48518 will ultimately end with a new build GWR ten wheeler gobbling its boiler up. Hot air, keyboard bashing wailing will not make one iota of difference. This is a deal done at a higher level than the plebs need to know about and is sealed and complete. Thornbury is no more, it has a destruction order on it. The Star thing is a distraction as ultimately those castle frames all nicely painted will end up as a 30' long flower pot in a corner of Oxfordshire
Only question is will it be for sunflowers or tulips?
Why not tell us what you really think?
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
I'm not the one crying over spilt milk. Still got seven of them to dribble over
No need to blaspheme old chap, its not life or death!
Separate names with a comma.