A2 60532 Blue Peter

To preserve an authentic visual appearance the owners of most locomotives equipped to work air braked trains have gone to a lot of trouble and expense to keep the visual impact to a minimum. Examples would be 45407, 60007, 34027 and 35028. On all of them there are just two brake pipes under the bufferbeam as a clue. 34027 is better than Clan Line to the extent they have hidden the air pump between the frames, on 28 it's hidden away in the back of the tender but it exhausts out of the top, that's the steam you see that looks like a coal pusher working. You would have to be on the footplate to see the driver's brake valve.
We do speak to passengers who are virtually all non enthusiasts on the Belmond and I can assure you they are more interested in how the engine looks than you may think

 

There are many locomotives throughout the UK, dare I say the vast majority in fact, that manage to operate as-built without the need of modifcations that the class never had in-service. Indeed, Blue Peter managed without the air pump right up until the end of its last ticket I believe, so hardly something that had to be done beyond LSL deeming it advantageous to their business. So why does adding the far more (in my opinion) historically divergent air-pump, air tanks, new additional brake lever and all the associated pipework and gubbins that go with it, purely because the current owner deems it operationally benefical to their mainline business get a pass, yet that same owner also deciding on an historical "what if" coat of paint that's far more easily changed, is to be critiqued? In my mind you can't cry about historical accuracy in one regard whilst completely ignoring another. And I'm open to being corrected as I can't find out definitively from a quick search, but the chime whistle next to the RHS smoke deflector I understand is a preservation addition, and most definitely not operationally required, as it's a second one - so why no moaning over that?

And they are all mechanically and operationally incorrect historically speaking, and yet it is seen without complaint as the cost of operating them, but apparently a far less impactful to the loco "what if" livery is objectionable. I fully agree with you that non-enthusiast passengers are interested in how engines look; at the GCR we often get asked about the star on 48305's cabsides as an example - there is a definite value in historical paint schemes, and they should be the norm, but my point is how many of the non-enthusiast passengers would care about travelling behind a blue Blue Peter and not a green one? If told it's a historical "what if" they'd all sagely nod their head and be satisfied. It's not like even amongst enthusiasts there's much complaint.

I'm all for historical accuracy the majority of the time, but "what ifs" are one of the favourite activites of people looking to the past across any area/discipline/theme, and given that there's nothing permanent about a coat of paint, it's hardly something to complain about whilst ignoring other inaccuracies (which is my main bugbear), especially after 22 years out of service. Just consider it the cost of seeing it steam again. Far cheaper for you than for the owner to get it operational again!

 

Blue for an A2 is not a what if, it was never on the cards. As for changes that don’t change the loco visually, the only alternative would be to to retire it to a heritage line, in the case of Clan Line the core work is the Belmond Pullman that is air braked. The engine and tender are still as it was in steam days, engine steam tender vacuum, everything that’s been done is reversible and apart from a couple of air pipes under the buffer beam is not visible to the observer. It’s the same with the LSL locos, they are using airbraked stock so need engines able to work with that stock.

 

John, I hope Iv misunderstood, but surely you are not suggesting you’d rather see the machine consigned to heritage working, or static, than have it on the mainline painted blue?
That can’t be your conjecture, or the conjecture of anyone sane, can it?

Not directed at you, but iv yet to see anyone demonstrate why mechanical changes are deemed acceptable but aesthetic ones are not.

The harsh truth in all this of course is that it’s deeply historically inaccurate to be running any steam in this country past the BR ban in 1968. Not to mention engines of particular regions going to other regions.

Seeing as we are, and very successfully too, let’s have some fun with it and do things which the designers and engineers of the steam era may well have done had they had the tools, means, or inclination.

Some are taking what is essentially a fun, interesting and magnificent hobby just a wee bit too seriously.

Blue Peter, in blue! The next generation of preservationists are going to be besotted with it, and that alone is reason enough to do this.

 

I find all livery debate a bit odd. Blue Peter is now 76. It seems odd to me that we insist that it only carry liveries it actually had in the first quarter of its life. Most preserved locos have now worked for their current owners for longer (often far longer) than they did for their original ones. As an example 30506 worked for the LSWR for 4 years, for the Southern for 24 years and BR for 16 years. It has been at the MHR for 48 years and has actually run in service for 19 years. The Urie Society have owned it longest, and during the current boiler ticket it will reach a point where the MHR has operated it longest. Whose livery should it carry? Logic might suggest whatever the current owners and operators want.

 

I’ve not said that I would rather see it with some reversible almost invisible additions to keep it running on the mainline than be confined to heritage lines. The owners can do what they like but the original aim was to preserve the past as happens with all museum pieces, no one has suggested repainting the BBMF fleet into current RAF colours because they have been out of normal RAF service for a long time.

 

Thankfully the MHR don’t have their own livery so your point is irrelevant. Back in the late 60s the men in suits took over what was then the Dart Valley Railway and ‘rebranded’ it with DART VALLEY rather than GWR on the engines cause a big walk out of volunteers, including me. Have a look at what has been done with the Stanier Mogul on the SVR, that’s what proper railway preservation is all about.

 

Have you complained about the steam heat fitted to 92220 Evening Star or the 33C shed plate fitted to LMS 3 cylinder 2-6-4 tank 2500? As 2500 is in LMS livery, the shed plate should be 13D.

 

That’s not true. The company policy is generally to adopt the liveries of BR (S) in the 1960s, but why shouldn’t it paint Watercress Line on the side if it wanted? My point was that when you look at it, it is perhaps odd that heritage railways don’t put their names on their locomotives and rolling stock (except on the narrow gauge.

 

Painting Blue Peter blue makes perfect sense. We already have two green mainline LNER / BR (E) locos.

 

Much like a coat of paint is reversible. Your aversion to historical inaccuracies seems to be only skin deep as it were. And it's hardly like the exhaust off the tender of Clan Line is out of sight. As an engineer, out of sight out of mind does not tally with me.

So why are ahistorical mechanical alterations to primarily serve the Belmond Pullman that first started trading in 1982 (so not like the alterations were made to preserve the past) acceptable in your eyes, but not ahistorical paint on a loco? Either you want complete accuracy and so Clan Line should be on a heritage line, stripped of a braking system it never had (and a diesel supplied lever marring the cab) or you accept sometimes people do cosmetic alterations in addition to mechanical. I don't think you can have it both ways.

I presume then you were against the display Typhoon being painted into Battle of Britain colours as it never served in the Battle of Britain? And continuing with the BBMF, the Lancaster's RAF service was in a photo reconnaissance squadron, stripped to bare metal with gun turrets removed, so it isn't displayed as it was operated (you could argue displayed as built but tenuous at best given it went into storage), so why does that get a pass from you?
I presume again that the Buchon 109's painted in fictional ME109 paint schemes annoy you as well? And the B-17 Sally B being in two paint schemes at once?
There's also the Silver Spitfire (https://www.silverspitfire.com/) that flew around the world in an ahistorical colour scheme and I don't recall any froth about that being done.
I could keep going on, but the point is ahistorical paint schemes happen all the time in the historic warbird scene as well and don't generate nearly as much criticism...so why for steam locos?

 

Locos are occasionally made to look grubby for a photo charter or other special event. Would those who are fussy about authenticity really prefer locos to be grubby all the time?

 

Yes they probably would.
Arguing the toss over personal preferences and motivations are pointless.. they are what they are. Not everybody even understands their sensibilities without the aid of a shrink.
I love the saphos Crimson and cream mK1's, the colour coded components and white painted step edges on the uprated/updated bogies grates...but thats the way they are, perhaps because they need to be that way.
Its Blue... until its not. Its not strictly appropriate for that class... but it looks alright.
When they put a big double arrow in White on the tender and paint its arse warning panel yellow then i might get a bit upset...

 

Only if they are from Gateshead.

 

In your opinion, which is all you'll listen to.....

 

Not just me, anyone who appreciates history including those who spent a lot of time researching to make sure they got it right.

 

Not agreeing with someone's opinion doesn't mean it hasn't been listened to, and your comment works both ways.

We have opinions and they differ, but getting personal about it doesn't persuade anyone.

 

I believe it's going to appear with the BR arrow on the tender, with yellow on the smokebox door and tender rear. renumbered as 987532 on 1/4/24

 

There are a range of approaches to understanding history. Some of them include a degree of imagination and reinterpretation, going beyond pure recreation.

I would argue that these approaches include the current modes of operation of both Bahamas and Clan Line.

 

Where is the old fictitious liveries website when you need it?