Castle/Star conversions

Re: Scotsman Overhaul updates

Nor me

 

Very similar arguments were thrashed out on the L&B Carriage in the NRM thread. It comes down to the balance of of what you would lose by restoring something to running order against what you gain by seeing it in action. Clearly, there is a difference between a loco that is essentially in "as last restored by BR " (or whoever) and locos (such as Mallard, the Midland Compound, Hardwicke, or, dare I say it, Flying Scotsman) that have run more recently and have lost that patina of originality. Remember, even someting as seemingly trivial as the formulation of paint used can at the moment be studied in perpetuity, but would be lost if a restoration was attempted. Whereas with, say, Mallard, that archaeological information is already lost, and therefore there is no further destruction of archaeology if all the paint were to be stripped and the loco be repainted as part of a restoration. With e.g. Flying Scotsman, very little of the original still remains and therefore essentially there is very little to be learnt about the LNER ca. 1923 by studying the engine as it is now: in that case the best outcome is to run the engine so that people can experience her as a living, breathing object.

You may want to play a thought experiment with the following engines. Ignoring any particular inherent bias in what you would like to see run, which of the following should be candidates for restoring to running condition, and which should be preserved in aspic:

- Stephenson's Rocket (the original, as preserved in the Science Museum, containing considerable fabric dating to the Rainhill trials and other material from just after)
- Lion - another early locomotive, but which has run in comparatively recent times presumably with some change of material
- Gladstone - essentially a product in its current restored form of Brighton Works at the LBSC / SR transition and basically untouched since; incorporating considerable original material scavenged from a variety of Stroudley survivors (but with many components that are timeworn and would require replacement if you wanted to operate her)
- LSWR T3 563 - basically restored in current form by Eastleigh in 1948; steamable at that point but at reduced boiler pressure. Again, a restoration would essentially require considerable replacement, particularly the boiler
- Lode Star - basically a time capsule of Swindon practice ca. 1950
- Midland Compound - a unique loco and therefore of greater value (IMHO) than locos for which many of the type survive; but steamed in the 1970s/1980s and therefore already considerably changed from any notion of "original" condition, or even "as last used in service" condition
- Evening Star - similar recent history to the Midland Compound, but not a unique survivor of its type (except inasmuch as it was the last steam engine built by BR).
- Flying Scotsman - an engine that has seen extensive "preservation era" usage, to the point where much of the fabric is relatively modern.

I'd see that as something of a continuum. "Rocket" is a no-brainer to preserve exactly in its current state almost in the way of a precious old master. "Flying Scotsman" should clearly be out and about reminding people of the majesty of British engineering. In between is where it gets interesting as a kind of grey area. Where do you draw the line between "preserve" or "operate"? On my list, I'd put that line between Lode Star and the Midland Compound (e.g. - preserve Lode Star, operate the Midland Compound). But others may vary - interested to hear thoughts.

Tom

 

Re: Scotsman Overhaul updates

Talking in geological timescales here, obviously, but when Lode Star's current paint job deteriorates with the passage of time they'll have to tidy her up and do a cosmetic restoration. Then the authentic Swindon paint job thing will be gone. Then it's, as you say, 'fair game'.

 

Re: Scotsman Overhaul updates

Lode Star is not just a paint job. It is Swindon engineering practice at its best. No nut and bolt on that loco should ever be disturbed.

 

Very good post, Tom. As you say it can all be found on the L&B coach thread. The way I look at it, most of the equipment we're lucky enough to have to play with is 'fair game' because the NRM - and others - hold a portion of the surviving material 'in stasis', conserved in a museum environment for generations to come. We shouldn't begrudge that.

I believe that the NRM has a 'report card' of some description on each artefact in its collection with information about the artefact and its history. It is from these reports - and visual inspection - that decisions are made as to what can be done with an artefact, which may explain why it appears to be a 'mixed' policy - in fact, it is a different policy for every artefact to best reflect that artefact's condition. Naturally Anthony can give us a better 'gist' of how it works.

irwellsteam - obviously eventually conservation takes on a remedial aspect, but considering the very careful attention given to 4003 - I believe that when it visited Didcot recently it wasn't allowed out if it was raining - I can imagine the paintwork having a lifespan of hundreds of years - there are 10th century painted murals about.

std tank - very well said!

 

Re: Scotsman Overhaul updates

In the end everything decays - but that's not an excuse for speeding the process up! The key point about archaeology (and I do see locos such as Lode Star, Gladstone etc as time capsules ripe for archaelogical investigation) is that once disturbed, the information content inherent in their current state is gone for ever - you can't get it back. Whereas, arguably, for locos such as Mallard or Flying Scotsman, that information is already gone by virtue of the fact that they have run since "the end of steam" (whatever that means!) So the loss of information that would occur by restoring Mallard to steam is, IMHO, considerably less than would occur by restoring Lode Star to steam. Of course, loss of archaeological information is just one of many factors that would be considered before deciding whether to restore a particular engine, but it is an important one especially because it is effectively a binary switch - once you make the decision to restore Lode Star (or Gladstone, or Stephenson's Rocket), their value as a time capsule is gone and can never come back.

Tom

 

Out of interest, how many Swindon engines are ex-works? Lode Star is one, but what about Dean Goods 2516 and Pannier 9400? I assume these are too?

 

How much pre1948 GWR Swindon has actually been saved On this engine ?

This picture was taken in 1960 may change that perspective ?

R0522 4003 LODE STAR Swindon | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

My untrained eye spots motion, chimney and steam pipes have changed since 1960...Also zooming close up to the smoke box... Is that the same as now ?


Granted all work is " factory fitted" at least BR / GWR stock parts rather than preservation replacements, but I'd guess anything that's never run in preservation carries something like that label.

(I'm in favour of it being unrestored btw)

 

4073 Caerphilly Castle is too, isn't it?

 

I think that it is as much about the workmanship.

 

Re: Scotsman Overhaul updates

They don't have to do anything! Museums in other disciplines sometimes consider it better to put things on display in unrestored condition; authenticity is thus more highly prized than presentability. L&B coach 2 is an excellent example!
I think paintwork can can sometimes crack with age, or be scratched by visitors - for example, I think I recall seeing some minor blemishes on 1275, which was restored for the S&D centenary in 1925 and, AFAIK, hasn't been touched since (except possibly asbestos removal). But you have look closely to see them, and it certainly isn't enough to justify destroying a time capsule of 1920s LNER practice.

Tom, your "thought game" is interesting. Where I think I might disagree is that I probably wouldn't steam Evening Star again. I know others may disagree, since se has run in preservation. But since she last steamed more ex-Barry 9Fs have been restored, and there are still others that could be, so there's less need for her to steam now. Also, as a young engine she probably didn't need major work in the past. But if it would take major work to make her steam again, then I think it would be better to leave her as she is rather than destroy any more of her original fabric, particularly given her historical significance. Besides, she might one day be seen as "historic" as a representative of 1980s preservationist workmanship!
But I would love to see the Midland Compound in steam again - and Hardwicke for that matter...

 

Lode Star lost any claim to 'Swindon authenticity' when the asbestos was removed. There was no need to do that, other than paranoia. No legislation and no need.
The touching up of the paintwork where the cladding was removed is a mess, both in colour and finish. Or it was when I saw it.

I've argued previouisly that it may be Swindon paractice at its best but it is not best practice. If you have nuts on studs that have the flats perfectly aligned, they can't be properly tightened.

 

It went through a full works overhaul before going on display in the Science Museum, not just the cosmetic job that was supposed to have been done.

 

Re: Scotsman Overhaul updates

Don't think it hasn't been discussed

We've got an old set of joggled frames kicking about, plus all the wheels & motion. plop the No 1 from that Barry 28xx that we're chopping for the 47 project & viola! ...lovely Star.

Spare boiler for 5051 then. Sounds like a plan.

Pete S
C&W Dept.,
GWS.

 

Proposed Castle Class Tank ?
Out of interest where did the spare set of frames, motion and wheels for a castle come from ?

 

We found them under a spare No 8 boiler that we got off the Aussies.

 

Originally Posted by irwellsteam
...they'll have to tidy her up and do a cosmetic restoration.

Will they? Have a look at Bauxite

 

For a minute I thought you had something serious.

 

And what a sorry sight she makes :tape:

 

Then you've missed the point of what she looks like.

I think it is easy to fall into the trap of seeing the NRM as akin to a heritage railway, where restoration is the norm - at the NRM it categorically isn't. It's purpose and aims are totally different. I don't know if there is a written NRM charter, but if there is at a guess it places a duty on the NRM to conserve and interpret Britain's railway history, and international railway history where appropriate.

Let's look at the NRM's duty to conserve -

Bauxite No.2 is a very rare beast - a locomotive taken straight out of service and put on display. The grime on it is grime from its days in service, not a single part on it is refurbished or replaced. It is an archaeological artefact, perfectly preserved. As an example of conservation, it is nigh on perfect - and you certainly won't find any better examples in the locomotives saved in these Isles.

Now let's look at the NRM's duty to interpret -

4472 Flying Scotsman. The loco of the people. A flagship of Britain, of nostalgia, of the railways. It's been in steam for almost 90 years with only very short breaks - I believe the last seven years have been the longest it's ever been out of service. Consequently, it's Grandad's Axe, as noted elsewhere on this thread - 3 new heads and 5 new handles. To overhaul it to steam again - sure it's expensive, a lot has had to be done, but what would be the point of conserving it. Enthusiasts all agree on one thing - a loco in steam is a loco being interpreted, and interpreted well. 4472 fulfils that.

So the NRM through its different artefacts fulfils its duties. Our railway history is upheld, with original artefacts to be studied by generation after generation, and other locomotives that we are able to steam, that we may enjoy them - and our successors will overhaul them and steam again, and we enjoy them, secure in the knowledge that we have locos like Bauxite No.2 to turn to when we actually want to see a locomotive just as it was in the days when steam was a viable, non-heritage means of traction.