Heritage Railway Magazine- Didcot to build 47xx class

I seem to remember a similar article in "Steam Railway" sometime ago, I think some people have been mentioning it since before the "New Works" had the brick potions of the side walls!!

 

Its a credible gap to fill in the collection which probably makes any rumour a runner as far as press stories go, but there simply isn't room in the works for anything else until something is finished, and even then it would be a long term slow burn project.

In terms of the comments about the collection - from what I've seen the out of ticket collection seems well cared for - its stored under cover, not rusting on a siding somewhere, and given that there is already more than enough in ticket to cover operations there seems little point having even more standing idle with its ticket running out. Far better to work through the collection slowly by rotation and let everything have a run every 20 years or so. Of course that won't wash with the "want it now" generation but since its not their collection, they'll just have to keep moaning about it!

The Great Bear was mentioned earlier in the thread - obviously a complete red herring in terms of typical GWR items, but I bet there is enough curiosity value in it (bearing in mind the number of models that get sold) to make it a fairly viable project if someone wanted to take it on!

 

As far as the loco part of the collection, all have either run at sometime in the recent past or are being worked on, the coach and wagon collection is another story, a look round the carriage shed will reveal this. Having said that all the coaches are under cover and dry which is a big plus and a lot more than some railways/museums manage.

I am not saying the locomotives are mistreated, it is a shame though that locomotives like the unique 6106 has run for around 7 years in the last 30 odd, it was stopped requiring boiler work (motion was still in good condition) and could have been turned around quite quickly but has since stood in the shed.

I can see the attraction for the special projects, but 4 ten-wheelers and a rail-motor?

 

There isnt really a need to restore everything to working order....and there really isnt an awful lot at Didcot that isnt presentable enough to display, which is what Didcot is about.

 

It was mentioned in the SR 30th anniversay thing the other month as being first mooted in the late 90's sometime, I queried it with Danny H on here at the time and he suggested that it was still an aspiration. So I assume that in the abscence of any direct quotes from Didcot someone has read this story/heard a rumour and made a story out of it (not that I am suggesting that any railway magazine would recycle stories from others).

Obviously as my username would suggest I would absolutely love a 47xx to be built, never got so see one in the flesh but from pictures they always look a fantastically imposing locomotive - however.... there do seem to be way to many of these schemes bubbling away at Didcot and it would perhaps be good to get some finished before striking out on another one.

The Saint project (which really does fill a huge hole in GW history) seems to have been going on for years and years - I can never understand why they have started the County project without finishing this one - as I assume that there are only limited donations and these get watered down by variety of projects.

I didn't realise that such a small amount of money would get Hinderton in steam again so perhaps as outlined elsewhere she should be restored and hired out (to be honest most visitors to Didcot wouldn't notice the difference between 5900 and 6998 - they are bost named Hall, must be the same) bring some income in, raise the GWS profile on other lines which may encourage more people to visit Didcot?

I would disagree with the posetr who suggested that the loco's are being allowed to deteriorate at Didcot, but perhaps a re-think on strategy is needed.

However if a 47xx project appeared that looked like it had something like a chance of success in a reasonable time period I would probably bung it some cash, otherwise it will have to remain the project I will undertake if I win the lottery!

 

People have been going on about hiring out the locos from Didcot, but why would they want to? Overhauling them and using up the usable life in them for asomeone else's benefit does not seem to me to be a sensible use of resources. Far better to conserve them against the day when their turn for rumnnig agaiin at Didcot comes around.

The WSR's decision to sell 6412 because it wasn't making enough money to cover its costs and so the WSR were effectively subsidiising hirers would also seem to give lie to the general belief that there is money to be had from hiring out locos.

 

That's the insanity of it all... as for something like 4144, you might be looking at as little as £10k. I just can't accept that raising those sorts of amounts is such the impossible task that the official 'fund raisers' make it out to be, who at the same time insinuate that 20 year mega-bucks projects like the County are easier. Of course 5900 & 4144 are some of the better examples in the shed. Although keeping the engines under cover helps prevent them deteriorate, over the years some of the ropier examples have been plundered for spares to keep the running fleet going, with the result that engines such as 6697 and 7808 are big jobs, no matter how you look at it.

Overall I think the Society needs to re-evaluate how it funds its engines. Personally I believe that solely relying on handing out the begging bowl, and expecting enthusiasts to fill it, should be a thing of the past. Engines shouldn't be done up, run for 10 years, and then have nothing to show for it. They are after all, the bread winners for the Society.

But like Panier Man, I get the feeling that Heritage Railway may be crossing its wires. I had a quick read of it today in Smiths; none of the usual suspects are quoted, and I wouldn't be surprised if the mag has just picked up on some of the recent developments concerning the Barry 10, put 2 and 2 together, and come up with 4709.

The 47xx's are impressing looking engines, no doubt about that, but I have to say I really do fail to see how they represent a credible gap in the Society's collection. The only thing a 47xx is representative of... is a 47xx. A specialist class of 9 engines. Now take your humble 0-6-0 goods engine, there were hundreds and hundreds of those, Gooch built them, Armstrong built them, Dean built them and Collett built them... in fact Churchward is about the only bloke who didn't! And yet we don't have a single one at Didcot. Relatively cheap, practical to use, and historically significant. Everything a 47xx isn't.

Did I mention we already have a suitable boiler out the back of the works?

 

Plenty of assumptions are being made on this thread that the stored locos at Didcot are not deteriorating.

Yes they are stored undercover (when there are no holes in the shed roof) but they are certainly not stored in heated museum type conditions. So seasonal dampness from condensation will be sure to be causing corrosion of the insides of tenders/tanks/under cladding in particular and boilers/smokeboxes as well unless particular steps are taken to completely eliminate this.

 

Playing devils advocate for a moment though, if you overhauled 4144 at the moment, you would simply add another loco to the operating fleet, one which isn't unique enough to get hired out (especially given Didcot's extra transport costs), and so it would largely just be sat as it is now, out of steam, albeit with a current boiler ticket.

Similarly if someone asked me for funds for "yet another" 51xx when I could go and see 3 or 4 others currently active, I'd probably think that should be funded out of the ongoing maintenance budget. I would be far more likely to put my hand in my pocket for a new project rather than something perceived as routine maintenance. That said clearly £10k for 4144 needs a lot less interested donors than the big budget jobs.

My own personal view as someone who wants to see Didcot succeed is that we need to see the current "project" phase as just a phase. There are opportunities at the moment to get things into running shape whilst the site ownership issues are in limbo. Hopefully there will come a time when the site ownership is the financial priority, and the loco fleet can settle into a structured overhaul plan based both on the individual conservation needs of the relevant locos, and on providing a balance operating fleet.

Long term I would like to see it settle to something like one 4 cylinder, one 2 cylinder "passenger", one from the "freight" types (3822, 7202 and 5322), one "big" tank, and one or more from the panniers etc. That sort of number could roughly be maintained on a 3 tickets off, one on sort of rotation. There simply isn't any point in running them any more than that both from an operational need perspective and in terms of long term conservation.

I am inclined however to agree that maybe a 0-6-0 would be a better addition but I suppose its back to the same argument - there already exists a Dean Goods and a 3251 albeit one static, so presumably the argument for the 47xx is that there isn't one. Still if I won the lottery I'd be wanting to do one of the Cambrian types so what do I know! Compromise on a Jones goods?

 

I couldn't agree more. If and engine like 5900 could be overhauled and sent to a preserved line I think it would be a nice little earner... I would definately go to a preserved line to see that! Also, how much is wrong with 5051? Surely a boiler overhaul and a quick bit of work on the motion would make it suitable for a preserved line... How many preserved lines have the GWR's most famous locos... oh yeah, none! Again, it would probably be a nice earner. There are so many things Didcot could do to raise money; there is so much potencial.

I think if Didcot did one project at a time I would probably be more inclined to help out financially but they have too many projects on the go, which has resulted in no results in terms of completed overhauls. I read an old magazine the other day that said that 4079 would be complete in 2004! Here we are at the tail end of 2009 and its still in 100's of bits. That could have been a reality if the GWS concentrated on one project at a time.

 

I would tend to agree with a lot of what you say 1472. You don't need to convince me of the above, I am firmly for GWR locos on the Gwili ; being part of the team restoring GWR Coach 216 I am fully aware that seeing it hauled by an Austerity just won't look right (however at this moment in time I'll take it being hauled by anything if there are passengers in it...!)

Like every railway, the Gwili was conceived mainly by enthusiasts with fond memories or a desire to see a 'local' line saved. Over the years the railway has evolved from being an enthusiast based operation to become more of a business than it used to be. In fact it may surprise you that many of our volunteers don't even have that much of an interest in trains!

That's not to say that some of our volunteers don't care about locos; we have over the years had many GWR visitors all of which looked very much at home in the Carmarthenshire hills.

Looking at the possibility of getting a GWR loco, yes we could probably indeed get 4115 for a nominal sum, and we are then faced with bringing it to site and then dismatling, and then restoring it. Even a volunteer based restoration would take many years, especially given it's condition. Practical problems right now include the fact that we have no covered accomodation for locomotives, and very limited storage space for dismantling engines comfortably. Therefore even if we were sucessful in attracting grants from the HLF for this work it is doubtful that they would be keen for apprentices to work outside!

Regarding the HLF itself, it has been well publicised that the Olympics has depleted this fund for the forseeable future, and also we would have to bear in mind that HLF will not grant fund 100%- the railway could be faced with finding as much as 50-60% in match funding again.

As a further aside, 4115 and 6686 were previously the subject of a failed HLF bid to restore them in Barry using apprentices around 10 years ago.

I have to say that anyone taking on a Barry wreck now would have to be an individual/dedicated group rather than a railway purley on economic reasons- look at the other Barry 10 examples (5538 and 5539- they have been aquired by individuals to restore, not railways). If we were looking at getting a GWR loco, as a previous poster suggests it would be cheaper to buy a complete locomotive - say 7760 or 4588 or even enter into a partnership with the owner of an already complete GWR loco.

The Gwili could quite possibly secure 4115 and dismantle it - but how long would it be before the critisism arrives after we have taken it from secure storage, dismantled it and done nothing since?

As another poster says, how many enthusiasts will get their wallets out for 'another' 41xx, even if it is for the Gwili?

Honestly feel the best policy for the Gwili is not to commit now to a project of this nature now, but to invest in sheds, extensions and the like so that more potential can be realised. If we have an improved railway with a train of GWR vintage coaches, covered accomodation and extended run then then I'm sure we would become a much better proposition for GWR loco owners, which if you like would be the icing on the cake.

At least if we had sufficient undercover storage we could take 4115 knowing that it wouldn't get any worse. That isn't even an option right now.

The timing is not right at the present, but things can change...

 

Matt - Stick with the Austerities at Gwilli. They are ideal for your line and have a true Welsh pedigree, with one of yours working in the Valleys into the 1980s. The majority of visitors never saw steam so don't mind what type/colour it is and if trainspotters can not see beyond their ABCs that is their loss. No GWR tank sounds as good!

As for another Didcot bodge job - isn't the loss of one 8F enough before destroying any more original engines so more spotters can relive their youth. If they want one so much why didn't they buy one in the 60s?

Alternatively why not give Steam the money to restore the Dean goods or get the Taff Vale tank back into action. They would be something worth seeing.

Cheers,

 

With the amount of work required wouldn't it be better to BUILD a COMPLETELY new 47xx if they are to build one? I still don't see why it wouldn't be better to focus on their impressive collection.
I have recently been going through my mountain of old magazines and I came across a interview with Pete Waterman and in it he said that these butcher new builds might look like the original but they are not really, now Tornado is a A1, not bits of other locos cut 'n' shut together to look like an A1. An 8f boiler is an 8f boiler, it was always an 8f boiler and it will not be county boiler no matter how many modifiations are made to it
I'm now retreating to my Nat Pres bomb shelter

 

With the relocation of the Society's unloading facilities from Milton to the west yard, transport costs should be significantly reduced. Have to say, the idea that other railways wouldn't want a decent sized tank engine, because 'it's not unique enough', is rather a new one to me! In any case, the point isn't that the engine should be overhauled right now, it's that it shouldn't be condemned to the back of the shed with no future.

Would you lump the overhaul of 5051 or 6998 on the maintenance budget? Seems a bit of a tall order to me! If enthusiasts are only willing to donate towards new stuff, does this mean you should automatically abandon your original engines and take on newbuild after newbuild, or do you look to see if you can finance/subsidise your original engines by other means? This goes back to what I was saying earlier, engines bring in the money, so it stands to reason that they should benefit from their 'contribution'. Or look at it this way, next year will see 6023 return to steam. Imagine 10 years down the road, the engine has been run into the ground, but like all the other engines, has recieved nothing back from the income it's generated. Would you be happy to see it dumped in the back of the shed for 25 years, and a Beyer-Garratt Great Bear built in its place, which itself would take 25 years to complete?

I know there are others who also view this newbuild obsession as just a phase, that the Society has 'nothing better to do' while it doesn't own the site. Yet the ownership issue has existed since 1967, while this newbuild phase is a relatively recent occurrence.

 

Excellent post. Perhaps we should start cutting up a few GW hulks to help create some missing links from other companies. :smt077

 

Hi could someone give me an update on 7202.it’s a shame that this loco hasn’t been returned to steam buy now and I don’t think any of this class have steamed in preservation to date. Surely a 72xx must be a good contender to be restored back into working order before a 47xx is built?

Thanks

 

Have a look at http://www.baldric.plus.com/ the site is run by one of the regular volunteers within the heavy freight group. in fairness to them they have raised all the money required for the restoration of the 72 as well as the 38's initial restoration and subsequent overhaul. This group shows that things can happen if you care to put your mind to things and get on with it instead of just sitting there complaining.

The new builds, 6023 and 4079 have brought in many new volunteers that I am sure would otherwise not be on the site every other weekend, I am sure that once their respective projects are complete then they will want to stay on and do other things, I for one will be one of those people.
If you all want to make a differance to the society and the way things happen, how about volunteering, then perhaps locos in the shed may get turned round?

 

Thanks for the link
:smt023

 

I agree with Kerosene Castle's post above.
Further, IMHO it seems to be the special projects that attract the money. Maybe Didcot is trying to do too many and a 47xx would only be one more. However, the money for what Didcot's doing is still filtering in. Fotopic and the like are full of enthasuiasts photos of everything from 0-4-0's to Tornado, but once they've got their picture of a blue pannier or a kahki 53 or a visiting Tornado at Didcot, where are they? Probably 90% of Didcot's income is from families not enthasuiasts. Hiring out locos, if you're lucky, may generate enough to pay for the restoration, but profit? nope. I think it's a shame that Didcot has too many mothballed ex-restored locos, but at least they are there for Didcot's future when everyone else has warn out their boilers and are into big bucks to keep their fleets running.

The quandry is, do you turn round enough locos to keep the enthasuiasts coming back, half of them not using their tickets or being warn out by someone else for no/little profit, or do you keep enough of a running fleet to keep the families comming which pays for the running of the place? For me it's a no brainer, which is a shame none the less. Right now, at this moment in time, with so many other projects, a 47xx is highly unlikely.

 

I think everyone is overlooking the great advantage didcot has over many others...

their restored fleet is not only under cover.. but undercover in a very authentic shed. So while 9/10 engines arent in steam... they look extremely authentic asis in situe, well looked after under cover.

meanwhile they are beavering away on all those other barry wrecks.. so eventually they may reach the nirvana of no barry wrecks a second to none fleet and luxury of much lower cost restorations in the future.

Whats the point in overhauling the manor, the hall or the castle.. with no where to run them and a few in working order currently, they arent going to bring in any new customers than the Prarie or anything else onsite currently... but when the 72xx, king, saint & county all hit the rails.. there going to change the game a little and Didcot's going to be the place to be.

Fair play to them.. I was impressed when I was there a few months back and think that shed's got lots of potential, I know I'll be going back there some day.