If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Loco 76017

Discussion in 'Steam Traction' started by johnofwessex, Nov 15, 2022.

  1. Johnb

    Johnb Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2014
    Messages:
    14,124
    Likes Received:
    16,162
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired, best job I've ever had
    Location:
    Buckinghamshire
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Maybe on the Cambrian Coast but no use on the Jacobite that operates all season with seven coach trains.
     
  2. Matt37401

    Matt37401 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2014
    Messages:
    15,157
    Likes Received:
    11,455
    Occupation:
    Nosy aren’t you?
    Location:
    Nowhere
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    You obviously know a little more about this than most of us Martin
    As an outsider I thought the line in the sand was drawn a few years ago with the transfer of 73096?
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2022
  3. martin1656

    martin1656 Nat Pres stalwart Friend

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2014
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    11,123
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    St Leonards
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I must admit, that has me confused also, I thought that relationships had moved on, and that was borne out by john selling 73096 to the Trust, and things had settled down, JB was allowed back on site to carry out the FTR, om behalf of west coast, and whilst i wasn't there, and its only hearsay, things appeared to be ok, between him and the railway staff, he was even invited to drive his engine from Medstead, , it could very well be that there is no problem, between John Bunch and the railway now, and that it was known that the 76 would be leaving to go mainline, or to another site, A simple statement from the railway, would have cleared everything up,, or on the other hand the railway did not know, and the bomb dropped as soon as the 76 had reached the Bluebell, and if that is the case, it's very underhanded. and will leave many supporters of the railway, very angry. but given that the Bluebell gala publicity, gets printed weeks in advance, I would have to come to the opinion that, its likely that the MHR, most likely knew the engine would be leaving.
     
  4. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    20,969
    Likes Received:
    20,598
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    That reads like a pretty measured summary of the situation to me. I've long realised that the way that things seem to be on heritage railways - plans, ownership, operations....you name it - are not always exactly the way that things really are. Maybe the complexity of these set-ups and the interrelationship of different groups within them, especially where big money is concerned, make it so.

    We should also remember that those who were on the scene back in time as these railways emerged when steam ended are not getting any younger so the sands have to shift. That will also uncover earlier 'arrangements' that perhaps need reviewing.

    I'm not suggesting anything specific here about 76017 or ownership but if you stand back from this one it's not the only set of circumstances where clarity is sometimes lacking, is it?
     
  5. Alan Kebby

    Alan Kebby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2019
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    1,221
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Brighton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    It may be that relations have improved, and there was no malicious intent from JB in purchasing 76017. Perhaps it just became available for purchase, he was interested, he had other plans for it other than keeping it at the MHR, and there was legally nothing to stop him removing it.

    It all does seem to be shrouded in a veil of secrecy though, with no announcement from the MHR or JB about what is happening. Particularly as Martin says when any questions about it on MHR Facebook sites quickly get removed.
     
    MellishR likes this.
  6. twr12

    twr12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,531
    Likes Received:
    674
    Quite frankly, in my opinion; Facebook is the last place to question and debate practically anything!
     
    Haighie, Gilesy68, Mick45305 and 6 others like this.
  7. Fred Kerr

    Fred Kerr Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    8,203
    Likes Received:
    5,211
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Freelance photo - journalist
    Location:
    Southport
    People forget that as current owners "reach the top of the ladder (of life)" action needs to be taken to protect the long term care of preserved locomotives given that they need major overhauls every 10 years. Much of this requires legal involvement especially regarding ownership as ownership of both LSL and WCRC traction fleets illustrate (e.g. owned by trusts rather than individuals) especially when operated on the main line. The early gung-ho "wild west" days are well past and ownership / operation is now constrained by legal agreements where breaches involve (expensive) legal action which IIRC the MHR is well aware of. More than one owner has found out that such breaches come both very dear and at the risk of threat to the safety and future of the locomotive(s) concerned hence current arrangements need to be reviewed to ensure the future of preserved locomotives.
     
    MellishR likes this.
  8. richards

    richards Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Messages:
    4,627
    Likes Received:
    1,900
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    There are also a number of enthusiasts who seem to think that they are entitled to know everything but have no right to this. There are privately-owned assets which have commercial operating agreements with heritage railways.

    However much the enthusiasts *want* to know all the details, there are good reasons why these are not put into the public domain.
     
  9. Big Al

    Big Al Nat Pres stalwart Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    20,969
    Likes Received:
    20,598
    Location:
    1016
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    So true.

    When I once part owned a locomotive - as in my avatar - these were times when there was 'managed freedom' but nothing like the necessary constraints, regulations and licencing that exits now for all the right reasons. I detached myself from ownership before boiler examination and certificates became necessary. But even with a small Andrew Barclay the same applied as to a Pacific so the next steps necessarily involved different partnership and financial arrangements.

    I see no difference with 76017. I don't see why the MHR needs to make an 'announcement' about anything. Those who need to know will presumably know what is going on. The trains will run; the engineers will do their job with those locomotives they are asked to maintain and that is it.
     
  10. GWR4707

    GWR4707 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,811
    Likes Received:
    15,441
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed, if anyone 'should' be making an announcement its the MHR* to their volunteers (if they are interested), I don't see why JB has any need to say a dicky bird to anyone outside said company.

    I am also a bit confused by the suggestions that JB has bought her, wasn't it suggested earlier than he was already quite a substantial shareholder anyway so just a consolidation of a position (likely entirely off market and with people he was already associated with). As it stands a little confused as to suggestion that anything nefarious has happened, bar a change of ownership.

    *Albeit understand a wish for silence if there are ongoing legals involved?
     
    Paul42 and Hampshire Unit like this.
  11. Alan Kebby

    Alan Kebby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2019
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    1,221
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Brighton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I take your point. However MHR resources were put into overhauling this loco, which has now left the line with the new owner having the benefit of 4 years ticket at the expense of the MHR. You can’t blame MHR members for wanting to know what’s going on, especially when those resources could have been put into overhauling a MHR owned loco instead.
     
    mgl, green five, Swan Age and 2 others like this.
  12. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,146
    Likes Received:
    23,184
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    To the extent that anything "nefarious" has happened, it is the way that this locomotive has been extracted from the MHR and then not returned to it, despite general expectations. This appears to have caught MHR management by surprise, and has certainly caught all others by surprise.

    If there has been a breach of contract between owners and MHR, that lies between them. Personally, my problem is more about the seemingly backhanded way that this has been done, and what it says about the owners' attitude to agreements.
     
    MellishR likes this.
  13. GWR4707

    GWR4707 Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    May 12, 2006
    Messages:
    17,811
    Likes Received:
    15,441
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Cumbria
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Which would all possibly be valid if we had a clue about the contractual position between the owners and railway, what was known by the MHR hierarchy before or after the locomotive left, whether the MHR management were surprised, and why if they were not, that detail seems not to have been communicated beyond the management?

    As it stands any suggestion that anything backhand has occurred is conjecture at best as is any accusations about the owners' attitude to agreements.

    I have noted on several threads over the years, this forum is pretty lucky that more people in the preservation world are not litigious considering the accusations which get thrown around in writing on here.
     
  14. johnofwessex

    johnofwessex Resident of Nat Pres

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2015
    Messages:
    9,119
    Likes Received:
    7,149
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Thorn in my managers side
    Location:
    72
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    AFAIK one of the characters in Absolutley Fabulous was based on a real life high profile person.

    But were she to sue, then there would be no doubt at all that it was her rather than just a suspicion.

    I notice another member in another thread recently has had to keep quite
     
  15. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,146
    Likes Received:
    23,184
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed, speculation is rife, and there is a fair bit of "2+2 = x" going on.

    By the same token, I also note what there has not been - any kind of statement (here or elsewhere) confirming the change of base. On the other hand, there is a history of dispute between some of the principals in this matter, and a seemingly sudden change of plan for the locomotive. The lack of any comment affirming that the movement away from MHR was expected is, to me, revealing.
     
    MellishR likes this.
  16. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    25,957
    Likes Received:
    56,746
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    You make it sound as if someone has crept into Ropley late at night and stolen the loco away on the back of a low-loader. In fact, as is well known, it left in steam, towed by a mainline diesel - there was even a video of that happening, in daylight, posted on this thread. I'd suggest that none of that could have happened without the active participation of the operating staff on the MHR, if for no other reason than the logistics of the inbound and then outbound move at the Network Rail boundary will have a defined protocol.

    I have no knowledge about who owns what, or the status of any agreements between various parties. But clearly to me, the outbound move must have happened with the active participation of the MHR, which presumably includes "the management".

    Tom
     
  17. Alan Kebby

    Alan Kebby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2019
    Messages:
    1,166
    Likes Received:
    1,221
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Brighton
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Indeed there is no doubt in that. The question is did they know at the time it wasn’t going to return?
     
  18. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,146
    Likes Received:
    23,184
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    If that was how it sounded, I'm sorry - I'm well aware that it left Ropley with the MHR's blessing and assistance. As @Alan Kebby observes, the question was about the return - the surprise being the non-return.
     
    Graft on likes this.
  19. Jimc

    Jimc Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,036
    Likes Received:
    4,644
    Occupation:
    Once computers, now part time writer I suppose.
    Location:
    SE England
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Bearing in mind the circumstances of 2009 it would be astonishing if there were not solid contracts in place. However contracts can be terminated if all parties agree. To speculate wildly and on exactly no evidence at all, significant sums of money changing hands may facilitate contract termination negotiations. Interested MHR folk might like to scrutinise this year's accounts when they become available to them!
     
  20. Fred Kerr

    Fred Kerr Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    8,203
    Likes Received:
    5,211
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Freelance photo - journalist
    Location:
    Southport
    One has to take note of the relationship between said owner and the MHR which influences the manner in which they interact. Having spent time in the company of said owner I found him to be "a good friend but a bad enemy" which - I suspect - is what the MHR is now appreciating.
     
    Paul42, Chris86 and 35B like this.

Share This Page