LSWR T3 563

Fireless locos have been around for a far whack of time too Hermod!

Let's just wait and see if this group of people can give this lump of Victorian metal it's soul back eh?

 

I have nothing to add but to say she's a beautiful machine and it would be wonderful to have her alive again!

 

I was on the ill-fated Ebor Flyer behind 60163 last April and on arrival at York (Courtesy of 66106), I had a look round the NRM. Until 563 was de-accessioned, I would have placed it in the top three elegant engines in the NRM's collection alongside SECR D Class No. 737 and the Midland "Spinner", 673. Looking at the immaculate 737 and 673 in the museum last April and considering how unlikely they are ever to steam again, I couldn't help reflecting how amazing it will be if the third engine in this glamorous trio will one day be working a train again.

 

Myself, I'd add the Stirling Single to that list of elegance - but that's for another thread... and yes, if/when 563 steams again, I will go and see it. Primarily because it can't be painted in BR black/green

 

I’m sure it could be, as an example of what might have been if it survived in service a few years longer. But hopefully not!

 

What ever colour paint pot you throw at her, she will still look every inch the grand, elegant Victorian lady she is.

 

Am I the only one on here that thinks that there is nothing at all elegant about her with that terrible Adams stovepipe chimney. It may give it an as built appearance but the loco only looked elegant in my eyes when it acquired the Drummond chimney it carried for most of its working life. The same goes for 488 on the Bluebell. At least in Scotland they have the good taste not to want to equip the Caley Jumbo or Caley Tank with such austere appendages, authentic though they might be. Just a personal opinion.

Peter

 

I like stovepipes

 

Neither could 3440/3717!

 

I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder: I prefer the Stovepipe look for Adams locos, though maybe it is conditioned by the general feeling that Adams locos were seldom improved at Drummond's hand.

Tom

 

I can recall seeing a Caley jumbo as a youngster at Balquhidder - or maybe Killin Junction - in the late '50s and being struck by how ugly it looked to my childish eyes with that stark brutal stovepipe chimney. What a contrast to the elegant beauty of a similar loco with a capped (if that is the correct word) chimney.I'm afraid that memory must have scarred me for life as far as stovepipes go.

Peter

 

A glorious engine! Do you know what these two barrels on top of the tender is?

Knut

 

I suspect for oil - the loco shown running while oil fueled.

Either that, or beer supplies for outlying running sheds ...

Tom

 

At the risk of thread drift - where/what/was/is this? It looks fascinating!

Steve B

 

Yep - same thoughts here! Spill the beans, Ralph!

 

I don't suppose 563 acquired a Vortex blastpipe again in her back-conversion to the Adams stovepipe? I seem to remember the Drummond chimneys were generally fitted at the same time as plain blastpipes, so she could be a bit of a mixed bag on the draughting front as-is.

(FWIW - I'm indecisive on the Adams stovepipe question; 563 looks good but Calbourne would be diminished by a stovepipe to my eyes)

 

The SRT will be considering fitting No.563 with a Drummond Chimney. As yet livery is undecided but the SRT will debate it if a return to steam is possible. If the report says that it isn't it will likely stay in its current 1903 livery.

That said, if No.563 is going to go back into service, I'm almost certain she will wear almost all liveries she carried at some stage.

 

That would seem to be the best course of action to me, have No.563 appear in all it's liveries during it's time in service, including perhaps interchanging of chimneys depending on what guise it's in.

Of course the next big question to this matter would be getting carriages that are appropriate to be pulled behind it, but that's a challenge for longer term I'd say.