New builds - how many will ever really work?

I beg to differ. The two new builds that have been completed (60163 and the railmotor) are very different projects. You could argue that Tornado was a ground-breaking initiative that ultimately garnered massive publicity for the whole movement and might well turn on a new generation. The railmotor was substantially supported by lottery funding (a source of funding that is still available for other projects) and two, otherwise derelict, coaches have been rescued as a result. Paul, you make the assumption that there is a pool of cash waiting to be distributed among all the existing restoration projects which is being diverted by the distraction of new builds. If human emotions were eliminated from the equation this might happen but people will always to contribute to the project that "floats their boat" rather than the most (in other peoples' eyes) deserving cause; this does not, however, mean that they would donate cash elsewhere if denied their pet project. hwell:

Foxy

 

It's also worth noting Paul that you, me and most people with an interest in this movement are old enough and wise enough - just about - to know how hard and difficult a road a new build is. But at 15, did we? I didn't - I've just admitted it. But that doesn't mean that I 'needed telling', lambasted and pooh-poohed - I worked it all out for myself with some gentle persuasion.

 

Jamie - you are one of the most sensible contributors to this forum and I respect your views. However I think you do not represent the typical 'part-time' younger person with an interest in railways, ie you actually take an active part in preservation rather than just enjoy the fruits of other's labour. I would guess that the majority of young people visiting preserved lines or linesiding /riding on heritage steam have views on what should be restored to working order or built new, but are unlikely to do more than chuck a few bob in a collecting tin on a gala day.Many will have a minimal knowledge of railways of a past era and no skills relevent to the project [which must be diminishing in spite of younger people getting involved in the workshops of preserved lines]

'Tornado' took 16 years to build from the basis of experienced people in both the financial planning and engineering fields. They had good facilities. Tornado had a lot of publicity because it was the first such standard gauge project but any upcoming projects will suffer from the law of diminishing returns. - man bites dog a second time is not news! Asking people with only a passing interest in railways to put their hands in their pockets for a less charismatic design is unlikely to raise much interest. The evidence is that even new builds using some existing components are taking a long time to reach completion [the Saint for example]. I suspect that those working on the new projects are also committed to maintaining the working fleets on the preserved lines on which they are based and so must share theri time between the two.

The arguements about 'if we had this attitude in the 1960s and 70s we would not have saved so many locos' are spurious. We were saving locos that had a large percentage of their components remaining and restorers were not starting from a sheet of plain steel.

I'm not against new builds but am of the school that says focus on thos projects that are already in progress, are being undertaken by people with a good reputation and have good facilities and have a sound plan and realistic timescale. When and if these are completed then is the time to move on to something new. Hopefully that 'new' thing will be something that will either be capable of running on the mainlineand earn a living or be of an appropriate size to keep our preserved lines running into the future, ie don't build an LMS Beyer Garrett!:nono:

http://mickpope.zenfolio.com/f63169718

 

Have updated this thread from 2009...

http://railways.national-preservation.com/steam-traction/19894-new-builds-2.html#post486091

If anyone can help with some gaps, since 2009 there are 13 new projects, 1 completed, 5 now failed.

 

The A1SLT did not have good facilities to start with, they had no base at all initially and even when Darlington Works was acquired it still had to be totally renovated and then fitted out. What the Trust did have was a business plan that worked and paid for a lot of contracted out fabrication before the Hopetown Lane building became available, they also had an incredible marketing machine that drove the cash flow that enabled progress to be made.

Foxy

 

Nowhere have I objected to new build projects diverting money from restoration projects. My complaint is that an excess of new build projects slows down the completion of any of them. Too many schemes afoot are for smallish, high wheeled machines which are no use either as main line power or for heritage railway use. The former needs something big enough to haul a large load and keep out of the way of timetabled services. The latter needs something able to pull five or six bogies at 25m.p.h. which costs little to fuel or maintain.

I hear often that "the public want big engines". Correction, it is gricers who "want big engines". On a visit to the South Devon Railway last week, little 1369 was handling five corridors with great competence. Overheard comments from families suggested they were impressed by rather than dismissive of this small machine which ran the service with such utter punctuality.

P.H.

 

Not everyone has access to the education to then have the skills required in the engineering side of preservation. That's not to say we shouldn't try to learn them, by any means, but the education system is so skewed in favour of diverting away from the hands on approach that the only way you are going to get kids, teenagers, and young adults in their 20s interested in getting their hands dirty is to get them interested in railways from a young age, and then encourage and guide them towards it.

On the other hand, some of the skills the youngest generations possess in terms of social media, networking and basic computer skills can and will have great benefits to any group if tapped, and carefully guided.

I simply don't buy the argument (which seems to come in every walk of life, not just railway preservation) that the newest generation are lazy/incompetent/unskilled, but they most certainly are being failed by older generations trying to break education down or remove it altogether. It doesn't help that they then also feel pressured from the top downwards to perform in lengthy examinations on a termly basis, and you can start to understand why at the extremes of society, we get problems.

I say this based on observations of my partner and her struggle in becoming an English teacher. She recently related to me that she used one of my many railway magazines as subject matter for a lesson - the Model Engineer - and a large proportion of the class was fascinated by some of the "how to" sections - but can they follow that initial interest in school to do some forms of metalwork? By and large, no.

Regarding the influx of "new build schemes" - they're not schemes, they're facebook groups, and have absolutely no consequence whatsoever on existing new build schemes which involve building things. I sincerely doubt with the number of page views these "schemes" have had that anyone other than those arguing about them on Nat Pres will take them seriously. To say they may divert money away from other new build schemes (as I have heard recently) is also somewhat laughable. If they're barely known, and with no real backing, then how can they divert funds away?

At the same time, it's these very people we should be bringing into railway preservation, with a gentle hand on the shoulder, showing them how it all actually goes together and giving them the guidance they need to become the next generation of railway enthusiasts.

If railway preservation wants to carry on ad infinitum, then it needs to embrace and support the youngest generations coming through, and help them to develop in the ways required so that we can still have this engineering prowess, the historical understanding and the sheer passion for doing it.

 

The GER 2-4-2 M15/F5 is apparently progressing nicely. Frames recently cut - The Holden F5 Locomotive Trust.

 

I think this was addressed by myself and others in the LNWR George thread (suitability, tractive effort, driving wheels etc). As to a George, they could 550-ton trains in their day. Not bad for a 'small' machine. And the 'City of Truro' which has a lower tractive effort (a good 3000lbf less) and similarly sized driving wheels seems to perform well enough on the preservation circuit and in mainline use.

Personally, I love small engines too - especially pre-grouping tank engines (endlessly fascinating variety). I think for instance it was a great pity that a Midland Johnson 0-4-4t of which there were almost 300 built was set aside for preservation in LMS days, only to be cut-up a few years later, and that none were subsequently saved. What a useful engine that would've been.

 

Lessons that the serious new-build projects are paying very close attention to.

 

I don't think that is true - I think most schemes (by which I mean the serious ones: let's dismiss out of hand the FaceBook / Hornby catalogue new builds) stand or fall according to their own ability to enthuse enough people to fund them, independent of any other projects that happen to exist.

For example, I'm a supporter of Beachy Head. Does that mean that Hengist or the Unknown Warrior or the GW County are suffering because my money is diverted to Beachy Head and away from those projects? Not really: I'm interested in all things southern, especially pre-grouping, and those other projects - worthy as they are - simply don't float my boat enough to make me want to fund them. If the Beachy Head project didn't exist, I probably wouldn't be supporting any new build - it's not like I have a budget and am deciding where to spend it between many projects of similar importance to me. Equally, if someone came up with a credible project for a Little Snoring and Much Muddling Railway express passenger loco, it would stand or fall by virtue of its ability to draw in enthusiasts of the LS&MMR; the likelihood is it would tap into new money that suddenly got enthused by an engine they wanted to see. I doubt it would lead to cuts in funding for other projects as people switched allegance.

Probably the one slight exception to this are the large number of projects going on at the GWS; however, even there, the difference between an essentially Edwardian Saint, a mid-thirties Night Owl freight loco and a late-period County are probably sufficient that many people will have a particular preference - plus, the GWS is a large enough society that it can probably support several smaller new-build groups within its ranks. In rather the same way, within the Bluebell, some are members of the Maunsell Society and some the Bulleid society (and maybe some are members of both): I don't think there is much evidence that the presence of one society scavenges members from the other, since the interests are sufficiently different.

Good point well made. My experience of the public is that basically they want steam; ideally colourful steam (which is why the Bluebell prefers SECR livery where possible, rather than painting the same locos in BR black; and why Bluebell is currently our most popular loco). Big is of secondary importance: in fact, for families especially with small children, big can be a bit impersonal and intimidating. People like to stand next to Bluebell and have their photo taken (and maybe come on the footplate) in a way that doing the same on the 9F can be quite scary.

Tom

 

Well said James. Salient points.

As a pre-grouping fan myself, I'll make the extra effort to see a pre-grouping engine resplendent in its pre-grouping livery. The Bluebell holds a special place for me for that reason. I've donated to the H2 myself and can't wait to see her running (and the Grinstead extension, which I've also donated to). I understand that Beachy Head will feature it's Southern modifications (as well as sport a name, which it didn't do under the old LBSCR). Will it run in the Marsh umber livery at any stage? Too, is there any truth to the rumour that following Beachy Head, the chaps there would like to tackles a LBSCR K-class Mogul? These were excellent engines I believe and I understand that the society in its early years was within a hair's breath of securing one.

 

Yes, she is being built as running in the SR period. The modifications (at least the most obvious ones) are cut down chimney, dome and cab (which also has an altered profile) to fit the SR composite loading guage.

When built, she will be lined black, because many of the people sponsoring her are, shall we say, of an age who remember her in the 1950s and wish to recreate that period. I'm sure she will run in 1930s livery at some point (because that will match our carriages better). Whether she runs in umber - personally, I'd like to see it. To be technically accurate, it would require some modifications (see above) which, while not huge, constitute more than just a repaint. I guess it would depend whether expedience or purism won out. My own feeling is that it would be a shame to spoil the ship for a ha'porth of tar, i.e. if she ever ran in umber, it would be worth doing the new cab and chimney - but I am only one person amongst many. In any case, it will be many years before that decision would be made.

A K class mogul has a lot of support, would be right for the line, very useful for preserved line use (not too big; small-wheeled etc - see discussion above by Paul Hitch). It would also appeal to the same people who are the driving force behind the Atlantic, and for much the same reasons of nostalgia and the thought of what might have been but for the sake of a few months.

That said, a K class is not the only loco being discussed. The other popular possibility is something (yet undecided) by JC Craven from the 1850s - 1860s. This would be of less immediate practical use, but would fill a much more significant gap in preservation (locos of that era are very rare; running ones almost non-existent) and potentially could run with reconstructions of our surviving Craven-era carriages. Given the choice, I know which I'd dip my hand in my pocket to fund. But realistically, it is unlikely that there will be serious moves in either direction until Beachy Head is basically on the home straight, probably in a few years' time.

Tom

 

Beachy Head will carry BR livery during the first half of her boiler ticket and then revert to a form of Southern green for the second half, not sure if it will be Malachite or Olive though. The problem with having Beachy Head in Marsh umber would be that, as you say, it never carried it's name during Pre-Grouping days so it wouldn't be historically correct. Although it wouldn't take much effort to remove the plates, from a marketable point of view having Beachy Head run without it's name might not be helpful. However the real big problem is that the H2's ran with a completely different style of cab during the Pre-Grouping era. So whether there would still be money in the kitty to construct a second cab or another fund raising effort to raise the monies needed would have to be investigated. Personally my Dad & I have donated money towards sponsoring various loco parts and certainly cannot wait to see the loco in steam hauling service trains. And of course we're rather chuffed that the loco will be outshopped in BR lined black livery first :clap2:

 

Having an original cab and chimney so that it'd be also possible to run her in her historically-accurate original condition would of course be wonderful and something that I'd be willing to put money towards if ever it came to it. However I'd be willing to see her run in umber with with the post-LBSC modifications just to see a large, late-LBSC express engine in it's original livery, even if there are some cosmetic inconsistencies.

As to a Craven engine, I would most definitely throw some money at that if the opportunity arises post Beachy Head! That period of British Railway history - 1850's-1880's is endlessly fascinating and wonderfully varied and there's real fertile ground for new-builds from that period. All those single wheelers, double frames, open cabs, saltaire-valves, ornate high domes and chimneys would all make for a fascinating spectacle and a real drawcard for the viewing public. As to the Southern antecedents, I'm also quite partial to some of Cudworth's designs for the SER. His 2-4-0's were particularly handsome machines.

The bonus with a locomotive from that period is that it's almost guaranteed never to to be painted BR black! (sorry David!)

 

I suppose this is not a deliberate windup?

 

I'm really not sure why you seem to have an almost compulsive need to be aggressive on a forum.

If the Bluebell people choose to pursue a replica Craven following the Atlantic then I'd say that's their choice. That I find the idea appealling is mine.

 

Not agression but, I trust, realism related to the title of this thread. I am much in favour of newbuilds but let them be of sensible prototypes which can earn their keep and be finished during our lifetimes. On present form we can expect many more "copper boiler" moments I fear.

P.H.