THE LAST KING : 6018.

In the new issue of Steam World out tommorrow there is a very interesting article (and some great pictures) on the last runs of 6018, for which she was brought back out of storage. In the article there is mention of the loco being "prepped" for preservation as Billy Butlin intended to buy her. I did not know that the Actor Kenneth More was also intending to buy the loco but changed his mind when he heard Butlin's were going to get her. Eventually Billy Butlin changed his mind and got the Duchess instead. Kenneth More was gutted when he learned that 6018 went for scrap.

 

Never heard that link with Kenneth More.

More on the tour here: The Railtour Files

 

That's not quite correct.

What actually happened is that Butlin wanted a King for Minehead (not sure if it was actually 6018) and Silver Link for Skegness. But neither Swindon nor Doncaster would cooperate, whereas Crewe did. He didn't go through Derby, I think there was a contact at Crewe, which seems to have worked. Bear in mind that at the time there was a fierce determination to prevent locomotives getting into the hands of preservationists - witness what happened over City of Lancaster. So he got an extra Duchess and the Royal Scot instead. I heard a tale many years ago that 46229 was originally to go to Ayr but an additional one was purchased, and that one went instead i.e. 46233. He was at first offered another engine, but he wanted one named after a Duchess. Coronation had already gone.

Notice also that 46203 was the engine that ended up at Pwllhelli. There was a story, unconfirmed, that the original choice was 46200, but it was stored at Upperby, and being out of the reach of Crewe a right royal battle went on with Derby for months, which Butlin lost and he did a deal with Crewe for 46203 instead.

 

What's the story with City of Lancaster?

 

I am sure I saw 6018 in Swindon Works after it's last run looking like it was being overhauled/restored. The story I heard was that work was started on the loco for Billy Butlin, but the deal fell through for whatever reason. So 6018 was quietly scrapped. Of course there is another story saying 6018 & 6000 swapped identities, probably totally untrue.

 

See this thread,



http://railways.national-preservation.com/photography/16477-2-weeks-cut-up-46243-city-lancaster.html

 

Fascinating how Preservation of big Mainliners could of been so different if Butlin had had it all his own way....

In the end I think it worked out the best way it could despite the loss of 6018 and 60014 (?), two Kings survived along with 6000 via Barry and A4's are hardley underepresented, it could have been the only LMS Express Loco's preserved above a Jubilee would of been 46115 and 46201 in different circumstances, hard to imagine the Mainline scene without a Duchess now.

 

Checking the boiler number would reveal the answer to that. If someone could check the engine records to see which boiler was fitted to those engines at their last repairs and then check that information against whatever boiler is now on 6000, that would tell the truth.

There have been persistent rumours about 34023 and 34051 exchanging identities before the funeral train. But the boiler numbers on both engines show that they were not swapped.

 

I think the poster intended to mean engines on the main line.

Reading the Wiki piece reminds one about the peculiar mentality of some museum people. New parts don't mean the old ones have to be scrapped. The NRM kept the old tender tank from 46229. I seem to remember that the excuse the Birmingham Museum came up with at the time was that they wanted to preserve the paint which was the last remaining authentic green paint from Crewe Works. Which is a joke because it's not a great paint job. It was only patched up and the colour of the fresh paint was different to what was already there.

If 46235 was running, it would be a much more useful promotional tool than it is now. But the museum are only interested in their own domain. It happens everywhere. Imagine if 46245 had been the one preserved. It would have been busy this year wouldn't it.

 

In 1985 there was a hope at the NRM that they could avoid 46229 being overhauled by having another one take its place. There was a lot of in-fighting over that engine between different personalities who have now all left the scene. Also because of it being administered by the friends, who weren't completely under the control of the NRM management. It was considered too much of a hot potato and they would dearly have liked to put it to bed (which now seems to have been achieved), and even 46235 would have been a welcome substitute, which the NRM would have supported.

Another story I remember hearing about a very long time ago, was that someone on Litchfield city council thought it would be a neat idea to obtain 46250 and display it in the town centre. They even got as far as contacting Derby about it, and the funds would have been made available. But the answer came back "oh no, you can't possibly have a complete engine" but you can have a nameplate. The excuse in those days was that the copper was needed for the electrification of the LNW line.

 

It's not a peculiar mentality - a museum is a different entity to a TOC or preserved railway. Steam locos are emotive subjects and we all like to see them run, but museums have objects to display and preserve, operation is a separate consideration. 46235 remains in the museum so we can do things with 6233 and 6229. I must finish that article. Arguably more schoolkids get up close with the City in Thinktank than they would if it was out and running - and I venture to suggest that this is not only being "interested in their own domain". Take it out, run it and wear it out for ten years - what would you put in its place that would mean so much to the City?

 

Maybe I was a bit unfair to some of the museum staff population, but it's a mentality I've encountered many times in many different places over the years. Sometimes they seem to be on a different planet, and to a certain extent, perhaps unwittingly, you've gone a little way towards illustrating exactly the point I was trying to make.

How many of these 'schoolkids' actually understand what it is they are seeing? Most of them aren't interested in steam locomotives, let alone an example of the most powerful beasts that were built in this country. Some of them will take an interest later in life when they understand the world doesn't just consist of computer games. The name of the locomotive doesn't mean a lot. Yes, it's nice to have the name Birmingham on it, but it doesn't make any significant difference to it as an exhibit. Most people who are interested in that locomotive being what it is are past school age, and many of them would much rather see what it can do. You could put another locomotive in it's place (and there's plenty of big engines lying around the country doing nothing to choose from) and it would hardly make any difference to the educational aspect. I bet if you asked 100 people at random in Birmingham if they knew there was a steam locomotive called City of Birmingham in the think tank, you could count the number of people who would answer yes on one hand. And as for being so meaningful to the city, well I find that idea almost incomprehensible. Before it was preserved it never was an integral part of the city, and it didn't even regularly visit. Of course other people might have a different view, but my guess is not so many. If it was based at somewhere like Tyseley it would still be within easy reach anyway.

There's also an argument that one working example is also enough. But that one is not always available, and there are for example six A4's, anything up to three of which may be operating at one time. And even it's possible to have four. Not only that, but there's been talk of maybe spending a huge amount of money to gather all six together in one place - just for a short celebration. Of course we have to preserve these things properly, but we also have to promote and generate interest, and impressive locomotives do the job best.

There seems to be a trend towards turning museums into playgrounds, just in a futile attempt to interest the kids. Or maybe to justify the existence of the people who are doing it. I don't easily forget the utterly contemptible attitude of Neil Cussons towards anyone who had the slightest interest in railway matters. And he at one stage had the management of the NRM dancing to his tune. Last time I visited the Natural History museum, it was an appalling mess. It's all so superficial, and anyone truly interested in the subject matter would struggle to discover what they want to learn.

I'm not personally at all bothered whether 46235 ever runs again or not. That's not the point. The point is the arguments presented as to why it shouldn't happen. In the main they are rather flimsy, and primarily reflect the mentality of the people presenting them rather than any real basis in fact.

 

D'oh!

 

Concerning Anthonys and TenWheelers debate above, i'd venture the opinion that a Steam Locomotive as a static exhibit is not a terribly interesting concept to a child, they see it as just a big collection of metal sitting silently, a fire and smoke breathing monster making loud noises and making its presence felt is much more likely to leave an impression.

 

Are there? Seems like a lot of good points to me.

 

Agreed David - but I share three memories from 35 years ago. 92220 in steam in the car park at York, 46235 in the old Science Museum being moved every hour up and down, and "Nellie" at Bradford Industrial Museum - all formative memories, all museum based and all very different.

To clarify, I am NOT against operation, those who know me well enough will realise that 23 years on the footplate does not mean that - operation IS the best form of interpretation. If I am on a different planet as you suggest, perhaps I ought to give up. I am a preservationist, a heritage railway volunteer and a museum curator - the three do sit together, but it is a hard line to follow - especially with colleagues who do not share the enthusiasm (until they've been on a live engine, I'll agree!) It isn't just about making something run - it's about unlocking the past, telling stories and making meanings

However, as I have said before and will doubtless say again, museums are institutions which collect and preserve material for future generations. They are not operating railways - and there IS a place for engines in museums, as there is a place for cars, lorries, aircraft etc - but why does everything have to run and why does it have to be now? There may come a day when 46235 does come out - when 6233 is no longer a viability and when everyone is bored with 6229 - but at the moment, it's warm, dry and not chasing work or finance. There's room for both - look at the growth of museums/interpetation/display centres at railways in recent years where out of traffic stock is stored.

Come to the NRM and have a cuppa with me, or seek me out at Railfest and we can have a natter. You may find we have more in common than a discussion on a forum can show.