The "linear scrapyard" revisited

1. We all seem agreed here.
2. Have been on the broad gauge replicas at Didcot. A few of this era would be useful to show how they provided something just a little better than outside on the road coaches of the era.
3. A Quad Art is likely to be about the sole 20th century design inferior to a Mk.1 although,from memory, Bulleid electric stock would probably run it close. By contrast the Bulleid 1947 composite, shortly to be turned out by the Bluebell, will show just what a missed opportunity the Mk.1 represented.

PH

 

It's slightly difficult to know how restorations or replicas of Victorian carriages compare with the originals due to their generally using modern van underframes, which typically have shorter springs and are therefore rather stiffer than the originals would have been. (Also some vehicles that were originally six-wheeled have been restored as four-wheeled).

The standard of trim / seat padding must also make a huge difference, as a ride in the LBSCR 1st 661 and LCDR Brake 3rd 114 on the Bluebell show: the two carriages have similar van underframes, so the difference in comfort must be very largely down to the amount of padding on the seats. When 949 (the LBSCR Brake 3rd) enters service, it will be undoubtedly authentic but even more spartan; as I understand having bare wooden seats with no upholstery. I assume loose cushions will be provided.

Tom

 

Understood, but the L&M experience is either claustrophobic (1st) or distinctly fresh!

 

Oh but since you did, there is a line which has some nice tidy sheds, but my biggest gripe is the difficulty in finding everything which is allegedly on site! They claim to have the largest collection of NG locos but some of them must be in the "pile of bits hidden by brambles / inside a van / in the loft / at someone's house" category. A proper "linear scrapyard" would make spotting so much easier!

 

You lightweight! Getting scratched to bits by brambles, noshed by gnats, scratched and bitten by alarmed feral cats, then stepping in fox sh** has to be a price worth paying to be the only one to see the remains of, say, a unique Baguely since it was rescued, listed, then misplaced and thought lost 40 years ago!!

Actually, re PP, scenery wise, I was thinking more of the tour of the housing estate before hitting open country! In view of the quoted post however, perhaps there's scope at some sites for a "Treasure Hunt" (remember those?) event ? ..... Orienteering for Gricers!

 

Actually the tour of the housing estate with unique views of people's back gardens was the bit my wife enjoyed most about our visits to Leighton Buzzard. I kid you not!

 

Isn't that the same as the big railway around many towns?

Edit: And that can indeed be a positive experience as described by Maggie Holland at

 

Not really. At Leighton Buzzard you are especially up close and personal, the railway is very close to the fenceline and you can travel in semi-open carriages.

 

Stretches of the RHDR are the same. I had forgotten just how close to some back gardens it runs. I swear at one point it goes through no.36's cat flap!

 

Coming out of Swanage is similar.............

Mind you though I have been up the Gloucester & Berkley Canal on Balmoral & Oldenburgh (Seagoing passenger ships) leaning on the rail looking down into someones back garden is quite unusual to say the least

 

All of which reminds me that at Loughborough, years ago, there was one resident who apparently liked sunbathing topless in their back garden. Not that I ever observed this to be fact myself, you understand. But I guess it did distract attention from the "linear scrapyard" anyway, just to pretend for a second that this is slighly on-topic.

 

Perhaps fairer to say how close to the RH&DR people had laid out their gardens!

 

Lovely ride the Quads! So there is a little less legroom than normal.

Don't knock them until you've tried them.

Sawdust.

 

When you are my height, legroom matters!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

One occasionally wonders if it might have been wise to throw on a coat of red oxide when some items of stock were acquired in quite reasonable condition. Glue/nail on a roof covering of roofing felt and at least the item is weather resistant. I'm sure the intent was to restore said vehicle soon, but 20years goes by in a flash.

Yes, I'm aware that all costs money, but a vehicle decaying out of sight in the brambles is going to degrade fast, and cost more to restore when that day finally does come

 

Reply to Tom's post (ex-Swanage thread):

With respect Tom, I feel you appear to be criticising doing anything to resolve an issue which ain't going away without something happening. Where I've shifted the answer to was a choice of two threads on much the same issues, which have been haunting our movement since ..... well, since the FfR dug piles of rotting stock out of (the then) Portmadoc Harbour Station, in 1954/55.

You raise the specific case of the Bluebell's loco No.65, which I'd suggest was a very different kettle of fish (and a long time ago), but I'll see your Ashford 01 kit of parts and raise you Shrödinger's S15, still lying in some forgotten corner of a foreign field that is forever Eastleigh (or Barry Island!). Some of the stock we're discussing (principally C&W, rather than locos) was sitting around, back when No.65 was in pieces, but unlike which, still are, having not seen so much as any stabilisation work, let alone active restoration. That's an awfully long time ... and a fair amount of stock.

I suppose my mentioning the IoM 3+1 was asking for it, though those were included as a case where (like No.65) a satisfactory outcome was achieved, in that the locos whose future was far from assured when Mr.Hendry and his fellow IMHR&T Trust members thankfully stepped in to secure them are now safe (and indeed have now had the costly absetosectomy to render them harmless). Whilst restoration proved beyond the means of the Trust, had that not happened, they could all too easily have gone the same way as Derby. In that case, the owners were known and remained in communication with the line.

The issue for which I suggested a posible solution was the case where gradually rotting stock has no contactable owner, or an owner who's demonstrated no interest is anything beyond (let's not mince words) taking advantage of a line's goodwill, without so much as any stated intention regarding their property. If lines honestly feel that's not an issue, who am I to tell them otherwise?

 

I'm not arguing nothing should be done; more just trying to point how how hard some of that sort of stuff is, particularly for railway boards that are stretched thin in many different directions. It's not as if teh last few years have been partciularly relaxed and easy! Equally, the points made by @Lineisclear about the regulatory environment are well made and will no doubt focus minds of boards.

It's also probably true that in many cases, the point of no return is approaching for many "preserved" railway artefacts, especially wooden carriages. My hunch is that over the next five years we will see large numbers of vehicles currently listed in places such as the VCT register and based on heritage railways being scrapped; either in a managed way (i.e. saving useful parts and breaking up the rest); or unmanaged (i.e. becoming food for a a wide variety of native beetles digging ever more elaborate and interconnected tunnel systems ...)

The sad fact is, particularly with carriages, that many railways are struggling to attract sufficient volunteers with sufficient skills even to stay on top of what they currently operate, let along make inroads into rows of unrestored stuff. Without proper storage to at least arrest decline, and a sea change in volunteer numbers, that story is only going one way.

Tom

 

I think with pieces of kit that have unclear histories, a cost to dispose of and perhaps hazardous materials this will always be difficult.
Slightly related back in the late 70's five of us in the Procurement office formed a Premium Bond syndicate. Being buyers we trust no one including ourselves. So it was set up that my bonds (ie in my name) we registered at an address for one of the others and the other four members bonds were registered at my address.
Fast forward 25 let alone 45 years. 2 of the 5 are dead that I know of, the other 2 I have no idea where they live or work and I have lived at two other addresses.
Add to that the Bond Holder number that did not exist at the time and it is a kings size mess. I only found the bonds themselves about a year ago in a clear out.
Easy compared to a big loco I suspect.

 

Agreed

I for one would prefer to see HRs tackling this problem now by effectively determining what they can realistically achieve and what they are going to have to "let go" and actually "letting it go".

As has often been said ongoing motivation springs from seeing progress. Surely it is better to have a smaller number of projects progressing than a larger number (nearly) stalled?

I know many volunteers have pet projects and feel that is the one and only thing they want to and can devote their time to but I fear unless difficult decisions are taken then the wheels might literally come off the whole enterprise.

Perhaps the most important project for some HRs is actually the building of undercover space in which to work.

 

But the heritage railways themselves don't necessarily have ownership of all this rolling stock, which was acquired by different groups over the years and storage agreed with the railway at various times with different agreements (if any). The railway can't just say, "Oi, off you go!".