Which loco do you think should be built in the future

Picking up on Tom's last paragraph there is a further element found that comes into the preservation of skills area, and that is in the development and improvement of designs. One railway that has been doing new builds for some time (in the modern era from the 1970's, but I'm sure that someone would want to point out that they started in the 1870's) is the Ffestiniog. They have 4 new builds (3 in service, one under overhaul). Of the 6 other mainline locos, 5 have been significantly rebuilt (as opposed to renewed) with better boilers, cylinders, changes to frames and motion, extra wheels in some cases, as well as better sized cabs for some. Palmerston is the one that remains the closest to an earlier form (but nothing like its original form). Only the smaller quarry Hunsletts remain pretty much as they were. I know some decry such changes as being akin to vandalism, but the railway would have struggled without them.

Of the new builds, 3 have effectively been new designs, drawing on the past, whilst one (Lyd) incorporates improvements, I believe, to the original design. In all this Boston Lodge has preserved skills, and developed expertise that others can benefit from, whilst at the same time continuing where the old railway companies left off - itself something that could be regarded as preservation.

Mostly it has been done with a clear practical purpose in mind, but they are also quite capable of the more emotional side of preservation (arguably Lyd, certainly the boat!). And they have preserved Princess and Livingstone Thompson as museum pieces. I wonder what approach they are planning with Welsh Pony?...

Steve B

 

Good point. But the original title was "what do you want to be built?". My first reaction was to think "what's the best engine for a preserved railway", but looking at it now I think altough that's an important question, it's not so far been the most important.

If we look at the majority of projects, the majority seem to be rebuilds, using existing major components (i.e. boiler and/or frames). That suggests to me, that for example the builders of the Bluebell's Atlantic didn't start off with the question "what do we want to build?", but somehow stumbled across a boiler and then thought "what is this going to fit?" and then decided based on historical reasons, to build a Southenr atlantic rather than a GNR one or whatever freight engine used the same boiler.

That means that any New new build projects either have to (1) also stumble across a boiler or major component (see the Dean Goods group), which restricts the options as to what to build, and I'm not sure there's that many spare boilers lying around. Or (2) they build the new engine mostly from scratch (incorporating a few second hand parts here and there if they can be suitably obtained).

Put the rebuilds into a separate category and the number of "entirely new builds" is only a handful, and many of those are at an early stage in their construction. There's Tornado, which is complete. And then several that are being physically constructed Clan, Patriot, 3MT tank, F5, G5. A few others that are potentially on the drawing board, some e.g. LNWR George V where they're making good progress, and others just testing the water with Facebook groups. I think it's these drawing board schemes that the OP was referring to.

 

Well said. This thread has ranged far and wide and, at times, become so heated that its easy to forget the original question, which was not whether those already started should continue, but what should be started next.

The issue that this raises for the "new-build" sceptics, myself included, is that it might be more sensible to see how some of the existing schemes progress before attempting to answer the question and, thereby encourage yet more new schemes.

I have never denied that some of the existing schemes, mostly, as it happens, those widely accepted as rebuilds, will come to fruition. But there are others that will not; in fact I am sure, based on personal knowledge, that at least one of those in your list of schemes at the "physical construction" stage is a "no hoper."

Though this thread has been lively and interesting, it is clearly not going to change minds. There are two opposing camps, both certain that they are right. Only time will tell who is!

 

How would you define a no hoper.... and of course you cant say which one for legal reasons ?
The problem with this type of thread is that it invites people to suggest their own personal fantasy MPD,...to be shot down by the naysayers,,,, to be rounded on by the never say neverers....

 

I think the distinction between 'what's the best engine for a preserved railway' and ' lets build my favourite engine and run it on the mainline' is going to be an important distinction in the future. None of us has a crystal ball that can predict what the future holds for mainline running as changes in the infrastructure, line speeds, safety issues etc impact in years to come. My guess is the number of mainlines open to steam specials will diminish and as a consequence the available work for Class '5','6',' 7' and '8' locos to stretch their legs on long trains will diminish. Ok they can potter about on a preserved railway at 25mph I suppose but that is hardly makes economic sense. I am looking forward to seeingthe Patriot run before I pass on, and some of the other more advanced projects such as Beachy Head. However for those just starting out and with possibly a planned building programme of ten years or more, the proposed LNER 2-8-2 or the B17 for example, I am not confident that they will have much mainline work.

I have not bothered much with this thread as it has mostly been chewed over before and any 'fantasy project' bait is goingto start off the usual debate. However I have followed the 'Bluebell Motive Power' thread and that touched on the issue of the number of active locos available for service on preserved lines as compared to the lines of locos awaiting overhaul due to workshop space, finance, available labour etc. even those with a large stock have found at times that they have insufficient locos to run the timetabled services. Adding yet more locos is just going to add to those lines of locos and the length of time they spend out of service when their ticket expires. Some new builds are usefull projects for preserved lines, the BR 3MT for example, others are more dubious. The numbers of those of us who actually remember steam on regular services diminishes by the year and those who remember pre-Nationalisation years are even fewer. I'm not sure that the composition of those visiting preserved railways or travelling on mainline specials will remain the same in years to come. The market is likely to be more purely recreational than enthusiast driven and will be much less interested in the historical origins of the loco pulling their train. I think it unlikely that many will be motivated to look through a photo album of pre-nationalisation types and have a sudden urge to select a favourite and set up a project to build it. First they need to research whether it was a succesful design rather than be motivated purely by aesthetics.

So I think I fall into the catagory of, 'yes' - a limited number of new builds is ok as long as they are practical for the work available and as a way of preserving skills. However I think it is indisputable that the finances available are finite and transferable and we will see more preserved lines resorting to diesel substitutes or expensive 'hire ins' if too much is diverted into pie in the sky schemes. The exception would be those schemes funded by individuals or small groups with deep pockets who are not reliant on public subscription.

As to what new build, I think I would be radical and say why not think outside the box and produce something completely new utilising modern techniques and materials. That would create interest and contribute to the development of steam traction.

 

I'm surprised this thread hasn't really touched on the P2, since I read in the latest Steam Railway that it is to go ahead!

 

You're right, I can't say which one, not for legal reasons, but because to do so would cause a few people real distress and I don't think the issue, important as it is, justifies doing that. Equally, I can't exactly define a no-hoper because, if I did so, it would not take long for some readers of this thread to work out which schemes I was talking about! Trust me, they are out there and time will tell which ones they are.

 

Oh, in that case, I give you ...



... the Adams single! Need to find somewhere that can turn 8' diameter wheels, but I assume the GWS will solve that problem for me.

Now, what's this "Facebook" thingy that seems an important part of the process?

Tom

 

b ute I full...

 

Like it, good choice.

 

I would like to see built...."a" shed to put under cover:

1. Everything we have
2. Everything we will have
3. All the equipment to look after 1&2

I would also like to see some new-build standard gauge carriages of older designs no longer common.

Locos ... not a priority, we have lots of nice ones already.

 

might be easier to just rebuild some of the many pre 1948 examples rotting away. there's no shortage of material to go at, all we need is money labour and that VERY big shed you mentioned

 

And in the same issue the outlook for 71000 looks pretty bleak and this is the most modern design by year in the UK.

 

Used to think that the ideal loco for the big Railway would be big, powerful and/or fast. But as the last bastion of mainline steam in the UK will in all likelyhood be the jacobite/ what is the best loco for this... a standard 4 ? ( a Gresley V4 ?) in which case its high time a shed was built at Forters....

 

The news that we will see the start of a new build P2 from the same people who brought you Tornado does excite though. Better adhesion than a Pacific, means better point to point timings, more powerful and freer running too if all other portions of the original Gresley design are carefully evaluated and improved. No.2007 could be the locomotive which changes the way we look at the Rail tour market in my view, not for speed but for better all round performance section to section.

It will in theory be Britain's most powerful steam locomotive, not to mention recreating one of the most beautiful.

 

An Ivvat 4-4-2?

 

i would to see a north eastern A8 and a Gresley v3

 

Gentlemen and Ladies, I posted this on here as to get thoughts on what we (if there was every chance of being built) general thoughts of locos people would like to see built, some are preferences and some are missing from collections that once was regularly seen around loco sheds and shunting or mainline.
I understand with some of you concerns to money to build these or volunteers to run projects, but looking back to British rails list of locos to be saved (which never really came off) and lots of pre 1948 locos or even the 1910 ones never survived, as you surely understand, this is just a general chat of peoples thoughts to as if a loco could be built ( with money no objective and manpower).
I was only asking for personal choices of locos, that you would like to be built ,if as mentioned could be .

 

Why does the future look bleak for 71000?