NRM owned locos on the mainline

[martin butler]

With the NRM, having at least two of its engines being overhauled by 3rd party organisations, for possible further mainline use, and now the majority of the stock used by tour operators being air braked mk2's, this is going to create a problem,

The NRM, are often very precise in what it will allow to be done to engines that are loaned to preservation groups, So far, they have been relaxed about TPWS, AWS, ETC, but so far, flying Scotsman excluded, they have not allowed any major changes to the engines, but if 70013, and 30777 are to return to mainline use, the operator they normally work with can't use them, unless they become air fitted, Would this be a step too far for the NRM? Your thoughts ?

 

[Ashley Hill]

As long as the modifications can be reversed if required then I don’t see a problem.
I wish the class 71 was allowed out to play again.

 

[andyjhatton]

This post on National Preservation states that 30777 won't be air braked.

 

[Trainlog]

I hope that Sir Lamiel does make a comeback to the mainline, especially with an absence of Maunsell locos with widescale mainline certification. (Yes I know that Repton and 31806 have some form of it but have limited ranges). Would be even better if Sir Lamiel was used on tours nationwide and not just for the Northwest aswell.

Lord Nelson would also be a good contender for the NRM to consider for an overhaul and mainline certification, though even a cosmetic restoration would be welcome for that loco as it has started to deteriorate at the Mid Hants.

If Lord Nelson was cosmetically restored, could it be a good contender for a on-loan display at the Margate 1:1 collection perhaps?

 

[Gwr12345]

It comes down to a question of whether it is better to have engines preserved in as close to original condition as possible, or out in service, showing what they did in the past.
I am firmly on the side of having as many of the collections locos in working order as possible, unless there are very good reasons for it to be preserved in its current state (eg. no point restoring rocket)
The NRM at the minute is far to hesitant imo to allow locomotives for what they were designed to do, rather than sitting on a plinth.

 

[158760]

I hope that Sir Lamiel does make a comeback to the mainline, especially with an absence of Maunsell locos with widescale mainline certification. (Yes I know that Repton and 31806 have some form of it but have limited ranges). Would be even better if Sir Lamiel was used on tours nationwide and not just for the Northwest aswell.

31806 doesn’t have any mainline equipment anymore. It was removed during winter maintenance this year.

 

[neil65]

31806 doesn’t have any mainline equipment anymore. It was removed during winter maintenance this year.

its gone onto Eddystone hasn’t it?

 

[158760]

its gone onto Eddystone hasn’t it?

That is my understanding yes. An engine with a power classification of 4 is a lot less useful mainline than one with a power classification of 7 - more than 7 coaches for the U Boat and the diesel on the back will be pushing hard.

 

[martin butler]

That is my understanding yes. An engine with a power classification of 4 is a lot less useful mainline than one with a power classification of 7 - more than 7 coaches for the U Boat and the diesel on the back will be pushing hard.

On another forum, someone when I asked the same question, said no the U class still had its mainline equipment, but now the U class is gauged to be non-compliant even on the Worgret Junction to Southampton section, so its no use anyway.

 

[158760]

On another forum, someone when I asked the same question, said no the U class still had its mainline equipment, but now the U class is gauged to be non-compliant even on the Worgret Junction to Southampton section, so its no use anyway.

I can tell you for a fact it doesn’t have the mainline equipment because I cleaned out the cabinet that previously housed some of it (GSMR etc). Interesting that it wouldn’t be allowed back on the mainline though, is that Wessex specific or nationwide?

 

[martin butler]

I can tell you for a fact it doesn’t have the mainline equipment because I cleaned out the cabinet that previously housed some of it (GSMR etc). Interesting that it wouldn’t be allowed back on the mainline though, is that Wessex specific or nationwide?

I believe its Wessex specific , platform clearances possibly following track realigning work the U's are quite broad across the cylinders where it used to fit,now I think its banned As i understand it also 34028 has issues with some electronics might these have been borrowed from the U boat?

 

[Trainlog]

31806 doesn’t have any mainline equipment anymore. It was removed during winter maintenance this year.

That's understandable. Thank you for clarifying that.

 

[rustbucket]

On another forum, someone when I asked the same question, said no the U class still had its mainline equipment, but now the U class is gauged to be non-compliant even on the Worgret Junction to Southampton section, so its no use anyway.

No mainline equipment on the U Boat when it was at the MNR Steam Gala the other week

 

[NER1621]

It comes down to a question of whether it is better to have engines preserved in as close to original condition as possible, or out in service, showing what they did in the past.
I am firmly on the side of having as many of the collections locos in working order as possible, unless there are very good reasons for it to be preserved in its current state

Experience dictates that it’s usually a waste of time trying to reason with this kind of enthusiast attitude, but here goes…

We have scores of “heritage” railways - more properly tourist railways - operating locomotives “showing what they did in the past”. In order to do this the locomotives are constantly rebuilt and repaired such that most if them should now be considered semi-replicas rather than historic artefacts. There is no need for the NRM to try and duplicate what is being done by heritage railways.

We have one national railway museum whose budget is dedicated to preserving, conserving and interpreting the full range of railway material culture - which includes far more than locomotives - as a research and educative resource covering a much broader context than simply “I like steam locomotives”. The NRM doesn’t exist to be a reserve motive power depot for the tourist railway industry - it’s a museum. Different type of institution.

Caveat: showing a steam loco in operating condition is, of course, an educative experience. Which is why the museum acquired Flying Scotsman, as that vehicle had been so mucked around that there was no risk to historical material by operating it. FS’s museum interest derives from its associations and public reputation, not its material condition. But one is enough (and perhaps one diesel and one electric in due course.).

Presumably you are equally up in arms that IWM Duxford doesn’t have all its aircraft in flying condition? And that the British Museum doesn’t let military re-enactors have a go with the Sutton Hoo helmet? At some point you have to draw a line.

I doubt I’ve convinced you.

 

[UP13]

Experience dictates that it’s usually a waste of time trying to reason with this kind of enthusiast attitude, but here goes…

We have scores of “heritage” railways - more properly tourist railways - operating locomotives “showing what they did in the past”. In order to do this the locomotives are constantly rebuilt and repaired such that most if them should now be considered semi-replicas rather than historic artefacts. There is no need for the NRM to try and duplicate what is being done by heritage railways.

We have one national railway museum whose budget is dedicated to preserving, conserving and interpreting the full range of railway material culture - which includes far more than locomotives - as a research and educative resource covering a much broader context than simply “I like steam locomotives”. The NRM doesn’t exist to be a reserve motive power depot for the tourist railway industry - it’s a museum. Different type of institution.

Caveat: showing a steam loco in operating condition is, of course, an educative experience. Which is why the museum acquired Flying Scotsman, as that vehicle had been so mucked around that there was no risk to historical material by operating it. FS’s museum interest derives from its associations and public reputation, not its material condition. But one is enough (and perhaps one diesel and one electric in due course.).

Presumably you are equally up in arms that IWM Duxford doesn’t have all its aircraft in flying condition? And that the British Museum doesn’t let military re-enactors have a go with the Sutton Hoo helmet? At some point you have to draw a line.

I doubt I’ve convinced you.

Very good post.

We are very lucky in this country to have the amount of working steam we have. My controversial opinion is that we probably have too many railways/locomotives competing for an ever decreasing pool of resources.

I'd rather see a beautifully conserved engine with a good display in a.museum than a heap of rusting scrap under a tarpaulin on a siding in the middle of nowhere.

Also one of the drawers of the Bluebell for me is the excellent museum at Sheffield Park. You really don't need everything in steam to enjoy it.

 

[Class15]

Experience dictates that it’s usually a waste of time trying to reason with this kind of enthusiast attitude, but here goes…

We have scores of “heritage” railways - more properly tourist railways - operating locomotives “showing what they did in the past”. In order to do this the locomotives are constantly rebuilt and repaired such that most if them should now be considered semi-replicas rather than historic artefacts. There is no need for the NRM to try and duplicate what is being done by heritage railways.

We have one national railway museum whose budget is dedicated to preserving, conserving and interpreting the full range of railway material culture - which includes far more than locomotives - as a research and educative resource covering a much broader context than simply “I like steam locomotives”. The NRM doesn’t exist to be a reserve motive power depot for the tourist railway industry - it’s a museum. Different type of institution.

Caveat: showing a steam loco in operating condition is, of course, an educative experience. Which is why the museum acquired Flying Scotsman, as that vehicle had been so mucked around that there was no risk to historical material by operating it. FS’s museum interest derives from its associations and public reputation, not its material condition. But one is enough (and perhaps one diesel and one electric in due course.).

Presumably you are equally up in arms that IWM Duxford doesn’t have all its aircraft in flying condition? And that the British Museum doesn’t let military re-enactors have a go with the Sutton Hoo helmet? At some point you have to draw a line.

I doubt I’ve convinced you.

Thank you for this, excellent post indeed. Locos like mallard should be kept safe in the museum.

 

[tumbles]

As long as the modifications can be reversed if required then I don’t see a problem.
I wish the class 71 was allowed out to play again.

Think I’ve read comments previous that the 71 shouldn’t really have been used the last time but don’t know how much truth there is in that. Would love to see it run again but guess it’s got a niche appeal and limited scope of where it can run so probably not financially a good choice purely on that basis?

 

[Trainlog]

Experience dictates that it’s usually a waste of time trying to reason with this kind of enthusiast attitude, but here goes…

We have scores of “heritage” railways - more properly tourist railways - operating locomotives “showing what they did in the past”. In order to do this the locomotives are constantly rebuilt and repaired such that most if them should now be considered semi-replicas rather than historic artefacts. There is no need for the NRM to try and duplicate what is being done by heritage railways.

We have one national railway museum whose budget is dedicated to preserving, conserving and interpreting the full range of railway material culture - which includes far more than locomotives - as a research and educative resource covering a much broader context than simply “I like steam locomotives”. The NRM doesn’t exist to be a reserve motive power depot for the tourist railway industry - it’s a museum. Different type of institution.

Caveat: showing a steam loco in operating condition is, of course, an educative experience. Which is why the museum acquired Flying Scotsman, as that vehicle had been so mucked around that there was no risk to historical material by operating it. FS’s museum interest derives from its associations and public reputation, not its material condition. But one is enough (and perhaps one diesel and one electric in due course.).

Presumably you are equally up in arms that IWM Duxford doesn’t have all its aircraft in flying condition? And that the British Museum doesn’t let military re-enactors have a go with the Sutton Hoo helmet? At some point you have to draw a line.

I doubt I’ve convinced you.

I have to disagree on this.

I do believe that whilst not every loco should be returned to service, and would instead see it be done like now on a case-by-case basis and the suitability and benefits the loco could provide if said loco was returned to steam.

For the case of Mid to late Victorian locos, a case could be made for many of these to be left as is, as museum pieces. Though the GNR single stirling would be great loco to see running again - obviously for heritage railways though.

As for 20th century locos, once again, it does depend, and some of the reasoning to not consider running some of these locos borders on ridiculous. The monoblock of V2 Golden Arrow would be better off on a physical display stand and actually visible to the public than not considering bringing back this loco to running order.

The NRM has many exciting locos worthy of running to either mainline or heritage railway standards. For example, Lord Nelson would be great on the mainline again. I know this argument has gone on for decades but should the Talyllyn ground Talyllyn and Dolgoch as they are 150 years old?

I believe that as long as a loco is mechanically fit for service, safe to operate, and any changes/modifications made to it are respectful to its original design, then the case for its restoration should be based on economic potential and the will of those who wish to return it to running order.

All you need to do is look at the success that the LSWR T3 has brought for preservation since it was de-accessioned from the NRM.

 

[Ashley Hill]

What is the prototype HST doing these days, stuffed and mounted? Is there any reasons why it was re-called?

 

[43096]

What is the prototype HST doing these days, stuffed and mounted? Is there any reasons why it was re-called?

Yes, it is stuffed and mounted (as you put it). It was recalled because the agreement for it had expired.

 

[Royston Vasey]

What is the prototype HST doing these days, stuffed and mounted? Is there any reasons why it was re-called?

I'd like to know this as well, we don't really know what went on but it seems a terrible pity for the 125 Group to have put so much work into it, and an engine and the related gubbins to get it operational. I did wonder if they got their Valenta back, or whether NRM bought it/were given it as a term of the loan.

 

[43096]

I'd like to know this as well, we don't really know what went on but it seems a terrible pity for the 125 Group to have put so much work into it, and an engine and the related gubbins to get it operational. I did wonder if they got their Valenta back, or whether NRM bought it/were given it as a term of the loan.

The engine in 41001 was/is the NRM's engine - it was donated to the museum by Porterbrook back when re-power was happening.

 

[s491]

I'd like to know this as well, we don't really know what went on but it seems a terrible pity for the 125 Group to have put so much work into it, and an engine and the related gubbins to get it operational. I did wonder if they got their Valenta back, or whether NRM bought it/were given it as a term of the loan.

The Valenta was "owned" by the NRM - it was donated as part of the re-power project. Nevertheless it had a 125G overhauled turbo and injectors on it.