RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted April 9, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 9, 2011 The damage does not look that severe, merely a bent bit of streamlining. I don't really understand the fuss about it, it's just another A4, not unique, there are several of them around and this one is less significant than the 'important' one that holds a world record. What's to say it would be any safer in the UK than where it is? Look what happened to the 37 at Barrow Hill a few years back... Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted April 9, 2011 Author Share Posted April 9, 2011 The damage does not look that severe, merely a bent bit of streamlining. I don't really understand the fuss about it, it's just another A4, not unique, there are several of them around and this one is less significant than the 'important' one that holds a world record. The overall condition is very shabby, and I would think, given the streamlined casing's importance, it should have been repaired after five years, surely? What's to say it would be any safer in the UK than where it is? Look what happened to the 37 at Barrow Hill a few years back... Andi Not really comparable? How many class 37s in various states preserved, compared to the six A4s? Are the four in the UK well looked after? An absolute yes, as they are each iconic in their own right. Dominion of Canada is very important to the A4 story - she is one of the original coronation A4s which Bittern is now to reproduce for a time. She was donated in good faith after being cosmetically restored, and has not been looked after very well. That is the issue I feel needs highlighting, in stark comparison (as I stated earlier) to that of Waddon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 SACM, Spot on. There is no comparison between a 40 a penny class 37 and an A4 . I'm sure that should DDW or DOC return that they WILL be looked after as they're just so iconic and well loved. Many people questioned having 3 A4s on the main line when No.19 came back, but there seems to be no issue there, and the fact of the matter is that save for a few niches, if you want to run mainline steam charters which pay their way then you really need a Class 8. Regarding the Musesums not selling, I seem to recall that when Tony Marchington was after an A4 that he approached both musueums in North America, I forget which one refused him point blank but one museum (I think the Canadians) named a price - £300,000 or thereabouts. That was circa 1995. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dagworth Posted April 9, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 9, 2011 My mention of the 37 is just to highlight that preserved locos get damaged in this country too, not comparing the 37 to the A4 (though personally I know which I'd rather ride behind... ) Andi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted April 9, 2011 Author Share Posted April 9, 2011 My mention of the 37 is just to highlight that preserved locos get damaged in this country too, not comparing the 37 to the A4 (though personally I know which I'd rather ride behind... ) Andi Fair enough Andi, and I respect that. But the key difference is that of a museum's ownership, and that of individual groups, in the case of DoC and the 37 you mentioned. It is just a shame that that a member of such an iconic class is in such a condition as the pics in my OP show. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 it shouldn't be over there in the first place. Same goes for Dwight D Eisenhower, all because it is named after an american doesn't mean it typically has the right to stay in the USA..... they should bring both of them back, and that terrier in the last pic too (although we seem to have enough of them now, lol), after all, we designed them, we built them and we used them, they are a part of british history more than theirs. rant over (not supposed to be a rant but it reads like one!) Yet the only reason both locomotives survive is because of their names, otherwise the engines probably wouldn't even exist today. Still I think it's an appalling way to treat such an historic locomotive. Even more so when it bears the name of your own country! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LNER Tom Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 You know, even as a LNER enthusiast, I'm in two minds about this. The LNER came out rather poorly in preservation, lets be honest....no A1s preserved, and 1 A2 and 1 A3....so the A4s really are the LNER's flagship in preservation, and at the end of the day 6 A4s is nothing compared to the amount of Bullied Pacifics Preserved, granted not all in working condition. I would love to see both Dwight D Eisenhower and Dominion of Canada storming down ECML once more....and here comes the but... We can't forget that these locos were given to there respective countries as gifts......you can't expect them to hand something back which is...frankly theirs! Having said that, DofC condition is rather awful, and I would expect a loco of such status to be treated in better condition....would it be possible do we think, that instead of say the Canadian's giving or selling her back....that they kept her but be put on long term loan to the UK where she could be returned to running order and run....just a thought, very unlikely I know. Just my thoughts on it all mind. Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I think I'd swap it for one J20............................. Best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted April 9, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 9, 2011 Many people questioned having 3 A4s on the main line when No.19 came back, but there seems to be no issue there ...apart from not much work for any of them That's the real point of main line operation, not for the armchair trainspotter to get another cop but for the loco owners to justify/recoup their huge investment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Have a word with your employers and ask them if they will make access available to the location of the images. Or is that against their rules? Or maybe just wait (revolutionary concept I know), til you get home Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted April 9, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 9, 2011 it shouldn't be over there in the first place. Same goes for Dwight D Eisenhower, all because it is named after an american doesn't mean it typically has the right to stay in the USA..... they should bring both of them back, and that terrier in the last pic too (although we seem to have enough of them now, lol), after all, we designed them, we built them and we used them, they are a part of british history more than theirs. If it wasn't over there your dad would probably have shaved with a small part of it and your mum would have been doing her washing in another part of it for a couple of decades while you might well be using a computer which in some tiny way incorporates another part of it. It was sad to see these locos leave the country but at least they avoided the scrappy and it isn't as if we happen not to have more than enough A4s or Terriers to be going on with. And others have already made plain what would happen if large locos like A4s did come back - the money and the market just isn't there to sustain them (unless of course you happen to have getting on for half a million quid going spare or know someone who has?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 it shouldn't be over there in the first place. Same goes for Dwight D Eisenhower, all because it is named after an american doesn't mean it typically has the right to stay in the USA..... they should bring both of them back, and that terrier in the last pic too (although we seem to have enough of them now, lol), after all, we designed them, we built them and we used them, they are a part of british history more than theirs. Are you aware that we donated them? The best thing is that two further examples of Gresley's finest are stil extant - yes DoC is not in the best of condition but overall it looks far from being in danger of being disposed of. And who are "they" out of interest? Our museums are full of things which British took from other countries - when we visited Luxor a couple of years ago, a local tour guide who was a historian and very knowledgable did pose the question as to who should have ancient egyptian artifacts in their museums. I think she wasn't too happy about her history having been taken across the world. But DoC was donated to Canada so it is a little different. Maybe we should really wish that BR had done the same for other parts of the empire honoured by A4 namings?! ave a word with your employers and ask them if they will make access available to the location of the images. Or is that against their rules? Like many big companies any sites where files can be stored are blocked. Not much which can be done about it. Thi nk I need to be thankful I can view sites like this! That doesn't have any bearing on the fact that Simon has acted totally within forum rules and by doing so has not carried out any breach of law. You can't do as you please just because someone has published something on the 'net. I saw a case some time ago where a website owner wholly re-published a professional photographer's images to lend credence to his start-up business without any consent. Nevertheless, if someone nicks a copy of an image for their private consumption, no-one really knows, but posting on here would put RMWeb in the wrong, and SACM is quite right to observe that essential fact. I need to make my own version of Leonard's sign... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF7MroTLDfU Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brossard Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 I live about half an hour from the Museum where Dominion of Canada is stored. I agree it is quite depressing but with limited funds, projects with more connection to Canada and Quebec are going to get the attention first - unless someone comes up with a wheelbarrow full of cash. To be fair to the Museum they have done a sterling job with the place since the government gave them a grant some years ago. Its not a patch on NRM of course but the interior exhibits are well presented and the main building is new, modern and comfortable. They hold Rail Expo every August with layouts on offer from all over the region (ours is BR of course), live steam and Sir John Molson (2-2-2) is usually in steam. Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Taylor Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Agreed it is sad to see, but also agreed we have barely enough work or in all likelihood finance to support the A4s already here. Another two makes no sense to me, especially when they are not ours to move around and dispose of as we see fit and are extremely unlikely to become so. Could we stop having frothy tedious what-if topics like this, that are just reminiscent of National Preservation at it's most childish - a primary reason why I no longer visit there - and concentrate on looking after and supporting what this country already has and struggles to care for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bingley hall Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 No, I have spoken with Pete Best (many years ago) he called me out of the blue when someone was trying to release the "Hamburg Tapes" - nice guy, could well be a railway modeller....... Best, Pete. Love the sig Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonhall Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Fair enough Andi, and I respect that. But the key difference is that of a museum's ownership, and that of individual groups, in the case of DoC and the 37 you mentioned. The damaged class 37 in question was the National collection one. J Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted April 10, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted April 10, 2011 Could we stop having frothy tedious what-if topics like this, that are just reminiscent of National Preservation at it's most childish - a primary reason why I no longer visit there - and concentrate on looking after and supporting what this country already has and struggles to care for. Other opinions are available.....and just as valuable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Doc and DDE YES, we did build them, YES they did belong to us. BUT just so face it. we willingly handed them over. and they now belong to someone else thats the point then about these rants. its like a parent getting worried about their child when it's gone out to play. because we have no control over whats happening, we get worried that it'll all go pear shaped. it would be great if we did have them, but we dont. and just because it has a dent doesnt mean that their mistreating it shunting mistakes are made over here as well such as the middleton railway's Y7 project. they damaged the valve gear while shunting it. but it was fixed and so can DoC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ste234 Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Don't get me wrong, I fully understand how some people would like to have it bought back over here, but I have thought about it a bit, and to be honest, if say someone was to donate X amount to get it sent back over here, I think I would rather they put the money towards keeping the 3 we have running in good nick, or even better; get Mallard up and running again! Il'l get me coat... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 ...apart from not much work for any of them That's the real point of main line operation, not for the armchair trainspotter to get another cop but for the loco owners to justify/recoup their huge investment. Aside from the A4LS, I seriously doubt the owners of No.9/19 are too worried about "their investment". As it is, all 3 were doing reasonably well both on the mainline and with respective running agreements on preserved lines, admittedly Mr C moving No.9 back home probably didn't too the loco any favours, as understandable and indeed welcome as it was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzyo Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Aside from the A4LS, I seriously doubt the owners of No.9/19 are too worried about "their investment". As it is, all 3 were doing reasonably well both on the mainline and with respective running agreements on preserved lines, admittedly Mr C moving No.9 back home probably didn't too the loco any favours, as understandable and indeed welcome as it was. Hello Bon Accord, can you please explain about moving No9 back home, as I was not aware that it left home. It was stored at Philadelphia (County Durham) for a number of years. OzzyO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pennine MC Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 I need to make my own version of Leonard's sign... Most folk manage with the smileys, somehow If it wasn't over there your dad would probably have shaved with a small part of it and your mum would have been doing her washing in another part of it for a couple of decades while you might well be using a computer which in some tiny way incorporates another part of it. It was sad to see these locos leave the country but at least they avoided the scrappy and it isn't as if we happen not to have more than enough A4s or Terriers to be going on with. As a general principle I find myself very much agreeing with this, much as I thought over the furore a few years back over Deltic 16. There's no 'law' that says preservation has to be for ever, any more than I would be obliged (for instance) to keep a classic car running if it got too much for me. I appreciate in the case of donated locos there's an implied moral 'duty of care' but Mike's point is underlined by the fact that at the time these locos were donated, preservation was in its infancy. The days when we'd have one or more of every class were way off and DoC evidently wasnt seen as particularly significant for the nation to save, not compared to Mallard (for obvious reasons). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Hello Bon Accord, can you please explain about moving No9 back home, as I was not aware that it left home. It was stored at Philadelphia (County Durham) for a number of years. OzzyO. OzzyO, Are you sure it was No.9 stored a Philadelphia? After John Cameron preserved her she spent most of her time either in a shed adjacent to Markinch station or at the Lochty Private Railway (both in Fife), however in the late 80s (I think), she moved South to the Severn Valley Railway as Southern England is of course the place to be for most railtours. However, most/all of the Support crew were Scottish and had to travel down week in, week out for railtours/preserved railway workings etc, and since nobody was getting any younger, John Cameron decided to move No.9 and 'The Great Marquess' back to Scotland, where he built a new shed to house both locos at Thornton in Fife. The idea being to hopefully employ on more railtours in Scotland. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 Another line of thought on this is that shouldn't we proud of showing some of our railway heritage overseas? Glamour tours such as Flying Scotsman in preservation and show-off tours from KGV and 'Coronation' in the 20s and 30s have increased awareness at various times so why not in the prsent day? What would we think if parties wanted to repatriate overseas exhibits from the NRM? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted April 10, 2011 Share Posted April 10, 2011 If you mean that 'orrible Chinese plumbers nightmare in the Great Hall then they're welcome to it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.