SirStanierFan6229 Posted November 22, 2015 Share Posted November 22, 2015 I don't know whether or not this is new information, but for some while now, long enough for it to appear on Wikipedia, there has been the possibility of Duchess of Hamilton returning to steam in her restreamlined condition, and with the completion of Flying Scotsman I emailed the NRM to check whether this was still the case, as a future project, and got the following response from Bob Gwynne, the Associate Curator: 'There are no plans to get Duchess of Hamilton in steam, I think that was on the previous Director’s wish list when he was talking to a railway journalist. The next locomotive in steam on the main line owned by the NRM will be Flying Scotsman.' So, sadly for any of us fans of the LMS streamliners, Hamilton will remain where she is... at least at present. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted November 23, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 23, 2015 Never trust anything Wikipedia says. It is an open site that anyone can change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisH-UK Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Never trust anything Wikipedia says. It is an open site that anyone can change. AFAIK it's no longer changeable by anyone, iirc suggested edits are curated/moderated/somethinged, however that doesn't mean it's a wholly reliable source. Of course if you go looking for a second opinion you're just as likely to find a copy and paste of that wiki as find something sourced independently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Wiki is much better than it's often given credit for, probably 90%, or more, of the content is factual. If you know a fact to be wrong you can challenge it. Over time it gets better. It's an encyclopaedia, not a news source. Reports of 'what might be happening' are, by their nature, less reliable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71 Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 ....would it be a fact if it were wrong? Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 By factual I mean that others can verify a fact and challenge it. Let's not get all smart arsey about it, it's a very useful resource. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Assuming that this is an accurate source (Wikipedia, I mean, not the OP) then I can hardly say that I am surprised. NRM spent Lord knows how much money returning the Duchess of Hamilton into a streamliner and that represents a phenomenal investment. They are hardly likely to take it all off again and go to the additional expense of a complete overhaul for quite some time to come. Even the paintwork comes to several thousand pounds at least, let alone the cost of any fabrication work which is required. I'll be the first to line up for her railtours, but I think realistically it's going to be another ten or twenty years until the idea gains any traction Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirStanierFan6229 Posted November 23, 2015 Author Share Posted November 23, 2015 Never trust anything Wikipedia says. It is an open site that anyone can change. Why does everyone say this?!? Since it is used by so many people, any inaccurate information is soon corrected, and it can be used as a springboard into further investigations, particularly if you can verify the information. In this case, the information was sourced from an inteview with the previous curator. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirStanierFan6229 Posted November 23, 2015 Author Share Posted November 23, 2015 Assuming that this is an accurate source (Wikipedia, I mean, not the OP) then I can hardly say that I am surprised. NRM spent Lord knows how much money returning the Duchess of Hamilton into a streamliner and that represents a phenomenal investment. They are hardly likely to take it all off again and go to the additional expense of a complete overhaul for quite some time to come. Even the paintwork comes to several thousand pounds at least, let alone the cost of any fabrication work which is required. I'll be the first to line up for her railtours, but I think realistically it's going to be another ten or twenty years until the idea gains any traction I suppose you're right... still doesn't mean it isn't disappointing though. In my opinion, a steaming, streamlined Duchess should be one of the world's 7 man-made wonders. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 ......any inaccurate information is soon corrected, and it can be used as a springboard into further investigations, particularly if you can verify the information. Indeed, errors, inaccuracies and falsehoods can be corrected. Unlike printed sources which once in print are 'cast in stone' so to speak. We've had some discussion on here about a recent railway related 'bookazine' which contains a few errors. As it is unlikely ever to be reprinted, those errors will mislead for years to come. And I like your springboard reference, spot on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted November 23, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 23, 2015 It's always worth having a glance at the talk and history pages of a Wikipedia article to see what people are bickering about. That's usually enough to get a half-decent idea of the accuracy of any points you're concerned with, although it requires the article to have enough popularity. Article vandalism is usally pretty obvious, and deliberate attempts to mislead often aren't written very well so stand out. Genuine errors are more likely going to be down to errors in the source material, so no worse than any other source. This is where the collaborative and adaptable nature of it is a strength, increasing the chances of these being found and corrected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
runs as required Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Never trust anything Wikipedia says. It is an open site that anyone can change.My medical connections reckon Wiki is trustworthy in one of the most critical areas: Health - because it is continually policed by all the interests that have a stake - especially drug companies.In the areas that interest me I use it as a first point of departure in research but it is very easy (and reassuring) to 'triangulate'. dh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
synthnut Posted November 23, 2015 Share Posted November 23, 2015 Why does everyone say this?!? Since it is used by so many people, any inaccurate information is soon corrected, and it can be used as a springboard into further investigations, particularly if you can verify the information. In this case, the information was sourced from an inteview with the previous curator. Hi, I can say without doubt that the way certain people "police" Wikipedia unfortunately means it can be far from accurate at times. I know of a case where a family member of mine tried to have some historical information on a relative's career corrected, only to have this removed multiple times. There are plenty of know-it-alls that basically troll wikipedia and I'm afraid the failing of many know-it-alls, is that that they sometimes don't know as much as they think! I would also query the concept that so many people use it that it's corrected, on the converse sometimes, misinformation is spread so far and wide that this is then corroborated in a circular fashion. It's the makings of an magnificent resource, just always going to be at the mercy of knowledge trolls... TTFN, Ben Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium rab Posted November 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 24, 2015 I don't know whether or not this is new information, but for some while now, long enough for it to appear on Wikipedia, there has been the possibility of Duchess of Hamilton returning to steam in her restreamlined condition, and with the completion of Flying Scotsman I emailed the NRM to check whether this was still the case, as a future project, and got the following response from Bob Gwynne, the Associate Curator: 'There are no plans to get Duchess of Hamilton in steam, I think that was on the previous Director’s wish list when he was talking to a railway journalist. The next locomotive in steam on the main line owned by the NRM will be Flying Scotsman.' So, sadly for any of us fans of the LMS streamliners, Hamilton will remain where she is... at least at present. After the Scotsman fiasco she's probably better off staying as and where she is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Dava Posted November 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 24, 2015 Judging by the reports on the Scotsman fiasco, the NRM no longer has the in-house capability or expertise to do a mainline steam restoration of a loco as complex as 46229. It would be contracted out. They dont have the money (watch what happens with CSR ie cuts to Science Museum budget tomorrow - this is more relevant than wikipedia). Dava Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldgunner Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I'd love to see 6229, and it has been a popular rumour for a number of years (along with restoration of 2500). Looking at the events, the NRM have quite a big year ahead of them with 60103, and is likely to be their sole focus for a while. Saying that, I wouldn't write it off entirely, stranger things have happened. She was restored by the Friends of the NRM before, maybe they would raise the cash again? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockershovel Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 Wikipedia is infinitely malleable by those with an interest in such things. There are regular accounts, and occasional minor scandals about the selective ongoing editing of pages relating to public figures of various descriptions, who may well have an interest in obscuring past support of issues which are no longer expedient to be associated with; all main political parties appear to carry out such activities. Some pages are outright activist in tone or read like party press releases (the BNP/SNP entry reads as though it originates from Guardian Towers, for example). Past marital shenanigans are usually glossed over, a sort of "de mortuis, nil nisi bonum" for the living. Some pages are bewilderingly otiose and self-referential. You might think "goth" denoted a hairy, axe-wielding barbarian from the Black Forest, but Wikipedia will inform you otherwise, at turgid and incomprehensible length, for as long as it takes for sleep or paralysis to intervene. There are numerous pages whose subject does not even appear to be grammatically coherent. It's the epitome of the Internet; a virtually unlimited source of information of a sort, on subjects you had never even heard of, half an hour ago. It is a playground for the promotion of self-interest, a free publishing house for some quite heavyweight technical literature, and an abundantly flowing river of utter nonsense and navel-gazing. Good fun, though. Mind you, if you think Wikipedia is bad, try TV Tropes... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 ...NRM spent Lord knows how much money returning the Duchess of Hamilton into a streamliner and that represents a phenomenal investment. They are hardly likely to take it all off again and go to the additional expense of a complete overhaul for quite some time to come... Question one relating to general network access: what's the clearance of the new streamlined casing like against current Network Rail guge requirement? If it was streamlined with an original dimensions casing then I suspect it would be no go, for height especially. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirStanierFan6229 Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share Posted November 24, 2015 After the Scotsman fiasco she's probably better off staying as and where she is. Judging by the reports on the Scotsman fiasco, the NRM no longer has the in-house capability or expertise to do a mainline steam restoration of a loco as complex as 46229. It would be contracted out. They dont have the money (watch what happens with CSR ie cuts to Science Museum budget tomorrow - this is more relevant than wikipedia). Dava I'd love to see 6229, and it has been a popular rumour for a number of years (along with restoration of 2500). Looking at the events, the NRM have quite a big year ahead of them with 60103, and is likely to be their sole focus for a while. Saying that, I wouldn't write it off entirely, stranger things have happened. She was restored by the Friends of the NRM before, maybe they would raise the cash again? Moving on from the Wikipedia issue, perhaps you're right. It would be a travesty if 6229 was damaged in a restoration attempt, making the repair cost unaffordable forever. But firmly on the side of seeing her restored, I'd still love to see it done, carefully planned by the experts (not that the NRM are not!), and with funds raised by the public, for what is essentially their engine... But, hold on, what about a new build? It cost £4m to restore Scotsman, but only £3m to build Tornado. Add to that, the fact that Coronation's speed record attempt, one of the only serious attempts with this class, was cut short by Crewe Station, then beaten by Mallard, who had a much better run. Does anyone think a new Princess Coronation could beat Mallard's speed record - perhaps on the old East Coast Mainline? And would we allow it to happen? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom J Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 6229's re-streamlining was done in such a way as to permit the loco to run on the main line in that condition; indeed, it has been towed on the main line in this condition. Someone from Steam Beano rode on the footplate, IIR! If the money turns up, I think it will happen, but the case also hangs on what happens to 6233, which doesn't show signs of being retired from an overhaul cycle any time soon, which is also a shame for those of us who miss 6203, a star performer from my childhood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 ... Does anyone think a new Princess Coronation could beat Mallard's speed record - perhaps on the old East Coast Mainline? And would we allow it to happen? Wouldn't be allowed, simply because the dynamics of a direct drive reciprocating loco are now better understood. It is interesting that between Germany, UK and USA, the claimed maxima for steam converge at circa 125mph / 200kph. The vibrational environment for the footplate crew was 'something else'; one driver reporting double vision, rather perturbing when single and double yellows had to be discriminated. Now if a direct drive steam record is required, the loco to build is a rationalised turbine type (doesn't need big wheels, just appropriate gearing between turbine shaft and axle). But since all railways with zip along fast electric traction records to their credit derive their power from power stations with steam in circuit, all electric records are steam records too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brack Posted November 24, 2015 Share Posted November 24, 2015 I thought blue peter had beaten the record anyway, at Durham 20 odd years ago. Certainly the wheels went a fair bit faster than 126mph. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Hilux5972 Posted November 25, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 25, 2015 I thought blue peter had beaten the record anyway, at Durham 20 odd years ago. Certainly the wheels went a fair bit faster than 126mph. Yeah but she did that stood almost still haha Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coldgunner Posted November 25, 2015 Share Posted November 25, 2015 Yeah, I think the loco and the train needs to be moving too for the record to count I think it was at Railfest where I queried the future of 6229, and I understand that the streamlining was reapplied with modifications to the loading gauge to allow future running on the network. It makes sense really, whether or not she is planned to steam or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke Piewalker Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 I'm sure when all the lesser engines have conked out she'll be ready to burst forth majestically... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.