RMweb Gold Clearwater Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 I'm in need of some learned advise. At what point can I justifiably underline a loco in my (and my son's) "Preserved Locomotives of British Railways?" Dilemma arises as on today's visit to the Gloucestershire Warwickshire Railway we could spy a tender clearly belonging to 35006 (as it is the only Bulleid MN they have and therefore by logic it must be) but we couldn't see either nameplate or number to confirm the identity. Somehow I feel this doesn't count but I'm definitely counting 7903... More generally, does seeing a set of frames or boilers count? David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 I was under the impression that the identity belongs to the frames... Another visit will be required...is that a hardship? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Kris Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 26, 2016 Maybe just underscore a percentage of the number to indicate you have only seen part of the loco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Clearwater Posted October 26, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 26, 2016 I was under the impression that the identity belongs to the frames... Another visit will be required...is that a hardship? That thought had occurred to me.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Davexoc Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 26, 2016 That thought had occurred to me.... Having toured behind the scenes at the GWR a couple of times, it was explained that most parts would have been replaced for others over the years. A loco entering works would be stripped and the parts used to put it back together would be from a pool of parts. So generally the frames would be the basic loco. The boiler, wheels and everything else could be repaired and refitted to the next suitable loco. Tenders and locos also took different times to refurbish, so were reused as required. As for the names and numberplates on preserved locos, I've never asked, but would have thought they were replicas anyway. Same with a diesel loco, engines were swapped, and bogies recycled, even between classes like 37, 50, 55. HTH Dave Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnb Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 On some items it can be seen that the original number was crossed out and the new one stamped on beside it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium pete_mcfarlane Posted October 26, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 26, 2016 Does this count as having spotted 76 039? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheatley Posted October 26, 2016 Share Posted October 26, 2016 Does this count as having spotted 76 039?Yes. And 27001. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed-farms Posted October 27, 2016 Share Posted October 27, 2016 I suppose it all feels how you interpret it. you have seen part of it but not the main numbered part so to speak. I own a reproduction Ian Allen from 1959 and I underline all locos I have seen but as the vast majority no longer exist I will use any part such as a nameplate, numberplate or even a connecting rod with that number stamped in it as counting, so the back of a tender would suffice. You can still go back when its running and make sure you have seen it fully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold PhilH Posted October 27, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2016 When I was trainspotting and travelled on a train, with my head stuck out of a carriage window, mostly all I used to see was the front of the smokebox and a numberplate (it was in the days of steam). That was good enough for me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Clearwater Posted October 27, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2016 I suppose it all feels how you interpret it. you have seen part of it but not the main numbered part so to speak. I own a reproduction Ian Allen from 1959 and I underline all locos I have seen but as the vast majority no longer exist I will use any part such as a nameplate, numberplate or even a connecting rod with that number stamped in it as counting, so the back of a tender would suffice. You can still go back when its running and make sure you have seen it fully. When I was trainspotting and travelled on a train, with my head stuck out of a carriage window, mostly all I used to see was the front of the smokebox and a numberplate (it was in the days of steam). That was good enough for me... I guess you could underline in red for those where you've seen a surviving artefact and blue for where you've seen a complete loco? Agreed re smoke box number being sufficient. My issue is there was no number on the rear of the tender so it's logic I'm relying on for my identification.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted October 27, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 27, 2016 An eternal spotting dilemma transported into the "heritage" era. On the active railway there were rules. They were unwritten and they varied somewhat from place to place. Woe betide if you transgressed on your own patch though you could sometimes be forgiven on an "away" shed bash for not knowing the local convention. I've even known a (somewhat bullying) lad demand that "cheat" numbers be somehow un-underlined among his spotting accomplices. Basically the locomotive had to be complete and capable of operation to count. In most places the local ethics had it that you could not count a loco stripped down in works, partially dismantled or being scrapped. In those days sectioned and cab-only exhibits were practically unknown. Arguments arose and friendships were lost over whether you had to wait until something moved before you "copped" it. In the north it seemed you couldn't count anything not in steam and in some cases you couldn't count anything until it turned a wheel. Down south you could count anything you saw, be it on shed or on the main line. As steam gave way to diesel so the "in steam" ruling seemed to fade as it became less relevant. But the "complete" thing generally persisted. No-one would dare claim the number of a shunter cab seen in Eastleigh works when the frame, wheels and power unit were elsewhere (even if elsewhere around the works site) because it wasn't a "locomotive". Spotting ethics became even more entangled when multiple units were in play. Most people took on trust that the carriages were in the listed formation though DMU sets and on Merseyside the electrics could (in theory) be re-formed daily. It was a minefield. It was competitive. It got ugly at times and you could somehow usually get away with underlining anything you had seen - provided everyone with you agreed! Moving into the current era where we have numerous partially-complete exhibits and listings which includes those in the present-day version of the old ABCs then I would suggest it it up to each one of us individually to make our own decision. If the item is listed as partial, sectioned or cab-only preserved then that is all there is to see. I see no harm in marking that off on that basis but not claiming it as having seen the entire locomotive. You have seen what there is today as a piece of preserved history. No-one pretends that a class 76 cab is an operable locomotive. If you happened to see that one when it was in working order then great - you can add it to you "Preserved" cops. But not the other way around. My ethics would not allow me to claim a cab in 2016 and underline the loco number in my "all-time" books which date from the late 1960s. Time moves on. Railway preservation moves on. Those who collect numbers should also move on. At least we still have examples of many past types to be seen. And if all you can see is the back-end of a tender then no, I would not count it because there is no guarantee that the expected locomotive is attached and you haven't actually seen it anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Clearwater Posted October 27, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2016 Many thanks Rick - an excellent and reasoned view! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold beast66606 Posted October 27, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2016 Our rules - for diesels and electrics (locos and units) - were you had to see the number, a nameplate only sighting could be agreed amongst those present but would normally be refused. About 1980 a group of us divided the 87s between us and the winner was the one who saw all theirs first - one lad saw his last but it was a nameplate only sighting, due to other structures - his request for it to count was turned down by the rest of us (obviously! ) At the end of the day, it's your choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Clearwater Posted October 27, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 27, 2016 Thanks - personally I'd count nameplates as it is a clear and unambiguous identification of the loco in question though I can see why your panel rule that one out ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddy water Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Nameplates are no certainty. Various diesel and electrics carried nameplates that had been swapped between locos.So if it is a preserved loco, it could carry one of many identities. There was one Deltic carrying nameplates of a scrapped sister loco! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Happy Hippo Posted October 28, 2016 RMweb Gold Share Posted October 28, 2016 If you have a nose around KGV at York, you will find the valve gear is all stamped up with the original loco number as she was built. I did post some photos on another thread some time back about this, but cannot remember where. But KGV has bits of valve gear that are either from a Star or a Castle (again can't remember the numbers) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddy water Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 The Deltic which had multiple identity was 55022 Royal Scots Grey. Which in 2015 carried the number and nameplates of 55003 Meld, 55007 Pinza and 55018 Ballynass. So which loco have you seen??!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Clearwater Posted October 28, 2016 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted October 28, 2016 The Deltic which had multiple identity was 55022 Royal Scots Grey. Which in 2015 carried the number and nameplates of 55003 Meld, 55007 Pinza and 55018 Ballynass. So which loco have you seen??!! 55022... knowing the originals were scrapped allows an absolute identification to be worked out! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted October 28, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 28, 2016 The recent trend of preserved locomotives running under the identity of scrapped classmates can create confusion for the unwary. I'm honestly not sure why it is done. You have only seen the "original" loco and cannot also claim any alter-ego it is presented as. I accept that rebuilding and the replacement of parts does muddy the waters but in general the identity stamped into the frame remains the identity of the loco concerned even if its actual running number may have been changed over the years. Step across into the world of the bus enthusiast for a moment. I have seen by number all 2760 Routemaster buses delivered to London. But the overhaul system changed the identity of most vehicles several times. As I never got into peering under staircases to check body numbers I have no way of knowing how many of the 2760 bodies I have actually seen. Rail enthusiasts are not alone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 You can only claim it if you have driven it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted October 28, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 28, 2016 You can only claim it if you have driven it Any diesels or electrics ever end up with a cab from one loco at one end and a different one at the other? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Gwiwer Posted October 28, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 28, 2016 Any diesels or electrics ever end up with a cab from one loco at one end and a different one at the other? There would have been some rebuilt accident victims ..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium keefer Posted October 28, 2016 RMweb Premium Share Posted October 28, 2016 i think the 24s and 25s were particularly subject to that - different style headcode boxes at each end being a particular identifier, as well as 2 or 3 old numbers showing through under the current one! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flood Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 The story I enjoyed was from the father of one of my friends at school. On arrival at Paddington he wanted to catch a very tight connection (possibly for a suburban service) so looked out of a door window and saw the reflection of the loco that had hauled his train in an opposite carriage window. Duly noting the reversed number he left his train and proceeded away from the lawn to cross to another platform using the footbridge. On arriving home he found out that he had not seen the loco previously. So he had definitely been hauled by a loco he had not seen (as all he had seen was the loco's reflection). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.