Ownership of LSWR T3 no. 563 transfered to Swanage Railway

[dibber25]

how many steam loco in the U.K. are in existence today with 100% original parts, as built ?.. even tornados got bits from multiple locos including a class 86 ! I bet when they look at the T3 they will find some parts ex -BR on it, needed to move it around the country in the 1950's.

 

They are all triggers broom.

No one has suggested scrapping any parts removed so nothing need be destroyed.

, indeed restoring to operational is anything but destroyed..unless they were sticking a Diesel engine in it.

Yes, but that's the difference between a museum-piece and a working locomotive. At present it's a museum artefact, of if not original parts, certainly ancient parts, assembled and painted by the craftsmen of Eastleigh. Put it into working order and you'll have a 21st century replica of a 19th century engine. Preserved railways need working locomotives to earn their keep so there will always be better, newer, more useful engines lined up awaiting repairs and getting priority in the workshop. Mac chose the T3 from a group of several because it was the most original. It was retubed and an Adams chimney was fabricated for it. It was then driven at reduced pressure and low speed to the Waterloo event because, in 1948 it was already in a very delicate state. I've seen it move - twice - at King's Cross and in Toronto and I'll admit that I thought at the time it would be lovely to see it working again. Those big wheels and that elegant gait are certainly attractive in motion, but heads need to rule hearts. It's a beautiful museum piece - not original but in 1948 renovated condition. First and foremost it needs a proper, warm, dry home, then we can argue for years over what happens to it, while someone raises the money. (CJL)

[Steamport Southport]

I was just as interested in the fate of the NSR New L as the LSWR T3. I still believe that both should still be in the National Collection, the same as many of the other items that have been disposed of. I was even more dismayed at the disposal of the LMS 502 which is even more important historically than most of the pretty steam locomotives. IMO.

 

I personally have no axe to grind with The Swanage Railway or any other society. But I still think that it should have been loaned rather than given away. I also have no problem with the good people at the NRM, just the bean counters.

 

But there is nothing we can do about it now, I just hope that the people in charge know that some of us weren't entirely happy with the outcome, and that they are now going to be a bit more transparent about any future deals.

 

 

As for running elderly locomotives. I think it depends on whether by running that locomotive are you likely to damage the main "fabric" of the item? Most running locomotives including the Terriers have been in steam since being withdrawn. Many have even received new boilers and other major parts.

 

Would it be worth restoring Boxhill to steam? No. There are eight others capable of steaming.

 

Should Coppernob steam again. No. They've got FR No. 20, which was restored from a derelict condition.

 

Should LMS 5000 steam again? Why not? It's steamed since withdrawal. Same goes for the Q1 and others. Even Lion should steam again as much of it was replaced when it was rebuilt in the first place.

 

As for Victorian and Edwardian locomotives steaming in general. Isn't that the point of new builds? There are at least half a dozen credible projects building Pre Grouping locomotives from LBSCR Atlantics to NER G5s to LNWR George The Fifths. Add in projects such as Betton Grange, The Unknown Warrior, County Of Glamorgan and 4709,  I seriously believe that's the future for heritage railway motive power.

 

 

Jason

[Red Fox]

The T3 seen today at Corfe Castle in the delightful summer weather....

 

 

[4630]

The T3 seen today at Corfe Castle in the delightful summer weather....

 

 

 

 

 

I really hope that that's a replica number plate on the cab side of the T3.

 

Either way, I hope that the Swanage Railway has effective measures to keep thieves and vandals away.

[Dava]

The current 'Steam Railway' [No 470, p10] reports that No. 562 had a net income of GBP239,000 from its performances of 'the Railway Children' in Toronto [which made a net loss] and Kings Cross [which made the profit] between 2011-17. All of this has funded other projects at the NRM but none was spent on conservation of the T3, which the NRM notes has suffered from the paint deterioration we see in the recent photos. The NRM confirms 'it requires conservation and restoration to bring it back to display standard which the Swanage Railway is willing to do'.

 

So the NRM was quite happy to receive the revenue from the performances but did not choose to spend anything on its conservation and chose to pass it on to the Swanage Railway instead, in the condition we now see. Some would not see this as responsible curation and stewardship of the collection. Any comment, Mr Handel? Nothing in the report about restoration to working order, which I maintain is for the fantasists, despite their protests on here.

 

Dava

[dibber25]

Since 'The Green Dragon' is a fictional engine, and the public don't care as long it has a chimney and makes smoke, The NRM could have used any engine for the 'The Railway Children'.. next year it could use 70013 Oliver Cromwell if it wishes as this will be out of ticket, Indeed are the shows organisers even bound to use the NRM if they don't want ?

 

its great the NRM raised so much from renting it out, probably more was raised in the few years it was doing shows, than was raised from some overhauled locos. If the show runs again (and I hope it does some day), they can pick another out of the collection... if not 70013, then 6000 or 3717.. that'll set fire's burning to some enthusiasts armchairs !!!

Other unknown green engines include 910, 1275, 1463, 1621, 1247, 990 all of which are LNER and more appropriate to the region of the story and arguably won't be missed from the museum for a period.

 

There's no tied debt to the T3 nor tie to the Railway Children, but given it's use for the Theatre, is sign enough that it was on the periphery of the collection as I doubt any one missed it at York, or went specifically to the theatre to see this loco.

 

Why should they spend the money they raise on the T3 ?, if they were already planning it's disposal ?, far better to put the money into running the museum, or perhaps paying down the costs of the Flying Money Pit which has sapped the nations financies and put paid to any chance of seeing locos like 46229, 2500, 3717, 4771, 6000 being restored for years.

 

I'm surprised the NRM stopped at 3 loco's, theres oodles of 4-4-0's in the collection, and very few in the wider movement, a Star, Castle and a King seems to be overkill but there are some gaps in the collection which maybe could be filled some day.. a Jubilee, 8F, S160, Large Prairie, 72xx 2-8-2T,  would all be worthy as would a Barry wreck (92219 would be my thought). When it comes to diesels a 31 and a 37 seem to tell the same (and not a very big) story, yet no example from one of Classes 24/5/6/7 ?

 

Museums need to clear house every now and again, just because some lines didn't benefit from the windfall shouldnt mean everyone gets a knife into the ones that did.

The public might not care but it was actually the theatre company that selected the locomotive, because of its Edwardian appearance, so Oliver Cromwell and KGV would not have been appropriate and would be too large. Presumably the same 'use it and throw it out' philosophy also applies to GNR No. 1?  It was used when the show was at Waterloo and, initially when the show was first put on at the NRM (there was a link between the NRM and the York Theatre Company's production). The T3 was certainly one of the things which attracted me to go and see the show for a second time, having seen it first at Waterloo with the single. You are clearly not a fan of the T3. Fair enough. Some of us are. I knew the man who selected it for preservation, so I have a particular interest. In view of the profit that was made, it doesn't seem unreasonable that a few thousand might have been spent on cosmetic restoration of an engine that's actually earned its keep. And the restoration cost of 563 has now been passed on to the Swanage Railway. It might last longer, stored in the open, if it had received a fresh coat of paint.  (CJL)

Edited August 10, 2017 by dibber25

[mvrnut]

Since 'The Green Dragon' is a fictional engine, and the public don't care as long it has a chimney and makes smoke, The NRM could have used any engine for the 'The Railway Children'.. next year it could use 70013 Oliver Cromwell if it wishes as this will be out of ticket, Indeed are the shows organisers even bound to use the NRM if they don't want ?

 

its great the NRM raised so much from renting it out, probably more was raised in the few years it was doing shows, than was raised from some overhauled locos. If the show runs again (and I hope it does some day), they can pick another out of the collection... if not 70013, then 6000 or 3717.. that'll set fire's burning to some enthusiasts armchairs !!!

Other unknown green engines include 910, 1275, 1463, 1621, 1247, 990 all of which are LNER and more appropriate to the region of the story and arguably won't be missed from the museum for a period.

 

There's no tied debt to the T3 nor tie to the Railway Children, but given it's use for the Theatre, is sign enough that it was on the periphery of the collection as I doubt any one missed it at York, or went specifically to the theatre to see this loco.

 

Why should they spend the money they raise on the T3 ?, if they were already planning it's disposal ?, far better to put the money into running the museum, or perhaps paying down the costs of the Flying Money Pit which has sapped the nations financies and put paid to any chance of seeing locos like 46229, 2500, 3717, 4771, 6000 being restored for years.

 

I'm surprised the NRM stopped at 3 loco's, theres oodles of 4-4-0's in the collection, and very few in the wider movement, a Star, Castle and a King seems to be overkill but there are some gaps in the collection which maybe could be filled some day.. a Jubilee, 8F, S160, Large Prairie, 72xx 2-8-2T,  would all be worthy as would a Barry wreck (92219 would be my thought). When it comes to diesels a 31 and a 37 seem to tell the same (and not a very big) story, yet no example from one of Classes 24/5/6/7 ?

 

Museums need to clear house every now and again, just because some lines didn't benefit from the windfall shouldnt mean everyone gets a knife into the ones t

 

The public might not care but it was actually the theatre company that selected the locomotive, because of its Edwardian appearance, so Oliver Cromwell and KGV would not have been appropriate and would be too large. Presumably the same 'use it and throw it out' philosophy also applies to GNR No. 1?  It was used when the show was at Waterloo and, initially when the show was first put on at the NRM (there was a link between the NRM and the York Theatre Company's production). The T3 was certainly one of the things which attracted me to go and see the show for a second time, having seen it first at Waterloo with the single. You are clearly not a fan of the T3. Fair enough. Some of us are. I knew the man who selected it for preservation, so I have a particular interest. In view of the profit that was made, it doesn't seem unreasonable that a few thousand might have been spent on cosmetic restoration of an engine that's actually earned its keep. And the restoration cost of 563 has now been passed on to the Swanage Railway. It might last longer, stored in the open, if it had received a fresh coat of paint.  (CJL)

 

I am unashamedly a fan of the T3. I specifically made a five hour trip to Toronto to see this locomotive when it was over here for The Railway Children. Through the kindness of those that volunteer at the Roundhouse Museum I was allowed to get up close to the T3 and even onto the footplate. Took many nice photos of her.

   I certainly hope that she will get restored , either cosmetically or to running order, As long as she is preserved for posterity,

   Cheers,

    Chris

[Christopher125]

That's not in line with a modern museum though.

 

A modern museum like Glasgow's Riverside . A collection of cars that are attached to the wall at various heights..........so you cant actually see them .   Trendy though!  Do you ever think the lunatics are in charge of the asylum?  Where did we go wrong?

 

...or an imaginative way to display items which might otherwise have been out of the public eye entirely. It would be great if museums could have everything on display in an ideal setting but that's rarely possible, so better on a wall where they can at least be appreciated from a distance than in storage where they can't IMHO.

Edited August 11, 2017 by Christopher125

[bike2steam]

)I'm being pragmatic, rather than sentimental.

 

1. The T3 is in no danger of being scrapped, now or in the future.

2. For example How is 1621 massively "unedwardian" than the T3 ? - why couldn't this be used in future ?

3. What's preventing the T3 being hired by Swanage for the theatre in future ?

 

It all sounds sour grapes.

 

The NRM doesn't want it and has donated to a railway that does.

I would love to see it steam, its chances of being steamed are higher at Swanage, than York, even if it means it will be expensive and take time. Even if it doesn't steam, it's still not at risk, had it remained at the NRM in the future it may face an even bigger risk..

 

In the wider movement, many more post 1923 locos face a very uncertain future, especially the larger ones. It is an elephant in the room ignored by most groups, and most likely could see them dumped on the railways that run them today, but if in the future there's 50% less volunteers, with 50% less skills, the lines themselves will need to be very commercial to run.. that means unique selling points to bring revenue, and /or low cost bases to afford to run. The T3 is a very unique USP. A Bullied Pacific is not.

 

Swanage today might justify 5 bulleids on a 10mile line, but the future might be very different, Deaccessioning the T3 today may be beneficial to both parties, planning future strategies.

 

Many years ago my late father took me to Lostock Junction signal box, specifically to photograph a black 5. I questioned him why, he said... because in 20 years the Black 5 will still be here, but the signal box will not... I couldn't get my head round that, at the time.... it didn't make any sense... but 20 years later he was right.

 

Railways in the future may face the same choices the National Trust has had to face with too many too large country houses to maintain... the NRM is simply ahead of that curve, because later they need to assume a greater role, who knows the NRM or maybe the NT may some day assume control of some lines too, that may bring some very harsh decisions in the future, and lines over flowing with non working Bulleids and Black 5s may not at that point be in a position to pick up and take on locos like the T3, let alone do anything with it... that may be when it's then lost.

 

There may come a day that the only loco the Swanage can afford to run, and the one that sells the line is the T3, and all the Bulleids are in a 1960's style shed with 3D holograms, Virtual Reality displays and cosmetic smoke harking back of the days when they had the right skills and enough money to run them for real.

Am I off base.. well it's happening overseas already... this Japanese D51 is now the 2nd to be converted to run off compressed air...

http://the-japan-news.com/news/article/0003854774

The museum in Tokyo has a fantastic footplate simulator, with working controls that respond with noise, video, smoke and the footplate itself vibrates wildly if you open the regulator too far and let it slip, but, nothing in the museum is operational.

 

By all means be sentimental, that's why it's a hobby, but In short I think people are worrying about the wrong thing, we can turn the clock back to the 1950's but it won't stop the clock ticking.

Makes interesting reading, but I hope you're not under any impression that Swanage Railway actally owns 5 (or any) Bulleid Pacifics.

Edited August 12, 2017 by bike2steam

[Sir Hadyn]

I'm back from holiday and my kettle goes on tomorrow for anyone wanting a chat.

 

Dava, the financial side of the Toronto operation wasn't anything I had any dealings with at that time.

 

And by the way, part of my holiday was spent firing steam locos in case anyone doubts my interest or enthusiasm for railways.

[PhilH]

From an above post...'The NRM doesn't want it and has donated to a railway that does '

 

As I asked in a previous (unanswered) post were other railways given a chance to put a case for becoming custodians of this loco, or were the Swanage railway simply picked for the job? And if so, why?

Edited August 14, 2017 by PhilH

[bike2steam]

 

As I asked in a previous (unanswered) post were other railways given a chance to put a case for becoming custodians of this loco, or were the Swanage railway simply picked for the job? And if so, why?

A good question, that a few of us would like to know the answer too, although the reasons may be obvious ( more of a tourist area, beach, Purbeck, Corfe, Dorset in general, etc).

[Sir Hadyn]

A good question, that a few of us would like to know the answer too, although the reasons may be obvious ( more of a tourist area, beach, Purbeck, Corfe, Dorset in general, etc).

Right engine, right place historically.

[bike2steam]

Right engine, right place historically.

Yeah thanks, but it's good to know as I think what PhilH was 'angling after' was the Mid- Hants could also have a claim ( L&SWR) although the T3's hauled the first generation of holiday trains to Swanage.

[PhilH]

Yeah thanks, but it's good to know as I think what PhilH was 'angling after' was the Mid- Hants could also have a claim ( L&SWR) although the T3's hauled the first generation of holiday trains to Swanage.

 

 

Not really, we would be in much the same position as Swanage with regards to finding somewhere to put it. It was more, as I said, the process of transferring it. I think at least it should be open and transparent and not announced as a done deal.

 

Btw these are my views and mine alone, they are not views that have been expressed or held by the MHR.

Edited August 14, 2017 by PhilH

[Sir Hadyn]

Hello Phil

 

The NRM disposal procedure (developed since 1913) and outlined in the blogs above allowed the museum to approach venues directly which were felt appropriate, this was done with a number of the disposals in the same suite as the T3 - such as the GWR 5 plank wagon - to Welshpool. If a direct home is not available, then the object would be offered on the open Museums Association disposals website, via the NRM's own website and in other locations such as the HRA publications.

 

Whilst the NRM has followed process, it is evident that people want more clarity about the museum's intentions and if there are future disposals, this will be given in advance.

[PhilH]

Hello Phil

 

The NRM disposal procedure (developed since 1913) and outlined in the blogs above allowed the museum to approach venues directly which were felt appropriate, this was done with a number of the disposals in the same suite as the T3 - such as the GWR 5 plank wagon - to Welshpool. If a direct home is not available, then the object would be offered on the open Museums Association disposals website, via the NRM's own website and in other locations such as the HRA publications.

 

Whilst the NRM has followed process, it is evident that people want more clarity about the museum's intentions and if there are future disposals, this will be given in advance.

 

 

Thank you for that, good to know that the museum's procedures are not necessarily set in stone.

[bike2steam]

Btw these are my views and mine alone, they are not views that have been expressed or held by the MHR.

Sorry Phil, no offence meant, but I was just saying as you are ( or have been) heavily involved with the MHR.

[woodenhead]

And by the way, part of my holiday was spent firing steam locos in case anyone doubts my interest or enthusiasm for railways.

Can't resist, I am sorry:

"T3, You're fired"

"2818, You're fired"

 

"Mallard, you need to be pulling in more clients or you're fired too"

 

"Flying Scotsman, sir, oil bath, massage"

 

 

 

Edit: jesters added

Edited August 14, 2017 by woodenhead

[woodenhead]

Interesting question, is the NRM the last line in guardianship of all the preserved items currently in private hands?

 

I would say not, it can't handle what it has through it's funding so it is not going to be able to buy up and maintain all these engines and stock scattered across the country.

 

Stately homes and land has a home in the National Trust, perhaps something similar is required for railways but how do you decide what to save and when these locomotives cease to be operable what then?

[PhilH]

Sorry Phil, no offence meant, but I was just saying as you are ( or have been) heavily involved with the MHR.

 

 

Don't be daft..absolutely none taken!

[eastglosmog]

I was looking at the NRM website today. As a matter of interest, when is 563 going to be taken off of the "Our Collection" part of their website?  Can't imagine someone going up to Shildon to see it being all that happy at finding they have to go down to Corfe Castle instead!

[Ian J.]

I was chatting with one of the guards on the Bluebell today, and he mentioned that visitor numbers are down a bit this year, and they're struggling to find volunteers fit and skilled enough for the various tasks on the line. Seems that having too many locos and not enough owners might be compounding the problems of private heritage lines.

[brack]

in 2017 the NRM has already made 3 spaces.

or alternatively, put 3 locos at risk. Which is the issue I personally feel is the biggest one. Private owners or lines are more likely to fail in future. At some point in time it is likely that lines will close, descendants will have no interest and locos will be lost. In many respects the golden era is now - many enthusiasts are retired, have spare income, can give large bequests to favourite projects in their will etc. Hence new builds, lines like the lynton & Barnstaple, the welsh highland and even the southwold being resurrected, the GCR bridging the gap and other great achievements.

Looking at the enthusiast demographic it seems that this will contract in future. I know that this sounds very doom and gloom, but there must come a time when nobody will remember working steam and people may question why we have all these lumps of iron, steel and copper to be kept around the place.

At that point in time you'd worry about the future of locos. Firstly those privately owned or on smaller (more marginal) heritage sites/lines, then those on larger lines would be at risk, particularly anything not easily maintained or able to earn it's keep economically. I'd hope that our national collection would be the safest of refuges, therefore deaccessioning historic, unique locos and transferring ownership to private trusts, companies or individuals will put the future of those locos at a much higher risk, perhaps less of being scrapped, but certainly of being acquired by a wealthy private collector and disappearing from public display for half a century (look at the rampton collection, Cecil Raikes or the Isle of Man's thornhill), or being acquired by less wealthy eccentric collectors who might dismantle them, put the pieces all over several barns and sheds, then pass on and nobody will ever find all the bits (I believe there are a few in this sort of state already).

I know there is some sort of agreement that the NRM get first refusal should the recipient of the gift decide to dispose of it, but if someone at the NRM has decided now that something isn't worth saving, I wouldn't hold my breath about them making the right decision at such a future time. Hence I'd be fine with a 25 year loan with an agreement in place that restoration is acceptable/preferable or something similar, but cannot agree with the decision to pass over ownership.

[Froxfield2012]

As one who remembers the Bluebell's beginning and the excitement of enthusiasts actually running a standard gauge railway, it has been a remarkable story over the last fifty plus years as the heritage movement has expanded.  However, as I visit various places I do find myself wondering about the viability of many of them in the long run:  it would be wrong to provide a shortlist here!  I am sure that consolidation will eventually be required.  I am guessing that the financial and other demands of the narrow gauge will ensure that more of those are able to survive.  I might hypothesise that a truly viable tourist attraction link and main line connection will be vital.  But I am not putting myself forward as a candidate for authorship of the Beeching Report on the Heritage Railway industry.  All things change and the preservation of the railway heritage will be no different.  Maybe everyone will need to manufacture themselves a Thomas in order to survive:  but how many Thomas days will the market stand?