Why were no GWR Granges saved from scrap and preserved for the future?

[Bomag]

Think of it from a NER enthusiast's point of view.

 

To me, all GWR 4-6-0s look the same (apart from the Kings which had a funny bogie) yet there are scores preserved.

 

How come no NER 4-6-0s were preserved?

 

Ian

 

 

What a revelation, I though that they were all the same !

[royaloak]

IThe Granges all are still in working order and are hidden in my and the Stationmasters respective compost heaps.

Sounds like a load of bullsh*t to me!

[Guest Belgian]

Sadly I came back to modelling AFTER all the Hornby Granges had left the shelves. I do hope they have a re-run... that includes a late BR example... maybe weathered.

Sadly, they've all been scrapped. The only way to get one is to scratchbuild one.

[Coach bogie]

Not every modeller has the confidence to rename a model.

 

And if the modeller never tries, then he/she never will develop skills and confidence. Even Bachmann, in a recent Railway Modeller coment page suggested that modellers should not expect manufacturers to produce every individual engine they want and a rename/renumber should not be beyond the average modellers ability.

 

A couple of years back a local modeller cold called and asked me to renumber a Bachmann class 47 as he did not think they would ever produce the engine he wanted and he had been told I had the skills required. As expected he told me he could never do that himself. He was very embarrased by my 12 year old son who altered one side for him. He then tried the opposite side himself without any problems, exclaiming he didn't realise how easy it was - the same chap who thirty minutes earlier claimed 'could never do that'.

 

In my second career as a teacher I spend my working life interacting with students who argue endlessly they can't do something without ever trying, who then surprise themselves when they produce a result by actually attempting the task. More confidence boosting than teaching.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Coach bogie]

Sadly I came back to modelling AFTER all the Hornby Granges had left the shelves. I do hope they have a re-run... that includes a late BR example... maybe weathered.

 

Several on Feabay at the moment, incluing a weathered example.

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/Trains-Railway-Models-/479/i.html?_sop=1&_mdo=Collectables&_dmd=1&_armrs=1&_pcats=1&_nkw=Hornby+grange&_nkwusc=Hornby+Garange&_rdc=1

 

Mike Wiltshire

[BRealistic]

Just looked at the Hornby website and there was indeed to be a Grange in 2012... (late BR and 'heavily' weathered, just as I want!)... so I'll be doing as Mike the Stationmaster suggested... and keeping my fingers crossed that it will re-appear later next year. No particuler rush... My funds are already stretched getting a 'Western' and '72xx'!!

[Bomag]

And if the modeller never tries, then he/she never will develop skills and confidence. Even Bachmann, in a recent Railway Modeller coment page suggested that modellers should not expect manufacturers to produce every individual engine they want and a rename/renumber should not be beyond the average modellers ability.

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

On a purely mathematical basis and that in normal discussion this is the mean, if an average modeller is able to renumber a loco then up to half of all modellers, by definition, will not be able to do so satisfactorily. If I want a specific loco which is not produced I get it done professionally - I can spend the time more enjoyably running trains then renumbering them myself.

[BRealistic]

Purely out of curiosity, Bomag, what charges do the professionals make to renumber/rename?

[Pacific231G]

On a purely mathematical basis and that in normal discussion this is the mean, if an average modeller is able to renumber a loco then up to half of all modellers, by definition, will not be able to do so satisfactorily. If I want a specific loco which is not produced I get it done professionally - I can spend the time more enjoyably running trains then renumbering them myself.

I'd question your maths because you're assuming that that the average level of modellers' abilities is defined by the point below which renumbering a loco would be beyond them. If half of all modellers fell below that point then you're probably looking at the median rather than the mean. You'd also have to put a mathematical score on modelling ability from someone who can't join two pieces of setrack together at the bottom to say the Gravetts or Nevards at the top. If you did that it is to be hoped that the ability to change a loco number would come at a fairly low point on the scale so far more modellers would be able to tackle the job than not.

 

It would probably have been better if Bachman had said that it should not be beyond most modellers' skills.

 

It's useful to understand the difference between mean and median as it's one of politicians' favourite ways of deceiving us. For example, if the economy rose by twenty percent in real terms in a ten year period but all the extra income went to the top ten percent of earners, then "we're all better off under ....." is a lie as most people's incomes would not have risen at all and the median income would have stayed the same.

[Coach bogie]

If I want a specific loco which is not produced I get it done professionally - I can spend the time more enjoyably running trains then renumbering them myself.

 

That is more proactive than some modellers, as you have done something about solving the challenge to get the engine you want. It is the repeated demands of a manufacturer to produce a specific model to suit a personal want, which is where I interpret the 'comment' page, and to which I was offering an alternative solution.

 

I would rather be running trains than working on them, but unfortunately, finances do not allow me to pay others, though more than once I have traded skills by working on a project for one modeller who in return works on a project for me, especially when it involves producing multiple models at the same time to speed things up. At £200 for a fully lined paint job, I am doing it myself, even if the finish is not as good as the pros. £600 to have a coach assemble and painted. Reason enough to learn how to solder.

 

It is your money and time and choice. Personally I would not pay someone else to do something, unless I had attempted the task first to determine if I had any chance of succeeding.

 

 

To BRealistaic. If you do not want to wait and see what Hornby produce next year late BR green weathered Grange available here

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Hornby-MODEL-RAILWAYS-EX-GWR-GRANGE-CLASS-LOCO-DCC-READY-MINT-BOXED-/140893523088?pt=UK_Trains_Railway_Models&hash=item20cde88c90

 

Mike Wiltshire

[BRealistic]

 

To BRealistaic. If you do not want to wait and see what Hornby produce next year late BR green weathered Grange available here

 

http://www.ebay.co.u...=item20cde88c90

 

Mike Wiltshire

 

Thanks for that Mike, although it does look to be as good as sold. I will be waiting and hoping, though, as I've just about hit my 'financial ceiling' at the mo after ordering the Western and 72xx... so a later in 2013 intro by Hornby would be fine by me!

[Pacific231G]

Think of it from a NER enthusiast's point of view.

 

To me, all GWR 4-6-0s look the same (apart from the Kings which had a funny bogie) yet there are scores preserved.

 

How come no NER 4-6-0s were preserved?

 

Ian

 

 

Because there weren't enough NE enthusiasts prepared to make the commitment of time and money that enough GW enthusiasts were able to make to preserve examples of their favourite railway's locos? That's probably a bit harsh and another reason could be that more Swindon built locos fetched up at Woodhams and so avoided Gertie the gas cutter long enough for the preservation movement to get into its stride.

 

In this country we're actually rather spoiled for preserved main line steam locos (though it probably doesn't seem like that if no examples of your favourite class survived). In other countries where railways and railway preservation are fairly popular there seem to be but a handful of main line locos in service despite the fact that steam often survived for five to ten years longer than here. There was for example huge excitement in France last year when AJECTA managed to get seven main line locos and a works shunter in steam (four of them tender locos I think) for a centenary, yet the Watercress line alone had as many at both of their galas.

[pH]

How come no NER 4-6-0s were preserved?

 

Because there weren't enough NE enthusiasts prepared to make the commitment of time and money that enough GW enthusiasts were able to make to preserve examples of their favourite railway's locos? That's probably a bit harsh ...

 

Very harsh IMHO. The last NER 4-6-0 was withdrawn in July 1964. By then, the private preservation movement (as distinct from the National Collection) had hardly begun. It was a new concept - let's buy a full-size steam engine and ... and ... and what? I can only think of 60103 and 46201 privately preserved before then (though I'm sure there must have been a few others). In general, early private preservation seemed to be of the very small (you could find somewhere to keep those) or big, shiny, green and named. Medium size, black, scruffy and regional didn't really cut it and there were still plenty of those left anyway, weren't there? (That's a 'sarcastic' smiley, by the way!)

 

... and another reason could be that more Swindon built locos fetched up at Woodhams and so avoided Gertie the gas cutter long enough for the preservation movement to get into its stride.

 

Again IMHO - that is the overriding reason there are so many GWR and Southern engines in preservation compared with LNER. Once BR steam was gone, that was the only collection of locomotives available to be preserved. With Woodham's not cutting, there was time to get organised and collect money over time to buy something from there.

 

I don't know what the price was for some of the later departures from Barry, but scrap prices for locos from BR were pretty steep. 46201 cost 2160 GBP in 1962. To put that in perspective - in 1968, the 'standard' starting salary to be expected for a university graduate was still under 1000 GBP. Assuming some inflation from 1962 to 1968, 46201 cost approximately 3 times a new graduate's salary. That's a lump to find/organise to collect in a hurry, when the engine you want to buy is going to be cut in a matter of weeks - plus there are so many other excellent candidates for preservation in similar circumstances.

[clecklewyke]

Again IMHO - that is the overriding reason there are so many GWR and Southern engines in preservation compared with LNER. Once BR steam was gone, that was the only collection of locomotives available to be preserved. With Woodham's not cutting, there was time to get organised and collect money over time to buy something from there.

 

I think that is right with regard to "private" preservation. Moreover, BR's concept of a national collection of steam locos was that they should be representative, significant and essentially in original condition, and the NER 4-6-0s which were extant at the end of steam failed those tests. The B13s, B14s and B15s had gone by the time large-scale preservation started: the original B16s were not seen as a significant design and the B16/3s, which were all that were left in the 1960s, were definitely NOT in original condition. I was always puzzled that BR scrapped the Hull K3s and replaced them by B16/3s, which seemed to the schoolboy me to be an antedeluvian, hotch-potch design compared my beloved K3s and B1s.

 

Ironically, some of the earliest preserved locos were NER - "Aerolite" etc in the old York museum, which were saved for posterity by the LNER.

 

Ian

[Guest Belgian]

Very harsh IMHO. The last NER 4-6-0 was withdrawn in July 1964. By then, the private preservation movement (as distinct from the National Collection) had hardly begun. It was a new concept - let's buy a full-size steam engine and ... and ... and what? I can only think of 60103 and 46201 privately preserved before then (though I'm sure there must have been a few others). In general, early private preservation seemed to be of the very small

Curiously, the first privately-preserved standard gauge locomotive was an LNER one, the ex-GNR J13 (LNER J52) saddle tank no. 1247 (later 8846/68846) which was purchased in 1959 by Captain Bill Smith and donated to the NRM in 1980.

 

Although I have shortened the quote, I wholeheartedly agree with the original post by pH.

 

JE

[Coldgunner]

 

I think that is right with regard to "private" preservation. Moreover, BR's concept of a national collection of steam locos was that they should be representative, significant and essentially in original condition, and the NER 4-6-9s which were extant at the end of steam failed those tests. The B13s, B14s and B15s had gone by the time large-scale preservation started: the original B16s were not seen as a significant design and the B16/3s, which were all that were left in the 1960s, were definitely NOT in original condition. I was always puzzled that BR scrapped the Hull K3s and replaced them by B16/3s, which seemed to the schoolboy me to be an antedeluvian, hotch-potch design compared my beloved K3s and B1s.

 

Ironically, some of the earliest preserved locos were NER - "Aerolite" etc in the old York museum, which were saved for posterity by the LNER.

 

Ian

 

Especially interesting as its the GNR/LNER museum that is now the national collection. In my eyes an ideal candidate for preservation was 2750 Papyrus (fastest non streamliner). Hell, the LNER once were custodians of City of Truro.

[Craigw]

The Ian Allan publication "The heyday of Tyesely and its locomotives" notes that Pat Whitehouse declined to buy 6853 Morehampton Grange for 1200 GBP when it was found to have a cracked steam manifold. The closing remark in the caption is "we have kicked ourselves ever since"..

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

[Pacific231G]

Our school railway society's longest shed bashing trip was to Darlington (from Oxford) just before steam ended there. Though travelling at 100MPH behind a Deltic was exciting and the spotters were happy because they got lots of numbers I found it really sad to see the lines of Eastern and standard locos which must have included a good few 4-6-0s. I wonder though whether the fame and glamour surrounding the Gresley Pacifics might perhaps have left other eastern locos a bit overshadowed?

 

I totally agree that Woodhams was an incredible bonus to GW loco preservation but my recollection from the 1960s was that a particularly strong and well supported desire to preserve the GWR as a whole, not just particular locos, did kick in ahead of that for other railways and maybe that also led to a wider range of locos being saved. I worked on the Dart Valley in 1968/69 and losing Ashburton (curse the A38!!) seems more important than not having a Grange and I'm still as thrilled to see a working pannier tank as a King.

[Bulleidnutter]

On the Grange side of this topic, Luck of the draw. Woodham quickly realised the money he could make by NOT cutting up locos and selling them to preservationists.

On that front, we have 61264. For some unknown reason was at Barry and was saved. No granges made it to Barry Island and were cut up at scrap yards tht were having locos arrive and being cut up still attached to each other. Cashmores & Great Bridge are perfect examples.

 

Speak to any of the old guard on preserved railways. They will testify how hard it was to raise the money needed. An example is Mr F Cronin on the SVR. he was offered a virtually brand new 82xxx but couldnt raise the money for the loco, he managed to buy 47383 instead.

 

If people want a Grange running again, Hands in pockets aree needed ( I have no connection with the 6880 group ).

[kevinlms]

On the Grange side of this topic, Luck of the draw. Woodham quickly realised the money he could make by NOT cutting up locos and selling them to preservationists.

 

I was under the impression that originally Woodhams didn't intend to not cut up steam locos, it just happened that way. His yard was busy cutting up wagons & so the locos got left.

 

Later, preservationists started asking for spare parts, which he sold to them. Realising that he was on to something and that locos with key parts missing were worthless, he changed the 'rules' of his business so preservationists could only buy complete locomotives, well as complete as they were after years of salt air.

[The Stationmaster]

I was under the impression that originally Woodhams didn't intend to not cut up steam locos, it just happened that way. His yard was busy cutting up wagons & so the locos got left.

 

Exactly so - he was reported as saying that some years back in a magazine interview, there were plenty of scrap wagons coming onto the market and they were easy and cheap to cut up quickly and get a return so the more difficult to deal with steam engines were left on one side.

[LMS2968]

Exactly so - he was reported as saying that some years back in a magazine interview, there were plenty of scrap wagons coming onto the market and they were easy and cheap to cut up quickly and get a return so the more difficult to deal with steam engines were left on one side.

 

That's exactly it. There were 'rules' - within the purchase contracts, but they were imposed by BR: the engines sold to private scrap merchants HAD to be broken up and were not to be resold. I recall some legal wranglings over this issue before the sales could go ahead.

 

Dai woodham was in the scrap business; he wasn't a railway enthusiast. He wanted a return on his investment in buying the engines, and in the long term this was higher from enthusiasts purchasing the engines rather than breaking them up. In the short term, he got a higher return from the scrapping of wagons. This isn't a negative comment on Dai; whatever the reason, he did railway preservation a massive service.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

Especially interesting as its the GNR/LNER museum that is now the national collection. In my eyes an ideal candidate for preservation was 2750 Papyrus (fastest non streamliner). Hell, the LNER once were custodians of City of Truro.

Actually the NER was the preservation champion (York is their in territory), the conciousness of the Stephenson inheritance as the cradle of the railways responsible for much of this. That's how we have the Stephenson long boiler and Tennant types today. The GNR had retained the Stirling single. The LNER board took up this theme, accomodated Truro (which Swindon would have broken up) and the Stroudley 0-4-2 if I remember rightly. Probably would have accomodated the 'set aside' Midland engines which an ex-Swindon man directed be cut up on joining the LMS. The obvious pacific to preserve would have been Great Northern, alongside the Stirling and Ivatt types to demonstrate the optimal line of UK express loco development.

[EddieB]

Actually the NER was the preservation champion (York is their in territory), the conciousness of the Stephenson inheritance as the cradle of the railways responsible for much of this. That's how we have the Stephenson long boiler and Tennant types today. The GNR had retained the Stirling single. The LNER board took up this theme, accomodated Truro (which Swindon would have broken up) and the Stroudley 0-4-2 if I remember rightly. Probably would have accomodated the 'set aside' Midland engines which an ex-Swindon man directed be cut up on joining the LMS. The obvious pacific to preserve would have been Great Northern, alongside the Stirling and Ivatt types to demonstrate the optimal line of UK express loco development.

 

Except that Great Northern had been rebuilt by Thompson, a sacrilege in many peoples' eyes.

[Richard E]

Only 25 standard gauge GWR engines went from main line use into preservation with all the other 3 up into the 40's

Where have the other 123 'preserved' standard gauge GWR locomotives come from? I can find a list of 148 in total some of which are from absorbed companies admittedly.

 

There are 38 Kings, Halls and Manors in total for instance.