Is It Really Preservation?

trainlover123 · Post by **trainlover123** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 3:53 pm

Hi,

Over the previous weeks I have being pondering the question in my head; Is It really Preservation? Just Dumping engines and Rolling Stock in a Siding on a Preservation Railway, just left to rot.

My personal opinion is no. True Preservation in my, and many other's eyes is of a Railway line with restored & working engines, with all their carridges working, being restored or displayed. Unfortunately, this is not a thing you can see on most railways these days. With carridges going out from the Mainline, the Preservation World has been over run with Mk1's & Mk2's. Most of these owners have no real funds though. When the coach has been moved to the line it is thenm left in the sidings until the owner decides what to do, and sometimes that decision is to just leave it on the railway premises, and just dissappear.

What do you think? Should they be allowed to dump stock on lines without the lines deciding what to do after a few years deriliction? Or just leave it to muck-up Britain's beautiful Countryside.

MuzTrem · Post by **MuzTrem** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:22 pm

I agree the situation with vintage coaches on our preserved lines is nothing short of tragic. Too many historic vheicles are being left to rot on our railways-some even to the point of destruction. But there are a lot of complex issues behind this. Many of the coaches are owned by private individuals, who are unable to restore them but do not wish to sell them for sentimental reasons or because of a misguided beleif they can finish the work themselves. Also, many belive the cost of restoring vintage coaches is too high, though Stephen Middleton of Sateley Trains has shown that this need not be the case. Finally, Mk1s are easier to restore and fit in better with the 50's/60's image most lines are trying to re-create.
Some new generation lines are even going for Mk2s while more historic vehicles rot in the sidings for want of the money and motivation to restore them. I think this is unnacceptable. It's high time our railways got together to do something about these coaches. The rot has gone on long enough.

Hymek · Post by **Hymek** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:25 pm

Yes but dont forget most locomotives and stock that comes from the mainline need parts replacing, an overhaul of generally a good tidy up and unless you have the funds and/or the manpower sometimes it takes years to do. I'd rather see a rusting relic than a pile of scrap that once was a loco or rolling stock because at least with a rusting relic it can be restored.

trainlover123 · Post by **trainlover123** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:27 pm

Yes but remember, the longer you leave stock, the more expensive it becomes to repair

MuzTrem · Post by **MuzTrem** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:30 pm

As I say, some coaches have been left to rot so long that they are now unrestorable-wood deteriorates much quicker than metal. Yet it's the metal engines that get all the attention, while the carriages-which to Joe Public are more important as they're what they'll be sitting in for most of their time at the railway-are ignored.

trainlover123 · Post by **trainlover123** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:34 pm

I think in the case of the NLR:

Scrap the 2 spare Mk1's (Both too weak to move)
Scrap the . (All the unused stuff down Pitsford Sidings)
Scap the 28XX, give FM Rail their 31, and remove the stock from the back of Pitsford & Brampton

Then use the cash to re-build the DMU half not yet restored

johncard · Post by **johncard** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:34 pm

What do you call "preserved"? It makes me laugh how you can have a BR green class 20 which is then hired by Network Rail and is therefore "de-preserved"! All railways, operational steam locos, stock etc. aren't preserved, they can't be, wear and tear take their toll and parts have to be repaired/replaced.

If stock owners don't have the money to restore their rolling stock, then they have two options: store it or scrap it. If it's a Mk. 1 then scrapping wouldn't be an issue, let's face it, but if your talking about a 100 year old NER saloon, then wouldn't it be better to leave it on a preserved line and hope the money for restoration comes along than just scrap it and lose a potentially valuable piece of heritage?

John

trainlover123 · Post by **trainlover123** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 4:37 pm

Remember, most coaches are too far gone to be rescued if they get left for too long, the Pitsford Sidings Mk1 has lost so much, it cannot move 10 ft without danger

.

johncard · Post by **johncard** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:05 pm

Also, many belive the cost of restoring vintage coaches is too high, though Stephen Middleton of Sateley Trains has shown that this need not be the case. Finally, Mk1s are easier to restore and fit in better with the 50's/60's image most lines are trying to re-create.
Some new generation lines are even going for Mk2s while more historic vehicles rot in the sidings for want of the money and motivation to restore them. I think this is unnacceptable.

Maybe that's the big underlying problem with all these heritage railways. Mk 1s are percieved to be the easiest/cheapest or whatever to maintain, so lines are fitting their image around this. There are exceptions, the Bluebell and Isle of Wight spring to mind, but as a proportion not enough IMO. I read in Heritage Railway a while back that the NYMR was dropping Mk 1s for a more LNER/Gresley image, and I sincerely hope they succeed. One or two apple green locos to match wouldn't go amiss either. I think the Bowes railway deserves a big pat on the back as, whilst operating original NCB locos, they're also operating regular demonstration freight trains (with brake van rides AFAIK - I've never been though).

Lines that just operate an Austerity saddletank with a couple of Mk 1s for the sake of giving families a ride on a steam train are known to a friend of mine as "mickey mouse" outfits.

John

dinmore · Post by **dinmore** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:14 pm

trainlover123 wrote:I think in the case of the NLR:

Scrap the 2 spare Mk1's (Both too weak to move)
Scrap the . (All the unused stuff down Pitsford Sidings)
Scap the 28XX, give FM Rail their 31, and remove the stock from the back of Pitsford & Brampton

Is that what you call peservation

johncard · Post by **johncard** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:27 pm

trainlover123 wrote:Remember, most coaches are too far gone to be rescued if they get left for too long, the Pitsford Sidings Mk1 has lost so much, it cannot move 10 ft without danger .

Time spent on the Vintage Carriages Trust website has made me acutely aware of that

. I suppose it's just up to the assertion of the owners as to what gets saved and what doesn't when push comes to shove - the scrap value of a Mk 1 could contribute towards paying for the restoration of a 6-wheeler. Covering rolling stock with tarpaulins is probably a relatively cheap way of slowing decay, with the added benefit of making it look less unsightly.

Talking of vintage coaches, does anyone know of any surviving NER "birdcage" brake coaches? I found one on http://www.vintagecarriagestrust.org ages ago (I don't think it was marked as a birdcage though), and I'd be blowed if I can find it since!!

John

calvert · Post by **calvert** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 5:57 pm

There was an intresting peice of writing in the NRM a while ago in the diesel tent.

It was the debate about preservation.

If you restore it you often need to replace parts, and it becomes less of the original loco/ carrage/ van etc.
OR do you leave it in 100% orginal condition but you can use it only show it?

For example, Prince only has 1 orginal peice on it.
Its a balance between need/ want/ value.

In the end I suppose it is down to the owner.

johncard · Post by **johncard** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 7:10 pm

Found it! I can't have been looking very hard

http://www.vintagecarriagestrust.org/se ... sp?Ref=897

Note: 'Rarity - Unique', 'Historical Importance - Exceptionally Important'....they've somehow omitted 'Condition - Very Sad'.............

You know when carriages are too far gone to be rescued, hows about this then?!

http://www.vintagecarriagestrust.org/se ... p?Ref=3217

Surely they're taking the mickey by putting 'Degree of External Originality - Very Good'?! I wouldn't dare climb on the roof of that, never mind jump on it.

Now you know why I'm not terribly enthusiastic about Mk 1s........

John

MuzTrem · Post by **MuzTrem** » Sat Sep 10, 2005 8:16 pm

johncard wrote:If stock owners don't have the money to restore their rolling stock, then they have two options: store it or scrap it.

...or sell it to someone who does have the resources to complete it.

johncard wrote:Maybe that's the big underlying problem with all these heritage railways. Mk 1s are percieved to be the easiest/cheapest or whatever to maintain, so lines are fitting their image around this.

I think part of the problem is our old "friend" nostalgia. People remember the 60's so that's what they try to re-create. By that time many of these old coaches had been relegated to branch line or engineers work or withdrawn, so it's harder to fit them into the picture.

johncard wrote: There are exceptions, the Bluebell and Isle of Wight spring to mind, but as a proportion not enough IMO. I read in Heritage Railway a while back that the NYMR was dropping Mk 1s for a more LNER/Gresley image, and I sincerely hope they succeed. One or two apple green locos to match wouldn't go amiss either.

Agreed.

johncard wrote:I think the Bowes railway deserves a big pat on the back as, whilst operating original NCB locos, they're also operating regular demonstration freight trains (with brake van rides AFAIK - I've never been though).

Agreed also-yet narrow-minded enthusiasts ignore the Bowes because it's not BR and therefore gives them no nostalgia. They are now struggling to find volenteers despite being one of the most historically important lines in the world. That's not right!

johncard wrote:Lines that just operate an Austerity saddletank with a couple of Mk 1s for the sake of giving families a ride on a steam train are known to a friend of mine as "mickey mouse" outfits.

Call them what you like. It dosn't matter, as they won't survive for long. As those who are nostalgic about steam die, these lines will too as there simply won't be enough volenteers to keep them going. The harsh reality of the movement's future.

dinmore wrote:
trainlover123 wrote:I think in the case of the NLR:

Scrap the 2 spare Mk1's (Both too weak to move)
Scrap the . (All the unused stuff down Pitsford Sidings)
Scap the 28XX, give FM Rail their 31, and remove the stock from the back of Pitsford & Brampton
Is that what you call peservation

Hmm...

nwallace · Post by **nwallace** » Sun Sep 11, 2005 1:55 am

calvert wrote:There was an intresting peice of writing in the NRM a while ago in the diesel tent.

It was the debate about preservation.

If you restore it you often need to replace parts, and it becomes less of the original loco/ carrage/ van etc.
OR do you leave it in 100% orginal condition but you can use it only show it?

For example, Prince only has 1 orginal peice on it.
Its a balance between need/ want/ value.

In the end I suppose it is down to the owner.

Its a question that exists in Historic motorsport as well, when is your 1930 Bugatti not a 1930 Bugatti.

The fact is that if oyu have a 1930s bugatti its probably had modifications made to it every week until it stopped being raced.

But then do you ban all these from historic racing? After all its a 1930s bugatti, but its got 1950s bits.

THe only true 1930s bugattis are sitting in museums. Anything else has to have modern parts to some extent to keep going.