Re: Volunteers restore Brighton Belle


"Chris Tolley" <cj.tolley@xxxxxxxxxxx (ukonline really)> wrote in message news:107ztpji125cd$.2eslo4j6p5rv$.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
simon wrote:

"Chris Tolley" <cj.tolley@xxxxxxxxxxx (ukonline really)> wrote in message
news:pubicljsvr9v.y90dws44v6lg.dlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
.......snip

As a Tornado skeptic, I would certainly warm to such a suggestion. The
difference, ISTM, is that if done properly, a restored/recreated
multi-coach emu train would allow people to experience the former
ambience of travel, whereas when even diehard fans own up to it, there
really isn't much of a difference between sitting in a Mk1 coach behind
an A4 and sitting in a Mk1 coach behind an ersatz-A1, or (have your
heart pills at the ready) a Castle, Princess or a Merchant Navy.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683715.html
(55021 (Class 121) at Reading, Jul 1985)

Have you no feelings, its the complete experience. See/hear/smell the
beautiful engine steeped in history coming in and stopping. Get on
knowing that beast will be pulling the train. Sit/stand/be anywhere,
hear it pounding away, see/smell the steam passing, look out the
window and see the loco at the front round suitable curve. Oh the
joy. Dont know about the A1, Castle or MN though.

Surely the *complete* experience is only available through travelling in
period coaches, over jointed track, with the train being foggy on the
inside because of cigarette, pipe and cigar exhaust (and at night the
lights need to be both completely inadequate to read by and also gently
pulsating)?

Perhaps it is, never having experienced that myself then wouldnt know. However was refering to the current day experience of travelling behind a Princess. As long as the coach is not sealed thus allowing the smell and sound of the engine to reach a passenger then a MK1 is emminently suitable to complete the experience of a Princess instead of a 'foriegn' engine.




The modern railtour experience is usually of an immaculately turned-out
loco being surrounded as it arrives by throngs of people, all intending
to get the winning photo, and once you're aboard it's a bit of a jerky
start compared with a diesel, followed by not that much difference once
the things is moving, except that periodically your view of the horizon
is obscured by smoke/steam, if the thing gets up to a decent speed, and
the one big noticeable difference is photographers overhanging bridges
along the route, and parents encouraging their children to wave as the
train passes (this last one is a good thing, btw). And I should point
out that I enjoy all forms of rail travel as a rule; I just don't find
the steam-hauled experience to be the pinnacle.

As to having feelings, the journey I'd like to recreate would be one
from say, Stafford to Rugby, behind a class 84 in the teeming rain, at
night. I'd be sticking my head out of the window, wearing safety goggles
(as I did back then) getting lashed by the rain and listening to the
roar of the loco while watching the scene being illuminated at frequent
intervals by sparks as the pantograph jumped off the wire. 1975, not
1945. My era, not my grandad's.

However, do you call Tornado an ersatz-A1 because of your knowledge
that it was built recently (note trap :-). My feeling is if it looks
like a duck, sounds like a duck, performs like a duck, was built (as
near as possible) to the design of a duck , then its a ....duck.

Yebbut we're talking about 60163, not 60022...

On the "ersatz" thing - what else should I call it? It isn't really an
LNER or BR engine, is it? Nor is it a replica, as it isn't pretending to
be a real capital-stock loco. It's modern build, using some modern
techniques, to an old design, and "ersatz" is less of a mouthful.

We all had/have to resolve this question with respect to Tornado for ourselves. I decided to consider it an A1 on the basis of the 'duck' statetment and by how the later built LMS 4Fs were classified. A number of 4Fs were authorised and built during Staniers time as CME but never seen anyone refer to them as anything other than Fowler 4Fs. There is a more apt example in the rebuilding of LMS Turbomotive to a Princess. This was done nearly 20 years after the other Princesses entered service, well after Stanier had retired and a few years into BR but still the resultant engine is considered a Stanier Princess.

As it is, the question of how to classify it is a real one for me,
because I not only take pictures, but I also collect pictures that
others have taken and posted in newsgroups, such as
alt.binaries.pictures.rail. And everything needs to have its place in
the right file folder. So, e.g., I place GWR-built engines in the GWR
folder, and engines built by BR in the BR folder, including those built
to GWR designs. This one goes in the AONESLT folder, showing it was
built by the A1 Steam Loco Trust.

Classification for filing purposes is a personal choice. However your choice of which company was in existense at the time of build as opposed to that of the time of design is not one that I would prefer. It does result in some anomolies like that of the Princess mentioned above. It would also mean placing LMS 10000 in the LMS folder, but its twin sister engine 10001 completed a few days (or weeks) later in the BR folder if you keep strictly to the parameters.


I'm not quite sure what the trap is in your question, but I do my best
to find out about the origins of all the various locos in my picture
collection, and the fact that I know when this one was built and who its
original owners were is not unique nor even particularly special in the
scheme of things. (As I write, according to Picasa, the collection
consists of 251,505 pictures, but only 93 of those are in the "awaiting
identification" folder, while 173 are classified ZZZU - my code for "I
have tried to find out what this is, but the best I can do is to
allocate it to a particular country".)

Congrats, a worthy collection !


--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683844.html
(158 872 at Basingstoke, 9 Jun 1995)

Cheers,
Simon

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: XP-59B
    ... been quite instrumental int the making of the P-80. ... (560 if built to high standards) ... about as much accuracy as your usual Axis Aircraft never was stats. ... Unrelated piston engine powered pusher propeller design developed ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: Paul Lamar
    ... The firewall forward weight is at least 450 pounds ... The numbers quoted above shows a lack of understanding about engine ... I built my plane, 3000 + hours of MY time. ...
    (rec.aviation.homebuilt)
  • Re: XP-59B
    ... (560 if built to high standards) ... about as much accuracy as your usual Axis Aircraft never was stats. ... Loaded weight: 11,040 lb ... Unrelated piston engine powered pusher propeller design developed ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: Diesels
    ... And wasn't built anywhere near as well. ... Sporting, which came with a better engine and red seat belts, "goes well" ... Dad's Passat isn't as well built as my Cavalier with a Saab badge... ... If you spend half your working day in a car, ...
    (uk.rec.cars.maintenance)
  • Re: Leftclick opens search window instead of folder....
    ... folder, it opens to the search window instead of the folder itself. ... Since it is a laptop, does it have an integrated mousing ... Could be the built in device has lost it's mind and just needs to be ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics)