Parts of 7027 Thornbury Castle to be used for new build 47XX.

[heathrowrail]

When you said about a Splasher being fitted, i am glad it means there is still some attention being given to the loco despite the uncertainty surrounding it until the spring. Has there been any more commentary between the parties involved for the locos fate? as tbf we haven't seen much from both sides recently.

I suspect given the backlash the 4709 group are waiting for the heat to die down before going any further. I think it really surprised them how angry people were although they do seem a bit obsessed to put it nicely on fictional trains.

 

[Trainlog]

I suspect given the backlash the 4709 group are waiting for the heat to die down before going any further. I think it really surprised them how angry people were although they do seem a bit obsessed to put it nicely on fictional trains.

To say the 4709 underestimated the backlash would be an understatement. But yes you are right, i think they supposed that as so many hall class locos have been sacrificed for new builds the assumptions over Thornbury where probably the same. I think this definitely was the biggest debate in the heritage railway world for 2022, as the Coal and volunteer debate will keep coming up over the decade and most people sided with the SVR over the purple pacific back in the summer at the end of it all.

The thing is that this debate will come back in March if nothing has happened, as it would mean that 4709 group will win and many will complain why didn't we do anything to help? Deep down the 4709 group has realised they messed up here as they wanted to build a star class with the rest of the parts then did a u turn 2 months later, and even other new build groups threw their criticisms in the ring with the LMS patriot group disliking what they are doing with Thornbury Castle.

Until this issue is resolved, as someone who really likes Castle class locos from going to see Clun Castle on the mainline, i have put some more of my thoughts on the lssue down below.

If Thornbury Castle steams, it will likely entertain the public on heritage railways and the mainline if it gets certified. During its rebuild, spares for other Castles will potentially get machined alongside its restoration, the loco will be famous for this episode on its 50 year journey to be restored and will be another famous surviving Castle class, being a crowd puller wherever it goes.

If Thornbury gets turned into 4709, as much as i have enjoyed visiting Didcot, the reality is that it will have a near carbon copy life of Lady of Legend where it will attend the Severn valley, Bluebell, and NYMR galas, and just sit in the shed for rivet counters to complain 'there is the inaccurate 47xx' for the rest of the year. In this months steam railway (Issue 539), the Great western society said they weren't doing mainline locos anymore due to modification hassles and costs for the mainline running, they tried to promise Lady of legend to be mainline certified in the late 2010s, but they had to reverse the decision due to the problems they raised.

 

[Sheldonian]

I really hope the 4709 crowd have been surprised by the hostility to this idea. I have been more vexed about rhis than anything else in my entire railway career of 40 to 50 years.
We arnt talking about a Hall or a commonal guarden freight loco here.. We are talking about a Castle. One of the GWR premier locos. A loco that in its own right would be a signifficant crowd puller across the uk.
Can you imagine Darlington dismantling an A4 to use the parts for a freight loco or bit part steamer... neither can i!
Didcot surprise me that they wish to be associated.
As there intentions seem so alien to mine, might not be visiting too many times in future

 

[heathrowrail]

To say the 4709 underestimated the backlash would be an understatement. But yes you are right, i think they supposed that as so many hall class locos have been sacrificed for new builds the assumptions over Thornbury where probably the same. I think this definitely was the biggest debate in the heritage railway world for 2022, as the Coal and volunteer debate will keep coming up over the decade and most people sided with the SVR over the purple pacific back in the summer at the end of it all.

The thing is that this debate will come back in March if nothing has happened, as it would mean that 4709 group will win and many will complain why didn't we do anything to help? Deep down the 4709 group has realised they messed up here as they wanted to build a star class with the rest of the parts then did a u turn 2 months later, and even other new build groups threw their criticisms in the ring with the LMS patriot group disliking what they are doing with Thornbury Castle.

Until this issue is resolved, as someone who really likes Castle class locos from going to see Clun Castle on the mainline, i have put some more of my thoughts on the lssue down below.

If Thornbury Castle steams, it will likely entertain the public on heritage railways and the mainline if it gets certified. During its rebuild, spares for other Castles will potentially get machined alongside its restoration, the loco will be famous for this episode on its 50 year journey to be restored and will be another famous surviving Castle class, being a crowd puller wherever it goes.

If Thornbury gets turned into 4709, as much as i have enjoyed visiting Didcot, the reality is that it will have a near carbon copy life of Lady of Legend where it will attend the Severn valley, Bluebell, and NYMR galas, and just sit in the shed for rivet counters to complain 'there is the inaccurate 47xx' for the rest of the year. In this months steam railway (Issue 539), the Great western society said they weren't doing mainline locos anymore due to modification hassles and costs for the mainline running, they tried to promise Lady of legend to be mainline certified in the late 2010s, but they had to reverse the decision due to the problems they raised.

There was a rumour of Johnathan Pratt Jones buying her back although that seems to have gone very quiet, I personally won't use Didcot until they sell 7027 or return her as a Castle. If more people did the same they would soon get the message instead of trying to play the games that have been going on. (Didcot are just as much in it as the 4709 group are).

 

[Trainlog]

There was a rumour of Johnathan Pratt Jones buying her back although that seems to have gone very quiet, I personally won't use Didcot until they sell 7027 or return her as a Castle. If more people did the same they would soon get the message instead of trying to play the games that have been going on. (Didcot are just as much in it as the 4709 group are).

I don't think boycotting Didcot will be the best approach to this as at the end of the day they are preserving rail heritage like everyone else, and the last time enthusiasts tried to protest against a decision (The case of the Purple pacific Taw Valley for the Queens jubilee) i remember hearing on a Chris eden green video that Severn Valley Shareholders walked out but yet nothing was changed at all. End of the day this was a mistake on a society within Didcot's means but i think just put the coins in the right tin would be a better approach instead if you choose to visit Didcot as there is many decent projects there that don't deserve this bad press associated with this issue.

This is the thing, there is too much silence from the side that should be working on saving the loco, where is the website, details? Would happily donate if there was an easy opportunity to help Thornbury survive. I remember the Change.org petition, now closed to save the loco but apart from the Rail advent article in September and a Steam railway follow up in October, there has been nothing that anyone can do to help since.

The community, has roughly 3 months to save the loco, otherwise the 47xx group will win and it will just be a what if we did save it rather than having Thornbury steam up by the decades close.

 

[Falcon1200]

We are talking about a Castle. One of the GWR premier locos. A loco that in its own right would be a signifficant crowd puller across the uk.

A class which has seven (7) other examples preserved, ranging from 1923 to 1950 built examples. And in what way would a Castle numbered 7027 be a significant crowd puller when there is already one numbered 7029 operating on the main line - 99.5% of the population would not have the faintest idea of the difference (if indeed there is any, apart from name and number) between a Thornbury and a Clun!

I for one will certainly not be boycotting Didcot, the achievements of the GWS in preserving Great Westenry (not just locos) is something to be admired and supported.

 

[heathrowrail]

A class which has seven (7) other examples preserved, ranging from 1923 to 1950 built examples. And in what way would a Castle numbered 7027 be a significant crowd puller when there is already one numbered 7029 operating on the main line - 99.5% of the population would not have the faintest idea of the difference (if indeed there is any, apart from name and number) between a Thornbury and a Clun!

I for one will certainly not be boycotting Didcot, the achievements of the GWS in preserving Great Westenry (not just locos) is something to be admired and supported.

The job of the GWS is to preserve and protect locomotives. Not cut them up and use their parts of phantom locomotives that never really existed. Feel free to carry on supporting them and having your own views. I'd say judging by the backlash you are in a small minority.

 

[Ashley Hill]

The job of the GWS is to preserve and protect locomotives. Not cut them up and use their parts of phantom locomotives

Couldn’t agree more!
Imagine the uproar if somebody suggested turning a Deltic into DP2. No,don’t go there…

 

[Trainlog]

A class which has seven (7) other examples preserved, ranging from 1923 to 1950 built examples. And in what way would a Castle numbered 7027 be a significant crowd puller when there is already one numbered 7029 operating on the main line - 99.5% of the population would not have the faintest idea of the difference (if indeed there is any, apart from name and number) between a Thornbury and a Clun!

I for one will certainly not be boycotting Didcot, the achievements of the GWS in preserving Great Westenry (not just locos) is something to be admired and supported.

Though there are 2 less of them surviving, couldn't the same be argued for the A4s with less impressive histories? 10 years ago and just like today you could argue one A4 in steam is enough, why do i need to care about either Bittern or Union of South Africa running when we have Sir Nigel Gresley. Yes i went for the what if it was an A4 in this position argument and it is the case for other locos classes too. I mean Duchess of Sutherland feels more like a sole survivor as Hamilton probably wont steam again in streamlined casing and Birmingham in tombed into a science museum exhibition, isn't Sutherland enough you might ask to pull a crowd?

The reason why Thornbury will be interesting is that heritage railways can use the loco to its potential, kinda what the GCR was going for until the summer. Apart from Thornbury the rest of the Castle class locos are at museums or centres. One of them is tombed into Swindon STEAM and the rest are either at Didcot, Tyseley or Crewe where they will either do Mainline service or steam up for visitors at their respective centers.

Its sad that Thornbury might have to leave the GCR as it felt like a brilliant home for the loco especially when their Northern extension is completed. As for your Didcot point i do agree with you that they don't deserve a boycott and should be respected for their achievements, however, my last criticism i will give them is that yes they have a castle currently in steam but unless they declare that they will loan it to a heritage railway for half a season, it will only really steam there on peak open days to cover the costs of it doing so.

 

[Bessie]

Pendennis Castle (the Didcot engine in ticket) will be out and about at a number of galas in 2023. If you want to see 4 Castles come to Didcot on 4 March. The 2 Tyseley based Castles are visiting on a railtour, Pendennis will be in steam and 5051 Drysllwyn Castle will be on static display. As for Thornbury Castle lets see what happens.

 

[Falcon1200]

The job of the GWS is to preserve and protect locomotives. Not cut them up and use their parts of phantom locomotives that never really existed. Feel free to carry on supporting them and having your own views. I'd say judging by the backlash you are in a small minority.

The 'backlash' raises an important point; If there really is such a huge demand for another operational Castle, why has 7027 not been restored in the fifty (50!) years since it left Barry scrapyard? That would suggest that there really is not, and never has been, sufficient finance, or interest, to get this particular loco working again. And it might be worth remembering why 7027 was bought from Barry in the first place - to provide spares for other Castles!

 

[Trainlog]

The 'backlash' raises an important point; If there really is such a huge demand for another operational Castle, why has 7027 not been restored in the fifty (50!) years since it left Barry scrapyard? That would suggest that there really is not, and never has been, sufficient finance, or interest, to get this particular loco working again. And it might be worth remembering why 7027 was bought from Barry in the first place - to provide spares for other Castles!

Suffice to say this kind of stuff is a long winded answer as it can be applied to many standard gauge locos such as 9fs, Bullied Pacifics, Br standards, and black 5s. The TLDR of it all is that interests change, sometimes the management of the locos whether its an owner that is looking at it as a 'one day i'll get round to it' kinda thing, restoration societies that are small and often get pushed to the background - take for example the 2 Black 5s and MN Blue Star on the Colne valley railway or the fact we haven't seen a 72xx steam for the first time in preservation despite 3 under restoration currently.

Thornbury did suffer a fair bit from owners and societies that where slow to get work done and now finally it had momentum and the publicity we have seen on the loco since 2016 has meant that many have enjoyed reading about the loco in Steam railway whether it was under Pratt or GCR and looked forward to its completion. Also lets look at the bit on its time in Barry, it can be said that's how people looked at 6023 King Edward 2 in the 70s also as beyond repair and seen for spares for King Edward 1 but since its restoration, its now a flagship piece at Didcot and probably a highlight of their collection.

 

[Sheldonian]

Mr Falcon,
I suspect the vast majority of people (enthusiasts and non enthusiasts alike) would rather see an original engine with all its history and pedigree, than a frankinstein creation of assembled bits that looks like something else.
What is proposed is Bit like tearing up an original Van Gough to make a collage resembling one of his lost works.
I appreciate that some may not agree, and that is their perogative.
It is unfortunate that those with the power of decision might be the only people with the funds, but i guess that is the way of the world.
Whether others choose to vote with their feet and go elsewhere for their railway entertainment is their decision alone. There are many other alternatives.

 

[pdeaves]

Ultimately, of course, the locomotive is a hunk of metal that belongs to someone else, and that someone else can do with it whatever they want to do with it. We may or may not agree with the decisions made, but until we have full legal possession of it, we can only watch from the sidelines.

 

[Chris125]

A ridiculous fuss about nothing.

 

[Falcon1200]

I suspect the vast majority of people (enthusiasts and non enthusiasts alike) would rather see an original engine with all its history and pedigree

I would have to disagree there, the vast majority of non enthusiasts do not have the faintest idea of the history and pedigree of any steam engine (unless its Flying Scotsman of course), and even some enthusiasts, including me, while perhaps being sad to see an old loco disappear, would rather see a new, operational loco of an entirely-scrapped class created in place of a heap of rusting metal, which 7027 has already been for over 50 years. And there are of course another 7 (seven) Castles in existence, so not really a parallel with a Van Gough, or even a Van Gogh......

The job of the GWS is to preserve and protect locomotives.

Which the GWS has done incredibly well, and not just locos but carriages, wagons, signalling, the broad gauge, and ephemera, not to mention a genuine GWR loco depot. To ensure the continuing preservation and protection of all this they need and deserve as much support as possible.

 

[Sheldonian]

You might be right Phil.
Just a very emotive subject when a loco of this stature is involved.

 

[Brush 4]

The main argument is that the A1 Trust have shown how to do it, twice so far with the A1 and now the P2. If you want to build a new locomotive you.......build a new locomotive. They haven't sacrificed any loco to create these so, why do others? It isn't just a Castle, an 8F, a Hall or 2, 28XX, 42XX, 41XX, maybe a Pannier scrapped for spares. The 'there are already others' claim doesn't work because only 1 example is needed to represent any class so logically, scrap all the rest. Of course without Barry many lines could not operate so, having multiple Bulleids, Black 5's, Halls, 45XX is a blessing, not an irrelevance at all. Even more duplication with multiple diesel class survivors. Loads of 47's, 50's, 25's, 31's, the same number of Deltics as Castles ( I think ). Scrap most of them then.

 

[Trainlog]

The thing is, after looking into any forms of updates on the project apart from the OPs photo, there hasn't really been much anyone can do to help. I doubt Railadvent or Steamrailway reads or cares about any rail forum to post an update for everyone, even in the 2 month gap that is for paperwork and maintenance for heritage steam.

The 47xx group hasn't posted on their blog since in the summer announcing they bought the parts, and its the same for the 7027 Facebook group. Unless by the middle of next month, Pratt has set up a legitimate page to support the effort of buying back Thornbury with a 'give what you can' approach, then frankly the 47xx group has won and we might have to come to terms with that.

 

[Bevan Price]

I would have to disagree there, the vast majority of non enthusiasts do not have the faintest idea of the history and pedigree of any steam engine (unless its Flying Scotsman of course), and even some enthusiasts, including me, while perhaps being sad to see an old loco disappear, would rather see a new, operational loco of an entirely-scrapped class created in place of a heap of rusting metal, which 7027 has already been for over 50 years. And there are of course another 7 (seven) Castles in existence, so not really a parallel with a Van Gough, or even a Van Gogh......

But the point is that they are not proposing to recreate a genuine 47xx Class 2-8-0. Their proposal seems to be to produce a phoney replica that vaguely looks like a real 47xx class. As such, the historical value will be near zero.

 

[Falcon1200]

Of course without Barry many lines could not operate so, having multiple Bulleids, Black 5's, Halls, 45XX is a blessing, not an irrelevance at all.

Indeed, however it should be pointed out, again, that 7027 has never worked since being withdrawn by BR, and has therefore been of no use whatsoever to any preserved railway.

Unless by the middle of next month, Pratt has set up a legitimate page to support the effort of buying back Thornbury with a 'give what you can' approach, then frankly the 47xx group has won and we might have to come to terms with that.

The result of this fundraising effort will demonstrate exactly what demand there is to save and restore 7027. If they reach their target, good luck to them, hopefully it will not then take another 50 years to get the loco running!

But the point is that they are not proposing to recreate a genuine 47xx Class 2-8-0. Their proposal seems to be to produce a phoney replica that vaguely looks like a real 47xx class. As such, the historical value will be near zero.

But a 47xx would be an interesting loco which I would certainly pay to see, I doubt there are many around now who saw the real things! And I have to ask, what would be the historical value of a restored 7027, given that the pretty much identical 7029 is restored and working to this day on the main line?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

But the point is that they are not proposing to recreate a genuine 47xx Class 2-8-0. Their proposal seems to be to produce a phoney replica that vaguely looks like a real 47xx class. As such, the historical value will be near zero.

This is my concern.

I have no issue with filling missing gaps, even if it means using parts from some other type which is well represented in preservation with multiple examples, but the replica created as a result MUST be fully accurate and not simply a "disguise". It's not a problem if something uses welded instead of riveted boilers or some other change like that - but using the wrong type of boiler altogether just because it "looks roughly like the right one" is not something that anyone should be doing.

 

[heathrowrail]

Indeed, however it should be pointed out, again, that 7027 has never worked since being withdrawn by BR, and has therefore been of no use whatsoever to any preserved railway.

1420 hasn't run in 20 something years, 3205 has barely run for more than 5 years this century, 4920 hasn't run since 1996 and is now an exhibit in Japan. I don't really see what your point is, overhauling locomotives is becoming more and more expensive, the knowledge base/interest is declining. Surely it makes more sense to preserve and protect the stock that was saved from the scrapyard and has history? A phantom locomotive that will only work a few years then sit in the Didcot sheds for 20 isn't doing anything for anyone.

 

[wce]

1420 hasn't run in 20 something years, 3205 has barely run for more than 5 years this century, 4920 hasn't run since 1996 and is now an exhibit in Japan. I don't really see what your point is, overhauling locomotives is becoming more and more expensive, the knowledge base/interest is declining. Surely it makes more sense to preserve and protect the stock that was saved from the scrapyard and has history? A phantom locomotive that will only work a few years then sit in the Didcot sheds for 20 isn't doing anything for anyone.

Sorry to be pedantic but -
1420 was last in service in late 2005 so not 20 something years, being withdrawn at the start of the 2006 season.

3205 worked 2000-2006 & 2010- 2017 so actually 13 years in the 21st Century rather than the just over 5 you suggest.

 

[xotGD]

With limited resources in the steam preservation movement, to me it would seem to be more sensible to overhaul existing locomotives to get them back in steam so that they can be enjoying by cranks and normals alike, rather than trying to rebuild something from a bag of bits (with some of the bits missing) or to start from scratch (whether or not cannibalising parts from elsewhere). And the latter certainly cannot be described as "preservation".

So when it comes to this debate, I think both sides are wrong.

 

[Falcon1200]

A phantom locomotive that will only work a few years then sit in the Didcot sheds for 20 isn't doing anything for anyone.

What is a loco preserved for over 50 years but which has never turned a wheel because in all that time, no-one has had the resources to restore it, doing for anyone? Whereas the 47xx conversion plan might be the impetus required to get a working machine instead of a heap of rusting metal. At the end of the day, it is up to a loco's owner what they do with it, anyone wishing a different future is of course free to make the owner an offer they can't refuse!

 

[Sheldonian]

Although it is fairly obvious which side of the arguement you come from Mr Falcon, guess it will all come down to available funds on all sides.
It is just a shame that in this instance this particular project relies on the demise of a fairly high profile loco.
Shame that new build parts cannot be used if 4709 is that wonderful and important. (Other new build projects seem to have managed).
Guess we all have differing opinions and judgement of importance and merits of locos.
We all just need to respect and appreciate the sensitivities of all parties.

 

[Trainlog]

With limited resources in the steam preservation movement, to me it would seem to be more sensible to overhaul existing locomotives to get them back in steam so that they can be enjoying by cranks and normals alike, rather than trying to rebuild something from a bag of bits (with some of the bits missing) or to start from scratch (whether or not cannibalising parts from elsewhere). And the latter certainly cannot be described as "preservation".

So when it comes to this debate, I think both sides are wrong.

Your opinion is a good take, however the saying where there is a will there is a way springs to mind. Take for example how the GCR or the Gloswarks has proven in the past 5 years that by resurrecting MN P&O and the BR standard 5 the GCR has rebuilt has proven worthy for their lines from being Barry Wrecks a decade prior. At one of my local heritage railways the 4253 group is doing a brilliant job at resurrecting a 42xx and a 56xx that probably would have been broken for parts, now they are having to have 2 work parties for each loco as their has been a lot of interest from volunteers to restore them both.

After some more digging around, in what feels like the ongoing debate of the fate of Thornbury Castle, now I know its Wikipedia-but the projects being undertaken by the GWS groups such as the County and the 47xx are from an assortment of loco donors by the looks of things. Does this mean that the 4709 group are right? Well seeming as they have been doing this for ages for their newbuilds with hall classes and GWR locos that most just about give some thought to you might argue they have a point. However, there is a difference between a loco that will likely never get restored versus one that was actually doing well for its restoration and had a sustainable amount of interest in the project.

What everyone is seeming to forget is that Thornbury's preservation history was a case of 'ill get round to it at somepoint' until the last decade. Firstly with Tyseley buying it and putting it to the side, then Pete Waterman (Essentially Jeremy Hosking of the 90s/2000s) snapping it up and pretty much having the same sentiment as before 'maybe at somepoint' -Quick side rant, i bet by the middle of this decade we will be seeing a similar story of Hosking doing this for his 2 merchant navy locos by using Holland America line boiler to restore Port line (again).

However, the fact that Thornbury has received the attention at last in the past decade has shown there is a will to restore it. Enthusiasts where confident in Pratt when he bought it as there was a genuine chance it can be restored- and even it being sold to the GCR hasn't put people off because there is volunteers who wanted to work on it, poeple where donating to it and the image of a restored Castle class loco pulling into Loughborough Central rather than a museum centre was quite appealing to enthusiasts. To have this project undone in a matter of a quick deal without the volunteers or the people who where donating having a say is understandingly frustrating to many.

Sorry if my response went on for too long.

4253 Locomotive Company Limited

Restoring Locomotive 4253 to original glory

www.4253.co.uk

GWR 4700 Class - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

GWR 1000 Class 1014 County of Glamorgan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Bevan Price]

What is a loco preserved for over 50 years but which has never turned a wheel because in all that time, no-one has had the resources to restore it, doing for anyone? Whereas the 47xx conversion plan might be the impetus required to get a working machine instead of a heap of rusting metal. At the end of the day, it is up to a loco's owner what they do with it, anyone wishing a different future is of course free to make the owner an offer they can't refuse!

Yes - but as I wrote earlier, the proposal will not produce a genuine 47xx replica.

And to me, even a County with a LMSR boiler is not really genuine.

Use of updated material standards is tolerable, but otherwise replicas should follow the original design as closely as possible.
Incidentally, I did see original 47xx class locos, but usually sat "on shed" between duties, or after withdrawal, and thought they were quite impressive, and would be interested to see a genuine, accurate working replica. .

 

[Falcon1200]

Although it is fairly obvious which side of the arguement you come from Mr Falcon

Actually I am not on either side of the argument, and would be perfectly happy to see a new loco operating, whether that be a restored 7027 or a replica 47xx. What I find bizarre is the huge fuss being made, considering that 7027 has languished, unrestored, for more than 50 years! If the 7027 supporters can raise sufficient funds to buy and restore the loco, good luck to them, but given that that has not been achieved at any time since 1972, I have my doubts.