Current traction which will be purchased by the NRM soon*

[edwin_m]

Although it's not part of the Science Museum grouping like the NRM, I'm sure a loan or transfer to the IWM would be possible. I don't see any point in spending public money preserving more than one class 91, though I agree the choice between 111 and 131 is difficult.

 

[DarloRich]

We should be very careful with expectations here. The list at post 2 isnt set in stone and designation alone means very little in practice. I doubt 90% of the rolling stock stuff will end up in the NRM. They will take an HST power car and a 91 ( and perhaps a coach or 2) to complete the Flying Scotsman/ East Coast story, an EMU of some sort to represent commuter railways, perhaps a heavy freight loco and perhaps a sprinter or pacer. Nothing else.

- 91111 is not actually designated, it's the "Nameplates, vinyls and power car number 91111 "For the Fallen". Quite apart from 91111 being a loco not a power car, exactly how do you preserve vinyls? They will fade over time.

A complete photographic record and the "plans" might do along with the "story" of the idea and who is honoured.

Although it's not part of the Science Museum grouping like the NRM, I'm sure a loan or transfer to the IWM would be possible. I don't see any point in spending public money preserving more than one class 91, though I agree the choice between 111 and 131 is difficult.

IWM aren't going to want a train. The train itself has no particular merit and no real interest to them.

 

[edwin_m]

IWM aren't going to want a train. The train itself has no particular merit and no real interest to them.

I was thinking of the vinyls nameplate and number, which someone further up mentioned were the scope of the designation. I rather doubt the vinyls would be useable when removed from the loco, so perhaps they should designate the data files for the artwork instead, which could be printed up at a convenient size to put on the wall next to the name and number?

 

[pdeaves]

I was thinking of the vinyls nameplate and number, which someone further up mentioned were the scope of the designation. I rather doubt the vinyls would be useable when removed from the loco, so perhaps they should designate the data files for the artwork instead, which could be printed up at a convenient size to put on the wall next to the name and number?

Hey, here's a thought, killing two birds with one stone. Remove the special vinyls with a giant tin opener for the war museum. Display the rest of the loco as a sectioned exhibit in the NRM. I mean, showing the inside of a high tech electric loco must surely be as valid as the inside of a kettle.

 

[Cowley]

Hey, here's a thought, killing two birds with one stone. Remove the special vinyls with a giant tin opener for the war museum. Display the rest of the loco as a sectioned exhibit in the NRM. I mean, showing the inside of a high tech electric loco must surely be as valid as the inside of a kettle.

I mean that’s bonkers. But then again you may have something there...
One entire side of the 91 in the Imperial War Museum (would make a lovely backdrop), the rest open sided (including the cab) to see the inner workings of an AC electric.
I quite like that!

 

[EbbwJunction1]

The problem with giving a locomotive to the IWM is "where do they put it?".

There are five parts to the IWM, two of which (HMS Belfast and the Churchill War Rooms) can be ruled out straightaway for obvious reasons. IWM Duxford is mostly aircraft, so isn't in my view appropriate. IWM London isn't practical - you'd never get it in there, and there's no space, anyway. IWM North (Manchester) could be possible (in terms of access), but they do move the large objects around there quite often, and they'd possibly not consider that it's appropriate to have it there anyway.

Using "One entire side of the 91 in the Imperial War Museum" would, indeed, make a lovely backdrop, but there aren't any blank areas on the walls big enough for it, so that would be a problem. I'd think that they would be interested in the nameplate(s), but I think that anything bigger that that would be a problem.

 

[LOL The Irony]

IWM Duxford is mostly aircraft, so isn't in my view appropriate.

91 110 would be appropriate since it's the Battle of Britain loco.

IWM North (Manchester)

It's also the closest to Crewe IIRC.

 

[Peter C]

There's a few points on that in terms of what they have designated:
- 91111 is not actually designated, it's the "Nameplates, vinyls and power car number 91111 "For the Fallen". Quite apart from 91111 being a loco not a power car, exactly how do you preserve vinyls? They will fade over time.
- There is no 442 set 201. It's 401.
- Likewise, they have made the designation for 43002 against Porterbrook. Even though it is Angel owned and every source says so.

Consider these added with changes you've listed.

-Peter

 

[DarloRich]

90% of the stuff mentioned in this thread will not go to the NRM. I wish posters would grasp what the NRM is for. It isnt some giant store house for wibblers, keeping one of everything and setting out every bit of excruciatingly boring detail for enthusiasts to obsess over. It is a museum for families to have a day out, look at some old trains, and feel a connection with the exhibits via a compelling story. It helps if the objects have a story of their own and some dull locomotive that might be the last one made at works X is boring for real people. it might mean something to you ( although personally I don't care) but it certainly means nothing to normals. They aren't going to flock to York to look at a class 150 unit or a manky old diesel.

I mean that’s bonkers. But then again you may have something there...
One entire side of the 91 in the Imperial War Museum (would make a lovely backdrop), the rest open sided (including the cab) to see the inner workings of an AC electric.
I quite like that!

The problem with giving a locomotive to the IWM is "where do they put it?".

There are five parts to the IWM, two of which (HMS Belfast and the Churchill War Rooms) can be ruled out straightaway for obvious reasons. IWM Duxford is mostly aircraft, so isn't in my view appropriate. IWM London isn't practical - you'd never get it in there, and there's no space, anyway. IWM North (Manchester) could be possible (in terms of access), but they do move the large objects around there quite often, and they'd possibly not consider that it's appropriate to have it there anyway.
Using "One entire side of the 91 in the Imperial War Museum" would, indeed, make a lovely backdrop, but there aren't any blank areas on the walls big enough for it, so that would be a problem. I'd think that they would be interested in the nameplate(s), but I think that anything bigger that that would be a problem.

They aren't going to do any of that. IWM don't want and don't have space for a locomotive that has no connection with the forces other than some stickers. If they did want a locomotive they would be much more interested in some kind of simplex type narrow gauge locomotive used on the western front.

 

[randyrippley]

Along the same lines, I'd like to see 59001 as the first loco built overseas for the UK main line ...............................

Have you never heard of class 56?
or 18000
or the french kettles the GW purchased for trials?

 

[EbbwJunction1]

91 110 would be appropriate since it's the Battle of Britain loco.

It's also the closest to Crewe IIRC.

But have you been to IWM North or IWM Duxford? It doesn't matter what the loco is, it would be totally out of place at either place.

They aren't going to do any of that. IWM don't want and don't have space for a locomotive that has no connection with the forces other than some stickers. If they did want a locomotive they would be much more interested in some kind of simplex type narrow gauge locomotive used on the western front.

Quite correct.

 

[Cowley]

But have you been to IWM North or IWM Duxford? It doesn't matter what the loco is, it would be totally out of place at either place.



Quite correct.

Having given my head a wobble I can also see that this is correct.

 

[yoyothehobo]

Why would people want to see a moudly old 150 when they have just arrived on one?

 

[LOL The Irony]

Why would people want to see a moudly old 150 when they have just arrived on one?

It's for the day when they haven't just arrived on one because they've all been withdrawn.

 

[yoyothehobo]

It's for the day when they haven't just arrived on one because they've all been withdrawn.

My post was half jest, however the point kind of stands.

At the end of the day on that list you have a 321, a 313, a 150, a 442, some Mk4s. Any kid who goes to the NRM and looks at those will say Wow a carriage, oh another, and another, and another, and another...

They also have to avoid having too many similar locos. They also need more things you can look at. Cut a 43 in half length ways, show them engineering.

The 91 is a good choice, i couldnt care less which one it is to be honest, as will a lot of people, allow them up close and I think a 92 would be a good option as well.

The NRM doesnt really have the space and need to become a linear scrap yard. Send the stuff that still works to a heritage line.

 

[Peter C]

My post was half jest, however the point kind of stands.

At the end of the day on that list you have a 321, a 313, a 150, a 442, some Mk4s. Any kid who goes to the NRM and looks at those will say Wow a carriage, oh another, and another, and another, and another...

They also have to avoid having too many similar locos. They also need more things you can look at. Cut a 43 in half length ways, show them engineering.

The 91 is a good choice, i couldnt care less which one it is to be honest, as will a lot of people, allow them up close and I think a 92 would be a good option as well.

The NRM doesnt really have the space and need to become a linear scrap yard. Send the stuff that still works to a heritage line.

The thing is, kids in the future when the NRM have these units will not be going "oh look, a carriage" they will be going "oh look, a multiple unit - we have those near us".


-Peter