I assume you meant the two-cylinder version, one of the three-cylinder type is part of the National Collection.
I had not realised there was no LMS 2-cyl 2-6-4T preserved in working order. That is quite ridiculous, really. I think it could be argued that this was one of the most successful locomotives ever built - certainly for it's type.
The 3-cyl version was really something of an aberration. I don't know if it was worth the bother - the extra cost and weight of the inside cylinder and gear saved on hammer blow, and in theory gave faster acceleration (but in practice?) but added to loco maintenance costs. Certainly, as I remember it, these locos were rapidly withdrawn once the LT&S was electrified.
Of course, the Standard 4MT 2-6-4T was more or less the LMS design modernised a bit. Perhaps someone could dig out the Fowler 2-6-4T that is buried under the service station near Mill Hill? Now that would be a preservation project with a difference
And there are plans to build a new Clan as well, 72010 Hengist. They've already produced quite a bit of it.
A less worthy steam-related project would be more difficult to imagine. A new 77xxx, I suppose. :roll: Their time would be better spent campaigning for the Port Line to re-open - and that's a hopeless cause.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Off the top of my head;
....
LNER V1 tank engine
LNER V3 tank engine
...
These, like almost all Gresley designs, were quite handsome locos. Not sure, in terms of cost-effectiveness, if they were up to the LMS 2-6-4Ts though. Again, 3-cylinder design would have made them maintenance-heavy on costs. Once the Edinburgh suburban and Durham Coast was dieselised, these had short lives - a sign of high costs vis-a-vis alternative steam power.