eBay optimist of the month...

Jan 08, 2007 62 Replies

In that case you were asking the wrong question.

You asked what we thought a purist would say, and how would we know, not being mind readers? The question should have been "If *you* are a purist, would you say that (Caley Fairburn) in preservation is prototypical?" As you can see, prototypically, questions need question marks to indicate the interrogative mode. Otherwise it sort of looks like it is dressed up to be a question, but it isn't really.

And how would you then know if the answers were coming from real purists, eh? They might be fake purists pretending to act like prototypical purists to confuse the unwary.

You can't be too careful in these situations.

However, I am a real, genuine, purist. Honest, guv. And the Caley Fairburn in preservation is prototypical, but not *typical". That is, in and of itself it carries a prototype livery (its own), but that livery is not typical of what it represents. Rather, the livery is whimsical, and should only be considered within its own context. I think that makes it artistically self-referencing, which always trumps mere technical representation. Rather like my layout, actually.

Cheers, Steve

Well yes, the cost of running a mainline steam locomotive would soon bankrupt almost any private individual.

(kim)

Andy Sollis CVMRD said the following on 09/01/2007 22:24:

No, definitely the loco. Even at that age, the big green engine registered. I probably didn't even know (back then) that there was a train also called Flying Scotsman!

"Andy Sollis CVMRD" wrote

It was the 10.00am from Kings Cross which first came to my attention. The A3 Pacific was much later, but when I knew it existed I always wanted to see it haul the named train, but being a 'mere' A3 it never did in my

1950s/1960s spotting era.

John.

Nicely put, but b*l**x

I think I agree with the discussion - same as what I wrote although maybe better wrote. However recon that means it cannot be described as prototypical without qualification.

Cheers, Simon

IIRC they were both billed as "most powerful". Of course, the castle in question was also preserved.

Could be because it was the "publicity locomotive" in the early days of the LN&E, and the magazine writers through the 30s to 50s (CJA, particularly) had a sodt spot for it and kept its name prominent.

It's hardly surprising, either, given that the LN&E applied the name "Flying Scotsman" to the 10am train at (pretty much) the same time as they named the engine - the reason for having the engine with that name at Wembley being to publicise the train (as well as the company).

On 10/01/2007 19:55, Andrew Robert Breen said,

Yes it was, but ask the general public to name a famous "train", and they'll name the Flying Scotsman (the engine) rather than the Castle.

Why?

"Paul Boyd" wrote

I'm told that 'Mallard' is now second in the 'most famous engine' table ....................... behind 'Thomas the Tank Engine'. ;-)

John.

I'd have thought that would be Spencer!

formatting link

It was probably only "done" on one side & smokebox door. I wonder what livery we could put on the other side? Perhaps an experimental British Railway livery of 1948 - as these were also only painted one side too, but probably all the same side. ;-)

I'd strongly suspect that started with the (however many) years it was the ONLY main-line steam engine in Britain.

Please don't go giving manufacturers ideas. Somebody just bid £127 for blue Fairburn so the latter suggestion is now a distinct possibility. Wish I'd bought the flipping thing now!

(kim)

"Badger" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com:

...

For a while at least during the 80s the SWO at Valley was a woman!!! now that was frightening.

I bet that caused a bit of angst!

In 1992 I had the (mis)fortune to spend a weekend at Leuchars (we took a Nimrod down for the airshow) and the SWO at Leuchars then was a big (as in wide, not tall), stocky Glaswegian woman! She took NO cr4p from anyone, and gave plenty out (in best Rab C. Nesbit style, LOL!) to anyone who dared cross her or speak out of turn. NOT a woman to be messed with, she could reduce anyone below the rank of Squadron Leader to a jibbering wreck within

30 seconds!!! Badger.

What on earth is there to admire about a person like that? I thought the forces were all about teamwork? She sounds like an out and out bully.

"Paul Stevenson" wrote in news:45aa10a2$0$4814$ snipped-for-privacy@free.teranews.com:

...

Yup, quite right, it works like this ... "You are my team and you will as I tell you".

A little like democracy, one man one vote ... which of course is fine if you're the man with the vote. :-)

Absolutely nothing, except maybe her "balls"?

Hahahahaha, only when it suits the propaganda machine. Rest of the time it's just constant pressure passing down through the chain of command, with those at the top of the chain being so out of touch with reality that they simply cannot comprehend the real-time effects of their poorly thought out decisions, and those at the bottom getting so thoroughly hacked off that they leave. Insufficient resources, insufficient manpower, ever-increasing taskings, higher than ever rates of equipment unserviceability, plummeting morale and a total inability to listen by those at the top of the chain. Based on that, why do you think I left? (I was somewhere in the middle of the chain, by the way.)

Yep, but that was pretty much the purpose of a SWO in those days. Command respect through fear and ye shall have NO discipline issues. Hate to say it, but it worked well. Very well, in fact. Ever watched the Sgt Major in the tv series "Bad lads army"? Badger.

No minor discipline issues perhaps. Increased risk of being fragged or other serious breakdowns of order.

Mark Thornton

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required