Pete Waterman may sell Britannia

Pop mogul Pete Waterman has reportedly held talks about the sale of British
Railways Standard 4-6-2
No 70000 Britannia to a multi-mllionaire City businessman.
The full breaking story can be read now at:
formatting link

Reply to
Robin Jones
Loading thread data ...
"Robin Jones" wrote
Still waiting for the return of the 'Brit' to the mainline (originally promised I think for 2001). Waterman seems to have let this slip, so a sale may be the best option of seeing this fine loco back in operation.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
formatting link
Unless you are suggesting that the 'City businessman' is a scrap metal mogul what is the big issue?
Reply to
:::Jerry::::
The message from ":::Jerry::::" contains these words:
Didn't a certain scrap metal mogul save the future of the steam railway in the UK...?
Reply to
David Jackson
railway
Not really, he saved his own pocket, the only reason he didn't get his men to cut the steam loco's up was because it was more profitable to cut wagons (other than between contracts, which is when steam was cut, instead of laying off staff), knowing that he could sell scrap metal in the shape of steam loco's for what he would get if he cut the things up....
Seriously though, yes he did make life easy for some in the preservation world (he made life very easy indeed for the group I was involved with), but he never allowed 'pleasure to cloud his business judgment.
Reply to
:::Jerry::::
One thing is certain about Pete Waterman - whatever rail-related item or business he invests in, he is unlikely to stay with it for long.
Reply to
Tony Polson
The message from ":::Jerry::::" contains these words:
That's why he was running a successful business.
But the effect was the same: the locos weren't cut (with some exceptions), and many are now running again.
Reply to
David Jackson
[ re Woodhams and Barry scrap yard ]
business
IMO you snipped the wrong part of my reply - I say that as someone who was part of a group who had close dealing with the man (the group as a whole bought eight loco's), if he had not made more money from cutting wagons he would have cut the steam loco's *without question*.
Reply to
:::Jerry::::
The message from ":::Jerry::::" contains these words:
You made that point quite adequately. I was pointing out that even if a scrap metal mogul bought Britannia it wouldn't necessarily be THE END, but I agreed with your point about him running a profitable business.
Draper's of Hull did a fair bit of cutting, but we have to be grateful that the boss took a fancy (as I understand it) to 45305.
Reply to
David Jackson
with the exception of two historically important tyoes of NBL Diesel. Although overtures were made to purchase them for preservation, nothing came of it. This demonstrates that he indeed never let his sentimentality to dominate his desire for hard cash :o)
Reply to
unclewobbly
"David Jackson" wrote
Not quite as I understand it. I believe Albert Draper was repeatedly pressured by local enthusiasts into preserving a steam loco, and 45305 was the last one left in his scrapyard. Pity it was 'yet another Black 5' - he cut some far more interesting locos including a number of ECML 'Peppercorn' Pacifics and some B16s, the last of which was specially cleaned in a forlorn attempt by said enthusiasts in an attempt to persuade Draper to preserve it.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
[ re Woodham and Barry scapyard ]
Diesel.
AIUI the problem was, no one ever made any sensible offers for the loco's, simple as that!
Reply to
:::Jerry::::
The message from "John Turner" contains these words:
Touch of the "legend variation" by the sound of things, but I was hearing the sanitised version from a Black Five fanatic, you were on the spot, so I accept your version!
A B16 would have been OK, but the last thing needed was "another" Pacific: they weren't built to trundle up and down a minor line at 25mph all the time, so "mounted and stuffed" would have been a suitable option. 5305 was a good, if lucky, outcome.
Reply to
David Jackson
"David Jackson" wrote
A B16 would have been a fabulous addition to the list of preserved locos, but the Pacifics included a host of Peppercorn A1s and had one of those been available to HLPG it might have avoided the A1 Locomotive Trust having to raise vast sums of cash to produce a replica.
John.
Reply to
John Turner
The message from "John Turner" contains these words:
...and I still haven't worked out _why_ they're doing it! There's probably a perfectly good reason (apart from a desire to have an A1 for sentimental reasons, and if that's the sole reason perhaps a Claughton should be considered next!), but I haven't sussed it yet.
Reply to
David Jackson
yeah you'd think so... the 29s (erstwhile 21s) were never really good, but the Western Region always performed wonders with their hydraulics and towards the end of their lives, the 22s and especially the 41s were quite reliable. The 41s were victims of being a small fleet and requiring spares from a defunct company meant they got laid up fairly early on. So even though they didn't bust much towards the late 60's when they did they stayed bust. Even to the point that they were gone before TOPS and so even though referred to as 41s, they were never officially allotted the class and it is only popular speculation that assigns it now. The 22s (except the first six) were latterly quite reliable up to withdrawal, and 1971 saw quite a few servicable machines scrapped purely coz they were non-preferred transmission.
I think the fact that the 41s were aluminium bodied (and so more valuable as scrap) played a good deal towards preservation attempts failing. At the time, preservation was in it's infancy and simply couldn't raise the money that it can today. Woodham after all had paid scrap value for the locos (plus a bit if memory serves) and he had to at least re-coup his expense. The paltry sums being offered were a joke - once again the 41s were a victim of timing and circumstance. I wonder where the nameplates ended up...?
Reply to
unclewobbly

Site Timeline

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.