Re: [VIC] headboards, nameplates and non authentic liveries. (was: [VIC] Steamrail headboard)

[James Brook <ajmbrook@ozemail.com.au>]

Roy Wilke wrote:

> (rant snipped)

There is a difference between a "rant" and a discussion. Don't call something a
"rant" simply because you don't agree with it, you can't see the point of it, or
you can't be bothered reading it. These sort of sarcastic comments never lead
anywhere except flaming.

> And if they don't have a camera with them, they'll be sure to pay
> more attention to a steam train passing them at a level crossing or a
> station than they will a diesel or an electric train.

They are putting headboards (large magnets) on diesel locos now.

> And those are the people who will notice the headboard, and (I take it
> that the organisers hope) will remember the name and contact the
> organiser for information about future tours.

Most people wouldn't know what Steamrail meant anyway.

> The gunzel will already know, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to
> introduce new people to your hobby in a friendly and welcoming way?

There are other methods of introduction that are a lot more effective than a
mysterious name. Anyway, I did not say to remove the headboard at all times. I
think that a compromise would be good, as I mentioned in my previous post. By
limiting the headboard to shorter trips, this would give Steamrail a similar level
of advertising in metropolitan Melbourne where their potential customers would
come from. Longer tours leave Melbourne early in the morning and arrive back late
at night so not that many potential customers would see the headboard. Even if
they did not want to do this they could at least remove the headboard during
photostops so people could get a shot of the locomotive without that hideous
headboard.

> As for naming locomotives and painting equipment in "non-authentic"
> colours according to the heritage values - at what point does a
> locomotive's or a carriage's heritage finish?

Then what do you call a museum or preservation group? The whole idea behind
preserving something is to keep it or restore it to the condition it was in at a
certain point in time during the item's past. How can you have a museum piece and
continue to modify it, change it and add to it and hope to have anything that can
be demonstrated as VR condition? If a so called "museum" did this then they
wouldn't be a museum because they would be wrecking heritage, not preserving it.

> If it still exists, it's
> heritage continues. Okay. VR might not operate a particular locomotive
> or piece of rolling stock any more. Then the new owner has every right
> to paint it in whatever colour they wish (take a look at WCR, and all
> the bizarre inheritors of CR/ANR) - and that applies to all owners, no
> matter whether they're a preservation line or whatever.

Did you read my post? The very first sentence stated that I was only talking about
railway preservation groups, not commercial operators like WCR. They are not
preserving R711. R711 is a commercially operated locomotive for a modern passenger
service. It isn't in "preservation" like R761 or K183. Whats the point of a
"preservation line" if they don't preserve anything. A preservation group should
be as historically correct as possible, because it is what they are set up for, to
preserve something not to modify it beyond recognition.

> There was mention of a preserved loco being named after a
> preservation-group member as a memorial, and a whinge that VR never
> named that loco after that preservation-group member.

Another statement that shows you only glanced over my previous post. I never
"whinged" about this. And why would I even have made any comment about the VR
naming the locomotive after a preservation group member???? I was criticizing the
naming of the locomotive after it was placed into the museum because that isn't
representative of the locomotive during its VR service life. This goes against the
concept of a museum. I have nothing against the person it's named after. I just
don't like the concept of putting non VR additions onto a museum piece, that's
all. The person it's named after is a retired engine driver and I think he helped
to save some of the locomotives that are currently exhibited in the museum.
Without people like him the museum wouldn't be where it is today. But as I said in
my previous post there are other ways of honouring people like him that don't
diminish the heritage significance of an exhibit. Also where do you stop? What
about someone else who makes a significant contribution? Do you just keep adding
brass plates until you run out of locomotives?

> But the loco isn't a VR loco anymore - and for all I know, that
> preservation group member might just have been the individual who
> saved that particular locomotive from the tender mercies of Simsmetal.

It's in the ARHS museum at Williamstown as a static exhibit. A museum is set up to
preserve items, not to modify them.

> If a preservation group want to name - say - X308a after Freddo Frog,
> then they can do so. They are not detracting from the heritage value
> of X308a, they are adding another chapter to that locomotive's
> heritage.

With a statement like that, you obviously do not understand the concept of a
museum.

> Whatever - I really have more important things to worry about than
> what colour a particular locomotive is painted.

You asked a question, you got an answer. I can't help it if you don't like it.Next
time read something properly before you reply because some of your comments here
really showed that you didn't.

--
- James Brook -

----------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail:
mailto:ajmbrook@ozemail.com.au
Victorian Railfan Web Site:
http://www.ozemail.com.au/~ajmbrook/
----------------------------------------------------------------