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

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

Roy Wilke wrote:

> Staff at the (volunteer-staffed) museum told me that they had
> enthusiasts like you complain that the headboard shouldn't be there,
> nor should the light on the tender.

I never complain about operational neccesities like the light. If it has to be there so
the locomotive can run, then I have no objection to it.

> The light on the tender is there because it is a necessity for the
> loco's 1990s operations along a 2-mile stretch of track with no
> turning facilities.

As I said in my previous two posts, I have no objections to operational necessities
because without these additions the locomotives would not be able run. All I am saying
is that non authentic additions should be kept to the absolute necessities like this.
Nameplates are clearly not neccessary for modern operation.

> As for the headboard - well, the locomotive is owned by the ARHS, and
> it is there to publicise their museum (as a volunteer-run
> organisation, they really don't have an advertising budget and their
> museum operations barely cover the operating costs).

But do they have headboards on the other locomotives that aren't running? Because in a
situation like this they are the locomotives that don't need one.

> And yes, I do understand the concept of a museum. But really, why the
> blazes are you getting so het up about this? There really are many
> more important things in the world than whether or not someone puts a
> sign on a locomotive or whether it's painted blue, green or
> polka-dotted pink.

If you really did understand the concept of a museum then you wouldn't be saying that
its ok for a museum to modify an exhibit. Would you agree to the National Trust putting
a modern extension onto an historic house like Rippon Lea? A museum presents an exhibit
in an appropriate condition that represents it at some time during its past. Naming a
locomotive after someone does not do this. When a non-railfan sees X36 in the ARHS
museum they are going to assume that the VR named it, not the ARHS museum. They either
have to read something or be told about it before they will know that it was never
named in VR service. I am getting "so het up about this" because I really believe that
Steamrail and groups like them should try to preserve locomotives as close as
operationally possible to their original condition. This is so people like me, who have
never seen a VR steam locomotive in actual service can see what they really used to be
like. Clearly headboards, weird colour schemes and names means that a locomotive is
just a vague resemblance to something that used to be.

> I'm not going to bother with this discussion any more. No, I'm not
> going to flame you or bite at your attempts to flame me. I'm just
> going to continue with living my life, and hope that you go back to
> living your life.

You flamed me first by describing my original post as a "rant". Also you clearly
haven't read my posts fully because in my first post, I stated that locomotives should
be restored to a condition that is as close as operationally possible to an authentic
VR (or whatever railway it came from) condition. Items like second headlights and
extended bunkers clearly fall into "as close as operationally possible". Also I have
stated that I think a compromise with use of the headboard would be the best option.
Although I don't agree with the headboard I can see the value of it in some situations.
If the ARHS only use the headboard on its regular tourist service then this is a
compromise. On special event days they shouldn't use the headboard. Steamrail use the
headboard all the time, no matter what the tour is and this is what I object to.


--
- James Brook -

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