So many interesting preservation stories. I learn a new one every day.

Here's an engine that was manufactured in England, spent its life working in China, and then was returned back to England for display in a museum. Wow, neat story.


Chinese KF7 Loco. by curly42, on Flickr



Did you notice the coupler on this loco? That was a bit of a surprise for me.

PS. If this photo excites your passions about indoor displays, please remember there is already an active thread for discussing that topic. :)

Nice display! It amazes me the number of locomotives English enthusiasts and museums have brought BACK to Great Britain. This is a prime example. Quite a contrast to what has been brought back to the U.S. I can think of one; the Pershing 2-8-0 in Green Bay.

One nit to pick on the displayed 4-8-2. I assume by the locomotives number that more than one engine of this class went over to China. Thus, wouldn't the number 607 been more appropriate in the headlight numberboard, and the KF7 painted somewhere else, such as on the locomotives cab?

Les

Why should the coupler be a "surprise?" Chinese railways have long used US standards for couplers, air brakes, and other basic technologies.

As for transporting this loco within the UK, no sweat. Virtually all moves of locos between various heritage railways and museums take place over the highway, where clearances are considerably more generous than those of the railways. One reason for this is that any rolling stock that does move by rail must meet all current standards (i.e,, be "mainline qualified"). Thus transport by road is the easy way out.

Les -- yes, it's a 4-8-4, not a 4-8-2.

The "KF7" IS the locomotive number. 607 was the number as built, but after 1949 the Communist regime thought highly enough of these locomotives to give them a class designation in Roman lettering, which is said to signify the English word 'Confederation' -- you CN fans will know why -- and renumber them starting with 1.

And it was the Chinese who offered (in 1978) to send one of these locomotives back to Britain, which they did with this one in 1981.

Who says the British couldn't design good locomotives with stokers, electric lighting, superheated turret steam, cutoff control indication for best operation, and other American-style features? ;-}

Valves on these locomotives were interesting. The valves are 12.5", very large for a locomotive this size, and the crank and block of the Walschaerts gear gives only half the actual travel (there is a 2:1 multiplying arrangement to give full travel).

Good to see this mentioned, and I enjoyed the picture.

RME - Thanks for the clarification of the engine type. Also for the explanation of the locomotives number in the headlight number board. So, all is right with the display!

I also appreciated the info that the Peoples Republic of China (is that the right terminology?) took the initiative to send the 4-8-4 back to England. Maybe someone in France might consider offering to send one of those surviving SNCF 141.R class 2-8-2's back to North America. The French seem to have gotten a lot of "bad press" in the U.S. over the last few years, maybe that would help their image. I know of a nice railroad museum in North Judson, Indiana who would love to have one and try to restore it to service.

Les

Has that museum actually demonstrated the ability to do so, and made progress locating and promoting the idea to the correct entities in France? Found a local politician willing to carry your request through diplomatic channels? How are you pursuing it?

dave

Hi Guys;

Here is an interesting link with photos of the China Railway Museum in Beijing where another KF1 class, number 006 4-8-4 preserved. I think there is one other KF1 still in China at another museum, but not as in good condition.

http://beijingman.blogspot.co.uk/2009/0 ... useum.html

Note the Baldwin builders plate on another loco, most likely an UNRRA KD7 class 2-8-0.

Have fun - David Notarius

Les,

Do you speak officially for HVRM when you make these pronouncements? I only ask because in the last month or two, you've stated that HVRM would be interested in:

1. C&O 377
2. Clinchfield 1
3. The C&O 2-8-0
and now a SCNF 4-8-2?

Seems kind of a slipshod collections policy, especially considering north Judson, IN is a long way from Eddystone, and that HVRM doesn't bill itself as a "National" railway museum.

David -

If you read my comments a bit closer:

1. C&O 377 was built for the Cincinnati, Richmond & Muncie, later the C&O of Indiana. Strong tie to North Judson, MUCH less to Baltimore and the B&O. Chances of the B&O Museum giving up ownership....probably none, although the appearance of the Ten-Wheeler has recently been allowed to deteriorate.

2. Clinchfield 1 was built in Logansport, Indiana (not that far from N. Judson) for a predecessor of the Pennsy. Strong tie to Indiana, MUCH less to Maryland. Chance of the B&O Museum giving up ownership....none. The engine is kept in beautiful condition and is one of the prime pieces on display.

3. C&O 701 ran on the Chesapeake & Ohio which ran through North Judson, but the locomotive never ran on C&O lines in Indiana. At one time though, it was in rough shape, and deserved to be better taken care of. That apparently now happily addressed.

4. Never talked about a SNCF 4-8-2. Did point out that it would be nice if SNCF (France) considered donating one of the 141.R class Mikes that Baldwin, Lima, Alco, MLW and CLC built for their system. There were more than 1300 of these engines built and sent to France to help the country in its railway restorations after the Second World War and returning one home to North America (like China did with its British built 4-8-4) would be a very nice gesture. And I simply mentioned that HVRM would be more than happy to offer it a home if that happened. Chances of France sending one back home I am sure are none.

Do I speak officially for HVRM? No. I am a member there though. I have managed to secure a few things through the years for the museum, most of which started out with just the gem of an idea. Apparently you find that offensive. Sorry.

Les

Les,

Read closer. I was just wanting clarification. I didn't find you or your statements to be offensive. If they were, I would have said so.

It just seemed that every time a discussion of a steam locomotive has come up the past couple of months, you've mentioned that HVRM would be interested, even if the particular locomotive isn't currently avaiable. The expression of interest was conducted even to the point of making repeated posts in the same thread that HVRM is interested in the locomotive, etc.

Ideas that form as brainstorms are great, and I am not trying to snuff that out. However, ideas must be grounded in a basis of reality, with a supportive organizational structure (money, plans, volunteers, etc.). It also doesn't hurt to "dream big" but those dreams have to be based in reality. Without such a basis, the "idea" is about as realistic as hoping the British Museum will give you the Elgin Marbles to display.

David -

Haven't played marbles since I was a kid and was never very good at it. Pretty certain the museum would not be interested in them. (I am going to assume that these Elgin Marbles aren't those kind of marbles at all; will have to check the internet I guess to find out).

Les

Les,

I doubt the Elgin Marbles will roll very well, best avoided.

David -

Wrong time period. Our museum from the late steam/early diesel era.


Les

Seriously, Les, if you guys are interested in acquisitions and legitimately ready, funded and able to pursue it internationally, what is it specifically you want and how can we help? Otherwise, it does no good to start rumors based on unrealistic broad based wishful thinking that getting everything is sort of nice..........especially when you consider the cost of maintaining everything you wish you had.

dave

Once HVRM gets the 2789 under their belt - restored and running, then another engine would be appropriate.

It's like the buffet rule from when we were all younger, don't take more than you care to eat........