News round-up: 82045, Tornado and G5

A quick round-up of news since the site first went live, of which there are only a few items to report. Firstly, the 82045 group have published their February news update, with pictures of the frames and the welcome news that the insurers will cover the copper theft.

The latest news update on Tornado confirms that it is due to return to revenue-earning service May 26th. Currently the boiler remains in Germany with repairs nearing completion, although the Trust has yet to state explicitly whether this is a design problem that will re-occur without major alteration of the design, or something one-off that can be considered fixed once Tornado comes back. They have, however, confirmed that Tornado will be running in early BR Brunswick green.

The G5 project has a very comprehensive section giving progress on the construction of every part of the locomotive, but unfortunately it doesn’t explicitly flag which developments are new and which occurred a little while ago. However, it’s an impressive read, with the bogie completed and the boiler progressed as far as it can be before they’re ready for the hydraulic test.



  1. It is far from obvious to which loco some of the New Build Project Sites links refer, because the loco number is missing. I suggest appending this info in brackets, for example LMS Patriot Project (45551 The Unknown Warrior).

    • Good point – the links reflect the name of the organisation concerned (where this can clearly be discerned, which isn’t always easy!), which do not always include loco numbers in their names. It’s a tricky one, and this policy was deliberately adopted for several reasons: firstly, including numbers would mean the links take up a lot of space on the screen; secondly, this risks confusion between the links and the article categories, which do include loco numbers consistently when available and could end up looking the same as the external links; thirdly, it’s not straightforwardly the case that there is one website for every project – there are two Betton Grange sites, for instance (one official, one by ‘friends’), and the A1 Trust is relevant to both the A1 and the possible P2 project, while the organisational arrangements behind the B17 changed earlier this year, bringing a new organisation and a second website.

      I’ll give it a mull over, however – I agree it’s not self-evident that the Standard Steam Locomotive Company is responsible for Hengist, for instance (though I’d suggest this is a problem at the project’s end, not this one!). I’d like to keep a consistent format for the links though, rather than using a variety of formats, dictated by how clear the project’s own web presentation is.

      One option that occurs to me is for text to appear when you hover the mouse over the link, which could give the loco number and additional information, eg it’s a ‘friends’ site. That seems like it might be viable – any views?

      Just to explain the policies for anyone (else) who might be interested… Links are (generally) given as:
      – organisation name, OR, when not available
      – locomotive designation as per article categories.

      Article categories:
      – for a named loco, number + name
      – for an unnamed loco, class designation (where there are several, the mostly commonly used) + number
      – where there is no number, class designation and any other appropriate description eg ‘Worsdell G5’

      As you’ll see, a bit of thought goes into this… arriving at a totally satisfactory policy is however a challenge.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.