Difference between revisions of "Talk:Cowans Sheldon 30-ton steam crane RS 1091"
(Proposal to merge the two crane pages) |
(Agreed!) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Proposal to merge the two crane pages== | ==Proposal to merge the two crane pages== | ||
| − | Thanks to Patrick for the various recent changes relating to RS 1091's updated crane runner information. I was already thinking of an article of the week to mention it. In doing so I have decided (unless anyone objects!) to merge the two steam crane pages to bring the details of both together on one page. | + | Thanks to Patrick for the various recent changes relating to RS 1091's updated crane runner information. I was already thinking of an article of the week to mention it. In doing so I have decided (unless anyone objects!) to merge the two steam crane pages to bring the details of both together on one page. --[[User:Robin|Robin]] ([[User talk:Robin|talk]]) 09:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC) |
| + | :Thanks. I've no objection!--[[User:Patrick Hearn|Patrick Hearn]] ([[User talk:Patrick Hearn|talk]]) 21:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
It seems clear that the ex-Worth Valley Railway crane RS 1087 was the one scrapped, as mentioned in SVR News at various times. The surviving crane has the painted number 1091 (ex-Chester) on the upper works but the works plate of 1087 (ex-Worth Valley) on the running gear. We (I should probably say 'I') drafted both articles on the basis that 1087 is still present, based on the works plate. However there must be some question over whether the running gear was swapped or just the works plate. Also while a loco ID is customarily given to the frame rather than the boiler, in the case of a crane, is the running gear or the upper works the more important bit? It would therefore probably be better to refer to the surviving crane as 1091, with a note on the query regarding its works plate. Any thoughts welcome. --[[User:Robin|Robin]] ([[User talk:Robin|talk]]) 09:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC) | It seems clear that the ex-Worth Valley Railway crane RS 1087 was the one scrapped, as mentioned in SVR News at various times. The surviving crane has the painted number 1091 (ex-Chester) on the upper works but the works plate of 1087 (ex-Worth Valley) on the running gear. We (I should probably say 'I') drafted both articles on the basis that 1087 is still present, based on the works plate. However there must be some question over whether the running gear was swapped or just the works plate. Also while a loco ID is customarily given to the frame rather than the boiler, in the case of a crane, is the running gear or the upper works the more important bit? It would therefore probably be better to refer to the surviving crane as 1091, with a note on the query regarding its works plate. Any thoughts welcome. --[[User:Robin|Robin]] ([[User talk:Robin|talk]]) 09:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
| + | :I've always found it confusing, and it's supposition what parts of each were kept or disposed of. What you suggest sounds logical, until or unless someone comes up with more definitive info!--[[User:Patrick Hearn|Patrick Hearn]] ([[User talk:Patrick Hearn|talk]]) 21:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:08, 30 June 2024
Proposal to merge the two crane pages
Thanks to Patrick for the various recent changes relating to RS 1091's updated crane runner information. I was already thinking of an article of the week to mention it. In doing so I have decided (unless anyone objects!) to merge the two steam crane pages to bring the details of both together on one page. --Robin (talk) 09:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've no objection!--Patrick Hearn (talk) 21:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
It seems clear that the ex-Worth Valley Railway crane RS 1087 was the one scrapped, as mentioned in SVRSevern Valley Railway News at various times. The surviving crane has the painted number 1091 (ex-Chester) on the upper works but the works plate of 1087 (ex-Worth Valley) on the running gear. We (I should probably say 'I') drafted both articles on the basis that 1087 is still present, based on the works plate. However there must be some question over whether the running gear was swapped or just the works plate. Also while a loco ID is customarily given to the frame rather than the boiler, in the case of a crane, is the running gear or the upper works the more important bit? It would therefore probably be better to refer to the surviving crane as 1091, with a note on the query regarding its works plate. Any thoughts welcome. --Robin (talk) 09:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've always found it confusing, and it's supposition what parts of each were kept or disposed of. What you suggest sounds logical, until or unless someone comes up with more definitive info!--Patrick Hearn (talk) 21:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
