Why is it that paint causes so many arguments?

In the railway diesel traction preservation world, what is paint for? Apart, that is, from a subject on which we can all fail to agree and argue endlessly about.

Well, paint does two things. It provides a degree of protection for metal to save it from oxidisation in the UK’s damp atmosphere. Secondly it allows the owner to advertise their brand through a choice of colours and design.

Back in railway history, I wager Mr Stephenson didn’t bother with paint for the second reason, applying just enough to prevent the metal deteriorating.

So why is the chosen paint scheme such an emotive subject? And I should point out here that my particular grief is with those who are not involved in the preservation of a particular loco but seem to think they can tell the owners what colours it should carry.

“Because large logo is hellfire”, “Because XYZ loco never carried it in BR service”, “Because I once had this loco in that livery”, “Because that livery was the start of the end”, “Because these locos never carried that livery in BR service”, “…

OK, let us unpick these particular issues:

a) Starting with the last one. OK so the loco didn’t carry it in BR service, but for several preserved locos they have been in private hands longer that they ever were for BR, so why not look at what might have been had they survived a little longer. Imagination is a powerful thing and shouldn’t be ignored.

b) Because that livery was the start of the end, this frequently is levelled at the NSE liveries when applied to class 50s. However for a small number of enthusiasts this is how they remember them, so why not recreate it?

c) I’m sure we’ve almost all had at least one loco that has followed us around. So over the years we’ve had it in what ever livery it carried at that time. Perhaps not a bad reason to chose a livery but unless you own the loco not a good arguement to put to those that do.

d) Why is BR ownership the only marker of authenticity? Many locos worked for only a few years under BR then had an even longer career with the National Coal Board before entering preservation. Should these examples only be painted in NCB’s colours? But I see very few are.

e) It is true some liveries suit some loco designs better than others. And aesthetics are at least one good reason for a choice of colour scheme.

If we followed all the rules dictated by the paint police (outlined above), probably all the class 50s would be large logo, and many other classes would have just two choices (green or blue)….

Surely there is room for all liveries whether they are authentic or not. And because locos in preservation are privately owned, why shouldn’t the owners decide.

I for one are waiting for the furry that will be unleashed if one private owner decides to apply his own livery in a preservation setting. But why should they be subject to ridicule or rudeness for a decision, which in all fairness, is their’s to make? Why shouldn’t they advertise their brand, in their way?

So stop wasting energy arguing over the livery. Just protect the metal and agree that this is the best form of advertising hording available.