Jump to content

keefer

Members
  • Content Count

    3,377
  • Joined

Community Reputation

2,014 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. C6696 I think this would technically be a 253 - this class covers the NE-SW sets (of which this is one) identifiable by having only one TF and a TRSB buffet. The power car is one of the DM type (with no guard's office) and not allocated to a specific set.
  2. There was a derailment caused by this - container was overloaded and the items inside were not secure and shifted in transit, so also causing a loading imbalance. This in turn caused the wagon it was on to derail. Now I just have to try and remember when/where it was so I can find the report (may be on the RAIB site)
  3. The Names list at railway-centre.com has D60 named, without ceremony, at Derby Works on 01/05/64. The Regiment-named ones were similarly named without ceremony at Works but had plates with the Coats-of-Arms incorporated. Did any of them have a subsequent dedication ceremony?
  4. So did I, it wasn't until you pointed it out that I noticed V & B are next to each other on a keyboard!
  5. Always meant to say, well done on trying to get such a reference work done. Not my area at all so had to rely on published sources, no spotting notes I'm afraid!
  6. Didn't spot that! Re: the locos. The quoted info missed the distinction (as did I)
  7. https://www.departmentals.com/departmental/97703 In the comments, it mentions the conversions 97701-10 (also that some were originally in the 975xx series): "97 701 and 97 702 converted at Wolverton in 1974 and ran as DB975178 and DB975179 but also managed to be incorrectly numbered 977363 and 977362 (these numbers already used for ex 4-sub de icing trailers on the Southern Region) Doncaster then converted 97 707 and 97 708 in 1975 running as LDB975407 and LDB975408 these numbers were then used in 1985 for class 40 012 and 40 118. Doncaster then convert
  8. You certainly managed to get out and about at the right time, before a lot of big changes came in and older infrastructure started to disappear
  9. 254006 short-formed due to no dining cars, iirc this would get a TRUK /TRSB pair?
  10. It's mentioned in Parkin as well. All to do with how the brain recognises words/letter patterns within other words etc Something which can particularly affect things like website names if they haven't been thought through - one I know is www.guitarsexchange.com - where you can exchange guitars, not where you can turn a Fender into a Gibson!
  11. Agreed Phil, the <22mph factor seems to be primarily about how such a slow-speed shunt could cause any derailment, much less on 3 bogies along the train and by such a large amount.
  12. For some reason, the shots of the 92 and 66 look like they're on an impressive garden layout! Looking down over the car park wall seems like as if over the garden wall.
  13. There's a section about the DMU engines & drivetrains at railcar.co.uk https://www.railcar.co.uk/technology/
  14. I must admit that, as an occasional viewer of this thread, i didn't realise it was in N! I'd assumed it was 00. Excellent modelling and really gives the impression of a railway in its real (rather remote) setting.
  15. I thought the orange conduit (well, when clean) was for the remote fire suppression system so would be on the 27/1s But looking at photos, it might've been for the ETH, so 27/2 only. Pic showing both sides of 27/1: https://railphotoprints.uk/p582944081/h5b84949e shows no conduit. Class 27/2: https://railphotoprints.uk/p582944081/h349847e7 Shows conduit (I was mis-remembering that it was thicker/more obvious) As you said, on one side only: https://railphotoprints.uk/p582944081/h280660a0 Conduit missing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.