Jump to content
We are aware of the intermittent site speed issues at the moment. Please be patient and don't repeatedly click things as that compounds the issue.

4069

Members
  • Posts

    215
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 4069

  1. On 04/10/2021 at 21:17, Headstock said:

     

    Good evening 4069,

     

    not completely the case, the Hornby model has the smokebox type fitted to the minority of the class. The majority had the type as represented by Tony's other two models.

     

    See link.

    https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_11_2012/post-98-0-55738700-1352037973.jpg 294.52 kB · 0 downloads

    My apologies- I didn't mean to suggest that any of the O1s had the wrong type of door. The point I was trying to make is that so often the shape of the smokebox door is a weak point in a whitemetal kit. Thick, clumsy-looking doors that do not match the subtle curve of the real thing spoil the face of the loco and stand out like a sore thumb. RTR manufacturers usually, but not always, get this right.

    • Like 1
    • Agree 2
  2. 13 hours ago, Ian Rathbone said:

    The evidence is a works grey photo in Russell’s Locos of the GWR. It shows the lining on the cylinders on a background that is not black. Further examination shows lining around the frame apertures, again on a non-black background. One can only assume that the cylinders and frames were Indian Red. The caveat is whether works grey photos were followed literally in the painting of locos in service. In my opinion the few that were painted prior to 1906 probably had red frames, but not for long.

     

    Ian R

    I'm not suggesting you are wrong about the frame colour, but surely every Swindon works grey photograph shows light frames and cylinders, even in the era when we know both were black in service?

    • Like 1
  3. 41 minutes ago, ColinK said:

    Just found a better photo of the bridge bash at Plymouth.  What it looks like to me is that the lorry was just under the maximum height of the bridge. But when it started to climb the steep hill just beyond it, the top of the truck caught the bridge.

     

    Going to be an interesting (and profitable) one for the lawyers - ‘the sign says 3.3 metres and my truck is 3.25 metres, so according to the signage I’m OK to pass through’.  If the road has been resurfaced since the signs were errected, the clearance could be less than indicated.  Could change who gets the blame and pays the bills.

     

    One of the major bus companies is working with suppliers to devise a system that alerts the driver through their ticket machine if he/she is approaching a low bridge.

    No- the lorry is 13'4" high and the bridge is signed at 10' 9". No room for doubt there!

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1
    • Informative/Useful 2
  4. I'm glad I took the plunge as it is indeed a very fine book. Nice to see evidence of actual proof-reading, in the correction to the Bath Junction plan date from the pre-publication image posted at the start of this thread. One wonders if that actually cost any sales- it was certainly a close-run thing for me, but the positive things said by people on here tipped the balance.

    • Like 2
    • Agree 1
  5. Blast! I missed the anniversary.

     

    It was my first railway event. I was 11. I'm the boy on the platform on the extreme right of the  picture, clutching a sketch pad 'cos I didn't own a camera.  I still have the paperwork: Special train ticket (child, 50p), Programme, and copy of The Last Drop.

     

     

     

    Barbican001.jpg

    • Like 3
    • Friendly/supportive 1
  6. It's an LSWR box (opened in 1908 as Yeovil Jn East, renamed Yeovil Jn A in 1949) which was fitted with WR-pattern windows in the BR period, probably around 1967 when the box was given a WR lever frame. Subsequent to your photo, the windows were replaced by oddly-proportioned plastic versions of the GWR style, making the box look even stranger. It closed on 12 March 2012. 

    • Informative/Useful 7
×
×
  • Create New...