Jump to content

Compound2632

Members
  • Posts

    16,002
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by Compound2632

  1. But they were buses and that's what buses are designed to do...
  2. That detail* I hadn't heard before. I had been going to comment on the hazards of genuine MEK but noting that @jamie92208 appears to live in a well-ventilated part of France. One of the dampers on my modelling progress at the moment is that all these solvents give off an odour and should be used in a well-ventilated space, which is hard to come by with my other half working at home and complaining of the cold if the doors and windows are open. *Probably not a detail from George's point of view.
  3. Interesting. Do you mean left-hand window as seen from the inside or the outside? The photo of the interior of a driving compartment was, I believe, taken in Derby works, certainly on 6 April 1908, so shows the equipment as first installed. Perhaps in the light of experience it was found more convenient to re-position the regulator - or possibly the instructions follow the later LMS layout (I don't know; I've no photos of that).
  4. Interesting to read Polly Toynbee expressing much the same view in The Guardian today - only wallpaper rather than curtains.
  5. If one looks at photos of Merlin, closing one eye, G N can easily look like C R.
  6. Various theories have been advanced either by Webb or on his behalf, to the effect that the low pressure system would slip into its optimum position relative to the high pressure system, and of course the avoidance of the additional friction introduced by coupling rods - a very real issue with the manufacturing tolerances of the 1880s. But what the uncoupled driving axles really gave was a longer wheelbase than was practicable for a coupled engine at the time - 9'8" on the Dreadnaughts and Teutonics as against 8'3" on the Precedent 2-4-0s - and hence an enormous (for the time) grate area of 20.5 sq ft, compared to the Precedent's 17.1 sq ft. The compounds had boilers pressed to 175 psi vs 150 psi for the Precedents. So altogether a much more powerful engine, which was what Webb knew was needed, even before the benefits of compounding were taken into account.
  7. As if that sort of thing hasn't been going on all the time over the last 18 months with a blind eye being turned in many quarters of the media. At least there are hopeful signs now of chickens coming home to roost. (Or is it pigeons? Turkeys?)
  8. Having them built at Woolwich, yes, I believe so.
  9. That is how our parliamentary system works - MPs are representatives not delegates. If they were not, we might as well have legislation by plebiscite. We've seen well enough where that gets us.
  10. The LNER system was based on the GNR system; I'm not sure if this originated with Ivatt or Gresley. The really confusing thing is that the class designations were changed, so Ivatt's Class J21 0-6-0s became LNER Class J1, and all GNR atlantics were C1 until the LNER reclassified the large-boilered ones C1 and the Klondykes C2. I think that must be right as the system was not used at Nine Elms before the first batch of Jubilee 0-4-2s, A12, all Adams' earlier LSWR engines having been built by Beyer, Peacock or Neilsons, and taking a class designation from the number of the first class member. Similarly, Drummond's 700 Class 0-6-0s buck the system, being built by Dübs. The T9s are a curious case: 31 were built by Dübs so have no order designation but the first of the class were G9 and K9 of 1899, followed by O9 and T9 in 1900, and X9 and G10 in 1901. So if you really want to put the wind up a Southern / BR(S) modeller, learn the construction table; then you can look at their Hornby model and say "that's a nice G10 you've got there" (or whatever).
  11. D526 45 ft brake composites Nos. 3401, 3417, 3488,3521, 3543, 3567, and 3572 converted in 1907, along with D502 43 ft brake thirds Nos. 0334, 0413, 0444, 0475, 0500, 746, and 1131. "No record appears to exist of the period they continued to run, but it is hardly likely that they lasted much beyond the 1920s" [R.E. Lacy & G. Dow, Midland Railway Carriages Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1986) p. 315]. The brake composites were a single lot of 20, lot 109 of March 1884, whereas the brake thirds were built to several lots, ordered in 1882 and 1886 [R.E. Lacy & G. Dow, Midland Railway Carriages Vol. 1 (Wild Swan, 1986) p. 101]. The composites were therefore 23 years old at the time of conversion and the thirds either 21 or 25. I suspect that the ones with duplicate numbers (0-prefix) would have been from the 1882 lots. The book life of a Midland carriage seems to have been around 23 years. In December 1905, there were 368 4-wheel bogie carriages on the duplicate list, 22 first class (which is curious); 135 composite (probably including the majority of the 40 ft composites and brake composites); and 211 third class (probably including all the 40 ft carriages) - so, pretty much carriages built up to c. 1881/82, i.e. 23/24 years old [Midland Railway Study Centre Item 77-11822 "Valuation of Coaching Stock December 1905"]. A bit more can be learned by reading up on VCR-fitted locomotives [S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 1 (Irwell Press, 2000), p. 105]. Originally seven 0-6-0Ts of the 1102 class of 1874 were equipped (duplicate stock being used again) but these were evidently found unsatisfactory, being replaced by seven 0-4-4Ts of the 1252 class, built 1887/6. "When motor train working ceased in 1917, these engines had the fittings removed." The VCR gear was fitted to four 0-4-4Ts in 1923/4 but no more until the LMS decided to standardise on the VCR system at the end of 1926; 39 0-4-4Ts were equipped between 1927 and 1935 along with a number of ex-LNWR tank engines; it would seem that ex-LNWR motor trailers were converted to the VCR system at this time; conversions of ex-Birmingham District 48 ft brake thirds and composites of 1908/9 as driving trailers and trailers had taken place by 1931 [R.E. Lacy & G. Dow, Midland Railway Carriages Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1986) p. 472]; later some LMS standard 57 ft carriages were converted too. So it seems there were two periods of motor train operation, 1907-1917, using 1252 class 0-4-4Ts and D526 composites and D502 thirds, operating piggy-in-the-middle, and 1927 onwards when the LMS greatly expanded the use of motor trains, with the engine at one end. The unknown seems to be what motor services were worked by the four engines fitted with VCR gear in 1923/4 - did they use the 1907 converted carriages? There is an article in the queue for publication in the Midland Railway Society Journal on the LMS motor trains by Reg Instone, with another in preparation on the particularly complicated history of motor train operation on the S&DJR from 1927. (I have had sight of both these but none of the information above is drawn from them.) One other engine was fitted with VCR gear in Midland days. When it was taken off the 0-4-4Ts in 1917, one set was fitted to 4-2-2 No. 600, the pioneer Johnson single, old No. 25 of 1887, along with a Deeleyesque cab, for working the General Superintendent's service car - converted from steam railmotor No. 2234. The VCR gear was taken off No. 600 in 1927, presumably to be recycled for one of the 0-4-4Ts converted in that year [S. Summerson, Midland Railway Locomotives Vol. 1 (Irwell Press, 2000), p. 99]: [Embedded link to catalogue thumbnail of Midland Railway Study Centre Item 62732.] Rather annoyingly, neither this photo nor the well-known broadside view of the ensemble in works grey [MRSC Item 64184] show the VCR gear, since on Midland engines it was fitted on the left-hand side of the smokebox. (The LMS continued to fit it on the left-hand side of ex-Midland engines and also the 2P 0-4-4Ts but on the right-hand side on ex-LNWR engines.) So, yes, elastic use of Rule 1. But I hope you've modelled the interior of the driving compartment: [NRM DY 2271, released under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) licence by the National Railway Museum.]
  12. I understood that to be a post-Armistice measure the help tide over the transition from armaments manufacture, e.g. the ninety LNWR Prince of Wales class locomotives built by Beardmore in 1920-21.
  13. As @Corbs posted, what? And in the pre-Grouping period, there were many lines that relied on the trade for their locomotives - the Midland is a prime example - batches of five or ten at Derby, typically built as renewals on revenue account, but when it was 50 or 100 new goods engines needed, it was off to Sharps, Neilsons, etc. They were no different to the other big four in that respect and you can count on the toes of one foot the pre-Grouping companies that built more than a handful of 0-4-0Ts. The main line companies simply didn't have the kind of jobs for which such an engine was suited.
  14. Unless you're a wolf. BTW, did you know that an LP has just one groof one each side?
  15. Crudeness my foot! It would be an interesting experiment to put a mixed portfolio of photos of Modbury and @wenlock's Sherton Abbas in front of people not familiar with either and ask them to identify the scale! Did that photo of your Dean Goods alongside Dave's get taken? Indeed, the 1921 film purports to show modern brick making methods but the brick handling methods would have been familiar to a medieval master brick-maker.
  16. Phew, that was close... But @Nearholmer has pulled us back from the brink into the civilised world of British democratic politics.
  17. There's plenty of them claim that. The next one won't be able to.
  18. At considerable personal risk, I'll offer that BR, whilst retaining the official classification in use from 1923, gave these engines the unusual power classification 1P2F - reflecting the fact that although originally goods engines, these useful machines were widely used for passenger work in East Anglia, per the photo. BR used the LMS formula for calculating power class - tractive effort at 50 mph for passenger, at 25 mph for freight - with an empirical curve for de-rating effective pressure as a function of piston speed. But I rather doubt that much East Anglian branch line passenger work saw speeds much above 25 mph, so the 1P classification was probably rather redundant!
  19. Wandering off from wagons a bit but to keep things ticking over, the Midland Railway Study Centre has a good collection of uniform items, including Item 30628, the "Oakham Hoard" unearthed in 2017 in the rear garden of No. 141 Brooke Road, Oakham: [Embedded link to catalogue image.]
  20. I have in mind the Lunesdale hill farm where we stay every summer - rather more marginal than a lowland dairy or arable farm and dependent on its small dairy herd (about 15 - 20 cows in milk) for regular income and Eid for lamb sales - the bottom having fallen out of the market for wool. Certainly not Brexiteers. I don't have that much sympathy for people who can get into slim fit jeans - envy, possibly!
  21. As a frequent user of that road (the A404) I have to point out that very little of the traffic is local, mostly cutting between the M4 and M40 avoiding one of the most congested sections of the M25; this is especially true from Friday evenings to Sundays at the moment with weekend closures of the M4 for smartening.
×
×
  • Create New...