Compound2632

But seriously, the whole system of scale / gauge description is a mess of different conventions so adding one more makes little odds! 009 and 0-16.5 are absurdities, because they both tell you that it's a gauge (16.5 mm or 32 mm, respectively) but actually another gauge (9 mm or 16.5 mm). Although to be more precise, both 00 and 0 represent scale/gauge combinations - 4 mm/ft scale on 16.5 mm gauge, 7 mm/ft on 32 mm gauge. On the other hand, one has P4 and S7, where the letter implies a set of track and wheel standards and the digit the scale, in mm/ft, but the gauge is not specified - these standards can in principle be applied to models of prototypes in any gauge - witness a number of fine Irish models to these standards. Then there's the utter nonsense of building kits sold as "00/H0 scale" or worse "00/H0 scale"! Excuse my rambling, but I used to be on committees that concerned themselves with terminology, nomenclature, and symbols in the physical sciences.

i look forward to the metre-gauge 7 mm scale range. OMG!

But there is a plan: allowing the road system to fall into disrepair will reduce traffic. "No roads, no cars."

My point was that it might be bigaugal, in which case the scale is the relevant descriptor. (If one wants to be driven by the gauge rather than the scale, go for 1:36 scale, which is spot on for 1' 11½" gauge on 16.5 mm gauge track.)

Perhaps they've got replacement 14 mm gauge wheelsets up their sleeves?

Goes without saying. Which is why it wasn't said.

Yes indeed but there's also no doubt that improvements in passenger comfort were one of the many factors that from the turn of the century ate into operating margins - all part and parcel of the 20th century slide into unprofitability.

To be fair to him, it's undoubtedly true that at the end there was not a single airport in British hands.

Ah, we are working to different definitions of 'maintain'. I was thinking, fewer bearings to keep adequately lubricated, fewer bearing springs to set, simpler brake linkage to keep in adjustment... Less to go wrong, all round!

The last point is undoubtedly true. As to speed, were there speed restrictions on non-bogie stock that would actually affect their ordinary usage? I do struggle to see how three or four four-wheelers could be more expensive to maintain than a pair of bogie carriages, with the added complexity of the bogie suspension.

I suppose that would be in the days when there was still a strong public service ethos: I imagine it was a public health measure, designed to ensure that these good Yorkshire folk got a good hosing down and scrubbing up once a week, or however often they made the trip.

I don't know. I can see how it can be a thing. The dog channels its owner's ill-controlled temper and urge to violence. So when some innocent passer-by gets savagely mauled, it's the dog that gets put down, not the owner. Whether that is a good thing... But as I said, I'm a cat person. In fact, I am our cat's emotional support human. Except that I'm out of favour just now because I've stripped all the beds. The look I got...

Much more likely! Does that tie in with (a) standard Swindon practice of the time and (b) the history of this locomotive?

The gas pipe runs along opposite sides of the roofs - so on the same side of the set when coupled with brake ends outermost. Does this demonstrate that they were built as a pair? Destination board brackets on one of the pair only - the same seems to be the case with the St Ives set (electrically-lit?) but I can't see any on the Helston pair. Apologies for this thread drift away from 3-plank wagons!

That was my first thought, but then I became convinced I wasn't seeing the increased spacing for the first and second class compartments in the rear carriage, but looking again, I've come back round to your view. That would mean three E40 pairs, one assigned to the Helston branch; where were the other two? This set has two first class, two second class, and eight third class compartments, carried on eight axles, in heavy bogie frames. The equivalent accommodation could be provided by a set of four-wheelers - first/second composite, third, and third brake - on six axles, and altogether lighter running gear, and cheaper to construct, too. One can see why many more of the four-wheelers were built than these low-roof bogie non-corridor carriages!

Connection made: The name of P. Ellis turns up frequently in the Derby C&W Drawing register, as draughtsman of very many drawings from 1873 up to 1900, and a handful more up to 1905. (There is also a C.C. Ellis, prolific from 1898 onwards - a son, perhaps?) HMRS members who are signed up to the Electronic Area Group have access to a pdf scan of Railway Carriages & Wagons: their Design and Construction, by Sidney Stone M.I. Mech. E., published in 1903. Stone was at that time Assistant Locomotive Works Manager at Gorton, GCR, having held similar positions with the Metropolitan and Ashbury carriage & wagon companies; his earlier career had been on the GER and LSWR. The book is dedicated to James Holden, who was, presumably, his first chief. In the chapter "Wheels, Axles, and Axle-boxes", p. 108 (p. 30 of the second half of the scan), Stone writes: "A good type of wagon axle-box, designed by Mr. Peter Ellis, is shown by fig. 216. It is adapted for the use of grease, and is extensively used on the Midland R. and by private owners." There follows a technical description; the figure does indeed show the familiar 10A axlebox, though without the MR initials cast on the front. So, the Ellis axlebox originated on the Midland; interestingly, at a time - 1888/89 - when, according to the C&W committee minutes, difficulty was being experienced in getting adequate supplies of castings from the trade.

Does the Swindon builder's plate say "ANO 1873"? (It's well known that Swindon sometimes struggled with the spelling of names from classical mythology, so "ano" for "anno" is, I suppose, a possible error.)

They were, after all, a version of the most ubiquitous and successful of Irish locomotives, the GS&WR Class 101.

Making up for the lack of 3-plankers, many other interesting features. The track is a very light-section flat-bottomed rail, invisibly spiked to cross-timbers (rather than longitudinal baulks) except by the Station Master's waistcoat, where it switches to conventional chaired bullhead rail, with a significant step in ground level. Also, by the same gent's right shoulder, the explanation of the elliptical roof commented on in an earlier photo. Is the portly chap in the bowler, in the background, a GWR inspector or some such grade, or just a farmer on his way to the bank? Are the carriages an E40 and D16 pair? https://gwrcoaches.org.uk/LowRoofs.shtml. The guard's doors are inward opening on both (open with the lad standing next to the doorway on the nearer carriage, no bottom hinge visible on the further) though the diagrams appear to show outward-opening doors. These and similar diagrams (D17, E49) were built in batches of 6 each in 1895/6, which suggest the provision of a dozen two-coach sets - can all the allocations be traced? There were next another 6 longer brake tricomposites, E51, which were evidently an attempt at a one-coach train, though the rather nice photo shows the addition of a 4-wheel van.

I'm browning nicely.

I've just been asked if I'm going to be ready to eat in 15 minutes.

The riposte that no doubt came to you as you cycled away was "I was not talking about the dog."

The heritage database is sometimes wrong!

No one wants to mess with a biker who has been reduced to a push-bike - knowing that he'd already be in a state of barely-suppressed frustration.

Some dog walkers behave in just the same entitled way as some cyclists. The paths in our local nature reserve are clearly signed "dogs must be kept on a lead" (also "no cycling") but, setting aside the possibility of a high rate of illiteracy, it is evident that many of these people take it for granted that rules don't apply to them or their dogs. Would you offer employment to someone with such a mindset? [In the interests of full disclosure, I'm a cat person not a dog person.]