Jump to content

PenrithBeacon

Members
  • Content Count

    4,218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by PenrithBeacon

  1. The LNW was parsimonious with coal! Actually it's paramount position in the matter of Lancashire services gave it the ability to ignore much of the opposition. Enthusiasts tend to like the idea of racing and so lionise the MR etc. I think the LNW knew it could afford to ignore much it, and as far as the Liverpool traffic is concerned, all of it. The MR, GCR, GNR just couldn't compete at all as far as Liverpool is concerned and their affect on the Manchester traffic was negligible excepting for those cities the LNW couldn't conveniently reach anyway. Freight was a different story, but there was plenty for everybody until WW1 intervened.
  2. They were quick for the day, but it was a long way round and it became a serious issue when the GCR withdraw support. After this the route through Derbyshire on secondary lines to the Midland at Ripley took a lot of time out of the service. Then there was the arduous and slow climbing of the Peak route. The GCR/GNR services to Lancashire never really competed for end to end KX-Lancashire, but the intermediate stops added aspects that the LNWR and Midland couldn't provide. The shortest route was the LNWR one and it was the shortest by a long way. It was also the less hilly, a major advantage. People tend to get misty eyed about Victorian competition, and it's true that the route to Manchester, with exceptionally hard running KX-Retford, could just about hold its own with the LNW, but projecting the service on to Liverpool and it was bound to fail as the LNW had much the best way south. The GC/GN split made the GN concentrate on freight to Manchester and Liverpool over the Midland and CLC and I should think the railway's bottom line was all the better for it. I think the passenger services, or what remained of them, were withdrawn by the LNER, but I'm not sure about the dates offhand.
  3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GWR_3700_Class_3440_City_of_Truro Not claiming that this is the first, but it seems that the City class locomotives were converted from slide to piston c1914-16 consequencial to superheating. I would imagine that similar processes were at work with other GWR classes but that these classes were being dealt with concurrently so the answer to your question might be difficult. I would guess that the first Churchward design would be the Saints and that would be a good approximation. But I'm not sure. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GWR_2900_Class Looking at this the OP is really one of was there a GW locomotive before the Saints that had piston valves?
  4. I imagine it would! The more mileage over its own system would mean less money paid to the GCR. Not quite on topic, but then we have strayed far from the OP, when the GCR opened its London extension it withdrew its agreement with the GNR about GNR traffic over its system. The latter wasn't too fussed about expresses to Lancashire as they were hopelessly uncompetitive from KX but it did care about freight and minerals to Lancashire on the CLC. These were run from the GNR over the Midland via Butterley and the Peak Forest line and very successfully too
  5. The rail connection to the Manchester docks was over the LNWR over whose tracks it also operated its Chester-Manchester services into Exchange. I am not aware of any GWR service into the Manchester docks (powered by its own engines that is), but the GWR did run into Liverpool Road goods and it had a goods office in the centre of Manchester, but I can't remember where. The GWR didn't own any tracks in the Manchester area. See
  6. Yes, you're right, Low Gill; thanks. I had intended to take a week based at Ingleton last month, again confounded by the lockdown. perhaps again next year, assuming a vaccine to be available by then.
  7. No, the S&C didn't make sense and it started as a political ploy by the Midland to get access to the L&C at Low Moor for Anglo-Scottish traffic. This isn't the place to go into this but things went belly up and after much to-ing and fro-ing the Midland was obliged to build the railway by parliament. There are books on the topic, lots on Amazon
  8. No absolutely not. The natural boundary of the MR was Bristol. It only took over the S&DR because of the joint agreement with the LSWR, so limiting it's liability. Even that was a mistake. The B&E was, and is, very much a rural railway, Exeter was very small in the mid nineteenth century, not much there for the MR. Regards
  9. For those who want to know about the subject https://www.abebooks.co.uk/9780951936719/Locomotive-Valves-Valve-Gears-Yoder-0951936719/plp Excellent, but does do poppet gears which hadn't, at the time of writing, been applied to locomotives. Well worth having in your library. Cheers
  10. The LSWR was a joint owner of the S&DJR. There was another connection at Bournemouth West and Broadstone
  11. There was a creamery on the west side of the GWR at Bridgewater that was served by the S&DJR, see https://transportvideo.com/product/branch-line-to-burnham/ Cheers
  12. Yes this is true in part, the Somerset Central was BG and the DVR was SG. It was the conversion and the subsequent sale to the MR/LSWR that caused the animosity, which seems to have been carried on to extreme length by some staff.
  13. https://maps.nls.uk/view/106020887 I believe the connection to the GWR was under the road bridge on the map. IIRC a single slip onto the GWR up mainline. Cheers EDIT: I can't see a connection between the two railways on this map although they were very close https://maps.nls.uk/view/106021952 Wasn't the S&D Jnt line to Wells taken out in the early fifties? IIRC the animosity between the two railways started when the S&D converted to standard gauge and the two railways became fierce competitors. That was before the line was joint MR/LSW. I'm sure it's all in Robin Atthill's book.
  14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy_valve_gear https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=joy+valve+gear+animation&docid=608026000229796502&mid=1BB9ECE8C6C665BFD8AA1BB9ECE8C6C665BFD8AA&view=detail&FORM=VIRE https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=joy+valve+gear+animation&docid=608010611422070033&mid=4E683F8477154B1B64E84E683F8477154B1B64E8&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
  15. I think the loop on DGs is too short, the curve was a B6 crossover and the vehicle a BR standard brake van. I'm still looking for a reliable coupling that doesn't require me to go all OCD to get it to work. Last year I noticed that the blokes who exhibit Flintcombe use S&W but only on one end, the other being a simple loop. Might give that a go. Cheers, and thanks for the thread.
  16. My DGs had problems with lwb wagons. They kept pushing them off the rails. I dumped DGs Cheers
  17. Just out of interest does it have a BS381C number?
  18. I notice that Sharman wheels are available, in very limited quantities, from Precision Paints. I've just ordered a set, in P4, for a Jinty. One thing though, although I haven't seen a Sharman wheel for decades, I have a memory of there being a brass insert for the axle, these seem to be a straight forward hole in the nylon, similar to AGW wheels. Regards
  19. I didn't make it clear that I was talking about Pacifics but then again I was replying to a post about pacifics or at least wide fireboxes. In that context both Churchward and Raven were behind the times, very much behind the times. Gresley, on the other hand was right on the ball about wide fireboxes and Pacifics although his valve events left a lot to be desired. In this, of course he was very typical of British locomotive engineers of the period, the proceedings of the Institute of Locomotive Engineers in the twenties make that much very clear. Lots of controversy there.
  20. Know sweat: scientists solve mystery behind body odour https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/jul/27/know-sweat-scientists-solve-mystery-behind-body-odour?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
  21. I was under the impression that most of the closures were under Harold Wilson's government when Barbara Castle was Minister of Transport. Almost all of the closures could, and can be, justified; as can the few re-openings that are occurring now. I see that this morning's Guardian has a proposal in it to electrify the motorway network for HGVs! Unexpected that.
  22. There is, potentially, another reason. This photo has been scanned and that could affect the outcome. I suspect that the blue sky has affected the light reflected from the engine, but it's all speculation without seeing the original slide/print
  23. I think the point about Gresley's designs is that he followed the latest design trends in the USA but adapted them to UK standards. The designs by Churchward and Raven were very conservative by the time they were built, this being particularly true of Raven. The LYR and LMS design offices were very much better at following US trends but none of their engines were built which might have been a good thing bearing in mind lubrication and valve gear issues. I think Stanier got it pretty much right with the Princess class and it was only his lack of experience in the details of superheating which caused the engine not to deliver right from the off.
×
×
  • 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.