Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


buffalo last won the day on November 16 2009

buffalo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,232 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Interests
    GWR and S&DJR 4mm EM P4

Recent Profile Visitors

1,339 profile views
  1. The seven wire type appears to have been very widespread, though the lower runs can easily be hidden in the grass. Why wouldn't bridge rail strainer posts be available? The GWR had been using bridge rail of varying weights and profiles since 1838, so I doubt there was any shortage of worn rail or, indeed, of recovered sleepers which had been quite normal on standard gauge since the 1860s. The only problem I'm aware of with using bridge rail in fences at an early date is that I've yet to find a definite example in photos before about 1890. Not a problem with Ian's period. Nick
  2. And it looks somewhat like this when built Nick
  3. Perhaps because the GWR mechanism had proved to be quite adequate for the job since its introduction around 1905, unlike some of the bizarre rope and pulley arrangements seen on some other railways. Though the vacuum approach was also effective, it was probably quite expensive to adapt engines to use it and gave no significant benefit over the GWR mechanical system. As to connection/disconnection, the mechanical linkage simply required insertion/removal of a pin to connect the sliding part to the universal joint on the engine's buffer beam. Hardly complex or time consuming in itself, but r
  4. Don, definitely red in 1894. I imagine it lasted until WW1. You can read the full 1894 and 1907 painting instructions at the bottom of this page. One of the main differences between them is the "Ripolin" paints that were introduced in 1897. Nick
  5. I used them on a previous EM layout, but, as you say, there's no effective way of coupling the flexible part to a vertical wire from a Tortoise or similar. I coupled them to an angle crank (also a C&L product IIRC) as seen below. The pin through the crank went through the baseboard in a tube to another angle crank below. As you can see, the flexible part of the bar has a tendency to distort where not supported by the internal wire. It worked, but I was never happy with it and have used other approaches (e.g. Masokits stretcher bars) since. Nick
  6. Yes, the green tank fronts only appeared on preserved examples. . 6400-9 were built in 1932 and would have had GREAT WESTERN on the tank sides. 6410-19 were built in November and December 1934 so would have had the shirtbutton when built. Apart from the topfeed, none of these were built with bunker steps on the fireman's side, nor were they initially fitted with whistle shields. Nick
  7. No, an injector without an overflow pipe would be very messy, if not dangerous for anyone standing alongside when it was operated, whether at ground level or on a platform. From the photo in Pannier Papers No 3, 5700 retained the earlier type of pipe, at least on the right hand side. It passed down through the running plate and is mostly hidden behind the valance and steps. If you look carefully, you can see the trailing end emerging at the bottom rear of the steps. A much neater arrangement than the later modification on most examples where the pipe passes out over the running plate, below th
  8. Yes, I agree, but only the first thirty (3001-3030) were built as 2-2-2 or converted from broad gauge 2-2-2. The real Achilles class (3031-80) were built as 4-2-2 from 1894 to 1899, with conversion of the earlier engines also starting in 1894. It's difficult to see, but I think this one has small clack valves and vertical feed pipes below them. This would suggest either that it is one of the final 1897-9 batch as these were fitted from 3096 onwards, or the photo is within a few years of this date as they were soon fitted to most of the class. The engine appears to be fitted with socket lam
  9. Yes, an early GWR type, 290 were built from 1871-4. Details, a drawing and 1898 photo of one at Pontyrhyll in Atkins et al. They were smaller and lighter (9' wb, 81/2 or 9T) than the ones built after 1882, some of which eventually became AA16. Nick
  10. That is an older A28 as in the Hornby/Aifix model. The OP asked about the later, 1951 BR built, A38. The interior of these had a few changes in the early years and only the first lot, W220-W234, appeared in carmine and cream. There is a description and photos of the interior variations in John Lewis' Great Western Auto Trailers, Part 2. For other photos on the web searching for the A38 preserved at Didcot might be the best approach. Nick
  11. In your example, divide the measured door height in mm by full size height in feet, i.e.22/6.5. This gives 3.3846... or, roughly 3.4. This then gives 3.4mm to one foot. Nick
  12. Some folk have very strange ideas of the GWR! Dismissing the Armstrong and Dean eras as 'oddities' is just bizarre. Then, what about all the saddle tanks? Many were still around until the thirties. Conversion to panniers took a long time. Nick
  13. Hi Andy, For the original builds there are three different types. 1076-81 built in 1870 were side tanks with a 5'2" overhang behind the rear axle. 727-56 and 947-66 built 1872-4 had short 5-course saddle tanks with the smokebox exposed and a rear overhang of 6'. 1134 onwards built 1874-81 had full-length 6-course tanks and a 6'9" rear overhang. Initially all had just a spectacle plate and cabs started to appear from 1878 on new builds, and throughout the 1880s on earlier engines. Other variations include chimneys from bell-mouth types on the earliest engines to typical Dean types on later
  14. Good question! Strictly speaking, the extended version is the 1134 class. Earlier engines would have had side tanks or short saddle tanks at your period. Most of the printed photos I'm aware of are after the 1888-1902 rebuilds and the best 1880s photos are of the broad gauge convertibles in broad gauge form (e.g. 1256 in Geof Sheppard's Broad Gauge Locomotives). Do you have a copy of the RCTS book The Locomotives of the Great Western Railway, Part 5, Six-coupled Tanks? It does have some small photos from the 1880s, but the text is essential to understanding the early development of these engin
  15. The banana transport story is rather split between here and Mikkel's blog. Atkins et al. suggest that the bunches were laid on a bed of straw in early banana vans, maybe suspending them came later? See also the first photo on this page. Boxes, however, were used for redistribution from the ripening warehouses long before the seventies.. See, for example, the second photo on this page. Nick
  • 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.