Bachmann announce Class 117 and Class 121 at Collectors Club event

[caradoc]

Wasn't Ruscombe where, many years ago, a 47-hauled Up freight ran through the end of the Up Loop and demolished the inconveniently-located relay room, knocking out all the signalling ?

Edited July 9, 2020 by caradoc
Spelling mistake

[Taigatrommel]

Whatever the railway term for it, this is the approach to the bridge...

[Roy Langridge]

18 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Sorry but it is Ruscombe with Ruscombe church very clearly visible in the background.  And yes it's my patch - both inside and outside the railway fence - over many years.  In that view you can not only see Ruscombe loop but the site of Ruscombe signal box and it has been shown, correctly, as Ruscombe in every edition of the Quail atlas going back for nearly 30 years and there is (still I presume) a nameboard alongside the railway identifying the location).  There is no such location as Waltham St Lawrence on the GWML and never has been although there was Waltham Siding, now identified as Waltham, over 3 miles east of Ruscombe; between the two there was Shottesbrook although that ceased to be a formally identified railway location in the early 1960s.    There are plenty of decent sources available to check stuff like this, particularly locations such as Ruscombe, where there is more infrastructure than plain running lines so there isn't really any excuse for getting location details wrong.

 

Back to Pressed Steel DMU land.

 

Sorry, but I am with emdpowerrules here. The caption says L124 and L401 "...pass Waltham St Lawrence". The train is passing exactly where captioned, railway location or not. If the photo were to be captioned to mention Ruscombe, then surely the caption would have to be to "... have passed Ruscombe..."?

 

Given in some places you can go 10-15 miles without a "railway" location it is not unreasonable to actually caption a photo with where the train is, not the last or next "railway" location. the latter would be significantly unhelpful.

 

Roy

[Pteremy]

Out of curiosity I looked up this location on the online OS map. 'Milley Bridge' is marked prominently. So if it had been me I suspect that I would have recorded the location as that! 

[mevaman1]

Quick question.  Can these excellent models be run as 2 car sets (as ran in NSE livery on the St Ives branch)?

[AY Mod]

1 minute ago, mevaman1 said:

Quick question.  Can these excellent models be run as 2 car sets (as ran in NSE livery on the St Ives branch)?

 

Yup, a power twin with full functionality.

[Class 158 productions]

I’ve had to run my 117 as a 2 car, as my current plank is too small for the 3 car one. Runs absolutely fine 

[mevaman1]

Thanks Andy and ‘Class 158 productions’.  I can apply the ‘if it ran in Cornwall’ rule as opposed to Rule 1.

[AY Mod]

58 minutes ago, mevaman1 said:

I can apply the ‘if it ran in Cornwall’ rule as opposed to Rule 1.

 

Nearly true, they ran as power twins to Looe but I don't think that applies to NSE flavour.

[mevaman1]

21 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

Nearly true, they ran as power twins to Looe but I don't think that applies to NSE flavour.

Hi Andy

I have photos of NSE liveried power twins at St Ives and on St Blazey.   In 1995/1996 we had 117708 (51336/51378) and 117709 (51344/51386) allocated to PZ.  We also had 117305 which was a Choc/cream NSE mix (51368/51361).

 

Flikr have a photo of 709 if you type ‘117 St Ives’. We also had NSE 101’s which ran with the 117’s on busy days.

 

I have always liked the look of NSE by the sea.

Edited July 10, 2020 by mevaman1
Additional info

[The Stationmaster]

On 09/07/2020 at 15:29, caradoc said:

Wasn't Ruscombe where, many years ago, a 47-hauled Up freight ran through the end of the Up Loop and demolished the inconveniently-located relay room, knocking out all the signalling ?

Yes.  Oh what an evening that was.  It was during the late afternoon and right at the end of the loop there was what many called a 'relay room' because it was a standard relay room building although in fact it was basically for cable terminations and junctions handling all the signalling circuits between the area to the east of the building and the area to the west of it.   The loco (not sure what it was but might well have been. Brush Type 4 - as they still were in those days) demolished the rather aged stop blocks and then proceeded to wreck the building and its contents, which also included all the power circuits.

 

It destroyed the comms between Twyford and Slough panels and all the signals on the Down Lines east of Ruscombe went black as did all of  Twyford panel for that end and a whole raft of trains came to a stand as the evening peak got underway with nothing moving, and of course all the SPTs were out as well.   And although every signal but the ones immediately in rear of the overbridge at Ruscombe was an auto not a single Driver moved.  An Assistant DI who lived in Twyford was called out and he drove up to Ruscombe expecting to get there and get trains past the first controlled signal.   But the trains hadn't queued at that signal and Charlie had to walk all the way to Waltham Sidings, over 3 miles, instructing each Driver as he got to their train to work in accordance with the Rule Book and get moving - Handsignalmen were by then in position at Ruscombe.  Even then it was another couple of hours before the back log had cleared the section and temporary block working could be introduced.   The delays were, to put it mildly, horrendous and would have been considerably less if the Drivers had followed the Rules and passed the 'black' auto signals with extreme caution until they joined a queue at the controlled signal at Ruscombe.  it was a clear evening with good visibility and the collision occurred in daylight and it was still light for some hours afterwards so no problem in carefully going past teh signals until they got to Ruscombe and wither found the Handsignalman or a lineside 'phone which worked..

 

The building was never rebuilt and was replaced by a row of location cupboards set back on the bank well clear of anything running through the trap point.

 

On 10/07/2020 at 08:15, Roy Langridge said:

 

Sorry, but I am with emdpowerrules here. The caption says L124 and L401 "...pass Waltham St Lawrence". The train is passing exactly where captioned, railway location or not. If the photo were to be captioned to mention Ruscombe, then surely the caption would have to be to "... have passed Ruscombe..."?

 

Given in some places you can go 10-15 miles without a "railway" location it is not unreasonable to actually caption a photo with where the train is, not the last or next "railway" location. the latter would be significantly unhelpful.

 

Roy

Actually the train is almost exactly opposite the sign, a few feet long,  just out of shot to the left, which says 'Ruscombe' in clear black letters on a white background.  Therefore the train is at Ruscombe - I doubt if anybody driving a train past there has ever heard of Waltham St Lawrence (unless they happen to live in the area).  So whatever the road sign might say the train, which happens to be on a railway, is passing the railway location Ruscombe.

 

Back, at last, from Ruscombe to Bachmann's excellent effort. 

[MJI]

Did they ever work 3 car to Looe?

 

I am about 80% sure I rode in a TCL Liskard Looe

[MJI]

4 minutes ago, MJI said:

Did they ever work 3 car to Looe?

 

I am about 80% sure I rode in a TCL Liskard Looe

 

Actually very sure it was W59520 as I would have noticed it missing.

[66738]

3 hours ago, MJI said:

 

Actually very sure it was W59520 as I would have noticed it missing.

Yes, 117305/B430 (all 3 cars I think) did work the Looe line. Flickr “Looe Dmu“ and image at Liskerd is there.

66738

Edited July 11, 2020 by 66738

[Roy Langridge]

9 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Actually the train is almost exactly opposite the sign, a few feet long,  just out of shot to the left, which says 'Ruscombe' in clear black letters on a white background.  Therefore the train is at Ruscombe - I doubt if anybody driving a train past there has ever heard of Waltham St Lawrence (unless they happen to live in the area).  So whatever the road sign might say the train, which happens to be on a railway, is passing the railway location Ruscombe.

 

Back, at last, from Ruscombe to Bachmann's excellent effort. 

 

To be honest The Stationmaster, you seem intent on having the last say, but fail to grasp the point of captions to photographs. I have admired your knowledge on subjects, but please accept that not everybody has the in-depth knowledge of what is on the railway side of the fence that you obviously do. The photographer has kindly made this photograph available to us and provided us, the user, with information that allows us to understand where the train is, not just the tiny percentage that will have learned that route. I could identify names for parts of the line that I work which demonstrate a deep understanding in my route knowledge, but would be of little use to the vast majority of the people on this forum.

 

I spend a lot of time mapping old railway routes, and I agree that the incorrect captioning of photographs can be a right nuisance. But, I can also assure that my primary requirement (as it is with many people) is to be able to view a photograph, read the caption and marry that with the names on maps (both old and new), not just in railway literature or learned on working a route.

 

Out of interest, the newest Ordnance Survey map have that uses the name Ruscombe anywhere near that location is 1960, ever since then, Milley Bridge and Waltham St.Lawrence are the nearest landmarks.  

 

Yes, it is in the Quail maps (although 1/4 mile west of where the train is) but again, only a small percentage of the viewers of the photo will have Quail maps. Oh, and as for your comment "There is no such location as Waltham St Lawrence on the GWML and never has been although there was Waltham Siding, now identified as Waltham, over 3 miles east of Ruscombe", Quail identifies Waltham WILD at 26.21 - funnily enough, exactly where the train is in that photo.

Roy

 

[Gwiwer]

6 hours ago, MJI said:

Did they ever work 3 car to Looe?

 

I am about 80% sure I rode in a TCL Liskard Looe

3-car trains definitely ran to Looe even after the new station replaced the old and only accommodated two-and-a-half coaches.  I was on board a class 120 triple travelling in the front coach from Liskeard therefore the rear from Coombe Junction.  We stopped alongside nothing at all and - in those days - there was no on-board p.a. to announce our arrival.  Numerous passsengers farther along the carriage could then be seen alighting so we walked forward and arrived in the platform on foot as it were.  

 

Not a 117 on that occasion but I have seen 3-car suburban-style units in the bay at Liskeard so 116/7/8 have gone down there as well.  

[The Stationmaster]

13 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

To be honest The Stationmaster, you seem intent on having the last say, but fail to grasp the point of captions to photographs. I have admired your knowledge on subjects, but please accept that not everybody has the in-depth knowledge of what is on the railway side of the fence that you obviously do. The photographer has kindly made this photograph available to us and provided us, the user, with information that allows us to understand where the train is, not just the tiny percentage that will have learned that route. I could identify names for parts of the line that I work which demonstrate a deep understanding in my route knowledge, but would be of little use to the vast majority of the people on this forum.

 

I spend a lot of time mapping old railway routes, and I agree that the incorrect captioning of photographs can be a right nuisance. But, I can also assure that my primary requirement (as it is with many people) is to be able to view a photograph, read the caption and marry that with the names on maps (both old and new), not just in railway literature or learned on working a route.

 

Out of interest, the newest Ordnance Survey map have that uses the name Ruscombe anywhere near that location is 1960, ever since then, Milley Bridge and Waltham St.Lawrence are the nearest landmarks.  

 

Yes, it is in the Quail maps (although 1/4 mile west of where the train is) but again, only a small percentage of the viewers of the photo will have Quail maps. Oh, and as for your comment "There is no such location as Waltham St Lawrence on the GWML and never has been although there was Waltham Siding, now identified as Waltham, over 3 miles east of Ruscombe", Quail identifies Waltham WILD at 26.21 - funnily enough, exactly where the train is in that photo.

Roy

 

Actually I will have the last word based on very careful research   The  25" OS map, as amended up to 1914  clearly shows the signal box as well within the boundaries of Ruscombe Parish (a boundary which incidentally is in the same position today according to modern maps). The original sidings and signal box were wholly within Ruscombe Parish hence no doubt the name 'Ruscombe Sidings' .  And of course today's right hand running junction is well within Ruscombe Parish.  Thus the GWR named the location after the parish in which it was situated and BR had no reason to change it, especially as the Up Relief Line end of the running junction is even further into Ruscombe Parish than the 1961 double junction and all of the original pointwork operated from Ruscombe Sidings Signal Box.

 

The 1891 STT shows the miieage of Ruscombe Sidings Signal Box as 29.40, as does the 1901 STT but the 1910 and 1938 STTs show it as 29.38 as does Tony Cooke's GWR Atlas.   Judging by the style of the signal box building  (Classified as GWR Type 5 by the Signalling Study Group) that would correspond with the building being renewed immediately east of the earlier signal box in the very early years of the 20th century.  As you will know signal box mileages are measured to the centre of the building and the new structure was probably larger than the earlier one although I can't date when the Relief Lines were realigned to create the Up Loop but I'm reasonably sure that came much later as did the Down Loop (which was altered in 1961 to re-site its connections from/to the Down Main Line.    The Ruscombe name board, erected a few years after the closure of the second signal box, was roughly on the site of the signal boxes so, once again, well within Ruscombe Parish.

 

I agree with you absolutely regarding the misleading nature of some photo captions (a common fault with this photographer judging by a book in which many of his photos appeared and of which he was the joint author) and regrettably some photographers are a long way from careful of the way they add captions to the point where they are misleading latter day researchers.  However if we are to talk about the railway it seems logical to me to talk about it in railway terms and not on the basis of road signs.  Many of us are more than happy to share our knowledge in order to help newcomers and those unfamiliar with the way the railway once was.  If for example this photograph had been noted as 'taken from', as opposed to 'of' a particular location there would be a clear indication that it is not what it claims to be with its present caption.  I doubt many people, except those engaged in fully documenting particular railway routes, would have much interest in researching Ruscombe Sidings and the history of all the various changes which have taken place since it first opened as a railway location a very long time back in broad gauge days.  Equally I am well aware from photos I have been asked to check by publishers that people sometimes have problems in correctly identifying locations in that area even when mileposts are clearly visible in the photo! Surely any logical research of railway routes would inevitably start with original source railway information as was the case with a late friend of mine who was involved in setting up the route indexing system for researchers.

 

Having now settled. by means of maps and railway information, exactly where the railway location of Ruscombe is (i.e not part of Waltham St Lawrence but in Ruscombe Parish) we can perhaps get back to the Bachmann Pressed Steel units?

 

6" OS map as amended to 1913

[dibber25]

Ah, we're back to talking about the Bachmann Pressed Steel 3-car (mine's not a 117 - it's a green one from the days when trains had proper names). I'm still no nearer to finding out if the intermediate red buffer beams are correct. It's difficult to believe it's a mistake as Bachmann are usually very hot on this stuff, the legacy of Merl Evans, I suspect, but I just can't remember them as anything but black. (CJL)

[Pteremy]

The 'Railcar' site has photos that appear to show red buffer beams

 

https://www.railcar.co.uk/images/117/works/5cr-145.jpg

[Gwiwer]

8 hours ago, dibber25 said:

Ah, we're back to talking about the Bachmann Pressed Steel 3-car (mine's not a 117 - it's a green one from the days when trains had proper names). I'm still no nearer to finding out if the intermediate red buffer beams are correct. It's difficult to believe it's a mistake as Bachmann are usually very hot on this stuff, the legacy of Merl Evans, I suspect, but I just can't remember them as anything but black. (CJL)

 I also wondered about those red intermediate buffer beams.  They look wrong.  Red was used on the leading and trailing end of locomotives but not on intermediate carriage or van ends.  So why the change of policy or instruction for the Pressed Steel units?  We may never know.  But if photos exist (as per the post above) which may prove the point then red they were.  And no doubt dirty very early on meaning few of us now will have ever seen them red.  

[dibber25]

2 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

 I also wondered about those red intermediate buffer beams.  They look wrong.  Red was used on the leading and trailing end of locomotives but not on intermediate carriage or van ends.  So why the change of policy or instruction for the Pressed Steel units?  We may never know.  But if photos exist (as per the post above) which may prove the point then red they were.  And no doubt dirty very early on meaning few of us now will have ever seen them red.  

Well, that picture certainly shows that they were red when they left the factory, so full marks to Bachmann. However, it is worth noting that Swindon had its set specification for certain things and under frames were a case in point. Here's a little story to illustrate. I was, for a while, owner of AC Cars railbus W79976. AC Cars painted the under frames like all bus chassis were painted at the time - aluminium (silver). Before the rail buses ventured out onto their first branch line duties, Swindon fitted the folding steps and the cab interior partitions - and painted the under frames black. After all those years it was still easy to find the aluminium paint if you crawled far enough under W79976. So I'm betting that the factory spec was red buffer beams and that's what Bachmann copied, but that the Western Region painted them black before they went in to traffic. I'll be painting mine black in due course. (CJL)

[bubbles2]

Class 117 DMU Coombe Junction by Neil Smith, on Flickr

 

I'm still trying to get my head around the differences between the 117s and 118s is it just the top of the 4 digit head code panel being flat on the 117 and rounded on the 118s?

 

DMU at Terras crossing, Looe branch, Sept 1985. by mailrail, on Flickr

 

 

Edited July 13, 2020 by bubbles2

[Geep7]

1 hour ago, bubbles2 said:

I'm still trying to get my head around the differences between the 117s and 118s is it just the top of the 4 digit head code panel being flat on the 117 and rounded on the 118s?

 

That's pretty much it, although according to railcar.co.uk in the green livery, the whisker shape was slightly different. Also, apart from the first few sets delivered, I think marker lights were added from new.

[Geep7]

And i've succumbed and ordered a Green liveried set to run alongside my father's steam era stock. Very much swayed by a photograph in 'Diesels on the Southern' of a set at my local station in that livery. I was extremely tempted to order a Blue & Grey set as I remember seeing them daily, and in NSE, but it's so far outside of my era of modelling it probably would just sit in the box. I shall have to wait for an all blue set to appear as well, and maybe a Green with SYP as well.....

 

It will be interesting to compare the Bachmann model with my modified and detailed LIma Class 117. I think it will be almost like comparing chalk and cheese, but we'll see.

Edited July 13, 2020 by Geep7

[pheaton]

anyone know when the NSE Model is due?