Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

The politicians must take a lot of the blame but so must the public. All to often we (not me personally just all the unthinking ones out there you understand....) prove time and again the candidate with the best sounding lies wins the day.

Probably the best way to save money is to cut out the layers of management they only serve to isolate those at the top from the truth. Down where the real work is done you know that waiting for the suppliers to send someone out to probably change a PCB board could be done the the operators quickly if they just had access to spares. The guys at the top fail to understand that if you add the cost of your staff contacting the suppliers explaining the problem being unable to use bits of kit while waiting for them all costs far more than you hope to save and thats just in peace time. If you are out in Helman or somewhere like that it may be a matter of life or death. 

 

Don

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Donw said:

The politicians must take a lot of the blame but so must the public. All to often we (not me personally just all the unthinking ones out there you understand....) prove time and again the candidate with the best sounding lies wins the day.

Probably the best way to save money is to cut out the layers of management they only serve to isolate those at the top from the truth. Down where the real work is done you know that waiting for the suppliers to send someone out to probably change a PCB board could be done the the operators quickly if they just had access to spares. The guys at the top fail to understand that if you add the cost of your staff contacting the suppliers explaining the problem being unable to use bits of kit while waiting for them all costs far more than you hope to save and thats just in peace time. If you are out in Helman or somewhere like that it may be a matter of life or death. 

 

Don

 

What's mayonnaise got to do with it?

 

b417a831c8aa19baed4bfecbe25da09c.png.7e59d6d3aacb451b5583682ba253f4b8.png

 

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 3
  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Members of the Parish Council may be interested to learn that the current issue of Archive (No.108) from Lightmoor Press has an extended feature on the Huntley & Palmers Biscuit Factory at Reading, with I understand some good very coverage of the extensive railway network there: 

 

arch108_2.jpg

 

https://lightmoor.co.uk/books/archive-issue-108/ARCH108

 

Edited by NeilHB
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 3
  • Informative/Useful 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I've got that number of Archive on order. I'll be interested to see what Nick Deacon has to say about the date of that photo. It's certainly not c. 1920 as stated in the Huntley & Palmers Collection's caption; my thinking is 1890s.  He agrees with my analysis of the make-up of the train, which I am gradually modelling! 

 

The two Black, Hawthorn locomotives A and B were supplemented by a pair of Peckett & Sons W4 class engines in 1900, works numbers 831 and 832, designated C and D. 

 

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before but looking through that list of Pecketts, my eye fell on works number 632 of 1896, an M4 supplied to Lancaster Corporation water works for the construction of Blea Tarn reservoir, and hence named Blea Tarn. It was sold on in 1901 to the suggestively-named West Norfolk Farmers' Manure & Chemical Co-op of South Lynn. The M4 is, I think, a smaller type than the W4.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct!  As always, Google and Wikipedia are your friends!  :)

 

that was also known as 'Scotch Gauge', being used on some of the early Scottish railways - Monkland & Kirkintilloch, Ballochney, Garnkirk and Glasgow.

 

Jim

Edited by Caley Jim
Added link
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few strange gauges originate in measuring between rail centres, then changing to measuring between inner faces, but I’ve no idea whether or not this one does.

 

Model railway gauges started that way: 35mm; 48mm etc, then losing 3mm, which is the diameter of tinplate tubular rail-head.

 

 

Edited by Nearholmer
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TurboSnail said:

Wondering what the origins of 4 1/2 ft gauge were - perhaps an attempt to rationalise standard gauge to a nice round number?

It was an early (failed) attempt to make railways conform to 00/H0 instead of EM or P4. In the end only the Redruth and Chasewater, and the Padarn got it right at 4ft:)

 

  • Like 1
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, webbcompound said:

It was an early (failed) attempt to make railways conform to 00/H0 instead of EM or P4. In the end only the Redruth and Chasewater, and the Padarn got it right at 4ft:)

 

Surely 4½ feet is EM?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

It's eighteen millimetres but is that EM? Surely EM is 4'6⅝", give or take?

Well played sir!. The track gauge is not eighteen millimetres, but eighteen point two millimetres.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

It's eighteen millimetres but is that EM? Surely EM is 4'6⅝", give or take?

Originally, it was 18mm, hence EM.

Just like the real railways were originally 18 hands gauge...

I was going to add that technically, it should be 4’6.6”, but comforted myself that the readership of this thread would get the point without quibbling over six tenths of an inch, and more importantly be aware of the history of the hobby in this regard, although apparently not:

3 hours ago, rocor said:

Well played sir!. The track gauge is not eighteen millimetres, but eighteen point two millimetres.

Well, firstly, see above.

Secondly, I was responding to the idea that it was an attempt to make things more like 00, which it patently isn’t.

 

The point two was added because the original idea of BRMSB 00+1.5mm gave some problems on curves etc with longer wheelbases, just as on the prototype, ½” was added to standard gauge and ¼” to Brunel’s gauge. Or in Peter Denny’s case, because he had made his track gauge slightly over wide.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Just now, webbcompound said:

And hence why I said "it was an early (failed) attempt to make railways conform to 00/H0 instead of EM or P4"". All the information is there, it just needs to be read.

But since EM started as 18mm which equates to 4’6”, it was a very failed attempt as it doesn’t parse.

If you had said, “an early attempt to promote EM gauge”, you would have been bang on and funny.

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, webbcompound said:

Regularity. Do you make this kind of picky crappy response to everyone, or is it just me?

 

Don't feel especially honoured but treat it as just part and parcel of his charm. I'd rather have a tart response from Simon than an anodyne "like" any day - it makes life more interesting.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
59 minutes ago, webbcompound said:

Regularity. Do you make this kind of picky crappy response to everyone, or is it just me?

I have found you to be, at times, petty and indeed picky with me. Mostly, I just ignore you, but occasionally I just get bored enough to respond, although it does give me a headache.

But no one is immune, and I have had spells on the naughty step as a consequence. So don’t feel picked on.

Actually, I just thought your remark was mildly amusing, but could have been uproarious. 

55 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Don't feel especially honoured but treat it as just part and parcel of his charm. I'd rather have a tart response from Simon than an anodyne "like" any day - it makes life more interesting.

Quite.

Who wants to be dull?

 

And I can be charming, when I feel so inclined, as well you know, Stephen.

Edited by Regularity
Please don’t think it’s personal. It really isn’t.
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...