Jump to content

Edwardian

Using RTR models to represent the LSWR

Recommended Posts

Gratefully adopting Ozexpatriate's suggestion, I thought I would experiment with a topic about LSWR and RTR.  This way, people can comment and update, and discussions of new releases can be added.

 

I cannot claim to any great expertise on the old South Western, but the beauty of a dedicated topic is others can correct and add information.  The important thing, I reasoned, was to make a start.

 

Besides which, I (i) am re-reading the Wrong Box, (ii) have just seen Corfe Castle at Ormesby, and (iii) recently breached my expenditure moratorium when I saw a nearly new Hornby M7 at a very good price!

 

So, for now, I would like simply to summarise what's on offer, along with a few initial impressions.

 

Locomotives:

 

- Kernow's Beattie Well Tank.  Probably representing the condition of the Cornish survivors after early-mid '30s re-builds.

 

- Kernow's O2.  Not issued in anything earlier than Southern olive green.

 

- Hornby and Oxford 415 Class Radial

 

Both manufacturers model the as preserved 488.  The major visual difference appears to be the bunker coal rails, which, on the Hornby model at least, appear to un-clip.  If favouring the Lyme Regis Branch, the class arrive there in 1914, following O2s and Terriers.  I assume that, as we are by then some 25 years after Drummond became CME, the Lyme Radials would have worn Drummond green, but I would be grateful for information. 

 

Despite the text book history that the Radials were replaced on suburban work by the M7s, I keep coming across pictures of the class working in the London area in the 1900s and 1910s.

 

A suburban setting might allow a Radial and M7 to so-exist on a layout quite happily. 

 

- Hornby M7.  A special edition was released some years ago in Urie sage green. For the pre-War modeller, more recently another limited addition has appeared in Drummond livery (pictured below with some very nice Roxeys).  Personally, I like the way C R Phillips paints the livery, which to my mind more closely resembles the colour in Hamilton Ellis's paintings.  The Hornby shade is a little different, but I reserve judgment on accuracy and am content with the model.

 

To my uneducated eye, the Hornby model, which is of an early batch, short front overhang, splasher sandbox version, compares favourably with photographs of the originals during the Drummond period.  

 

- Hornby T9 and Class 700 - These classes were extensively rebuilt. It would be difficult if not impossible to back-date them.

 

- Hornby N15 - a bit modern for me, so completely ignorant.

 

- 395 Class - Golden Arrow do a resin body kit for a Hornby donor chassis.  Nile of this parish built one. Inter alia they succeeded the Ifracombe Goods on the Ifracombe branch.  Add a Craftsman T1, a Heljan L&B Manning Wardle and some Great Western stuff and model Barnstaple Town!

 

Pas

 

Coaches

 

- Kernow's Gate Stock.  These are coaches of 1914 vintage, but the Southern changed the ends, so, the tooling confines the coaches to 1933 onwards.

 

- Hornby's rebuilt ex-LSW stock.  This would be a challenge, and one would be at the stage, cost and effort-wise, of questioning whether it would be better simply to buy some Roxey kits.  The modern brake ends need cutting off, but the bogies and underframes are no good and you would have to remove the curious wedge along the bottom of the bodies, added to repel rain when married to the new underframes. 

 

- Triang clerestories.  In 1909, the SW took a number of 42' Thirds and 45' Tri-Composites dating from the early 1890s and converted them to Brake Thirds and Brake Compos respectively.  They were formed in pairs for branch work.  Some had an arc roof, and some the more recent semi-elliptical (like the Roxey coaches).  Coaches were paired with matching roof profiles.

 

One of the arc roof sets is pictured at Lyme Regis, circa 1909.  For the arc roof sets, use Ratio Midland coach ends and roofs.  The ends and roofs are on the same sprue and sold separately for £4.

 

(1) The Brake Third.  For this you require 1 Triang brake coach.  The Third Class compartment spacings are a good match and you have enough of them.  The double luggage doors and 3 blind panels, ditto. The bit in between (3 blind panels, projection/ducket and Guard's door) you cut out and discard.  Replace it with a wider SW style ducket (which Roxey do) and a narrow vertical strip of blind panelling. The resulting coach is a little shorter that the Triang.  If modelling the arc roof, I suggest the Ratio Midland Suburban coaches have ends and sides that are likely to be of a similar profile (but I have not checked).

 

(2) The Brake Composite.  For this you require 1 Triang brake coach and 1 non-brake coach. The brake end is exactly like the Brake Third: End section of your Triang brake plus the narrow panel and ducket section you will need to build.  You will find that the Triang non-brake coach has compartments that work well for Second Class.  To reproduce the next 4 compartments (Second, First, First, Second) just take 2 pairs of the Triang compartments and add a thin sliver between them to give you the additional width between the 2 First Class compartments.  Then add a Third Class compartment from your Triang brake coach.

post-25673-0-81249300-1475528164_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-01376100-1475528223_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-13607100-1475528276_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-24900300-1525333231_thumb.jpg

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take care with the Radials; models of the preserved 488 have the single slide-bars that all the class had originally - the other two survivors received the twin version under Urie's regime, as did several others that lasted into SR days. 488/30583 didn't get them because it was sold off in 1919.

 

The other thing to bear in mind is that just over half the class had 3' diameter wheels under the bunker as per 488/30583, the rest had 3' 6" ones - from new, they were NOT a later alteration.

 

Just to really make your day, carefully check photos before you pick a number - some of the short side tanks were shorter than others. All three of the late survivors match and, as they came from three different builders, I'm guessing that the shorter ones were probably on the Beyer Peacock built locos, which all disappeared. 

 

Despite the similarity in diameter, the bogie wheels also varied in the style of spokes between different builders. If you look at Hornby's 30582 and 30584, they have correctly represented the different shapes. Much kudos for such attention to detail.

 

Also, at some point, the water fillers in the bunkers were increased in height. I think it probably coincided with the coal rails being plated but I'm not certain of that and I don't know if 488's has been back-dated in preservation.

 

Be wary about renumbering M7s, too, as there were four distinct sub-classes as well as detail variations. 

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we just talking about 4mm scale? There are Terriers in both 4mm and 7mm, but I get the impression that the 4mm one (is it ex Dapol taken over by Hornby?) is a pretty awful A1/A1X hybrid. The Dapol O gauge one is good though. Not exactly a numerous class on the LSWR, but something different, although requiring a repaint.

 

What about the forthcoming Dapol B4? Does that have potential?

 

Dare I also mention the good old Tri-ang Polly/Nellie? It's based on the C14, but whether it's close enough to have potential is probably best left for each individual's judgement.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

; models of the preserved 488 have the single slide-bars that all the class had originally - the other two survivors received the twin version under Urie's regime, as did several others that lasted into SR days. 488/30583 didn't get them because it was sold off in 1919.

 

Then the 'as preserved' models truly favour the pre-Grouper.

 

EDIT: I confess my ignorance here, or, rather, my failure to possess the 4-volume Bradley work on LSWR locomotives, but it appears to me that the two images, Hornby's 488 and the prototype 493 are both in Adams livery.

 

Aside from the later and removable coal rails, the differences appear to be (i) the domes and (ii) the front framing. 

 

Certainly the difference in framing, I should have thought, could be ascribed to the different builders of the two batches: 493 a Dubs product of 1884 and 488 built by Neilson in 1885.

 

If pushed on the question of wheel sizes, raised by Dunsignalling, I'd say that 493 has smaller leading and trailing wheels, but there does not look to be much in it.

post-25673-0-38491600-1475564023_thumb.jpg

Edited by Andy Y
Copyright issue
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Beattie Well Tank can be backdated to LSWR condition (did they run this while you were there on Sunday?) but it's not a conversion for the faint of heart. I drew the line at chopping the 2mm out of the running plate just behind the buffer beam and the one decent photograph I had didn't show the donkey pump at all well, but in the early days of the Swanage branch these were very common so we really had to have one.

 

BWT_3_zps441os1lr.jpg

 

I've also never felt brave enough to cut back the smokebox on the Hornby T9 which ought to be done to be completely accurate.

Edited by jwealleans
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Beattie Well Tank can be backdated to LSWR condition (did they run this while you were there on Sunday?) but it's not a conversion for the faint of heart. I drew the line at chopping the 2mm out of the running plate just behind the buffer beam and the one decent photograph I had didn't show the donkey pump at all well, but in the early days of the Swanage branch these were very common so we really had to have one.

 

BWT_3_zps441os1lr.jpg

 

I've also never felt brave enough to cut back the smokebox on the Hornby T9 which ought to be done to be completely accurate.

 

Excellent.  I did glimpse this from afar.  The operator was disinclined to run anything but the 395 and its goods train.  The mainly static M7 took the odd turn.   

 

I won't be allowed back, of course, having pointed out that the GW siphons had the wrong bogies.

 

Would it be too much to ask you to summarise the necessary changes to the Well Tank?  I have limited knowledge of the prototype.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Dare I also mention the good old Tri-ang Polly/Nellie? It's based on the C14, but whether it's close enough to have potential is probably best left for each individual's judgement.

It has been done, by a chap called Brian Cook, who described the process in the January 2001 issue of Railway Modeller.

 

Having read it, it's not for the faint-hearted - it is necessary to slice up the body into numerous sections and omit several of them when sticking it back together. 

 

I think most normal mortals would end up using at least two bodies before getting all the bits to fit each other!

 

John

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been done, by a chap called Brian Cook, who described the process in the January 2001 issue of Railway Modeller.

 

Having read it, it's not for the faint-hearted - it is necessary to slice up the body into numerous sections and omit several of them when sticking it back together. 

 

I think most normal mortals would end up using at least two bodies before getting all the bits to fit each other!

 

John

I've got one, but fortunately it's in my box of stuff to convert to O-16.5!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...summarise the necessary changes to the Well Tank?

I have to say that I was also starting from a position of almost complete ignorance, having the thread on these locos on this august forum and one photograph of No. 314 from the Roger Carpenter collection to work from.

 

From memory (I'm afraid I didn't document it as I went along):

 

Boiler clack pipes had to be remade

Stovepipe chimney (Alan Gibson)

Remove safety valves from dome and remake top

Ramsbottom safety valves on pedestal (? - may be an Arthur Kimber casting, may be Alan Gibson)

Fabricated donkey pump and pipework.

Remove BR number and shedplates from smokebox door.

The small valve on the side of the smokebox should still be there but was knocked off and I haven't found a secure means of reattaching it.

 

Repaint, obviously. I still need to order the numberplates from King's Cross plates.

 

It's a lovely runner and if we are given enough budget I'd like another, which we'd finish in the lighter (Drummond?) green. What it doesn't have is much puling power or space for weight, but it usually has a set of 5 x 4- and 6-wheelers which it copes with quite adequately.

Edited by jwealleans
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then the 'as preserved' models truly favour the pre-Grouper.

 

EDIT: I confess my ignorance here, or, rather, my failure to possess the 4-volume Bradley work on LSWR locomotives, but it appears to me that the two images, Hornby's 488 and the prototype 493 are both in Adams livery.

 

Aside from the later and removable coal rails, the differences appear to be (i) the domes and (ii) the front framing. 

 

Certainly the difference in framing, I should have thought, could be ascribed to the different builders of the two batches: 493 a Dubs product of 1884 and 488 built by Neilson in 1885.

The frames may have differed when built but 30582 and 30584 had both received at least one set of new frames post-1923. 488/30583, having never been "grouped" and only returning to SR ownership in 1947, retains its original ones though, if you've ever seen underneath, there is evidence of substantial repair/reinforcing work that took place whilst under EKR ownership.  

 

Boilers are another pitfall - the Drummond ones are easy enough to spot with their dome-mounted SVs though they are legitimate for pre-group liveried models if you pick the right locos and dates. 

 

However, there were two different Adams boilers, one type having a taller and fatter dome than the other. 30584 carried the larger version from early 1948 until 1959 when it was transferred to 30583 and she carried the smaller-domed one (previously stored for some years) for the rest of her days. 

 

Check out pics of Hornby's 488 and 30584 to see the difference in model form, I am waiting for Hornby's 30583 because the dome on Oxford's first release just doesn't look right to me.

 

Thus, prior to re-acquisition of 488/EKR 5, the SR had three boilers (two Drummond) shared between two locos: and BR had four between three, which got swapped around at overhauls. The small-domed Adams one was out of use from 1954 with 30582 carrying a Drummond boiler thereafter. 30583 carried one for its whole BR career until the 1959 works visit. It then went to 30582 in 1960, hence the slight error with the model of that loco which has the late crest applied at that works visit but the differently positioned lamp irons as fitted to the other Drummond boiler which it carried previously. Mine will get the early emblem to correct the matter as well as making it a proper match to run with the rebuilt ex-LSW coaches.  

 

That 1959 overhaul of 30583 showed definite evidence of all the most "original" bits being brought together on one loco, suggesting that someone at Eastleigh was already thinking ahead to possible preservation.

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that I was also starting from a position of almost complete ignorance, having the thread on these locos on this august forum and one photograph of No. 314 from the Roger Carpenter collection to work from.

 

From memory (I'm afraid I didn't document it as I went along):

 

Boiler clack pipes had to be remade

Stovepipe chimney (Alan Gibson)

Remove safety valves from dome and remake top

Ramsbottom safety valves on pedestal (? - may be an Arthur Kimber casting, may be Alan Gibson)

Fabricated donkey pump and pipework.

Remove BR number and shedplates from smokebox door.

The small valve on the side of the smokebox should still be there but was knocked off and I haven't found a secure means of reattaching it.

 

Repaint, obviously. I still need to order the numberplates from King's Cross plates.

 

It's a lovely runner and if we are given enough budget I'd like another, which we'd finish in the lighter (Drummond?) green. What it doesn't have is much puling power or space for weight, but it usually has a set of 5 x 4- and 6-wheelers which it copes with quite adequately.

 

Very helpful, thank you, Jonathan.

 

LSWR livery appears complex. 

 

I think your Well Tank and the Hornby Radial are in Adams's "Pea Green", which has black borders and white lining.  Standardised after 1885, I think. Interestingly, at this period the SW was attempting to standardise coach livery as salmon and brown.

 

Drummond green is a different shade, though I should not say lighter.  It has brown borders.  The white lining is often double, whereas it appears single in the Adams livery, and the Drummond treatment of the boiler bands is far more elaborate.  So, it ought to be possible to distinguish the two liveries on monochrome photographs, useful when dealing with Beattie or Adam classes. Drummond was 1895-1912, if I recall correctly. 

 

The lighter green, as seen on Hornby's "as preserved" T9, is Urie's and I think was applied from 1917.  I think this tends to be referred to as Sage Green.

 

Of course, Goods classes had, for some considerable time, been in a darker "Holly Green" and I think this green was similar to that applied to coaches shortly prior to Grouping.

 

This is but the vaguest of imprecise summaries; I need the Southern Style book!

 

Below, examples of preserved Adams T3 in Adams livery, models of a T3 and T1 in Drummond livery and Hamilton Ellis's rendition of the livery.

 

See the pictures in my post above of the Hornby M7 and Ron Rising's M7.  Both are ostensibly in Drummond livery, and the greens are quite different.  Ron's is a yellower green, closer to Hamilton Ellis and the models pictured below. Mind you, the Hornby green looks better in certain lights.

 

 

The frames may have differed when built but 30582 and 30584 had both received at least one set of new frames post-1923. 488/30583, having never been "grouped" and only returning to SR ownership in 1947, retains its original ones though, if you've ever seen underneath, there is evidence of substantial repair/reinforcing work that took place whilst under EKR ownership.  

 

Boilers are another pitfall - the Drummond ones are easy enough to spot with their dome-mounted SVs though they are legitimate for pre-group liveried models if you pick the right locos and dates. 

 

However, there were two different Adams boilers, one type having a taller and fatter dome than the other. 30584 carried the larger version from early 1948 until 1959 when it was transferred to 30583 and she carried the smaller-domed one (previously stored for some years) for the rest of her days. 

 

Check out pics of Hornby's 488 and 30584 to see the difference in model form, I am waiting for Hornby's 30583 because the dome on Oxford's first release just doesn't look right to me.

 

Thus, prior to re-acquisition of 488/EKR 5, the SR had three boilers (two Drummond) shared between two locos: and BR had four between three, which got swapped around at overhauls. The small-domed Adams one was out of use from 1954 with 30582 carrying a Drummond boiler thereafter. 30583 carried one for its whole BR career until the 1959 works visit. It then went to 30582 in 1960, hence the slight error with the model of that loco which has the late crest applied at that works visit but the differently positioned lamp irons as fitted to the other Drummond boiler which it carried previously. Mine will get the early emblem to correct the matter as well as making it a proper match to run with the rebuilt ex-LSW coaches.  

 

That 1959 overhaul of 30583 showed definite evidence of all the most "original" bits being brought together on one loco, suggesting that someone at Eastleigh was already thinking ahead to possible preservation.

 

John

 

So, in order to use the Hornby "as preserved" model more or less OOB, one would need to identify 488, or another of the 1885 Neilson batch, in pre-Grouping years, with that type of Adams boiler, that smaller dome and in Adams livery.  If such a combination existed, it could be as simple as popping out the coal rails, or, perhaps, renumbering.  S*d's law may suggest otherwise, however!

Edited by Andy Y
Copyright issue
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that I was also starting from a position of almost complete ignorance, having the thread on these locos on this august forum and one photograph of No. 314 from the Roger Carpenter collection to work from.

 

From memory (I'm afraid I didn't document it as I went along):

 

Boiler clack pipes had to be remade

Stovepipe chimney (Alan Gibson)

Remove safety valves from dome and remake top

Ramsbottom safety valves on pedestal (? - may be an Arthur Kimber casting, may be Alan Gibson)

Fabricated donkey pump and pipework.

Remove BR number and shedplates from smokebox door.

The small valve on the side of the smokebox should still be there but was knocked off and I haven't found a secure means of reattaching it.

 

Repaint, obviously. I still need to order the numberplates from King's Cross plates.

 

It's a lovely runner and if we are given enough budget I'd like another, which we'd finish in the lighter (Drummond?) green. What it doesn't have is much puling power or space for weight, but it usually has a set of 5 x 4- and 6-wheelers which it copes with quite adequately.

Where possible, can we quote dates for conversions/changes? I imagine this as built in 1875 loco needs a little more work than that, if it's even possible to do without building a new body. And this was one of the last batch built, so earlier ones may be even more challenging!

 

LSWR_Beattie_well_tank_%28Boys%27_Book_o

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSWR_0298_Class

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take your word for all that. My guide in all this is the HMRS LSWR Livery Register, which is one of the most mind-numbingly dull publications I've ever opened and which I have to have in front of me as I can't retain any of what it says.

 

It would be the lighter livery I would try to apply on a future well tank. We have a few locos in the Drummond green which looks too gaudy to my eye and must be a swine to apply.

Edited by jwealleans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can we quote dates for conversions/changes?

I'm told that Corfe is set on April 23rd 1923, it being a Monday and the church flying the flag of St. George.

Edited by jwealleans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where possible, can we quote dates for conversions/changes? I imagine this as built in 1875 loco needs a little more work than that, if it's even possible to do without building a new body. And this was one of the last batch built, so earlier ones may be even more challenging!

 

LSWR_Beattie_well_tank_%28Boys%27_Book_o

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSWR_0298_Class

 

I gather you own one of the Kernow models, so you have the advantage over me, but I cannot imagine that the motor would fit underneath the "as built" body, as pictured. 

 

I should know more about these, as the Memsahib's distant ancestor built the Bodmin & Wadebridge (I married up).  What I do not recall seeing are many images of the class between its Victorian condition and its late Thirties to Fifties Cornish survivors.

 

Swanage sounds appealing.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take your word for all that.

 

Please don't!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm told that Corfe is set on April 23rd 1923, it being a Monday and the church flying the flag of St. George.

So "modern image" in my world then, and of no use to me :).

 

I gather you own one of the Kernow models, so you have the advantage over me, but I cannot imagine that the motor would fit underneath the "as built" body, as pictured. 

 

I should know more about these, as the Memsahib's distant ancestor built the Bodmin & Wadebridge (I married up).  What I do not recall seeing are many images of the class between its Victorian condition and its late Thirties to Fifties Cornish survivors.

I don't own one, in fact I don't think I've even seen one apart from pictures online.

 

Modelling the B&W is very tempting, and may well involve a BWT as delivered long before the LSWR had any other presence in Cornwall. It's a long way down the list though, so maybe I'll just be able to tell my Star Trek like replicator what I want, and it will magically appear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where possible, can we quote dates for conversions/changes? I imagine this as built in 1875 loco needs a little more work than that, if it's even possible to do without building a new body. And this was one of the last batch built, so earlier ones may be even more challenging!

 

LSWR_Beattie_well_tank_%28Boys%27_Book_o

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSWR_0298_Class

 

Had a quick shufty, and found this useful http://www.brc-stockbook.co.uk/Beattie_Cent_09.htm.  Essentially there were rebuilds in 1889 and 1901-2. 

 

The former state is pictured below.  This is presumably the class as per Jonathan's model, as logically the loco would be out-shopped in 1889 in Adam's Pea Green with black border and single white lining, and that is what the photograph appears to show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a quick shufty, and found this useful http://www.brc-stockbook.co.uk/Beattie_Cent_09.htm.  Essentially there were rebuilds in 1889 and 1901-2. 

 

The former state is pictured below.  This is presumably the class as per Jonathan's model, as logically the loco would be out-shopped in 1889 in Adam's Pea Green with black border and single white lining, and that is what the photograph appears to show.

That's better then. If I ever get a chance to get my hands on one cheap, and can dream up a suitable excuse, it would just fit into the time frame of my dreamed of mega broad gauge, plus other things of interest, layout. Now, about conversion to P4!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's better then. If I ever get a chance to get my hands on one cheap, and can dream up a suitable excuse, it would just fit into the time frame of my dreamed of mega broad gauge, plus other things of interest, layout. Now, about conversion to P4!

 

Has been done: http://www.ultrascale.uk/node/35

post-25673-0-89347700-1475580159.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

Graham Baker (GRAMODELS) is planning kits in 4mm of the 42' & 45' stock. Probably a complete body, with details to be added then roof and bogies attached.

 

Bill

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

Graham Baker (GRAMODELS) is planning kits in 4mm of the 42' & 45' stock. Probably a complete body, with details to be added then roof and bogies attached.

 

Bill

 

That is good news.  Thank you for letting us know.

 

I would certainly buy these, but, in addition, I would buy roof fittings and Fox 8' Bogies in quantity if available separately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to Radials.

 

Looking at the dome on the preserved 488, it seems to resemble the dome on 493 and 55, pictured in pre-Grouping days.  By contrast the Hornby dome looks a little skinny and Oxford's a little squat.

 

Re livery, numbers 524 (a Dubs of 1885) and 493 seem to be in Adams livery. whilst No. 55, said to taken in 1909, appears to be in Drummond livery.

 

I noted the lozenge splasher works plate on 524 and 493, also a Dubs from an earlier batch, as opposed to the oval worn by 488, the Neilson engine. 

 

The Drummond liveried No.55 (Robert Stephenson, 1883) has no works plate, but I think it would have conflicted with the wider, double-lined, Drummond livery, so there might have been one originally. 

 

The major difference in No. 55 appears to be the newer chimney.  Note also that she has coal rails, but not the filled in type supplied with the models.

 

Seeing the Oxford model causes me to recall Dunsignalling's comment at Post #2, "at some point, the water fillers in the bunkers were increased in height. I think it probably coincided with the coal rails being plated but I'm not certain".  Looking at No. 493, undated but in Adams livery and without coal rails, it is quite clear that there is no tell tank filler.  The interesting question would be whether No. 524 received one when, at some point prior to 1909, she was fitted with coal rails.

post-25673-0-30436900-1475586130.jpg

post-25673-0-71469000-1475586140_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-86297500-1475586153_thumb.jpg

post-25673-0-28811800-1475586170.jpg

post-25673-0-46002400-1475586218.jpg

post-25673-0-23610000-1475586258_thumb.jpg

Edited by Edwardian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please may I respectfully remind all members of the forum rules here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/35-forum-rules/ specifically regarding copyright

 

item 5. Please do not post any material which infringes copyright. It is the responsibility of the poster to seek reproduction permission before posting other persons' material.

 

Just because an image is already of the web it does not devolve the rules regarding copyright that could potentially result in action being taken against this site. If you do not own or have the owners explicit permission to use an image please refrain from doing so. 

Share this post


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

×
×
  • 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.