Peckett W4 types - weathering, modifying and prototype

[Gordon A]

L.T.S.R. green?

 

Thanks Adams442T.

L.T.S.R?

 

Gordon A

[Captain Kernow]

L.T.S.R?

 

London, Tilbury & Sarfend Railway, presumably.

[Ruston]

Nice job. I don't think its necessary to shift the dome [unless you have a proper scaled drawing] as the apparent difference is more likely a matter of perspective. I'm intrigued by the "closed" cab on the early chassis. Normally by the time those cabs came along the running plate was level with the tops of the buffer beams.

The thing about the closed cab and running plate doesn't really come into it as the prototype pictured isn't a W4 anyway. I'm not sure exactly what it is but it is w/n 1690 and so would have been built around 1925, by which time W4 production would have ceased. Could be an R2?

[PGH]

The thing about the closed cab and running plate doesn't really come into it as the prototype pictured isn't a W4 anyway. I'm not sure exactly what it is but it is w/n 1690 and so would have been built around 1925, by which time W4 production would have ceased. Could be an R2?

 

Correct an R2, a 12" cylinder loco, the W4s were larger with 14" cylinders.  Ex works 1.7.1926

[NHY 581]

Thanks Adams442T.

L.T.S.R?

 

Gordon A

  

London, Tilbury & Sarfend Railway, presumably.

 

 

Late, Thrifty & Sluggish Railway.

 

 

Rob.

[Adams442T]

Late they certainly weren't, Thrifty they certainly were, but Sluggish they certainly WEREN'T!!!

[Regularity]

Last Train to Southend Railway?

 

From a GER perspective in 1912: Lost To Some(other) Railway Company.

After the GCR had bought the LDEC 5 years earlier, a cruel blow to Liverpool Street.

 

Now, there’s an interesting might have been: absorption of the LDEC and LTS into the GER, considerably improving its financial position.

[Norton961]

I thought it would be usefull to post some photos  of the prototype particularly in relation to the weathering.

The first photo is of P1704 taken in 1960. Photographer unknown.

 

the second photo is P1897 of 1936 taken at Walsall gas works in 1966.

 

the third photo is of Peckett P1931.

 

lastly an unknown Peckett at an unknown location.

 

This small snapshot shows that generally the locos were kept in reasonable condition although the walsall gas woprks loco is the exception.

My view is that a light weathering is more prototypical rather than compltely careworn.

 

David

[Ruston]

What we need is a rivet counter's guide to small Pecketts as none of the above are W4 types. Still interesting though.I agree about the weathering and I have to say that some of the examples of the Hornby W4 that I've seen weathered are way OTT and look as if they're ready for the scrap man to come and cut them up, rather than working locomotives.

[Marshall5]

I'm no Peckett expert (even though I once owned P1990/40 - a W6) but I find the easiest way to tell the R's & W's apart is the relative position of the footplating and front bufferbeam.  The W classes have the footplate level with the top of the bufferbeam whereas on the, smaller, R classes the top of the bufferbeam is a couple of inches above the footplating.  Hope this helps.

Ray.

[Ruston]

I'm no Peckett expert (even though I once owned P1990/40 - a W6) but I find the easiest way to tell the R's & W's apart is the relative position of the footplating and front bufferbeam.  The W classes have the footplate level with the top of the bufferbeam whereas on the, smaller, R classes the top of the bufferbeam is a couple of inches above the footplating.  Hope this helps.

Ray.

That's not a good way at all to tell the difference. Some W4 had the footplate level with the top of the buffer beams but most (those that are the subject of Hornby's model included) didn't. Those with the footplate level with the top of the buffer beam had larger diameter wheels, which accounts for this.

 

The things to look for are the shape of the cab opening, the shape of the dome and the curved lower front part of frame on R2. Also the W4s with the footplate lower than the tops of the buffer beams have a thick wooden buffer plank, whereas the R2 doesn't.

[Marshall5]

Fair enough.

Ray.

[PGH]

I do wish people would record full details of any image they 'lift' from other sources (I assume that applies to the photos included in Post #83 - correct me if I'm wrong) and provide these details when they republish, such as where it was taken, when it was taken, etc, etc.  These details may not be of interest to them but would be of interest to others.  For example I find it hard to believe that the original photographer of the last image in the above post would have published it without giving these details.

 

As for the different types of Peckett, I think to most people a Peckett 0-4-0ST is just that, a Peckett 0-4-0ST and they don't really care whether its a R2 or a W4, or whatever.

[Tiptonian]

As for the different types of Peckett, I think to most people a Peckett 0-4-0ST is just that, a Peckett 0-4-0ST and they don't really care whether its a R2 or a W4, or whatever.

 

 

People who are interested in industrial railways do care if it is an R2 or W4. One would not say to a GWR fan that it's just a GWR 4-6-0 and they don't really care if it's a Grange or a Star. Think of the forum pages of criticism if Hornby released their W4 in the livery of an R2 loco with different details.

[Norton961]

As the person who posted the photos of various Pecketts, I would add the following comments:

The purpose was to show the weathering on various Pecketts, it did not matter which version. I was trying to make the point that most industrials were generally kept quite clean and I agree with Rushton that some of the weathering is overdone. Finding photos of W4 would limit how many photos I could post. The thread is about weathering so I thought that I would add to the debate. I won’t bother again!

 

Referring to PGH commments about photo credits I completely agree about giving credit to the photographer but in all the photos I posted I have no idea who the photographer was or where the locations are.

 

I now understand why people stop posting on RM Web threads. I will now join them.

 

David

[Corbs]

Still interesting though.I agree about the weathering 

 

 would be of interest to others.  

 

I now understand why people stop posting on RM Web threads. I will now join them.

 

David

 

Please do not get upset.

 

The problem with these types of things is that it's hard to get tone across in text, so I have highlighted some of the bits to show that it was not negative feedback.

 

The photos you posted were clearly helpful and interesting (3 x like and 2 x agree ratings) plus they prompted discussion. Perhaps PGH did not express the sentiment of 'I find these interesting and would like to know more, do you have more details you could share?' in the best way and I can see how it could have come across as 'for goodness' sake, why just post pictures without any info!??!?!?!1?'. When people write in a hurry this can often happen.

PGH - please correct me if the above is wrong.

[Oldddudders]

I do wish people would record full details of any image they 'lift' from other sources (I assume that applies to the photos included in Post #83 - correct me if I'm wrong) and provide these details when they republish, such as where it was taken, when it was taken, etc, etc.  These details may not be of interest to them but would be of interest to others.  For example I find it hard to believe that the original photographer of the last image in the above post would have published it without giving these details.

 

As for the different types of Peckett, I think to most people a Peckett 0-4-0ST is just that, a Peckett 0-4-0ST and they don't really care whether its a R2 or a W4, or whatever.

What an odd post. On the one hand you grumble that chapter and verse have not been provided, when the pics were offered as suggestions of how a loco might look, then you go on to say that actually a Peckett is a Peckett and different versions are all the same to most.

 

And actually, managing to introduce a grumble into such a thread is quite something. A more informative and inspiring few pages are hard to imagine.

[Tiptonian]

Norton 961, hoping you get to read this.

 

My previous comment was made purely within the narrow context of the quote above it. It was not intended to criticise you for posting pictures of locos other than W4s. On the contrary, sourcing such good quality colour photos of any industrial locos was no mean feat. What you provided was interesting and valuable. Please, keep posting.

 

If my comments caused distress or offence, I sincerely apologize.

Edited October 8, 2018 by Tiptonian

[Buhar]

Those with the footplate level with the top of the buffer beam had larger diameter wheels, which accounts for this.

 

The things to look for are the shape of the cab opening, the shape of the dome and the curved lower front part of frame on R2. Also the W4s with the footplate lower than the tops of the buffer beams have a thick wooden buffer plank, whereas the R2 doesn't.

 

Not so on the wheel diameter, the Ayr Harbour Peckett (the "larger" version, for want of a better description) had the same driving wheel diameter as the standard W4, 3ft 2 1/2in.  The main difference below footplate level seems to be the inclination of the cylinders which looks enough to account for the raising of the footplate.

[Trains4U]

Matt has created a couple of NCB examples

We know they aren’t historically accurate, but I’m sure they’ll tempt someone!

 

[Corbs]

I can't remember if I had posted these before, but Oly and Chris have adapted theirs into these two examples.

 

From...

https://otcm.wordpress.com/?s=peckett

[Ruston]

As the person who posted the photos of various Pecketts, I would add the following comments:

The purpose was to show the weathering on various Pecketts, it did not matter which version. I was trying to make the point that most industrials were generally kept quite clean and I agree with Rushton that some of the weathering is overdone. Finding photos of W4 would limit how many photos I could post. The thread is about weathering so I thought that I would add to the debate. I won’t bother again!

 

Referring to PGH commments about photo credits I completely agree about giving credit to the photographer but in all the photos I posted I have no idea who the photographer was or where the locations are.

 

I now understand why people stop posting on RM Web threads. I will now join them.

 

David

Is there really any need for all that? I simply pointed out that the locos that you posted photos of aren't W4s, which, as the topic is about W4 Pecketts, I thought worth mentioning so that people who may not know the differences wouldn't get confused and perhaps assume that they were.

 

 

Another way to tell the difference between a W4 and an R2 is that the R2 doesn't have the "wings" at each side of the smokebox front plate. The second model in Corbs' post has had them removed, which I think makes it look more modern and is a useful and fairly easy thing to do to update the model if you don't want to go into making lots of specific changes to make it into a specific type of later Peckett.

[rope runner]

Another way to tell the difference between a W4 and an R2 is that the R2 doesn't have the "wings" at each side of the smokebox front plate. 

 

Unfortunately that's not a certainty either - the early R2 class members have wing plates on the smoke box too. See P1257 UPPINGHAM, P2159 ROTHWELL etc for prototype. 

 

Paul A. 

[Corbs]

Going off on a bit of a tangent here, but trying to tell the varying types of Pecketts apart reminded me of trying to figure out the history of the various PBA Pecketts and why some looked different to others despite being built in a similar timeframe.

Specifically, I had been trying to work out why 'Henbury' of the BHR had the curved smokebox front plate similar to the W4, when all her sister engines had the more modern straight sides. Turns out in 1960 it had been rebuilt with the boiler from an older Peckett, 'Mackenzie' of 1910, which had received a new boiler in 1955!

So not only did the manufacturer change details all the time on the same overall class of loco, but the end user would often change around parts too!

 

See more on my little blog here if anyone's interested:

 

https://bristolharbourrailway.co.uk/industrial-railways-of-bristol/avonmouth-docks/

[Caledonian]

Its got a new handle, its got a new head, but its still the real old original axe