Killybegs Posted February 27, 2018 Share Posted February 27, 2018 I was intrigued by this photo in this weeks RT. Surely no need to protect the subject's identity. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
009 micro modeller Posted March 3, 2018 Share Posted March 3, 2018 Strange that there's no crests or lettering either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jub45565 Posted March 3, 2018 Share Posted March 3, 2018 Apologies for sprinting off at a tangent - but that's an interesting tender cab. I presume that's a preservation addition? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted March 3, 2018 Share Posted March 3, 2018 Looking the rivet line on the cabside wondering if it could actually have ran like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davefrk Posted March 3, 2018 Share Posted March 3, 2018 Probably didn't want to fall foul of data protection by revealing the number and owner..... Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonathonAG Posted March 3, 2018 Share Posted March 3, 2018 Definitely a photoshop out the number job, but enough evidence there for those familiar with the 5's, in particular Ian Riley's and the Jacobite operation, to conclude which locomotive it is.The location is Loch Dubh, on the decent from Polnish and just East of the typical Loch Dubh shot for Eastbound trains. Certainly a Jacobite service, which limits the Black 5's used with maroon coaching stock to :No. 45407No. 44871No. 45231No. 44767No. 45212No. 45305767 can be eliminated due to the Stephenson Valve Gear. 212 eliminated due to that locomotive having a riveted tender, and also the position of the headboard on 2017's runs was on the smokebox iron of the 1960's WCML OHLE requirement, so would have seen the headboard protruding from the edge of the smokebox.231 can be eliminated due to the rear of the tender lining ends before the handrail on 231, while Riley engines sport the lining extending past the handrail. 305 can be eliminated due to it only appearing in LMS Black during any Fort William runs. Not 100% sure if it did or did not appear on maroon stock, hence inclusion.That leaves both No. 407 and 871. This is further justified by the speedometer being visible in the cab window, sourced from Class 37's and fitted on to the 5's during Riley ownership. The final give away then that it's 44871 in the photo, is the tender dome. 407 sports the curved top version, where as 871 features the flat top as seen. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TT3 Posted March 5, 2018 Share Posted March 5, 2018 Shhh, it's from the Strategic Reserve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Classsix T Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 They've built more and never told us. This one obviously a product of Lockheed's Skunk Works (Bury Lancs. division). Stealth capacity, anti radar paint job as a trial before Flying Scotsman is so treated to combat trespass inclined loons. Now I've given you this information, I shall have to ask that you supply your names and addresses for rendition to a lovely resort in Cuba. C6T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium t-b-g Posted March 6, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 6, 2018 Obviously somebody at the Beeb was concerned about product placement advertising appearing on the front cover. The Beeb would never allow itself to be seen to be engaging in such practices. Next time there is a Spitfire on the front cover, the RAF roundel will be airbrushed out and of course, any cars will need any identifying badges removed. Any photo of a high street will have to have all the shop names deleted. Yet if a celebrity wants to plug a tour, a book or a film, that is fine in any number of interviews. Has the world gone mad or is it just me? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Apologies for sprinting off at a tangent - but that's an interesting tender cab. I presume that's a preservation addition? To actually answer your question (seems to have been rather missed lol), it looks like a regular old tarp form the cab to the tender to me, they were common throughout all ages of steam loco. its not actually a tender cab at all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Covkid Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Snip That leaves both No. 407 and 871. This is further justified by the speedometer being visible in the cab window, sourced from Class 37's and fitted on to the 5's during Riley ownership. The final give away then that it's 44871 in the photo, is the tender dome. 407 sports the curved top version, where as 871 features the flat top as seen. It was the tender water dome that intrigued me. Would I be right in thinking this was over the water scoop mechanism, and is actually an obsolete fitting, so why fit it ? Were thre any "flat top" domes ? Thanks very much for your post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMS2968 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 It is to do with the water scoop: the water travelled to the top of the dome and was then cascaded downwards into the tender proper. But the dome also had a function in providing structural strength to the rear platform behind the coal bunker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul.Uni Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Obviously somebody at the Beeb was concerned about product placement advertising appearing on the front cover. The Beeb would never allow itself to be seen to be engaging in such practices. Next time there is a Spitfire on the front cover, the RAF roundel will be airbrushed out and of course, any cars will need any identifying badges removed. Any photo of a high street will have to have all the shop names deleted. Yet if a celebrity wants to plug a tour, a book or a film, that is fine in any number of interviews. Has the world gone mad or is it just me? BBC Worldwide sold the Radio Times and numerous other magazines back in 2011. It is owned by Immediate Media co. http://www.immediate.co.uk/business-division/radiotimes/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium t-b-g Posted March 6, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 6, 2018 BBC Worldwide sold the Radio Times and numerous other magazines back in 2011. It is owned by Immediate Media co. http://www.immediate.co.uk/business-division/radiotimes/ Sorry! I was trying to be ironic about the amount of advertising on the Beeb but it clearly didn't come across. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
w124bob Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 Obviously somebody at the Beeb was concerned about product placement advertising appearing on the front cover. The Beeb would never allow itself to be seen to be engaging in such practices. Next time there is a Spitfire on the front cover, the RAF roundel will be airbrushed out and of course, any cars will need any identifying badges removed. Any photo of a high street will have to have all the shop names deleted. Yet if a celebrity wants to plug a tour, a book or a film, that is fine in any number of interviews. Has the world gone mad or is it just me? Surprised they haven't airbrushed out the smoke and coal in case it offends someone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 The Radio Times is published by Immediate Media, a combined publishing house containing the former assets of Origin Publishing, Magicalia and BBC Magazines. Suspect the image could a from stock of images and was redacted for that stock rather than for the cover of the magazine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted March 13, 2018 Share Posted March 13, 2018 If anyone has bought some of the DeAgonstino railway books that are forming a new part work series may have noticed that the inside cover depicts a similarly numberless and crestless Black 5 crossing Glenfinnan viaduct. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ramrig Posted March 14, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 14, 2018 (edited) Not sure where the location is, but is it due to the image being reversed and the number/crest has been removed for that reason? Just a thought I appreciate it is most likely on a Jacobite working Edited March 14, 2018 by Ramrig Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMS2968 Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 It hasn't been reversed; the vacuum ejector pipe and reach rod are in their correct positions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Probably didn't want to fall foul of data protection by revealing the number and owner..... Dave. Sadly, there is possibly some foundation to this. Having had to delve into the ridiculous bum-covering components of rules intended to meet GDPR added to catch all possibilities I wouldn't have been surprised to see the trees airbrushed out as living entities that had not signed release forms to be included in the image due to being readily identifiable due to their geographical location blah, blah. The midges have been photoshopped out though. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
009 micro modeller Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 I wonder if it's because the loco's owner or operator didn't want it to be identifiable. Not sure why this would be though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPH 603 Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 Perhaps this is supposed to be at a fictional location? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Reorte Posted March 14, 2018 RMweb Premium Share Posted March 14, 2018 I wonder if it's because the loco's owner or operator didn't want it to be identifiable. Not sure why this would be though. British Railways? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
009 micro modeller Posted March 14, 2018 Share Posted March 14, 2018 British Railways? I meant the current owner in preservation (identifiable by the number for those that know the loco). Alternatively I wonder if there are reasons to do with the picture quality - i.e. the numbers and markings didn't come out well (blurred) when the photo was taken so were removed to maintain the overall quality of the photo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold tomparryharry Posted March 16, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2018 Most probably the printer didn't want to pay loyalties to the owner of the photographer/locomotive. I've had this one before, when other companies have used photos of my installation work without permission. Cheers, Ian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now