Rugd1022 Posted July 29, 2021 Share Posted July 29, 2021 (edited) 9 hours ago, MidlandRed said: A photo which shows just how filthy the examples used generally on freight on the Midland Lines got - you’d be forgiven for thinking there are no white window surrounds on the right hand example - D5374 looks like it’s yellow warning panel has been cleaned. Yes and it's in complete contrast to the shot I posted quite a while ago of a pristine 27 passing through Lilbourne on the Rugby - Market Harborough line in 1966! Edited July 29, 2021 by Rugd1022 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
montyburns56 Posted July 29, 2021 Share Posted July 29, 2021 19 hours ago, Neil Phillips said: The loads they used to hang on those early air-braked 26s! They must have been running on diesel with added Weetabix! I think they used a fuel additive. 1 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted July 29, 2021 Share Posted July 29, 2021 3 hours ago, montyburns56 said: I think they used a fuel additive. Ah. Yes of course. Gotcha !! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmrspaul Posted August 1, 2021 Share Posted August 1, 2021 I mentioned my few photo a couple of years ago, D5389 appears unusual in the position of the arrows compared to most photos on here. https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/brclass26/edd3963d Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidlandRed Posted August 1, 2021 Share Posted August 1, 2021 (edited) 11 hours ago, hmrspaul said: I mentioned my few photo a couple of years ago, D5389 appears unusual in the position of the arrows compared to most photos on here. https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/brclass26/edd3963d Paul D5389 and D5026 got repaints in the same style as the new build D7660. The spec for numbers was that they were to align with the gap in the double arrow symbol - based on loco numbers under the second man’s cab windows, the arrows under the driver’s windows are placed quite high so the numbers align with the gap - however the inboard numbers seem unreasonably far inboard!! I wonder if this was to match those on the new 25s, which had the large grille behind the cab door at one end? Subsequent new 25s got arrows on all four cabs, and fye from D7662 - the new 25s had the arrows placed high on the cab side to avoid the works plate (moved to the cab door for the last few built). Edited August 2, 2021 by MidlandRed 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidlandRed Posted August 1, 2021 Share Posted August 1, 2021 On 29/07/2021 at 01:04, Neil Phillips said: That's the odd thing - if 5389 had simply had full yellow ends applied then yes, I'd have expected its nearly 5-year-old blue paintwork and sooty roof to look just like this. But then it would have been displaying a double arrow logo where the number is, plus a bodyside number. If both had been painted out surely this would have been visible as darker blue patches. The spaced-out numbers were typical ScR (St Rollox?) at the time so it looks like a full repaint into Bfye around 12 months earlier has weathered particularly badly on this one. Maybe the date's wrong but how much longer did 5406 last in green? It's a bit of a mystery TBH! As you say, it’s weathered extremely badly if it’s a repaint. I’m minded to think it’s had an fye applied and lost it’s D, with the new numbers spaced out over the extent of the cab panel width. There appears to be a patch of normal colour where the numbers are applied. Perhaps they were able to peel off the old transfers? Would be interesting to see a photo of the whole side of 5389 in this era. An extraordinary photo for liveries really - three different styles, and almost 50 yrs ago!! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted August 2, 2021 Share Posted August 2, 2021 1 hour ago, MidlandRed said: (moved to the cab door for the last few built). Yep, D7672-7. For some reason Crewe outshopped a few, including 5184, 7562 & 7609, in this style around spring 1970 but left the works plates on the cabsides so the arrows were in the higher position. This was around the same time Crewe also released 6882/3 with cabside arrows and bodyside numbers so I wonder what was going on in their paintshop at the time.....?! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted August 2, 2021 Share Posted August 2, 2021 2 hours ago, MidlandRed said: An extraordinary photo for liveries really - three different styles, and almost 50 yrs ago!! Yes, I noticed that too! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckymucklebackit Posted August 2, 2021 Share Posted August 2, 2021 On 29/07/2021 at 19:00, montyburns56 said: I think they used a fuel additive. SIlly boy, that is the unleaded fuel they use for class 66s - this is the stuff for class 26s 1 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
montyburns56 Posted August 3, 2021 Share Posted August 3, 2021 D5376 Fort William 1973 by KDH Archive 260673 Fort William 1973 16 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted August 3, 2021 Share Posted August 3, 2021 16 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
montyburns56 Posted August 5, 2021 Share Posted August 5, 2021 27066 1987 16 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium John M Upton Posted August 5, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 5, 2021 That almost qualifies as a looks like a model shot... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold rodent279 Posted August 5, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 5, 2021 1 hour ago, John M Upton said: That almost qualifies as a looks like a model shot... Yes. That background scene is really convincing! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
montyburns56 Posted August 6, 2021 Share Posted August 6, 2021 Clachnaharry D5326 1973 by KDH Archive 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted August 7, 2021 Share Posted August 7, 2021 Photo by Craig Dunn : 27 010 at Haymarket, April 1983.... 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium iands Posted August 7, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 7, 2021 1 hour ago, Rugd1022 said: Photo by Craig Dunn : 27 010 at Haymarket, April 1983.... Must have used the same cleaner as the one below 5 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpb56125 Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 26 001 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 015 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 026 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 025 at Manchester Victoria on 20th October 1990 Mark https://mark5812.smugmug.com/Recently-uploaded-Scanned 15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugd1022 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold rodent279 Posted August 12, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 12, 2021 On 10/08/2021 at 16:50, mpb56125 said: 26 001 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 015 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 026 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 025 at Manchester Victoria on 20th October 1990 Mark https://mark5812.smugmug.com/Recently-uploaded-Scanned If I'm not mistaken, the fire damage on 26001 was sustained in April 1990, during the "Tay-Forth Centenarian" tour. This tour also featured 47822, which similarly self-immolated later in the evening, in the Brum area. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 On 10/08/2021 at 16:50, mpb56125 said: 26 001 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 015 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 026 at Eastfield Depot on 14th September 1990 26 025 at Manchester Victoria on 20th October 1990 Mark https://mark5812.smugmug.com/Recently-uploaded-Scanned Once again a humble freight locomotive totally overshadows a dowdy-looking 'passenger' Class 31/4. Why a greater effort to lift the appearance of the latter sub-class was never made is an enduring mystery to me, depot-applied white stripes excepted. The design was tailor-made for the yellow wrap-around treatment but it never happened - another depot initiative to 31135 in the early 80s showed how all 31/4s should have looked at the very least, IMHO......however I've stood on this soapbox before and this is a 26/27 thread so I'll get off it (again!) Nice sharp pics BTW - poor old scorched 26001, it was usually 27s that looked like that...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium brushman47544 Posted August 12, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 12, 2021 1 hour ago, Neil Phillips said: Once again a humble freight locomotive totally overshadows a dowdy-looking 'passenger' Class 31/4. Why a greater effort to lift the appearance of the latter sub-class was never made is an enduring mystery to me, depot-applied white stripes excepted. The design was tailor-made for the yellow wrap-around treatment but it never happened - another depot initiative to 31135 in the early 80s showed how all 31/4s should have looked at the very least, IMHO......however I've stood on this soapbox before and this is a 26/27 thread so I'll get off it (again!) Nice sharp pics BTW - poor old scorched 26001, it was usually 27s that looked like that...... Whay would any depot want to tart up locomotives they’d rather see the back of? Underpowered rubbish once fitted with ETH, more 37/4 conversions would have been much more useful. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halvarras Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 3 hours ago, brushman47544 said: Whay would any depot want to tart up locomotives they’d rather see the back of? Underpowered rubbish once fitted with ETH, more 37/4 conversions would have been much more useful. I was thinking Doncaster might have showed some initiative during general overhauls, after all they were giving the Railfreight 31s 'the treatment'. Agree about more 37/4s, I reckon they've proved their worth over the years, although it was a pity so many of them were transferred to the freight sector so early on. I suppose that's why no more than 31 were created in the end, although presumably your point is that the Class 37 ETH conversions should have commenced earlier than 1985, instead of yet more underpowered 31s, even if that would have pre-dated the refurbishment programme.....? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
montyburns56 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 D5405 Bournville 1963 by Geoff Dowling 10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
montyburns56 Posted September 9, 2021 Share Posted September 9, 2021 26045 Achnasheen by Andrew Sharpe 9 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