jrg1 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 There was the minor problem of a lack of foreign exchange to fund imports post WW2, a situation which lasted into the 1960s, and a perceived need to support British engineering for strategic reasons. Britain was not the only country in this position; France also opted for home-produced diesels against imports from North America, despite the success of the 1-4-1R steam locos and Baldwin A1A-A1A diesels that had been supplied as part of Marshall Aid UK industry could have produced proven equipment under licence. They did with the hydraulics. Without government interference, the ECML and South Wales lines at least could have been electrified; which could have led to a HST with pantographs, as was suggested in Australia. Regarding the ECML and the use of Deltics-a great machine, and a favourite of mine-could we see some through life costs for these versus WCML first generation electrics? At least in modelling terms, we have a fantastic choice of locomotives and rolling stock, so it's not all bad. I have just seen a photo of a scratch built DES1 shunter-a Mike Edge masterpiece-which incidentally spent time at New England. Can we crowdfund for a kit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I think the greatest irony of the situation is that it is now more cost-effective to refurbish legacy diesels to comply with EU emission regulations than to build new ones - so we now see Deltics back in regular service, along with veterans like class 47 and 37, and even the old Southern Electro-diesels being re-engined and modernised to bring them up to present day standards and type 3 ratings. Funny old world! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I think the greatest irony of the situation is that it is now more cost-effective to refurbish legacy diesels to comply with EU emission regulations than to build new ones - so we now see Deltics back in regular service, along with veterans like class 47 and 37, and even the old Southern Electro-diesels being re-engined and modernised to bring them up to present day standards and type 3 ratings. Funny old world! The 73s are a funny case; part of the reason for keeping them is apparently that they can work engineer's trains on Thameslink, other types being out-of-gauge. Apart from them, I can't think of any 'legacy' diesels that are being re-engineered to comply with the new emission regulations; the 57s were re-engined, but with second-hand American engines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 HSTs? I know it wasn't to do with emission regs, but it worked out cheaper to refurb than replace. My Wife's cousin is something very high up in one of the Leasing companies and he says that Euro 6 is a nightmare, because the emission control equipment means it is nearly impossible to build a compliant loco and stay within loading gauge and length / axle weight requirements to give decent RA, hence the mad dash to find serviceable legacy diesels or hire in diesels that have been sold for preservation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Popular Post great northern Posted June 22, 2015 Author RMweb Premium Popular Post Share Posted June 22, 2015 Dramatic happenings at PN. The arrival of the duck! The invasion of the poles! No, not by, of. They are springing up all over the place. The two arrivals are of course connected, and our mighty duck, aka Phil, has been putting a lot of hours in, and doing some very fiddly work. I sort of expected one pole today, but bless him, he's done nearly the whole lot. See them stride majestically across the landscape, while their creator is totally unaware that his photo is being took. They are temporarily in place at present, as I now need to paint and weather them, but haven't they made a difference already? The first shot lulled me into compacency though, as it was very easy to photoshop. It is not advisable though to have anything behind them when taking photos, as I discovered with the second and third. I've shown this photo before, copyright of Andrew C Ingram, and reproduced with permission, but of course I couldn't try to compare it with the model... until now. Ths was a rather rushed effort, as we had other things to do before Phil left, and I shall see what else can be done when I've more time, but even from this I'm decidedly pleased. Thanks to Phil for holding up a sheet of white card to block off that picture on the back wall, thus making shopping possible. Not so successful, but another angle. The mighty and very clever duck did not just bring poles. He's found time to make other things as well. He says it is a dogfish, though it looks like a wagon to me. As he doesn't have a layout to display it on.......yet, he asked if it could come and pose on PN, and of course I was happy to oblige. I'll leave him to tell you all about it. It does look very nice. What's been going on here then? Sawing Mallard in two? well no, but I couldn't resist doing this. The answer is that Phil also brought his Railroad Mallard, which will feature on a special on his layout in due course. He wanted to see it run, which it did very nicely, and I put mine next to it, so that he could see the differences, and decide what he might wish to do to gild the lily a bit. Did Mallard ever haul a dogfish? Well she has now. The loco cost just over £60, decoder fitted, Phil tells me, and in my opinion it is very good for the price. Last one - Railroad Mallard, dogfish, and another angle of "the beast" aka that big ****** of a pole. Many thanks again Phil. Another step towards bringing PN to life. 20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 It's coming to something when the orange lining is far better (less garish) on a Railroad beasty than on the full-fat version. This is no disrespect to the builder. I have no doubt they are to scale and all that but those in-yer-face poles are one of those instances when less is more, as quick frankly they are an eyesore. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LNER4479 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) Apparently SWMBO reckons its a Catfish, not a Dogfish (and trust me she knows her 'fishkind's!). Trust a duck not to know the difference between cats n dogs... (a potentially fatal mistake I would have thought?) TPs are simply awesome! Edited June 22, 2015 by LNER4479 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 22, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 22, 2015 Poor spotters look a bit bemused...............................checking their specs.................have they been at the cider? Quackers. 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 22, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) Apparently SWMBO reckons its a Catfish, not a Dogfish (and trust me she knows her 'fishkind's!). Trust a duck not to know the difference between cats n dogs... (a potentially fatal mistake I would have thought?) TPs are simply awesome! Nah, tis a Dogfish...honestly. The poles were planted after carefully assessing their height. Yes, they really are rather in yer mush, however they really were a feature around the Station Forecourt (and the small Engineers' yard just north of the Station). Fine, technical equipment was used to create the groundwork/holes and special tools were employed on the pole shortening operation. Any GPO Linemen out there, look away now is my advice! Field surveys were carried out to confirm the positioning of the 'Dock Pole'. (That's where an incident happened involving some car park fencing.......oops). Must not have been a thorough Risk Assessment carried out prior to work. Quackers. Edit: pole shortening and planting was carried out after the pics were taken. This was due to me trying to find a suitable drill that wouldn't damage the buildings during the work. Edited June 25, 2015 by Mallard60022 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Probably photo angles etc, but the poles look far too high from the ground? Comparing the heights e.g on the original photo with Royal Mail van with the model with BR van they look far too high perhaps that is the reason for their prominence? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Alister_G Posted June 22, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 22, 2015 I agree, with micklner, the telegraph poles are a bit too tall at the moment, but easy to adjust and better too long than too short. I think they're a bit too intrusive at the moment as coachman says, but I reckon once Gilbert has worked his weathering magic, they will be far less "in Yer Face". They certainly add something to the scene, in my view, one of those things that you don't really notice, and yet once there, really add an air of reality. Coach said they are an eyesore, but If you look back at photos of the prototype, that's what the skyline really looked like, very cluttered, with wires going everywhere. I don't suggest you take it to that level of verisimilitude though Gilbert, you'll go quackers with the photoshopping Great photos again, and nice poles, Duck. Al. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 23, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 23, 2015 Apologies, should have made it clear that the poles have been shortened but after the photographs were taken. I'm sure Gilbert will also adjust them once he has painted and weathered them. P 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted June 23, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 23, 2015 FDS! (For Duck's Sake) The poles are a triumph! Well done Phil. I have a slight concern about their snagging potential for the proud operator, but a rapid learning process may avoid too many problems. Marvellous work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidw Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 PN gets to look better and better... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSWRlinesider Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Dear Gilbert and Duck, with the greatest respect and positivity, I'm going to stick my neck out and use my architectural eye on this one: Duck the telegraph poles are impressive, HOWEVER, being absolutely empirical, I would say that - taking the famous one with 17 struts in front of the station, if you compare the photo that started it all (image 4, post #7905), to the model (image 5) the issue is I believe this: It is not that the poles are too high per se, but that the struts are slightly too far apart, so the proportions are the issue. If in the original you measure the distance between strut 1 and 17, you can see that it is approximately 4/5ths of the height of the 2 storey building in the original photo. Compare this with the model (image 5) and the struts span approximately 6/5ths of the height of the 2 storey building. Anyway, I hope this is taken in the spirit of helpful constructive advice! I'll get my (GPO) coat. Matt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Apparently SWMBO reckons its a Catfish, not a Dogfish (and trust me she knows her 'fishkind's!). Trust a duck not to know the difference between cats n dogs... (a potentially fatal mistake I would have thought?) TPs are simply awesome! It's a Dogfish, though the side shutes seem to be missing; the give-away's the three operating wheels, one for each shute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 23, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 23, 2015 The SR had Dogfish with 'fluted' shutes so that ballast would not spew over the third rail, so I've modelled one of those. Phil 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 23, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 23, 2015 (edited) Dear Gilbert and Duck, with the greatest respect and positivity, I'm going to stick my neck out and use my architectural eye on this one: Duck the telegraph poles are impressive, HOWEVER, being absolutely empirical, I would say that - taking the famous one with 17 struts in front of the station, if you compare the photo that started it all (image 4, post #7905), to the model (image 5) the issue is I believe this: It is not that the poles are too high per se, but that the struts are slightly too far apart, so the proportions are the issue. If in the original you measure the distance between strut 1 and 17, you can see that it is approximately 4/5ths of the height of the 2 storey building in the original photo. Compare this with the model (image 5) and the struts span approximately 6/5ths of the height of the 2 storey building. Anyway, I hope this is taken in the spirit of helpful constructive advice! I'll get my (GPO) coat. Matt Yes, that's fine thanks. I have to admit that I had no idea what I was doing with these things. However, I have a little excuse in that the construction is limited somewhat by the actual struts/pots (they are white metal castings). I can't complain at all as I have been gifted those by a friend's friend. Had I used pots with J fittings from Express Models and a more 'authentic' strut, I think it would have produced a finer model. By that I mean fine as in thinness and correct dimensions). However, I thinlk I would have gone bonkers trying to make it. Express models poles RTR are very fine indeed, beautifully made and exceptional value. However, Gilber reckoned the 'Beast' would have cost at least £100! This one and all the others cost him the brass bits and that was the price of a good curry. As time passes, if Gilbert and myself think the look is not good enough then there will be a rethink. I suppose we hadn't really made it clear that these are a bit of a prototype project to see if they 'fit in' around the station. If Gilbert is too polite to say they don't look 'right' then I shall say it for him. Time will tell. P Edited June 23, 2015 by Mallard60022 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeeleyBridge Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Whether or not the poles are perfect, they certainly look the part. Without them the model looks bare when compared with photographs of the real thing. (I hope that makes sense) Very dedicated modelling by Mr Duck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Popular Post great northern Posted June 23, 2015 Author RMweb Premium Popular Post Share Posted June 23, 2015 Thanks for all the comments about the posts folks. Predictably, there is a divergence of opinion, which is fair enough. My brief to Phil was to go no further than making a representation of the poles. I specifically said that I didn't want him to spend a ridiculous amount of time on them, firstly because he was doing me a great favour by doing them anyway, and secondly because I knew we had no chance of getting them exactly right. He has, I suspect, put more time into it than I wished, and the results are brilliant. For me, they have to be there, because they were. I rushed into photographing them before we had looked closely at the correct height, because I was frankly so excited to see the impact they made. I should really have waited I suppose. I have a very large selection of images to work from, but frustratingly I can't show the vast majority on here for copyright reasons. That means that I have to ask you to accept our word for it that they are pretty well at the height they should be, with I think one exception. The one on the loading dock for example had to be very tall, as the next one to the South was the other side of Crescent Bridge, so it had to be high enough to clear that. Those photos which show the whole run of posts suggest that they didn't to any great degree go up and down from that datum position. They are of course there "in the raw" at present, and I agree entirely with those who suggest that painting and weathering will lessen their impact. Fortunately most of them are in positions where it will not be neccessary to reach over them, so I'm not too concerned about snagging accidents. I've managed to take a couple more images this afternoon, which appear below. Very rushed I'm afraid, but hopefully they will show that some visual improvement has already been achieved. I still can't get the right angle on this view. The camera is I think just a bit too big to get where it needs to be. I think the photographer was standing on the corner of Station Road, on the footpath. He wouldn't be wide enough to collide with the wall behind, but the camera is. This image shows pretty conclusively that "the beast" is set too high - that can be corrected after painting. I stll can't juggle brightness and contrast as well as I would like, and of course the bus is wrong, but it is the only single decker I have. I reckon all the other poles in view are now not too far away from correct, but as always your opinions will be valued. 23 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 I once read we humans rarely look above the ground floor at buildings, particularly on the high street, so I wonder how many rail travellers passed through Peterborough unaware of those mighty poles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 "Mighty Poles" perhaps they were hiding from the Russians at the time ? . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Trevellan Posted June 23, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 23, 2015 My brief to Phil was to go no further than making a representation of the poles. I specifically said that I didn't want him to spend a ridiculous amount of time on them, firstly because he was doing me a great favour by doing them anyway, and secondly because I knew we had no chance of getting them exactly right. He has, I suspect, put more time into it than I wished, and the results are brilliant. Don't worry Gilbert, they'll look splendid once you've finished wiring them all up 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donington Road Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 FDS! (For Duck's Sake) The poles are a triumph! Well done Phil. I have a slight concern about their snagging potential for the proud operator, but a rapid learning process may avoid too many problems. Marvellous work. It just amazes me how people are so quick off the mark to criticise something they have neither seen nor would even attempt to model. Living here I've seen the originals, lent on them, probably tried to climb them, those poles are the dogs bo**ocks. Well done Mr Duck, Peterborough just wasn't Peterborough without them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted June 24, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 24, 2015 LOL Quackers. 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