Wright writes.....

[Headstock]

There might be a clue in the annotations in my Summer 1947 book regarding sets 37, 38 and 39A - the typed note about 37 was my replacing a pencil annotation with something legible:

 

 

Seems they might well have been changed from TK(8) - side door ones - to TTO. At that time, the third class compartments had their armrests sewn up and were treated as having 4 per side seating, so the seating capacity would not have been affected.

 

It looks good Robert, you will still have to land a photo to seal the deal.

 

Thanks, I think all the images came from my collection. There are lots more GC ones besides - all in this album.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/29081031846/sizes/l

 

That looks like the NE set of the Bournemouth.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/20039413480/sizes/l

 

Someone has done some horrible photoshop work on the version of this photo that appears in the digital magazine. The train is most likely 'the Spitfire' and could not have been taken prior to 1957.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Headstock

[Mookie]

On 28/10/2016 at 12:03, robertcwp said:

Thanks, I think all the images came from my collection. There are lots more GC ones besides - all in this album.

.

Edited July 20, 2022 by Mookie

[Headstock]

About 230-250 grams, which doesn't seem much although at least the weight is concentrated over the drivers.

 

So about 9 ounces with all the bits and bobs added. I go for about 12 to 14 ounces on a big pacific, with the attention they will take 11 or 12 kit built carriages up a 1/75 grade. It seems to work well enough, but there is probably quite a bit of leeway as long as the stock and locomotive are free running. Some time ago I stripped the weight out of a RTR Hall and replaced it with lead . I can't say what this has done to the lifetime of the motor and gearbox, but it will now handle a good sized train. It stands as a spare engine, happily, it has never been needed.

[thegreenhowards]

 

I'm sure people can find plenty of faults with my various articles. Some were screwed up by others (notably the one on East Coast Pullmans) and other errors were mine for various reasons. .

Hello Robert,

 

An article by you on East Coast Pullmans sounds interesting (even 'screwed up'!). Where can I find this?

 

Many thanks

 

Andy

[robertcwp]

Hello Robert,

 

An article by you on East Coast Pullmans sounds interesting (even 'screwed up'!). Where can I find this?

 

Many thanks

 

Andy

Model Rail 116 April 2008.

 

EDIT

 

Screwed up was probably a bit strong now I have tracked down my post on the old RMweb with the correction, so apologies to Model Rail. Here it is again:

 

 

A small error in my Pullman article has been drawn to my attention. I didn't make my correction request clear enough when I looked at the proof. Two sentences were replaced per my request but the one in front of them was deleted by accident. In the section headed 1974 and thereafter:

 

After:

 

"On their last day, May 5 1978, the 'Yorkshire Pollman' included cars E315/18/19/26E and the 'Hull Pullman' E313/17/28E."

 

Insert missing sentence:

 

"The 'Tees-Tyne Pullman' did not survive as long as the other two trains as it was withdrawn upon the introduction of the 1976 summer timetable."

 

Before:

 

"Its final formation was 4 x TSO IId, RMB, RU(s), PFP, 2 x PFK(s), BG, reflecting the decline in first class traffic on the train. The Saturday 'Yorkshire Pullman' was also withdrawn in 1976."

 

Hence, the final formation referred to is that of the Tees-Tyne Pullman in 1976, not the Hull Pullman in 1978 as the text implies.

 

Edited October 28, 2016 by robertcwp

[robertcwp]

It looks good Robert, you will still have to land a photo to seal the deal.

 

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/29081031846/sizes/l

 

That looks like the NE set of the Bournemouth.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/robertcwp/20039413480/sizes/l

 

Someone has done some horrible photoshop work on the version of this photo that appears in the digital magazine. The train is most likely 'the Spitfire' and could not have been taken prior to 1957.

 Photos from 1947 are hard to come by. I don't think I have found any good ones of the Manchester-Marylebone trains from 1948 either.

 

Thanks for the information on the photos. The ones I acquired recently on GC subjects came with as much information as you can see in the image. Both these Black 5s are carrying a reversed headboard, including the one in the image you refer to above:

 

44824_nr-Belgrave-Birstall_c1950 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

44824_Belgrave-Birstall_1950 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Was the next (or previous) working the South Yorkshireman?

[Mike 84C]

Hi Robert, just browsed your GC album thanks for sharing, it brought back many happy memories, Nott Vic, Woodford and the Joint. Where have the years gone?

[Headstock]

 Photos from 1947 are hard to come by. I don't think I have found any good ones of the Manchester-Marylebone trains from 1948 either.

 

Thanks for the information on the photos. The ones I acquired recently on GC subjects came with as much information as you can see in the image. Both these Black 5s are carrying a reversed headboard, including the one in the image you refer to above:

 

44824_nr-Belgrave-Birstall_c1950 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

44824_Belgrave-Birstall_1950 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Was the next (or previous) working the South Yorkshireman?

Good evening Robert,

 

The black 5 worked into Sheffield on the South Yorkshireman, it was usually a Low Moor engine. It came off the train at Sheffield, simmered for a bit and then took the Bournemouth south as far as Leicester Central. It made the return Journey on the northbound Bournemouth again coming off at Sheffield. Finally, it made the return run to Bradford on the evening South Yorkshireman. Ex LM locomotives from other West Ridding sheds also turned up at Sheffield on the working and they would also make the return run to Leicester. They also worked the Swansea express on occasion as far as Leicester. The headboard for the Soth Yorkshireman remained with the Locomotive.

 

The NE set of the Bournemouth was almost the second train running on the line to carry the Crimson and cream livery. I say almost, because the Gresley 3 compartment brakes that topped and tailed the formation remained in teak, this does make it rather easy to spot in photographs.

[Headstock]

Ah up Robert,

 

 am I allowed to call myself a dumb ass online without being banned? I finally plugged in one of my backup drives and realised I had already found out four years ago that end door thirds and opens were operating in the Manchester expresses in 1946. I may have even sent you some photographs at the time. I think I shall retire to bed. 

[thegreenhowards]

Model Rail 116 April 2008.

 

EDIT

 

Screwed up was probably a bit strong now I have tracked down my post on the old RMweb with the correction, so apologies to Model Rail. Here it is again:

 

 

A small error in my Pullman article has been drawn to my attention. I didn't make my correction request clear enough when I looked at the proof. Two sentences were replaced per my request but the one in front of them was deleted by accident. In the section headed 1974 and thereafter:

After:

"On their last day, May 5 1978, the 'Yorkshire Pollman' included cars E315/18/19/26E and the 'Hull Pullman' E313/17/28E."

Insert missing sentence:

"The 'Tees-Tyne Pullman' did not survive as long as the other two trains as it was withdrawn upon the introduction of the 1976 summer timetable."

Before:

"Its final formation was 4 x TSO IId, RMB, RU(s), PFP, 2 x PFK(s), BG, reflecting the decline in first class traffic on the train. The Saturday 'Yorkshire Pullman' was also withdrawn in 1976."

Hence, the final formation referred to is that of the Tees-Tyne Pullman in 1976, not the Hull Pullman in 1978 as the text implies.

 

Thanks Robert,

 

Another Model Rail back copy to keep an eye out for. The mid noughties were a good period for the mag with lots of interesting prototype articles.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Headstock]

There might be a clue in the annotations in my Summer 1947 book regarding sets 37, 38 and 39A - the typed note about 37 was my replacing a pencil annotation with something legible:

 

 

Seems they might well have been changed from TK(8) - side door ones - to TTO. At that time, the third class compartments had their armrests sewn up and were treated as having 4 per side seating, so the seating capacity would not have been affected.

Hi Robert,

 

I've sent you a PM that you may find interesting.

[Headstock]

A bit of modelling before I start on the epic task of wheel cleaning. I've been experimenting with roof boards for my own 1949 Manchester Marylebone express. I'm not 100% happy with them at the moment. I should have probably fitted working brackets, they will have to do for the time being until after the Newcastle show.

[robertcwp]

Thanks Robert,

 

Another Model Rail back copy to keep an eye out for. The mid noughties were a good period for the mag with lots of interesting prototype articles.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Yes, there were some good articles, and a few of mine. A very early edition had some good colour photos of pre-nationalisation designs of parcels vans in maroon and blue liveries if I recall correctly.

[Barry Ten]

Just a quick update on the Schools, with valve gear now fitted (to this side only):

 

 

I just can't get to grips with the brass pin method of valve gear assembly, so until I've had a lesson from TW, my only option is to

rivet the whole lot together, which needs to be done on the workbench before being transferred to the loco. However, all went

well so far, with no fettling or adjustment needed to the Craftsman parts. This might be an old-ish kit, but it's pretty nicely designed

in my opinion and everything seems to work as it's meant to. So far it's been a very enjoyable process!

 

Alastair (Barry Ten)

[Headstock]

Just a quick update on the Schools, with valve gear now fitted (to this side only):

 

schools3.jpg

 

I just can't get to grips with the brass pin method of valve gear assembly, so until I've had a lesson from TW, my only option is to

rivet the whole lot together, which needs to be done on the workbench before being transferred to the loco. However, all went

well so far, with no fettling or adjustment needed to the Craftsman parts. This might be an old-ish kit, but it's pretty nicely designed

in my opinion and everything seems to work as it's meant to. So far it's been a very enjoyable process!

 

Alastair (Barry Ten)

 

Hi Alister,

 

I shall look forwards to seeing what you decide to lop off the body of the locomotive and what you retain. Again compliments on your scenics, you must be a secret Romantic painter. With all those intersecting diagonals and flowing curves, it makes an interesting contrast to the comparative starkness of Little Bytham.

[Mallard60022]

Alastair, what score out of 10 would you give to the ease of construction of the chassis/gear (presumably the wheels were a simple fit)? In comparison (say) to a Comet product.

Thank you.

Phil

[salmonpastures]

Valour on those Pullmans is, for me, what railway modelling is about.  Super - it's a loco I would love but, I fear, wishful thinking!

2750,,, many thanks for your post,,,, simple one liner's like yours make it all worthwhile,,,, and it did take a while!!!

 

Tony was kind enough to try and re-create this picture

even down to the telegraph poles!!!

Mr J.G.Robinson and a lot of his Edwardian counterparts seemed to feel the aesthetics were as important as the performance.

I don't really care what the real one's were like,,,, I don't know enough about it to comment.

But when Valour pulled 9 pullmans round LB I was "rather chuffed" to say the least.

Tony then decided it needed glazing,,,, and 15 minutes later it had some!!!!

Typical teacher,,,, things can always be improved,,, and I am not complaining.

Many thanks Tony,,, what a wonderful day out,,,, again!!! 

 

SAD

[Willie Whizz]

Thank's Robert.

 

ex-Bournemouth set 295 open third no 1456 was a part of this set in 64/65. I believe this carriage is undergoing restoration, hopefully to its original condition. I wonder if the train was a special working similar to the type that would frequent the Nottingham goose fair or just another holiday express?

 

Presuming the "8-62" part of the photo's file-name relates to the month it was taken, and that the dating is actually accurate, then it wouldn't be a special train for Nottingham Goose Fair, as that great annual event did and still does take place in the second half of the first week of October.  (Ah, I can smell the candyfloss and taste the mushy peas just thinking of it ...!)

[robertcwp]

Presuming the "8-62" part of the photo's file-name relates to the month it was taken, and that the dating is actually accurate, then it wouldn't be a special train for Nottingham Goose Fair, as that great annual event did and still does take place in the second half of the first week of October.  (Ah, I can smell the candyfloss and taste the mushy peas just thinking of it ...!)

Yes, 8-62 refers to August 1962, which was the date written on the negative sleeve, but there is no way of telling whether or not that date is accurate.

[Tony Wright]

2750,,, many thanks for your post,,,, simple one liner's like yours make it all worthwhile,,,, and it did take a while!!!

 

Tony was kind enough to try and re-create this picture6167 Lord Faringdon.jpg

even down to the telegraph poles!!!

Mr J.G.Robinson and a lot of his Edwardian counterparts seemed to feel the aesthetics were as important as the performance.

I don't really care what the real one's were like,,,, I don't know enough about it to comment.

But when Valour pulled 9 pullmans round LB I was "rather chuffed" to say the least.

Tony then decided it needed glazing,,,, and 15 minutes later it had some!!!!

Typical teacher,,,, things can always be improved,,, and I am not complaining.

Many thanks Tony,,, what a wonderful day out,,,, again!!! 

 

SAD

Thanks SAD,

 

It was actually ten Pullmans, and it could have easily been more!

 

Thank you and the others for your collective hospitality as well.

 

Speaking of wonderful days out, I had a quite splendid time yesterday at the Caistor Show. What a jolly event, put on by some friendly folk and greatly enjoyable. My compliments to all involved. It reminded me of how a lot of shows used to be in a way. Not too much pressure, time to chat and an easy atmosphere. Talking of chatting, that's what I did most of the time! I was down to help the avuncular Graham Moorfoot operate his Boston Sleeper Works. I even took some of my locos and trains. Sadly, they would not go round the curves. My lack of operating prowess didn't matter because he had a pair of perfect operators in Will and Tom. Youngsters, keen as mustard and diligent in the extreme. It's a pity there weren't more, though not everyone was old and decrepit. May I please thank all those I spoke with, and say a personal thanks for all who wished me well?

 

I think what impressed me the most was the personal modelling which was on display. Ian Mellors' O Gauge heritage essay was a joy to behold - real model making, not just box-opening or getting someone else to do it for you. Though there was the odd bit of RTR apparent on some of the layouts, everything had been altered/improved by the guys/girls themselves who were exhibiting. How refreshing indeed. It's a pity the show wasn't highlighted more in advance. Was there a thread for it here?

 

I managed to get all the Crowood manuscript finished and away. I hope it'll turn out all right. Though it's based around the building of Little Bytham, there should be much of interest to all modellers, or at least I hope so.

 

 

How to disguise the entrance/exits to non-scenic sections is considered, as here on the MR/M&GNR bit of my railway. The curve is ridiculously tight in being about 28" radius (it tightens further out of sight) but this modified Skaledale plate girder bridge disguises it a bit. There was a bridge very similar to this at Wymondham, but that was about six miles away. Modeller's licence? I live with a tight curve on the 'minor' line, but I would not consider a tight curve in view on the main line. I built this K2 from a LRM kit and Ian Rathbone painted it. 

 

 

I admit to cheating in this shot by just blanking out the darkened area beneath the MR/M&GNR overbridge. The main lines go around a 180 degree curve some six inches beyond that, but it's not visible from the side, and all trains go on/off stage on the straight. The approaching O2/2 I modified from a Heljan O2/3. A picture of it appeared in a recent BRM. 

 

 

The final chapter is concerned with the making of trains. Obviously, I've concentrated on the passenger side of things but the more humble freights have not been neglected. Freights like these, mainly the work of others achieved through the usual horse-trading channels. Rob Kinsey built the O4/7 from a Little Engines kit (which I weathered) and I built, painted, lined, lettered and numbered the DMR K1, which Tom Foster weathered for me (more horse-trading).

 

In a recent post Little Bytham was mentioned as having 'comparative starkness'. I take that as a compliment because it is very plain indeed. There is no grand topography, no rolling distant vistas of towering hills or grandiose architecture. Just an open lot of 'nothing' in a way. Only the fastest stretch of main line in the (steam) world passing through the rolling Lincolnshire countryside, as I hope the last picture depicts.  

Edited October 30, 2016 by Tony Wright

[gr.king]

Although the Caistor show was listed in what I seem to remember is called the "events diary" or something similar, there was no exhibition thread until quite late on when I thought I'd better do something to help:

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/116159-caistorail-29th-30th-oct-2016/

 

One or two of us in this neck of the woods, outside of the club, have mentioned to those in the club on more than one occasion in recent years that the show ought to be more widely publicised, in more detail, and further in advance of the event. We can only make suggestions......

 

PS, I should add in fairness that the club members are, realistically, limited by the current location of the show - there's little point attracting more visitors, especially on a Saturday morning and early afternoon, as so few parking spaces are likely to be available at or near the Town Hall, and some people do moan bitterly if they have to walk more than ten yards from the comfort of their cars. Attempts have been made, and continue, to find a suitable alternative venue.

Edited October 31, 2016 by gr.king

[Headstock]

Presuming the "8-62" part of the photo's file-name relates to the month it was taken, and that the dating is actually accurate, then it wouldn't be a special train for Nottingham Goose Fair, as that great annual event did and still does take place in the second half of the first week of October.  (Ah, I can smell the candyfloss and taste the mushy peas just thinking of it ...!)

 

Hi Willy Whizz,

 

I didn't say that it was a special for the Nottingham Goose fair, I was comparing it to the sets that did run in conjunction with that event. The reason being that a special event could bring one off formations  on to the line that would not normally be associated with the summer Saturdays holiday trains. In other words, workings that would only show up in the special trains notices rather than the CWN's or working timetables. The train is unusual because of the amount of open stock in it, compared to the amount of compartment stock normally associated with the holiday trains. In addition, the amount of baggage area provided in the brakes would be less than many of the holiday trains.  If it is a holiday train, that may reflect changes arising from the late date of the photograph. If it is a special excursion then it would be consistent with the type of trains that worked to the Goose fair. I hope that is of help if any confusion was caused.

[Headstock]

 

 

In a recent post Little Bytham was mentioned as having 'comparative starkness'. I take that as a compliment because it is very plain indeed. There is no grand topography, no rolling distant vistas of towering hills or grandiose architecture. Just an open lot of 'nothing' in a way. Only the fastest stretch of main line in the (steam) world passing through the rolling Lincolnshire countryside, as I hope the last picture depicts.  

 

Most definitely a compliment, I can see what you intended to achieve.

[Barry Ten]

Alastair, what score out of 10 would you give to the ease of construction of the chassis/gear (presumably the wheels were a simple fit)? In comparison (say) to a Comet product.

Thank you.

Phil

 

Hi Phil - I'd be wary of sounding like I know what I'm talking about, as my experience of chassis construction is still quite limited, but I'd rate it as marginally easier than a Comet

chassis in that the frame spacer had locating tabs, so it would have been hard to get it seriously out of square. That said, I still used jigs and took my time setting it up. As for the

rest, I've built a few Comet kits with outside pistons but none with valve gear, so can't really compare. I think I'd give it 8/10 though as I really haven't hit any significant snags and

nothing's needed modification. The wheels were simple, too, and unlike recent Romfords, they fitted onto the machined axles perfectly first time, a nice surprise.

 

I put the other set of valve gear on this afternoon. I expected the second side to be simpler, but this one put up a bit of a fight for some reason, but it all came good in the end.

[Tony Wright]

Just a quick update on the Schools, with valve gear now fitted (to this side only):

 

schools3.jpg

 

I just can't get to grips with the brass pin method of valve gear assembly, so until I've had a lesson from TW, my only option is to

rivet the whole lot together, which needs to be done on the workbench before being transferred to the loco. However, all went

well so far, with no fettling or adjustment needed to the Craftsman parts. This might be an old-ish kit, but it's pretty nicely designed

in my opinion and everything seems to work as it's meant to. So far it's been a very enjoyable process!

 

Alastair (Barry Ten)

Alastair,

 

Please arrange a further visit. 

 

The soldered pin method of assembling valve gear is much simpler than riveting. I can never get rivets right; I either bash them too much so that they bind or leave them too loose.