Wright writes.....

[thegreenhowards]

Tony,

 

I like your BG, in particular, the glazing looks far better than the Hornby example in such a close up.. The Hornby bogies on the sleeping car are their attempt at HD bogies as they have the extra set of rivets above the axle boxes. But I agree that they look rather puny compared with the HD pair which certainly look the part. I’ve had a rummage in my kit pile since this morning and found one 8’0” HD bogie - goodness knows what happened to its partner! But then I had to go and build 1:1 scale locos (928 at the Bluebell), so more searching is required this evening.

 

One comment on your BG if I may - I think it would look better with brass and/or black door furniture as appropriate.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

 

[Anglian]

 

Please could somebody tell me what the purpose of the lever/arm with the chain attachment is, to the lower right of the grill on D9018.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Anglian

[Clive Mortimore]

3 minutes ago, Anglian said:

 

Please could somebody tell me what the purpose of the lever/arm with the chain attachment is, to the lower right of the grill on D9018.

Handbrake.

[Anglian]

Thank you.

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Handbrake.

It could well be part of the braking system on a Deltic's bogies. 

 

Someone out there must know.

[micklner]

11 hours ago, Headstock said:

It is well worth fitting the 8' heavies, they are very noticeable, being chunkier than the standards with deeper side frames. Because they are shorter over all, there is a greater overhang at the ends and those BG's so fitted ( the vast majority ran on 8 ' bogies of one form or another) just look longer than the normal passenger carriages.

Andrew,

            I have a set of old Comet Thompson BG sides to update the equally old Bachmann BG version. The instructions say LNER version was painted in "Teak grained " livery. Obviously you have done your beautiful version above in Teak shade paint. I have only ever read that the Thompson Deal board version was Teak shade painted as above ? . 

[Jesse Sim]

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

It depends on a few factors, Jesse, but you'll always be welcome to see Retford I'm sure. 

 

If we do go up, it won't be in a TVR this year! 

Well, we can always hire a Porsche or something? My treat!  

[Headstock]

25 minutes ago, micklner said:

Andrew,

            I have a set of old Comet Thompson BG sides to update the equally old Bachmann BG version. The instructions say LNER version was painted in "Teak grained " livery. Obviously you have done your beautiful version above in Teak shade paint. I have only ever read that the Thompson Deal board version was Teak shade painted as above ? . 

 

Evening Mick,

 

good livery spot.

 

The Thompson steel paneled BG's were, as you say, turned out in painted grained teak. However, the BG up thread is a Gresley steel paneled BG, those built before the war were turned out in painted grained teak and fully lined with painted beading. The example in the photograph was one of the War time builds that York turned out in plain brown, believed to be in the gloss paint supplied for the long wheelbase CCT's built before the War. York also built a batch of 'teak' BG's that actually had hardboard panels, these  were also painted brown.

[asmay2002]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

The one 'spotter here would appear to be contemplating racing BALLYMOSS when she gets going. Just think; at the time, Britain's most-powerful and fastest locomotive running on a railway still controlled (in part) by pre-1923 somersault signals.

 I think that a West Coast partisan would argue their electric locos were rated at the same speed as the 55's and had a higher HP rating (3300hp at the traction motors continuous - higher for 1 hour- rather than 3300 at the engine). 

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by asmay2002

[micklner]

23 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Mick,

 

good livery spot.

 

The Thompson steel paneled BG's were, as you say, turned out in painted grained teak. However, the BG up thread is a Gresley steel paneled BG, those built before the war were turned out in painted grained teak and fully lined with painted beading. The example in the photograph was one of the War time builds that York turned out in plain brown, believed to be in the gloss paint supplied for the long wheelbase CCT's built before the War. York also built a batch of 'teak' BG's that actually had hardboard panels, these  were also painted brown.

Evening Andrew,

          That was a surprise, as I has presumed it was a Thompson version !! Looking at the two versions in a web search for photos other than the length, they appear virtually identical in design,  I should have looked the roof profile as well !!  . 

 

thanks 

 

Mick

Edited May 8, 2019 by micklner

[Headstock]

58 minutes ago, micklner said:

Evening Andrew,

          That was a surprise, as I has presumed it was a Thompson version !! Looking at the two versions in a web search for photos other than the length, they appear virtually identical in design,  I should have looked the roof profile as well !!  . 

 

thanks 

 

Mick

 

Mick,

 

the Gresley steel paneled BG's were identical to the teak BG's in all major proportions. Being 61'6'' over the body and 8' 6'' wide at the waists, compared to the Thompson design at 63' by 8' 11 1/4''. The Thompson Deal vans were built on Gresley 61' 6'' underframes, some from recovered Wartime casualties, there was no roof overhang, so the roof was skinny as well. The Gresley steel BG's of course had the familiar domed roof ends not found on Thompson stock.

 

The photo below, taken at Carlise, shows how skinny the typical Gresley BG was, notice the overhang of the roof on the narrower body and the subtlety of the tumblehome. Also a good view of the 8' HD bogies. The Thomo steel type to diag 344 were full fat, being identical to the passenger carriages in all major proportions. As a result, a ducket could not be provided.

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by Headstock
add info

[St Enodoc]

9 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Typical of a historian needing a date. Early 1961?

The Napier Chronicles http://www.napier-chronicles.co.uk/9018.htm says that D9018 entered service on 2411/61 and there is a photo of it at Grantham on 21/6/62 , still with no yellow panel.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/david_christie/6078579243

 shows it at Darlington with yellow panel on 18/7/64.

 

Go to go to work now so I haven't got time for more Googling to narrow it down further!

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

It could well be part of the braking system on a Deltic's bogies. 

 

Someone out there must know.

As Clive said, it's definitely the handbrake linkage.

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, asmay2002 said:

 I think that a West Coast partisan would argue their electric locos were rated at the same speed as the 55's and had a higher HP rating (3300hp at the traction motors continuous - higher for 1 hour- rather than 3300 at the engine). 

 

As A GER AC lines fan I would like to add the AM9s to the list of 100mph machines with an horse power of 3384hp for a full 10 car (later 12 car) train. Unfortunately most of the line like the WCML was 100mph with modern colour light signals not blokes pulling levers in boxes to work the signals as Tony had indicated. Thinking about it, it was quite amazing what the ECML achieved in the 60s.

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, asmay2002 said:

 I think that a West Coast partisan would argue their electric locos were rated at the same speed as the 55's and had a higher HP rating (3300hp at the traction motors continuous - higher for 1 hour- rather than 3300 at the engine). 

 

 

And without an external power supply they couldn't move themselves an inch. Do they even count as locomotives? One definition says that a locomotive should be capable of self propulsion.

 

Don't mind me. Just feeling cantankerous!

[Clive Mortimore]

53 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

And without an external power supply they couldn't move themselves an inch. Do they even count as locomotives? One definition says that a locomotive should be capable of self propulsion.

 

Don't mind me. Just feeling cantankerous!

Hi

 

Your assumption makes diesels the only real locomotives. Without the 3rd rail or overhead lines electrics are useless. Without that geezer with the shovel bunging the solid fossil fuel on the fire steam locos are useless. The fireman is the external power source.

 

 

I am sure someone will disprove my logic.

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, asmay2002 said:

 I think that a West Coast partisan would argue their electric locos were rated at the same speed as the 55's and had a higher HP rating (3300hp at the traction motors continuous - higher for 1 hour- rather than 3300 at the engine). 

 

The picture of BALLYMOSS was taken in 1962, three years before the 100 mph AL6s were introduced. 

Edited May 9, 2019 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

And without an external power supply they couldn't move themselves an inch. Do they even count as locomotives? One definition says that a locomotive should be capable of self propulsion.

 

Don't mind me. Just feeling cantankerous!

I like cantankerousness!

 

I think 'self-propulsion' is axiomatic as meaning that the locomotive can move under its own 'internal' power, and, even a diesel loco needs a driver. A steam loco, of course, needs a tender (unless it's a tank), which, to some extent, is 'external'. 

 

Electric traction always suffers on preserved lines because examples can only be static exhibits. 

Edited May 9, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Jol Wilkinson]

8 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi

 

Your assumption makes diesels the only real locomotives. Without the 3rd rail or overhead lines electrics are useless. Without that geezer with the shovel bunging the solid fossil fuel on the fire steam locos are useless. The fireman is the external power source.

 

 

I am sure someone will disprove my logic.

Allow me, Clive.

 

A fireman would only be a power source if fed into the firebox.

 

Both steam and diesel locomotives carry their own power "supplies". In that way they are both different to electric locomotives which rely upon a continual power feed from a remote source (unless battery powered).

 

Jol

[Clive Mortimore]

15 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

The picture of BALLYMOSS was taken in 1962, three years before the 100 mph AL6s were introduced. 

All the WCML AL series of locos were geared for 100mph running. Except those intended for freight the E33xx AL3s when built, these were later regeared (and renumbered) the same as the rest of the class. Later the 85/1 were regeared to 75mph again primary for freight duties.

[grahame]

3 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

A fireman would only be a power source if fed into the firebox.

 

 

Surely the fireman gets his power from being fed a decent breakfast to enable him to work and shovel the coal from an external location in to the fire. Odd, as usually these day firemen put out fires rather than stoke them.

;-)

 

G

 

[Clive Mortimore]

8 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Allow me, Clive.

 

A fireman would only be a power source if fed into the firebox.

 

Both steam and diesel locomotives carry their own power "supplies". In that way they are both different to electric locomotives which rely upon a continual power feed from a remote source (unless battery powered).

 

Jol

Jol

 

The coal may be carried on the loco but without the man with the shovel there is no means of getting the coal to where it is useful, thus rendering the loco a static object.

[Clive Mortimore]

There are many electric locomotives that don't require an external power supply for them to move. Like a diesel or steam loco they do need to top up their "fuel".

[t-b-g]

Most diesels are really mobile electricity generators.They are like the WCML electrics in that the axles are turned by (in most cases) electric motors but they generate their own electricity instead of having it fed to them down a long wire.

 

Anything like the WCML electrics will always have a huge advantage over steam or diesel in terms of power available for hauling trains because they do not generate their own power and don't have to lug around a great heavy means of propulsion. Malcolm Crawley used to reckon that the Deltics used around 4-500 of their horsepower just to move themselves and power all the gear on board. So only around 2,800 was available for hauling trains. He should know. He took the prototype on trials!

 

Having a crew or not is a red herring. I have seen radio controlled steam move with no crew! The difference comes in whether or not the locomotive, equipped with fuel, lubricant and out on the track as it would be in normal service, can move itself or not. Steam, diesel and battery electric locomotives can. The WCML electrics (and other similar types) could not.

 

 

 

 

[Pannier Tank]

39 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

Anything like the WCML electrics will always have a huge advantage over steam or diesel in terms of power available for hauling trains because they do not generate their own power and don't have to lug around a great heavy means of propulsion. 

 

 

But they do have to lug around a Heavy Transformer!

Edited May 9, 2019 by Pannier Tank
Speeling mistook