Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

Good Evening Tony

 

Great to see all these A4 photos.

 

If I may this was a Hornby RTR A4 60031 Golden Plover which I renumbered and named as A4 60009 a long standing Haymarket A4 and still famous after the steam depot disappeared.

 

I was only after its identity change and weathered that I realised the overhead warning signs should not be on an A4 in the 1958/9 period.

 

They will have to be removed at some point.

 

Very nice to see the two southern locomotives on LB.

 

Regards

 

David 

IMG_1993_edited-2.jpg

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 30368 said:

 

Tony good evening, and very pleasant it is, at least in South Wiltshire.

 

Good to see these two "guest" ex SR(BR) locos running on LB. Fine models and great prototypes, with, in the case of the WC, a significant Doncaster input. I often wonder how things would have evolved if Bulleid had stayed at Doncaster and succeeded his boss. Given the size of the LNER pacific fleet would he have been able to build his pacifics? Perhaps, but the drawing office team at Doncaster would have influenced the outcome so no chain driven valve gear?? What would a Bulleid mixed traffic 4-6-0 looked like???

Sorry, pointless speculation really.

Lovely pictures of a great layout, thanks.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

Good evening Richard,

 

I don't think it's pointless speculation at all; it's fascinating.

 

There's no doubt, had Bulleid stayed on the LNER he would have succeeded Gresley, the P2s would never have been rebuilt (though their problems would have been sorted out) and he'd have built a mixed traffic 4-6-0. I imagine that it would have looked different from the B1, maybe even having a Belpaire firebox, though the valve gear would have been conventional. It could well have been that the subsequent Peppercorn Pacifics would have been turned out much more like the Jarvis rebuilds (surely Britain's finest Class 8P?), all heaven wouldn't have got into a rage, and Edward Thompson's name would hardly have been remembered.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

 

I do recall at the time BR attempting to introduce 'fixed formations' ie keep the same vehicles in the same sets - with mixed success.   I can't really comment on earlier times also I strongly suspect your hunch is correct in that 'fixed formation' philosophy really only applied (and only really practical) to the prestige sets.

 

 

So the LSWR had introduced fixed formations round about 1910.  And if you ask about holiday traffic, some sets were taken into works at Easter to have the strengtheners inserted within the set.  Bill

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Percentages means sums! 

 

I suppose, since the A3s were the most-numerous of LNER Pacific types then there should be more of them than the A4s. 

 

The ones available for service on Little Bytham are 60039, 60048, 60054, 60062 (being painted at the moment), 60063, 60077, 60080, 60101, 60102, 60103, 60104 and 60111. Awaiting building are 60036 and 60088. Should there be more A3s? 

 

The A1s should probably be the most-numerous through Little Bytham, since they tended to monopolise the West Riding services.

 

Those available for service on LB are 60114, 60116, 60117, 60119, 60120, 60121, 60125, 60128, 60130, 60136, 60146, 60149, 60155, 60156 and 60157 (being painted). Others awaiting building include 60147 and 60148. 

 

All the above locos, with two exceptions, are kit-built.

 

Then there are the various Thompson Pacifics and the Peppercorn A2s, all built from kits with one exception. These comprise 60113, 60500, 60501, 60504, 60506, 60508, 60513, 60515, 60516, 60523 (being painted), 60526, 60528 (on a running-in turn) 60533, 60538 and 60539. I have no plans to build any more A2s or their variants. Not because Hornby is bringing out the latter; I won't have either of those types, anyway. 

 

Plenty to choose from. 

 

Whether the percentages are right, I have no idea. Every single loco listed has a place in my memory!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi Tony

 

I am surprised you have A3 60101 Cicero on your list, I thought she was hardly ever seen south of Newcastle.

 

Or is it a Doncaster running in turn.

 

Regards

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, landscapes said:

Hi Tony

 

I am surprised you have A3 60101 Cicero on your list, I thought she was hardly ever seen south of Newcastle.

 

Or is it a Doncaster running in turn.

 

Regards

 

David

Sorry David, 

 

A typo (since corrected). I never saw 60101 (an imperative for the locos I build in almost every case). Indeed, a friend remembers the plaintive 'I died waiting for CICERO' written on a wall at Hadley Wood! 

 

I did see COLORADO on a running-in turn, so I'll put her on to my 'to do' build list. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember Stoke Summit at a show somewhere:- Rob:- " We need another engine for that train". Tony W:- " There's another box of pacifics under the layout" !

 

Happy days.

 

Great to see the different A4s, even though I'm not a fan of them!

 

Best Regards

Tony

 

 

  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bbishop said:

As an LSWR / DB enthusiast, can I ask a dumb question about the A4s?  You all highlight tender variations, but were all the locomotives the same?

Not always Bill,

 

Only four were built with double chimneys (though all eventually got them), and some had smaller-diameter cylinders for a time.

 

In a way, the A4s highlight the inconsistency of the LNER's loco classification system. They were just all A4s, whether they had single or double chimneys, different cylinders or different tenders. 

 

Yet, some classes were sub-divided for merely having a water scoop on the tender, or different brakes. Many were sub-divided for having different tenders, and in other cases a mere sub-division indicated a different class. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, dibateg said:

I remember Stoke Summit at a show somewhere:- Rob:- " We need another engine for that train". Tony W:- " There's another box of pacifics under the layout" !

 

Happy days.

 

Great to see the different A4s, even though I'm not a fan of them!

 

Best Regards

Tony

 

 

Weren't they great days, Tony?

 

Near 80 shows for a big trainset. Did any other 30' 4mm layout attend as many exhibitions? And all in just over 15 years! Prestige shows as well.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Since their lives now consist of just living in a cabinet in my workshop, I thought I'd give them a spin this afternoon. 

 

Something I have been doing for the last couple of weeks. Both in OO & O I have many locos collected over many years. Slowly working through those "stored" giving them a service, clean the wheels and a quick run with (if I have it) the appropriate stock. For instance back in the late 80's I collected Lima 47's, some of which were back then special editions. Lima locos are like cockroaches, you can't kill 'em !!. Also I find older locos are easy to dismantle / service / clean etc, unlike there modern RTR counterparts stuffed with electronics and fine details that twang and disappear as soon as you attempt to remove the body !!

 

I came across this site by accident, some nice railway photos -  

https://www.thebythams.org.uk/2016/01/28/a-section-of-old-photos-taken-around-little-bytham/

 

Flickr Album

https://www.flickr.com/groups/thebythams/pool/

 

Well, not quite by accident, I was trying to find out why the signal box nameplate at Little Bytham  was simplynamed  "Bytham" (as in your layout room.) Was the station similarly named, or did the station signs show "Little Bytham" ?  Just curious.

 

Brit15

Edited by APOLLO
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

Something I have been doing for the last couple of weeks. Both in OO & O I have many locos collected over many years. Slowly working through those "stored" giving them a service, clean the wheels and a quick run with (if I have it) the appropriate stock. For instance back in the late 80's I collected Lima 47's, some of which were back then special editions. Lima locos are like cockroaches, you can't kill 'em !!. Also I find older locos are easy to dismantle / service / clean etc, unlike there modern RTR counterparts stuffed with electronics and fine details that twang and disappear as soon as you attempt to remove the body !!

 

I came across this site by accident, some nice railway photos -  

https://www.thebythams.org.uk/2016/01/28/a-section-of-old-photos-taken-around-little-bytham/

 

Well, not quite by accident, I was trying to find out why the signal box nameplate at Little Bytham  was simplynamed  "Bytham" (as in your layout room.) Was the station similarly named, or did the station signs show "Little Bytham" ?  Just curious.

 

Brit15

Lovely stuff,

 

Many thanks for posting. Some of the non-railway images are actually taken in Castle Bytham.

 

What stands out to me is that out of all the railway photos (and some are not that old), with the exception of the aerial shot, NONE could be taken now. Unless one were taking pictures of trees! Even the Pullman shot (which I have) would be surrounded by trees. 

 

Though the signal box sign was contracted to just 'Bytham', the station had the full name 'Little Bytham' on its running-in boards, and on its station sign. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Not always Bill,

 

Only four were built with double chimneys (though all eventually got them), and some had smaller-diameter cylinders for a time.

 

In a way, the A4s highlight the inconsistency of the LNER's loco classification system. They were just all A4s, whether they had single or double chimneys, different cylinders or different tenders. 

 

Yet, some classes were sub-divided for merely having a water scoop on the tender, or different brakes. Many were sub-divided for having different tenders, and in other cases a mere sub-division indicated a different class. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

In that case the Bachmann locomotives look different in two ways.  1. The valences meld into the smokebox front.  2. The smokebox front doesn't have a smooth curve, but rather looks like a duck's beak.  Sorry to be critical but just looks wrong.  Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, bbishop said:

 

In that case the Bachmann locomotives look different in two ways.  1. The valences meld into the smokebox front.  2. The smokebox front doesn't have a smooth curve, but rather looks like a duck's beak.  Sorry to be critical but just looks wrong.  Bill

Good evening Bill,

 

I think it's accepted that the Bachmann A4 isn't as good as the alternatives - it's derived from the original Trix body from the 1960s, after all.

 

Mind you, that's not to say that the others don't have different 'issues'.

 

And, since Trix A4 (or Bachmann A4) bodies were good enough for Roy Jackson..........................

 

608226894_Retford72006.jpg.f50ad66a84d23dbc6306175e5637d812.jpg

 

1885692076_Retford12101931A4byfootbridge.jpg.73ef0cd12d2888fab54535a2597da949.jpg

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Not in 1958, John,

 

In 1958, many 52A locos will have come on/off trains at Grantham, exchanging for Top Shed equivalents. Grantham was still an important loco-changing post in 1958, though later on the through workings took Gateshead's locos right through to Kings Cross. A few would have changed at Peterborough, taking them through Bytham.

 

I did have another 52A A4 at one time

 

 

 

946203692_60018onUpexpress.jpg.97d9eb962e72ea6d41c44c21626beb26.jpg

 

This is just a Hornby 60018, fitted with new bogie wheels, proper 'plates and heavily-weathered. I gave it to Ian Wilson.

 

It was some time ago, and the old girder bridge is still present.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

I think you need 1 more, Tony, as The Talisman was a Gateshead turn. 60018 would be a good choice, as would nos 1 and 19.. There are pictures of both on the train. And only 8 coaches to worry about.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Hi WW,

 

Good question and I was tempted to expound a little on this subject in the original post.

 

What I saw (late 1980s) was largely the 'one of the right type' philosophy in practice. That at least was quite important from the seat reservation point of view.

 

I do recall at the time BR attempting to introduce 'fixed formations' ie keep the same vehicles in the same sets - with mixed success. The big advantage of 'fixed formations' from a railway operations point of view is that the vehicles all remain in sync. for maintenance. Under the BR coach maintenance regime (CMS123), coaches were due heavy maintenance every 36 cycle days (roughly six weeks). Each set was stood down for 24 hours (and the maintenance set sent out in its place) to facilitate this happening. It was thus advantageous for all vehicles to be at the same point in the cycle for maintenance, otherwise you ended up having to maintain coaches individually, which was far less efficient.

 

I can't really comment on earlier times although I strongly suspect your hunch is correct in that 'fixed formation' philosophy really only applied (and only really practical) to the prestige sets.

 

Some sound observations there, Graham, not least the reference to seat reservations where the "wrong" type of coach would throw the system into chaos and cause questions to be asked in the House (Buchanan House in my case).

 

Maintenance sets for coaching stock in general were uncommon when I was involved. At Craigentinny we were used to the idea with HSTs and E&G push-pull sets so in the early 80s we (in conjunction with the aforementioned Buch House) introduced the same concept on loco-hauled sets that worked captive diagrams out of Edinburgh, mostly the Dundees. Availability and reliability both went up and we didn't need any extra coaches as those that were previously dotted round the country as "spares" were all formed together into a set.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't think anyone has mentioned the Finney/Brassmasters A4 of late.

 

All-in-all, it probably is the best 4mm A4 available, but it does take some building. 

 

I assume SPARROW HAWK is one in your picture? If so, have you changed the tender, because all the Finney A4s I've seen as-supplied come with a 1928 corridor tender (inappropriate for any Gateshead-allocated A4)?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

There is only 2 types of tender available from Brass masters appropriate for the A4 being the streamlined tender and the 1928 tender. After all your pointing out of the various types of tender for the A4's , along with the angle to the bottom edge for the Coronation 4... there is no great reason why people get this wrong. the information is out there in Yeadons, along with a number of others (In fact I have been so impressed with the number of times you have pointed out the details for any one to use. I just hope I can remember to use the right detail when I decide which A4 I want to build! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

The C2 arrived safe and sound Tony, here she is on BJ with my mini me signal man getting a good look at her! She runs sweetly down the scenic section, I haven’t given her a full run yet, I’ll run her in and lube everything and then let her stretch her legs! 
 

Thanks again, Tony and Geoff, she’s marvellous. 
 

Horrible photo as it’s just on my iPhone with a bit of editing to make her pop

66A17FD6-5C30-4A7A-A9D7-807AFC3FD16F.jpeg

 

Looks Great Jesse,

 

Obviously, a wonderful job has been done by Tony and Geoff in the building and painting of the model. Looks far to shiny though, even a light weathering (appropriate for the 1930s) will greatly enhance the model. I am sure Tony would agree.

 

Regards Connor

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I do recall at the time BR attempting to introduce 'fixed formations' ie keep the same vehicles in the same sets - with mixed success. The big advantage of 'fixed formations' from a railway operations point of view is that the vehicles all remain in sync. for maintenance.

 

The LNER streamliner sets were also managed in this way and taken out of service for overhaul every spring so they'd be ready for the start of the summer timetable.    In the last 12 months or so I've seen two pictures of the spare Coronation set working, one where it's replacing the Silver Jubilee.  I've also very recently seen a picture of a Coronation working with a teak pair (RTP-RF) replacing twin C-D.   That must have been a last minute failure.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

 

The LNER streamliner sets were also managed in this way and taken out of service for overhaul every spring so they'd be ready for the start of the summer timetable.    In the last 12 months or so I've seen two pictures of the spare Coronation set working, one where it's replacing the Silver Jubilee.  I've also very recently seen a picture of a Coronation working with a teak pair (RTP-RF) replacing twin C-D.   That must have been a last minute failure.

 

That was my understanding as well Jonathan and using the spare set is going to be my dodge to be able to represent both the West Riding and Coronation services without needing two fiddle yard slots. I've not heard of teaks being used in the streamliner sets before; is this a publicly available photograph?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

The C2 arrived safe and sound Tony, here she is on BJ with my mini me signal man getting a good look at her! She runs sweetly down the scenic section, I haven’t given her a full run yet, I’ll run her in and lube everything and then let her stretch her legs! 
 

Thanks again, Tony and Geoff, she’s marvellous. 
 

Horrible photo as it’s just on my iPhone with a bit of editing to make her pop

66A17FD6-5C30-4A7A-A9D7-807AFC3FD16F.jpeg

Wonderful, Jesse,

 

Thanks for letting me know. 

 

She was oiled before being sent, so shouldn't need any more for a while. 

 

All you've got to do now is save up the pennies to pay for her.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, CCGWR said:

 

Looks Great Jesse,

 

Obviously, a wonderful job has been done by Tony and Geoff in the building and painting of the model. Looks far to shiny though, even a light weathering (appropriate for the 1930s) will greatly enhance the model. I am sure Tony would agree.

 

Regards Connor

Good morning Connor,

 

Too shiny? I think the 'shine' has been highlighted by Jesse's railway room lights.

 

Anyway, when the loco's finish was discussed, the brief was 'light weathering', which she carries. One of the guide prototype pictures was Fig. 44 in the appropriate RCTS Pt. 3A. I assume you have this?

 

Anyway, C2s were repaired/repainted in the 1930s, and Geoff's lining is so well-done that to consider covering it would be shameful.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
19 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

 

The LNER streamliner sets were also managed in this way and taken out of service for overhaul every spring so they'd be ready for the start of the summer timetable.    In the last 12 months or so I've seen two pictures of the spare Coronation set working, one where it's replacing the Silver Jubilee.  I've also very recently seen a picture of a Coronation working with a teak pair (RTP-RF) replacing twin C-D.   That must have been a last minute failure.

True enough Jonathan but somehow you've attributed Graham's words to me. Credit where credit's due...

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DougN said:

There is only 2 types of tender available from Brass masters appropriate for the A4 being the streamlined tender and the 1928 tender. After all your pointing out of the various types of tender for the A4's , along with the angle to the bottom edge for the Coronation 4... there is no great reason why people get this wrong. the information is out there in Yeadons, along with a number of others (In fact I have been so impressed with the number of times you have pointed out the details for any one to use. I just hope I can remember to use the right detail when I decide which A4 I want to build! 

Good morning Doug,

 

When you state 'streamlined' tender, I assume you mean the non-corridor type? The 1935-type corridor tenders were also streamlined - and the best-looking of all the A4 tenders with their radiused rear and lack of beading. Sadly, none has been preserved, and even when a 'new' corridor tender was made for BITTERN (something she never towed in service) it ended up as a 1928-type; an opportunity missed?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...