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

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Thanks Tony,

 

I have been looking through my photographs and couldn't find one. The question is, was there a batch built like that, or was it a later alteration? Could you also confirm if the photo in 'Larkin' is a dia 120 or one of the others, is it dated?

 

Many thanks, in anticipation.

Good afternnon Andrew,

 

The diagram is not given (it's just listed as a BY), but it's E70217E - of 1933 vintage. It's the one I based my model on, and it also doesn't have horizontal handrails towards the ends of the sides.

 

The prototype picture was taken at Shields Junction in 1962. The van is in crimson.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited by Tony Wright
to clarify a point
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Buhar said:

I think it was Ian Rice who suggested soldering a smidgen of gold on the business end of pick ups. 

Alan 

 

I read that and tried it. The gold seemed to attract dust and fluff and although the metal stayed clean, the muck quickly lifted the metal away from the wheel, where it can be as clean and shiny as it likes but doesn't pick up power! So I took the gold pads off and the loco worked properly after that.

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

54 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternnon Andrew,

 

The diagram is not given (it's just listed as a BY), but it's E70217E - of 1933 vintage. It's the one I based my model on, and it also doesn't have horizontal handrails towards the ends of the sides.

 

The prototype picture was taken at Shields Junction in 1962. The van is in crimson.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Thanks very much for the information Tony,


E70217E was part of the original Stratford batch built in 1928*. It would have originally been built with a continuous footboard, symmetrical battery boxes on the non ducket side, and the missing handrails that you mention in the photograph. It would also have originally carried the distinctive Stratford patten rainstrip, rather than the curved version of some other batches. The LNER did start fitting individual step boards to later batches of well trodden designs. However, the retrofitting of individual steps to carriages / NPC's, that originally had a continuous stepboards, seems to have been a BR phenomenon. I've not seen it on a dia 120 before. When the change was made, I can not say. It's another modelling opportunity, but something to be weary of if you are planning an LNER or earlier BR version from the kit.


The 1933 batch was built at Darlington to dia's 170, 176 and 177*, all on different underframes. One easy way to spot them is by the wooden headstocks. 'Larkin' is probably a book that I should have, I do try to keep my library to a manageable size.

 

Tatlow*

Edited by Headstock
add word
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Thanks very much for the information Tony,


E70217E was part of the original Stratford batch built in 1928*. It would have originally been built with a continuous footboard, symmetrical battery boxes on the non ducket side, and the missing handrails that you mention in the photograph. It would also have originally carried the distinctive Stratford patten rainstrip, rather than the curved version of other batches. The LNER did start fitting individual step boards to later batches of well trodden designs. However, the retrofitting of individual steps to carriages / NPC's, that originally had a continuous stepboards, seems to have been a BR phenomenon. I've not seen it on a dia 120 before. When the change was made, I can not say. It's another modelling opportunity, but something to be weary of if you are planning an LNER or earlier BR version from the kit.


The 1933 batch was built at Darlington* to dia's 170, 176 and 177, all on different underframes. One easy way to spot them is by the wooden headstocks. 'Larkin' is probably a book that I should have, I do try to keep my library to a manageable size.

 

Tatlow*

 

Different diagram, but the Isinglass drawing for D141 (52'6 corridor 3rd) states that "economies of the latter 30s brought in the 3'9" long step board on both sides". However BR era photos show a full length footboard along the side with the compartment doors, and short ones on the corridor side. I'm struggling to find evidence either way for LNER days as to if or when the short footboards came in. Personally I am modelling 1939 so am into "latter 1930s" but I would expect the war period to bring in the biggest economy which of course started in late 1939...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
15 minutes ago, Headstock said:

I do try to keep my library to a manageable size.

The Larkin books are quite small and thin so you should be OK. I have four - the aforementioned parcels stock, BR Standard Freight Wagons, BR Departmental Rolling Stock and Pre-Nationalisation Freight Stock on BR. I never bothered getting Private Owner Freight Wagons on BR.

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Chamby,

 

I don't think that I've seen your layout before. I very much like the sweep of it, what a difference your new curve makes.  I always like the look of an embankment that forms a near horizon against the sky. The M&GN on LB does that quite well. Your newly created embankment, reminds me a little of Staverton Road on the GC's London extension. That would make a dramatic 'watch the trains go by' setting for a layout in my opinion. I think you should keep cutting away and make it longer.

 

Good afternoon Headstock,  

 

My first acquaintance with the GCLE was in my Grannie’s back garden in Wilford, it was at the foot of the embankment on the line’s approach to Trent Bridge.  Seeing the steam locomotives silhouetted against the skyline as they noisily rushed past left a lasting impression.  I also remember Grannies constant irritation at the soot deposited on her washing line.  Happy days.

 

I haven’t decided yet whether to extend the embankment, or undulate the scenery into a shallow cutting to give a little more variety.  Either way, the remaining flat top will go.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Chamby said:

 

Good afternoon Headstock,  

 

My first acquaintance with the GCLE was in my Grannie’s back garden in Wilford, it was at the foot of the embankment on the line’s approach to Trent Bridge.  Seeing the steam locomotives silhouetted against the skyline as they noisily rushed past left a lasting impression.  I also remember Grannies constant irritation at the soot deposited on her washing line.  Happy days.

 

I haven’t decided yet whether to extend the embankment, or undulate the scenery into a shallow cutting to give a little more variety.  Either way, the remaining flat top will go.

 

 

Good Afternoon Chammy. From 1960 to 1966 I lived on Wilford Lane with about half a mile from the GC with a long clear panorama of the line from Trent Bridge all the way South  to the Coronation Hotel, just off Wilford Lane. I spent many an evening after school waiting for the fish trains at the bridge on Wilford Lane - first a K3 on the Hull about 6-50pm and then a Brit on the Grimsby at 7-30pm. Over that period I watched the endless stream of 9Fs, V2s, B1s, L1s, K3s, B16s and eventually Brits, Scots and black 5s etc both from the upstairs windows of our house or by the line side at Wilford Lane or Coronation Avenue. I saw 'Cheltenham' on the 12-15 from the house in 1962 after Annesley borrowed it for a week or so, plus many other memories. Very sad watching the line's decline but those first couple of years of that period were magic!

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

oing back to the "shortie" GE section Gresleys; I see the one built by Tony was painted maroon. I was under the impression (having read it somewhere) that none lasted beyond the blood & custard era. Can any confirm or deny this?

 

Stewart

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bucoops said:

 

Different diagram, but the Isinglass drawing for D141 (52'6 corridor 3rd) states that "economies of the latter 30s brought in the 3'9" long step board on both sides". However BR era photos show a full length footboard along the side with the compartment doors, and short ones on the corridor side. I'm struggling to find evidence either way for LNER days as to if or when the short footboards came in. Personally I am modelling 1939 so am into "latter 1930s" but I would expect the war period to bring in the biggest economy which of course started in late 1939...

 

Good afternoon Rich,

 

short footboards on the corridor side and full length on the compartment side, seems normal for the majority of the thirties. This arrangement started with the latter turnbuckle equipped carriages and was continued with the introduction of those with the angle iron underframe. It should be possible to work out when the change over happened, At one time I may have known, but I confess that being well before my own time period, it isn't a priority for myself to hold in memory. I usually deal with this sort of detail on a diagram by diagram basis as I am building the model. I shall have a look at my notes on individual carriage builds, that usually has some info on structural changes to be incorporated.

 

With regard to short step boards on the compartment side, I've seen it, but usually on a very late BR period carriages. If it was an LNER thing, I doubt if it was very widespread. Generally speaking, cost savings were the rule of the day in the decade of the great depression, so it is entirely possible.  The traffic committee reports are full of this sort of thing, for example, the simplification of liveries on goods wagons and their sheeting.

Edited by Headstock
clarify a point
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

oing back to the "shortie" GE section Gresleys; I see the one built by Tony was painted maroon. I was under the impression (having read it somewhere) that none lasted beyond the blood & custard era. Can any confirm or deny this?

 

Stewart

 

I'm not super up on those carriages, isn't this one? 

 

EDIT Apologies, shortcuts don't work on that siTE. You will have follow the link,  go to page five row two, second image in.

 

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/lnercoach

Edited by Headstock
shortcut problem
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
10 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

I'm not super up on those carriages, isn't this one? 

 

EDIT Apologies, shortcuts don't work on that sight. You will have follow the link,  go to page five row two, second image in.

 

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/lnercoach

 

Page 5 row 2 number 2 is a catering vehicle for me - I'm guessing the site shows differently depending on screen size.

 

This one may be the one you are referring to?

 

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/lnercoach/hbdfeb37#hbdfeb37

 

Thanks for the info regarding footsteps. My gut feeling was that long compartment side and short corridor side for "my" era would be correct.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Thanks very much for the information Tony,


E70217E was part of the original Stratford batch built in 1928*. It would have originally been built with a continuous footboard, symmetrical battery boxes on the non ducket side, and the missing handrails that you mention in the photograph. It would also have originally carried the distinctive Stratford patten rainstrip, rather than the curved version of some other batches. The LNER did start fitting individual step boards to later batches of well trodden designs. However, the retrofitting of individual steps to carriages / NPC's, that originally had a continuous stepboards, seems to have been a BR phenomenon. I've not seen it on a dia 120 before. When the change was made, I can not say. It's another modelling opportunity, but something to be weary of if you are planning an LNER or earlier BR version from the kit.


The 1933 batch was built at Darlington to dia's 170, 176 and 177*, all on different underframes. One easy way to spot them is by the wooden headstocks. 'Larkin' is probably a book that I should have, I do try to keep my library to a manageable size.

 

Tatlow*

Thanks Andrew,

 

Larkin suggests 1933. 

 

Whatever, when and why changes were made, I just copied the picture - which, give or take, in crimson, suited LB's period perfectly.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

 

Page 5 row 2 number 2 is a catering vehicle for me - I'm guessing the site shows differently depending on screen size.

 

This one may be the one you are referring to?

 

https://paulbartlett.zenfolio.com/lnercoach/hbdfeb37#hbdfeb37

 

Thanks for the info regarding footsteps. My gut feeling was that long compartment side and short corridor side for "my" era would be correct.

 

 

 

That's the one, thanks,

 

how annoying, you recorded my spelling mistake just as I was editing it! Right, enough of railways, time to mow the lawns.

Edited by Headstock
  • Like 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 21/05/2020 at 14:05, Tony Wright said:

The Crownline J17 is 'finished' - for now!

 

Looking through my equally-crumbling Ian Allan abc for 1957, no J17 is underlined. By the time I got into ex-GE territory, there was very little steam left. Thus, this model breaks my usual practice of only building models of locos I actually saw. Still, it'll suit the M&GNR bit of LB - J17s were common at Spalding, but whether they got further westwards in numbers might require a bit of Rule 1! 

 

All in all, a pretty-typical British 0-6-0. 

 

Unfortunately, I don't have a prototype picture of a vacuum-fitted one. 

 

 

I've snipped quite a bit from the above quote - I'm not sure if it's been answered already, the book "East Anglian Branch Line Album" by Dr Ian C. Allen shows J17 65567 at Aldeby - it is vacuum fitted. The book doesn't have page numbers, but it is figure 71.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And now for something completely different............................

 

1248992775_Craftsman360001.jpg.5e4ab88091ebbb184c37fd2a6642709b.jpg

 

This morning, I started on the Craftsman 36XX GWR 2-4-2T. 

 

An open-framed DS10 and standard Romford gears were provided - a recipe for noise! 

 

I've fiited a DJH AM10 motor/gearbox. From my experience (yes, I know I did the initial testing/assessment) these are the finest drive combinations available right now. Not cheap (nor should they be), but super-smooth. Because they're made-up, they're a doddle to fit. Just two points to note - the grubscrew is very small and adept at escaping, and the gear wheel occasionally needs reaming for a snug (rather than tight) fit. Just phone 01207 500050 and ask for Kelly.

 

I should point out I have no commercial connection with the firm.

 

1295219797_Craftsman360002.jpg.2d8c1ddfabb02a25d9fcadd47f1d7d02.jpg

 

The simplest of pick-ups. Perfect current connection, dead easy to install, no squeak, infinitely adjustable and not (as far as I know) a hazard to health.

 

I know very little about 36XX tanks. Does anyone on here, please? 

 

 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

 

I've snipped quite a bit from the above quote - I'm not sure if it's been answered already, the book "East Anglian Branch Line Album" by Dr Ian C. Allen shows J17 65567 at Aldeby - it is vacuum fitted. The book doesn't have page numbers, but it is figure 71.

Thanks Rich,

 

I have the book you mention.

 

My statement about not having a prototype picture of a vacuum-fitted J17 was ambiguous. I should have qualified it by stating 'in my collection'. I have loads in books. 

 

In fact, a glance at fig. 39 (page. 22) in M&GN in Focus by M. D. Beckett and P. R. Hemnell (Becknell Books, 1980) shows vacuum-fitted 65533 at Spalding (not too far from LB). 

 

I think mine will be that one.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
14 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

And now for something completely different............................

This morning, I started on the Craftsman 36XX GWR 2-4-2T. 

I know very little about 36XX tanks. Does anyone on here, please? 

 

My first recommendation might be to seek out an old copy of "Churchward Locomotives" by Brian Haresnape:

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Churchward-Locomotives-Brian-Haresnape/dp/0711006970

 

They were a great series; as a kid I used to disappear into the study for hours with books like these.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

My first recommendation might be to seek out an old copy of "Churchward Locomotives" by Brian Haresnape:

 

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Churchward-Locomotives-Brian-Haresnape/dp/0711006970

 

They were a great series; as a kid I used to disappear into the study for hours with books like these.

Many thanks,

 

I might well have a copy. But where? 

 

I'm using Volume 2 of Russell's standard works on GWR locos as a primary resource.

 

The loco will be in later guise, with a taper boiler.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

It was purchased at a show from a reputable trader with a "You should try this for pick ups" and had no health warning. What does it do and what precautions should I take?

 

Just looked it up on t'internet! I should be OK as long as I just use solid wire and don't heat it enough to make it give off fumes and don't inhale beryllium dust.

 

Or maybe I go back to using other wire!

 

 

In a (now) former life (I retired at the end of April) I worked on a system that contained electrical contacts made from Beryllium Copper.  Whilst I never had cause to actually work with the material itself, the Boss was always twitchy about it (and this was on a system where other components would really hurt you given the chance. 

My understanding that any dust, mist or fume can cause a serious Lung condition, Chronic Beryllium Disease.  It's also classified as a Class 1 carcinogen.  I've no idea what exposure rate is needed to cause problems though.

I'd suggest (if it shows real advantages over other materials and you fancy using it) then be wary of any process which involves dust, filings etc.  And don't go sniffing the fumes when soldering....:jester:  

 

5 hours ago, Buhar said:

I think it was Ian Rice who suggested soldering a smidgen of gold on the business end of pick ups. 

Alan 

 

Wouldn't gold wear rapidly, being soft?

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 5
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...