Wright writes.....

[Clem]

11 hours ago, t-b-g said:

The restored one is probably too well maintained to give the sound recorders a good "clank" to capture but there must be some on old recordings.

How about this. It's a recording from Kimberley signal box taken by Alf Henshaw. The date is 10th July 1964 and WD 90392 clanks by.  The recording is taken from when the levers are pulled. There are kids playing near the level crossing and although you need a little patience, sure enough you here the WD clank by on a train of empties at about 1:35. Worth listening through the full 2:35 just for the atmosphere.

 

08 Kimberley_19640710_008_90392.mp3

 

[Bernard Lamb]

9 hours ago, Mike 84C said:

The WD 2-10-0 at the North Norfolk makes all the right noises, could be louder but its a WD and well looked after. Unlike 99% of those BR owned.

But was not a major feature of their construction an ability to keep running with very little attention?

Keeping one in good nick might be a justifiable aim for a museum but hardly realistic.

It might make most of the right noises but I am pretty sure not all the sounds that a skilled fitter would be able to hear.

Not a loco but a 75t power press. I knew a chap who could tell the wear on a bearing by listening to the press running. He could also set the air pressure on the return jacks by ear.  He taught me to listen to various sounds of metal on metal to understand what was going on without the need to shut the machine and take a look. They don't train people like that these days.

I can still remember at Berko station before school when you could hear one coming long before it came into view. 

Bernard

[t-b-g]

 

24 minutes ago, Clem said:

How about this. It's a recording from Kimberley signal box taken by Alf Henshaw. The date is 10th July 1964 and WD 90392 clanks by.  The recording is taken from when the levers are pulled. There are kids playing near the level crossing and although you need a little patience, sure enough you here the WD clank by on a train of empties at about 1:35. Worth listening through the full 2:35 just for the atmosphere.

 

08 Kimberley_19640710_008_90392.mp3 4.75 MB · 2 downloads

 

 

That may well start a debate about whether there was enough clank or not! It almost sounded in good nick to me!

 

I have heard a recording, perhaps a Peter Handford one, of an Austerity 2-8-0 hat sounded as though it was falling to bits internally and externally. I recall the clank was the loudest sound by far as it went by and sounded like a blacksmith hitting metal on an anvil with a very big hammer.

 

With modern technology, I can see a range of different settings on a sound chip, going from "fresh out of shops" to "totally shot".

 

Many thanks for the link. Very atmospheric!

[t-b-g]

1 minute ago, Bernard Lamb said:

But was not a major feature of their construction an ability to keep running with very little attention?

Keeping one in good nick might be a justifiable aim for a museum but hardly realistic.

It might make most of the right noises but I am pretty sure not all the sounds that a skilled fitter would be able to hear.

Not a loco but a 75t power press. I knew a chap who could tell the wear on a bearing by listening to the press running. He could also set the air pressure on the return jacks by ear.  He taught me to listen to various sounds of metal on metal to understand what was going on without the need to shut the machine and take a look. They don't train people like that these days.

I can still remember at Berko station before school when you could hear one coming long before it came into view. 

Bernard

 

Malcolm Crawley and I used to visit preserved railways together and he would often comment whether the valve settings on a loco were slightly off. I couldn't tell the difference at all. I could see his eyes light up when he heard one that was "just right". His comment was usually "That is nice and square at the chimney top" which must mean something to engineers!

[Tony Wright]

Without wishing to prolong the 'debate' further, perhaps an interesting fact?.................

 

I've just received for review two books from Crecy; one is a reprint Ian Allan abc for 1954, and the other is the current 2020 equivalent. 

 

Much to my shame, I haven't bothered counting the different locomotive types in the latter volume (which also includes all the carriages and units, as well as preserved, active locos), but here are the number of different steam classes in operation on BR in 1954.....

 

WR: 62

SR: 55

LMR/ScR: 66

ER/NER/ScR: 105

 

That list doesn't include sub-divisions in classes (Fowler/Stanier/Fairburn 2-6-4Ts, for instance). Staggering, isn't it? Granted, by 1958, a few of those would have disappeared, but I've not included the BR Standards nor diesel or electric locos, of which there would have been a lot more in 1958. 

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, jrg1 said:

Spalding is a prime example for me.  Comparing what was a major steam era railway centre to the pared-down characterless country station today is just depressing.  

I think what sums up Spalding's decline is the footbridge at the Down end. Its length suggests it once spanned loads of tracks. Not now!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Clive Mortimore]

15 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

'How many locos, coaches or wagons have you had to miss off the timetables because they don't exist RTR or as a kit as there simply isn't enough time in the day to scratch build them?'

 

Assuming that question is asked of me, the answer is none. 

 

Granted, that doesn't mean I have every variety of coaches or wagons, (I have every loco type one would have seen at LB in 1958), but what's missing are the really rare ones, at least with regard to coaching stock; and, with over 250 wagons, most types are represented. 

 

'look like a string of identical boxes on wheels'

 

 I'm not sure I agree with that.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

In fact, I definitely don't.

 

Obviously, I don't have a model picture of a modern Freightliner train, but I'd be surprised (indeed, astonished) if it displayed as much variety as these......

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

Hello Tony

 

I disagree with my mate Grahame regarding a string of brown boxes, your brown boxes are quite interesting. There is of course the time traveling Vanwide as discussed before. I am a bit confused by the Insulmeat in bauxite livery, it would still be in white livery in 1958. As for the Mogo, most of them were on trains from Cowley to the various Morris Cars distribution points not in general use until well into the 1960s. 

 

As for the lack of variety in a modern container train.

 

Even empty  they can be interesting.

 

[Compound2632]

"Identical boxes on wheels". There was a poster a while back, maybe not on this thread, who expressed disdain for pre-grouping modelling because, they said, trains of identical wagons are dull. Which shows that at least they had understood the essentials of pre-Great War (pre-pooling) freight operation.

Edited June 5, 2020 by Compound2632

[Headstock]

21 hours ago, Clem said:

Good morning Tony. Looking at your photos of Little Bytham now leaves me quite sad. I've seen the destruction of railway heritage so many times before but it still grieves me for each new episode of wanton destruction. It's almost as if today's railway needs to forever prove it is modern and has no soul. Anyway, at least your layout of Little Bytham documents the line in its last years of steam glory.

 

Whilst I'm writing this little post, may I ask what is probably a very dumb question. What glue do you use to fix your loco crew in place? I'm really rubbish at the basics!

 

Finally, the last couple of months been a period of 'Austerity' for me, but luckily it's drawing to an end and I can turn my efforts elsewhere:

 

Colwick's long time resident 'top of the class' WD 90000. (DJH). Sister Bachmann 90499 is behind on a coal train fully weathered. 90000's turn for weathering next.

 

Bachmann WD converted to EM using Gibson wheels - this took me a couple of days work as compared to the DJH one taking a couple of months. You can imagine which I found most satisfying (although very challenging at times). This one is down to become 90215. Still some detailing required, including the re-attaching of the brakes which had to be removed for EM as they seriously fouled the re-gauged wheels. You can get away with the brakes where they are for many EM conversions.

 

Good morning Clem,

 

nice looking WD's. I think that 90000 was an Annesley locomotive at one time, until they were moved on. The only thing that I would add to a model of one, would be to have away with the moulded on lubricator pipe runs and replace them with the jumble of spaghetti seen on the real things.

 

A question about the nomenclature of locomotive nicknames. The ex GC men that I interviewed, almost twenty years back, referred to the Robinson O-8-0's exclusively as 'Tiny's'. Are these the locomotives that you referred to on the Iron ore trains in another post?

 

Finally, I very much appreciated your collaboration with autocorrect to provide a written account of the sound of a WD, can you do the Hush Hush?

[Buhar]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Strange how the Word Police are OK with that word but not with d0ng.

I suspect it's an American feature which would possibly block the donkey version but doesn't recognise the rich, rounded British equivalent. And would not allow the lyrics of Frere Jaques. 

 

Alan 

[APOLLO]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Strange how the Word Police are OK with that word but not with d0ng.

 

It was a local Wigan spotters term !!

 

How many of us run a train such (tender first) ? - I do with a coal empties. A common sight in mining areas. 

 

Brit15

[St Enodoc]

3 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

It was a local Wigan spotters term !!

 

How many of us run a train such (tender first) ? - I do with a coal empties. A common sight in mining areas. 

 

Brit15

I've told this story on RMweb before but possibly not on this particular topic, so here goes.

 

One day back in the 1970s there was some fairly major disruption to trains in the Derby area and things were running, as the saying goes, "by the calendar". The signal box supervisor was obviously telling the lady announcer what to say and she would broadcast it verbatim over the PA. At one point the announcement came through "The xx.xx to London St Pancras is now arriving at Platform 6. First-class accommodation is at the @rse end of the train".

 

Radio silence for about three minutes...

[Bazza]

To my mind one of the problems with modelling current freight and passenger trains is the length of the vehicles, not so much the perceived lack of variety. Unless you can have very generous curves and or length of run, you end up with short trains which then limits any variety there may be. Large exhibition layouts (remember them?) can provide the scene where longer trains can be displayed but for most of us, trains of shorter vehicles provide a more realistic basis for our layouts.

Bazza 

[great central]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I think what sums up Spalding's decline is the footbridge at the Down end. Its length suggests it once spanned loads of tracks. Not now!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

True, but unfortunately mostly tracks relying on freight for their lifeblood.

A lot of that freight has disappeared altogether, coal, iron ore, steel, etc. 

The other main traffic was agricultural, passenger traffic was never a great driver for routes in predominantly rural areas although holiday traffic helps. These are both seasonal in nature so costly to maintain, I believe as part of the Beeching report it was stated that quite a large amount of coaching stock worked for around 30 days a year, wagons would be the same to some extent. I remember seeing lines and lines of stored 16t mineral wagons parked up in summer, probably similar with vans in winter to a degree.

Spalding has seen a resurgence in freight but it's pretty much all container traffic from the east coast ports although each train probably carries the equivalent of two or even three 'traditional' freights.

I have three main interest areas, all different, steam from childhood memories, Woodhead electrics which definitely aren't modern image, it's 39 years since the line closed! Finally West Coast electrics and diesels up to Pendolino days for modelling purposes but working on the railway I take an interest in current things as well, I'm not overjoyed that we're losing the 156s in favour of 170s over the next couple of years but that, as they say, is progress.

[Clem]

29 minutes ago, Headstock said:

A question about the nomenclature of locomotive nicknames. The ex GC men that I interviewed, almost twenty years back, referred to the Robinson O-8-0's exclusively as 'Tiny's'. Are these the locomotives that you referred to on the Iron ore trains in another post?

Yes, the Tiny's as referred to by the GC men were indeed the 0-8-0s but I believe it was the O4s that were referred to as Tiny's by Colwick's ex-GN and LNE men. Certainly when I used to speak at length with Alf Henshaw,  who worked in control at Nottingham Victoria and later East Leake during the war, he always referred to O4s as Tiny's. I once brought this subject up with him but he said, certainly withing the locality, it was O4s. It was probably a GN thing. You know, 'all GC freight engines look alike', never mind the front pony!

 

As regards the Hush hush, I could do a representation on here but you wouldn't hear it. 

 

You're correct 90000 was at Annesley - for the summer of 1947.  But from October 1947 to February 1959 it was at Colwick.

 

Finally, I thought long and hard about cutting off the moulded piping on the DJH WD but chickened out in the end. However, I have got another DJH WD to do and I *will* cut it off on that. You're absolutely right that it's not a great representation of the real thing.

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hello Tony

 

I disagree with my mate Grahame regarding a string of brown boxes, your brown boxes are quite interesting. There is of course the time traveling Vanwide as discussed before. I am a bit confused by the Insulmeat in bauxite livery, it would still be in white livery in 1958. As for the Mogo, most of them were on trains from Cowley to the various Morris Cars distribution points not in general use until well into the 1960s. 

 

As for the lack of variety in a modern container train.

 

Even empty  they can be interesting.

 

I'll give the builders of the various wagons a good telling off, Clive,

 

Your pictures show a great deal of variety (at Ipswich, East Suffolk Junction?), but they also show (to me) how depressing the infrastructure of the 'modern' railway can be. Abandoned sidings, being overgrown with tree growth. Desolate!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Clive Mortimore]

6 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I'll give the builders of the various wagons a good telling off, Clive,

 

Your pictures show a great deal of variety (at Ipswich, East Suffolk Junction?), but they also show (to me) how depressing the infrastructure of the 'modern' railway can be. Abandoned sidings, being overgrown with tree growth. Desolate!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony

 

The photographic trip was done by a group of who were going to build East Suffolk Junction. Most my photos from the day are of the infrastructure, the OLE there is very interesting.  Here is my unfinished drawing of the power feed mast. Sadly the layout was not built.

[TheSignalEngineer]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

 

It was a local Wigan spotters term !!

 

How many of us run a train such (tender first) ? - I do with a coal empties. A common sight in mining areas. 

 

Brit15

My local freight locos usually spend a whole session the same way round. Main line locos on loaded power station slack come in head first and trundle back later tender first with a rake of empties or engine and brake. 

Another common sight early in my career was locos pushing a brake van along the Up Goods from Water Orton to Washwood Heath or Lawley Street. Always good for a lift home if you were working mid-section.

[ROY@34F]

18 hours ago, Clem said:

Evening Roy. Yes it's interesting to compare the WDs with the tinies. Generally, I believe tinies were often preferred by Colwick men to WDs on the iron ore trains to Stanton in spite of the extra power of the austerity. But to their credit, the WDs did put in an incredible amount of work all over the country in those post war years and, being a fairly large cog in 1950s motive power, an absolute must for a layout representing an ex-GN coal carrying line.

 

It's funny, but from the point of view of an enthusiast as opposed to someone on the business end, I have quite a liking for them. Having said that, I still prefer a tiny! Obviously Grantham had the O2s, which for some reason never seemed to travel west of Colwick. Did you work on them, Roy?

Good afternoon to Clem . You are quite right , the WDs certainly played a big part on general goods , coal and iron ore . As you know I'm sure , carting iron ore about off the Stainby branch to Highdyke and then on trains to Frodingham , in my day via Seaford and Boston , often as far as Louth or usually before when we swapped over with the empties  , formed a large part of the work at Grantham . The  work was shared between the Frodingham WDs and our 02 tangos . Again that applies to the few years I was at Grantham . I never saw any other engines than the tangos up the Stainby branch , and I've often said I think I spent more time on on them than any other engine , except of course in my two years on loan to KX Top shed . The tangos were much better riding than the WDs . Well , being a Gresley built engine helps I suppose . Some WDs were better than others of course .

You mention tangos not seen west of Cowlick - well I believe at that time , around 1960s , they were all shedded at Retford , Grantham and New England . I've read it somewhere .

 

Regards , Roy . 

 

 

[Headstock]

Some more steel carriers rolling out of the paint shop. A second Quint, the steel bodied version came out after nationalization and featured an early version of the BR livery, sans patches. The lower steel bulb angle sides and reclaimed split spoked wheels, make them look rather spindly in contrast to the two plank drop sides of the earlier Quints.

 

Also out shopped is an ex NER 12 ton plate wagon and a bit of an outlier in the form of a converted plate to trestle wagon. The conversions were after my cut off point, it was purchased alongside a batch of LNER pipe wagons and was put aside. I decided to put it together and finish anyway, whether it runs in the finished train or not, has yet to be decided. The trestle may eventually transfer to a suitable NER wagon.

 

 

Edited June 5, 2020 by Headstock

[johndon]

On ‎04‎/‎06‎/‎2020 at 07:45, Tony Wright said:

 

Recently, there was a comment that my backscene was too 'bright'. Considering this picture was taken in the March, before any colours were at their peak, I think it's about right. Note how close the horizon is.

 

 

That was me and, based on the photo above, I stand by my comment.  I appreciate the explanation that you gave in your reply and, yes, the fields beyond the railway aren't 'dull' but they are no brighter a green than the foreground scenery.  For me, the green in your backscene is too bright compared to the foreground scenery.

 

All of course, in my opinion which I hope is seen as constructive and others will clearly differ.  As and when I get round to the backscene on my layout, I'll upload some photos and let others offer constructive comments...

 

John

[Headstock]

3 hours ago, Clem said:

Yes, the Tiny's as referred to by the GC men were indeed the 0-8-0s but I believe it was the O4s that were referred to as Tiny's by Colwick's ex-GN and LNE men. Certainly when I used to speak at length with Alf Henshaw,  who worked in control at Nottingham Victoria and later East Leake during the war, he always referred to O4s as Tiny's. I once brought this subject up with him but he said, certainly withing the locality, it was O4s. It was probably a GN thing. You know, 'all GC freight engines look alike', never mind the front pony!

 

As regards the Hush hush, I could do a representation on here but you wouldn't hear it. 

 

You're correct 90000 was at Annesley - for the summer of 1947.  But from October 1947 to February 1959 it was at Colwick.

 

Finally, I thought long and hard about cutting off the moulded piping on the DJH WD but chickened out in the end. However, I have got another DJH WD to do and I *will* cut it off on that. You're absolutely right that it's not a great representation of the real thing.

 

Afternoon Clem,

 

02's left of, sorry, west of Colwick. Annesley had regular workings and 02's could be on Leicester shed overnight on a Sunday. Frank Stratford remembered working on them on a number of occasions.

[Clem]

35 minutes ago, Headstock said:

02's left of, sorry, west of Colwick. Annesley had regular workings and 02's could be on Leicester shed overnight on a Sunday. Frank Stratford remembered working on them on a number of occasions.

Sorry Andrew, I meant/should have said  West, specifically on the GN Derby/Pinxton line. I know they were regular on the GC and came down the Leen Valley line and GC main line to Annesley. I personally never saw one South of Annesley on the GC though. Having said that, I only lived in sight of the GC line from January 1960 onwards. I presume Frank Stratford was talking 1950s and the O2s were on freight from.... Doncaster or York?

 

I know there are plenty of pictures of O2s on Annesley. I have a slight interest in this as when my brother passed away in 2014, his kits came to me including a Nucast O2/2. So I'm looking for an excuse to build and run it, although it would be down the list a bit.

[jrg1]

7 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I think what sums up Spalding's decline is the footbridge at the Down end. Its length suggests it once spanned loads of tracks. Not now!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Too true-I do hope it is preserved.  That type of construction was superseded many years ago.  I visited Mablethorpe just as the marvellous footbridge there was chopped up-what a loss. 

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, johndon said:

 

That was me and, based on the photo above, I stand by my comment.  I appreciate the explanation that you gave in your reply and, yes, the fields beyond the railway aren't 'dull' but they are no brighter a green than the foreground scenery.  For me, the green in your backscene is too bright compared to the foreground scenery.

 

All of course, in my opinion which I hope is seen as constructive and others will clearly differ.  As and when I get round to the backscene on my layout, I'll upload some photos and let others offer constructive comments...

 

John

Thanks John,

 

The 'trick' when assessing the brightness of comparative colours in a picture/photograph is squint at it. 

 

In the prototype picture, other than the nearest bush, the brightest green is in the fields to the right. And, this is not high-season.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.