Popular Post Chris Turnbull Posted January 21, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted January 21, 2018 Here's another selection for you. 92223 in the scrap roads at Carnforth on 9th July. 48773 complete with yellow stripe at Rose Grove on 10th July. 44803 at Manchester Victoria on 17th April. 45156 at Hoghton on 11th July. Chris Turnbull 24 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Trev52A Posted January 22, 2018 Author Popular Post Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) @ Chris I wonder if 92223 ever turned a wheel between my earlier shot from 17th March and yours from 9th July. Here are more Black Fives at Preston: 44806 with a short(!) freight on 2nd August A recently-cleaned 45388 waiting to leave with a southbound parcels train on 18th July Just south of the station, 45212 stands with a ballast train as 45200 passes with southbound mineral wagons on 18th July. Does anyone know what 'COLEX' means, painted on the wagon on the extreme right of the picture? Trevor Edited to delete reference to not having seen a 9F in steam at Carnforth in 1968 - 92118 is clearly in steam on my post #147. I meant not seeing a 9F in action in 1968. Edited January 22, 2018 by Trev52A 20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 @ Chris I wonder if 92223 ever turned a wheel between my earlier shot from 17th March and yours from 9th July. I don't seem to have any shots of a 9F in steam at Carnforth in 1968! Here are more Black Fives at Preston: (546a) 44806 Preston 2-8-68 (Trevor Ermel).jpg 44806 with a short(!) freight on 2nd August (565a) 45388 Preston station 21-07-68 (Trevor Ermel) .jpg A recently-cleaned 45388 waiting to leave with a southbound parcels train on 18th July (2103bS) 45212 on PW train+45200 Preston station 18-07-68 (T Ermel).jpg Just south of the station, 45212 stands with a ballast train as 45200 passes with southbound mineral wagons on 18th July. Does anyone know what 'COLEX' means, painted on the wagon on the extreme right of the picture? Trevor 'COLEX', 'SUBEX' and other markings were applied by wagon graders to indicate how much could be spent on a wagon to keep it in traffic. A quick Google found this:- https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/BR_wagon_research/conversations/topics/97?var=1 £5 wouldn't buy you much, even then.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonny777 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 #151. That image of 92223 is almost part photo, part David Shepherd painting. I can see why he loved painting the decline of steam era. 92223 is another of the tragic locos which didn't even manage 10 years in service. If it never turned a wheel after arrival at Carnforth (and see below for its visit to Swindon), it makes the reality even more depressing. This particular loco replaced 92079 as Lickey banker in 1963, but had major cylinder problems and became the first withdrawn 9F after only five and a half years. Strangely, it was towed away to Swindon Works where after an inspection it was deemed an economic repair candidate and was eventually reinstated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Turnbull Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 @ Chris I wonder if 92223 ever turned a wheel between my earlier shot from 17th March and yours from 9th July. I don't seem to have any shots of a 9F in steam at Carnforth in 1968! When I was posting my original thread (see post #54 for link) I retrieved all my relevant Railway Worlds and Railway Magazines from the loft and am sure I read that Carnforth stored all its remaining 9Fs at the end of 1967. Regards Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) The last ones,92077, 92160, and 92167 were withdrawn in June 1968, 92167 having worked ( or so they say!) as a 2-8-2 for it's last few days. ( RCTS BR Standards Part 4) Edited January 22, 2018 by bike2steam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trev52A Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) The last ones,92077, 92160, and 92167 were withdrawn in June 1968, 92167 having worked ( or so they say!) as a 2-8-2 for it's last few days. ( RCTS BR Standards Part 4) Although I have yet to see a picture of 92167 working as a 2-8-2 (someone must have caught it?) it certainly was when it reached the scrapyard of Clayton & Davie in Dunston (near Gateshead), a short cycle ride from my home at the time. This view clearly shows the rear driving wheel is not connected to the others. A friend of mine has a photo taken shortly after it arrived in one piece showing the same wheel configuration. 92167 at Clayton & Davie's scrapyard in Dunston on 7th October 1968 This is one of the few pictures I have of a 9F in steam at Carnforth, although it is outside (just!) the timescale of this thread. It still has a 12A (Kingmoor) shed plate, and the RCTS book states it was reallocated to Carnforth '1/68' 92004 at Carnforth shed on 30th December 1967 Trevor Edited January 23, 2018 by Trev52A 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trev52A Posted January 22, 2018 Author Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) 'COLEX', 'SUBEX' and other markings were applied by wagon graders to indicate how much could be spent on a wagon to keep it in traffic. A quick Google found this:- https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/BR_wagon_research/conversations/topics/97?var=1 £5 wouldn't buy you much, even then.. Thank you, Fat Controller. Interesting reading! Yes, £5 wouldn't even get you a small tin of paint these days! Cheers Trevor (Edited to correct typo) Edited January 22, 2018 by Trev52A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Corbs Posted January 22, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 22, 2018 The last ones,92077, 92160, and 92167 were withdrawn in June 1968, 92167 having worked ( or so they say!) as a 2-8-2 for it's last few days. ( RCTS BR Standards Part 4) There was some debate about this recently, I think the conclusion was that it did not actually do any work as a 2-8-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 There was some debate about this recently, I think the conclusion was that it did not actually do any work as a 2-8-2. Yep, I'm aware of that, hence the brackets at the end. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Turnbull Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 Well, I hope you're satisfied! I've been up to the loft to retrieve my 1968 Railway Magazines where, on page 501 of the August '68 issue, it says "It has been reported that 2-10-0 No. 92167 (the last 9F to remain in service) has been running as a 2-8-2 with the rear pair of driving wheels disconnected." I have also checked my spotting book of the period and by 9th July 92167 was noted as being at Carnforth next to 75020 in the scrap roads so, as this is 75020, I assume it is the next one along. Chris Turnbull 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold adb968008 Posted January 22, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) I have also checked my spotting book of the period and by 9th July 92167 was noted as being at Carnforth next to 75020 in the scrap roads so, as this is 75020, I assume it is the next one Chris Turnbull Unfortunately it looks to be a myth.There’s plenty of photos of it at Carnforth minus rod, and slowly deteriorating. https://farm9.static.flickr.com/8148/6963715462_8e5b9a4a79_b.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8507/8397878429_b23bedb44d_b.jpg However the loose wheel is perfectly in sync with the rod position and crank pin for the rest of the loco in every picture of it... in other words it looks like it was taken off the loco as it was stored in the siding. Why is this important.. wheels bounce on track joints, points, curves etc. If it were running uncoupled it would bounce out of sync with the rest of the coupled wheels on the very first wheel slip off shed. The pictures taken at the scrapyard confirm this, as in the scrap yard, it’s journey to it has taken the wheels out of sync, as it bounced along the track from Carnforth. http://www.whatreallyhappenedtosteam.co.uk/images/2010article/92167.jpg It’s hard to imagine the staff syncing up the pins (jacking up the wheel) on a withdrawn loco on shed, and it’s pretty lucky to have it just in sync just as they moved it to the siding. More likely it was withdrawn intact and shunted there, then the rod removed for another class member, there’s nothing to say both the part removal and the placement into the siding didn’t happen at the same time or even the locos last movement to that siding that it was In steam/cooling down and thus spotted and propogated as a myth.. https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3302/3411347518_50d2b07338_b.jpg considering it has to be one of the more remarkable myths, and at a time when everything with a fire was monitored by hundreds of enthusiasts bouncing round the north west, not one so far has photographed the alleged running as a 2-8-2.. given even trivial shed derailments at Rose grove was captured in film dozens of times...but a 9f as a 2-8-2 wasn’t camera worthy.? Edited January 22, 2018 by adb968008 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Chris Turnbull Posted January 22, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted January 22, 2018 (edited) Here's the next selection, all at Carnforth on 8th, 9th and 10th July. 44963 92085 92088 and D4140 Preserved locos, 42075, 75009 (behind), 46441 and 61306. 45025 is in the foreground to the right 45342 Chris Turnbull Edited January 22, 2018 by Chris Turnbull 20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leopardml2341 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 The pics in this thread leave me with mixed feelings, I'm not quite old enough to have seen steam loco's in revenue service - but if I were, they would all have looked like those in these pics. Is it better to have known and lost, rather than have never known? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted January 22, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 22, 2018 What wonderful photos Chris But 92085 at Carnforth in July 68? Was withdrawn from Birkenhead at end of 1966 http://brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=locodata&type=S&id=92085&loco=92085 And here she is at Barry in 1967 https://www.flickr.com/photos/96859208@N07/24979695589 and https://www.railscot.co.uk/img/42/761/ Cheers Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Turnbull Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 What wonderful photos Chris But 92085 at Carnforth in July 68? Yes, you are quite right Phil. I have checked my original notes and they say 92088. Yet another correction! Ho-hum. I saw 92085 some weeks later on 24th August in Woodham's scrapyard in Barry but, sadly, no photo. Chris Turnbull Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Phil Bullock Posted January 22, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 22, 2018 Easily done Chris! It would be strange if the odd caption glitch didn't emerge in such wonderful historic records... Phil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Turnbull Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 The pics in this thread leave me with mixed feelings, I'm not quite old enough to have seen steam loco's in revenue service - but if I were, they would all have looked like those in these pics. Is it better to have known and lost, rather than have never known? It was bittersweet but I would not swap my memories for the world. Chris Turnbull Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Corbs Posted January 22, 2018 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 22, 2018 It's only in recent years I've come to grasp just how gargantuan and sever the cull was, so many locomotives reduced to baked bean tins over a short period. Really puts in perspective how lucky we were to have Dai Woodham's steam pergatory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djparkins Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 The pics in this thread leave me with mixed feelings, I'm not quite old enough to have seen steam loco's in revenue service - but if I were, they would all have looked like those in these pics. Is it better to have known and lost, rather than have never known? I totally agree with Chris's reply to you in his post #168. As a teenager I caught the last two and a half years of steam on the Bournemouth line. Unlike my father, who kind of lost interest in 1964, I knew it was important somehow to get out on the trains every weekend that I could manage, and throughout the school holidays, in order to experience as much of it as I possibly could. I would now hate to be without those, still very vivid, memories. I watched as every service was steam-hauled and all the Bulleid pacifics had their nameplates intact, through to there being less and less steam and things becoming much more akin to the photos in this thread - although I don't think they were ever quite as bad on the SR as some of the locos I have seen in photos of the very end of steam in the north-west. There were. after all, several 100mph+ performances turned in on the racing stretch around Fleet and Farnborough in the final weeks. After it was over I lost most of my interest in railways [other than models] until something pivotal happened. I was on Oxford station in 1980 when a Class 56 came through with a Southampton-bound 25 vehicle Freightliner train. It really stirred me and I realised I was just as impressed with this as I ever had been with steam. My interest instantly clicked back into place. Since then I've been equally interested in all forms of railway traction and, for me at least, I realised that it was a kind of false delineation - just as a lot of aviation enthusiasts don't over-differentiate between prop and jet. I watched a Class 60 with the up 'logs' on the Ribblehead Railcam today. Still a stirring site! As the great US Railroader Don Ball Jnr. said, if we are talking steel flanges on steel rails, its interesting! David Parkins 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bike2steam Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 I watched as every service was steam-hauled and all the Bulleid pacifics had their nameplates intact, through to there being less and less steam and things becoming much more akin to the photos in this thread - although I don't think they were ever quite as bad on the SR as some of the locos I have seen in photos of the very end of steam in the north-west. There were. after all, several 100mph+ performances turned in on the racing stretch around Fleet and Farnborough in the final weeks. I mostly agree with the first sentence, although there were some in bad condition. Nine Elms shed did a good job in keeping it's locos in running order by 'cannibalizing' after Eastleigh works stopped 'shopping' steam, but there were some bad examples at Feltham, and Guildford sheds. 'Racing' went on along the LSWR main-line after the re-signalling to Basingstoke was completed in 1966 when the old LSWR pneumatic semaphore system was taken out of commission ( see the Winkworth book on Bulleid Pacifics) which kept the speeds down to 60mph. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve4rosegrove Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 It was bittersweet but I would not swap my memories for the world. Chris Turnbull I agree - I only caught the last 2 years, but was lucky in that I lived in Macclesfield (in the North West) so even as a school boy with money only for a few trips and not much more for film I have wonderful memories. the sight sand sound was not to be missed, and the atmosphere in a steam shed was unique, and thrilling. I am now very grateful for people like Chris for posting photos to supplement my memories. THANKS! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckymucklebackit Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The common phrase of the scrap metal from steam locomotives being turned to razor blades or baked bean cans cannot be said of the locomotives that were scrapped at the yards of Airdrie and Coatbridge. These yards fed the open hearth (and later electric arc) furnaces at the Stewarts and Lloyds (later BSC) Clydesdale works, and the entire output of those furnaces was used to make high quality seamless steel tubes the majority of which went to the oil and gas industry. Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trev52A Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 Two more at Preston station: 44758 heading south with coal wagons on the west side of the station on 17th July A more unusual angle for a Black Five... 45212 heading north with a more coal wagons from the East Lancs side of the station on 15th July Trevor 18 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trev52A Posted January 23, 2018 Author Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) Unfortunately it looks to be a myth. There’s plenty of photos of it at Carnforth minus rod, and slowly deteriorating. https://farm9.static.flickr.com/8148/6963715462_8e5b9a4a79_b.jpg https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8507/8397878429_b23bedb44d_b.jpg However the loose wheel is perfectly in sync with the rod position and crank pin for the rest of the loco in every picture of it... in other words it looks like it was taken off the loco as it was stored in the siding. Why is this important.. wheels bounce on track joints, points, curves etc. If it were running uncoupled it would bounce out of sync with the rest of the coupled wheels on the very first wheel slip off shed. The pictures taken at the scrapyard confirm this, as in the scrap yard, it’s journey to it has taken the wheels out of sync, as it bounced along the track from Carnforth. http://www.whatreallyhappenedtosteam.co.uk/images/2010article/92167.jpg It’s hard to imagine the staff syncing up the pins (jacking up the wheel) on a withdrawn loco on shed, and it’s pretty lucky to have it just in sync just as they moved it to the siding. More likely it was withdrawn intact and shunted there, then the rod removed for another class member, there’s nothing to say both the part removal and the placement into the siding didn’t happen at the same time or even the locos last movement to that siding that it was In steam/cooling down and thus spotted and propogated as a myth.. https://farm4.static.flickr.com/3302/3411347518_50d2b07338_b.jpg considering it has to be one of the more remarkable myths, and at a time when everything with a fire was monitored by hundreds of enthusiasts bouncing round the north west, not one so far has photographed the alleged running as a 2-8-2.. given even trivial shed derailments at Rose grove was captured in film dozens of times...but a 9f as a 2-8-2 wasn’t camera worthy.? Very well reasoned and explained, adb, so unless photographic evidence turns up I will have to regard this as a myth too. Pity, 92167 would have made an unusual 2-8-2 running on a model layout! Cheers Trevor Edit to correct typo Edited January 23, 2018 by Trev52A Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now