Diesel Shunters at Slough 1958-1963

[Tallpaul69]

I am trying to find out when diesel shunters (08s?) were first used at Slough?

I cannot find any documentation of an allocation to Slough shed in my Locoshed books of the period. However Hawkins and Reeve suggest in Great Western Railway Engine Sheds London Division that shunters from Slough went to OOC at some time each weekend to refuel so maybe the Slough shunters were part of the OOC allocation?

Any thoughts would be welcome

Many thanks

Paul

[TravisM]

I’m pretty sure that diesel shunters, especially the Class 08’s as they later became would have taken over shunting duties fairly quickly once they came on stream, so by the late 50’s they would start being a common sight. As to their allocation, I’m pretty sure it would have been Old Oak Common, Reading or even possibly Southall but it might be worth investing in some Ian Allan locoshed books for the era you wish to model.

[Steamport Southport]

Have you tried BR Database? Seems that at least two were allocated there.

 

http://www.brdatabase.info/sites.php?page=depots&subpage=locos&id=483

 

 

 

Jason

[Pannier Tank]

Southall had an Allocation (EE 350's) from 1960 to closure in 1968

[jonny777]

A much better idea would be to visit the Shedbash website, because they actually show the locos that spotters saw on shed. 

 

http://shedbashuk.blogspot.com/2017/12/slough-aylesbury-1945-1964.html

[Steamport Southport]

A much better idea would be to visit the Shedbash website, because they actually show the locos that spotters saw on shed. 

 

http://shedbashuk.blogspot.com/2017/12/slough-aylesbury-1945-1964.html

 

The problem with that is how many are wrong? I would take any "spottings" with a pinch of salt. All sources should be cross referenced if possible, preferably with photos.

 

There was a whole series of books that were a total fiction as was many of the "sightings" that were published in the railway press at the time. Unfortunately people like Peter Hands and others thought these people were reliable. They weren't.

 

 

https://www.whathappenedtosteam.com/

 

https://www.whathappenedtosteam.com/blog/2017/10/04/what-happened-to-steam/

 

 

 

Jason

[bike2steam]

A much better idea would be to visit the Shedbash website, because they actually show the locos that spotters saw on shed. 

 

http://shedbashuk.blogspot.com/2017/12/slough-aylesbury-1945-1964.html

 

Thanks for that link, for years I've been certain I saw 1636, in the west London( well West Drayton yard) area during the early to mid 1960's, I thought it was 1964, by that list you linked it looks more like 1963 - tar!!

[br2975]

The problem with that is how many are wrong? I would take any "spottings" with a pinch of salt. All sources should be cross referenced if possible, preferably with photos.

 

There was a whole series of books that were a total fiction as was many of the "sightings" that were published in the railway press at the time. Unfortunately people like Peter Hands and others thought these people were reliable. They weren't.

 

 

https://www.whathappenedtosteam.com/

 

https://www.whathappenedtosteam.com/blog/2017/10/04/what-happened-to-steam/

 

 

 

Jason

 

Could you have been a little more 'diplomatic' ?

.

I'm well aware of the 'Whatever happened to steam" - Peter Hands - "Zulu"  scenario; where it appears "Zulu" set out to mislead others....... not genuine mistakes, or the poorly written numbers of an honest spotter on a train passing a depot at 90mph.

.

I also note the 'tone' in which Peter Hands, his source  "Zulu" and others are referred to by those now seeking to correct "Zulu's" fantastical records and information.

 

My interpretation of this post  is that all other enthusiasts are now to be, at least tarred with the same brush, at best treated with suspicion ..........with the information I have provided other modellers / enthusiasts in the past, taken from my spotting notes and personal observations, should now also be 'taken with a pinch of salt'.

.

Methinks, In light of this post,  I'll need to review my future assistance to fellow RMwebbers - or compose some 'caveat' to accompany any assistance I provide, such as "lector cave" (excuse my first form Latin)

.

Brian R

Edited October 22, 2018 by br2975

[Tallpaul69]

Wei, I didn't expect to stir up such a hornets nest!! Thanks anyway to everyone for their input.

[Steamport Southport]

Could you have been a little more 'diplomatic' ?

.

I'm well aware of the 'Whatever happened to steam" - Peter Hands - "Zulu"  scenario; where it appears "Zulu" set out to mislead others....... not genuine mistakes, or the poorly written numbers of an honest spotter on a train passing a depot at 90mph.

.

I also note the 'tone' in which Peter Hands, his source  "Zulu" and others are referred to by those now seeking to correct "Zulu's" fantastical records and information.

 

My interpretation of this post  is that all other enthusiasts are now to be, at least tarred with the same brush, at best treated with suspicion ..........with the information I have provided other modellers / enthusiasts in the past, taken from my spotting notes and personal observations, should now also be 'taken with a pinch of salt'.

.

Methinks, In light of this post,  I'll need to review my future assistance to fellow RMwebbers - or compose some 'caveat' to accompany any assistance I provide, such as "lector cave" (excuse my first form Latin)

.

Brian R

 

I'm unsure what you mean. I never said that source was incorrect, just that All sources should be cross referenced if possible, preferably with photos. The bold from my quote. How anyone can dispute that is bewildering. Especially in an era of "fake news".

I was just pointing out that people should be aware that some sources are incorrect. The example I used may be an extreme one, but after buying all those books in the 1980s then I am a bit pi##ed off that I spent good money on them for information that is almost certainly worthless.

 

How many books have you read that describes a locomotive and it's clearly not that locomotive in the photograph. Often not even the same class of locomotive. I see photographs of Black Fives, Jubilees and 8Fs mistaken all the time, often by very famous writers.

 

If I offended you personally then I apologise.

 

But I would like to ask do you believe everything on the internet or what you read in the newspapers?

 

So why should I trust any website that I don't know where the actual information has come from. No names or references on that site. Just a vague reference to "enthusiasts" that could be anyone. Where are the citations and links?

 

Even the photographs are nicked from Wikipedia.

 

 

 

 

Jason

[jonny777]

I'm unsure what you mean. I never said that source was incorrect, just that All sources should be cross referenced if possible, preferably with photos. The bold from my quote. How anyone can dispute that is bewildering. Especially in an era of "fake news".

I was just pointing out that people should be aware that some sources are incorrect. The example I used may be an extreme one, but after buying all those books in the 1980s then I am a bit pi##ed off that I spent good money on them for information that is almost certainly worthless.

 

How many books have you read that describes a locomotive and it's clearly not that locomotive in the photograph. Often not even the same class of locomotive. I see photographs of Black Fives, Jubilees and 8Fs mistaken all the time, often by very famous writers.

 

If I offended you personally then I apologise.

 

But I would like to ask do you believe everything on the internet or what you read in the newspapers?

 

So why should I trust any website that I don't know where the actual information has come from. No names or references on that site. Just a vague reference to "enthusiasts" that could be anyone. Where are the citations and links?

 

Even the photographs are nicked from Wikipedia.

 

 

 

 

Jason

 

 

 

Don't worry too much Jason. 

 

I posted the original link because I found it useful; and I'm sure others will, too. I agree that all unconfirmed reports should not be taken too literally, and photo evidence is great if it can be found.

 

However, for many situations a photo or video just does not exist; and even reports in the contemporary magazines are not completely reliable, so it may be that websites such as these are the only information we have. I think we will just have to compromise as best we can in certain situations. 

[br2975]

I'm unsure what you mean. I never said that source was incorrect, just that All sources should be cross referenced if possible, preferably with photos. The bold from my quote. How anyone can dispute that is bewildering. Especially in an era of "fake news".

 

I was just pointing out that people should be aware that some sources are incorrect. The example I used may be an extreme one, but after buying all those books in the 1980s then I am a bit pi##ed off that I spent good money on them for information that is almost certainly worthless.

 

How many books have you read that describes a locomotive and it's clearly not that locomotive in the photograph. Often not even the same class of locomotive. I see photographs of Black Fives, Jubilees and 8Fs mistaken all the time, often by very famous writers.

 

 

If I offended you personally then I apologise.

 

 

But I would like to ask do you believe everything on the internet or what you read in the newspapers?

 

So why should I trust any website that I don't know where the actual information has come from. No names or references on that site. Just a vague reference to "enthusiasts" that could be anyone. Where are the citations and links?

 

Even the photographs are nicked from Wikipedia.

 

 

 

 

Jason

May be, it's not what you think that offends, but the why you say what you think ?

.

[keefer]

Even The Railway Observer was prone to misinformation at times, requiring later corrections to published information and with occasional pleas for care/accuracy with submissions.

[Tallpaul69]

Can I suggest we close this line of discussion unless anyone has anything new to say on my original question...…..

Many thanks

Paul