Highland Railway 'Jones Goods' 4-6-0 in 00

[pH]

Lack of front hoses meant that the train engine on a double-header had complete control of the train brakes. That’s what Smith was writing about - failure of the Westinghouse pump on a train engine and the pilot couldn’t help. 

[Compound2632]

But surely any Caledonian stock working through onto the Highland would be dual-fitted anyway, unless complete trains were worked through? Likewise from the North British. Any stock working through from England would be dual-fitted too, since the L&NWR, Great Northern, and Midland were vacuum lines - WCJS, ECJS, and M&NBJS was all dual-fitted. (The Glasgow & South Western followed the Midland's example and dropped the Westinghouse brake in favour of vacuum in the 1880s.) 

 

I suspect the reason the Highland went for the vacuum brake was really that the GNoS went for Westinghouse!

[The Stationmaster]

11 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

But surely any Caledonian stock working through onto the Highland would be dual-fitted anyway, unless complete trains were worked through? Likewise from the North British. Any stock working through from England would be dual-fitted too, since the L&NWR, Great Northern, and Midland were vacuum lines - WCJS, ECJS, and M&NBJS was all dual-fitted. (The Glasgow & South Western followed the Midland's example and dropped the Westinghouse brake in favour of vacuum in the 1880s.) 

 

I suspect the reason the Highland went for the vacuum brake was really that the GNoS went for Westinghouse!

No problem with regular workings of dual fitted stock but Westinghouse equipped engines on vacuum brake Railways did happen (the GWR had some) for the simple reason that a special could turn up from a Company which used the Westinghouse brake. So it would be quite logical for the HR to have a Westinghouse equipped engine in order to work any trains formed wholly of Westinghouse braked stock thus preventing the other Company's engine from running over its network.

 

Don't forget that through working of engines complicated accountancy, even where regular workings were in force, as there was need to raise charges for things like water or use of a turntable let alone divvying the receipts differently. 

[uax6]

There were workings from Inverness to Aberdeen which were worked using each others stock, I can't remember if it was turn and turn about, or if it was every other day, but that is probably the reason for fitting a couple of the Westinghouse. Also the Caley were a Westinghouse line, so there would be occasions that their stock would come north.

 

All the Clans had Westinghouse at some point (not all at the same time)

4 Big Bens were fitted

4 Castles were fitted

7 Wee Bens were fitted

3 Lochs were fitted

Plus the two Big Goods (106 and 116) 

Interestingly the two Big Goods were the only Westinghouse fitted locos on the HR from 10/94 to 7/98 when Ben Alder was delivered....

 

Andy G

 

 

[Asterix2012]

On 25/02/2022 at 21:34, Compound2632 said:

 

Except for one class member that has worn the yellow livery in and out of service for many more years than any other class member wore any other livery!

In One of my books on Highland locomotives it is said that a descendant of David Jones who was present when the first one was delivered stated that it was yellow.

 

Not sure if it was Peter Tatlow or the RCTS books

[Asterix2012]

On 25/02/2022 at 21:46, SteamingWales said:

Not for me necessarily but the Highland Green versions look very tempting

 

Also this might be a stupid question but is the central driver meant to be flangeless? Is this the case on the real locos too? 

They were flangeless initially I believe and some were fitted with flanged centre drivers at a later date 

 

Interesting to see if Rapido do both versions 

[Compound2632]

20 minutes ago, Asterix2012 said:

In One of my books on Highland locomotives it is said that a descendant of David Jones who was present when the first one was delivered stated that it was yellow.

 

Not sure if it was Peter Tatlow or the RCTS books

 

Not in Tatlow. I have to say that seems unlikely to the point of absurdity. One has to consider that, according to Tatlow, the yellow livery had been discontinued for passenger engines ten years before the Big Goods were built and for goods engines, twenty years before; green had been standard for a decade for both passenger and goods engines. Furthermore, the engines would have been first painted at Sharp, Stewart's Atlas Works; they would have been working to a contract specification.

Edited March 7, 2022 by Compound2632

[Asterix2012]

21 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Not in Tatlow. I have to say that seems unlikely to the point of absurdity. One has to consider that, according to Tatlow, the yellow livery had been discontinued for passenger engines ten years before the Big Goods were built and for goods engines, twenty years before; green had been standard for a decade for both passenger and goods engines. Furthermore, the engines would have been first painted at Sharp, Stewart's Atlas Works; they would have been working to a contract specification.

Thanks I just dug out RCTS volume 1 as well and no mention in there of this story. 
But  I have read this version of events somewhere.

[Compound2632]

8 minutes ago, Asterix2012 said:

Thanks I just dug out RCTS volume 1 as well and no mention in there of this story. 
But  I have read this version of events somewhere.

 

I wonder if the story originates in someone misunderstanding a photo of an engine in photographic grey, like the one of No. 108 with the snowplough?

[Asterix2012]

9 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I wonder if the story originates in someone misunderstanding a photo of an engine in photographic grey, like the one of No. 108 with the snowplough?

The only thing I know for certain is I now have to find the book I read it in.

[Corbs]

I think it would be easy to confuse the works grey with IEG, as seen here on 111, and here the photo of 108 with the plough fitted, also works grey.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Corbs

[Compound2632]

55 minutes ago, Corbs said:

the photo of 108 with the plough fitted, also works grey.

 

I'm curious about that now. The photo is presumably at Lochgorm rather than the Atlas Works? It seems rather surprising that the locomotive should be repainted into photographic grey just to pose with the plough; so were the engines delivered in grey? 

[uax6]

Defo Lochgorm Works, on page 13 of vol 1 of the RCTS book there she is again in the same livery. As for the photographic grey, its certainly not unheard of, but it is highly unusual to repaint into 'works grey' after delivery. I've not got my HR liveries book with me here in work, but the lining out is certainly the same as 106 in fig 91 (page 127) of that book, and my guess is that a grey 'wash' has been painted over the top to make the livery stand out for the photo. I would be surprised that Stroudley would be used, as looking on the evidence in the book, it you would have to go back a long time to see it, even Stroudley used green with white and red lining with a darker border for goods engines. We may of course never really know.

 

Andy G

[Synch]

The Yellow livery will probably be debated as the red wagon livery of the GWR, I think I can add a few points to it from a Pendragon/HMRS publication, I've quoted the relevant points that were brought up in it by Howard Geddes and Eddie Ballass:

"Notes accompanying a November 1959 SLS excursion of 103 from Glasgow to Blair Atholl said of the then recent repaint '...the engine was repainted according to the original 1894 specifications which called for a change in the then standard pea green colors'"

Both the SLS and JN Maskeleyne seemed to be of the opinion that the yellow shade was the exact same as that adopted on the LBSCR(!)

 

In the RCTS Locomotive History book, Cormack and Stevenson give the opinion that all up to 108 carried the Yellow livery, but Hamilton and Ellis disagree with this.

 

As a result not only has there been disagreement on the livery existing in itself, but also to the number of engines it was applied to.

 

As a side note, 103's first cosmetic restoration had it's own host of livery questions, notably giving rise to the idea that possibly there was a variation of Drummond's green that was just a single shade, stating that "The repainting would have been proposed, sanctioned and and possibly executed by men who may have themselves been in railway service when the Big Goods were brand new in 1894." (103's wheels from this repaint also ended up on another member of the class which was then scrapped with them, LMS black with Highland Green wheels!)

[Corbs]

Yes both the 1934 and 1946 repaints appear to be a single shade, rather than the two-tone. The 1946 one definitely was lighter!

 

 

Edited March 15, 2022 by Corbs

[Steamport Southport]

1930s it was green.

 

Colour photo of it somewhere. Possibly Colour Rail.

 

 

 

Jason

[Corbs]

On 13/03/2022 at 14:35, Steamport Southport said:

1930s it was green.

 

Colour photo of it somewhere. Possibly Colour Rail.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Yep, both green. I posted a colour photo of the 1946 green on this thread but deleted due to unknown copyright.

I just mean that the green inside the lining should (according to the paint guide and reference photos) be a lighter shade than the green outside the lining for Drummond I, but that was not represented in either 1934 or '46, as it was the same shade inside and out.

Reference for Drummond I on 107 here showing the two-tone.

 

Potential future option for Rapido to do the 1934 or 1946 versions for pre-nationalisation railtours?  

 

 

Edited March 15, 2022 by Corbs

[Dunsignalling]

Boy, am I glad that I only want the version suited to c.1960 railtour use, even if I do intend to play fast and loose with "geographical correctness".

 

John

[Blandford1969]

It's not in colour, I can't tell you which engine it was (no details with the negative) and the image was too poor, but it is a nice 20s/ 30s image of a Jones goods at work at Culrain, from my Flickr stream.

Who says engines were always clean in pre war days. 

[Compound2632]

3 hours ago, Blandford1969 said:

Who says engines were always clean in pre war days. 

 

Depends which war you mean. Boer War, perhaps.

[Corbs]

6 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Boy, am I glad that I only want the version suited to c.1960 railtour use, even if I do intend to play fast and loose with "geographical correctness".

 

John

Could go the full NORD John?

 

[uax6]

I'm not sure that there would be any railtours with 103 after she was preserved by the LMS, and before the overhaul by BR. I know of no evidence that she was even steamable at the time....

 

Andy G

[Dunsignalling]

8 hours ago, Corbs said:

Could go the full NORD John?

 

I think that may be going a little far for me, but I do love the "in service" grubbiness shown in that view.

 

Much nicer than a glittering "show pony" IMHO.

 

John

[Corbs]

1 hour ago, uax6 said:

I'm not sure that there would be any railtours with 103 after she was preserved by the LMS, and before the overhaul by BR. I know of no evidence that she was even steamable at the time....

 

Andy G

True, the only outing described in the book is an exhibition at Inverness in 1935 but it doesn't detail whether it was towed there or not. The 1958 overhaul is described as 'restored to running order' so it is doubtful if it was steamable before that.

[Covkid]

On 03/03/2022 at 11:06, The Stationmaster said:

The more I read on here about the Jones Goods the more it sounds like the GWR's understanding of the word 'standardiosation'. - that sounds like an even better reason to buy one

Haha.  Agreed.

Until this week I knew nothing at all about the Jones Goods apart from a Scottish 4-6-0 numbered 103 in a wierd diarrhoea livery. 

 

RMweb is definitely a classroom