November's Modern Locomotives Illustrated

[Pennine MC]

Wonder what D8400 did in the intervening period as the text states it was allocated to Stratford after the exhibition.

 

Worked from Stratford, presumably. The text isn't strictly incorrect, just misleading.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Worked from Stratford, presumably. The text isn't strictly incorrect, just misleading.

 

That's right; new to 30A in May'58. Just happened to be chosen for display in the exhibition referred to above. The magazine could have phrased it better; "returned to" rather than "allocated" would have been clearer as it wasn't actually reallocated away from that depot.

 

All the class were allocated to Stratford and never went anywhere else. Last members withdrawn in Sep'68 after a working life of just 10 years.

[newport_rod]

I'd never heard of the magazine until Craig mentioned it in the GWRJ so I've invested in a copy to help with my D95xx (if I manage to get one of the next batch - I already have the Ultrascale conversion kit). I agree with other contributors that there rather too much coverage on the post-BR scene for my use/taste, but I'm forced to concede that this reflects the class's history.

 

Anyway to business, Craig said this :

 

I haven't checked through again but I was hoping for a mention under the class 14's on why the brake shoes were modified from the double shoe to later single shoe type as its something i'd noted but i'm not sure at what stage it was changed. The original drawings of the earlier type in the NRM didn't have superceeded on them anywhere.

 

 

And I came across this in John Drayton's Across the Footplate years.

"We had No 6666 on the Talywain Pilot and coming down from Pontypool Crane Street then Panteg and Griffithstown at the head of 40 coal wagons on a falling gradient of 1 in 54 the application of the vacuum brake caused shuddering of the entire engine. People in Griffithstown used to register strong complaints and likewise other similar locations where lines ran parallel to housing estates or streets. If you dropped a little sand to counteract skidding of wheels a terrific noise emanated and could rattle your dentures. At that time everyone was asking the cause of the trouble but as far as I knew nobody did know, until one day a lynx-eyed fellow spotted it. The brake block hangers were made in two sections. At the top the supporting bracket holding both outer and inner lengths of hangers with the centre having the usual brake block pin going through, holding (1) outside hanger, (2) brake block, (3) inner hanger. The action of heavy braking by the blocks being pressed and held against the driving wheel tyres by the lower pull rod pins (and the related law of levers) created a condition akin to quivering or disturbed equilibrium or in simple terms - the shakes. Whilst all 'Jumbos' like No 6666 behaved in the same way, the '42XX' class to a lesser degree had the same trouble until finally Swindon produced a solid block hanger which in time replaced the split hangers, thus solving yet another problem."

and I wondered if there were some connection here.

[craigwelsh]

Different situation Rod. The steam locos had a brake block sandwiched between two hangers which I think this is referring to. The D9500 has a pair of brake blocks one above the other like a BR brake van on some of the build and the hanger was central with the brake block forked around it. Later on most of the class seemed to gain one massive shoe per wheel instead of the pair.

 

I did find another batch of drawings for these at York on Saturday though goodness knows why the driver needed a sun visor when they were in S.Wales . I've still not found the cab outer former drawing or any brake blocks though as the ammendments section would normally list the changeover date. I do have the drawing of the earlier hanger though.

[newport_rod]

Different situation Rod.

 

Ah, OK Craig

Rod, writing in Coryton, where the sun is shining and dazzlingly reflecting off the snow.B)