Wright writes.....

[Mallard60022]

A little OT but it is interesting that quite a few 'European' railways adopted 2.8.2 and 4.8.2 arrangements for long distance, secondary express locos (Poland comes to mind with the PT47 2.8.2s; built in1947). I realise that their 'geography/topography and Government' was different in so many ways, but these beasts were still running main line fast expresses until mid 80s +.

The remaining operational Pacific over in Poland can be very light on its feet with an inexperienced crew, however it  has run high speed workings in the last 15 years or so (80mph +) not unlike some of ours but without the continuous 'looping' required over here.

I don't think they have a 2.8.2 still in long distance service sadly as they were very run down by 2004 when I last saw them/it. Could be wrong as the Polish steam scene is a bit confused at the moment as to what's going to be the situation in the future.

Germany is a different matter altogether with many main line express and MT loco's in magnificent condition; no surprise there.  

Phil

Edited December 10, 2015 by Mallard60022

[t-b-g]

I am sorry to say that this thread is now being infected with the same partisan tripe that gets trotted out every time a comparison between companies or designers appears.

 

Everybody has their personal favourites, even the writers of so many railway books and articles. Every class of locos has good points and bad points, as do all designers.

 

Us trotting out age old myths and stories about particular matters will not change anything.

 

There are a number of posts on here that are either deliberately inflammatory or show huge ignorance of the facts. I would have thought that some folk would have known better!

[bbishop]

I notice that no-one has yet seen fit to comment on today's wagon weathering exercise - but as one of the old gits concerned, I for one had a great time!

(Oh and the wagons look pretty good to my inexperienced eye).

Tony

 

I spent yesterday evening trying to work out the parentage of the "SR" wagon.  Sorry, doesn't look like a Southern Railway wagon to me, and I can't find anything similar in my LMS or LNER books.  Does it originate from a certain other railway?

 

Bill

[Horsetan]

....Germany is a different matter altogether with many main line express and MT loco's in magnificent condition; no surprise there...

The German regulations for mainline steam are probably even more stringent than ours, so the standard classes that you see running at Plandampfs and railtours really are the best of the best.

 

Note however that the proportion of running engines to those on static display is relatively small. Germany doesn't quite have the number of preserved lines that we have either.

[Focalplane]

I am sorry to say that this thread is now being infected with the same partisan tripe that gets trotted out every time a comparison between companies or designers appears.

 

Everybody has their personal favourites, even the writers of so many railway books and articles. Every class of locos has good points and bad points, as do all designers.

 

Us trotting out age old myths and stories about particular matters will not change anything.

 

There are a number of posts on here that are either deliberately inflammatory or show huge ignorance of the facts. I would have thought that some folk would have known better!

If you admit you are ignorant of the facts is it not right to ask a question on a "board" that has many experts?  Just asking.

[queensquare]

I am sorry to say that this thread is now being infected with the same partisan tripe that gets trotted out every time a comparison between companies or designers appears.

 !

Tony is of course absolutely correct. There is of course only one basis on which locos should be judged and that's on the basis of colour and as every fair minded enthusiast knows it's a score draw between Midland red and SDJR blue!

Mind, I rather like Doncaster green as adopted by the North Somerset Light Railway...............:-))

 

Jerry

[Tony Wright]

I am sorry to say that this thread is now being infected with the same partisan tripe that gets trotted out every time a comparison between companies or designers appears.

 

Everybody has their personal favourites, even the writers of so many railway books and articles. Every class of locos has good points and bad points, as do all designers.

 

Us trotting out age old myths and stories about particular matters will not change anything.

 

There are a number of posts on here that are either deliberately inflammatory or show huge ignorance of the facts. I would have thought that some folk would have known better!

Good stuff there my friend.

 

So, as one who should know better, and with no wish to carry on with producing tripe, may I add my final comments on this topic, please? 

 

I doubt if there is a book about Thompson and his works (or Gresley or Peppercorn) that I've not read or have a copy of. I have also had access to first-hand, unpublished notes written by (long-deceased) professional railwaymen of high authority with regard to the original P2s and the rebuilds. 

 

I've built over 25 models (in OO and EM) of Thompson's Pacifics (he built 26 by the way!), so, as part of those constructions I've read extensively. This, I hasten to add, does not make me an expert - just someone who can read and draw conclusions from what I've read. 

 

There is no record of a P2 pony derailing out on the road. There is evidence of them derailing in shed yards (because of their great length?), but there's a picture in Top Shed of a J50 on its side, so being off the road isn't exclusive to giants.

 

No other class of steam locomotives could do what the P2s did in terms of haulage over the difficult Edinburgh-Aberdeen road.

 

If the Thompson Pacifics were superior to their predecessors, why did they not take over the top jobs? Granted, there were fewer, but a further order for 15 was cancelled and replaced by another design.

 

Finally, with regard to the A3s, and firmly wearing my UKIP rosette (see previous posts from the dawn of time), if they were so 'poor' (as has been intimated), how come they were eventually used (with success) on top-link express passenger services on no fewer than seven of the pre-Grouping main lines (eight, if you include the GC/GWR joint)? No other post-Grouping class can come near that.

 

That's it, other than to say I'll post a series of pictures in the near future of Thompson locos I've built models of. Despite what's been said about his real locos, they work very well as models.  

Edited December 10, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Poggy1165]

The Thompson v Gresley debate reminds me of the Richard III debate. Two sides, each convinced they know the truth, fling sources at one another, but there is not and never can be any resolution. Because ultimately a lot of it comes down to opinion and interpretation.

[coachmann]

That's it, other than to say I'll post a series of pictures in the near future of Thompson locos I've built models of. Despite what's been said about his real locos, they work very well as models.

I am pleased to read this, because when I posted a shot of a Thompson A2-2 model some time back, the "experts" said it would be difficult for manufacturers to make Thompson Pacific models go around curves. I for one look forward to seeing your models. As you may know, I painted the display models for Bill Stott @ NuCast, my favourite at the time being his A2-2 variant. Today, a RTR A2-3 would fit nicely on my display shelf above the computer so I live in hope....... 

[billbedford]

I am sorry to say that this thread is now being infected with the same partisan tripe that gets trotted out every time a comparison between companies or designers appears.

 

 

Most of the 'tripe' that you complain about comes from professional railwaymen who were at least as partisan as amy 'enthusiast'.

[jwealleans]

as one who should no better

"as any fule kno"?

[billbedford]

There is no record of a P2 pony derailing out on the road. There is evidence of them derailing in shed yards (because of their great length?), but there's a picture in Top Shed of a J50 on its side, so being off the road isn't exclusive to giants.

 

 

No, but the scored axle box brasses and broken crank axles are a symptom of the pony truck not leading the drivers into curves as they should.

[ScRSG]

 

That's it, other than to say I'll post a series of pictures in the near future of Thompson locos I've built models of. Despite what's been said about his real locos, they work very well as models.  

 

Looking forward to the pics, Tony.

 

Whether people liked or disliked the prototype, if they were part of the railway scene you are attempting to model, then you should have them on your model!

[billbedford]

No other class of steam locomotives could do what the P2s did in terms of haulage over the difficult Edinburgh-Aberdeen road.

 

 

That may be true, but I would have to question the wisdom of building a small class of specialised loco to handle a relatively small number summer peak trains, however prestigious those trains were.

[jwealleans]

The P2 group building 2007 have altered the design of the pony truck. There's a very learned article about what they've done in the LNER Society Journal, which went way over my head and a summary on their website.

Edited December 10, 2015 by jwealleans

[Mallard60022]

There are two P2s being proposed I believe? Will one have a Red box and the other a Blue box I wonder?

Phil

[corneliuslundie]

I too am not sure about that Southern Railway van. I don't seem to remember seeing many Southern vans with corrugated ends, though it is really too modern for me to know the details and my wagon books are almost all about the pregrouping scene. It could have been a wartime one built for the Southern by another company. Any suggestions?

 

But it is a useful lead-in to a question I have been wanting to ask Tony for some time. During the period he models, what was the number of goods and mineral working son the main line compared with the express passenger trains and how does this compare with his fleet of locos, carriages and wagons?

 

And a footnote to the discussion of the costs of locos, if you want a return on your capital you don't build A4s, Duchesses, Spamcans or Kings, you build lots of these:

At the time these were being built the company was paying 8% or so. I don't seem to remember the LMS or LNER managing that dividend.

 

Jonathan

 

 

[LNER4479]

But it is a useful lead-in to a question I have been wanting to ask Tony for some time. During the period he models, what was the number of goods and mineral working son the main line compared with the express passenger trains and how does this compare with his fleet of locos, carriages and wagons?

Look forward to Tony's answer - but if I may be permitted to provide an equivalent response on a different route...?

 

When I researched the train workings for my previous project (the ex-Midland Railway routes out of Manchester in the 1950s) I determined the ratio to be 5 freight trains for every one passenger working (ie express and ordinary combined). I figured that to be a little too unbalanced (even though I was trying to be prototypical) - so I compromised at 3 freight trains for every passenger working...

 

I suspect the ECML through Little Bytham will be more generous towards passenger workings than that as a lot of the slow moving stuff (in particular the coal traffic) went via the GE&GN joint to Peterborough (from where they [the coal trains] were formed up into the massive trains down to Ferme Park).

[60027Merlin]

With regard to some comments concerning the non use of the P2s on the southern section of the ECML the detail can be found in Harry Knox's excellent book on the history of Haymarket M. P. D. as to why this was the case. 

 

In it he relates details of some of the events which took place between the senior management of the LNER and the Locomotive Running Superintendent in Edinburgh/Haymarket Shed management regarding the P2s. 

 

In brief,  the Shedmaster at Haymarket was under strict instructions emanating from very senior level down south that the P2s were not to be used for turns south to Newcastle. A.H. Peppercorn visited Edinburgh under instruction to ensure that this was to be adhered to. In addition he was also tasked to emphasise that the class was going to be rebuilt no matter what the operating authorities in Edinburgh had discovered about the less than suitable maintenance regime at Cowlairs contributing to mechanical failures which if rectified properly would result in no requirement for rebuilding.

 

A most interesting and informative read which throws light on various aspects separating facts and opinions.

Edited December 10, 2015 by 60027Merlin

[micklner]

NRM Hornby A3 renamed Columbo with new Banjo Dome courtesy of TW a while ago (thanks again),  Boiler top seam filled , washout plugs relocated repainted and Bands relined. Tender repainted and lined out . Detail parts using Brassmaster detail parts.

 

 

 

 

Re the recent  LNER lamps discussion. I have never seen a picture of these ones posted, they are by Dave Alexander base drilled out and a tiny piece of Blutack inside hold it fast.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2015 by micklner

[Poggy1165]

The point about goods locos is a valid one. Enthusiasts have traditionally been focused on top link express engines. However, I strongly suspect that - for example - the LNWR coal engines contributed more to LNWR and LMS dividends than all the express engines put together. Expresses were more about prestige and PR than anything else, and I wonder what proportion of time the CMEs (and their senior staff) devoted to these express loco classes. 

 

But of course, modellers are not bound by prototype practice in this area, so a focus on express passenger trains is fine if that's what floats your boat.

[Tony Teague]

I spent yesterday evening trying to work out the parentage of the "SR" wagon.  Sorry, doesn't look like a Southern Railway wagon to me, and I can't find anything similar in my LMS or LNER books.  Does it originate from a certain other railway?

 

Bill

 

 

I too am not sure about that Southern Railway van. I don't seem to remember seeing many Southern vans with corrugated ends, though it is really too modern for me to know the details and my wagon books are almost all about the pregrouping scene. It could have been a wartime one built for the Southern by another company. Any suggestions?

 

But it is a useful lead-in to a question I have been wanting to ask Tony for some time. During the period he models, what was the number of goods and mineral working son the main line compared with the express passenger trains and how does this compare with his fleet of locos, carriages and wagons?

 

And a footnote to the discussion of the costs of locos, if you want a return on your capital you don't build A4s, Duchesses, Spamcans or Kings, you build lots of these:

rrloco9.jpg

At the time these were being built the company was paying 8% or so. I don't seem to remember the LMS or LNER managing that dividend.

 

Jonathan

To clear up the mystery of the SR van - firstly it does not belong on Little Bytham, it was a visitor only there for weathering / desecration - secondly, and because this was my first attempt at any weathering I took along a couple of wagons that I felt could be safely ruined, and this is a non-authentic Dapol Limited Edition, sold as an SR van but which, as several have observed, bears no resemblance to any SR van that I know!

What it is based on, I know not, but it will certainly look better in a train now that it is seriously weathered - perhaps I should go further and ensure the SR markings are completely oblitereated!

For the sake of clarity, my layout is SR 1938 - 48.

Hope this clears up this point.

Tony

[Allegheny1600]

That may be true, but I would have to question the wisdom of building a small class of specialised loco to handle a relatively small number summer peak trains, however prestigious those trains were.

One might level that particular argument against the Deltic's, especially after the national traction plan took effect! Okay, they were not exclusively used on "summer peak trains" but they were well within the "small class of loco" bracket!

I've certainly never heard anyone question the wisdom of keeping them however!

Cheers,

John E.

[Tony Wright]

"as any fule kno"?

Well spotted - I'm losing it!

 

As a stickler for correct English I deserve this, and it's now corrected. 

Edited December 10, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

I am pleased to read this, because when I posted a shot of a Thompson A2-2 model some time back, the "experts" said it would be difficult for manufacturers to make Thompson Pacific models go around curves. I for one look forward to seeing your models. As you may know, I painted the display models for Bill Stott @ NuCast, my favourite at the time being his A2-2 variant. Today, a RTR A2-3 would fit nicely on my display shelf above the computer so I live in hope....... 

Which experts are these?

 

Please, name and shame them. 

 

The irony is the Thompson Pacifics are much easier to get round bends because their cylinders are so far back. All that's needed is a little bit taking off the inside of the cylinders behind the rear bogie wheel. This is invisible, and it's only necessary on layouts with tighter curves. 

 

The worst, in my experience, for the cylinders interfering with the bogie wheels are B16/1s.