Wright writes.....

[teaky]

I have to say, Phil, given the context in which you're dealing with Geoff's locos, does it really matter whether the tender is right or not? I considered myself a pedant, but in this context it is not of great relevance in my view. 

 

With the greatest of respect to Geoff's memory, his building was for himself - to run on his railway. As such, there are anomalies in the locos. Has nobody commented on the wholly incorrect tender for 70047? Or the inaccurate use of maroon on the Pat? Or the fact that the Coronation is too short? One might say, 'So what?' 

 

Since the mysteries of eBay will remain forever thus to me, I don't know what offers are being bid, but I'd be surprised if many of them reached the price of their component parts. So, with regard to this, if one of the Jubs has the wrong tender then the buyer either won't care, or will subsequently change it. 

 

Were I bidding (I don't know how), I'd look on these locos as a means of obtaining some very good-running items of motive power, for a very good price, and then use them as a finishing-off/detailing exercise. Thus, obtaining something a little bit unusual, rather than the run-of-the-mill. 

Hi Tony,

 

If you are interested, there is no need to register with eBay just to look at items for sale.  Simply click this link http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Geoff-Brewin-built-OO-Gauge-BR-8P-Duke-of-Gloucester-with-Maxon-coreless-motor-/141923501354?hash=item210b4cc52a:g:YKEAAOSwyjBW3gsU for Duke of Gloucester and then See seller's other items over towards the right to see the rest.

[St Enodoc]

Interesting to read of the token hand over.  I recently visited Williamstown rail museum, where I was collared by a volunteer (Ex-VicRail steam driver) and he spent the next half hour describing the correct procedure for token changing at speed.  My main impression was that an everyday occurrence could be suddenly disastrous if the people involved were not on the ball.  

Indeed. The bobby, being lower down than the fireman, was generally at greater risk (don't ask how I know this).

[Tony Wright]

Beyond than the evident "old fashioned" thickness of the K2 frames and the potential saving of cost if only one type has to be etched rather than two, is there some other reason for trying out the K3 frames under the K2 body? No doubt they will work with simple adaptations and will look more refined, regardless of whether any profiling, cut-outs and rivets are exactly right for the K2.

Reasons for using a K3 chassis fret beneath a K2?

 

1. I already have it

 

2. SE Finecast make it.

 

3. SE Finecast have acquired all the old Nu-Cast range.

 

4. As far as I can tell the wheelbase is exactly the same, though the valve gear is different. There might also be differences in frame cut-outs, but I'll investigate. 

 

5. Though an etched brass chassis replaced the old cast-metal lump (the kit to be built has just the lump), it wasn't particularly detailed and had no provision for brakes, etc. 

 

6. I'll adapt the K3 chassis to suit the Nu-Cast K2 body and report to Dave Ellis accordingly. 

 

7. Though the Nu-Cast chassis isn't up to much, the valve gear fret is entirely suitable and should work with a little adaptation. 

 

It might well be that it's a one-off exercise, though it's worth pursuing I think. I've suggested to Dave that he looks at the possibility of re-introducing the K2 because of its unlikely prospect of ever being offered RTR. There is an etched-brass alternative (though the chassis design is too complicated at source), but a revamped cast-metal K2 might be a good product, especially as parts for the Scottish version will be supplied. 

 

May I suggest that if anyone is interested in a K2, they contact Dave Ellis at SE Finecast, please? Even if you just want a GN tender kit. 

[gr.king]

Reasons 1 & 5 sound good enough for a start.

[Clem]

"4. As far as I can tell the wheelbase is exactly the same, though the valve gear is different. There might also be differences in frame cut-outs, but I'll investigate. "

 

Surely,the K2 wheel base for the drivers is 7'3" + 9'0" and the K3 is 7'3" + 8'9"

 

I know it's only 1mm but 7'3" + 9'0" does have a certain look. Are the two chassis both out out in different directions so thaey match up with the K2 rods?

[46256]

Tony just pondering on the life of the staff at Little Bytham jct signal box.

The box was it staffed 24/7.? given the rivalry of railway companies which I understand persisted long into nationalisation.....were they isolated from their co workers on the predominant GN/ LNER system...

It was your mention of the privy....it was the thought of these staff....living in isolation in a way, from the mainstream railway so close yet so far, on their own secondary route.

It is truly a vanished world, which yours,and other excellent models bring back to life.

[jrg1]

Tony just pondering on the life of the staff at Little Bytham jct signal box.

The box was it staffed 24/7.? given the rivalry of railway companies which I understand persisted long into nationalisation.....were they isolated from their co workers on the predominant GN/ LNER system...

It was your mention of the privy....it was the thought of these staff....living in isolation in a way, from the mainstream railway so close yet so far, on their own secondary route.

It is truly a vanished world, which yours,and other excellent models bring back to life.

With the intention to build signalling super centres using radio control, the everyday railway we knew will be further away in history.  Travelling through once important rail centres such as Spalding, and remembering how they were, and how barren they are now, and then imagining no more telegraph poles, no more signals and no more signal boxes makes rail travel more of a convenience than an occasion.  Truly, the past was better.

[westerner]

I feel the same about my home town Gloucester. 2 sheds, 2 stations linked by a long footbridge (some 200ft I think), Ex GWR and LMS, Now almost all gone.

[jrg1]

I feel the same about my home town Gloucester. 2 sheds, 2 stations linked by a long footbridge (some 200ft I think), Ex GWR and LMS, Now almost all gone.

I understand that there was a proposal to relocate the station on the original site-thereby erasing all trace of the subsequent railway development.  The old Midland station looked decrepit enough when I used to travel through in the seventies-but was still better than the soul less modern environments we have for stations.  At least my local station, Lincoln Central, still has it's character-even though there were attempts to bulldoze it.  Although St Marks is still extant, as a shopping centre-----Fancy that------------surely a better resolution would have been to dismantle such a distinctive structure and re-erect it as the Midland Railway Trust Headquarters at Butterley------just thinking.

[Focalplane]

When you do see a well preserved station, such as Moor Street, Marylebone or St. Pancras, it is easy to understand peoples' dislike for change for change's sake.  Of the three mentioned, Moor Street seems to have been the best simply because it mimics the original station layout dating back to 1908, complete with GWR signage, etc.  The traverser is missing as are the signals, etc. but the atmosphere is as good as it gets.  Ironically, the adjacent Bull Ring (it's branded The Bullring these days) redevelopment helped to pay for the restoration.

 

This photo was taken soon after the restoration in 2003.  The static GWR 28XX is no longer there:

 

 

Here are the GWR signs:

 

 

By contrast, this photo of the concourse at Marylebone was taken in the 1990s.  The same view today is cluttered with kiosks.  Marylebone is still a good place to visit, though:

 

 

I like what has been done at St. Pancras but it is nothing like the old station except for the Barlow roof and the Victorian Gothic hotel.  The undercroft was, however, nicely incorporated into the Eurostar departure lounge.  And the retail signage is not as overpowering as in modern (shopping mall) stations.

 

 

 

[PMP]

 

This brings back memories, a few years earlier I commuted through here every week to and from Bicester, working supplying aircraft spares to the aviation industry and F1 and other motorsport teams in the 'silicon valley' around Silverstone!

[The Stationmaster]

I would hardly call St Pancras 'restored' except for its external appearance and the original trainshed plus cleaned up interior walls.  More a question of cleverly blending old & new to produce what I think is a pretty good looking station and relatively easy to use as a passenger but with more than its fair share of operational inadequacies (which were a result of site constraints and budget cuts).

[Tony Wright]

"4. As far as I can tell the wheelbase is exactly the same, though the valve gear is different. There might also be differences in frame cut-outs, but I'll investigate. "

 

Surely,the K2 wheel base for the drivers is 7'3" + 9'0" and the K3 is 7'3" + 8'9"

 

I know it's only 1mm but 7'3" + 9'0" does have a certain look. Are the two chassis both out out in different directions so thaey match up with the K2 rods?

You're (almost) right, Clem, so I'll have a rethink. The K3 is actually 7' 6" + 8' 9", so the length of the coupled wheelbase is exactly the same. This means that the driven axle is a mil further back on the K3. 

 

At the risk of having a capital sentence issued by the zealots, if I 'were' to use the K3 frames, without measuring, once the loco were finished (and on a layout), would anyone by able to tell? 

 

It shows in a way how far we've come. My first locos were mounted on proprietary chassis, the correct number of wheels being the only 'nod' towards authenticity. For instance, it would appear that Tri-ang used the same chassis block (turned around in some cases) for its B12, A3, Streamlined Princess Coronation and Hall.   

[Barry Ten]

When you do see a well preserved station, such as Moor Street, Marylebone or St. Pancras, it is easy to understand peoples' dislike for change for change's sake.  Of the three mentioned, Moor Street seems to have been the best simply because it mimics the original station layout dating back to 1908, complete with GWR signage, etc.  The traverser is missing as are the signals, etc. but the atmosphere is as good as it gets.  Ironically, the adjacent Bull Ring (it's branded The Bullring these days) redevelopment helped to pay for the restoration.

 

 

 

My wife and I stopped in Moor Street last week for tea and scones in the beautiful period cafe. I recommend it even if you're not catching a train - worth it for the wonderful framed GWR system map on the cafe wall. The scones weren't bad either...

[Tony Wright]

 

At least the coupled wheelbase is right on this (it couldn't be anything else, could it?)

 

The Ace 2002-build is progressing reasonably well. The problem of the firebox/boiler/smokebox being 2mm too long overall was resolved by cutting before fitting, taking a mil each off the boiler segments. 

 

For anyone interested, she might just be parked in a remote siding on Grantham at the Notts Show over the weekend. 

 

At the risk of stirring up the proverbial hornets' nest again, what fantastic locos these must have looked in real life. Personally, I like this first-appearance of 2002 the best of them all. The cylinder arrangement is neater than on 2001 in my view, and the lazy 'S' of the footplate is so redolent of the GNR/LNER. When she got the big deflectors it spoiled the appearance of that elegant front end, and the Bugatti noses made them look just like big A4s. 

 

 

It still beggars belief (at least to me) how one of the most elegant (even beautiful?) big locos could have been altered to such an extent to produce one of the ugliest of RA9 motive power, in the shape of the A2/2s. But, it's all been said before.

 

My final comment on the situation. The full-sized The P2-build group is surging ahead. What price a group starting up a Thompson Pacific build at 12" to the foot?  

Edited March 11, 2016 by Tony Wright

[gr.king]

That certainly whets the appetite for the weekend.

 

Should anybody be issuing a mogul wheelbase error Fatwa it will have to extend to me too as I have K3's and K2's running on indiscriminately mixed chassis units, several actually from V1/V3 tank engines......

[jrg1]

I think the K2 chassis simply looks different to the K3-possibly because of the larger boiler.  I also think the SE Finecast K3 chassis is an excellent product for using as a basis for the K3.

 

Regarding the P2, it was a terrific machine, but why it was used in the wrong application will always be a mystery.  The Aberdeen-Dundee road was unsuitable for the chassis, and they were poorly utilised.  Toram Beg (Driver Norman MacCillop) describing his experiences of the class was very disparaging of them.  They would have been ideal for the GNR main line, hauling prodigious loads at high speeds.  If that had happened, perhaps they would have lasted to BR days.  Pleasant thought.

[Tony Wright]

I think the K2 chassis simply looks different to the K3-possibly because of the larger boiler.  I also think the SE Finecast K3 chassis is an excellent product for using as a basis for the K3.

 

Regarding the P2, it was a terrific machine, but why it was used in the wrong application will always be a mystery.  The Aberdeen-Dundee road was unsuitable for the chassis, and they were poorly utilised.  Toram Beg (Driver Norman MacCillop) describing his experiences of the class was very disparaging of them.  They would have been ideal for the GNR main line, hauling prodigious loads at high speeds.  If that had happened, perhaps they would have lasted to BR days.  Pleasant thought.

Much has been said about the P2s already on this thread, so I'll try not to just go over old ground. 

 

As for Toram Beg, Geoff Lund (one of the officials responsible for their running) thought little of his comments about the P2s because, at the time, Norman McKillop was only in the junior links at Haymarket and would have had little experience of them. 

 

As for the wrong application, there's no doubt the tortuous road, particularly through Fife, was hard on such a long rigid wheelbase. However, more work might have been done to the pony truck to enable it to guide the loco into curves. Indeed, a proposal was mooted but Thompson would have none of it, insisting on their rebuilding into Pacifics. As it was, the only class capable of taking the heaviest loads in Scotland over a difficult road was destroyed and turned into locos of highly questionable worth. 

 

As has been said, had wiser counsel prevailed, all six should have been transferred to the ECML proper for the duration of the War where their prodigious strength would have been invaluable. Thus, surviving the hostilities (and Thompson's retirement), they might well have remained in England, seen out their days into the early '60s and one would have been preserved. 

 

As it was the last thing the operating department in Edinburgh wanted was the class to be rebuilt. Trask and Lund knew their worth. 

[kingfisher24]

Much has been said about the P2s already on this thread, so I'll try not to just go over old ground. 

 

As for Toram Beg, Geoff Lund (one of the officials responsible for their running) thought little of his comments about the P2s because, at the time, Norman McKillop was only in the junior links at Haymarket and would have had little experience of them. 

 

As for the wrong application, there's no doubt the tortuous road, particularly through Fife, was hard on such a long rigid wheelbase. However, more work might have been done to the pony truck to enable it to guide the loco into curves. Indeed, a proposal was mooted but Thompson would have none of it, insisting on their rebuilding into Pacifics. As it was, the only class capable of taking the heaviest loads in Scotland over a difficult road was destroyed and turned into locos of highly questionable worth. 

 

As has been said, had wiser counsel prevailed, all six should have been transferred to the ECML proper for the duration of the War where their prodigious strength would have been invaluable. Thus, surviving the hostilities (and Thompson's retirement), they might well have remained in England, seen out their days into the early '60s and one would have been preserved. 

 

As it was the last thing the operating department in Edinburgh wanted was the class to be rebuilt. Trask and Lund knew their worth.

 

Tony

 

I know it would be make believe but a p2 in what might have been br green sounds attractive. I am assuming they would have the same numbers as were given to them in the late 1940's? If and when Hornby get round to doing an a4 nose version i may attempt a what might have been. That is ofcourse wife, children work and money permitting.

 

Gary

[Clem]

You're (almost) right, Clem, so I'll have a rethink. The K3 is actually 7' 6" + 8' 9", so the length of the coupled wheelbase is exactly the same. This means that the driven axle is a mil further back on the K3. 

 

At the risk of having a capital sentence issued by the zealots, if I 'were' to use the K3 frames, without measuring, once the loco were finished (and on a layout), would anyone by able to tell? 

 

It shows in a way how far we've come. My first locos were mounted on proprietary chassis, the correct number of wheels being the only 'nod' towards authenticity. For instance, it would appear that Tri-ang used the same chassis block (turned around in some cases) for its B12, A3, Streamlined Princess Coronation and Hall.   

I stand corrected, Tony. I did know that - I must be getting (must have got?) old! But what I was getting at was the look of the 7'3 + 9'0" verses the look of the more evenly spaced K3 wheelbase. Many of the ex GN classes had the 7'3 + 9'0" - J1, J2, J5, J6, K2, J50 and the distance between centre and rear axle gives each of these locos 'that' slightly elongated look. I realise that we all look for different things in model locomotives. For instance,  if a model has chimney that is not correct, it's something that always seems to jump out to me. Hence I always work on getting that detail right as a priority (as well as everything else right, hopefully). But I realise that different people have different reference points from which they decide whether a model captures the essence of the prototype.

 

Changing the subject,  if you're at the exhibition over the weekend, I'll certainly be dropping by to see Grantham in particular and of course other layouts and stands. Perhaps have a bit of a catch up. Not much modelling has taken place chez Clem recently I'm afraid,  as the back of the house is a building site!

[richard i]

Who be trask? Hay market shed foreman?

[vitalspark]

Who be trask? Hay market shed foreman?

 

 

E D Trask was an LNER Loco Superintendent working under Thompson…Trask I believe opposed the rebuilding.

[micklner]

Much has been said about the P2s already on this thread, so I'll try not to just go over old ground. 

 

As for Toram Beg, Geoff Lund (one of the officials responsible for their running) thought little of his comments about the P2s because, at the time, Norman McKillop was only in the junior links at Haymarket and would have had little experience of them. 

 

As for the wrong application, there's no doubt the tortuous road, particularly through Fife, was hard on such a long rigid wheelbase. However, more work might have been done to the pony truck to enable it to guide the loco into curves. Indeed, a proposal was mooted but Thompson would have none of it, insisting on their rebuilding into Pacifics. As it was, the only class capable of taking the heaviest loads in Scotland over a difficult road was destroyed and turned into locos of highly questionable worth. 

 

As has been said, had wiser counsel prevailed, all six should have been transferred to the ECML proper for the duration of the War where their prodigious strength would have been invaluable. Thus, surviving the hostilities (and Thompson's retirement), they might well have remained in England, seen out their days into the early '60s and one would have been preserved. 

 

As it was the last thing the operating department in Edinburgh wanted was the class to be rebuilt. Trask and Lund knew their worth. 

 

Don't forget the catastrophic potential result of the Crank Axle failures as a reason for the rebuild . It doesn't hold water for me as that could have been cured much more cheaply than total rebuilds ( really scrapping as hardly anything of the P2 was left when they became A2/2's). Total madness to rebuild them in the middle of a war. Coupled with Thommo's obsession with tinkering with worn out/obsolete designs e.g J11 D49 D20 it does make you wonder what he was thinking or how he ever got permission from the LNER Board for the work to be done.

 

Brief history of the P2 here

 

http://www.lner.info/locos/P/p2.php

 

A2/2

 

http://www.lner.info/locos/A/a2_2.php

[jrg1]

All Thompson's rebuilds were, politely, mystifying.  K3 to K5, B17 to B2, P2 to A2, O4 to O1, B3 to B3/3, D49 to D(ud)-no benefits in engineering or economy, and various classes getting long in the tooth.  As Willie Yeadon opined, "He was a good engineer when he did not meddle with Gresley".  At least it gave us a variety.  Pity about the operators.  At least Thompson came up with the B1-a machine made up established bits. 

[Headstock]

All Thompson's rebuilds were, politely, mystifying.  K3 to K5, B17 to B2, P2 to A2, O4 to O1, B3 to B3/3, D49 to D(ud)-no benefits in engineering or economy, and various classes getting long in the tooth.  As Willie Yeadon opined, "He was a good engineer when he did not meddle with Gresley".  At least it gave us a variety.  Pity about the operators.  At least Thompson came up with the B1-a machine made up established bits. 

 

I have to disagree with you as regards class 01, they are massively underrated by modern day enthusiasts, Perhaps because they did most of their best work away from the limelight of the East coast mainline. They performed extremely well against the other big four 2-8-0's in the interchange trials of 1948. A year latter the LNER were looking for better replacements for class O4 and K3 on the demanding Annesley - Woodford runners. The 01's were tested against class 02 and WD, and proved superior to both types. virtual the whole class was allocated to Annesley depot, they proceeded to work the most intensive timetabled freight service in the country with little fuss or recognition outside of railway circles. Let us not forget that the five locomotives not allocated to Annesley were slugging it out on the climb to Consett at the head of the heavy iron ore trains. Not bad work for mystifying rebuilds.