Wright writes.....

[Headstock]

From a technical point of view, that is quite the cleanest parcels train I have ever seen. It needs a headcode though.

 

http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/32/18/2321801_df142140.jpg

Edited January 13, 2017 by Headstock

[phixer64]

Not a 9F but quite impressive.

 

 

 

That second loco produces 6,300hp and has a great whistle/hooter!

 

Loading gauge and the need to run trains that could fit loops and siding were the two biggest limiting factors in this country. There are only so many places you can put a boiler and big cylinders on a steam loco.

 

Mind you, there would be something a bit wrong if a modern Class 66 couldn't do a bit better than a steam design from 60 plus years ago.

 

 

 

Have a quick look at Black Prince with a 1000 tonne train !!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9NcNmaNjQ

 

Regards Jeff

[chris p bacon]

Scrumble could / can? be obtained from good hardware stores and decorators' suppliers.

 

It was / is basically a varnish with some pigment, and is applied in a 'streaky' fashion to a lighter coloured undercoat to simulate wood grain.

 

I recall it as being a popular finish for front doors in the 1950s.

 

What the householders were trying to achieve is pretty much what the LNER did in later days, and what we do when trying to imitate the finish of varnished teak.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

As you'd guess it's much older than that, it was used in the 1800's as a means of making your house look much more "up market" than it really was by immitating very expensive hardwood.

Here is the back of my office door which is softwood/pine 

This is the original 'graining' from 1893 which has never been touched but has been re-varnished to protect it. It's got a few marks now but I'm loathe to cover over such good workmanship which has lasted 120+ years.

 

PS. If anyone wonders why in the home of a carpenter there's a broken handle on the door, they're £78 a pair and you have to order 5 pairs at a time.....as it's the only one it can wait.

[jollysmart]

Have a quick look at Black Prince with a 1000 tonne train !!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9NcNmaNjQ

 

Regards Jeff

 

Slightly more dramatic than the 66! Thanks for posting. 

[The Stationmaster]

Have a quick look at Black Prince with a 1000 tonne train !!

 

 

 

Regards Jeff

 

Oh dear - what abysmal driving!  When we did it the first time, and very much in secrecy because of the then steam ban, back in 1975 with just over 1,000 tons (note 'real' tons) plus a 350 on the back to help lead the train back into the quarry there was no slipping and no fussy steam and exhaust everywhere nonsense - but then the Driver had had regular experience on 9Fs on heavy trains on BR so knew how to do the job.  

 

David Shepherd was leaping up & down with joy and it was a great day and fortunately all the magazine editors had agreed to say nothing and refuse any photos they were offered although fortunately there was only a handful of people there - just as well really as several of us would probably have got the sack if the BRB had ever got wind of it happening (even though we had the necessary permission, but on the basis it was kept very quiet)

Edited January 13, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[t-b-g]

Have a quick look at Black Prince with a 1000 tonne train !!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pu9NcNmaNjQ

 

Regards Jeff

 

I did have a look at that one but thought that the USA one with a 10,000 ton train (yes, those are 100 ton wagons and there are 100 of them), just pipped it!

 

A friend of mine was there that day at the quarry watching the 9F (and there was an S160 there as well with a superb hooter)  and said that it was very impressive. I recall reading in the press at the time that the fireman suffered burns to his arms though his overalls due to the heat from the firebox door.

 

I am not a huge fan of American railways, much preferring the more subtle and stylish looks of the works of J G Robinson but even I was impressed with those two.

 

Cheers,

 

Tony

[MJI]

So, a 9F has 40 sq ft of grate, which would imply at grate limits, about 4000 lb/hr of coal burned, or about 2000 DBHP.   I understand that the working agreement between ASLEF and BR was 2200 lb/hr coal, so the limit is more the fireman than anything else.  A Class 66 is 3000 DBHP, so should be able to manage the train at about 1.25x the (point to point) speed (because accelerating the train will take 4x the power to double the speed).  Now, is the Shed at flat out to get the container train up to 60 MPH or not, I can't say.  

 

So, it is all a matter of how fast they want the train to go, and how hard they want to flog the 9F, vs the 66. If the train weighs 1150 tons, that would imply 78 hp/ft.   So a 2000 HP engine runs out of grunt on 1:100 at about 30 MPH, and 3000 would run out at about 45 MPH.  (that neglects all kinds of losses, but for us would at least get us in the ball park).

 

All in all, you really need 2 firemen, or a automatic stoker to get to >2000 HP.  

 

James

 

Beale & Smith once got 3000 out of a S&D 9F

[MJI]

When I was referring to scumbling without the previous t in the spelling  !!  it is done using this kind of paint . There are special brushes for the various graining effects as well.

 

1 lner ParsoGlaze-grained.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

I use a similar technique on my LNER Coaches models using a cream base paint then "Teak " with various  various shades of Brown , brushed on not using a stippled motion. It is very effective when done well on models and on full size objects.

 

 

I have just found this photo of the Thompson being brush painted using a similar method , on the LNERCA site

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lnerca/10652171064/

 

At our last house (just over 17 years ago) the neighbours did this to their living room, door frames, doors, cupboards, TV

 

 

[Black Marlin]

...I was running it on a parcels train and was all set to apply the appropriate headcode when I started to wonder: was Claud Hamilton, as the lone LNER-liveried apple-painted example, reserved for more august duties than mere parcels workings? In other words, does my photo show a train that, while technically possible, never actually ran?

 

From a technical point of view, that is quite the cleanest parcels train I have ever seen. It needs a headcode though.

 

http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/32/18/2321801_df142140.jpg

Hi Headstock

 

First of all, thanks for providing the photograph. It's a great resource. However, as I said, I'm well aware of the need to apply a headcode. My question, though, was whether it was appropriate to model that particular locomotive, 8900 Claud Hamilton, at the head of a parcels train.

 

Can anybody help with information on the trains headed by 8900 Claud Hamilton in the 1930s?

 

Regards,

Gavin

Edited January 13, 2017 by Black Marlin

[jwealleans]

Unless you can find specific material relating to wherever 8900 was shedded in the 1930s, or pictures of it on a specific working, then there's no reason to suppose it was singled out from any other D16s. The only ones I am aware of which had specific uses were th etwo Cambridge ones, 8787 and 8783 which were kept for Royal working when required (but did work other trains, they didnt; juts sit on shed being polished).

 

The RCTS volumes often contain details about specific diagrams and workings. I don't have the one which covers the D16s but maybe someone could let you have a sight of one?

[Headstock]

Unless you can find specific material relating to wherever 8900 was shedded in the 1930s, or pictures of it on a specific working, then there's no reason to suppose it was singled out from any other D16s. The only ones I am aware of which had specific uses were th etwo Cambridge ones, 8787 and 8783 which were kept for Royal working when required (but did work other trains, they didnt; juts sit on shed being polished).

 

The RCTS volumes often contain details about specific diagrams and workings. I don't have the one which covers the D16s but maybe someone could let you have a sight of one?

 

Good morning Jonathan,

 

by the time that the long wheelbase CCT's were built wouldn't 8900 have been painted black?

[Tony Wright]

Can I please pose a question to all the Eastern/LNER modellers enjoying this thread?

 

My wife continues to demonstrate her general loveliness by having bought me Hornby's D16/3 'Claud Hamilton' for my birthday. I was running it on a parcels train and was all set to apply the appropriate headcode when I started to wonder: was Claud Hamilton, as the lone LNER-liveried apple-painted example, reserved for more august duties than mere parcels workings? In other words, does my photo below show a train that, while technically possible, never actually ran?

 

I've been struggling to find information on the actual day-to-day workings of Claud Hamilton, particularly in the 1930s, so any information would be most gratefully received.

 

Many thanks,

Gavin

 

Gavin,

 

I don't think CLAUD HAMILTON would have been singled-out for nothing but 'special' duties, so its use on a parcels train would be entirely credible; just like any other D16. 

 

Jonathan has mentioned the 'Royal Clauds', shedded at Cambridge, which were kept regally-clean for taking the monarch up to town (usually to Kings Cross because of the red tape needed for the King to enter the City at Liverpool Street). But, that was not an everyday duty, so they'd be used on any D16 diagrams from that shed as well. 

 

The same thing was perpetuated post-War when the B2 ROYAL SOVEREIGN (another piece of Thompson self-publicity?) was designated for Royal Train duties, but used to run into Kings Cross very often on ordinary services. 

 

It seems that very few locos were kept for exclusive duties. The GN 4-4-0 which Thompson had rebuilt with side-window cab and painted in full regalia for Inspectors' trains, was also used on day-to-day duties as well (locomotives lying idle generated no income). 

 

On a slightly different tack, one thing I've found with some caption-writers is that they completely mis-read a duty which a loco might be on. For instance, I've seen a picture of a Top Shed A4 at Ponton on a three-carriage, all-stations Grantham-Peterborough local. 'What a come down for a mighty engine' was the sort of tone adopted by the caption-writer. What utter nonsense! It's one of two things. For one, the loco has just been shopped and is running-in, or, two, it's on an unbalanced working where it's taken a DOWN express to Grantham, but it's next major job is to take-over an Up express from Peterborough. It just saves a light-engine path and also earns revenue. With regard to the former option, one local Bythamite (is that the name for a native of Bytham?) recalls MALLARD, no less, running-in on a pick-up at Little Bytham, where it got stuck on one of the siding points. Because the point must have been sharp-radius (it was the lead into the limestone-loading road) and the loco absolutely tight on side-play, the fastest steam loco in the World just got jammed. It had to be towed free by a passing loco. Apparently he was told Control then prohibited the biggest engines from shunting duties of the sort, and he's a reliable witness. Very often brand-new Doncaster-built smaller locos were used on Grantham-Peterborough pick-ups, so 76XXXs destined for far-away Regions could be seen.

 

Another loco/train combination which gets misinterpreted is the High Dyke-Doncaster (then Rotherham) fully-fitted ironstone workings. These were very heavy trains and had to run fast over what was effectively just a double-track main line between High Dyke and Doncaster, so Grantham put Pacifics on the job, for obvious reasons. One caption writer thought it was 'menial work for an express engine'. Nothing could be further from the truth.  

[Headstock]

Can I please pose a question to all the Eastern/LNER modellers enjoying this thread?

 

My wife continues to demonstrate her general loveliness by having bought me Hornby's D16/3 'Claud Hamilton' for my birthday. I was running it on a parcels train and was all set to apply the appropriate headcode when I started to wonder: was Claud Hamilton, as the lone LNER-liveried apple-painted example, reserved for more august duties than mere parcels workings? In other words, does my photo below show a train that, while technically possible, never actually ran?

 

I've been struggling to find information on the actual day-to-day workings of Claud Hamilton, particularly in the 1930s, so any information would be most gratefully received.

 

Many thanks,

Gavin

 

 

8900 was rebuilt in 1933 and painted in LNER green as Hornby has provided. The long wheelbase CCT's were first built in 1939, so the two would be seen together. The super Clouds were pretty much on secondary services by then, so a parcels train is quite appropriate as shown in the link above.

[Black Marlin]

Thank you all for your assistance. Thus reassured, my train of thought can move on!

Gavin

[Ian Smeeton]

Thank you all for your assistance. Thus reassured, my train of thought can move on!

 

Gavin

 

 

All that is missing now is the ubiquitous Southern PMV!

 

Best regards

 

Ian

[Headstock]

I had a crack at scumbling or stumbling last night and this morning. To be fair, the results have probably come out more like the preserved example rather than what I was originally after. It's probably better to keep it on the subtle side in 4 mm, or that's my excuse anyway. I was so inspired by people's posts that I completed one side the other is still to do.

[New Haven Neil]

All that is missing now is the ubiquitous Southern PMV!

 

Best regards

 

Ian

 

[Mike 84C]

Thanks to all who replied to my musings! I'll muse to myself for a while.

[Mallard60022]

As you'd guess it's much older than that, it was used in the 1800's as a means of making your house look much more "up market" than it really was by immitating very expensive hardwood.

Here is the back of my office door which is softwood/pine 

IMG_1370.JPG

This is the original 'graining' from 1893 which has never been touched but has been re-varnished to protect it. It's got a few marks now but I'm loathe to cover over such good workmanship which has lasted 120+ years.

 

PS. If anyone wonders why in the home of a carpenter there's a broken handle on the door, they're £78 a pair and you have to order 5 pairs at a time.....as it's the only one it can wait.

Dave, re your handle. If you were to post a picture of it (the other side?) on here it may be that the 'gang' could look out for one on their travels. Maybe there is someone that actually has one in an old cellar?

Phil

[Black Marlin]

The thought occurs - I know I'm a bit late to the party with this, but bear with me - that in all the discussions on liveries and locomotive/stock combinations the notion of freight workings has been somewhat underappreciated. GWR green married to blue Express Dairies tankers works well, as it does when combined with the dark brown of Ocean Coal's wagons.

 

 

However, I am in a privileged position. I have spent years accumulating the stock necessary to model one of the most glorious trains ever to run in Britain. Although regarded by some as a sober and austere working, for the connoisseur there is much to admire. The harmony of the composition. The magnificent marriage of glorious motive power with a humble - but somehow elevated - form of rolling stock. The loads themselves hold more than a passing interest, and much has been made of their mysterious origins. Even small children can be made to care, and care deeply, about a train such as this.

 

 

Unfortunately my example has yet to appear on my layout, which is in a different country, but I will present a photograph of the train made up on my sideboard.

 

 

And it will be, I think we can all agree, a sight to warm the heart of any finescale modeller. I know Tony may well be so appreciative that the whole panoply of the English language could prove insufficient to record his strength of feeling.

 

Do please prepare yourself. This is a sight not often seen.

 

 

 

Regards,
Gavin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Memphis32]

It matches the sofa quite well...

[Black Marlin]

It matches the sofa quite well...

 

Believe me, I'm quite aware of how ghastly that sofa is. What no photo will tell you is just how desperately uncomfortable it is. Ugly and backache-inducing - what a double whammy!

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Believe me, I'm quite aware of how ghastly that sofa is. What no photo will tell you is just how desperately uncomfortable it is. Ugly and backache-inducing - what a double whammy!

That's why our tatty old sofa is still with us and hidden under throws, its too comfortable, compared to dozens that we have looked at and have tried over the past five years!    

[Stanley Melrose]

Believe me, I'm quite aware of how ghastly that sofa is. What no photo will tell you is just how desperately uncomfortable it is. Ugly and backache-inducing - what a double whammy!

But it's ideally placed to (not to) watch Sickly Dumb Prancing or the caterwauling of Let It Shine that my wife insists on having switched on now that the other rubbish has finished for a while.

 

Never mind, Dad's Army is on soon.

 

Stan

Edited January 14, 2017 by Stanley Melrose

[The Johnster]

The thought occurs - I know I'm a bit late to the party with this, but bear with me - that in all the discussions on liveries and locomotive/stock combinations the notion of freight workings has been somewhat underappreciated. GWR green married to blue Express Dairies tankers works well, as it does when combined with the dark brown of Ocean Coal's wagons.

 

 

However, I am in a privileged position. I have spent years accumulating the stock necessary to model one of the most glorious trains ever to run in Britain. Although regarded by some as a sober and austere working, for the connoisseur there is much to admire. The harmony of the composition. The magnificent marriage of glorious motive power with a humble - but somehow elevated - form of rolling stock. The loads themselves hold more than a passing interest, and much has been made of their mysterious origins. Even small children can be made to care, and care deeply, about a train such as this.

 

 

Unfortunately my example has yet to appear on my layout, which is in a different country, but I will present a photograph of the train made up on my sideboard.

 

 

And it will be, I think we can all agree, a sight to warm the heart of any finescale modeller. I know Tony may well be so appreciative that the whole panoply of the English language could prove insufficient to record his strength of feeling.

 

Do please prepare yourself. This is a sight not often seen.

 

 

 

Regards,

Gavin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My eyes, my beautiful eyes...

 

Nice fish tank btw!