Wright writes.....

[grahame]

26 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

One correspondent seemed to be 'angry' at what Hornby were going to produce. Angry? How can one get so worked-up about model railways? 

 

 

Angry? Wow. Mildly disappointed, maybe, about what is not being made this time (if it something someone wants), but angry about what they have announced they will be producing? Perhaps I should be absolutely livid and besides myself - I didn't notice any British N gauge models in their plans.

;-)

 

 

[grahame]

11 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

That should be a very interesting wagon, Grahame.

 

I built the Kitmaster/Airfix/Dapol Interfrigo van once (to a different design than yours) on the assumption it was 00 scale (as marked on the kit) but by the time it was finished, it was pretty obviously HO scale - and it went banana-shaped (appropriate?) so I think it took a quick trip bin-wards.

 

Al

 

There's quite a few types of Interfrigo refrigerated ferry wagons - bogie types, fixed two axle types, rounded roof, angled roofs and so on. The one I'm attempting is dia. E375 dating from the 1970s. My plan is to produce three. I've started three chassis and the body will be a master to resin cast a number of identical bodies so that they at least all look similar. But there's lot to do on both body and chassis. And, although it may take me a while to complete, at least it is very unlikely to be produced at a RTR or kit in N/2mm (or will it?) :

 

 

 

[Denbridge]

A question if i may. Hornbys announcement of the Hush Hush has prompted me to dig out the SEF kit I started some time ago.

This was going to run on a friends layout. But with the passing of my friend, it got put away and forgotten about. 

I was told the tender included in the kit is wrong for 10000. My LNER reference material is sadly lacking. I wonder, what would be the correct tender for this locomotive and is a kit available? Are there any other glaring errors I should be aware of?

Many thanks.

[APOLLO]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Their names were the best of them - the best of all! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I can't argue with that Tony, superb names for large steam locomotives.

 

I never saw a Thompson one, but they've "grown" on me, to the extent of pre ordering a "Cock of the North".  Those small deflectors each side of the double chimney do make these locos look "something different". If she pulls like my Hornby Brits she will "do".

 

Brit15

 

 

[Barry Ten]

1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

There's quite a few types of Interfrigo refrigerated ferry wagons - bogie types, fixed two axle types, rounded roof, angled roofs and so on. The one I'm attempting is dia. E375 dating from the 1970s. My plan is to produce three. I've started three chassis and the body will be a master to resin cast a number of identical bodies so that they at least all look similar. But there's lot to do on both body and chassis. And, although it may take me a while to complete, at least it is very unlikely to be produced at a RTR or kit in N/2mm (or will it?) :

 

 

 

 

Enviably neat and consistent!

[Tony Wright]

57 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

A question if i may. Hornbys announcement of the Hush Hush has prompted me to dig out the SEF kit I started some time ago.

This was going to run on a friends layout. But with the passing of my friend, it got put away and forgotten about. 

I was told the tender included in the kit is wrong for 10000. My LNER reference material is sadly lacking. I wonder, what would be the correct tender for this locomotive and is a kit available? Are there any other glaring errors I should be aware of?

Many thanks.

It depends what you mean by 'wrong' with regard to the Hush Hush's tender. 

 

If your kit is for the original 10000, then the corridor tender supplied is 'correct'. However, since the kit's tender was produced from the Roche drawing, then it needs modifying. Modifying by filing off the flange at the base of the tank both sides. Roche drew it to the correct corridor tender width, then added the flanges as if it were a non-corridor type. The depth of the tank is a little under-scale as well.

 

If your 10000 is in rebuilt condition, then the corridor tender (with the caveats mentioned) is correct, at least until BR days, when 60700 towed a streamlined non-corridor tender. This latter tender is not supplied with the SEF kit. It has the 1928 corridor type, as fitted to the original Hush Hush.

 

Should you wish to fit a streamlined corridor tender to 60700 (which SEF doesn't actually make), then buy an A2 one and file off all the rivet detail. As I did here.........................

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Denbridge]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

It depends what you mean by 'wrong' with regard to the Hush Hush's tender. 

 

If your kit is for the original 10000, then the corridor tender supplied is 'correct'. However, since the kit's tender was produced from the Roche drawing, then it needs modifying. Modifying by filing off the flange at the base of the tank both sides. Roche drew it to the correct corridor tender width, then added the flanges as if it were a non-corridor type. The depth of the tank is a little under-scale as well.

 

If your 10000 is in rebuilt condition, then the corridor tender (with the caveats mentioned) is correct, at least until BR days, when 60700 towed a streamlined non-corridor tender. This latter tender is not supplied with the SEF kit. It has the 1928 corridor type, as fitted to the original Hush Hush.

 

Should you wish to fit a streamlined corridor tender to 60700 (which SEF doesn't actually make), then buy an A2 one and file off all the rivet detail. As I did here.........................

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Thanks so much Tony. That's a great help. It's the original high pressure hush hush. Very reassuring to know I don't have too much work to make it right, though since I've already built the tender I think I'll have to accept it being a little too low. Thank you again.

[The Johnster]

Many of the names of ECML pacifics, and some of the Deltics, were taken from racehorses, which tend to have names with a certain ring and cachet to them.  They are highly appropriate, not only for the evocation of speed but because the entire route seems to have been built as a means of connecting courses.  I believe I read somewhere that the names were chosen at the shed the loco was originally allocated to, and would like to believe that but don't know if it was true.  Blink Bonny, Gay Crusader, Spearmint, Pinza, Crepello, Sun Chariot; magnificent, all of them.

 

I play a game if I'm on my own in the pub at lunchtime and the racing's on the telly, nodding affirmatively if any horse has a name I deem suitable for a Gresley, Thompson, or Peppercorn Pacific or a Deltic, and repeating the performance if it comes in first.  Several punters assume I have a system (and as a method of picking winners it's probably no worse than anything else), and cannot fathom it, although I do not bet myself.  It's a good pastime and fun to wind them up, though...

[polybear]

3 hours ago, Denbridge said:

A question if i may. Hornbys announcement of the Hush Hush has prompted me to dig out the SEF kit I started some time ago.

This was going to run on a friends layout. But with the passing of my friend, it got put away and forgotten about. 

I was told the tender included in the kit is wrong for 10000. My LNER reference material is sadly lacking. I wonder, what would be the correct tender for this locomotive and is a kit available? Are there any other glaring errors I should be aware of?

Many thanks.

 

Tim Shackleton wrote quite an in-depth build feature on all things Hush Hush wrt to the SEF kit in MRJ Compendium No. 3 some years ago ("The Art Deco Legend", pages 67 to 73 inclusive).

HTH

[Andy Reichert]

20 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks David,

 

The sky in the pictures of the Pullmans passing each other is real, of course, superimposed in Photoshop. Those pictures were taken some little time ago (before the station buildings and footbridge were made). 

 

I no longer put anything 'real' in my pictures, because it's not showing the model 'as it is'. I do take out 'clutter' in the background, by merely putting in a neutral colour cloned from my backscene. 

 

As for fake smoke......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

That's another good reason for modelling electric traction systems. No wrong position crank arms to worry about either.  .

 

Andy

[Denbridge]

31 minutes ago, polybear said:

 

Tim Shackleton wrote quite an in-depth build feature on all things Hush Hush wrt to the SEF kit in MRJ Compendium No. 3 some years ago ("The Art Deco Legend", pages 67 to 73 inclusive).

HTH

Thanks. For some reason I never bought No.3. I'll try to find a copy.

[Ray Flintoft]

37 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Many of the names of ECML pacifics, and some of the Deltics, were taken from racehorses, which tend to have names with a certain ring and cachet to them.  They are highly appropriate, not only for the evocation of speed but because the entire route seems to have been built as a means of connecting courses.  I believe I read somewhere that the names were chosen at the shed the loco was originally allocated to, and would like to believe that but don't know if it was true.  Blink Bonny, Gay Crusader, Spearmint, Pinza, Crepello, Sun Chariot; magnificent, all of them.

 

I play a game if I'm on my own in the pub at lunchtime and the racing's on the telly, nodding affirmatively if any horse has a name I deem suitable for a Gresley, Thompson, or Peppercorn Pacific or a Deltic, and repeating the performance if it comes in first.  Several punters assume I have a system (and as a method of picking winners it's probably no worse than anything else), and cannot fathom it, although I do not bet myself.  It's a good pastime and fun to wind them up, though...

Sorry to say ,but L.N.E.R. loco . names were chosen by the locomotive committee , nice idea though . I do look at racehorse names myself & think , that would have been good on a Pacific ( or not )

  Regarding loose coupled freight trains , I believe the 25 m.p.h. limit came in with dieselisation . Speeds in the 30's & 40' s more common in steam days . For example the Thompson O.1 in the 1948 trials attained a max. of 43 m.p.h. & averaged over 30 for lengthy periods .

                         Cheers ,

                                    Ray .

[Ray Flintoft]

On 06/01/2020 at 16:02, micklner said:

Perhaps better than the originals , especially the A2/2 versions !!

 

 60502  96 m.p.h. down Stoke , 60502 95 m.p.h. Darlington - York , 60503 91 m.p.h. York - Darlington ,

   Who says they couldn't fly !

                             Cheers ,

                                    Ray .

[robmcg]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

.....

 

Their names were the best of them - the best of all! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

And of all the A2s the name of 60514 'Chamossaire' wins for me, I shall have to buy one. 

 

I must say the wedge-front cabs and banjo (edit; streamlined) domes win for me, too.

 

Are there any books with accounts of driving and firing these fascinating engines? A 50 sq ft grate, 20" pistons an 250lb boilers as the P2 rebuilds had, according to a google search (LNER engine info) must have meant nothing less than stupendous power in the right hands. More t.e.than a 9F.

 

And who says New England didn't have clean engines?

 

 

Grateful acknowledgements to 53a Models of Hull Collection

 

or possibly this below ;  A2/3 class Pacific 60514 CHAMOSSAIRE at Peterborough, New England (34E) shed. V2 class 2-6-2 60936 is on the left. September, 1960. Copyright © Ron Fisher.

 

 

 

Lovely!  

 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2020 by robmcg

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, robmcg said:

 

And of all the A2s the name of 60514 'Chamossaire' wins for me, I shall have to buy one. 

 

I must say the wedge-front cabs and banjo domes win for me, too.

 

Are there any books with accounts of driving and firing these fascinating engines? A 50 sq ft grate, 20" pistons an 250lb boilers as the P2 rebuilds had, according to a google search (LNER engine info) must have meant nothing less than stupendous power in the right hands. More t.e.than a 9F.

 

And who says New England didn't have clean engines?

 

 

Grateful acknowledgements to 53a Models of Hull Collection

 

or possibly this below ;  A2/3 class Pacific 60514 CHAMOSSAIRE at Peterborough, New England (34E) shed. V2 class 2-6-2 60936 is on the left. September, 1960. Copyright © Ron Fisher.

 

 

 

Lovely!  

 

 

 

 

They are lovely pictures, Rob,

 

Thanks for showing us.

 

Just one little 'correction'. No Thompson (or Peppercorn) Pacific ran with a 'banjo' dome. The only locos to carry such a device were the last-built A3s, and then only until their first boiler change, pre-War. What was underneath was a perforated steam collector, which was 'peardrop' in shape. Someone must have decided that panel-beating a banjo dome (with its complex shape) was too difficult, so the 'streamlined' dome cover was adopted  - easier to make, with its straight, tapered sides. 

 

Your pictures of 60514 illustrate a dilemma for the RTR boys. Along with 60500, she had plates between her sandbox fillers, but the ones she had were extended rearwards. The other 13 in the class didn't have these protective plates. She also has a rimmed chimney - something she retained until withdrawal, along with 60519. All the others eventually got lipped, cast-iron chimneys. She's carrying a Thompson Dia. 117 boiler, with round dome on the second ring. Later in her life, she'll receive a Peppercorn Dia. 118 boiler, with streamlined dome, further back. 

 

Not only is she named after a racehorse, but also an Alpine mountain. 

 

Just for clarification, some pictures.....................

 

 

I don't have a prototype shot of an A3 with a banjo dome, but here's a model with one. Only WINDSOR LAD to BROWN JACK had these.

 

 

Here's an A3 with a streamlined dome - quite different. 

 

Other ECML big locos with streamlined domes................

 

 

 

 

The Thompson and the Peppercorn Pacific boilers were interchangeable, and classes A2/2, A2/3, A2 and A1 carried both. When fitted to the A1s, the 117 boilers had a streamlined dome cover, further forward (with the exception of 60153). The A2s with 117 boilers had round dome covers. 

 

 

Here's an A2/3 with its original boiler (and original rimmed chimney), built by me from a DJH kit and painted by Ian Rathbone. HYCILLA later got a Peppercorn boiler and a lipped chimney. 

 

 

And here's an A2/3 with a Peppercorn boiler and lipped chimney. It's a Graeme King/Bachmann conversion (done by Graeme), patch-repainted by me and weathered. 60515 was the last to retain the front numberplate at the top of the smokebox door. She later, like all the rest, had it lowered to the top hingestrap.

 

Do you see why Paul Isles and I spent ages poring over Thompson Pacific pictures?

 

Please (all) observe copyright restrictions)

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Edited January 7, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Jol Wilkinson]

Locomotive names? Look to the LNWR for a wealth of varied, interesting and sometimes outright unusual names carried by their passenger locomotives. Just a few examples may be found here;

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Named_LNWR_"Prince_of_Wales"_Class_locomotives

[landscapes]

Good Evening Tony

 

All this discussion about one of my favourite subjects, Thompson Pacific's I can get enough of them.

 

Following Hornby's recent announcement I hope you don't mind me enclosing one of my photos showing three of Thompsons Pacific's together.

 

Recently renamed and numbered A2/1 60510 Robert the Bruce a PDK kit built loco, and two of Graeme King/Bachman converted A2/3's.

 

I assume that the proposed Hornby A2/3's will probably look very similar to these conversions.

 

Interesting to see the different shades of Brunswick Green. 

 

Regards

 

David

Edited January 7, 2020 by landscapes
Additional Information

[micklner]

A couple of mine via G Kings resin/etched conversions , sadly it appears the Hornby version will not cover the original LNER versions.

 

[robmcg]

4 minutes ago, micklner said:

A couple of mine via G Kings resin/etched conversions , sadly it appears the Hornby version will not cover the original LNER versions.

 

 

Hard to believe those P2 rebuilds packed more tractive effort than a BR Riddles 9F (if the LNER info via google is right)

[Chamby]

Apologies for lowering the tone somewhat using RTR models, but this birds-eye view of different Hornby A3’s clearly shows the difference between their gloss finished Firdaussi with the relatively short-lived banjo dome (right) and two versions of Flying Scotsman with the later streamlined dome (left and centre):

 

 

 

[Woodcock29]

I note in the listing of the 2020 Hornby program on a certain box shifter from Liverpool's website that one Hush Hush (R3840) version is listed as in apple green! Now we know that No 10000 was never painted apple green, despite a cigarette card in the 1930s showing her as such. 

 

Andrew

Edited January 8, 2020 by Woodcock29
Typo

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, landscapes said:

Good Evening Tony

 

All this discussion about one of my favourite subjects, Thompson Pacific's I can get enough of them.

 

Following Hornby's recent announcement I hope you don't mind me enclosing one of my photos showing three of Thompsons Pacific's together.

 

Recently renamed and numbered A2/1 60510 Robert the Bruce a PDK kit built loco, and two of Graeme King/Bachman converted A2/3's.

 

I assume that the proposed Hornby A2/3's will probably look very similar to these conversions.

 

Interesting to see the different shades of Brunswick Green. 

 

Regards

 

David

I don't mind at all, David,

 

The more the merrier.

 

I hope Hornby's Thompson Pacifics will have those 'wiggly pipes' on the smokebox sides. When Hornby borrowed my model of an A2/3, I did point out their being there. 

 

I imagine they will sell very well. They're the last of the BR 'big green engines' not represented RTR, and their names did 'sell' them to Hornby. Someone suggested elsewhere that Hornby decided to do Thompson's Pacifics on my recommendation. This is not so, though I certainly didn't dissuade them. Simon Kohler and I discussed them over two years ago, and, when my help was requested, I gladly gave it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Hard to believe those P2 rebuilds packed more tractive effort than a BR Riddles 9F (if the LNER info via google is right)

They were very much more powerful, and a lot bigger and heavier than a 9F, Rob,

 

It's been mentioned before, but the ECML's heaviest steam-hauled train, the block cement working, which was diagrammed for a 9F, frequently lost time climbing Stoke. The 9Fs weren't quite up to the job. Neither was a V2. At the suggestion of Peter Townend, a Peterborough A2/3 was tried, and delays ceased instantly. They were the only steam class to manage it without losing time (though an A2/2 wasn't tried, neither an A1 or an A2). When the diesels first took over, two Type 3s were employed (later reduced to one, after reliability issues were resolved). Such was progress. 

 

I wonder whether Thompson was looking down (it was after his death) and smiling!

 

I run the train on Little Bytham. Hauled by an A2/3, of course............................

 

 

 

Appropriately hauled by EDWARD THOMPSON itself!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Dunsignalling]

On ‎06‎/‎01‎/‎2020 at 12:28, The Johnster said:

Why is that the set back outside cylinders on Thompson Pacifics look odd and ‘gawky’, whereas the same feature on Stars, Castles, and Kings, not to mention Princess Royals, looks absolutely perfect!

 

I’m not really asking, just musing...

Given that the Thompsons have smoke deflectors and the four classes you mention don't, may have much to do with it (though not all carried them throughout their careers).

 

I do agree, though, that the Thompson A2 sub-classes have a somewhat "unbalanced" look about them, and it looks "worse" from some angles than others.

 

The square step in the running plate ahead of the cylinders, juxtaposed with an elegant curved drop toward the front is, perhaps, the major factor.

 

As Tony's reference implies, however, handsome is as handsome does.

 

John

 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[micklner]

Thommo in its intended colour !!