Wright writes.....

[landscapes]

Many thanks for posting the pictures Arthur (is that your name?). 

 

I assume you'd like some comments from me? 

 

Firstly, my compliments on having built the thing, and for making it look at least something like an A2/2 (which few modellers have ever done with a Millholme A2/2). Yes, the firebox is still too short (the A2/2s with a 117 or 118 boiler had a fair bit visible ahead of the 'S' below the footplate - Millholme made no provision for the differences in the respective lengths of centre footplate between the originally-rebuilt locos and 60501/2/5/6), but you've made a sound job of the part 'V'-fronted cab. The front footplate still has the too-shallow curve and the steps (because they suit the A2/3 as well) are too far out. The bogie still looks too short, and where are the leather-covered bearers between the wheels? Because the superheater headers are too small, the horizontal handrail is too high up. As far as I know only 60501 had a crank in its vacuum ejector pipe to clear the nameplate at the smokebox end (60504 had a crank the other way on rebuilding) and it was not as much as this. The domes were never 'banjos' either, they were streamlined (even on 60505, which had a round dome underneath). The problems of the too-fat tender with turn-ins at the front are apparent as well, but well done for removing all those 'dustbin-lid' rivets! The cabside numbers are too small (the ER used the larger type), as too are the tender emblems. My even greater compliments on having built the valve gear/motion - that was way beyond me. 

 

In case you think the above is an 'assassination' of your work, then please don't take it that way. It's your work, and nobody can take that away. You've paid nobody else to do it, nor basked in 'reflected glory' because of it. I offer the above as constructive criticism, and, for something built a quarter of a century ago and from what source, I think it does you great credit. My Millholme-built A2/2 was sold years ago, though it appeared in Railway Modeller as one of Leighford's locomotives. Find that article and gloat! 

 

To 'put my money where my mouth is', please see below my current A2/2s. These are painted by Ian Rathbone - at least you painted yours yourself. 

 

60506 02.jpg

 

This has appeared before and shows by DJH 60506, the third one I built. Please note the lower firebox ahead of footplate 'S'. 

 

60506.jpg

 

Here it is again, posed on Peterborough North. 

 

A2 2 02 DJH 60506.jpg

 

And in its days running on Stoke Summit.

 

60504.jpg

 

By way of a comparison, here's my 60504 (also posed on Peterborough North). Note the differences in the respective boilers. The superheater headers are also too small on this Crownline kit and the footplate steps are also too far out. 

 

A2 2 60501 DJH.jpg

 

Finally, my part scratch-built/modified A2/2, 60501. This too has the incorrect front footplate shape - it came from Millholme as a spare!

 

Hi Tony

 

Great set of photos for a very nice looking Pacific locomotive.

 

I do not want to open up the old debate about RTR locomotives again but I am convinced that if an A2/2 was produced as RTR it would be an instant sell out.

 

Bachmann produced the Prototype Deltic on at least three occasions as a limited edition and they were all sold out almost immediately on each occasion.

 

It's a shame that either Hornby or Bachmann could not do the same with a RTR Thompson Pacific.

 

Regards

 

David

[Mallard60022]

The Brits falling to pieces issue was something to do with a 'cotter' type pin coming loose and dropping out as it had been designed incorrectly. I seem to remember that the 'cure' was to invert and refit the fitting and thus the pin then didn't drop out. Well I read something like that many years ago and the technical description was, of course, better.

Arthur that A2/2 looks the part and proves that the kit will work, but as Tony intimates, the inaccuracies are there for those that know. I didn't know anything about those 'faults' when I did mine. Had I completed it to that/your standard I would have been very proud.

Phil

Edited May 24, 2015 by Mallard60022

[The Stationmaster]

The Brits falling to pieces issue was something to do with a 'cotter' type pin coming loose and dropping out as it had been designed incorrectly. I seem to remember that the 'cure' was to invert and refit the fitting and thus the pin then didn't drop out. Well I read something like that many years ago and the technical description was, of course, better.

Arthur that A2/2 looks the part and proves that the kit will work, but as Tony intimates, the inaccuracies are there for those that know. I didn't know anything about those 'faults' when I did mine. Had I completed it to that/your standard I would have been very proud.

Phil

According to the Report of Inquiry into the Settle incident in January 1960 the failure was initiated by the bottom slide bars falling off the engine and this was down, mainly, to the difficulty of ensuring the nuts of the securing bolts were properly tightened - various mods took place including inserting the bolts the other way up (which allowed better access to the securing nuts and a few other minor changes to the way in which the nuts were secured.  The Settle incident was not the first time it had happened and modifications were already in hand at the time it occurred as slidebars had reportedly fallen off 4 other engines previously.

 

To describe the 'Brits' as a 'blunder' is to somewhat overstate the case but it was a think an expression first used by a particular Laira Engineman who was extremely critical of them when they first arrived on the WR and who made his views widely known in the press.  The writer mentioned by Tony Wright tends to follow Western criticism of various things and it would appear he has done so in this case  (apologies for veering OT)

Edited May 24, 2015 by The Stationmaster

[APOLLO]

Out of interest, the full official Ministry of Transport report on the Settle accident 21 Jan 1960 is here

 

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_Settle1960.pdf

 

 

Brit15 (interested in all things Britannia !)

[corneliuslundie]

Are you sure that b/w photo of Stoke Summit is of the model?

 

Jonathan

[Andy Reichert]

Are you sure that b/w photo of Stoke Summit is of the model?

 

Jonathan

 

Only if the real thing was non-smoking area

 

Andy

[it's-er]

Many thanks to Apollo at post 4773 for giving us the full official Ministry of Transport report on the Settle accident 21 Jan 1960. It is astonishing what RMWebbers come up with - the subject has just been mentioned, and within an hour or two we have the official report on the incident. Astonishing, given this was something that happened 55 years ago!

 

The report makes absorbing and interesting reading about the operations of the real railway on a night of inclement weather all those years ago.

 

John

[coachmann]

Considering 'best practice' from Big four engineering was supposed to be uppermost in Riddles and his teams collective minds, some of the design details on the Britannia were new and needless. LNER-style 3-bar slide bars needn't have worked loose had LNER practice been followed to the letter. Hollow axles that had to be plugged later on to prevent wheels slipping ther quartering was something else. Also the LMS-style return crank fitting had to be adopted in the end. The cab layout was new, unfamiliar and drafty. The end-on reversing 'mangle wheel' was also new.

Edited May 24, 2015 by coachmann

[APOLLO]

But their Chime whistles were fantastic !!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony

 

Great set of photos for a very nice looking Pacific locomotive.

 

I do not want to open up the old debate about RTR locomotives again but I am convinced that if an A2/2 was produced as RTR it would be an instant sell out.

 

Bachmann produced the Prototype Deltic on at least three occasions as a limited edition and they were all sold out almost immediately on each occasion.

 

It's a shame that either Hornby or Bachmann could not do the same with a RTR Thompson Pacific.

 

Regards

 

David

Thanks David,

 

Whether an RTR A2/2 (or any Thompson Pacific) would be an instant sell out, I don't know. As you probably know, Bachmann borrowed one of Graeme King's A2/3 conversions for some time and then politely gave it back to me. I've heard no more about it since. 

 

As for the prototype DELTIC, that originally was produced in conjunction with the NRM and the prototype still exists, so, I assume, several visitors to the Museum (or wherever DELTIC is now) would have bought one, thus topping up sales in a manner unlikely with a Thompson Pacific (though I could be wrong). 

 

On a wider (if admittedly selfish) point of view, the appearance of an RTR A2/2 (and for sure an A2/3 as well) would mean the 'death knell' for DJH or PDK kits of the same things, and then the lack of need to buy appropriate wheels and motor/gearboxes. And (and I know we've been here before), within a few months mainstream OO layouts would be over-populated with them, demonstrating the ability of the owners to be able to buy them and then put them on the tracks. 

 

One of my recent pictures showed my 60506 in B&W on Stoke Summit. It was taken shortly after the DJH kit was introduced and I'd just built three (the early 'noughties?). One was the DJH test model, the other was for a customer and the other was for me. Looking at its parcels train, I'd (with one exception) built all that as well - from Kirk, BSL, Mopok, Southern Pride, Comet and PC kits. Apart from the shorty Gresley BG, every carriage in that rake is now available RTR (or will be when Bachmann's latest Thompsons appear). Would I have derived the same 'pleasure' in running that train if all I'd done was buy it (or had it commissioned), especially if an A2/2 became available RTR?

 

As mentioned, yesterday was spent most enjoyably running trains on LB. The fact that I'd built over 90% of the locos we ran and built/modified over 90% of the carriages/bogie stock we ran, gave me far greater pleasure than just being able to say 'that's all mine'. The freight stock, I admit, is not my work (apart from a dozen or so vans). 

 

I also admit, though, I'm probably an example of a modelling dinosaur these days. I much prefer making things myself (of course, with considerable help) and (the record's stuck long ago) much prefer to see what people have made for themselves, not just bought or had commissioned. In that respect, Arthur's A2/2 is an absolute nugget! 

[Mallard60022]

According to the Report of Inquiry into the Settle incident in January 1960 the failure was initiated by the bottom slide bars falling off the engine and this was down, mainly, to the difficulty of ensuring the nuts of the securing bolts were properly tightened - various mods took place including inserting the bolts the other way up (which allowed better access to the securing nuts and a few other minor changes to the way in which the nuts were secured.  The Settle incident was not the first time it had happened and modifications were already in hand at the time it occurred as slidebars had reportedly fallen off 4 other engines previously.

 

To describe the 'Brits' as a 'blunder' is to somewhat overstate the case but it was a think an expression first used by a particular Laira Engineman who was extremely critical of them when they first arrived on the WR and who made his views widely known in the press.  The writer mentioned by Tony Wright tends to follow Western criticism of various things and it would appear he has done so in this case  (apologies for veering OT)

Ah yes...thanks Mike. I knew there was an inversion issue somewhere. I should have checked my nuts (and bolts).

Just a bit OT but I rather liked Brits, however they were, along with most of the other Standards, rather a waste of time, effort and money. I do not mean that to be any criticism of the loco's as so many were great (teddy bear tanks for example ......) but simply as a comment about PPP from the railway authorities following Nationalisation.

I suppose though, they didn't have a crystal ball although 1950/51 was a time of looking forwards after years of awful austerity. 

Personally I blame all those sellers of surplus MOD vehicles for the demise of rail freight transport...............................................  and don't get me started about the motor car.

Phil

[jrg1]

Difficult to say what the rationale was for the Standard programme-apart from the 9Fs there were existing designs that were just as good.  The 78XXX was virtually identical to the 464xx, the Standard 5 was no better than the LMS 5, and the 75xxx and 76xxx were different by a front bogie.  The 77xxx had a 76xxx chassis, and you have to ask what was the point of the 77's?.  Same with the tanks-there were plenty of good LMS class 4s, and GWR 61xx., plus the LMS class 2 was virtually the same as the 84xxx.  The Britannias were doing the same work as Scots and V2s-were they an improvement?  As for the Clans-class 7 chassis, class 6 boiler and class 5 performance, unless flogged.  The Duke was an expensive luxury-another LMS 8P could have been erected.

However, the 999 Standard locomotives meant that much more variety, and if they did not see out their booked lives, just remember the disaster of the modernisation programme, and the likes of class 22 and class 28 diesels, underpowered class 40s, derated 47s, and abandonment of the hydraulic programme.  However, for modelllers, that means that much more variety, and a far more fascinating railway then than now. 

[coachmann]

'Modernity' all depends on one's age. For me the Thompson A2's and the postwar steel coaches were the bang up to date representing the swish post war railway. They appeared on book covers, in newsreels and British Transport Films so they were in yer face regardless of what Peppercorn had done. But the real railway I saw everyday was far from modern.

 

When I look back, the only train that to me truly represented space-age technology was the Blue Pullman in 1959/60. I wouldn't waste valuable film on it, but it was definitely impressive and ultra modern in appearance. Yet strangely enough, when blue & white was adopted for all of BR, the whole system deteriorated into something that looked utilitarian and far from modern. 

Edited May 25, 2015 by coachmann

[Focalplane]

'Modernity' all depends on one's age. For me the Thompson A2's and the postwar steel coaches were the bang up to date representing the swish post war railway. They appeared on book covers, in newsreels and British Transport Films so they were in yer face regardless of what Peppercorn had done. But the real railway I saw everyday was far from modern.

 

When I look back, the only train that to me truly represented space-age technology was the Blue Pullman in 1959/60. I wouldn't waste valuable film on it, but it was definitely impressive and ultra modern in appearance. Yet strangely enough, when blue & white was adopted for all of BR, the whole system deteriorated into something that looked utilitarian and far from modern. 

Other than referring to Eastern Region locomotives and designers, I could not have said this any better!  My home turf was still largely LMS in the late 1950s, with Pates, Jubes and Mickeys being the main motive power at New Street.  Well, there was a daily B1 from somewhere east (?Immingham).  I also remember the Blue Pullman (have you seen the speeded up movie "Let's Go to Birmingham"?) but did not go out of my way to see it on its way from Paddington.

 

When I spent a day at Tamworth, though, I did see the changing scene with early diesel electrics taking over many of the expresses on the Trent Valley Line.  I have never liked diesel electrics ever since - in fact they are banned from any (British) layout I ever build!  (I do own several Southern Pacific and Union Pacific EMDs, all in their boxes).

[peach james]

 

To describe the 'Brits' as a 'blunder' is to somewhat overstate the case but it was a think an expression first used by a particular Laira Engineman who was extremely critical of them when they first arrived on the WR and who made his views widely known in the press.  The writer mentioned by Tony Wright tends to follow Western criticism of various things and it would appear he has done so in this case  (apologies for veering OT)

 

I'd have to agree.  The need for new 7P power was questionable, but not in 51-53, when the designs were set.  There were logical reasons WHY steam still made economical sense up until well past 1954, mostly outlined in "The Red Devil", and in a few other primary source documents.  So, to describe them as "blunders" seems a bit heavy handed to me.  Certainly, while my experience is limited to my 3 1/2" gauge version, understanding that Riddles most certainly had his fingers in that design too...(the LBSC Britannia), and it is an incredibly free steaming, easy running engine.  On indifferent track, with stupid loads (like 1000+ lb, the scale of about the same # of tons), he will make the north side of 8 MPH  (scale of 128 mph) and not tax the driver to the limit to do so.  It does have a tendency to be a bit pulse like, and I would believe that the full sized engines would suffer the same condition, but it doesn't have 3 or 4 cylinders, or anything else between the frames.  (well, a feed pump, but that's a model thing...)  So, I would put it down to the individual engineman not liking that class as much as another.  As an engineman, I can certainly understand the ease of disliking new vs liking old.  Unless the new was a LOT better than the old, then the old is quite often to be preferred because you KNOW how it is going to act.

 

James

[jrg1]

'Modernity' all depends on one's age. For me the Thompson A2's and the postwar steel coaches were the bang up to date representing the swish post war railway. They appeared on book covers, in newsreels and British Transport Films so they were in yer face regardless of what Peppercorn had done. But the real railway I saw everyday was far from modern.

 

When I look back, the only train that to me truly represented space-age technology was the Blue Pullman in 1959/60. I wouldn't waste valuable film on it, but it was definitely impressive and ultra modern in appearance. Yet strangely enough, when blue & white was adopted for all of BR, the whole system deteriorated into something that looked utilitarian and far from modern. 

I thought the Blue Pullmans were an incredible idea-and backed up by great PR.  Not since the days of the LNER publicity machine topping their efforts by naming engines after racehorses did the railways get it so right-and what a shame they slipped into irrelevance.  Seeing the last power unit as a standby generator for power cuts (Bristol?) really trashed the brand.  The power bogies had technical problems that gave poor riding, and they were unfortunately built with no airconditioning.  Another problem solved by the scrapyard.  Same with the MetroVick Mark 1 Pullmans-surely the finest coaches of their time, and doomed because of no AC.  

[Clive Mortimore]

I thought the Blue Pullmans were an incredible idea-and backed up by great PR.  Not since the days of the LNER publicity machine topping their efforts by naming engines after racehorses did the railways get it so right-and what a shame they slipped into irrelevance.  Seeing the last power unit as a standby generator for power cuts (Bristol?) really trashed the brand.  The power bogies had technical problems that gave poor riding, and they were unfortunately built with no airconditioning.  Another problem solved by the scrapyard.  Same with the MetroVick Mark 1 Pullmans-surely the finest coaches of their time, and doomed because of no AC.  

Hi Jrg1

 

The Blue Pullmans were fitted with air conditioning.

[Tony Wright]

I thought the Blue Pullmans were an incredible idea-and backed up by great PR.  Not since the days of the LNER publicity machine topping their efforts by naming engines after racehorses did the railways get it so right-and what a shame they slipped into irrelevance.  Seeing the last power unit as a standby generator for power cuts (Bristol?) really trashed the brand.  The power bogies had technical problems that gave poor riding, and they were unfortunately built with no airconditioning.  Another problem solved by the scrapyard.  Same with the MetroVick Mark 1 Pullmans-surely the finest coaches of their time, and doomed because of no AC.  

I don't think I can add much to the debate regarding 7MTs and the Blue Pullmans, other than mention a little anecdotal evidence. 

 

With regard to the Brits, they revolutionised the 1950s' GE timetable in a manner impossible with any other class. Trains previously 5MT-hauled, now had 7MTs at the head. Someone mentioned the V2s as equivalents but they were too heavy for the road. Where the 'Brits' supplemented established motive power (on the WR and MR, say), they were not so well-received because they were no more powerful than the indigenous Class 7s. That said, my memory of the 6J examples is that they were well-liked on heavy trains such as 'The Irish Mail'.

 

As for the Blue Pullmans, I only ever saw them at Manchester Central or Derby and, I must admit, paid them no heed - not even taking their car numbers. The problems with their poor riding has been well-documented. One set was actually tried on the ER main line but, as far as I know, it wasn't fast enough to challenge the times of the 'Deltic'-hauled Pullmans of the day, and the idea of using it was dropped. With regard to the ECML Pullmans and the BR Mk.1 cars, in conversation with the late David Jenkinson one day when I was writing for Modellers' Back Track he told me of his insistence during his visits to London travelling in 'The Yorkshire Pullman' that he were allocated a seat in the Parlour brakes, even though they were 'only' Second Class, such was their superiority of ride over the Mk.1s. 'Proper Pullmans' I think he called them!

 

Returning to the Blue Pullmans, I knew a (now late) businessman who used to travel regularly from Birmingham to Paddington who was delighted when the Blue Pullman was out of action and he could travel in the 'Western'-hauled old-fashioned Pullman cars. I don't think it mattered a fig to him about any air-conditioning, just the smoothness of the ride in comparison. 

 

As I say, though, just anecdotal evidence. 

 

Just to finish off, a couple of shots of two of the three 'Brits' on Little Bytham. 

 

 

This is a DJH kit, originally started by Bob Alderman but completed by me and painted by Ian Rathbone. I saw this particular prototype loco outside the paint shop at Doncaster in August, 1958 and its appearance heading this parcels train is on a running-in turn. I saw my Eastern 'Brits' usually on the North Country Continental at Retford or Kiveton Park, after they'd taken over from the B17s. Then, of course, they all ended up shedded on the LMR. 

 

 

My apologies if this picture has appeared before, but it shows my original Hornby tender-drive ANZAC, now fitted with a Comet set of frames and renumbered/renamed as DORNOCH FIRTH, allocated to Holbeck. I saw this actual loco at Retford on a Down express freight in August 1959, hence my choice of prototype. An unusual working? How it was modified appeared in BRM some years ago. 

 

Both pictures were taken prior to a lot more scenic work now having taken place on the layout. 

 

My third 'Brit', BOADICEA, is a detailed current Hornby offering, but the motor has given up. 

[jrg1]

Hi Jrg1

 

The Blue Pullmans were fitted with air conditioning.

Oops-I must have confused them with the Mark 1 Pullmans.  I did not understand why they were withdrawn wholesale and scrapped-the coaches were relatively new, and the inferior motor bogies under the end coach could have been swapped.  The coaches could them have been cascaded for further use

[The Stationmaster]

I thought the Blue Pullmans were an incredible idea-and backed up by great PR.  Not since the days of the LNER publicity machine topping their efforts by naming engines after racehorses did the railways get it so right-and what a shame they slipped into irrelevance.  Seeing the last power unit as a standby generator for power cuts (Bristol?) really trashed the brand.  The power bogies had technical problems that gave poor riding, and they were unfortunately built with no airconditioning.  Another problem solved by the scrapyard.  Same with the MetroVick Mark 1 Pullmans-surely the finest coaches of their time, and doomed because of no AC.  

In fact the power cars were the best riding vehicles of the lot in the Blue Pullmans.  Fortunately there was some 2nd Class seating in the power cars and that was always the place a colleague and I tried to book for our Friday journey back east when we were working 'on loan' in South Wales - the ride there was far, far better than elsewhere in the train.  And having had a cab ride from Cardiff to Paddington in one fairly late in their service life I'm in no doubt that the oft repeated anecdote 'the Driver got the best ride of all on the Blue Pullmans' had a lot of truth in it - definitely better throughout the speed range than certain diesel locos I could name.

[coachmann]

Wun I dun earlier, as they say. Dunno when it went through the shops here but probably in the early 1990s. Coming on the eve of the steam finale, I think the 'Britannia' outline is up there amongst the classics.... 

 

It also shows how far the model railway hobby has come when Hornby can produce Britannias that look every bit as 'solid' and good in 4mm scale for a fraction of what a scale model would have cost even in those days.

Edited May 26, 2015 by coachmann

[edcayton]

What scale and source is that one Larry? It does look the biz.

 

Ed

[Tony Wright]

The Brassmasters 0-8-4T is now complete and will be subject to a full review in BRM. 

 

 

I note on another thread some comments regarding compensation/springing. This chassis was designed to be sprung at source. This, in my view, is wrong. It should be designed as solid and leave any compensation/springing to those who are clever/intelligent/bright enough to succeed in getting such things to go. I 'solidified' it, made new one-piece rods and it now runs beautifully smoothly over hand-made track in EM. With jointed rods, it ran dreadfully. The bogie carries nothing but its own weight and runs equally smoothly. Because the whole thing is now fully-ballasted, it now runs better than when it ran at the Stafford show in January (where its good-running was commented on at the time). 

Mike Sharman's name was mentioned, and I couldn't resist a smile recalling one Missenden weekend where he built a 'flexichas' item and I built my Stone Age rigid type. Mine was much quicker to build (jig-assembled) and ran more smoothly without any tweaking. I think Mike considered my approach to chassis-making beyond salvation! 

 

 

Ready for Geoff Haynes to paint her (Ian Rathbone is taking on no new 4mm work as far as I know). Boiler bands are PVC self-adhesive insulation tape and the balance weights in the spokes are Plastic Padding.

 

An overall assessment? Basically a sound kit but let down slightly in my view by over-complication in the chassis department and a lack of simplicity in much of the bodywork. By the latter I mean, why provide the bunker in three separate pieces? Why no tabs and slots for ease of construction? Why provide a boiler in thick-walled brass tube where a lathe/milling machine is necessary to remove the space for the motor and provide positions for washout plugs? Why not a pre-rolled (or even flat) piece of brass for the boiler? Have you ever tried soldering thick-walled brass tube? It's clearly been designed by a clever bloke, but clever blokes should never assume that only other clever blokes will build what they've designed. The DJH Klondike (which is almost ready for painting), is much more user-friendly, even in EM, though not for P4. 

 

All the above said, any reasonably-experienced loco-builder should be able to make a decent job of this kit. It'll never be available RTR (never say never?) and is the product of an individual's handiwork. I've never seen another example made-up. Does anyone out there have one they've got pictures of, please? If you want one, other than scratch-building, this is the way to go. 

Edited May 26, 2015 by Tony Wright

[APOLLO]

My third 'Brit', BOADICEA, is a detailed current Hornby offering, but the motor has given up. 

 

My first model Britannia was indeed 70036 BOADICEA, a Tri-ang TT gauge example, bought for me by my parents for passing my 11+ exam back in 1963.

 

The bees knees back then, smoke and see through driving wheels !!!

 

Still have her and although she's a bit careworn and has done a million (scale) miles, she still runs (though I no longer have a TT layout).

 

Brit15

Edited May 26, 2015 by APOLLO

[Mallard60022]

I still have a Triang OO Brit! Boy did that look good in 1964/65.

I have to say that cabbing a gleaming Britannia at Liverpool Street in the summer of 1960 probably makes me a little biased re the Class. However, I think they are really handsome locomotives and were probably designed to last until the mid 70s as were the Bulleid 'rebuilt', Pacifics (Brits with Bulleid boiler and BF wheels?). TW is absolutey spot on when he intimates they (the Brits) were a Godsend for the GE services to Norwich. They were also very well thought of in the N. West.

It is such a shame that the duties, for which many of the Standards were built, just disappeared far too quickly after the war. The need for them was no longer there by the mid 60s; about ten years earlier than 'planned'.

Phil