Wright writes.....

[St Enodoc]

 Photo evidence shows this must have happened later in the late sixties The one man that could have given me the exact date of introduction (if there was such a thing) is no longer with us.

This 1967 pic that shows the north end pilot in it's normal ready and waiting position doesn't have one.

Newcastle by Keith Long, on Flickr.

 

and no match truck in this 1965 view.

http://www.time-capsules.co.uk/picture/show/2918/Shunting-at-Newcastle

I've got a few more pics from the keep taken between 1963 and 67 that show no match truck. I'll have to check other pics to see if there is any evidence of match trucks used in that period.

 

P

Thanks, very informative.

 

If that were a model some folk would say that the lumps of coal were overscale.

[Focalplane]

Tony

 

With your experience of the Poppy chassis jig, would you recommend the 8 wheel jig as a one fits all solution?  I am thinking Gauge O here but I am sure the same applies to 4mm.  In other words, could you build a 48XX chassis on the 8 wheel jig?  Sort of one extreme to the other.

 

Paul

[Tony Wright]

Tony

 

With your experience of the Poppy chassis jig, would you recommend the 8 wheel jig as a one fits all solution?  I am thinking Gauge O here but I am sure the same applies to 4mm.  In other words, could you build a 48XX chassis on the 8 wheel jig?  Sort of one extreme to the other.

 

Paul

I would, Paul.

 

I suppose it was good marketing to make the three-axle jig first, then introduce the four-axle one. 

 

Certainly, one could make a four-coupled mechanism on the four-axle jig. In fairness (though I haven't tried it), one should be able to make an eight-wheeled mech on the three-axle jig - jig up the first three, then move them along, I know I've successfully built eight and ten-coupled chassis using just the three axles of my Jamieson jig. I've got a 9F to build, so will use the four-axle jig to make that. 

[Tony Wright]

Thanks, very informative.

 

If that were a model some folk would say that the lumps of coal were overscale.

But are they lumps of coal? It looks like scrap to me. 

[Arthur]

 

It is scrap, the first wagon contains shredded scrap and the second crushed bales.

[polybear]

Glad to help if I can, Brian.

 

I'm surprised that no coupling rods (not connecting rods - they're inside on an N2) were supplied by Comet. I'm sure Andrew will provide you with a suitable set. 

 

Because Comet chassis don't have slots and tabs, may I suggest the Poppyswood jig for putting it together? 

 

Many thanks Tony.

The Comet etch is quite early I think, being in Brass.  The current etch for the N2 is in Nickel Silver, and Comet now include coupling rods on the same etch (they used to be sold separately, but the N2 ones have now been discontinued - unless Andrew has re-introduced them of course).

I have the Master Chassis Jig from Hobby Holidays, purchased from Phil some (read quite a few..) years ago, but yet to be used in anger.  Bows head even lower in shame....

I've just laid the Perseverence etch over the Comet one to check relationships; axle positions are the same.  The front guard iron on the Perseverence etch is around 0.5mm rearward of that on the Comet, however the rear iron on the Perseverence etch is further back than that on the Comet by around 3mm, which if my sums are correct means it is actually worse than that on the Comet etch

I'm still pondering over the frame depth (i.e. strength) in places on the Perseverence etch, and whether or not it may prove problematic/susceptible to damage.  I'll have a think about ways to locally strengthen the etch maybe.

 

Regards,

Brian

[Tony Wright]

Many thanks Tony.

The Comet etch is quite early I think, being in Brass.  The current etch for the N2 is in Nickel Silver, and Comet now include coupling rods on the same etch (they used to be sold separately, but the N2 ones have now been discontinued - unless Andrew has re-introduced them of course).

I have the Master Chassis Jig from Hobby Holidays, purchased from Phil some (read quite a few..) years ago, but yet to be used in anger.  Bows head even lower in shame....

I've just laid the Perseverence etch over the Comet one to check relationships; axle positions are the same.  The front guard iron on the Perseverence etch is around 0.5mm rearward of that on the Comet, however the rear iron on the Perseverence etch is further back than that on the Comet by around 3mm, which if my sums are correct means it is actually worse than that on the Comet etch

I'm still pondering over the frame depth (i.e. strength) in places on the Perseverence etch, and whether or not it may prove problematic/susceptible to damage.  I'll have a think about ways to locally strengthen the etch maybe.

 

Regards,

Brian

Brian,

 

Could you not use the Comet frames and the Perseverance rods? I assume the wheel spacings are the same. 

[Headstock]

Guess who got the tools out and moved the body side in but left the roof at the correct width.

Hornby-BG-Mods-103copy-SM.jpg

 

P

 

Now that is craftsmanship/clever. I must admit I just replaced the sides with the or Comet The sides were soldered to the MJT brass inner ends (the narrower brake end profile) forming a box. I then fitted the original roof and ends over the top like an inverted U. The Hornby ends were then filed down to match the MJT profile. More work involved, however less skill required. Plus I wasn't bothered about the Hornby finish.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Headstock

[Headstock]

I've just re-read the Van chapters in Harris, and you are right, Fox bogies were replaced by heavy duty 8' bogies and the permitted load was increased from 8 to 10 tons. Which leaves me wondering just which vehicles used the 8' standard. bogies.

 

To late, you have me in doubt, a trip to the NRM will have to be arranged.

[Porcy Mane]

But are they lumps of coal? It looks like scrap to me. 

Very probably from Shepherds scrapyard metal processors on the Riverside branch. The yard was one of the first to introduce the hydraulic crushers that produced the small cubes of compressed scrap as seen in Goldfinger and as once demonstrated by Christopher Trace on Blue Peter. The scrap is very likely on the way to Consett via Tyne Yard.

 

P

Edited February 24, 2016 by Porcy Mane

[jrg1]

To late, you have me in doubt, a trip to the NRM will have to be arranged.

Are there any tables or records of LNER bogie use?  I understand there were Fox and Gresley types, 8 foot and 6 foot wheelbase, and heavy and normal duty.  Heavy for restaurant cars and some NPVs, Fox on early vehicles, and much swapping around.

[St Enodoc]

It is scrap, the first wagon contains shredded scrap and the second crushed bales.

Better go to Specsavers I think - thanks.

[jrg1]

It is scrap, the first wagon contains shredded scrap and the second crushed bales.

The first wagon appears to be metal swarf-probably from lathes.  Heavy industry churned out this scrap by the ton-razor sharp, dirty and difficult to handle.  At the factory where I worked, (Ruston & Hornsby) every Friday 16 ton mineral wagons which would have been filled over the week, were shunted to the exchange siding to be tripped to Holmes Yard, and on to presumably Sheffield.  Swarf was segregated into ferrous, non-ferrous and stainless.    

[Focalplane]

I would, Paul.

 

I suppose it was good marketing to make the three-axle jig first, then introduce the four-axle one. 

 

Certainly, one could make a four-coupled mechanism on the four-axle jig. In fairness (though I haven't tried it), one should be able to make an eight-wheeled mech on the three-axle jig - jig up the first three, then move them along, I know I've successfully built eight and ten-coupled chassis using just the three axles of my Jamieson jig. I've got a 9F to build, so will use the four-axle jig to make that.

 

Tony

 

Currently five in the morning and my virtual 47XX is working hard. I see I have a midnight reply from Anthony at Poppy to much the same question. The four coupled chassis has reduced maximum axle spacing compared to the three coupled chassis, 7' 6" instead of 9' 0". So it seems that your excellent idea of using the three axle jig may be the better way to go. At least for setting up the chassis, but perhaps not so convenient for subsequent handling of the body? Anyway, I will meet Anthony at Kettering and make the decision then. My next project will be a 4-4-0 with 6' 9" wheels so the four axle jig may be impractical anyway.

 

Thanks for the insight, Paul

[t-b-g]

Are there any tables or records of LNER bogie use?  I understand there were Fox and Gresley types, 8 foot and 6 foot wheelbase, and heavy and normal duty.  Heavy for restaurant cars and some NPVs, Fox on early vehicles, and much swapping around.

 

Don't forget the quite different type of bogie that came out during the Thompson period too. Only a small number were put into service but they should be included. 

[Headstock]

Are there any tables or records of LNER bogie use?  I understand there were Fox and Gresley types, 8 foot and 6 foot wheelbase, and heavy and normal duty.  Heavy for restaurant cars and some NPVs, Fox on early vehicles, and much swapping around.

 

If only things were that simple, however Harris records that a single 8' bolster bogie used for suburban stock was adopted for full brakes, they had 10" by 5" journals. A rather tedious trawl through the Doncaster drawling list produced by the NRM reveals that the only 8' bogie with 10" by 5" journal is the heavy type. A drawing dated 1928 exists in the archive for this type, so fairly close to Bills stated date of the adoption of new bogies for the big full brakes. Provisionally it looks like my original information stands.

[edcayton]

How common was it to see two of those Clayton things apparently working in the same photo?

 

Re bogies. Didn't they put those under some Pullman cars? I would have thought poor riding would be unacceptable there.

 

Ed

[Clive Mortimore]

How common was it to see two of those Clayton things apparently working in the same photo?

 

Re bogies. Didn't they put those under some Pullman cars? I would have thought poor riding would be unacceptable there.

 

Ed

Quite common on the NER for a very short period of time. They had the later build locos which were slightly more reliable than the ones built for the ScR. They fell out of use with the rapid decline in short hauled light freight trains, in fact the general decline in freight. There were enough more reliable type 2 and type 3 locos to do the remaining duties.

[Izzy]

Most probably went to live under York built Diesel brake tenders.

 

 Edit: And those poor riding EMU's (Clacton & Scottish units)???

 

P

 

While the GE area surburban EMU's (AM2-AM8/302-308) were very rough riding at times and do seem to have had some type of Gresley looking bogies - I haven't a clue what they might have been, I have always understood that the actual 'Clacton' electrics, the AM9/309's ran on commonwealth bogies although I am not sure about the power bogies.

 

Izzy

[Porcy Mane]

How common was it to see two of those Clayton things apparently working in the same photo?

 

Re bogies. Didn't they put those under some Pullman cars? I would have thought poor riding would be unacceptable there.

 

Ed

Quite often; when they they were on freights from Tyne Yard to Consett or banking the Iron Ore. What the photos's of these operations doesn't show is the rag firmly wedged between the firebell gong and striker.

An ex neighbour who was a one time Consett Driver once related a story in a railway magazine of driving double headed Claytons up to Consett. He was a little bemused during the trip as why there was firemen waving at him from every over bridge & foot crossing. You can probably guess the rest.

 

P

 

EDIT: Didn't see Mr Mortimores post above.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Porcy Mane

[Porcy Mane]

I haven't a clue what they might have been, I have always understood that the actual 'Clacton' electrics, the AM9/309's ran on commonwealth bogies although I am not sure about the power bogies.

 

No I'm not sure what units they were hence my question marks. What I do remember is reading about it. Probably in Modern Railways or it's predecessor.

 

P

[Mallard60022]

Tony, this should be with you shortly.

Phil

[Mallard60022]

Quite often, when they they were on freights from Tyne Yard to Consett or banking the Iron Ore. What the photos's of these operations doesn't show is the rag firmly wedged between the firebell gong and striker.

An ex neighbour who was a one time Consett Driver once related a story in a railway magazine of driving double headed Claytons up to Consett. He was a little bemused during the trip as why there was firemen waving at him from every over bridge & foot crossing. You can probably guess the rest.

 

P

I never knew Claytons worked to Consett! How long did that experiment last? Two days I should think?

I'd have loved to see the 24s (think it was 24s) or 37s doing it but I did prefer the Q1s and then the 9Fs; spectacular.

Phil

[Fat Controller]

Most probably went to live under York built Diesel brake tenders.

 

 Edit: And those poor riding EMU's (Clacton & Scottish units)???

 

P

And the AM4s on the LMR

[Fat Controller]

The first wagon appears to be metal swarf-probably from lathes.  Heavy industry churned out this scrap by the ton-razor sharp, dirty and difficult to handle.  At the factory where I worked, (Ruston & Hornsby) every Friday 16 ton mineral wagons which would have been filled over the week, were shunted to the exchange siding to be tripped to Holmes Yard, and on to presumably Sheffield.  Swarf was segregated into ferrous, non-ferrous and stainless.    

Swarf is horrible stuff. It's light enough for it to be blown off wagons, ending up in places like point blades- SNCF now insist that it, and coil trimmings, have to have nets to retain them in wagons.