Wright writes.....

[robertcwp]

 

Having written several books and countless articles, I can agree entirely with your points of view. Every time I look through something I've written which has been published there is a metaphorical neon-arrow pulsating away next to something I've got wrong.  

I know the feeling!

[Clearwater]

A quick question around these restaurant car ECS moves. I may possibly be being dense here but I'm failing to understand the one directional nature of the move. What was the restaurant car provision on the down trains and why weren't those cars used for the up return service?

 

David

[Tony Wright]

K3 locos are particular favourites being used a lot in the eastern counties. They were particularly well looked after by Lowestoft shed who provided power for the fast fish trains to London which were K3 duties. They are also difficult to get "right" and the addition of the correct size wheels makes a huge difference to their appearance in the 4mm models shown here. It rather begs the question as to why this work should be necessary on a commercial "scale" model. I remember them as fast and powerful and massive looking with the huge boiler presenting a massive frontal look. I have not read anywhere that they suffered unduly from the wear in the Gresley gear which is strange given the fact that it was in the same position as found on the pacifics where the wear is well documented. Lovely pictures chaps.

 

Martin Long

Martin,

 

Unfortunately, with regard to the Bachmann K3 it isn't just a question of dropping correct-sized drivers in, either on the original chassis or by using a replacement. 

 

In order to get some adhesive weight in, the footplate is made of cast mazak, which is a bit thick. There are cut-outs at the top of the drivers, but new (correct-sized) ones foul these. I had to carve a considerable amount away (resulting in a wafer thickness at the footplate's inner edge) and then alter the fixing heights on the replacement chassis (which are dead right for a SE Finecast body) to make sure the Bachmann footplate then sat at the right height. It really was a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul, but it does work.

 

I asked the late Merl Evans why the drivers were too small on the Bachmann K3 (I think they're about 5" to 6" too small in diameter - way beyond what might 'pinch' with regard to the real wheels' tyres being turned down to scrapping size - about 2"? He just told me that is was the only way to ensure the locos would pull and the too-thick footplate was a consequence of that. It's a shame, because the body is really rather good. I also asked him about the omission of the front steps and was told it was in order for the loco to clear trainset curves. I have to say if the bends on a layout are so tight as to mean the loss of things like front footsteps then there's something wrong. However, as I've found with SR locos with huge front steps, they have to be filed wafer thin and fixed too far out. 

 

One thing I didn't mention in my original K3 post was that I fixed the Bachmann K3 motion in forward gear. At best, unaltered, the gear is in reverse and inclined to wobble about. 

 

Finally, what an incredibly inventive set of folk are out there with regard to making K3s. I'd have never entertained some of the methods employed (they're way beyond me!). The main thing is, as I always state, they are personal creations, the products of real modellers prepared to have a go themselves and producing some really ingenious and creditable results. Please, keep it up. 

[Tony Wright]

A quick question around these restaurant car ECS moves. I may possibly be being dense here but I'm failing to understand the one directional nature of the move. What was the restaurant car provision on the down trains and why weren't those cars used for the up return service?

 

David

David,

 

This is off the top off my head and, I hope, someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but the last car on the Down Aberdonian was an RU. It served dinner on the way north (at the time, dinner, to me, was served around the middle of the day and tea was at tea time) but was detached at York. It was then locked and returned in an early morning train to Kings Cross, where, I assume, it was then cleaned and re-stocked at Bounds Green for service in the next northbound Aberdonian. 

 

The Up working had an ex-streamlined pair of catering cars as the first two in the train from Aberdeen to Edinburgh - a BSO and a RSO (with kitchen). I assume they served dinner until travellers had retired for the night. How they got back to Aberdeen, I don't know. 

 

All fascinating stuff. 

[Focalplane]

As one who knows nothing much about anything on the eastern side of the country, is a K3 a third of a dog?  Given all the problems that have to be sorted I am beginning to believe it could be a K9.

 

I am sure someone can come up with a similar sentiment against the LMS?

[Tony Wright]

The only K3 I (think) I ever saw was against the buffer stop at Central Wagon, Ince Wigan ready for the chop around 1962 or so, when I was aged 10. Several were cut up here according to the book "Requiem at Ince" - a sad but informative and well illustrated story of the infamous Wigan scrapyard.

 

Anyway, back around 2006, JUST before Bachmann announced there K3, I had a desire for one. My Bachmann V3 tank had packed up, and I bought her a new chassis unit from Hattons. So I had a spare chassis that didn't work. Looking around, I reckoned a Bachmann V2 loco body could be made into a presentable K3. So with a bit of research and parts from various places here she is, standing on the Leeds - Liverpool canal Bridge at Wigan Central (goods). K3's occasionally got to Wigan Central Goods back in the 50's.

 

DSCF8317rszd.jpg

 

And alongside Lower Ince shed

 

DSCF8319rszd.jpg

 

She has a cut down (rear section removed) Bachmann V2 body, slightly modified unpowered Baccy V3 chassis, hand made dome, Hornby B17 motorised tender chassis and Bachmann V2 tender top, coupled together with a Hornby sprung loco - tender electrical coupling. Suitably weathered, she pulls the fish train on my main layout, and runs fine. Still a little work needed on the cab front windows. I later bought a bachy K3 and was pleasantly surprised by how close my dogs breakfast was to the original, (sorry this pix a bit out of focus)

 

DSCF8315rszd.jpg

 

Brit15

Most ingenious work indeed, and my compliments. 

 

May I make one observation, please? It concerns the cabside numbers on your K3 modification. They should really be true Gill Sans (apart from early BR days). The purity of the Eric Gill number style is very distinctive. 

Edited December 12, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Andy Kirkham]

As one who knows nothing much about anything on the eastern side of the country, is a K3 a third of a dog?  Given all the problems that have to be sorted I am beginning to believe it could be a K9.

 

I am sure someone can come up with a similar sentiment against the LMS?

I sometimes think that the famous "North-South Divide" is actually less profound that the East-West Divide. As resident of Bristol I feel a degree of affinity with Cornwall, Wales, Liverpool, Manchester, the Lake District, Glasgow and the Hebrides, but Kent, Lincolnshire, Tyneside and Fife feel almost as alien to me as Samarkand.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Andy Kirkham

[Clearwater]

Thanks Tony - much appreciated. I can see the logic but to my modern mind, it seems to produce a low stock utilisation rate. I can see why Dr Beeching may have had such workings in his sights. However, it does make for way more interesting train formations!

 

David

[APOLLO]

Most ingenious work indeed, and my compliments. 

 

May I make one observation, please? It concerns the cabside numbers on your K3 modification. They should really be true Gill Sans (apart from early BR days). The purity of the Eric Gill number style is very distinctive. 

 

Thanks for the comments Tony.

 

I made the number together with the black background (but not the lining - that's Bachmann original) on an Excel spreadsheet. The number were cream on the black background, easy to do and trial and error zooming got them the right physical size when printed for the loco. They were printed on thin paper, cut out, edges run round with a black felt pen and glued on the loco, then hidden by weathering. The smoke box number was done this way also. 

 

Just looking at my spreadsheet the nearest match I could find to the original (Gill Sans as you state) was Arial CE Font Size 16. I have changed computers and now use open office, my original sheet works on this though I can't find Arial CE on open office.. I use this method to make signal box & station etc nameplates also.

 

Brit15

Edited December 12, 2016 by APOLLO

[Clive Mortimore]

I sometimes think that the famous "North-South Divide" is actually less profound that the East-West Divide. As resident of Bristol I feel a degree of affinity with Cornwall, Wales, Liverpool, Manchester, the Lake District, Glasgow and the Hebrides, but Kent, Lincolnshire, Tyneside and Fife feel almost as alien to me as Samarkand.

Hi Andy

 

East -West or North-South divide? Surely it is a South East-North West issue because to me anything west of Reading is bandit country, and all civilized people know that once you reach Wellingborough you should be wearing your cloth cap and have your Whippet by your side. :jester:

 

I like all the various ways of modelling a K3 that people have posted. All I done was open a box and one fell on to the track. It will do for now as I have very limited knowledge of steam locos.

[Dr Al]

Good evening Tony.

 

I suspect most of the K3s folks will show you will be OO or larger, so here's something slightly different - K3 in N, I built, painted and decal lined.

 

 

This is a good mix up of parts, comprising:

- Atsocad 3D printed body, detailed with N-Brass locos detail components (buffers, handrails, lamp irons)

- Farish B1 tender chassis

- Farish J39 tender body

- Farish B1 loco chassis and wheels

- Farish Crab eccentric rods and hangers

- Farish GWR Prairie front bogie

- Dapol A4 front wheelset for the bogie

 

It took a bit of warped thinking to come up with using these components to go under Steve's body, but possibly not as much as the K1 I also did, after wondering what to do with a load of B1 parts I had:

 

 

This came from:

- Farish B1 loco body, hacked in half to shorten, cab sides elongated to lengthen cab, front end cut footplate modified to remove continuous section, boiler bands repositioned, and I think I hacked the dome out too and moved it, though I forget now.

- Farish B1 chassis

- Farish standard 3MT tank wheels fitted to the B1 chassis

- B1 coupling rods, Prairie connecting rods, Fairburn eccentrics located in offcuts from Farish Crab hangers

- Farish GWR Prairie front bogie

- Dapol A4 front wheelset for the bogie

- Farish B1 tender (unmodified apart from lining!)

 

 

 

I've no doubt you'll be screaming at me as there are plenty of things not quite right about them, but they hopefully capture the essence of the prototypes in a scale that has little other means of achieving them!

 

Best Regards,
Alan

[Michael Edge]

A somewhat larger K3, this one is 7mm scale built for a customer.

Much of this is nickel silver, the motion and frames etched in .022". The boiler is rolled from brass (because it rolls a lot better) but most of the tender is built from steel shim. This is my usual material for building in this scale, one of the reasons is that it's easy to keep flat.

After painting by Ian Rathbone, the change in the garden background gives an idea of how long one has to wait - and this one was done quite quickly.

[LNER4479]

Thanks Tony - much appreciated. I can see the logic but to my modern mind, it seems to produce a low stock utilisation rate. I can see why Dr Beeching may have had such workings in his sights. However, it does make for way more interesting train formations!

 

David

The East Coast and GN Main Line Carriage Working Notices that we have studied in our research for the Grantham project (and I must record grateful thanks to Robert Carroll for the work done to make these available for such study) reveal just how complex the operational plan was for the services in LNER days - 25 years and a war away from that man with his axe. It seems that nothing was too much trouble to fine tune the formation of each train to match demand (presumably based on recorded traffic levels). The result was that no two trains were alike and many were re-marshalled at the end of the journey to create a different formation for the return run (not to mention the myriad of portions and through coaches that scattered hither and thither). Inevitably, some of these workings ended up with vehicles simply in the 'wrong' place at the end of the day so were returned back to point A on the most convenient service. This was by no means the exclusive reserve of catering vehicles.

 

The other thing to bear in mind with catering vehicles is that, to be operational, they require a crew! Which equals expense. So catering provision was a carefully calculated thing - little point in having a fully manned catering vehicle running around outside normal eating times or on services where there was insufficient custom to warrant it being open. Mind you - there would still have to be a way of getting the catering crew back home wherever possible (to avoid the expense of lodging)...

 

I count myself lucky to have caught the tail end of this in my railway career as I spent a couple of years at coaching stock depots where we still had locomotives hauling trains (perish the thought!). It was all a lot simpler in the 'modern' era, yet we still had four day diagrams and part sets that combined and split en route - and one of these did indeed involve a diagram for a single catering vehicle! Even with much greater simplification, it was still a constant battle to keep the depot's 200-odd vehicles correctly marshalled up and up-to-date with maintenance - goodness only knows how they did it in the 1930s. Formation variations are very easily explained away when you experience the practicality of trying to keep the whole thing hanging together. And as for timetable change weekend when all the formations changed - what an experience that was!

Edited December 13, 2016 by LNER4479

[Mallard60022]

See post #13317 above for the 1961 formation!

 

Chris

Apologies Chris. Brain not functioning correctly at the moment (...."what's different?" I hear the cry).

Phil

[glo41f]

All this info about carriage workings is fascinating. I am particularly intrigued by the "one way" workings of catering vehicles. This must have meant that the crews spent a lot of time riding the cushions to get back to where they started at the end of a run. How did this work?  As I have someone in the family who is involved in catering, I know the amount of preparation required to provide say an evening meal menu. Where was this done? Did the on train crew merely heat up what was prepared earlier?  A further thought is that on the longer journeys, the catering crew may have to do lunch and afternoon teas. Did this involve a crew change?  So many questions.

(In my train travels never could afford the restaurant car .... buffet only for me!)

 

Martin Long

[coachmann]

Thanks Willie,

 

Having written several books and countless articles, I can agree entirely with your points of view. Every time I look through something I've written which has been published there is a metaphorical neon-arrow pulsating away next to something I've got wrong. And, the book in question is an invaluable source of reference, so I have no wish to devalue it in any way. It's just that one of the authors has been quite critical from time to time in the past about models/publications (particularly of/on carriages) and to misidentify several vehicles and types in the book does seem strange. 

 

That said, there is nothing of its equal nor anything so comprehensive on the subject. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony 

It was well known in the circle I mixed in that Bank's couldn't  take being told he was mistaken!

Edited December 13, 2016 by coachmann

[Barry O]

The East Coast and GN Main Line Carriage Working Notices that we have studied in our research for the Grantham project (and I must record grateful thanks to Robert Carroll for the work done to make these available for such study) reveal just how complex the operational plan was for the services in LNER days - 25 years and a war away from that man with his axe. It seems that nothing was too much trouble to fine tune the formation of each train to match demand (presumably based on recorded traffic levels). The result was that no two trains were alike and many were re-marshalled at the end of the journey to create a different formation for the return run (not to mention the myriad of portions and through coaches that scattered hither and thither). Inevitably, some of these workings ended up with vehicles simply in the 'wrong' place at the end of the day so were returned back to point A on the most convenient service. This was by no means the exclusive reserve of catering vehicles.

 

The other thing to bear in mind with catering vehicles is that, to be operational, they require a crew! Which equals expense. So catering provision was a carefully calculated thing - little point in having a fully manned catering vehicle running around outside normal eating times or on services where there was insufficient custom to warrant it being open. Mind you - there would still have to be a way of getting the catering crew back home wherever possible (to avoid the expense of lodging)...

 

I count myself lucky to have caught the tail end of this in my railway career as I spent a couple of years at coaching stock depots where we still had locomotives hauling trains (perish the thought!). It was all a lot simpler in the 'modern' era, yet we still had four day diagrams and part sets that combined and split en route - and one of these did indeed involve a diagram for a single catering vehicle! Even with much greater simplification, it was still a constant battle to keep the depot's 200-odd vehicles correctly marshalled up and up-to-date with maintenance - goodness only knows how they did it in the 1930s. Formation variations are very easily explained away when you experience the practicality of trying to keep the whole thing hanging together. And as for timetable change weekend when all the formations changed - what an experience that was!

Yes and North Fiddle yard and South fiddle yard operators do quite a bit of coach formation shuffling to get the trains correct... well most of the time....

 

Baz

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks Tony - much appreciated. I can see the logic but to my modern mind, it seems to produce a low stock utilisation rate. I can see why Dr Beeching may have had such workings in his sights. However, it does make for way more interesting train formations!

 

David

 

You should have seen our local branch terminus in the 1950s where the carriage sidings could hold c.80 eight wheelers.  Probably 5 or so sidings were full to the brim with coaching stock which was removed and set to work on Summer Saturday services for  just a couple of month's worth of weekends every year - and that was all those coaches ever did, until they were swept away.  And our sidings weren't unique of course.

[Fat Controller]

You should have seen our local branch terminus in the 1950s where the carriage sidings could hold c.80 eight wheelers.  Probably 5 or so sidings were full to the brim with coaching stock which was removed and set to work on Summer Saturday services for  just a couple of month's worth of weekends every year - and that was all those coaches ever did, until they were swept away.  And our sidings weren't unique of course.

And even when those vehicles were out and about, the usage was often not intensive. There was a SO dated service from Swansea to the Bournemouth area in the 1960s, using SR stock; the train would work outwards on Saturday morning, returning in the evening. The stock would then go into Maliphant Sidings until the following Saturday; the whole process repeating every Saturday for about eight weeks.

[Willie Whizz]

Robert,

 

I spoke to Clive Carter at the Warley Show and he wasn't sure when the second volume would be published. We live in hope. 

 

Indeed.  And perhaps it would also be helpful for those of us interested in Volume 2 of the Banks and Carter book to start pressing the publishers too, in case some of the delay or indecision lies at their door.  Although Volume 1 was nominally published by "OPC", that appears to be just an imprint of Ian Allen Publishing Ltd, and there is provision on the latter's website for feedback and comments to be sent.

 

As I've mentioned before, some while back now Volume 2 was listed on Amazon as 'coming soon', showing a cover similar in style to Volume 1 but with an A5 tank engine and train. Then there were reports of delays due to 'illness'; and then to 'more information coming in'.  The latter may in the end be something of a mixed blessing though ... the military and intelligence communities will recognise the problem of "paralysis by analysis", where decisions and actions are endlessly delayed and deferred because tiny nuggets of information keep trickling-in that confirm or deny specific often obscure small points ... and the big picture gets lost, and nothing happens in the end till it's too late or becomes overtaken by other events.

 

On the hypothesis the latter might be a factor here, and given the caveats expressed about Volume 1, perhaps we should therefore be questioning ourselves.  Which would be better: to have Volume 2 available 'now' (i.e. in practice during 2017) and scoring, say, 9/10; or to wait for it to reach 10/10 given that might take till, say, 2020 or even beyond ... and hope that it doesn't get overtaken by other events and never come out at all ...?

 

Some of us are not getting any younger, and personally - on balance - I'd rather have something good and useable despite minor flaws 'now' than wait for 100% perfection - if that were attainable anyway - at a time I may no longer care or be physically able to make use of it any more.  Remember, in another context, radar in 1938 wasn't expected to be 'perfected' till 1942, but they put it into production anyway and in 1940 'good enough' had to be good enough, and was.

[Willie Whizz]

It was well known in the circle I mixed in that Bank's couldn't  take being told he was mistaken!

 

It's the way you tell 'em, though, Coach ...

 

Like any other walk of life, railway modelling has its prima donnas; and one man's 'mistake' is often quite genuinely another man's 'different interpretation'.  Ideally we should all stay calm enough to recognise other points of view; and to accept that - in our hobby more than most - so-called 'facts' are quite often actually 'norms', 'general intentions' or 'company customs' for which there are demonstrable exceptions, and that the rule-books (etc.) were written for the practical guidance of wise men and the slavish obedience of fools.

 

Life isn't always like that though, and personalities do get in the way.  Not every expert is an attractive personality with good inter-personal and communication skills, which doesn't help promote and persuade their case - but doesn't make them wrong either.  Mr Banks would undoubtedly make the same comment as you do about him regarding some members of "the circle (you) mixed in"; and for the interested outsider to such debates it's very difficult to make a judgment who to believe.  The real tragedy in all this is that some people take permanent and mortal offence, and end-up 'taking their bikes home' - for which we're all the poorer in the end.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Willie Whizz

[2750Papyrus]

As I (and others) have said before: it's true the Banks and Carter book is not perfect; but one would have to look long and hard for anything else comparable in focus and scope relating to the LNER and BR (ER) carriage workings and the rationales behind them.

 

And of course any published author (myself included, in a very small way) knows that you can research every conceivable source and appeal for information until you're blue in the face, but sooner or later you either have to say "that'll have to do" and find somebody to actually publish what you have; or else consign your work and knowledge to die with you.  And at that point some ... precious soul ... will come out of the woodwork and say:  "But surely every fool knows it was like this, not like that ..."!

 

Steve Banks has himself published a list of known corrections and additional points on his website:  http://www.steve-banks.org which will address at least some of these points, and he is contactable via it for anyone who has more to suggest.  What I would add is that too many of us seem to  treat the official working books and diagrams as 'gospel'; whereas in many cases they were more in the nature of a 'statement of intent' by the Railway that was often heavily-modified in practice by the amount and nature of the traffic actually offering and the vehicles on hand at the time to service it.  They do not therefore tell the whole story and, as Tony suggests and Banks & Carter would certainly agree, study and interpretation of reliably-captioned photographs (which itself can be another story ...) is essential too.

 

 

On the subject of modern on-train dining, I would have to say the service and quality on Canada's Rocky Mountaineer (Gold Service) , which Lady Whizz and I sampled last year would take an awful lot of beating.  Expensive mind you ... but it was our 40th Wedding Anniversary, so justifiable as a one-off.

 

Glad you enjoyed the Rocky Mountaineer (Gold).  Mrs 2750 and I were booked on it some years ago but were unlucky.  The on-board staff were on strike and were replaced by office staff and then derailment of a freight train meant we were bussed through the most scenic part of the trip!

[2750Papyrus]

As one who knows nothing much about anything on the eastern side of the country, is a K3 a third of a dog?  Given all the problems that have to be sorted I am beginning to believe it could be a K9.

 

I am sure someone can come up with a similar sentiment against the LMS?

 

Are you trying to make us Crabby?

[St Enodoc]

A quick question around these restaurant car ECS moves. I may possibly be being dense here but I'm failing to understand the one directional nature of the move. What was the restaurant car provision on the down trains and why weren't those cars used for the up return service?

 

David

 

David, as I understand it in very simplistic terms, there were many Friday night/Saturday morning Up workings from Penzance and Newquay made up from the previous weekend's Friday night/Saturday morning Down workings, which were stabled all week. The Down workings did not, for the most part, include dining cars (don't ask me why) whereas the Up workings did, hence the Friday ECS (as I understand it, the crews also travelled down on that train).

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

A bit more on WR ECS for you. A list for Friday 3 August 1956 shows:

 

12.05pm (Empty Diners) Paddington to Newquay

Brake Second - Newquay

Kitchen First 304 - Newquay

Dining Saloon 9630 - Newquay

Diner 9579 - Newquay

Brake Second - Newquay

Diner 9563 - Plymouth

Buffet Car 9632 - Paignton

 

Not mentioned previously here (as far as I can see) was:

 

8.40am (Empty Diners) Old Oak Common to Paddington and back (but see notes below)

Kitchen Buffet 9613*

Dining Saloon 9621*

Brake

Diner 9572

Diner 9553

Kitchen First 9615

Diner 9573

Diner 9534

Kitchen First 9614

Diner 9610

Diner 9638

Diner 9540

Brake

 

* These vehicles when stocked to be detached at Paddington and forwarded to West London by a suitable service. (They were at the 'Bristol end' of the train.)

 

I have only ever seen one photo of the 12.05pm ECS train. Such a shame, as it - and the one above -  ran every summer Friday for many years.

 

Hand-written notes in the margin of the sheet I have might have something to do with what Mike (Stationmaster) alluded to. One example was "10.30am, 29/245, Slip 4/28". Perhaps the number of reserved seats?

 

Brian