Miss Prism

1 hour ago, Brassey said:

Thanks Miss P. A lot of belpaires there.  I prefer a roundtop myself on these.  Note the Armstrong smokebox door.  Bigger and less dished than the Dean:

If I had more roundtop pics, I would have included some. I was surprised, and had remarked to Mikkel earlier in a PM, on how early the Armstrong Goods started to get Belpaires.

Thanks for pointing out the style of the Armstrong smokebox door - I hadn't noticed that before. It seems the locos, or most of them, got Dean doors at a very early stage.

38 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

Thanks for posting that, I first saw it some time ago and decided that if I were ever to build a diorama, this would be it! But I've forgotten where the photo is featured (ie what source). Any hints?

It's given in a couple of views on the Warwickshire railways site:

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrls2086.htm

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrls2086b.htm

I sent Mike Musson a note a long time ago advising that the loco was not 'a Dean Goods', so maybe I need to remind him.

Quote

I now have to ask a question that has been a bit foggy in my mind: Is there a relationship between superheating and chimney position? 

Generally yes, but it's deceptive. Chimney to the rear of the smokebox = saturated. chimney to the front of a smokebox = superheated. (The forward position was necessary for the blastpipe exhaust to clear the superheater headers.)

However, as I pointed out on the gwr.org panniers page, a forward position doesn't mean that superheater elements are present or have ever been present. The Collett panniers had chimneys in the forward position, but none of them were ever superheated.

Coincidentally, http://www.gwr.org.uk/armstrong-goods.html

Plate 423 of the bible. An 1888 official ex-works pic of a P5 ballast wagon. The body and the running gear are different colours.

T9s were regulars on the DN&S, but what 30120 is doing at that end of the station I'm not sure, unless it is turning itself around on the Didcot triangle (rather complex compared to taking a visit to the shed).

The continental wagons are a mystery.

The Provender wagons are a bit of an anomaly, few in number, so they could not have been regarded as much of a success, otherwise a lot more of them would have been made. The vast majority of hay was transported in normal opens.

Lots of good things to savour in this blog. I will return later for a lazier read.

What is 'AMMO' ?

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Would there be any effort to make or keep a branch set with all gas or all oil lamps - from the point of view of economy?

Good question, and one could argue it either way. Things carrying passengers got converted to gas at a fairly early stage, so that would mean a branch set would need access to a gas tank, and it would make sense for anything working regularly with a branch set, like a PBV, to be gas-fitted as well.

It's difficult to predict when oil to gas conversions took place, and some V diagram vehicles kept their oil pots until a fairly late stage.

I like the floating track!

Yes, thanks Mikkel.

Ah, I think I have a copy of those Signal Department painting instructions somewhere, but it will take some finding.

Great stuff - the view through the bridge arches is excellent.

One thing that did jump out at me was the colour of the point rodding. It seems too 'pink'. Yes, rodding got rusty (although stained with oil at the moving bits) but was usually a dark rust - more brown. And rarely a homogenous colour.

Marvellous images - I've seen them before, but was unaware embedding was permitted. (I guess that's Getty Images way of accepting they never really owned the picture copyright in the first place!)

Just a thought though - what would be the point of weighing a cart with stacked up cases on it (whose contents would be known in the cartage instructions)?

A nice green.

Sorry if I missed it, but how is the nylon hornguide attached to the inside face of the frame?

Despite my reservation about the raising of the upper yard, the height difference doesn't seem that much in practice, particularly in side-on view, and the best aspect is the great feeling of spaciousness in the final picture.

12 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

the sandbox fillers should be out of sight underneath the transverse wooden bench?

Yes I think so. The seats are individual, in the corners, on the early AA3s, and only later became the standard 'cross-bench'.

24 minutes ago, sumo said:

So key question, is this the same font as used on wagons for the G W? 

No it's too bold and too condensed

The wagon G and W was never an actual font. Those letters were, I believe, on a drawing, from which transfers were made.

Interesting indeed. It's important to note these modern computer fonts are only approximations of the originals, and I feel this one is a tiny bit too 'bold'. and the G is the wrong shape

20 hours ago, sumo said:

Would someone be willing to email me the GWR Nameboards.ttf file?

Can't PM ttf files on RMweb. I've sent you an alternative download target.

Super-looking tender, but, hells bells, it's another variation of features that I had not seen before - suspension links above shackles fixed to prominent J-hangers! (And seemingly untypical for a Waverley?)

Goes to prove how much development was going on in tender underframes, even as far back as c 1860.

Note the big coal lumps acting as fenders. I wonder how much stayed onboard through point and crossing work!

Paddington stables, 1936

Nice.

I'm glad it wasn't pitprops - Sherton Abbas doesn't strike me as coal mining territory...