talisman56

Oh goodie! Guess the Deltic time again! No idea...

My first thought was an ex-LSWR 'Ironclad' but the windows on the end were a bit too high...

I didn't clock the signalling issue in that picture, I was too busy admiring the footbridge architecture...

The only problem is the standard class passengers customers who are in the end remote from the buffet car in the first two can't get refreshments...

J6026 is a 4VEP (Class 423). Otherwise pretty accurate reporting...

It's surprising how much the brain interpolates what one is seeing if one is reading quickly. Mis-spellings and letter substitution or transposition are usually corrected 'in-house' unless one is really looking for actual mistakes. I didn't notice the error until it was pointed out...

Any technical/other reason why these trains need 4 translator/barrier vehicles?

The thirty four-car 458s had a TSOL added from the 460 fleet, making 30 five-car 458/5s. Six further 458/5 units were assembled from the remaining Class 460 vehicles, leaving four driving/luggage coaches, which were stripped for spares and scrapped. In the photos above, 458 530 is an augmented Class 458; 458 532 is a 'new' unit made up from five Class 460 vehicles - the different style/size windows are the giveaway...

Not necessarily the sign, but the Facebook response...

No they haven't - not on the individual coaches, or on the brakes in the set. Which is disappointing, seeing as the BR(S) Green ones had the appropriate set numbering on the ends of the brakes. I don't have any Crimson/Cream ones so can't say if they had any set numbering applied to the BTKs... The BTKs do have spurious seat numbers in the above-window lining, as if they've used the BCK tampo set to apply the lining there...

A bit difficult weaving around those barriers... ...and the perils of a non-ventilated tunnel exposed...

Yes, my earlier comment re the BIG at the front of the train going south, and being left at Eastbourne, applied to my experiences and observations in the early 70s. After I left the area in 1974, things undoubtedly changed. Certainly the headcode did, as I recall the Vic-Hastings being headcode 52 between London and Eastbourne...

I had the same query re the BCK running number on my identical order to yours, but as Rails and Kernow are quoting 6565 and the correct formation for the 3-set I assume it's a Hattons SNAFU...

Having been viewing some Canadian train videos so I know what to expect on our trip to the Rockies later this year, the difference between the BR 'Freightliner' and Canadian National/Pacific 'intermodal' is quite striking

In the early 70s Brighton depot had an allocation of nine BEPs and 19 (later 12) CEPs. The BEPs were usually seen on Mid-Sussex trains, but there were two or three peak services (depending on time of year) Brighton-London (and evening return) which were diagrammed for 12-car C/BEP formations. My notebooks of the time record that most of the Vic-Hastings services were formed with the BIG as the leading unit at the 'country' end.

I am finding this an increasing problem with newer cars with LED 'all-day' lights on the front. After dark, driver gets in, can see where he is going because the lights that illuminate all the time are so bright, and therefore omits to put the proper head- and tail-lights on.

When I was a regular traveller on the Brighton line (early 70s) and you wanted a drink, etc and your train was to Eastbourne/Hastings then you had to walk all the way along the train as the BIG was the front unit of three, being dropped at Eastbourne while the two CIGs wandered along to Ore and back. My usual morning commuter service was formed CEP/BEP/CEP, so we didn't have any problems finding a second class compartment...

I found this hiding in my Pictures>Railways>Prototype folder on my laptop - I've tried to find the original on-line but it doesn't appear to be on RailPictures.net any more so cannot find any background info on it, or indeed post it via a direct website link. I post it with the full copyright info included. It appears to be a display of new locos at English Electric(?), note the Class 20 on accomodation bogies. My interest is the two electrics on the left. Is the AL6 in 'Electric' Blue or the later 'Rail' Blue? If the former then the 'JB' livery is remarkably similar. If in 'Rail' Blue then was the livery originally applied to E6007 onwards 'Rail' Blue as well? Discuss.

There were three or four that had the 'wrap-round' yellow ends. E6012 and E6018 for sure, and I also recall E6015 as one. The 4CIG with 'wrap-round' ends while in Green livery was 7303.

Unlikely. They tried to keep the Maunsell stock in green for as long as possible...

While I'm on here, with the latest Dapol Maunsell offerings in the process of being delivered (the outstanding Olive Green ones should be in late this month), I have updated the Dapol production list and applicability which some of N gauge modellers might have seen on the Dapol Digest forum and which might be of interest here... NB: These are all low-window R4 stock. (Click on image to see readable version )

According to my records, Set 247 was formed in 1933 from previously loose stock, 1929 R4 high-window 6-cpt BTKs 3777/94 and TK 1187 were joined by low-window FK 7212, in service in 1927. The original formation was BTK 3777-TK 1187-FK 7212-BTK 3794. In the June 1951 CWA it was reported to have 1932 high-window CK 5691 in place of the TK and FK. In 1955, CK 5691 was replaced by similar CK 5659. In November 1961, CK 5659 was replaced by Bulleid CK 5881. Unit 247 was disbanded in 1962, the Maunsell brakes being condemned and the Bulleid CK released for further use.

Hattons just got my pre-order for a couple of the 'Meldon Quarry' branded ones. Looking forward to the finished products.

+1 on this. I was given a slip when I last visited my local branch with details of the latest local scams and what they need to get them stopped...

I would be careful on that - they obviously know the numbers to ring to get case-histories for their training... "If you get a funny-pants on the other end of the line who claims that they work for Openreach (or another company), this is what you say..."