Arun Sharma

This seems a very complicated way of asking for the answer to one of this month's crossword clues in the Railway Magazine!

Being pedantic, I might add that the original 1967 Victoria Line stock also appeared [in passenger service] above ground when units were tested in ATO mode on the Woodford-Hainault shuttle service [on the Central Line of course]

Rather interestingly the Oxford Times today has one of its "doom and disaster!" stories regarding the closure of Oxford Station to "most" FGW/Chiltern trains between 7 Jul-22 Jul and 28-29 Jul for engineering/resignalling purposes. However it studiously ignored i.e., didn't mention at all, the two trains per hour in each direction that XC run from Reading and the South Coast to Manchester and the North East through Oxford. It does suggest that Chris Ord [cord@nqo.com] the "journalist" in question has just regurgitated a press release and has possibly never actually been anywhere near Oxford Station. BTW Does anybody know whether NR plans to use this opportunity to put OLE up between Moreton Cutting and Oxford?

You are of course absolutely correct. As long as museums are effectively held to financial ransom by the Heritage Lottery Fund and Arts Council [England], they will require to be driven by an ethos which solely encompasses diversity, inclusivity and accessibility. In practice, if you want money from these bodies [or the Government] then the best way is to put on dumbed down displays for the apparently poor, disaffected, educationally and physically challenged & disenfranchised. This anti-intellectual philosophy means that museums should no longer be regarded as collections and repositories of material for research as that is self-evidently an "elitist" proposition. The net result is that very often graduate curatorial staff can move from one museum to another [on promotion perhaps] without knowing or indeed, caring anything about the exhibits - Increasingly the exhibit knowledge base is held in the skulls of museum volunteers/Friends rather than in the skulls of the curatorial staff. Obviously this is a matter of differing degree in different museums. I say this from personal knowledge being a long-term volunteer in a transport museum.

At #413 Rockershovel said, "I seem to recall that the principal reason that the railways were nationalised in 1948, was that the “Big Four” (and particularly the LNER) had never been able to make the railways pay, and had (partly in consequence) failed to keep pace with overseas developments - particularly electrification. That same “Big Four” has been created in the early 1920s, by Act of Parliament, in significant part to stem the losses suffered by many of the railway companies of the time, and mitigate the wasteful effects of competition." Having just gone through WW1 prior to the Grouping, and again WW2 just prior to nationalisation, during the course of both wars the railways were run into the ground by the governments of the day with limited funds and [minimal downtime] for maintenance and stock replacement as well as tardy payments for services to Government, it is hardly surprising that the railway companies found it difficult to make ends meet. Secondly, whilst there was certainly competition [which latter day armchair economists might define as "route duplication"], the existence of such routes was essential during the two wars given the increased troop and freight loadings as well as the likelihood of any route being selected at no-notice for "redevelopment" by the Hermann Goering school of Town and Country Planning. None of that is to say that the Grouping and de-facto subsequent Nationalisation of LT in 1933 and BR in 1948 weren't required but the Govts of the day might uncharitably be described as kicking the companies whilst they were down.

As a resident of the area in question, I am inclined to despair regarding the inability of the VWHDC to take a decision. I am also inclined to ask myself, "What would IKB have done?" in the event of him determining one of his design structures being no longer being fit for purpose. With the increasing housing being built in southern Abingdon and Drayton, much newly generated traffic now tends to head south through Steventon [and over this steep bridge rather than northwards through Abingdon] to join the A34. This avoids the peak hour jam of southbound traffic leaving the A34 and going to the new housing and industrial estates between the A34 and Didcot town centre. Essentially the local councils have authorised infill close to the A34 and are appalled that they will be publically discovered to have made insufficient allowance for vehicle movement. In any event, the road element of IKB's bridge at Steventon will sooner or later be unfit for purpose and will provide yet another reason for its replacement.

Post #450 is interesting. Not many 9Fs had AWS fitted but amongst the few that did, were all the pump-fitted Tyne Dock ones. The AWS bang plate was also a much more rectangular version than the type fitted to other standards [indeed other locos]. The extra small link in the standard 9F coupling i.e., the same as found on Bulleid pacifics and some other SR classes also shows up rather well.

SR man and Titan At present the plan is simply to produce in 7mm scale the two cars of the 309/1 stock i.e., DMBSK and BDTS. However, I do have [probably] enough information to produce BDTC and MBSK cars as well. I haven't studied enough underframe photographs of the AM9 griddle cars [ as opposed to the Mk1 griddle cars that operated with loco hauled trains and described in Mr Parkin's masterpiece] to know whether I can do justice to these. If I can dig out some more pics [mainly underframe boxes] then a full 6-car Clacton segment unit is a real possibility. The same applies to the trailer in the 4-car Walton segment. An 0gauge 10 car unit in maroon would be something to see! There again, as the 2D and 3D design work is all computer-based, scaling down to 4mm scale as well is not outside the bounds of possibility. Many thanks for the Bluebell pages - very helpful.

Anyone who has ever sailed into Jebel Ali, Dharan or Dubai will have smelt the antipodean sheep transporters from several boat lengths away. The animals are being transported so that they can be killed "Halal-style" - hence the unstated message that to object can be construed [by some] in some way as an objection to certain "religious" practices and by extension, to certain religions as well.

Thank you both for that. SRman - I'm not familiar with the "Trojan" pattern - are there any pictures of that available?

I am looking for information on what sort/pattern/colour of seat moquette was used in the AM9/Class 309 when first introduced in the early60s. As they were the first 100mph multiple units, I had an idea that there may well have been contemporary Eastern Region publicity blurb produced showing the interior or perhaps even a BTF film showing the new units which may well have had interior shots. It's possible of course that they might have just used the Mk1 coach moquette in common use at the time - Anyone any ideas?

Not wholly so. To get foreign currency, the Govt of the day banned the use of "best welsh steaming coal" by BR. It was for export only. Hence the need for the Standard classes and the later LNER pacifics to have larger fire grates so that they could make useful amounts of steam using poorer quality coal.

Clive - Attached are side views of the 8ft9in power bogie from MBSK and an ordinary trailer 8ft 6in bogie from a DTC. Note the lack of ribbing on the compensation beam on the 8ft9in bogie.

Thanks Clive - The motor bogies also have these rather interesting devices tacked onto the four corners as well as having different cross members.

I now have close up pics and measurements of all the bits under the solebars of the class 309 BDTC, MBSK and DTC so in a week or so, I should have them all drawn in 3D. What I found especially interesting are the subtle [but visible] differences between the 8ft6WB trailer Commonwealth bogie and the 8ft9in WB Commonwealth power bogie under the MBSK [and presumably DMBSK on the 309/1]. I think I'm going to have to produce my own 7mm versions of these cosmetic bogie frames.

I had the opportunity to measure one of these switches and a 3D drawing [to be followed idc by a 7mm scale print] is attached. Some bits still need to be added of course.

and Didcot-Weybridge via Ascot

So putting that into today's terms, that would be asking purchasers of a Black 5 to cough up 100x the late '60s purchase price say, £350,000. I can't think of many groups of late teens/twenty year olds who could organise rustling up that much money legally these days.

You may well be correct in that the spec is wrong. I don't know about railways [or your TOC or Network Rail] but both the aviation and maritime safety regulators have confidential human factors reporting chains interested in [indeed, fascinated by] "near misses" of any description. If you have any reason to think that, as an expert user, there is a potential accident waiting to happen, you have both an opportunity and a duty to report it to [i assume] HMRI or RSSB or whoever- anonymously if need be. And nobody can fob you off [poor english, but you get the point].

Does anybody know what the cost of a house [say, 3bed semi in a major city] would have been in the 1965-68 period just so that we can put a £3000 asking price for a Black 5 into perspective?

MORILL was and still is a very useful reference source. It was of a time when editors realised that some/many/most/all* modellers wanted detail close-up prototype photographs as well as clear well-executed drawings. Iain's successor journal "Rail Model Digest" was cast in a very similar mould but sadly only lasted for seven issues. *delete as per your personal beliefs

The Atlantic softback book "The Colour of Steam" Vol6, The LMS Pacifics by Derek Huntriss [1988] has pics of all the LMS pacifics. As far as the BR orange lining goes, there is a superb picture of 46226 [27 May 59] wearing it whilst in maroon.

Thank you Titan - An informative and useful post [#15] which explains why the equipment survives to this day.

Yes, Thanks for that Andi - I saw some of that on the Rail 80 photo website pics. It is surprising that even though by ?1964-5 the GE main line was no longer using 6.25kV, that these vehicles retained the switch capability. Indeed even the two units that survived to go into departmental stock at Old Dalby still retained that switch. I suspect that, since 6.25 divides quite neatly into 25, the switch was also part of the series-parallel switching system to increase/reduce power rather than just a system for accepting different OHLE source voltages.

Thanks Andi - Seriously useful. I can see some serious 3D drawing sessions coming. These also incidentally confirm the presence of the MBSK's main transformer in its expected position adjacent to the switch but inboard -i.e., in the midline of the vehicle underframe. Some of that visible [lateral] pipework will belong to the oil cooling system for the main transformer and some will be for the switch. They had separate radiators as it seems not a good thing for the two lots of coolant to mix. PS - The prize winning cats are also rather impressive.