Ken.W

Thank you Tony for your kind comments. Both Andy and myself throughly enjoyed our visit, and the privilege of being able to operate your great layout. It was fine, just a few small errors, not really operating incompetence on your part, and after all, you were doing two jobs, the fiddle yard and main panel, while also talking with us at the same time. There's a bit of a story to the Buffet car conversions. I'd built an Isinglass D27 Open Third / Diner kit which I'd got when these first appeared, then, needing more Tourist Open Thirds, which wernt then available, got a second kit intending do a conversion. Then, following a request, Andy Edgson at Isinglass made a TTO kit available (closely followed by the long awaited re-introduction of ex-Kirk kits). So, what to do now with the extra D27? Well, I'd read in 'LNER Carriages' that one D27 TO was converted to a Buffet in 1933 when the LNER were experimenting with the concept. Then a diagram was found on Steve Banks' website which showed the necessary changes, panelling in 3½ windows and new interior layout. So, the resulting model of a one-off vehicle. My mate Andy, liking my model, then did a similar conversion himself, using a Kirk Open Third, and in his usual impressive rendition of LNER teak, so now two versions of a unique vehicle, lol. The 12-wheeled full kitchen, another unusual vehicle, though there were three of these, which were converted mid-30s from redundant ex-GNR Composite Restaurant Cars. Again, from an Isinglass kit, but this time as intended. The steel-panelled BG also has a bit of a story. A Kirk kit, it's sides were donated to make the correct pattern brake compartment of a BT-CL Twin set l was converting from Kirk kits (5 in total). The BG kit was resurrected with a pair of Comet brass sides for the steel-panelled version, which l happened to have! Partly visible behind it, yes just the old Bachmann Thompson SK, but as can just be seen, running on 'Fox' bogies (Isinglass) which, from a photo I've seen, bear very close resemblance to the 'Metro' bogies fitted to the first batch of these. It's original bogies were donated to the Buffet car above. The pair of Gresley suburban CLs. The right hand one's a Hornby model of a standard D50 teak panelled coach. On the left, a steel panelled version, again from an Isinglass kit. Note the coupling between them, screw coupling, and with the brake pipes connected! As nicely detailed as modern models are, as a (now former) Driver it's something of an anathema to see a passenger train running with the vacuum pipes neatly stowed on their dummy plugs, particularly on non-corridor stock where its very visible. It is, of course, a bit of a cheat, as shown here... It's all on one coach end, the screw couplings soldered rigid, and it's tommy-bar acts as the hook over the goalpost wire on the next vehicle I've heard that as rebuilt those engines 'couldn't do', at least what they were intended for, hence their rapid banishment south of the Border. Thank you, yes that 12- wheeler full kitchen does make for an impressive and unusual model. As a 65 footer, l knickname it the beast. Although of course, in its original GNR splendour, it would be a RC. A kit for the original version's also available. PS, the usual disclaimer, no connection with Isinglass other than a satisfied customer

Thanks, an interesting photo on two counts Firstly, in relation to this thread, as l suspected would generally be the case, the grouping of ex-GW & LMS coaches together in a separate section from the others, meaning only one adapter- fitted vehicle was required. Secondly, it's the Paington to Newcastle, ie a Down train, on the Up Fast, so wrong line Pilotman working in force for some reason.... and the date of August 67 puts it shortly after the incident involving DP2 just North of there

Good point there, edited accordingly. I should have known that one, plenty exNER engines had steam reverse too!

Hi, the easy way to tell, for any loco; The reversing lever and rod gear, and, if vacuum fitted the ejector pipe (the one along the boiler side from cab to smokebox) near handrail, are on the drivers side

Yes, apparently from what I've read of this matter, the water tube boiler didn't take kindly to being battered about running around the railway However, one surprising aspect of the story which l recently came across... The water tube boiler actually out-lived the loco by around 5 years It survived as a stationary boiler at Darlington loco works until 1964, used for high pressure testing of boilers The rebuilt W1 having been withdrawn June '59

With the LNER vans it was the drop-down racks which designated them as being pigeon vans.. As well as the 4-wheel BY, they also had bogie BG pigeon vans.

Nope, it got up to 125 after we cleared the PSR over the fens

Nah, it's going to the pheasants Another encounter l had with one, back in InterCity days with an HST, non-stop through Peterborough and going over the fens south of there... Pheasant takes off out of 4ft in right in front of us at 105mph, dead centre of windscreen... Took 10 miles to wash it off

Two different systems to consider here All trains I've dealt with that have centrally controlled power operated doors do have an Interlock of some sort, power, brake, or both The CDL system as retro- fitted to slam-door stock is a secondary locking system and is not interlocked, AFAIK, on any stock. EG, 91/Mk4 has Interlock on both power and brake. Traction power can't be obtained without Interlock, but in addition, if interlocks lost above 3mph the brakes dumped. On the HST, we had no interlock with the CDL, nor any indication in the Cab.

Perhaps a bit more info on this one, even a level crossing there for a tenuous claim to getting back on topic. 91/Mk4 set, DVT leading, approaching Doncaster in the Bentley area, so was probably at 125. The pheasant attempted take off out the 4ft just ahead of me, but hit right on the ATP isolating cock, forcing its handle back against the buffer beam and opening the cock. It must, l think, have known our Defensive Driving Policy, as it dumped the brake on me at just the right place to bring us to a stand a loco length from the signal protecting Arksey Level Crossing. This was fortunate as the signaller was then able to reset the signal and re-open the crossing while we waited for the Doncaster fitter to come out to free the cock handle which was very firmly wedged against the buffer beam. He didn't have far to come though, on the first available northbound, for those who don't know the location, this is the signal where we get the double yellow when getting cautioned for the turnout into the platform at Doncaster.

Nothing you could do about it anyway, by time you stopped you're anything up to a mile and a half away. A different matter with large animals though, as its a possible obstruction so need to stop to protect the line. I did once though get stopped by a pheasant!

Well, at least it suits them

I remember hearing of the same thing happening at Falloden LC No footbridge though, this is the ECML in rural Northumberland Dog walker stopped at lowered barriers, so slipped end of lead on end of barrier, train goes past..... At the time, this was an AHB crossing.....

I sometimes wonder whether we still do

That's Interesting. So, if SETG are going to be able to fit CDL to 60 doors on just a 4 car set, just what is WCRs problem with fitting it to just 48 doors on 12 cars?

I find that funny that they class Tyne & Wear Metrocars as Mk1 stock

Corrected that for you. (My bold) I'm am, of course, very familiar with that crossing. It still is a private crossing, being an occupation crossing with user-worked barriers, for access to the cottages and farm on the side your photos taken from. As can be seen in the photo in the linked NR notice the 'road' immediately becomes an unmade track on that side of the line. You're correct that linespeed, on the Fast lines (the two centre ones), is 125mph, the Slow lines are 80. Current status? Was still the same when l retired around 4 years ago, happy to see it's probably going.

Indeed. Aren't Off Peak Tickets regulated fairs? Which, AIUI, means that any change to them can only come from higher up

That would be the best solution to this situation Just let those imbeciles at WCR get themselves banned (as they should have been years ago) and allow others who are willing to comply with the regulations take their place

Reminds me of an incident l had when we used to run through to Glasgow, so probably GNER days. At about 80, approaching Curriehill going round a blind left hand bend into a cutting, no visible track ahead, just a whole flock of sheep. Brake to emergency and leaning on the horn. Came to a stand, just missing the OH neutral section with the 91, did the necessary and continued to Glasgow. On arrival, was told 8 of them were killed On getting back to Newcastle had to go upstairs for a debrief with the duty Driver Manager..... Mr. Wooley

Yes safety is paramount, someone needs to get that through to WCR, and they are a mainline operation. They did have an exemption in place for the Jacobite, with provisions in place to ensure safety - which they were found to not be observing, not once, but twice in the space of a month. The first got them an improvement order, being caught again after just a month earned a prohibition. Don't forget, they'd also previously had two open door on moving train incidents, luckily without injury, or worse. So, as for your last point, what's that got to do with it? There's already been more than enough incidents of deaths and injury with hinged door stock (hence CDL in the first place), so why do we need to wait for such an incident on that particular train to do something about that one? I find WCRs attitude to this, failing to comply with the provisions for the exemption to CDL, and continued refusal to its fitment rather disturbing given their past record, and leads me to wonder what else they may be failing to observe. At Wooton Bassett, one of their trains came within 30 seconds of a high speed head on with an HST which would undoubtedly resulted in a major casuallty toll, the outcry from which could well have had all heritage mainline operation shut down. Although it was the driver responsible for isolating to override a TPWS application, it was the company's safety management culture (ie lack of) which permitted it to happen, no driver on a properly managed company would ever consider such a thing. Someone earlier made reference to cowboys in relation to WCRC, sorry, but that's a gross insult.... To cowboys. Personally I'd need to think twice before allowing them to run a Hornby trainset

The LNER Tyneside stock apparently didn't have any interlocking, there's been previous references to them frequently running with the doors open in hot weather. On the LNERs GE & Hadfield stock, it was a certain Austrian Corporal responsible for the delay in their introduction

Not quite so simple unfortunately. It seems that the locos WCR have for the Jacobite are vacuum only, if spare CDL fitted vacuum stack is available for hire then yes, no problem However the problem seems to be that any available CDL fitted stock, including some that WCR apparently have, is air braked. Although it is possible for an air braked only loco to work a vacuum braked train with a dual braked loco between as a sort of translator, it does not work the other way round. On a dual braked loco working in vacuum mode, it's the air train pipe pressure that governs the vacuum via a relay valve in the engine room, the drivers brake valve being purely an air brake valve apart from in the emergency position. The relay valve would still work the same way with the air train pipe pressure being reduced by another loco, but doesn't work the other way with vacuum controlling air. Another issue, that seems to have been missed, in the pictures posted earlier of WCR's CDL fitted stock which were air braked, is they were also air conditioned stock. This means that having no ventilators, they'd be required to have an ETH supply. Although this is easily solved by having a diesel loco or generator van on the train this causes a further problem as, l believe, the train is already up to the load / length limit for the route. So, this additional vehicle couldn't be added without removal of a passenger one, significantly reducing capacity.

From what I've read of WCR, they could probably still manage to fall foul of the regulations even with these

The other version of that quote is; Remember, lad, all those rules are written in blood