Ken.W

Hi Jools

I did appreciate you were just quoting what you'd been told.

Just that I was never aware (as secondman) of them being said to be borderline on fuel for Kings X - Edinburgh, which is longer than a return Leeds and often on overnights with much heavier loads

Steel paneled LNER coaches, corridor as well as non-corridor stock, started to appear from 1935, and the last teak paneled non-corridors were built in 1938, apart from some twin artic thirds built in 1940.

The gangwayed steel paneled stock was somewhat more limited though. Besides, notably, the streamlined stock, there was some 5-coach sets for secondary GN and GC section workings which had a pair of BTK+TK twins with a CK between, and also some BGs

These were all steel paneled but still with timber body framing, as was standard for most pre-Mk1 stock.

Interestingly, in 1927 a batch of BGs which were used on ECML services, and a batch of Corridor Open Thirds, were built with all steel construction. These are easily distinguished from teak or steel paneled stock in having no underframe trussing.

In LNER days, apart of course from the steamliners, all these were painted in a teak finish

Ref; LNER Carriages Harris

14 hours ago, jools1959 said:

When I worked on the London Underground in the early 80’s, we had a ex KX driver who told us that the Class 55’s had a “eye watering” fuel consumption.  If they did a KX - Leeds return, by the time it arrived at Kings Cross, it was basically on fumes.

Sounds a bit of an exaggeration tbh

At that rate, from Kings X, they wouldn't have made it to Edinburgh!

On 02/07/2020 at 21:31, keefer said:

IOnce the HSTs were in service Deltics worked to Aberdeen regularly, although the usual practice for KX-Abdn trains was to swap Deltics at Edinburgh. The fresh Deltic would then work Edin-Abdn and return, while the other would go off to Haymarket.

The HSTs on the other hand, would comfortably do 1,000+ miles a day without refueling.

One turn in particular that I remember, from the year before the 91s came in;

We'd take over the first train of the morning off Edinburgh at Newcastle, working through to arrive in Kings X  shortly before 11.00.

After our break, we were booked for the same set, which had remained in the platform for this time, back to Newcastle on the 12.00.

Yes, that's right, 12.00... the Inverness

So the day's booked working for the set was Edinburgh - Kings X - Inverness, without refueling.

3 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

I believe that the anchor signifies that it is fitted with the necessary holding-down points etc for use on a train ferry. Not all UIC standards dictate compatibility with a train ferry so far as I know.

Yes sorry, I meant in reference to train ferrys as the subject of this thread

On 05/01/2010 at 13:39, BrushVeteran said:

 Whilst on this subject I am contemplating building a Gresley/GNR inspection saloon as it ended up DE340042 in 1963 period. Did this last until the blue era. I'm sure that I have come across a view of it on the High Dyke branch when Flying Scotsman and Pendennis Castle were on the line. I believe it was built in 1909 as Dia.10 43178 (3178) but may have this wrong.I hope it is still in preservation. Anyway any info on this would be most welcome and sorry to go off subject... slightly!

On 05/01/2010 at 15:44, DaveF said:

Hi Grahame,

 

Do you mean this photo?

 

 

 

Sewstern D2381 Gresley inspection saloon SECR Pullmans Oct 73

 

Sory if it's a bit off topic, but it is a Gresley coach.

 

David

Thought I recognised it.

Yes, it is live and well, and operational for party bookings since 2005, usually attached to the teak set, on the North Yorkshire Moors Railway

http://www.lnerca.org/home/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/43087_08-19.pdf

4 hours ago, Jack Benson said:

Is there a common UIC type?

I believe the anchor symbol, top left, signifies conforms to the UIC standard

1 hour ago, Trainshed Terry said:

 

Why not change the title to " Sorry server has thrown it toys out of pram!"

 

Hat coat and running for exit.

Or, "Sql has gone away, looking for it in Barnard Castle"

Seriously though, thanks very much Andy, sounds like a hard and frustrating night

Was there trouble with the site last night?

I started to keep getting this error again;

Not sure if was my connection or a local issue though, as also had trouble with some other sites, but not all.

On 28/11/2019 at 19:53, gordon s said:

At Newcastle locos coming off the train there would go straight to Gateshead depot, or. on terminating trains would usually take the stock to Heaton and then proceed light back to Gateshead.

Locos arriving onto Gateshead would do so direct to the 'Daily Shed' (fuel point). There they would all, as a matter of course, be fueled and, if boiler fitted, also watered.

The daily shed staff had no knowledge of what the loco's next working would be.

On 28/06/2020 at 21:56, Artless Bodger said:

Easter vac 1976, I was on a geology field course, based in Torquay. Crossing the railway line on the way to Paignton and beyond I saw a Gresley (?) catering vehicle on a train passing underneath, I recall nothing else about the train except it was in blue / grey and had the square paneling immediately making me think 'LNER'. Would this have been on an excursion train? Though I'm pretty sure this would have been mid-week, so at that time of year excursion seems a bit unlikely. No camera of course

As this was mid-week then I'd think most likely a service train.

It was used around that time, as has been suggested above, on cross country (or NE/SW as then known) trains.

I remember, sometime mid-70s coming across it at Darlington, having traveled from Newcastle on the service train it was in, and being confused, at that time, by the 'W' number. It seems from previous posts that was the only Western allocated one.

11 hours ago, 62613 said:

Is that even a catering vehicle? Lovely film; one of those where you're listening to the music and watching the trains going by.

 

8 hours ago, Bucoops said:

 

It looks like there is wording in roughly the middle upper waist panel, and two adjacent whited out windows so I think it is yes.

Yes, definitely a Gresley Buffet...

The legend can be seen mid-way along, and the two white windows beyond the far end door.

It's the side opposite the counter/pantry

13 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

South Eastern Finecast have the glazing kit. Ref SF29.

 

Others here will be better qualified than me for the other detailed prototype info. Robert Carroll in particular.

 

I think that some Mk1 sleepers received BR5 bogies before repaint to blue grey. So that would be three livery possibilities: Maroon, Blue/Grey, InterCity.

 

For modelling purposes, you presumably don't want that much detail on the interior. But, then again, if you can do it in 3D print why not? Include the beds, sink etc. The partitions were between each pair of windows that are close together on the compartment side. The bed therefore not intruding on the window. Compartments could be configured with one bed or two (bunks). I think that the sink (and cupboard for pot) were under the window.

Almost, the compartment partitions were mid-way between each window.

All had the same body design. First class compartments had a single bed, Second class a twin bunk, both to the plain wall side of the compartment, top bunk frame roughly level with the bar of window vent and ladder in the middle. The sink was in the corner under the window, quadrant shaped and with a lid that looks like would double as a table. A large rectangular mirror was mid-way on the wall opposite the beds. The attendants compartment was the non-toilet end one.

Compartment windows had horizontally sliding shutters.

There's good pictures in the Parkin Mk1 book if you can access a copy.

3 hours ago, Gwiwer said:

Hornby sleeping cars never had interior detail.  The thinking perhaps being "Why?  It adds to cost and cannot be easily seen"  

 

They only ever carried maroon or blue/grey livery.  The Mk1 sleeper fleet was entirely replaced some years before IC livery appeared.  

Agree it probably was a case of 'Why?' The most you would normally see of a sleeper interior would be either the corridor wall, or the window shutters, depending on which side.

Sounds right on liveries, they didn't first appear until after Crimson/Cream had ceased, and their Mk3 replacements appeared in Blue/Grey

7 minutes ago, lanchester said:

Of course, I've mislead myself. GE etc were of course originally 1500V DC, but on conversion to AC the 6.25 kV system was used as the standard for suburban areas on safety grounds which subsequently proved unnecessary - presumably the lower voltage was still reasonably fatal. Units were dual voltage.

As I understand it, on the GE lines on conversion to AC, the 25kV was standard and 6.25kV was used in certain sections, particularly into Liverpool St., where overhead bridge clearances were inadequate.

Getting back to lamp irons, the changes on LNER Pacifics had more to do with the BR numberplates than OHL.

The numberplates were originally fitted above the handrail, which resulted in the top lamp iron position being raised. This resulted in train headboards protruding above the smokebox, almost to the top of the chimney, and the resulting air turbulence around the chimney was found to cause problems with smoke clearance. Therefore a start was made from 1953 (so before OHL was of any concern) to fit the numberplate over the top hinge strap and the lamp iron revert to the original position. This change was to affect the Pacifics (except A4), the B1s, and V2s.

A further change occurred in 1962. The problem was exacerbated on the A3s, which hadn't been altered, when trough type deflectors were fitted. Two were modified as above, but then a change was made to the split handrail arrangement with the lamp iron between. This modification only seems to have affected locos shopped in '62, and Pacifics of other classes were also affected, including 60532 - so 4 years before it was withdrawn.

The pictures of 60532 posted above show the two lowered arrangements.

[Ref: RCTS Pt.2A]

3 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Even if you take out Woodhead, the GER section was 25KV. They were also the first to get the "flashes" attached.

 

No, the GE lines were also 1500vDC originally , converted to 25KvAC in early '60s

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Ahrons: "An old friend of mine wrote a letter many years ago to one of the technical journals to the following effect:

1. London and North Western Railway, Tebay dep. 9.48, Preston arr. 10.55, 53 miles, speed 47.4 mph
2. London Brighton and South Coast Railway, London dep. 5.0, Brighton arr. 6.05, 50.5 miles, speed 46.6 mph.

The first is a fish and meat train from Carlisle to London, and the other is the fastest and most wonderful of the Brighton expresses, first class only at rather dear fares. Moral: it is better to be a dead mackerel on the North-Western than a first-class passenger on the London Brighton and South Coast... "

[E.L. Ahrons, Locomotive and Train Working in the Latter Part of the Nineteenth Century Vol. 5 (Heffer, 1953; reprinted from Railway Magazine, 1919).]

Funny, although he does totally miss the point that, due to their nature, perishables trains, and fish in particular, usually had priority as expresses.

I've a 1960 Freight Trains WTT for the NE Region Main Line, the Aberdeen - KGX Fish have the instruction;

"Takes precedence over all trains except East Coast passenger trains"

So, even had priority over passenger trains other than the East Coast expresses, and the East Coast fish were, famously, regularly afforded 'Pacific' haulage.

The Aberdeen - KGX Meat also had the same instruction.

On the topic of traffic levels, there was two daily Aberdeen - KGX fish trains.

From a previous post, I note the LNW were carrying fish in open trucks. This presumably ensured no signalman would keep them hanging around at his box

I read recently in another thread on here that it was found to be unsuitable / in too poor condition

12 hours ago, keefer said:

, if it was left on too long it would start attacking the paint finish - hence all those pics of diesel-hydraulics whose paint seemed to be being removed one layer at a time.

8 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Mike makes the important point about how long the Exmover was left to "pickle" Carriage washers were designed so you ran the train through, at 3 mph, 

      Later installations tried to have sequential acid and rinse in separate plants - but how much length does your yard need to do that? Rather more than 3 x 12-cars! And we think we have space limitations to cope with!

The old wash plant at Heaton (at least the 1970s depot rebuild one) had two separate stages for wash and rinse around just over a train length apart.

The cabs of the 08 pilots used to leak like sieves, so the technique was to stop with the rear of the last coach just through the wash leaving the cab just outside (we were propelling through), and wait till the wash stopped before going through.

This meant of course, that the engine bay of the pilot got a rather unhealthy dose of Exmover, the regular pilots there seemed to be fading from blue back to green!

Seemed as though it was somewhat unhealthy stuff

The new plant there installed in more recent years is a single  unit for wash and rinse

If Exmover was used on modern trains it would probably wash the vinyls off!!

9 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Yes there is a LOT of unexploded ordnance scattered around the Light Pacifics in particular .....

Not just those

In my loco collection I've 12 A3s and no two are the same...

and I only cover the 1957-64 period!

Hornby have recently announced an A2/2 model

Out of a class of just 6 locos, the 2 models as being released are only suitable for three of them, and even thats with some minor differences for one, and not suitable for any from being rebuilt from P2s in '43/'44 prior to '51 for one model, and '57 for the other.

Then there's my three J39s with, yes, three different tenders (and that's not all the varieties).

18 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

It has just been announced on Radio 3 that today is International Level Crossing Awareness Day.

I am sure you wanted to know that!

Jonathan

So motorists only needed to be aware of level crossings yesterday?

Gateshead, NER; W Worsdell's X Class 3-cyl 4-8-0T Nos. 1350-1359 of 1909, the last 4 completed 1910. (LNER T1)

These, interestingly, had the three cylinders and valve chests in a single casting.

Due to lack of space for expansion all new construction was subsequently concentrated at Darlington works

9 hours ago, spamcan61 said:

Ah right that's why my irony meter bent its needle on the end stop.

And my irony meter burnt out...

It must have been some relation of his  J94

For inflammable products, Class A, then yes barrier vehicles, I believe two, are required, both between the tanks and loco, and also the guards van - don't forget it contains the guard's stove, as well as having paraffin lamps hung on the back of it! Also, if in a mixed goods train then barrier vehicles would also be required between the tanks and any vehicles carrying the likes of steel pipes or girders. Certain classes of dangerous goods were also required to socially distance from each other.

On a delivery destination for your tanks, the yard at Hexham had a fuel distribution depot. As I recall, this was more like a private siding adjacent to, and accessed off, the yard, but fully fenced off with high wire mesh and gated. As 101 has said, reach wagons would probably be used to place and retrieve the tanks, as the loco would not be allowed to encroach within the depot at all.

On 03/06/2020 at 20:43, Davexoc said:

Just consider that when it is running, it is fairly stable, with airflow from the various fans etc. But when it is stopped, that is when the temperature will rise considerably, probably still much less than 90 degrees. But even stood idle in the midday sun parked up in a yard, it isn't going to be somewhere a person would want to be for long. You wouldn't leave your hand on the bodyside for long...

Class 91s stood idle in the midday sun parked up at KGX could get hot enough in the equipment bay to set the fire extinguishers off.

A regular cause of failures till a modification made allowing the cooling fans to run with the master switches at off when no driver's key in

10 hours ago, JohnR said:

 

Possibly. I was under the impression that while the 71 was not as good as the Hornby model, the J94 was much better? Could we see reuse of those tools?

I don't think so

I got a pair of J94s, with all the talk of raising the standards (which ones I'd like to know)

One of them burnt out the motor after a couple of laps on the club test track.

A friend at the same club had the same experience with his, and with the replacement!

Wouldn't have another if they did re-appear