Ken.W

... Both?

Should've gone to... Barnard Castle

Arrrgggghhhhh!!!! Go and wash your mouth keyboard out with soap and water!

Thanks. I'd assumed them to be conversions, as certainly wern't standard freightliners - it (or they) were 'single' vehicles whereas the freightliner vehicles were in fixed sets of 3 or, mostly, 5. Also the permitted speed was higher than the freightliner's 75. I certainly don't recall ever seeing them in normal passenger trains, and that was was the only occasion I remember seeing one. Thinking about it, it occurs the timing may be significant; It must have been late 70s / early 80s, as I was the secondman; So, at that time most / all daytime ECML trains would have been HSTs

It didn't trust the driver and was trying to run away from him

Pretty sure the Doncaster Works test train had plated windows Would often see it work up to Newcastle with a 50 on when they were doing the refurbs. Would use the goods lines behind the station and out over the other bridge to return without running round. I was on, as a secondman, a train with one of these once, but that was run as a special train, not in a passenger train. Light engine, a 31 I think, off Gateshead to TCFD (Park Lane) yard, where the train, along with half the local Police force, was waiting. The train was one of these vans, plus one or two, loaded, converted fraightliner flats. Then off to York or Doncaster with it, and I presume it continued on to London. Would have been late 70s / early 80s

Yes, I seem to recall a lot of orange/red plastic, probably similar to the red in the T-F sign I think

Thanks Jonathan, It had puzzled me as to why a vehicle which had electric basically just for lighting would require two sets of batteries. I'd not found the Campling book particularly helpful for underframe fittings, as it gives a single drawing from one side for all the standard stock with no plan view. No need to pinch the D.62 idea, you're welcome to it. Seeing it in the Harris book, it just occurred that it was basically a 'cut n shut' job, with the cut bit already done. I've no info on carriage allocations. From the Harris book though the pre-'43 numbers were all 3xxx indicating Southern Scottish Area, however the one in the photo was captured at York in BR days and with an E prefix so some did move around.

Thanks John, Those two coaches are actually the first Kirk kits that I've attempted detailing the underframe, on previous models I've simply used the Kirk parts. On the BT, being the shorter 51' underframe, I found there was insufficient space to fit the vacuum reserviors between the brake V-hangers - with the cylinders located by the moulded positions on the floor - and either the battery box or the cross piece for locating the queen post etch, and in photos of 51' stock in the Harris book I was using I was unable to see them fitted. This kit, btw, has been 'modified' by fitting the van sides the opposite way around and filling the end windows to make a Dia.62 (1 batch, built 1925) which had the guard's position at the inner end adjacent to the compartments (LNER Coaches, p62). For the battery boxes, the kit instructions for both types specified on one side only, and also the Comet LNER underframe details set provided for just one pair of boxes. I'm aware the catering vehicles being electrically powered had extra battery boxes, but the information for other stock has always seemed vague, in photos some do be appear to have them both sides, but generally it's not possible to tell. On the BTO, while I'm aware the cross bracing should really be L section, the square's all I have at present in the current situation, plus I'd found it necessary to use Kirk trusses which are also square section anyway instead of the MJT as intended as they didn't fit with the Kirk solebars. It does still give a reasonable representation from normal viewing distance rather than nothing at all which previous builds have had.

From what I've read in the Harris books, agree that was the case. The stock was effectively owned by the six areas / sections, each specifiying to their own requirements, and the East Coast stock operated as another independent fleet. This led to a situation where the areas / sections were ordering replacement vehicles on a like for like basis, and often for the needs of specific services, hence brake ends with anything from 3 to 6 compartments depending on parcels etc requirements, and also the continuation of building corridor stock with exterior compartment doors later than generally on other railways, as they were seemingly favoured for the shorter distance / more frequent stops pattern of internal area services for ease of quicker boarding / alighting.. There would have still been a large degree of standardisation of parts though, as standard compartment dimensions were largely adhered to, hence the 'coupe', or half, compartment in CKs By the time the post-war stock came along, war-time conditions had caused a change to centralised control of stock, and hence easier standardisation of types. For Brake Third Twins discussion's been on the unsuitability of the Kirk 4-compartment BT A quick check of my Harris book, most Brake Third Twins had a 5-compartment BT and... such a kit (8837) did also exist in the Kirk range... Nearing completion atm, with additional Comet parts and on Bachmann bogies On the brake sides and end here you can see the alterations from the standard kit Regarding underframe fittings, both the BT (above) and a BTO, also near completion, have had additional parts from Comet added The BT. The turnbuckle truss rodding's cross pieces with queen posts, obviously designed for etched kits, were too wide to fit between the thicker plastic solebars of the Kirk kit and had to be cut through the middle and filed out in the top corners to fit. The Comet etch provides one 51' pair and one 61'6 pair. On Bachmann bogies. The BTO I looked at fitting MJT angle iron trusses to this, but again the cross pieces were too wide to fit between the plastic solebars. The kit's trussing was therefore used, with the crossing bracing added from square plastic rodding. On the new Isinglass 3D resin-print bogies.

Hi, As it's 3D printed resin, not plastic, the material is a bit on the brittle side. The instructions do caution on this and advise on handling, particularly drill or file, do not use a knife blade on them. Once built up into a bodyshell structure however, they seem to be sturdy enough. In my model, posted above; Sides, ends, roof, vents, and gangways are the basic kit, plus floor, which incorporates the solebars and underframe trusses, and bogies, purchased with the kit. Other underframe parts, buffers, and door handles from Comet Seats and tables from Southern Pride, partitions plasticard. As an experiment, which seems to look ok, the toilet window was glazed with clear plasticard, then a piece of white plasticard glued inside of it. Provision is also made for fitting Hornby / MJT bogies, and alternative floor / underframes can be used. If I could add another question here, what colours do people use for LNER coach interiors? (BR period if relevant)

Hi John, and thanks. No, none at all. The only surface treatment was arosol sprays of Halfords Burgandy Red and a Railmatch varnish, no rubbing down at all, or primer, needed. Ken

Getting back to the topic of sleepers, yes, going back to the Mk1s, as well as the Mk3s, the sleepers were always timed at a maximum of 80mph. Both for comfort for passengers to sleep, plus there was no need to arrive at destination in the middle of the night. If the train was late however, then, as always, " the maximum permitted speed of the train's the permitted speed of the slowest vehicle", and the driver was free to make up time, but this would generally be just to the extent required and bearing in mind the usually more than ample recovery time in the schedules. There was very little, if any at all, direct communication between drivers and control in those days. On the east coast though, we ceased to have anything to do with sleepers after they were "temporarily" transfered to the west coast for the electrification engineering works to take place, so I don't know if any changes to authorising running speeds has taken place since then

Just caught up on this thread sorry, as its just been revived. An HST power requires the ETS to always be on when the engine's running, even 'light engine', and irrespective of whether supplying ETS to the train. With ETS on the engine revs at the equivalent of notch 2 power, and no, Valentas didn't have single bank idling. ETS was important for a lot more than just the TDM! All the control systems, lighting, and also the fuel lift pump (that's the one you can see front R/H side of the fuel tank), as these are required before starting the engine, run off the battery supply. But, crucially, the battery charge is supplied from the ETS, which is why it always needs to be on. So yes, any HST power car dies quickly if starved of ETS, you start losing the controls, including the brake, and then it shuts down (that fuel lift pump), in under two hours. Although this may seem strange at first, having the battery charge off the ETS, it does make sense, as this allows a train to continue in service with one engine shut down, as the 'dead' power car's still getting it's battery charge supply from the other. I remember when the HSTs were new hearing of an incident when a pair of power cars were sent ' light engines' down south from Heaton. No coaches, so the ETS wasn't turned on... they didn't make it as far as Selby! (which was still on the main line at that time)

A new alternative source, Isinglass are now producing 3D resin-print kits. I first came across them at the Peterborough show, and purchased one to try out. They're basic kits for the body shell, also available with floor / underframe and bogies. Underframe fittings, wheels, and interiors need to be sourced separately. Quality and fit good, and easy assembly using superglue. The sides have a recess on the inside around the windows to get the glazing near flush. Basic shape looks good to me. Two more in the post as I type. Bucoops, all the types you list are in the range, apart from the D141. I believe he can also supply roofs. The ex GN Buffet conversion also previously mentioned's also covered. Dia.27 Third Open

From pictures I've seen, by 61/62 there was still many trains - but not principal expresses - with the odd one, or maybe occasionally two coaches in blood and custard. In the case of BGs though beware of b/w images as many, particularly pre-nationalisation vehicles, were painted plain crimson rather than crimson and cream, as allocated to parcels work. I don't know about the ex-LMS vans you asked about but on the ER, from what I've read, it seems about the only ex-LNER BGs in blood and custard were the Thompson ones allocated to the Elizabethan sets

Or stop us from taking 31s to Edinburgh... especially if booked back passenger... we'd 'have' to bring it back with us light engine ..making it a nice Mileage bonus job! That reminds me of my one turn on a 27 Route conducting a Carlisle man from the Central to Heaton C S and back

Thinking about that, it must have been mid Nov - early Dec, as I was only there 26th Sept (as in my 'location') till 10th Dec, and the first six weeks were classroom. By 'that slot', do you mean just forward and to right of the toffee apple? IIRC, it's a window for the indicator showing the 'Master Switch' position as the toffee apple's rotated

If the 50s went to the Intercity sector, then why would that have stopped them working some Intercity services?

As I posted earlier, the main difference was the control equipment, not just the multi-working system Knew I had this somewhere, so here it is in all it's glory, The actual 'Toffee Apple' The Controller's the knob on a stick, resembling a toffee apple (right), It's rotated for the functions of the usual Master Switch; Off, Reverse, Engine Only, Forward, and goes forward in notches for power. When changing ends, you removed the toffee apple from the desk and took it with you, along with the straight air brake handle (center). That contraption on the left's the vacuum brake. Sorry, no record of which one it was. On Stratford sometime Oct-Dec '77

Yes, the significant difference was electrical, with the non-standard 'red circle' control equipment which meant they couldn't multi with the others

It would have been more obvious to tell them apart for a couple of years before the Peaks came, when A3s took over on the S&C. Surely a simple matter you'd have thought of looking at the departure board as you arrive the station, which tells the platform number your trains at, and each side of the platform would have different numbers? But no, still too complicated for some people it would seem, as regularly observed at Kings X for example, when there's two similar trains either side of a platform. Perhaps only one side of each platform should be used?

Also, IIRC, around the same time as the 47/8 long-range tank conversions

Thanks, some more detail to whats been posted, and clarifies the position with DMUs prior to '69 as I thought. On double manning light engines, yes it was due to any train (which for this includes a light engine) to have two persons for carrying out protection if needed. A secondman though did not require route knowledge. A secondman was required for steam heating as, as I posted previously, we were often required to go inside - into the engine room - to attend to the boiler while still running, either to reset faults when they occurred, or shut off steam in sufficient time before somewhere a loco change or shunting was to take place. You didnt want to be splitting those pipes with steam still in them. When the grades designation was changed (definitely pre '77) the equivalent to 'Passed Secondman' was 'Relief Driver', not assistant. Though of course, it was the old terms that remained in general use. The requirement for high speed running was two Drivers with route and traction knowledge. A Passed 'Man though, when acting as Driver did so as HGD - Higher Grade Duty - and was in effect the grade of Driver for the day, with of course exactly the same responsibilities, but also conditions, as a Driver. This last point could confuse the shunters at Heaton at the time. As I said previously a turn would be double manned if any part f the diagram required it, and this included HST running... So one day I'd be going down to Heaton on a loco, light engine or ecs, the shunter guides us in, then I'm down to couple up / uncouple as the case may be. Next day I go down, on a different turn, shunter guides us in, he looks at me as I'm not getting down, "two drivers today", as another part of the diagrams HST work, he then goes in-between.

Thanks, I thought that was the case with EMUs, and had heard the Tyneside electrics being referred to as having 'Motormen', but these ended in '67. What I'm less clear on, which I was referring to was the position with DMUs. My experience with these being of the NE area and as far I recall back to traveling on them in early 70s where always single manned but they'd have conformed to single manning by then anyway I'm less clear on whether they always had been, though I believe this was the case. Not so much officially ended, but with the Traincrew Concept mentioned by W124Bob, was merged with that of Guard into that of Trainman, which allowed guards for the first time to the driver's line of promotion. Some of the conditions requiring double manning were also eased at or around this time, such as asking additional 'as required' work to be done, or a full diagram being double manned if any part required it. By this time however as has been said, secondman's turns were already quite limited and in rapid decline. Right from the initial single manning agreement of the late 60s, the 'norm' was for single manning, ie if a diagram conformed to single manning then it would be. So, particularly as more trains became ETH and steam heating was phased out, double manning sharply declined. Thanks Roy, and although I wasn't at Gateshead at the time, yes from what I saw the lodge turns were always double manned, Gateshead crews used the then BR staff hostel at Ilford. The HSTs bring in another matter though. Lodging ended from the introduction of HST services in May '78, the month before I moved to Gateshead, Newcastle / Kings X turns then becoming two-way turns. The HSTs though were still double manned, but with two drivers, not a secondman, which was the agreement for over 100 mph running - later eased to over 110 mph and ended with the first Driver Restructuring Agreement early under GNER. We did then however have a situation where, in there first couple of years an odd Newcastle / Edinburgh turn needed to be in effect triple-manned. A two driver diagram which worked an HST in one direction, but a steam heated one was worked the other way. As many of the older mainline drivers at the time had been drivers since steam days it meant they'd never learned the steam-heat boilers, so a secondman had to also be provided for that.