Ken.W

Unfortunately, that would be rather difficult When Blenheim Street was demolished to make way for the St James' Boulevard dual carriageway, The Model Shop moved to the corner of Marlborough Crescent / Scotswood Road. Didn't last very long there though. No, not been a proper model shop in town for many years now. Seems insignificant to most visits mentioned on here, but in terms of a trip specifically to visit the shop, I did once visit Crownline Models in Maidenhead(?) from Newcastle (though a BR pass did help). They were of course, the biggest supplier of detailing parts and conversion kits at the time and I was also a regular customer of Dave's at the shows.

I believe the 800s take more power than the 91s, combined with as I said previously a greater number of trains operating on electric. As the 800s don't need to be at a stand to change over, I'd have thought the Aberdeens should have been able to run on electric as far as Saughton Jn (is it? I never worked beyond Haymarket in that direction). Not a lot further, but given the 800s performance on diesel (ie absence of it) it would make a big difference in getting away from Haymarket and up to linespeed. The last I heard, just last month, they were also still having to run on diesel between Waverley and Stirling. As for Glasgow, as I said I'm not sure of, but aren't the SR via Shotts now also electric? Again extra electric trains, and I remember when we did work through to Glasgow, the 91s often suffered from voltage drop on the Haymarket - Carstairs line and the via Shotts were still diesel at that time

Thanks. Am surprised they got those to move by rail after the years (decades?) they've been stood

TPE, yes, though in relation to the OP an example of 800s routinely running on diesel under the wires LNER, not sure if it includes the Glasgow, but their others require to change over at Waverley (still in touch with some of my former colleagues)

And sometimes some units will have to run on diesel even when 'under the wires' where there's now too many electric trains for the juice available, eg; TPE North of Chathill LNER North of Edinburgh Waverley

Presumably went by road then? Can't have turned a wheel for decades

Not according to LNER Coaches by Michael Harris, the authority on LNER stock. He also gives a typical specification for body framing, as TheSignalEngineer has summarized above, and there's pictures of two vehicles under construction showing the timber framing. The LNER did order two small batches of all steel stock from outside contractors in 1927/8, one for Open Thirds, the other for BGs. They're described as costing around a third more, being one and a half to two tons heavier, and heavier on maintenance than the teak bodied equivalents. Steel paneled timber framed stock did start to appear in the late 30s, mostly on suburban and secondary mainline sets, but also with the Streamlined stock. The post-war stock is described as having intended to be all steel. However, the number of new coaches required to make up for the war losses, lack of new building, deferred withdrawls, and maintenance backlog, meant that the post war restrictions on steel use necessitated timber framing having to be retained. Both main carriage works, Doncaster and York, suffered major fires during the war and had to be rebuilt, so the works facilities didn't have an effect on the construction of post war stock.

IIRC, the Intercity sector was required to operate at a profit So, routes requiring too much subsidy went elsewhere Cross Country, btw, was part of Intercity under the BR business sectors, it was only separated when the shadow franchises came in preparing for privatisation. At Newcastle, under Intercity, we started working the NE-SW trains through as far as Derby (previously only to York / Leeds / Doncaster) ps although not asking for specific example, you did mention Cross Country

Yes, Gresley coaches were wooden framed bodies. So too were the Thompson stock, although these were intended to have steel body framing, post-war conditions necessitated otherwise.

As noted above, GW locos were right hand drive anyway, plus positioning it on the platform side would also allow station staff and the guard to see it. It should also be before the toe of the point into the gasworks siding. As shown the signals are as though they would apply to platforms 2 and 3

The term 'limit of shunt' can perhaps be a little miss-leading to the uninitiated. It should be thought of more in terms of actually being a fixed STOP signal, or perhaps as it's modern equivalent of a position light signal with only red lights. As RailWest said, it can only be passed on verbal authority of the signaller, and it's classed as a signal for doing so (and yes, it would count as a SPAD), so can not be used in situations where movements would normally be required to pass it.

I'd suggest the shunt signal(s) on the Up in front of the signal box controlling setting back moves through the crossovers, however you decide to do these signals, should be the other side of the level crossing. As it is, you basically have unsignaled setting back moves over a level crossing.

Was talking with one of my (former) colleagues on Thursday He was saying LNER are now planning on keeping 9 or 10 91/Mk4s for another three years

The yellow panels to identify (air) piped vans referred to in the OP were on the sides of the vans, around but not including the lookout ducket, as well as a central panel on the end. Yellow end panels, or by that time more likely wasp stripes, on vans adapted for propelling movements were a different matter and came much later.

Melkridge rapid loader, between Bardon Mill and Haltwhistle on the Newcastle - Carlisle, was just that. The rapid loading bunker, which was fed by a conveyor from the opencast site at Plenmellor - a mile or two over the hill and across the river South Tyne. It was in the middle of a loop off the main line, with a cripple siding adjacent to it. Bunker and conveyor long gone, but trackwork still in place.

So, is that an announcement of an announcement of having a feasibility study into having a feasibility study? And then they wonder why these schemes cost so much

Masking (or Gaffer) Tape over all the cab desk joints on the 47s was the standard attempted solution for the draughts, coming straight in from outside through the flat cab front with no nose end, and all the main heaters on the rear bulkhead, they were absolutely freezing. They'd be nice and warm standing in the station when you got on, but you waited at least 10 miles before even thinking of taking your overcoat off! The 'Wick' bit doesn't make sense to me, and it is clearly written with a different pen and also writing. Also, the loco was left at York when reported, it's home depot by that time, and I reckon that would have been Charlie Trayler, of Gateshead

There was also a restriction on Down HSTs on one engine approaching Waverley, the Signalling Centre had to be advised and we required a clear run in from Abbeyhill Jcn. We wern't to take a Single Yellow there as if stopped at the next one, in Calton Tunnel we wouldn't get out the other end! Yes sets on one engine were still capable of getting over the 100, and some would still put up a fairly decent performance.... eventually. It all depended though on the nature of the fault of course. If the failed power car was simply unable to apply traction power but the engine was still running, then the Train Supply would be put (or kept) on that one, leaving the full output of the good engine for traction. It made a significant difference if the failed engine was shut down though and the good one had to supply the ETS as well. The engine supplying ETS idles at notch 2 speed just for the ETS load

Ah yes, I certainly remember where I was that night, though probably for a somewhat different reason to most; 16/10/87 01:40 Addl. 47457 LE GD - N'cle, 1Z02 Newcastle - Doncaster. For some reason, I'd never previously known there were so many signals between Newcastle and Doncaster that were actually capable of displaying a green aspect From leaving Newcastle, the first yellows I even spotted were already flashing for inside at Doncaster! Could it, perhaps, have had anything to do with that strange headcode?

... and for failing to surrender to Court bail as well! Further down that page, among the 'promoted stories' was an item headlined; 'Police rush to Hampshire high street after reports of person...' Crikey, we're used to reports of the decline of the high street, but didn't realise it was getting that bad!

Plus the bridge by the NRM site's more like a tunnel as it passes under the north end of the platforms. That one's on the two-track section just past the TPE depot. And it's signed as 10'9", you'd just about get a single decker through there, never mind trying to with a double decker

Hi, have just seen this thread sorry as it's just resurfaced. If I can just clear up the point earlier about the brake pipes. Those locos dual-braked in preservation with air brakes fitted have three brake pipes, not two. British passenger stock uses the two-pipe air brake system and in the photo of Bittern posted earlier the two pipes visible are both air brake pipes, the brake pipe (red) and reservoir pipe (yellow). Although it doesn't show clearly in the photo, the original vacuum pipe is also still present. The vacuum pipe's around twice the diameter of the air pipes and doesn't have an isolating cock, hence always clipped back on the dummy plug, as shown on photos, when not in use. The reason for being dual-braked, as above, locos that still operate on the mainline require air brakes for all the mainline stock now in use, but the vacuum needs to be retained as stock on preserved / heritage railways is still vacuum. On the subject of pipes, there's also the steam heating pipe, positioned on the opposite side of the coupling to the brake pipes. Originally (as express locos that wouldn't operate tender first) only on the tender (though again probably can't be fitted if Hornby coupling retained), but those working on preserved lines may have had one fitted to front also. In the photo of Bittern it's visible below the 'A4' marking. Edit; In the photos in the post on page 1 showing the different tender types, on the rear of Bittern's tender the three brake pipes are visible to the left of the buckeye, and the steam heat pipe to the right of it. (corridor tenders have buckeye couplers, non-corridor have screw couplings).

Remember though, on the Pullmans dinning was served at seat to all passengers, so more kitchens needed to cope, and spaced out so not too far to carry meals though the train. On ordinary trains passengers went to the restaurant car while dinning. Also, the kitchens were quite small. As above, 30 seats in a Pullman kitchen second despite their wider seat spacing, whereas ordinary kitchen cars only had about 18 to 24 seats. But the PF (B) is FX, so the extra KS (C) is between the BPS (A) and a KF (D) I expect that would have been the practice, as that's a copy of the actual rostered formation in the Carriage Working Book, and they're lettered for reservations in that order. Presumably more seating was needed on a Friday, so with it an extra kitchen, but without increasing the train load so as not to affect timings.

But this is the 21st century! Something as simple as hanging a bit of metal would never do when a nice new high tech laser can do the job

It does seem to be a bit of a conundrum, this photo. Personally, I think the NER carriage looks slightly darker and the white roof, rather than gray on the Gresley, also suggests brown. However, as Bill says... (my emphasis) And that coach definitely looks to have just been painted. You can imagine the photographer would have still been able to smell the paint on it! And yes, that does look like a '52 paint date on the solebar