Ken.W

4 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Or this?

 

 

 

And they're older, unfitted tank's that would be long gone by the latec70s

For the late 70s / early 80s the OP's asking about oil tankers would be either the 35t vac braked, or 45t TTA types mentioned above. Other than that it was the 100t bogie tankers.

For heavy fuel oil, they'd be 'Class B' (ie black) tankers

1 hour ago, Stuart A said:

I wasn't too sure on the oxblood, but I think once the whole set is viewed together it will work.

 

Better photos below from James Glossop on Twitter

That looks good, really seams to suit it from those pics. Previous pic a bit dark to show the oxblood properly.

Also, good to see that they've not done the additional grill behind no1 cab door all black, as was done with the 91119 Intercity repaint  I wonder if they'll change that it (if it's still running)

On 03/06/2022 at 22:24, Steven B said:

 

As far as the Mk4 is concerned, it wouldn't be impossible to relocate door control and parking brake equipment from the DVT into a modified TSOE to make a TSOBE. The Electric train supply needs would restrict their use on preserved lines unless they were fitted with a generator. Probably far too much work for the vast majority of railways. There may be scope for train tour sets such as with the refurbished Blue Pullman HST and Intercity Mk3a sets.

 

Steven B.

Well, not impossible, but it would mean expensive work messing about with complicated equipment which can be temperamental enough as it is.

But then, where does that get you?

Too much, as you say for preserved lines, plus you can't just go making significant alterations to safety critical systems as such changes would invalidate their "Grandfather Rights" derogation to operate on NR for railtour use,  meaning they would need recertification of Type Approval to operate on the national system, a long and extremely expensive process, and possibly to modern standards which would they now pass anyway. This was, we were told at the time, the reason why despite all the problems with them, GNER dropped plans to replace the air-con systems.

As to all the discussions about where the compressor for air brakes needs to be, erm, we are talking about Mk4s here, they've only be running for approx the last 30+ years with the compressor at the rear for 50% of the time.

On 13/06/2022 at 14:25, toby_tl10 said:

Seems like quite a lot of effort to repaint the entire fleet if they are only going to last until 2023 or 2024. Nonetheless, it looks superb.

Well, as l posted on the class 91 thread last month, driver reviews at Newcastle are being planned for them to resume running through to here from next May

Not Network Rail, but there's one at Alston Station, South Tynedale Railway

Originally from How Mill on the Newcastle - Carlisle line

1 hour ago, boxbrownie said:

If you’ve not had the phone call yet it’s still not enough 😱

I probably have had the call...

I've a phone app, 'Truecaller' that helps filter out / block spam calls 😀

Hmm, am wondering if that's enough about glazing?

Even the pop-up add at bottom of page has come up with..

Solar... innovative glass solutions 🙄

Oops,  there goes the credit card running for cover

Oh dear, this announcement has come just too late....

Just missed my clubs exhition, so my Bachy Mk1 Sub's now going to have to wait a year to go on the club sales stand.

These do look excellent,  as would be expected here. I'm not sure if these ran in the NE Region though, could that guy with a Tardis be contacted to just pop back and transfer some here?

The magnetic fitting roofs a great idea, any chance of the pats being available as spares? My kit-built coaches tend to be permanently sealed.

6 hours ago, Phatbob said:

I am reminded of an old addage, "if you think something is foolproof, you have yet to meet the sufficiently talented fool".
🤣

Or, making it foolproof only results in a better class of idiot

5 hours ago, G-BOAF said:

 

Useful.

So in theory (subject to certification) the boilers are still working? I know 9009 has had its boiler removed (and i believe the space is to be used for in-cab signalling equipment), do all the others still have boilers fitted?

Just wondering if i can work steam heat only stock on the winter on my layout without too much of a leap of imagination.

Sorry, but all l can say is that they all still had boilers fitted when l was on them, but that was up until end of BR service. As HSTs were taking over, a lot of their remaining main line work was on overnight services, of which IIRC, all but one (Night Aberdonian?) were still steam heated. The Mk3 sleepers weren't around at the same time.

What's happened to them in preservation, no idea I'm afraid.

3 hours ago, mkrob said:

Apparently, the steam boiler needed plenty of TLC, from what I have read!

I remember traveling from Durham to Darlington once in the coach right behind a Deltic, with my head out of the window all the way. Great stuff.  

Talking about the DP2, can you you tell me if the DP2 sounded like a 40 or 50, as I have a Heljan DP2 which I will eventually fit sound to? From what I've read , it sounded more like a 40,even though it was a slightly different engine.

Anyway ,back  to topic. It' great that the my Deltic (D9007 PINZA) will soon be here. YIPPEE!

A big thank you to Accurascale for keeping us up to date on progress & putting other manufactures to shame. Keep up the good work guys.                                 

The various Spanners didn't need that much tlc in my experience,  more usually just a 'lock out' (flame detection failure), pop in, press the reset, and away it goes again.

Once with a Stones (on a 47 l think), l spent just about a whole trip York (or Leeds) to Newcastle tending to it to keep it going.

It was more often the need to shut it off  at least 10 minutes before  anywhere that any loco change or attaching / detaching was to take place - there was 60psi in those hoses when in operation! 

Sorry but DP2 had suffered its argument with some errant Cemflows long before l got to observing trains so can't help there.

I did though get to work as secondman to Jock Evens, it's last driver, a real gent.

I've a DP2 model also, but a Silver Fox one. I've seen a Legobiffoman sound chip advertised for DP2, but confusingly described as Deltic Prototype 2 and having automatic 2nd engine start.

2 hours ago, G-BOAF said:

Quick question - when the boiler filling ports were plated over, was the boiler isolated? I know the boiler was left in situ, but was it still working? Or were the locos then classed as Electric Heat only?

No, the plating over of the boiler filling ports didn't affect boiler status. They were redundant after the steam age water cranes they were designed for had disappeared, and the plating over was just BRs aversion to anything that might lead to anyone getting too close to any OLE for comfort.

The water tanks were then filled by hydrant type connections at solebar level, as are tenders on steam railtours present day.

The ones to watch out for with these were the Peaks, tank in the body above the valve, which fed directly into the bottom of it (no internal riser pipe). Add to that, the valve was 'upside down' (handle below the valve), so turned opposite way to normal. You made sure you turned that valve the right way before disconnecting otherwise you were faced with the full contents of the tank wanting to escape! It was also wise to make sure it didn't come off during filling either, if you see photos of them being filled, there'll usually be someone standing on the hose.

1 hour ago, 45125 said:

No 8 was always a bit of an oddball, , it also had a Clayton boiler for a while rather than a Spanner 2.

 

Al Taylor.

 

Interesting, l never came across that, though it was only their last 3 years or so l was on then.

I only encountered very few Clayton boilers, on any class. A relief as they were reputedly the most awkward and troublesome to work of them all.

On 06/06/2022 at 15:46, ERIC ALLTORQUE said:

Their range of locomotives will expand to pull them,they are all on the cards,this is Accurascale,dont knock quality when its offered.

I've had quite enough of a range of locomotives that expand, thank you very much.

One particular manufacturer is persona non grata with me.

But this is AS so there'll be non of that sort of thing here!

3 hours ago, mkrob said:

Hi Ken.W, great to hear your stories & info about the Deltics, as someone who use to train spot In the sixties @ Newcastle central most Saturdays. I vividly remember being allowed to go in the engine room of a Deltic. Not something you forget. Thank you for your input & wonderful memories.

Hi, and thanks for you comment.

Ah yes, going inside on a Deltic, definitely something that's not forgotten 

- as someone who did so quite frequently seeing as, the reason that l was generally there was to...

attend to the steam heating boiler.

As to the experience being on them, the 'official' drive of No8 l related earlier, I'd just become old enough to pass the MP12 about halfway through the coarse!

Just found a £224 debits arrived on my credit card from somewhere in Sheffield 😃

17 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Theres only 5 left now.. one is the “as built” D9004, 

Well, for my 'as built', it just had to be number 8.

Back in my train spotting schooldays, it was my last one to complete the set, and my first for haulage, both at the same time!

I was about 13, and mum took me on a day trip to York by train. We got the 9am from Newcastle, at that time still the Tees-Tyne but only Pullman for first class, so l remember being disappointed when the train arrived behind a 47.

Rounding the curve arriving into York however, l saw the 47 had been replaced by a Deltic! Getting off, l ran excitedly up to the front before it departed, and, YES!!! NUMBER 8!

Several years later, after starting work, as I've said previously, l did get on all apart from the the first two withdrawn, as secondman. I never got to learn them though, but there is just one l can say that l 'officially' drove.

In '81, on the MP12, drivers basic training course, at Gateshead the basic traction was the 47, so for the practical handling part we were taken in groups of 6 on the Newcastle - Liverpools, by then 47 turns, to Leeds and back, each taking a turn driving.

One day, the lad in the seat on the first part stopped the train at Ouston Jn to report erm, spotting something by the lineside, and our 47 also died.

An assisting engine was called for, and after a short wait, rolling out from Gateshead along the Slow Line round us to the rescue came...

Yes, Deltic 8!

And when we got to Darlington, it was my turn to do the to run York.

We probably had 8 on, eth mk2s, and the 47s were generally hard worked to do 95 with them.

With the dead 47 still on as well, at 95 the Deltic was still just playing with them.

Yes, 95. A 47 behind, and a Traction Instructor over my shoulder.

I also have a G,SYP on order direct from AS, but this time a case of not No13

Unlucky for some? Maybe.

My one memory of this one on the mainline, on an Ediburgh turn we'd got it off Haymarket for our return working from the Waverley.

We got as far as Haymarket station when one engine shut down. My driver promptly brought it to a stand, declared a failure, changed ends, and back onto the depot for a replacement,  which l think was probably a 47.

3 hours ago, Bucoops said:

Do you have Aldi checkout staff on standby?

They're reserved for when (if) 40s come

....to match their speed

(lack of)

On 05/06/2022 at 20:40, paulbb said:

BR's  Chief Mechanical Engineer J.F. Harrison disliked 'nose ends' on diesel locos, and also believed that high speed engines 1500 rpm of more to be 'unsuitable' for rail applications, and was a strong supporter of the Brush/Sulzer combination that gave us the class 47.  He retired in 1966, so the HST may not have seen the light of day had he been in post, possibly.

19 hours ago, Mophead45143 said:

 

While I have nothing solid to back it up, I have heard multiple accounts that Mr Harrison was somewhat 'in bed' with Sulzer, which I'm guessing led to the bias towards the 47 design. 

 

Hmm, there does seem to have been some preference, if not bias, within BR towards Brush/Sulzer, however when it came to the second generation Type 4s it also seems that EE to some extent simply missed the boat.

The 40s were quite simply overweight and underpowered for 'Main Line' locos.

Fair enough the initial batch of 10 were early pilot scheme locos, the type continued to be built without any improvement for 4½ years totalling 200 locos! The final 40s were actually outshopped months after the last of the Deltics!

Meanwhile, with Brush/Sulzer, with the contemporary 'Peaks', the pilot scheme locos were 300hp higher to start with, and the production series uprated to 500 hp higher- 25% greater.

They were therefore significantly superior in performance to the 40s. When l first got on the Newcastle - Liverpools as secondman in the late 70s, they were by then booked for 45/46 haulage, but occasionally we still got 40s on them. Our turns with these were to Leeds and back, and waiting at Leeds for our return working we always knew when a 40 was on, they were always late! And when we saw the 40 coming in, we knew it'd be a late finish,  they just couldn't keep the 'Peak' timings.

By the time EE did come up with DP2, using a bodyshell design that actually pre-dated the 40s - 'Deltic' was built 1955 - and the engine uprated as should have been done, at Brush the 47 was already going into production. 

EE left behind.

Anyway, what's all this got to do with a thread on Class 55s?

Well, quite a lot actually, in a way the 40s did us a great favour on here. Some of the early trials of them were on the ECML, and the Eastern management took one look at them, decided those things are no use for us, and went off a d bought themselves a fleet of Deltics.

8 hours ago, brushman47544 said:

 

I hadn't heard before that DP2 was fitted with a Class 40 engine. Wasn't the Class 40 engine a 16SVT whereas DP2 and the 50s were 16CSVT engines - similar but a later development. DP2's engine was reused in D400 and then later in other Class 50s as engine swops occurred.

Yes basically, as l said, a class 40 engine, uprated with improved turbocharging over the feeble 5 - 10 psi charge air of the 40s. The C indicates addition of charge air cooling, increasing its efficiency. 

The 40 engine itself, the same as 10203, was an uprated version of those in 10000/1 and 10201/2.

Finally, a further uprated version of the engine with higher still charge air and increased rpm was used in the 56.

Similarly, the 44, 45/46, and 47s had 'A' 'B' and 'C' versions of the same engine.

20 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

 

If you model a six month period then I imagine you have a very limited choice of RTR available. 

 

Well that's certainly not what l said!

This is though towards the end of the period l cover, so as l did say roof mounted horns would,d be more appropriate for me, and as the photo l was referring to showed would not be wrong as you'd suggested.

I've already said though that I'd had the impression they'd lasted longer, and they'll be an easy mod to do.

6 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

I think you’re right. DP2 had a different and less powerful engine, which would have been important operationally. Classes 44, 45 and 46, especially 45 and 46, might well have been classed as subclasses if thinking had been a little different at the time. As for a DP2 production series, perhaps Class 50? 😇

Quite right. DieselPrototype2 wasnt a 'Deltic' - the name refers to the Napier Deltic engines fitted in the 55s and 'Baby Deltic' 23s.

DP2 had a class 40 engine, but fitted with turbo chargers which actually did more than just make a nice noise for the enthusiasts to listen to.

And yes, the 50s were the DP2 production series, but by that time BR's design standards required flat fronted cabs.

On 04/06/2022 at 06:35, Roy Langridge said:

Not sure why you say missed, as modelled I don’t think roof mounted horns would be right on the models. 
 

Riy

Well, the photo linked in the posts l was replying to showed Nimbus, with small yellow panels, and still with the roof mounted horns, which would probably be more appropriate for the period l model.

AS seem to have just about every other variation covered.

On 04/06/2022 at 08:44, 45125 said:

Ken, the roof mounted horns were removed in late 62, and replaced with the behind the buffer beam horns. From what I have been told by various well informed sources the roof mounted horns were an attempt to improve the audibility of the horns, tails later found the best place was the nose mounted horns.

 

Al Taylor

 

Thanks for that Al. The book l referred to gave the same reason for the trial of roof horns, but as l recall not how long they lasted (can't find the reference to them at present). I had the impression they'd lasted longer.

Personally though, I'm not so sure about the bonnet mounted ones being better.

I remember one occasion on one, we were standing in (the then) platform 10 at Newcastle, the platform being on my side l was leaning out the window looking for the guards right away. When the guard gave the tip l popped the horn in acknowledgement, but popped the wrong one giving myself a thick ear!

Made sure l didn't do that again!!

On 02/06/2022 at 11:04, thetrains said:

Noticed the horns on roof of Nimbus which look good, I am not a Deltic detail/modification expert, but looking back this morning at old books, I can't find any photos from early sixties with roof mounted horns for any Deltic.  Was this unique to Nimbus at that time 1962, Accuras. specs say buffer beam mounted as was in 1964?  I have Creppelo on order as Nimbus sold out, and was going to relocate horns to bonnet but now may put them on roof instead.  Rule 1, haha.  Cheers

One of my Deltic books has that the last three had roof mounted horns as built, pity AS have missed this but should be an easy enough mod to do.

Hmm, mention of Crepello, afraid my nickname for that one had an 'a' in it, as l don't think l was ever on it with both engines operational! 

On 02/06/2022 at 10:25, brushman47544 said:

 

Wasn't there an agreement with the Unions that trains running at 100mph or above would be double manned? It was only later that single manning was agreed. HSTs were double manned when first introduced.

On 02/06/2022 at 10:41, boxbrownie said:

Yes, all Deltics were double manned during BR service.

 

I think it was around 1996 or so the agreement with ASLEF regarding 110 mph working was implemented.

No, the high speed manning agreement was for trains traveling over 100 mph, later amended to over 110, ie up to 100 /110 wasn't affected by this. Also, it was for manning by two drivers, not driver and secondman.

After the '68 manning agreement then, yes, Deltics could run single manned, just as any other locos, though as 40052 had already posted, this was subject to certain conditions, such as if any part of the driver's diagram included a steam heated train, or LE running, or if it didn't have a PNB break, then the whole turn had to be double manned.

And of course, the Deltics did regularly work steam heated trains, particularly the overnights as HSTs took over, right up to their end of service. So, as secondman l was on all apart from the first two withdrawn.

Although AS describe the BR blue ones as 'electric heat' they were in fact always duel. 

On 01/06/2022 at 21:01, Artless Bodger said:

I'm wondering if this might be part of the Selby diversion under construction (opened 1983). So far searching on the internet and using Google maps has not shown the long brick building (looks a bit like it's a model) in the area of the Hambleton fly over. Can anyone confirm the location, or deduce the alternative please? 

Yes, that's the Selby diversion under construction.

Your trains joined the Leeds - Selby line at Gascoigne Wood, and is crossing what will be the Hambleton Junctions.

The brick building's in the North-west corner of where the two routes cross, and the single track opposite's the North - East curve.

The line adjacent the building the wagons are on's a bit of a mystery, there's no lines there.

Must have been a works access siding.

On 02/06/2022 at 10:28, Captain Electra said:

Providing you have a standard class end coach with buffers or a DVT at the end, the Mk4s can be hauled by any conventional loco, with or without ETH. Class 90 haulage on the ECML was common along with Class 47 and later 67 Thunderbird rescue locos. The end coaches are blanked off at the buffer end, so could couple to other marks of stock but through access would not be possible.

Yes, that's the TOE (Tourist Open End) vehicle l referred to above, with conventional drawgear and no gangway at the outer end. I should perhaps add to what l said earlier about the Mk4 gangways being incompatible with other gangways that, the gangwayed end of Mk4s were actually prohibited from being coupled to any other types of gangwayed stock.

ETS isn't a problem, other than the high load of these, as l said they've the standard BR loco-hauled system, and although of course they can be hauled without it on, you certainly would not want anyone travelling in them in that case as there's no other form of ventilation. GNER even introduced portable door barriers on them so they could stand with doors open when stranded by power failures.

Plus after a short time without ETS the lighting goes down to emergency only, and when the batteries go down you've no door control and Interlock!

The class 90s were of course fully compatible* and worked in push-pull mode with them, not just loco hauled.

* Other than screw-coupled ones were prohibited from propelling around Carstairs curve.

On 02/06/2022 at 13:10, JeremyC said:

When it comes to heritage railways I would suspect they would rather avoid anything later than a Mk2b/2c, because beyond that you are into much more complicated sub systems, e.g. Air Conditioning.

Added to which, in this case, door control and Interlock operated by FDM, and retention toilets requiring specialist equipment to empty.

22 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

.... and few heritage railways could operate air braked stock anyway.

Or operate ETH