62613

Yes, the Japanese attack down the Malay peninsula was masterful; their "Hook and infiltrate" tactics unsettled the Empire troops involved. They employed similar tactics in Burma, with the same effect on the troops on the ground, and it took Slim's Battle of the Admin Box in 1943 (IMHO), to show to his troops how they could defeat the Japanese.

Oldham and Torquay! Agree with you there

He's correct! There was a perception, among the European democracies at least, that the Japanese were all short - sighted, for instance; or that they couldn't fly aircraft as Europeans/Americans did. After Pearl Harbor (bringing the thread back onto the subject) the Americans saw their war in the Pacific as a moral crusade against inferior orientals who needed to be wiped from the face of the earth.

National League, the old Vauxhall Conference. Sadly!

The RCTS "green book"* says that when the LNER were looking at a more powerful design for the GE section than the B12s, they considered a tank engine, but the Sevenoaks derailment dealt the idea of express passenger tank engines a mortal blow * RCTS Locomotives of the LNER Part 2B: Tender engines classes B1 to B19, in the part about class B17

You're correct; for the design department had axle load informing every decision (Nominally, it was designed by S.D. Holden of course, but it was the drawing office that was entirely responsible). The GE needed a loco more powerful than the Claud, as they were becoming overloaded on the hardest turns. After the modifications in the 1930s (slightly larger boiler, long - travel valves) they became quite good locos, not that they weren't before. BR put them in class 4P3F

Really wouldn't want to be the fireman with a firebox that long, even with the special longer - handled shovels supplied for this class. Make the wheels 6 foot, or even 5 foot 8 (a G.E. mixed traffic 4-4-0 with that size wheels reached the G.A. stage - it was reproduced in Backtrack many years ago); shortens the firebox and/or boiler.

Is that the Stalybridge Pullman? I think that was about the only thing using that bay by that time.

Oh, yes! Up the beach off Lagos in 1975! Looking at a damaged prop in Stockholm in 1972. Ship trimmed heavily by the bow to get it clear, with a Storno to engine room to get them to turn the engine.

I never did any of that! I was on several ships where the lifeboat was used (never for the purpose it was installed for, thank the lord!)

Apart from mentioning that your dad took some superb photos that deserve a wider audience, black and white

Surprised to see that! What engine is it?

S69 (LNER B12): bigger boiler, bigger cylinders, smaller driving wheels, big piston valves instead of slide valves. Superheated from the off Not really a development, but completely new design, with, in late LNER days a lower RA. I think the firebox was over the middle coupled axle. The firebox being in the postion it was led to the long cab.

I've seen somewhere, in UK practice, 30 years for an express passenger loco, 40 for a mixed traffic type, and 50 for freight and mineral enines; which seems to tie in with typical dates to traffic/withdrawal. There were exceptional circumstances, of course.

The S (B13) class had all gone pre - WW2, apart from one retained for a special service, the S1 class (B14) only 5 locos, 1928 - 1931, both due to declining traffic. The last survivors of the S2 class (B15) lasted until 1947. The S3 class lasted until the great cull of steam at the end of 1962, although some of them had been considerably rebuilt. The G.E.R. 1500 class, (B12) was not an emlarged Claud, due to having to build an engine more powerful than them within weight limits. The boiler was larger, as were the cylinders.

And actively changed Belpaires from some classes that were built with them. They also fitted saturated boilers to at least a couple of classes that were built superheated

There's the fallacy. It's not coming from taxes, which don't actually pay for anything except the interest on government borrowing, and the loan premiums when they become due. See my comment from about three days ago.

Which cuts? The idea is to take trains which don't at the moment stop anywhere south of Birmingham/Crewe/Stoke, except MK, off the existing lines and allow more services which DO stop south of there, e.g., to/from Trent Valley stations, to be expanded; the existing all stations Brum - Euston trains would also continue, I would think. There would also be more room for freight services. Expanding services from say, hourly to half - hourly is not a cut, in anyone's language!

I think the Thompson B2s weren't multiplied further after some B17s were fitted with 100A boilers, pressed to 220lb/sq in, rather than the 180 to which they were derated during WW2. These (B17/6) were found to be as good when tested as the B2s, which had one cylinder less (even though it was larger). It might be worth mentioning that Thompson cut his rebuilding teeth on the GE and NE sections; he was responsible for the rebuilding of the B12/1 to B12/3 (long - travel valves)*, and the various Clauds to D16/3, 20 with 8" or 9" piston valves instead of slide valves. He also was responsible for the complete rebuilding of an NER class R (D20); it was his description of this in the technical press without permission that caused a rebuke from Gresley**; it may have been this which caused the rift between them. * Clay and Cliffe: The LNER 4-6-0 classes, Ian Allan 1975, ISBN No. 0 7110 0622 9-88/74 ** RCTS Locomotives of the LNER Part 3C, Tender Engines, Classes D13 to D24: It's worth noting that of the 12 classes described in this book, the only ones surviving at Nationalisation were D15, D16/2, D16/3 and D20. Three D17s survived to be allocated numbers in the 1943 scheme, but were withdrawn by January 1948.

They were in 1980. I went.

One of the tropes you get, along with "Only fat - cat businessmen will be able to afford the fares" and "It's destroying the countryside" is that "The government are putting money into their mates' back pockets". Does that include the "Mates" pouring the concrete and operating the machines, I wonder, or are they volunteers?

Infrastructure investment, especially in a recession, is one of the best ways of keeping an economy going. I seem to recall Mike Storey, a long way back, saying that HS2 is being built by a stand - alone government - backed company (HS2 Limited), and that just like any other company, has powers to raise capital on the markets using bond issues. The only actual government involvement is in guaranteeing the loans taken out (if the company goes bust, the government pays the money). Isn't this similar to how the LNER financed its much - needed Woodhead and Shenfield elecrification schemes, how the Channel Tunnel was built, and so on? ISTR reading somewhere that BR had to find the money for the 1955 Modernisation Plan by going to the banks and borrowing at the commercial rates applying at the time. I'm fairly sure that "The Taxpayer" (all of us!) isn't paying. If any of this is tosh, please feel free to shoot me down in flames! Martin's post is something that needed saying.

Buckingham Road?

The main problem with the 4-6-0 is that the ashpan has to sit over the rear coupled axle; on a 4-4-0 it was between the two coupled axles. If you have a loco. with large coupled wheels and a large boiler (express passenger 4-6-0), there isn't much room for an ashpan that doesn't fill up quickly on a long turn, thus restricting airflow to the fire. The Jones Goods of course had smaller wheels and a relatively small boiler. Most 4-6-0s were mixed traffic engines, weren't they? Remember when they were introduced, several of the companies were still building single - driver express locos, or had only just stopped doing so

That's an awfully long boiler!