7007GreatWestern

John, The film is fabulous! Am I right in saying all the train movements are running automatically under the control of RR&Co or are you "at the regulator yourself" operating them manually? You mention in the captions that some movements are dependent on trains clearing block sections. Is RR&C using some kind of physical sensor to detect that or is it using "dead reckoning"? (e.g. 7226 has been moving at X mph for Y seconds so must have travelled Z distance so is therefore clear of block....) Also, the smooth running of your locos is impressive. Those heavily weathered plodding freight engines like to 72xx and the Super D just ooze atmosphere. Great to see Granby "brought to life" for those of us who aren't going to see it in the flesh! Andy. PS The camera work and editing are spot on. I found to my horror last week that Youtube removed their online Editor in September last year, so I'm guessing you used a PC based NLE?

How about 7930 "Kneausefolk Hall"? A long term Southall loco I believe.

Hi David, Regarding Collett's opposition to additional war work being taken on in World War II: Collett cited the disruption and run down in railway stock he had experienced during the first conflict as the reason why the railway should not do the same in the second. Apparently the "Men from the Ministry" were not impressed by his argument! Regarding the part Spiritualism played in Collett's life: You're (almost) bang-on! Collett's wife Ethelwyn died of kidney failure in 1923. They had married in 1896 and were childless. Collett it is said was utterly devastated. Weight fell away from him and he grew "thin and wasted." He became increasingly cut-off from colleagues at Swindon and all talk about anything other than work was prohibited in his presence. He never fully recovered from the loss and as you say Spiritualism was part of his way of coping. After the loss of his wife he immersed himself in medical text books. Apparently became both very knowledgable and dismissive of conventional medicine. Later in his life he claimed to have cured himself of cancer by strict abstinence and dieting. Chacksfield speculates that Collett blamed the medical fraternity for failing to save his wife, hence his embracing of what we would call today "alternative medicine". I hope the above is not too depressing for this normaly jocular 'organ' and that some insight into the man behind the designs are of interest. Andy.

The timing is interesting. 7017 "G.J. Churchward" was one of the batch of Castles built immediately after Nationalisation. So, it was British Railways Western Region, not the GWR that honoured Churchward. Collett retired in 1941 but didn't pass away until 1952. Maybe the justification (excuse?) in 1948 for not naming a loco after him is that it was an honour only granted posthumously? If Collett was asked if he would like to be so honoured, I am not surprised that he declined. I base that on the insights into his character provided by J.E. Chacksfield's biography "C.B. Collett - A Competent Succesor". Collett was an enigma. He could be awkwardly stiff and formal at times (*) but at the same time hated pomposity. I think that having a locomotive named after him would not have "sat well" with his dislike of self-importance. Also it is important to bear in mind that Collett was for the most part emotionally detached from the life of the company. Unlike Churchward who threw himself wholeheartedly into the life of the GWR and to the community of Swindon (He was the town's first Lord Mayor while working for the company), Collett had as little to do with either as he could manage outside working hours. In the months leading up to his retirement he bought a house in Wimbledon unbeknownst to almost everyone in the company. Upon his retirement he resigned his professional memberships (Institutes of Civil and Mechanical Engineering) and moved immediately to Wimbledon. He then severed his connections with the world of railways completely. Almost nothing is known about his final years except that he threw himself into his real passions, Spiritualism and Metaphysics. All the above assumes that Collett WAS offered to have a locomotive named after him. If no such offer was made one would have to wonder why. Chacksfield's book makes a remarkable claim that may or may not be relevant (or indeed accurate). On Page 144 of the book Chacksfield says that it was rumoured that M15 were investigating Collett because of his belligerent opposition to the GWR taking on addition 'war work' (ie non-railway work such as production of munitions). That the GWR yielded to the demands of the Government Ministries was due to the Board overruling Collett! Maybe that incident from the early part of the war was still in people's minds in 1948? The above may be nothing more than a juicy bit of workplace gossip, but there is no doubt in my mind that Collett was not regarded at Swindon with anything like the respect or affection felt toward Churchward. GJG died crossing the tracks from his house into the works to "check up on things" eleven years AFTER his retirement! He lived, ate and breathed the GWR. C.B. Collett on the other hand did NOT and those in positions of influence in the company knew it. One final, amusing point. The Great Western DID in fact name something in honour of Collett - a road! Collett Avenue is to be found in the Rodbourne area of Swindon and the "honour" was bestowed upon him while he was still in office in 1938. *An anecdote about Collet's formality from Chacksfield's book:- There is a story of Collet and Churchward visiting a boiler shop at Swindon that was lit by portable gas flares connected to the mains by a flexible pipe. "Collett turned to a chargehand and said 'Fetch me an illuminant'. This request was met with a blank stare. Churchward stepped briskly forward and called "Bill, bring a bloody gas!". Collett spent much of his career failing to communicate with the ARLE, the individual CMEs of other railways and even his own Drawing Office staff. It seems his efforts on the shop floor were little better! Andy.

Hi John, The UK is forecast to be hit by a weather system next week straight from Siberia! The journos have dubbed it "The Beast from the East". You might be wondering how terrible a meteorological phenomenon has to be to earn such a daunting sobriquet? Well apparently we can expect night time temperatures to plummet to -5 (centigrade) and snow as deep as 10-15cm (4"-6") is expected. At this point I imagine your average Canadian would be in fits of hysterical laughter that something so puny could cause such consternation. You have to look at things in UK terms however. This is a country who's transportation network, both public and private, grinds to a complete standstill with barely an inch of snow on the ground. You Oh well, time to ready the emergency rations, batten down the hatches, put one's affairs in order and prepare for the uniquely British form of pandemonium the begin! Andy. Below: Brits stranded in their cars....there's all of an inch of snow on the ground....

Believe it or not I think there may well be a tiny shred of justification for the Dartmouth Steam Railway's use of lined green on its 2-8-0 tanks. I'll explain. In 1925 celebrations were held to mark the centenary of the Stockton and Darlington Railway. I very useful website describes the events and lists the locos in attendance:- http://www.railcentre.co.uk/RailHistory/Stockton/Pages/StocktonPage6.html#Section02_ID LNER locomotives dominated, but the GWR sent a strong contingent including 'Castle' 4082 'Windsor Castle', 'Castle' 111 'Viscount Churchill', prototype 47xx No. 4700, the replica of Broad Gauge 2-2-2 'North Star' and finally 2-8-0T No. 5225. 'Windsor Castle' would have been chosen as it was considered the company's 'royal engine', having been personally driven by King George V during his visit to Swindon in April 1924. 'Viscount Churchill' would have been chosen because it was the rebuild of 'The Great Bear'. Perhaps the GWR were keen to remind their hosts that the GWR built the county's first 'Pacific'? 4700 and 5225 was chosen would have been chosen to represent the company's good locomotives. 4700 was certainly painted in non-standard lined green for the purposes of the celebration. The question is, was 5225 also so adorned? I haven't managed too find any photographs, but amazingly film of the event does survive. The 4700 and one of the 'Castles' ate clearly seen, but sadly not the 2-8-0T Andy.

If you carefully read the paragraph "Mid Chrome Green" it says "weather boards, sides and rear of bunker, sides and rear of tender." I think weatherboard is probably the correct term for what we would call the faces of the cab. In the paragraph "Black" it says "inside of bunker, inside, top and front of tender." which is self explanatory. I believe Stephen Freeman to be correct. Andy.

Here's a GWR 2-8-0T with full livery including lining......it just isn't green! https://www.steampicturelibrary.com/2-8-0-tank-locomotive-no-4202/print/7630516.html Andy.

Oh I dunno. I think it's a bargain........ relatively speaking:-

The leading coach looks to be a Gresley Brake Third and the vehicle being it also appears to be a Gresley. Is that Autocoach one of the ones converted from being a Railmotor?

John, I hope you will indulge me in illustrating my point about the three patterns of chimney fitted to the 'Halls'? Sounds like a good excuse to saviour some fabulous period photographs before 'retiring' for the day..... So, here's an examples of the early, tall chimney:- Here's a stonkingly atmospheric photo from 1947 of 6909 'Frewin Hall' alongside a Webb Coal tank attached to and equally antiquated looking carriage. The location could be Granby, but actually it's Newport:- https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Trains-Railways-British-Isles/GWR-and-BRW/GWR-4-6-0s/i-nGsDPRL/A Now compare that with this equally atmospheric photo of 4949 'Packwood Hall" taken at Exeter St. Davids. The chimney is shorter, wider and appears to taper out towards the bottom:- https://goo.gl/2jj1tp When the 'Modified Halls' were constructed they were all fitted with this second chimney type. Here's another photo oozing period detail at Exeter St. Davids. Although I've picked this photo to illustrate a point about the locomotive's chimney, just look at those carriages! https://goo.gl/yRk2Xp Following the trials of 1951 most if not all of the Modified Halls got the new, capuchonless chimney. Because of the interchangeability of the standard No.1 boiler this chimney type ended up on 'Granges' as well as the older 'Collett Halls'. Here's Old Oak's 7904 'Fountians Hall', freshly ex-works and being oiled up by the driver and showing the final chimney design:- https://goo.gl/PsCQvX G'night all! Andy.

No John, I've found something worse - it had a non-standard tall safety valve bonnet! http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrls232.htm OK, I'm being naughty now. This photo was taken in 1938 and an awful lot of 'water passed under the bridge' between then and 1947! Seriously though gents, I would be mortified if this information that I am finding for you ceases to be of assistance or interest and instead becomes a scourge. There is only one purpose to models railways that I can see is to give pleasure to those who build, operate and admire them. Yep, it's better to be historically accurate than not, but if the pursuit of accuracy takes the joy out of the hobby for someone.........well let's just say I think they've missed the point. Andy.

Hi Rob, You may recall that in a previous incarnation I PM'd you a photo of the self same loco slogging up Dainton with a freight at roughly the same time (circa 1948). Seems a bit coincidental doesn't it? According to BRDatabase it was a London Division engine from November '47 onwards. Unfortunately it doesn't say where it was based prior to that. Does anyone have the appropriate "Book of the Hall 4-6-0s" as this might reveal its allocation prior to then? In terms of physical differences, 4943 should be the same as Bachmann's forthcoming 4920. The cab side handrails should be the same and neither should have a fire-iron tunnel. One thing I have noted about the product images for the new model: they've omitted the capuchon on the chimney which they also did with the 'Modified Hall' model of 2016. That's incorrect for either type of Hall until the 1950s. I'll explain. The Halls and Modified Halls had three different chimneys during their careers. The original chimney was fitted to the Collet Halls only. It was tall and had a lip or capuchon around the leading edge. The second chimney was wider and shorter than the first and also had a capuchon. It was fitted to the Modified Halls when new and many Collett Halls also when new. The final chimney design came about as a result of trials conducted by Sam Ell on 7916 'Moberley Hall' in 1951 in an attempt the improve the steaming of the class on the poor fuel then available. The final Hall chimney was tall, narrow and devoid of a capuchon. It was fitted initially to the Hawksworth AK variant of the Swindon No.1 boiler built for the Modified Halls. These boilers were routinely swapped between different 'Halls' when they went to Swindon for major overhaul, so eventually many Collett Halls as well as Modified Halls had the new narrow chimney. So, at the very least a capuchon needs to be fitted to the top of the chimney - very easily done with some suitable plasticard or brass or n/s strip. The super fastidious might want to replace it with a suitable casting (e.g. PDK or Gibson) as I think the height and width will be more accurate. Andy.

Hi Gents, I'm afraid I'm going to be a P.I.T.A. by questioning the above, if only for the purpose of historical accuracy. If you re-read Stationmaster's paragraph the context of his remark is the 2-8-0 tanks, not necessarily the 7200s. I'll happily be corrected if someone can prove otherwise, but there are simply too many photos dated post '46 of 7200s without the fender fitted for me to believe they all (but one) had them in '46. Here's a few I found with a cursory search of the web:- 7204 & 7234 https://flic.kr/p/8RwQCm 7205 http://www.ipernity.com/doc/philsutters/26503535 7209 https://flic.kr/p/9tZ67N 7211 https://goo.gl/36qb7v 7213 https://flic.kr/p/eafpLn 7225 http://www.geoffspages.co.uk/monorail/kg04.htm 7235 https://flic.kr/p/dqEWjx 7236 https://flic.kr/p/o11Vyr 7240 https://flic.kr/p/qZZetw 7245 https://goo.gl/g6QKCW 7247 https://flic.kr/p/jqrPGG 7249 https://flic.kr/p/WDZ5E3 In addition to the above that I can share with you, I have copyright photos of 7202/7203/7210/7227 all running in BR service without fenders. That's 17 or roughly a third of the entire class! The usually reliable gwr.org website (http://www.gwr.org.uk/no-heavy-tanks.html) is much more circumspect about the fitting of fenders and said the following:- “The situation regarding bunker fenders on 72xx locos – certainly in the first group of original rebuilds – seems to have varied very much from loco to loco and is best checked, if at all possible, by reference to dated photos as some seem to have lasted quite late without fenders and were probably withdrawn without them.” My theory (and it is only a theory) is that the fitting of the fender guard was of far more urgent on the 2-8-0 tanks than the 7200s because of their limited bunker capacity. The early 7200s had 6 ton coal capacity anyway, the same as a standard Collett 400 gallon tender! I hope this is of use, and I will happily ‘wear sackcloth and ashes’ if I am incorrect. Regards to all, Andy.

Here's another story about that most unlikely 'speed demon', the humble Churchward 43xx. The following is from "C.B. Collett - A Competent Successor" by J.E. Chacksfield and concerns Collett's thinking with regard to driving wheel diameter for his new 'King' Class. "The 6' 6" driving wheel diameter, non standard, followed an experience Collett had which helped him decide on this value as being suitable. He and C.C. Crump, by now the Running Superintendent, were travelling to Paddington on an express which, at one point on the journey, was overtaken by a train hauled by a class 4300 Mogul with its 5' 8" wheels. Crump was all for reprimanding the driver of the Mogul, having taken the number of the locomotive, but was dissuaded from do so by Collett, as he explained: "This confirms a thought I have had recently." As a result of his high speed encounter with a Mogul, Collett ordered that the 'drivers' on 5002 'Ludlow Castle' be turned down to 6' 6". There was negligible effect on 5002's performance so Collett settled on that size for the 'King'. Andy.

Thanks COY. There's a darn good reason why I never post on RMWeb about carriages and wagons...it's called total ignorance! I'm glad someone on here knows what they're talking about...... Andy

'Evening Gets, Mike the Stationmaster did indeed post a very detailed survey of difference between the bunkers of different 72xxs, though that was not primarily about fenders:- http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/49734-gwr-8-coupled-tank-engines/?p=571493 There is good news and bad. First the good news. In John Hodge's superb "The North & West Route Volume3B" there is a photograph of 7220 dated post 1956 clearly showing that it did not have a fender fitted at the time. Does that prove that the loco didn't have one in 1947? Sadly no, at least not conclusively. Now the bad news. In the same book is a photo of 7210 dated 1964 WITH a fender fitted. Unfortunately, in David Maidment's equally excellent "Great Western Weight Coupled Heavy Freight Locomotives" the same loco is seen in 1953 WITHOUT a fender guard! The above proves nothing more than we all know already, namely that there is no substitute for an actual photo taken in the period one chooses to model! As we've discussed before, the period you guys are modelling was one of extreme depravation and hardship. High quality photographs of locomotives taken in that period are rare; those of heavy freight locos far rarer. All of which poses a good question: "Just how fastidious should one be about details like this?" For me, the answer is "as fastidious as the best historical evidence you can find allows you to be". In short, if you know with certainty that something was a particular way, then model it that way. But if it's uncertain, I think modeller's license is entirely reasonable! Put it another way gents, if I had built a layout to the same standard as either of your excellent works and an invited guest found fault with with the bunker fender on my Hornby 72xx I think I would be throwing him or her out of the door by their ear! One final and entirely unrelated point. I've just found this wonderful photograph of "Marington Hall" and "King George III" at Kingswear circa 1947:- https://mikemorant.smugmug.com/Trains-Railways-British-Isles/GWR-and-BRW/GWR-4-6-0s/i-TgrMsxz/A Of note is the Collet 'Bow End' coach still in wartime brown and what looks to be a 'Centenary' vehicle behind the King. Andy.

Hi Castle et al, 5322 and its classmates had a reputation for their 'riding qualities', vividly described by 81E's best known engineman, Harold Gasson. In his book "Footplate Days" he described his experiences working on these locos in the 40s and 50s:- "Regarding the tractive effort of this engine, the sheer all-out power, was a sight to see. Pulling out of Didcot East Junction up gully, or from the West curve and over to the down main at Foxhall Junction, each cylinder would take a charge of steam and would go over hard on that side, then over to the other side, and each blast from the chimney would be in unison with the movement of the cab. No cross-Channel steamers ever rolled so much in a heavy sea, but it was not a roll to give cause for alarm, just a solid punch from each piston." The 43s and 53s certainly 'rolled' at low speeds and under heavy load, but could steam beautifully if you knew what you were doing. Mr. Gasson describes his mixed feelings towards the class based on some rough trips he had with them. That all changed when a Carmarthen enginemen showed him the 'trade secret' technique necessary to get the best from them. The trick was to wedge the back damper lever open as far as possible using the gauge glass spanner, since the notches in the damper lever (designed by Mr. Holcroft no less) didn't open the door far enough! The front damper was lifted just of the face of the ashpan. With the loco set up thus, the fire would burn with such intensity as to scorch the unwary Driver's trousers! As a result the needle on the pressure gauge would remain rock solid even with prodigious loads on the back. I wonder if the lads at Didcot are aware of this trick? Andy.

Hi Neil, When you say it has "no vacuum pump" I guess you're referring to the spindle (which is connected to the crosshead by a triangular bracket) rather than the black cylindrical pump body (which is attached to the running plate)? If memory serves that was omitted from the recent 'Grange' release (eg 'Bucklebury Grange') but was present on the earlier Sander Kan models. Peter's Spares are showing a replacement Hornby 'Grange' valve gear set (part no. X9348) on eBay with the spindle present! It's easy to make your own spindle from appropriate n/s wire. I have done so with several Hornby 28xxs using two-part epoxy to attach the spindle to the bracket. Hope this helps. Andy.

Hello John et al, Here are some meandering thoughts which I hope you will find amusing or informative..... First off, well done to Tony for such a marvellous weathering job. Inspirational! I too have become to be an admirer of the "Super D". As a staunch Great Western man it's a kind of guilty pleasure, a bit like liking ABBA. I hope we can keep this between ourselves? Anyway, I bought my first Bachmann Super D with the reluctance one might expect from a small boy presented with a plate of cabbage for lunch! You see, I intend to model the "North & West Route" in the 1950s and they were simply an indispensable part of that route at that time. "Maybe I'll grow to love it one day" I thought to myself, without much conviction. Then quite recently I was 'grazing' railway videos on YouTube and found a couple that really brought these venerable locos to life for me. The first is by Chris Eden-Green whose videos you might already be familiar with:- The 'Super D' it seems was awkward, idiosyncratic and temperamental to work on....just my kind of loco! Over on the National Preservation forum, a group of very knowledgable members including volunteer footplate crews discussed the 'foibles' of the class:- https://www.national-preservation.com/threads/super-d-49395.38595/page-2 It seems that list of foibles is even longer than that listed by Chris Eden-Green! For example, if you wind the tender handbrake 'on' too much the mechanism falls to bits! Apparently the firebox grate is flat rather than sloped so the fireman would have to throw the coal right to the front of the box without 'gravity assistance". The lubricators dispensed oil faster on one side of the loco than the other, so there was a danger of running out.....which could entail a 'hot box'. Also it was very easy to accidentally open the tender water valves.....which could cause the loco to run low on water....which could entail the 'ultimate' disgrace of having to throw out the fire in order to save the firebox crown sheet! Whatever their vices, for a class built in the early 1920's to be still around in 1964 they must have operationally useful. Bear in my that the Hawksworth "Counties" were built 25 years later but all had gone by 1963! Here's some footage of the preserved 49395 filmed on the North Yorkshire Moors Railway doing the kind of work these locos evidently did rather well, whatever the crews thought of them..... Moving on to Bachmann's model, a railway modeller and YouTuber called Australia1957T performed 'strength trial' of six different eight-couple, OO gauge RTR models. Perhaps you can guess which model won? And before anyone asks, yes, I admit it, I bought a second 'Super D'. I guess I'm a convert. Just don't tell anyone....... ;-) Regards to all, Andy.

There is some nice footage of the preserved Railmotor No. 93 on the West Somerset Railway here:- The first 20 seconds are particularly helpful as they shows the proximity of the coal bunker to the external doors - an important consideration given that it was coaled manually.

Some more findings on the fuelling of GWR Railmotors which don't answer the OP's question conclusively but are hopefully interesting all the same! I found an interview with a gentleman called Harold Gubbins, dated 1967, on the GWS Website:- http://www.didcotrailwaycentre.org.uk/zrailmotor93/history/pictures/sub_gubbins.html It's a priceless bit of social and railway history which someone had the foresight to preserve for posterity. Mr Gubbins was a Fireman on the 'Chalford Railmotor' and recalls working on them when they were introduced in 1903. Coal for the Railmotors was initially supplied in 1cwt (50kg bags). However after a month or so this arrangement was abandoned and the 'motors were coaled directly from a wagon dispatched to Chalford shed. Chalford, like Southall, was provided with a galvanised shed and coaling/watering facilities though he doesn't say what the "coaling facility" was. Mr Gubbins estimates that he used approx 30 cwt of coal per day. This equates to about 1.5 Imperial tons I believe. That sounds like a lot to our modern ears but was not much by the standards of the day. In his book "A loco Fireman Looks Back" (Bradford Barton), former Laira and Swindon Fireman Ray Gwillam recounts his experiences of working on the coaling tower at Laira shortly after joining the Railway in the 1950s:- "A shift's work was about 12 tons, after which the tonnages tipped qualified for a bonus. The men had to go like the clappers to qualify - and for the first week I didn't. It turned out that in actual fact, I was termed a 'passenger' - and losing the men money, which was worse than running off with their wives!" In summary, it would be well within the physical capabilities of a shed labourer to coal up a Railmotor with 1.5 tons of coal from the Southall platform, and manual loading from 1 cwt sacks or from an adjacent wagon would not be considered extraordinary by the standards of the time.

Looking at the 1895, 1914 and 1962 maps there appear to be sidings running into the factory from a junction to the west of the station. Indeed by 1962 there seems to have been quite a complex of lines, some of which appears to be just the other side of the vertiginous drop on the other side of that wall:- http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/southall/index2.shtml Given that the factory was generously rail-served, is it likely that churns for it would beloaded/unloaded on railway property on a rickety platform above the level of the factory roof? Could it be that the platform was, coincidentally, either newly built or recently refurbished at the time the photograph was taken? Note that the cross-bracing and "headstock" look similarly clean. Just a thought.

There is a fascinating and detailed description of the development of Southall Station and its environs here:- http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/southall/ The Otto Monsted factory traded under the name "The Maypole Dairy Company", possibly to avoid (misguided) anti-German sentient? The company was in fact Danish! Southall had a one-road loco shed until 1884 when it was replaced by the new six road shed. Interestingly however it did NOT house the rail motor. That was stabled in a corrugated iron shed to the south of the Brentford branch. It was built in 1903 and demolished in 1953. If you scroll down the article you will find a map for 1914 which can be expanded a little. That appears to show the Railmotor shed roughly half way between the six road shed and the footbridge from which the photograph was taken.

The Railmotor explanation makes a lot of sense. Given the proximity of Southall shed I wouldn't expect hand-coaling of conventional steam locos. However, coaling a Railmotor from above and by gravity was hardly an option! The shed's Coal Stage would be useless for the Railmotor. Even the GWR (notable for it's primitive and labour intensive coaling practises!) would attempt to avoid hand coaling if possible, though there were exceptions. At small sub-sheds at the end of country branchlines (eg Princetown branch) coaling by hand from an adjacent wagon was the modus operandi.