Yellowperil

17 hours ago, Bucoops said:

 

You clearly didn't look after them very well then?

 

Haha, well I'be broken much more expensive kit in a shorter time frame!

 

However, in all seriousness, it became apparent very quickly that once the pan on a loco could no longer be raised for whatever fault, the vehicles were going to end their days as parts donors. No major work was undertaken on them, just very minor stuff like the occasional battery charge.

 

91104 in particular had a lovely amount of mould in it...

 

9 hours ago, jools1959 said:

As far as I’m aware, they were just been “switched off” and two headed to Sims with their nameplates still attached.

I looked after the 13x 91s at Belmont for over a year. When they finally went for stripping only 3 still worked properly. They weren’t just “switched off” they’d been gradually deteriorating for a number of months.

SED fantastic historical photos...especially as I model the Erewash Valley Line!

Agreed, the photos would be fascinating!

Steve, useful info thanks very much, I'll try and source the book mentioned.

The wagons were unfitted but could be fitted with a temporary pipe for operation in a fitted train, particularly in later years. Brake vans were used anyway not only for carrying the guard, but also the attendant load inspector. The info about the headcodes is also extremely useful!

 

I've seen BR loading drawings showing conflats, Lowmac and Loriots acting as runner wagons. Quite often, there would also be bogie bolsters used to return the empty wagons (they often didn't run unloaded).

 

What does seem weird is the lack of photos of the wagons operating in an actual train. I assumed they'd be photographed, being specially diagrammed trains, but this appears not to be the case.

 

 

thanks

Hope RMWebbers can help!

 

I'm after pictures of the BR Dia 150 Girder wagons operating in traffic.

 

Paul Bartletts site has some great detail shots of wagons in sidings, and there are two good shots in the 53A Models Collection, but what I'm really after is photos showing the wagons in traffic showing locomotive types, runner wagon types, brake van types, train headcodes, dates etc.

 

If anyone has any good photos, they would be gratefully received.

 

Pictures of these wagons operating in traffic are quite rare it seems.

Wow never expected the MTV, excellent!

16 minutes ago, PaulCheffus said:

Hi

 

There is a third alternative but you have to be a member of the 2mm SA to obtain the ex Stephen Harris kit. I have built six with another six in the stash all with N gauge wheelsets.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

Cheers Paul, thought there might be a 2mm kit but couldn’t remember.

Be nice to see the Shark in N, I was very much looking forward to it.

The fact Hattons sold all of their mermaids might mean that the height issue isn’t a problem for joe average modeller. The alternative is a crude white metal lump, the rtr version will look 1000 times better. I have 6 and I’m very happy with them.

 

i don’t think there are any obvious conclusions at this point, if it’s a joke it’s a very odd one.

I don’t know, there’s categories in n gauge diesel locos and wagons but not populated yet, curiouser and curiouser....

What’s this all about?

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/stocklist/3156688/1000589/1000672/0/hattons_dreamlist_n_gauge_electric_locos/prodlist.aspx

 

look at the product codes!

1 hour ago, Edward Blue said:

So they make Dapol as well.  http://www.shinedew.com/product_show.asp?id=9

 

I suppose if you are selling at the more basic end of the market and happy with an overseas design. its a simple matter of sending photographs and some mesurements? They don't appear to ask for technical or design skill in their customers.

However, such skills would be most useful when reviewing their drawings, artwork and EPs, to make sure there aren’t any “boo boos”.

The Dunning Kruger affect seems particularly apt for this particular manufacturer.

...still nicer than a Porterbrook Purple Deltic

I wouldn’t count on it, still lots to do.

Yes, it's DB 67s used for EC Thunderbirds, and there's four in use at a time (Kings X, Doncaster, Newcastle, Edinburgh). Although whether any adapters would be carried on the 67s is another matter as they keep being changed, or if they'd be carried by the 800s themselves.

 

The emergency screw coupling's used to the 67 on either end of a 91/Mk4 set. (In fact, just put a 67 onto a Mk4 set at Heaton at lunchtime).

 

In the dis-jointed post-privatisation world, even 'conventional' couplings can be incompatable. Although the 91s and 67s both have buckeye type couplers, we're not allowed to use the 67's buckeye (the DVT only has a drawhook for an emergency screw shackle).

I recall one occasion with a failed Mk4 set at Durham, a 66 was turned out onto the rear, onto the 91, to haul the set back to Newcastle. Although neither loco had an emergency scew coupling onboard we weren't allowed to use the 66's buckeye (same as a 67's), and I'd to get the screw coupling from the DVT end. I commandeered one of the passenger luggage trolleys to carry the thing the length of the platform!

Also, although the 67 with the buckeye swung to the side out of use then has a 'conventional' drawbar hook, that's not compatible with the emergency coupling bar of an HST!

In this case an adaptor, carried in the Power Car, is used to connect the coupling bar to the 67's buckeye!

Those who are interested in UK coupling systems may find this RSSB document useful:

 

https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/reldocs/sd001%20iss%202.pdf

 

Interesting point, the Alliance and Drophead type couplers as made had no in built vertical restraint. However BR modified them in the late 1980s/early 1990s to incorporate a lower shelf bracket which provides vertical restraint after a movement of about 104mm IIRC. Certainly on the alliance couplers the LSB only has a strength of about 30kN and doesn’t really help in a high speed crash, there were also a lot of problems with knuckle pin fatigue due to the weight of the LSB, which is now why many drophead and alliance couplers incorporate a welded LSB.

 

The buckeyes in the US have cast lower and upper shelf brackets, but this was deemed too expensive on legacy BR fleets.

 

Regards

 

YP.

These were WR ones, but there were many around the place; Ashford (Kent) had one, as did Hoo Jct and Hither Green. One still remains, I believe, at Stapleford and Sandiacre, just north of Toton Yard; new sloping-bed wagons mean a set of points can be assembled (as previously) but are then just broken down into fairly large components for transport to site. Previously, every timber and rail had to be numbered, before the points were dismantled for transport to their intended destination.

Someone associated with Tonbridge West Yard (the model) has done a minimum-space model of the Hither Green site, which may be on RM Web.

There’s also the sister site at Beeston (former freight liner yard) where the largest layouts are assembled, inspected and broken down.

 

Unless they’ve repaired the bridge, the yard at sandiacre is restricted as the bridge over the river is in a poor state of repair.

Like. We used to diagram on the basis of one gallon per mile for mainline diesels and I don't think we ever had a problem with any running out of fuel for that reason. This didn't apply for Class 60s where Derby produced, as I've said previously, individual fuel figures for each diagrammed working - the only class for which that was done and presumably on the grounds that they were more thirsty, especially on heavy trains. than other locos (we didn't diagram 58s so I've no knowledge of those in respect of fuel consumption.

 

It was interesting to see that BR's work in carefully assessing data for loco working and matters such as fuel consumption seems to have been replaced by a table of approximations. I sincerely hope that approach does not extend to permitted loads and critical things for heavy train working such as coupling strength and marshalling.

 

BTW when I refer to 'heavy trains' I wouldn't consider anything under about 3,500-4,000 tons as being 'heavy' (and yes TONS not tonnes).

I should point out, that table of approximations was only a small amount of the output from the project, I’m not going to share the majority of the information for obvious reasons.

 

The Class 66 figures, for example, were derived from an analysis of over 300 different real journeys.

Not sure that chart is too correct.

When we do RHTT pairs of 37 s use about a third less fuel than pairs of 66 s

Would be interesting to see how a 57 compares as they are also pretty thirsty

It’s an approximate figure based on a number of assumptions. For example, train class has a significant affect on consumption, these figures are based on a Class 6 train. In reality consumption is a very complex subject and is subject to a huge number of variables, making it difficult to calculate accurately, hence the ‘approximate’ nature of these figures.

 

These figures are used by a number of rail organisations, including some FOCs.

Based on something worked on previously, here are ‘approximated’ fuel consumption figures (gallons/mile) for a number of locomotives which makes for an interesting comparison.

There have also been mooted projects to fit swing heads to the Class 59/0 and /1, but a lack of locomotive drawings and cost is a potential issue, they aren’t quite the same as the 66 underneath.

Some HTAs are only buckeye fitted at one end, the other being the bog standard screw coupling, and there have been feasibility studies into converting the rest, cost might be an issue though.

 

These wagons are notorious for structural cracking (body bolster top webs to name one) with several mods/repairs to improve their strength, might be one obstacle to shortening in a similar manner to the HYA.

oh here's another stealth deviant! Make yourself known next time FFS!

You know me very well

Certainly the stuff I’ve been fairly recently involved with gave me no cause for concern re:Class 59 reliability, but there’s no nostalgia involved, just making sure the numbers stack up. The 59/1s is of similar vintage and the 59/2s are newer than the Class 60!