MidlandRed

By way of clarification, 51137/51150 were withdrawn and scrapped from WR parcels service in the early 1970s - they’d spent a brief period on the ScR also. The others (50819/62/72/915) were all returned to passenger service in 1977 at Tyseley - seemingly without gangways - 50862/72 were in one of the first Tyseley sets given gangways to operate with redundant ex ER class 101 trailers in the early 80s. All info from Railcar.co.uk.

The NTP process started before this (first version 1965) this led to classes 14 and 43 (Warship) being offered to other regions as redundant. I suspect if it had stayed open it could have functioned as a route for MGR trains say to Didcot (dependent on where the coal was originating) but loco hauled would likely have been classes 47 with some 45, maybe 44 ( freight or passenger for the first two) but very likely DMUs. Possibly class 37s from the WR or ER. NB the NTP did result in quite a number of DMU migrations (WR to ScR), and class 37 (WR to ScR) at the end of summer 1966 - as a region which had generally eliminated steam by the end of 1965, and combined with the effect of Beeching especially on freight, the over provision of modern traction was becoming apparent and would also extend elsewhere, resulting in withdrawal of other classes, especially as steam fizzled out area by area. It’s almost inconceivable any extra traction would be required (or even permitted - a ceiling of around 3000 units had been placed by the mid 60s and even requests from the WR for more Brush type 4 and type 1s were met with offers of the temporary loan of LMR bound new build Brush 4s and EE type 1s until traffic flows had become clearer following Beeching - WR did not take up that offer).

They and the Birmingham Division cars (all of W55991-6) started off with a narrow version of speed whiskers (two) on the gangway covers. They then all graduated to yellow painted gangway covers. The class 123 DMUs also had yellow painted gangway covers on the fronts of the driving cars when new. Some class 128 fronts were so filthy and in some cases damaged after a couple of years you could barely see the yellow. Interestingly I think W55992 (the second London Division class 128) also received that early version of corporate blue - I have it recorded as such as Paddington (basically, Swindon seems, for DMU cars, to have simply initially applied blue instead of green and lining, the remainder being the same as in green livery (white cab roof, syp and blue buffer beam) with the exception of the under frame (burnt umber instead of black) and the small height white numerals and BR logos on cab door. Most if not all WR classes (including LMR Tyseley units) had a handful of cars repainted like this although I don’t recall any of the Tyseley class 128s (M55993-6) receiving it. Going back to the class 128 used during the Barmouth Bridge closure, I’m pretty sure I’ve seen a photo of it hauling a couple of hopper wagons loaded with ballast (possibly a brake van also although my memory may be playing tricks 🤨 )

Wow - these are great, as I thought they would be - the wait will be worth it - I already have D7666 and (green as built) D7598 on order but that D7661 is really tempting as well!! Looks great in blue syp with red buffer beam.

Mine also has a wobble/waddle. On checking the free play in the wheel sets, from the front, numbers one and two are quite firm in terms of play in the side to side movement whilst the third (nearest the back) has much more play - notably the wobble is at the rear. I think this may be to do with making the loco freely operable over tight radii curves. The two Bachmann 03s I bought used similarly had a slight wobble and also had differences in the sideways play in the wheel sets - I tightened slightly the screws on the coupling rod on the one with the most play and it improved it. The PWM has hex screws on the coupling rods so I haven’t tried that on the one with the most play. It’s a really nice model with one of two niggles - great for a WR pre TOPS modeller!

I’m quite happy with mine - I think it looks great and it also runs fine - body is not an absolutely snug fit but it’s hardly noticeable owing to the dark colour. I’ll possibly look to improve it when I eventually fit a chip.

Fabulous to see WR pre TOPS class 37s - I’ve pre-ordered D6600 (green syp) and D6992 (blue fye)! Nice to see the availability of pay on despatch (or thereabouts)!!

I know people in this thread have referred to Thameslink once or twice. Those trains ride pretty well in my view but the seats start to get uncomfortable after 40 mins or so. Therefore if you want to travel all the way from London Bridge to Peterborough or Bedford it won’t be terribly comfortable and definitely less so than the 387s (or even 365s) (low density trains) which the 700s replaced. However the network is undeniably helpful providing many travel opportunities than were not available hitherto. Is this simply the same case with the 345s and the previous GE suburban and GW suburban. Perhaps the GW had interim 387s - the GE had 315s all along!! I have to disagree with @The Stationmaster regarding Docklands - this was well underway by the 90s though the Jubilee Line (as well as DLR) provided many travel opportunities, completion of which probably post dated the early 90s BR thinking for Crossrail. Do people living near the GWML not travel to Docklands and thus benefit from not having to put up with the crush load on the Jubilee line in the peak? I suspect the BR people of the early 90s had less interest in such things than TfL does now. Im afraid I’m too remote from it to understand the machinations of the Berkshire commuter but I’m guessing, as with some bits of Thameslink, the longer distance commuters are intended to use ‘semi fasts’ (I.e 387s on GWML as per 360s on MML and semi fasts beyond Shenfield in Essex) - beyond that, where available, longer distance trains such as GWR and EC trains. The Thameslink service at London Bridge is astonishing to be honest - as is the Elizabeth Line through the central core. As stated earlier in this thread, we are where we are - not entirely sure how we can discuss theoretical alterations whilst focussing on a network which is 30 odd years out of date and ignores such matters as Docklands and E London, which generate huge amounts of traffic some of which overloads the Jubilee Line. Also if anyone has tried to board a Javelin travelling out of London in the evening peak at Stratford International, they will see the pressure of this as it’s often physically impossible to board the train, such is the demand from both St Pancras and Stratford International. The comments about Marylebone are interesting. Would Paddington and its approaches accommodate Marylebone’s modern day traffic as well as its own modern day traffic plus the Elizabeth Line as implemented? Sorry if I’m overlooking things here, I’m sure people will point them out. My fear is people are focussing on certain elements of the outer reaches of the GW route and not the broader picture.

That depends on your point of view - note there is no link to the south east from Whitechapel to Abbey Wood, via Canary Wharf, so in that sense it’s hugely poorer than what we got - in fact looks simply like a cross city link from the GW to the GE. What’s been added presumably covers fundamentally important transport links and travel patterns beyond that initial concept. The trains look not dissimilar to an AC version of a Networker (as previously featured on the Great Northern) - class 365.

Not a branch line but definitely a DMU - RCTS photographic archive CUL0642 depicts W50063 at the rear of a DMU service at Shirley station, Birmingham in July 1957, with Siphon tail load (referred to as GW 1459). Part of the reason I’ve ordered one!!

You’d never guess they have white stripes - seems to be a result of coal dust and the cleaning regime for freight locos on most of the ML allocated 27s!! Patch cleaned numbers and electrification notices!!

Not to mention the fine spray of engine and fuel oil - spray the Manager’s saloon for best results 😄 Quite a few were off the road nearly all their lives - I guess at least they were written off the availability figures as stored. https://www.flickr.com/photos/12a_kingmoor_klickr/9670531413

Absolutely - the 350 hp were very limited beyond yard use - slightly less so the 204 hp - indeed in the mid 60s the NE Region were modifying them to run in multiple so they could be used on heavier work. Rather similar to what the WR did for the BPGV later. The WR tank locos could operate at a decent speed so as you say, were more flexible in terms of usage. Direct replacements I noticed on the LM were EE Type 1s (Bescot’s) singly on trains previously hauled by Mickey Mouse 2MT and standard 76xxx. It was not too long before these diesel locos had been banished to work in useful pairs (often) replicating a weighty class 40 at Toton, but could work singly on lighter trains on colliery branches - the WR type 1s, built to a lower spec, did not have this flexibility. The 20s (about 15 of them) were replaced by even more type 2 Sulzers of both the 1160 and 1250 hp types (there were already a lot of them in the Birmingham Division), which worked generally singly but sometimes in pairs (effectively making a heavier Peak). As a spotter, in the early 60s tank locos were few and far between on the LMR around Brum, but Panniers, large and small praries and 56xx were very common on the ex GW lines, reflecting @The Stationmaster’s comment that the GW was very much a tank engine railway - well certainly parts of it were - I recall Halls and Granges being pretty ubiquitous as well. One element of note in respect of my earlier comments about pick up and local freight at the southern end of the WCML - it was quadruple track which meant the type 2 hauled freight only had to compete with the AM10 local passenger and other freight rather than express passenger.

Probably - maybe 94xx as well. WR seemed to use a lot of 0-6-0Ts till the end - despite having replaced yard shunters with diesels. Hence their desire for v large quantities of type 1s (400) as late as the early 60s.

I actually can’t remember what locos were used on pick up goods on WR lines like Snow Hill through to Stourbridge but there were numerous goods yards en route such as Rowley Regis and Cradley Heath amongst others. Also were there not pick up goods along the more important main lines on the WR? And could these have had larger engines? What makes me ask is I recall quite vividly the pick up goods on the southern end of the WMCL in the mid 60s - they were often hauled by new D766x type 2s, built in BR blue (this sticking in the mind) and used also on the Kensington to Willesden portion of motor rail trains.

This is really interesting and entertaining stuff @The Johnster - I’ll look forward to these.

@The Johnster I don’t disagree with you regarding the ‘Death Steam’ era. And receipt of a new Ian Allen Combined Volume was always a fervent read in the early 60s to see exactly what steam had disappeared (and what modern image had appeared). However apart from the Dave F photo, my observations were from 1961-4 on LMR lines around Birmingham. During this era I also saw 70042 (in very clean condition) pulling a short freight train through Sutton Park - tender first as well! I’d say Saltley may have had its first allocation of type 2s by then, but full dieselisation wasn’t till 1966 ish (Bescot - receiving amongst a host of others, brand new D8134-43) and if you ventured to the ex WR lines radiating from Snow Hill, in 1966 much freight was steam hauled and even one or two peak period local passenger trains (Stanier 8F, Black 5 and 9Fs predominated on heavy freight by then though there were plenty of ex GW locos) (except Castles and Kings - express passenger was Brush type 4 post late 1963, preceded for a short period of about a year by Westerns). I suppose ‘Death Steam’ occurred locally for me around 1965-6, maybe 1967 if you travelled as far as Shrewsbury - I can’t remember the exact date but probably late 1966 I wandered around one of the dilapidated roundhouses at Tyseley where there several steam locos including pannier tanks, some in steam - the place was virtually deserted, although the DMU depot and diesel repair depots were hives of activity. This really was ‘Death Steam’!! The energising of the WCML electrification Birmingham area in early 1967 heralded a large change generally in motive power including the adjoining non electrified routes (banishing of several hitherto ubiquitous DMU types, I discovered subsequently to Chester and the bucolic Cambrian being one). Snow Hill downgrade and removal of through traffic occurred as well. And then we got some Warships……extraordinary!!

This is very interesting (particularly having observed the dieselised equivalent in the later 1960s). Im very impressed by the 4F rating - these were replaced in many cases by Sulzer type 2s, although some of these operated bulk freight services previously operated by 8Fs. Also, would a 9F be rated similarly to a Garratt (9Fs replaced them on Toton/Brent)? I wonder what the ratings were for the GC ‘Windcutters’, although ER until the 60s?

With great and due respect to the members referring to GWR/WR practice, would the relative amounts of 2-8-0 locos available have a bearing on availability to operate a pick up goods train? The LMS/LMR is obviously a much bigger network but had over 1000 2-8-0 or 0-8-0 locos available, in comparison to the low hundreds for GW operations. I know I’ve seen LMR 8Fs operating short trains (for instance depositing wagons at a water softening plant) and there’s a couple of photos recently uploaded of an 8F on a pick up goods operating on the Settle and Carlisle in Dave F’s photos. I suspect it was a case of what’s available was used - and the volume of 8Fs might have a bearing on it. J0861 and J0863 depict this. https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/85326-dave-fs-photos-ongoing-more-added-each-day/page/944/

Another very evocative set of photos from 1967 - this thread never fails to get the nostalgia going - great photos as well - J0907 shows a class 108 in what appears to have been Doncaster Works’ initial and apparently unique interpretation of blue livery with a large(r) yellow warning panel!! There’s another thread in prototype questions asking about the use of large locos on pick up goods and the 8F shows a good example - fabulous weathering as well. I think the LMR used these for this purpose quite often (or more likely any loco available) - I saw 8Fs in the Birmingham area in use on such trips in the early 60s, including one in a siding dropping a few wagons at a water softening plant and one at a colliery (Hamstead) collecting a few wagons.

Aha - you must be referring to the private junction off the M4 with an access road going north across the downs!! I think I saw a convoy appear there on one occasion!! I think it’s signed as ‘Works Unit’ - access is on to the eastbound carriageway only. There’s a blank area on OS maps to the north of the location. I had a similar experience - however having been ‘fitted’ with a large number of radioactive studs it was somewhat amusing (or maybe alarming) when part of the discharge process was for the urologist to point a Geiger counter at me and for it to make a great deal of noise…… the radioactivity gradually reduced to zero over 12 months but written instructions like no animals or small children to be sat on your lap for the first two months and various other matters indicates the potential for affecting others (beyond providing effective treatment, for which I’m most grateful). For all of those referring to ‘nuclear free zones’, there’s nothing wrong with local authority Committees voting to state their opposition to nuclear based power and its bi-product, nuclear warhead fuel - however the signs were, of course, illegal as such legend was not prescribed, and there were examples of the SoS, via the DfT instructing removal. However this type of thing is not unheard of - there have been other instances of instruction to remove such varied items as non compliant box junctions, or to place reflective studs in non compliant double white line systems. It’s also interesting that Planning systems proposed by the current administration considers ‘local support’ must be demonstrated for on shore wind farms, but not for new nuclear power stations (unless indirectly via the development consent order process) - not sure which are more visually intrusive or potentially dangerous to the local populace.

178 deaths in the U.K. (see attached Wiki article)(apologies off topic but posted to correct info). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_BSE_outbreak

If only - however it also affected the labelling/lettering of hauled stock, including data panels (also on locos) - this can be a major headache when trying to select items like RTR wagons if you’re modelling pre TOPS. It’s mentioned quite often.

There’s a lot to be said for this @The Johnster. The only disagreement I would have is the changeover from period 4 to 5. I would put this at the introduction of TOPS - this would affect all stock. Thus the earlier rail blue corporate era, which started in 1965 would be in era 4 (along with blue electrics, Pullmans etc, right up to blue fye with the original numbers). This would mean neatly that any BR locos and stock with TOPS paraphernalia would be beyond era 4. This doesn’t, of course, work for preserved stock - I well recall viewing with slight disdain the KWVR stock in fictitious liveries on a visit in about 1969 (and especially the railbus) - it wasn’t only the KWVR that did this sort of thing at the time - however seeing photos of that era now I rather like them - perhaps it’s an age thing!!!

And for me, this will be the ‘acid test’ of the Accurascale - does it run reliably? I guess we won’t know for quite a while. I think the Dapol class 22 is an excellent model and also think the Accurascale class 37 will find it difficult to beat the new Bachmann class 37 - but let’s see what appears in due course! And what about the Sutton’s baby Sulzers? Surely at the pinnacle of RTR diesels. If Hornby applies the 9F treatment to any of their diesels, then we’ll have another contender!!