65179

I think the signalling diagram is a bit of a composite representing the later situation once the Hartley Mains trackbed was just used as sidings, but still indicating the previous layout when the Mains were in place. Sassaby image from Flickr showing the situation in 1973, and with some explanation in the text. Edit to add the four track situation: and the Mains being lifted in 1961: (Both copyright Alan Brooks, North Tyneside Steam Flickr images). Regards, Simon

Hammond air pre-heater apparently. See note for 189 at bottom of page here: https://sremg.org.uk/steam/b1(lbsc)-mob.shtml Simon

47100 is named Merlin in that photo. Thus it's Stratford style with a touch of Tinsley as the loco was a Tinsley Speedlink/Railfreight Distribution loco when photographed. The name places it between 20 September 1989 and withdrawal in July 1991. Simon

I think we've had views of No.7 in this thread before. It was certainly well photographed on its trips between Wheldale and the washer at Fryston. For instance this Steve Banks image on Flickr: Simon

It's all really coming on. Which Duchesses will you be sawing in half to pose on the rear shortened tracks Graham? Simon

Thank you Mike for making your etches available in 2mm scale. Here's one of your GC tenders attached to a 3D printed J11 body with etched chassis: Regards, Simon

Not sure if this has been highlighted elsewhere , but I thought I'd bring this to the attention of anyone who had missed it: https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2024/04/welsh-steel-works-to-introduce-replacement-for-class-08-locomotives.html 3 Zephir LOK 16.300s have been purchased by Porterbrook to replace the 08s. It looks like the days of scenes such as this: , so familiar to Cardiff residents, are numbered. Simon

Here's a private owner wagon one from another thread: Simon

It was the suggested arrival of Vol 6 of the Larkin series, and assembling a ca.1950 coal train, that got me thinking about these ex-PO wagons that made it to BR days - still numerous, but largely unphotographed and certainly underrepresented in model form. Volume 6 is advertised as out in May. Simon

Thanks to all those who responded to my query. I'm slightly confused by what looks to be an M prefix to the number. It's quite different to the Wirksworth Quarry absorbed PO shown here: in the M36XXX series. Should I assume the ex-PO in my first photo is 9ft wb and 15ft 6in-ish given the very different relationship between axleguard and headstock to the wagon above? Simon

A bit late for much of the discussion on this thread, but can anyone help with identifying what this grease axleboxed 5 plank wagon pictured at Barnsley Jct. in October 1950 might be please? It's a crop from the edge of an image so the quality isn't great I'm afraid. Many thanks, Simon

3 Class 20s, including 20142, and the barrier wagons currently sat in Pengam Sidings this morning after one of these workings. Regards, Simon

110mph, I understand, when the coupling bar was in use, although the practical limit was usually the max speed of the assisting loco. So it's 110mph regardless of which way round the assisting 91 was orientated:

Yes, covered previously in this thread (post at the bottom of this page): Simon

Operational flexibility. See post 5 here: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/the-hsts-with-buffers.36134/#post-489260 Simon

Yes, I was looking for a typical image of these drags because I have fond memories of seeing 47402, 47413, 47417 and 47418 (and for a while 47517/500) on these after introduction of the Mk4s and DVTs. However, I stumbled across this image taken near where the Class 31 image was at Shipley. As others have noted, this view is a little earlier and shows one of the Mk3 sets initially used with a buffer fitted HST power car at the rear. Simon

Better with a Generator: John Whiteley Flickr image 19 June 1989 The phrase 'Bradford Drag' needs careful use in a search engine now! Simon

I'd completely missed the raised section of running plate on a J20! Simon

Looks like 8269. It's a J19/2 rather than a J20 because of the gap between the smokebox bottom and the valve cover. See this Flickr image: Simon

My current favourite in this regard is a June 1950 view of a South Manchester transfer freight with a 3F 0-6-0 pulling 3 LNER sleeper wagons, an LNER pipe wagon, 2 LMS 10ft wb vans, 2 SR 4 wheel PLVs/PMVs, an NER BZ, and a long string of opens/minerals bringing up the rear. Regards, Simon

Volume 6 of this series is now being advertised on the Crecy site: https://www.crecy.co.uk/the-acquired-wagons-of-british-railways-volume-6 It is stated as covering an eclectic mix including pre-1923 minerals and some specialist wagons such as roadstone and glass wagons. Really looking forward to this one. Simon

It won't be a surprise Richard that it's MSW, but this time steam/electric transition era. It was only boards plus track a few months ago, which is why it's unsurprising Bob wasn't aware of it. Simon

As noted in my post, the flat topped scoop dome was original. The domed type a replacement. B16/1s started to acquire replacement diagram 49A boilers, hence the altered dome etc positions. Some B16/2s ran with the earlier Diagram 49 boiler as you note and Yeadon states that no B16/3s ran with a diagram 49 boiler. Simon

The B16s were fitted with NER 4125 gallon tenders with water scoop. These have coalguards which slope down at both ends. The Q6s were fitted with various tenders including 4125 gallon tenders. Of those some were visually similar to those fitted to the B16s (normally and possibly exclusively without water scoop). One of the tenders Hornby have produced is this 4125 gallon tender. However, it represents a tender without scoop gear and thus lacking the dome behind the tank filler required for a B16. The Hornby Q6 4125 gallon tender I've described is as per this Charlie Verrall Flickr image: (note tender body is wider than the Q6 cab). The B16 tender is like this (Robert Gadsdon Flickr image): There are detail differences over time. For example, the filler dome shown here has rounded off top edges. The original lacked the rounding off. If you want chapter and verse on Q6 tender types then look at the Hornby Q6 thread: Regards, Simon

This is looking excellent Dave. Just a small point to consider for your revised etch. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say the valence needs to be flush with the footplate edges, but if you mean that the footplate edge shouldn't overlap the valance, then this isn't quite true. Most (all?) Stanier classes have the footplate slightly overlapping the valance. In this image from ebay (https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/334345541277): you can see the slight overlap clearly (it's normally very hard to see because of the lining). Sorry if I've misunderstood what you meant. Regards, Simon