rodent279

Didn't both use virtually the same boiler as the GWR 51xx 2-6-2's? Which means the 77xxx can be considered almost a BR Standard version of the WSR's 9351, a 51xx converted to a tender loco. This was actually envisaged by the GWR, but never done. It results in a lighter version of a 43xx, with a higher RA.

Those are brilliant, thanks! It never occurred to me that the under bridge had been rebuilt, but of course, it was. Do you know when these were taken? I'd guess about 1964. Thanks for taking a diversion during the permitted walk. No rush, but I'd love to see what it looks like. My dad has a copy of Arthur Grigg's book "Town of Trains" somewhere. Cheers, N.

When were those buildings demolished? Don't suppose there's any chance you could get a photo of the front of the TR building is there? Please :-) And while we're on the subject, since the TR building seems to be in the limelight at the moment, does anyone have any photos showing the PSB, flyover & TR site before the TR building was built? Around 1973'ish? I've trawled Flickr and come up with surprisingly few shots from that era, none from the right angle. cheers N

If I remember rightly, the main office was built in 1975/6. TR moved it's HQ lock stock and barrel out of London, can't remember from where, but I think somewhere near Charing X. I still have my old desk, classic wooden 70's office furniture, well built stuff. Somewhere on it, it's dated 1975.

One of the hidden benefits of COVID-19. We might all end up speaking better Latin!

Make me wonder what was used to put the decks up there in the first place.

Don't know. I've got a book on it somewhere, but not easily accessible.

APT-E was a turbine-electric, much like the French RTG units.

I think you're right, as originally planned, the "base" class was xx/1, sub classes starting at xx/2.

I think apart from sharing the same bogies and traction motors, 90's are significantly different to 87's. 87's are much closer to 86's. The transformer and electronics on a 90 is very different, even from 87101. I'm not even sure the traction motors are interchangeable between 87's and 90's.

Wasn't a 40 found to have been uprated, and running at something well over 2000hp, when it entered preservation, either deliberately or accidentally? I'm sure I remember reading about that sometime. Edit- I may have been thinking about a hydraulic, possibly a Hymek.

I rode on an SNCF gas turbine unit once, they also ran to Calais for a while. They had a fairly reasonable life, this was in 1983. They lasted until the early 2000's, finishing up on cross country services in the South. Don't remember much about what they sounded like, but I remember the interior and the ride being similar to an HST.

According to "Prototype Locomotives", by Robert Tufnell, on test GT3 achieved :- 0.7lb/hp-hr at full load (55mph) 0.95lb/hp-hr at half load (40mph) 1.33lb/hp-hr at ¼ load (35mph) It also states that problems with overheating of the turbine blade tips necessitated them being shortened, which meant maximum speed was reduced to 7700rpm, from 8250rpm. This reduced turbine power output to 2190hp, from 2700hp and wheel rim output to just under 2000hp. So although GT3 was nominally a Type 5, in reality it was a Type 4, making it class 49?

Which explains why the V-engined Brush type 4's became class 48, when at 2650BHP they were more powerful than the derated twin-bank version. Did any actually carry class 48 TOPS data panels? And did any Brush type 2's carry class 30 data panels, before re-engining?

So, if what was to become 47's hadn't been de-rated, would they have become class 50? Would the EE product then have become class 51, and is that why the Westerns were class 52, not class 51? Or would 47's have become class 52, with Westerns and EE type 5's being 50 & 51 respectively?

So was there ever a class 51?

One that hasn't been mentioned yet is the former Midland Bristol-Gloucester line under the M4, at what is now Westerleigh oil terminal. The M4 actually still has track under it, the stops being under the south side of the motorway. I've seen p-way machines stabled under the bridge, which is at the left hand side of the photo below. There can't have been revenue earning railway traffic for very long under this bridge. Edit: J18-23 of the M4, including the Severn Bridge, opened in 1966, the Lawrence Hill-Yate section of the Bristol-Gloucester line closed in December 1969, so by my reckoning, passenger trains ran under the M4 for 3 years. The Bath branch remained open until 1971, presumably accessed from Yate, so the last revenue earning trains would have passed under the M4 in 1971.

Did it ever get electrified?

Looks like the end of the road for TR HQ then. Maybe they need the land for E-WR?

That's the logic of a one size fits all, all or nothing, free market, supply and demand solution to providing railway services. It works if you can afford it, or if you can choose when to travel, if you can't, tough.

Thanks, good stuff. I think those industrial units are just discernible in my photo. I stand to be corrected, but I think it was sidings, and maybe either a goods yard or a wagon repair shop.

Is that a Thompson or a Gresley buffet behind the 50?

Thanks. Did you get any photos of the railway from the bridge?

Is the red thing hanging down from the canopy, just in front of the camera, the rear of a St Andrew's cross?

Which seems wrong to me. We need some sort of revised RCH. Isn't that what the SRA was supposed to be until it was abolished?