rodent279

Yep, you're right. I think there are two stages in the 81-85's. Another anecdote from my dad, who was heavily involved with the electrification south to Euston. At one stage they were going through brushes for class 86's so quickly, he was having the manufacturers deliver them directly to his office! They had to change the spec of the brushes to a harder compound, they were just disintegrating. He was either at Euston or Bletchley at the time. He says there were proposals to mount a camera inside a motor to record what was going on. Someone did some tests and found that the motors were experiencing accelerations in the order of 100G, which was way more than any camera of the day could withstand.

I believe that class 86's were designed to work over their full torque/speed range without field weakening.

Is there a pattern amongst builders? Were all those that eventually became 86/0, 3, 4 or 6, built at Doncaster, and all those that became 86/2's built at VF? Or was it entirely random?

Exeter, of course! How did I miss that?

What am I missing? Where are all FGW's dmu's for Devon & Cornwall based?

None at Laira?

Correct. My dad was on a test train behind Zebedee as it was known, which went through Leighton Buzzard at over 120 mph. The line speed at the time was 80. I believe some testing was also done with this loco into cant deficiency and ride around curves at high speed.

Yes, they were.

Ha ha! Apparently, I would have been Ruby if I'd been born a girl!

Evening all. Another piffling trivia question ahead. Looking at continental locos, e.g. DB V200, SNCF CC6500 etc, the air brake pipes are usually neatly arranged on the buffer beam, 2 abreast, side by side & at the same level. On UK locos, that does not seem to be the case. Now I can understand, when retro-fitting locos built with VB & SH, that it may not be possible to come up with a neat arrangement of pipework, but on later builds, such as 50's, 56's, 58's etc, which were A or X from new, the pipes are usually still at different levels. Is there a sound reasoning behind this? Or is it "just how it's always been done"? cheers N

I love reviving old posts! Was Temple Meads goods really still handling traffic into 1980? My gob is truly smackerated!

Excellent, thank you all. That should keep me out of mischief! It's not a bad model in it's own right actually. I think a lot of Lima models were underrated, and with a bit of detailing, can still hold their own. Mine's in the loft at my dad's at the moment, so I'll have to dig it out first, but it's going to get the treatment! cheers N

They got at least as far as 86045 under TOPS. Not sure if there were ever any higher numbered 86/0's. By the time my interest in railways kicked off, (late 1978/early 1979), they were numbered 86001-039, 101-103 & 204-261. Names were starting to be applied to the 86/2's, I still have the sheet of suggested names my dad gave me, which differs slightly to those applied eventually.

I believe the transformer, rectifiers & traction motors are all class 87 types. To all intents & purposes, an 86/1 is a class 87/0, though somewhat heavier.

Not necessarily. You could start at 101, & number to 86200. If you can have 47500, you can have 86200. TOPS didn't like classes starting with 3 digits, which is why there is no 47000, 56000 etc. Quite why this should be I don't know, it's only a number, and computers are number crunching machines. In my line of work we number mobile base stations using 5 digits, many of which end in 3 0's.

They were about 10 years too late really. If they'd appeared in the early 50's then they would perhaps have had more of a place, and a more respectable working life. By the time HST's arrived, the Pullman as a fixed formation or semi-permanent rake was starting to lose it's commercial viability. I well remember the electric Manchester Pullman, even went on it once, but in all honesty, apart from at-seat service, and fancy wood panelling, it didn't offer much that a 1st class Mk2 D/E/F or Mk3 didn't.

Evening. Can anyone suggest a detailing kit for a Lima class 26? I can't find anything currently in production, but maybe something for another kit would be suitable? I'm thinking of 70's-80's BR blue era. cheers N

The one I'm waiting for is a picture of the Dean Goods that supposedly made it to China. Surely there's a photo out there somewhere? cheers N

How far north did a BP make it? Did any reach Scotland? Or Penzance? Cheers N

If a plate had a red background, what sort of red would it be? Signal red, or LMS/BR maroon? Cheers N

I think regional prefixes as a whole, on coaching stock, disappeared around the time regions were finally abolished & full sectorisation happened, around 1988-90. My question is, when did HST power cars cease being numbered W/E/Sc43xxx, and start being just 43xxx, and which were the first ones built without regional prefixes? cheers N

Heilmann-never heard of him, will have to google. Surely though, you wouldn't need a heavy, bulky, conventional locomotive boiler, if you're going down the condensing/turbine route? Surely a water tube boiler, oil/gas/pulverised coal would be the way to go? Going back to atmospheric railways, a modern day equivalent would be a linear induction motor powered railway? A concept proven in some areas, but which has never been translated successfully to the railway. Imagine that though? Every vehicle powered, but no heavy, noisy traction motors under each axle. Acceleration & braking no longer dependant on wheel/rail adhesion. Gradients become virtually irrelevant. There are some pretty big technical problems to be overcome before it could be reaity though. cheers N

Evening all. Piffling trivia question ahead. At what point did HST power cars start losing their W/E/Sc prefixes? Which ones were built with prefixes? Cheers N

Personally, I was always surprised that Cricklewood was allowed to go to waste. That would have been ideal for at least overnight servicing of HST's. That, or base 'em at OOC & run them via Crficklewood-Acton.

I agree with the first sentence, yet....there are always refinements that can be applied. Roller bearings throughout, roller bearing on the big ends & con rods (like on some German Neubauloks), electric lighting, oil/pulverised coal firing, better, cleaner methods of dispaosal (big vacuum cleaners!), maybe a re-visitation of condensing engines, compounding, the list is endless. None would be silver bullets that suddenly made steam on a par with modern diesel & electrics, but a whole load could be done that was not really tried. As for Bulleid, and for that matter, Brunel, both were gifted geniuses, possibly a little too wayward and off the wall at times, but as I said before, you don't make progress by sticking with what you know. And anyway, electric railways are essentially steam powered with electric transmission, in the sense that most power up unitl the last decade or so has been generated by steam turbines. (Granted, some countries like Switzerland have probably always generated more by hydro-electric than by steam). cheers N