JeremyC

Taken at Clydebridge Steelworks about 1972/73.

According to A.W. Brotchies book on the Weymss Private Railway the 'Fife Area Standard' design had the following differences from the Andrew Barclay standard design: extended wheelbase [7' rather than 6'], larger water tank [1120 gallons against 1070 gallons] and a boiler 6 inches longer with increased grate area and heating surface.

Not all gasholders visibly rose and fell. There were two at Granton gasworks in Edinburgh that had an external cladding that hid the working parts that were presumably the same as any other gasholder. https://www.scottish-places.info/features/featurefirst6437.html Granton also had one open frame type.

A few years ago while visiting the NYMR I ordered a pork pie in their cafe at Grosmont and was asked if I wanted it heated. I'd never heard of anyone heating them up before (My answer was a definite no!)

A couple of photos taken at the Old Edinburgh (Turnhouse) Airport in the late 1960s early 1970s. British European Airways Vickers Vanguard British United Airlines BAC 111

I was an engineer. Originally I was with Denholms (Ship Management) of Glasgow, then with the Dept of Agriculture & Fisheries for Scotland / Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency / Marine Scotland (The last 3 were the same company, it was reorganised twice) on the Scottish fishery protection ships.

We used to call them top end spanners.

Check out your local library service. Edinburgh libraries have free access to one of these services for members. The only disadvantage is you can't access it from home, but have to use a computer in a library branch.

On my last ship we had a notice that went up when the air con was on. "Air Con on. Please keep this door closed, the plant isn't big enough to cool the whole planet"

The LNER seems to have used a Thermotank system. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermotank_Ltd (The section on the Punkah Louvre has a picture of a LNER sleeping car and the caption mentions it's part of a Thermotank system)

From what I can find: Titanic's anchor links were 33 inches long made from 3 inch dia bar (one source give 3inch another 6inch) and each link weighed 175 pounds. For 3 inch diameter material I reckon there were approximately 40 links in each shackle (90 ft) (allowing for the links being linked and not laid end to end) By that each shackle weighed 7000 pounds or about 3.1 imperial tons or just over 3.2 metric tonnes. For 6 inch diameter material I reckon there were approximately 44 links in each shackle (90 ft) By that each shackle weighed 7700 pounds or about 3.4 imperial tons or just over 3.5 metric tonnes.

A point to note is that a ships anchor chain is not made in one piece, but is of separate lengths which are then joined using a Kenter Shackle. The length of each section is a shackle which is 15 fathoms (90 feet). The link below gives more information than you're ever likely to need 😀 https://dieselship.com/marine-technical-articles/ship-safety-and-naval-architecture/ship-anchor-complete-information/#:~:text=A shackle is a unit,standard length of a chain . (Small note of interest. The ship end of the chain is the bitter end, hence the saying 'to the bitter end' for something that has gone all the way.)

When I was a child my mother would remind me of her Co-op number every time she sent me there for messages. I'm now 66 and can still remember it.

The question is whether the heritage industry creates sufficient demand to make a mine viable, bearing in mind that other coal users might not have the same requirements. A lot of people who blame environmentalists for the closure of British mines seem to forget the UK coal industry was massively declining on economic grounds long before environmental considerations became serious. In the end I think environmental concerns have only sped what was inevitable.

I would suggest it doesn't matter if the supports are slightly off the vertical providing they are all the same. So I'd set one up as near as possible using a square and use bluetac or similar to hold it while the glue dries. Then set up the next one the same way but also 'eyeball' it from the first one and so on. Another way might be to set up the first and last posts then use a straight edge to align the intermediate ones.

On the age of SMBP tank wagons it is interesting to read the report on the 1964 Henwick Hall accident where one of the tank wagons that derailed dated from 1903. (The wagon was actually owned by the Oakbank Oil Company who were part of Scottish Oils which was a BP subsiduary) It's also interesting to note the quoted annual mileages of a tank wagon (24,000-30,000 miles) compared to a normal BR goods wagon (2,700 miles).

The Leighton Buzzard Railway seems to use a system like you are suggesting. Of course what is acceptable for a light narrow gauge train might not be permissable on a larger one. https://www.deviantart.com/rlkitterman/art/Isabel-in-PC-Allen-s-Train-at-Stonehenge-Works-752073542 (The caption says "Isabel was built on the frame of a Motor Rail Simplex diesel locomotive to power air brakes on passenger trains pulled by locomotives lacking their own compressors.")

A - Drop Lights B - Quarterlights C - Side Light (http://www.rasalmon.co.uk/r/semg/bulleid_sidelight.html) E - Top Light - A small window situated between the cantrail and the top of the main window ( Description From Essery and Jekinsons LMS Coaches)

The GWR postioned its signals to suit the driver being on the RH side of the cab so there wasn't a problem. It only became an issue once LH drive locos were allocated to the Western Region. At least one accident involving a Britannia class was partly attributed to this, leading to the handrails on the smoke deflectors being replaced with hand holes. Prior to the Grouping many railways were RH drive. I have seen a few reasons given for the changeover, one of which was the introduction of colour light signals where there was a desire to place them at the drivers eye level which made the LH side of the line the best place to put them because there was more space.

Would retention toilets be that difficult a problem to deal with, wouldn't the equipment required be similar to the 'pump out' facilities provided at many boatyards on the canals? On the subject of air brakes, can a steam loco fitted with the steam era Westinghouse brake work modern air brake stock or is the system totally different?

When it comes to heritage railways I would suspect they would rather avoid anything later than a Mk2b/2c, because beyond that you are into much more complicated sub systems, e.g. Air Conditioning.

My last ship had 'under cupboard type' fluorescent fittings for the switchboard facia lighting. After about 4 years these started to fail and changing the tube didn't get them working again. After a bit of digging in the small (tiny) print of the instructions we found the quoted life of the fitting was less than the expected life of the tube!

I have been reading a book on NBR coaches published by the NBR Study Group. It says an additional reason for Mansell wheels falling out of favour was that as coaches got heavier there was more heat generated in braking and the wooden centre was unable to disperse the heat.

Some years ago I read an article which said stresses within the casting were the reason for the curly spoked wheels common on narrow gauge wagons. The curly spokes could relax while cooling to relieve these stresses. It gave the reason for the change to straight spokes as due to improvements in casting technology.

In his book 'Steam Days at Haymarket' Harry Knox mentions using a coal hammer in the coupler jaws to lift the buckeye into position.