RMweb Premium great northern Posted May 22, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted May 22, 2014 Agree totally, Gilbert - life is too short to get all het up about a bit of photo manipulation - it's been going on for years, only the medium has changed. The J6....phooooar! I say sir! Are you transferring your affections. Who is going to pay for the counselling that the N5 will need? Or is it bigamy? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 @ Mallard Both actually - My dad taught me how to play the drums when I was 14, and I mis-spent much of my youth playing in bands on Saturday nights, until I cottoned onto the fact that the lead singer always got the girls! Then I polished up the guitar playing enough to get into the folk/Country world. I actually spent two years in the music business following my divorce/career change/ mid life crisis and realised it's no way for a 35-year old to make a living! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted May 22, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted May 22, 2014 G'Day Gents Love the J6, to few Ex GN locos, made it to your era, mores the pity. manna Couldn't agree more. Every time I see that D2 on Grantham, and Graeme King's lovely apple green B4 I come over all funny. Are we sure these history books are correct though? Mistakes do get made. I just wonder if a few locos lingered on in deepest darkest Lincolnshire for a few more years, and occasionally made a furtive dash to Peterborough when none of the historians were looking. One or two of those M&GN 4.4.0's might have done the same too. One or two of David Jenkinson's "funny trains" might be the answer. This could become very expensive......... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manna Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 G'Day Gents Who are we to argue that the historians, go it right every time, I do know of a certain J3 that made it to 1958 !!!! so maybe a D2 did as well. manna Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium New Haven Neil Posted May 22, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 22, 2014 I say sir! Are you transferring your affections. Who is going to pay for the counselling that the N5 will need? Or is it bigamy? Bigamy without a doubt, Gilbert! I couldn't leave the N5, I love her!! I have a thing about tank engines I'm afraid, but that J6 does look rather splendid. Actually, the guy sitting next to me is a counsellor (the joy #cough# of multi-disciplinary teams), should a referral be deemed necessary. Or just send the N5 to 'Neil, Andreas, Isle of Man' it'll get here..... I'll look after her. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrg1 Posted May 22, 2014 Share Posted May 22, 2014 Couldn't agree more. Every time I see that D2 on Grantham, and Graeme King's lovely apple green B4 I come over all funny. Are we sure these history books are correct though? Mistakes do get made. I just wonder if a few locos lingered on in deepest darkest Lincolnshire for a few more years, and occasionally made a furtive dash to Peterborough when none of the historians were looking. One or two of those M&GN 4.4.0's might have done the same too. One or two of David Jenkinson's "funny trains" might be the answer. This could become very expensive......... The unfortunate B3/3 rebuild eked out a living in Lincolnshire-and the final Ivatt Atlantic was a fixture in the Grantham-Boston area. Then there were the GCR 4-6-0s, GER B12s, various LDEC oddments, an LTSR Tilbury tank, and Jones Metropolitan 4-4-4s, going back somewhat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium New Haven Neil Posted May 22, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 22, 2014 The Ex-GC B3 is another loco that makes me go all funny. 'Valour' is just gorgeous. Could I ask for that to be TIC'd, Gilbert? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwealleans Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) That Valour is gorgeous I wouldn't disagree with... but the B3/3 is a very different beast. Have a look here if you can bear it. Edited May 23, 2014 by jwealleans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium New Haven Neil Posted May 23, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 23, 2014 I'm not going to look, Jonathan. I know only too well what a monstrosity it is, I'm afraid I'm mostly a Thompson detractor. I ask myself 'why' when I see things like that. I do understand the raison d'etre of the pacifics, and the B1s & L1s are fine, but some of his Frankenstein creations...... Please don't think this is a Thomson/Gresley war folks - I don't understand the V4's either! or the P1s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 B3/3 - OK I'm not a rivet counter, but to me it looked pretty much like a B17 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted May 23, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) The Ex-GC B3 is another loco that makes me go all funny. 'Valour' is just gorgeous. Could I ask for that to be TIC'd, Gilbert? Only if you promise to commit no further offences. I agree about B3's as designed, there was even one called City of Lincoln, which would somewhat make up for the unaccountable failure to name a B17 Lincoln City. Edited to acnowledge that City of Lincoln was a B2, not a B3. My excuse is that it is still quite early in the morning, or at least it is for me. Edited May 23, 2014 by great northern 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted May 23, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted May 23, 2014 That Valour is gorgeous I wouldn't disagree with... but the B3/3 is a very different beast. Have a look here if you can bear it. I'm not going to look, Jonathan. I know only too well what a monstrosity it is, I'm afraid I'm mostly a Thompson detractor. I ask myself 'why' when I see things like that. I do understand the raison d'etre of the pacifics, and the B1s & L1s are fine, but some of his Frankenstein creations...... Please don't think this is a Thomson/Gresley war folks - I don't understand the V4's either! or the P1s. B3/3 - OK I'm not a rivet counter, but to me it looked pretty much like a B17 Hey chaps, I just learned how to multi quote. I agree we don't need (another) Gresley/Thompson war, and I've made my feelings quite clear in the past about most of ET's rebuilds, but in the case of the B3/3 I don't feel the need to be quite as critical. The B3's were very handsome engines, did Robinson produce anything that wasn't? but they do seem to have been less than successful in practice, and by the end of the war they were really towards the end of their useful lives. I can therefore understand the decision to rebuild a life expired loco as an experiment to see what could be done using the B1 boiler. The result as Jonathan's link shows was not a pretty sight, though the disgraceful filth of the engine does it no favours, but there is some logic to be discerned. After all, the 04/8 and 01 both used the B1 boiler, and were among Et's few successes. Mind you, why he bothered with the B3/3 as well as the rebuilds from B17 to B2, which by all accounts made very little if any improvement I don't know. Presumably he would say that in a world of post war austerity two cylinders made more sense than three. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 If an engine looks like a B1 or B2, it is hardly a monstrosity. It was an attempt to get more life of out existing engines at a time when the LNER was suffering hardship on various fronts. I never understood why Robinson was held in high esteem, but there we are. Sure, his designs were a delight on the eye, but his 4-6-0's were a disaster in the boiler/firebox/ashpan area. Thompson no doubt considered his standard B1 boiler might sort out the problem short-term at a time when the railways were starved of raw materials (which were going elsewhere and into bus building). Apparently the loco did not take kindly to the rebuilding and no more were rebuilt, but from a modellers viewpoint, does any of this really matter? We are enthusiasts, not partisans, and some of us are modelling real locations where engines with indifferent streaming and/or mechanical deficiencies happened to operate. This applies to the East Coast and West coast routes and all lines in between with the exception of the GWR. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Larry are you being ironic? ..."We are enthusiasts, not partisans... ...with the exception of the GWR." Sounds partisan to me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) Larry are you being ironic? ..."We are enthusiasts, not partisans... ...with the exception of the GWR." Sounds partisan to me! Taken out of context, anything can appear ironic. But If you can argue that the GWR had a stud of duds, go ahead. Edited May 23, 2014 by coachmann 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Larry, I vaguely recall that the last time that discussion washed it had the result of 'Castle class 1, A1 class 0' So I'll not be going there! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium New Haven Neil Posted May 23, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) Larry, my point is that little remained of the (admittedlly not very good at all) loco, half the frames and the front bogie I think. (edit add wheels) It wasn't really a rebuild. He should just have built his B1, it would probably have been cheaper. My original comment stands as an engineer and a student of locomotive history. I won't model one as I don't like them, useless or good. The original was probably no better, but at least looked modelogenic. As for Robinson, the D11's were OK, and the O4's. Less said about the various 4-6-0's the better. Edited May 23, 2014 by New Haven Neil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 I promise I won't turn this into a Thompson war…! The B3/3 is one locomotive I have been researching extensively for my own model. There are actually some very positive accounts, no less from JF Harrison, about the rebuild. Both in terms of it being a handsome locomotive (it's not just a B1 boiler on GCR frames, it was a very well thought rebuild which was intended to lead the way for the rebuilding of the B17s) and there is even - shock horror! Some praise for its ability. The original GCR frames were the weakest point of the whole build and it's notable that the boiler, cylinders and portions of the valve gear went into B1 stock after the locomotive was dismantled in 1949. It's also notable by 1950 that virtually all of the Robinson GCR 4-6-0s had been withdrawn and scrapped. None of these 4-6-0 classes covered themselves in glory and "as a standard", they weren't, and their duties were replaced outright by the easier to build, maintain and run B1 class in all cases. Interesting to note that the similarly rebuilt 2-8-0 classes, the Thompson O1 and O4/8, have been remembered as mostly excellent machines, hindered slightly by the original GCR components they retained. However Thompson was making the best of a bad situation (mostly in wartime) and even BR recognised the principle of rebuilding the numerous O4s into O4/8s and O1s in the 50s where the original boilers or cylinders were life expired. I would say, if you have a copy, read Yeadon's Register volume 22 and look at the photographs of the B3/3 in fully lined out apple green on page 50. In the flesh, with the larger than B1 style cab, the GCR tender, the angular dome and the deep, high shoulders on the running plate - she is gorgeous! This locomotive may be a rebuild but the overall look is a purposeful and very handsome 4-6-0. There's also the possibility of (as I intend with my kit bash) the possibility of modelling the B3/3 as numbered 61497 with British Railways on the tender in full apple green livery. Keep an open mind, I say. The problem with Thompson is the stigma, not the reality. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 (edited) I like Thompsons Big Locos but this one must go down as the worst effort by miles. For a virtually total rebuild of a Loco to last only 6 years in that form must classify as a total disaster. http://www.lner.info/locos/B/b3.shtml The numerous questions regarding Thommo are 1. How did he ever get permission from the board for his strange one off rebuilds. Being realsitic not one of them other than the A1/1 was a better Loco for all the effort. 2 What did he hope to achieve . 3. The LNER was always skint and so I have read on numerous occasions, so why was so much money wasted on such projects 4. All of this was going on in war conditions therefore lack of supplies ,spares etc . He should have been concentrating on keeping the fleet alive and well for the war effort, not tweaking knackered old designs. Anyway this thread is not the place for it, a Thompson only thread is the place for it IMHO. Edited May 23, 2014 by micklner Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium great northern Posted May 23, 2014 Author RMweb Premium Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yes indeed gentlemen, no continuation of the Thompson debate on here please. The majority of us are not going to change our minds, and Simon is not going to change his, so there is nothing to be gained by going over old ground. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Mallard60022 Posted May 23, 2014 RMweb Premium Share Posted May 23, 2014 Calm down chaps, it's only a loco. If a Pacific of any type was/is still working on the ECML I'd go and see it........beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say. Oh yes, it is also Friday....hurrah. P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.A.C Martin Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Yes indeed gentlemen, no continuation of the Thompson debate on here please. The majority of us are not going to change our minds, and Simon is not going to change his, so there is nothing to be gained by going over old ground. I've already set up a new thread Gilbert. Not to worry I'm more than happy to change my view if the evidence is there however. There was a time for me when Edward Thompson could do no right and all of his Pacifics were ugly! Over time and through reading and discussing with knowledgable individuals my opinion has changed drastically. That's the beauty of historical research and debate, after all. However if I may - why single me out? The debate was already being had by other forum members. I added my tuppence worth because I've been doing some work on the B3/3 recently. I felt it added to the already flowing discussion. If that's not your view, then I apologise for that. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwordsmith Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 ...decides to stir the pot even further by showing what has just arrived from Hatton Shed to take up duties on Waverley when it reopens... 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Leacon Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 Taken out of context, anything can appear ironic. But If you can argue that the GWR had a stud of duds, go ahead. He'll never win that one ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Leacon Posted May 23, 2014 Share Posted May 23, 2014 ...decides to stir the pot even further by showing what has just arrived from Hatton Shed to take up duties on Waverley when it reopens... IMG_0982.jpg You are quite mad comrade. Best of luck with the forthcoming insults :-D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now