Wright writes.....

LNER4479 · July 20

5 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

I’m refurbishing a Mailcoach Tourist Buffet I picked up cheap but I’m not sure where all the undergubbins go, I’m not as familiar with coaches as I am wagons.

Is it two half battery boxes on each side?

What’s to the far right?

Thanks in advance

Battery boxes on the same side on that vehicle, by the looks of it.

When you say 'what's to the far right?' ... which photo?!! You've shown both! As has already been said, the smaller, additional box would have been the voltage regulator (possibly with fuses in as well?). Hanging down at the other end is the dynamo (with belt drive to the adjacent wheelset), providing power to keep batteries charged up when on the move.

polybear · July 20

52 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

And certainly add more weight.

Hello Tony,

What adhesive do you use to secure the Lead (knowing that PVA is a big no-no).

Many thanks

Kind Regards,

Brian

LNER4479 · July 20

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Stanier's masterpiece - the 'Princess Coronation'.

Hornby/Hornby Dublo's most-recent manifestation is remarkably good.......

I had one to review, and, as for haulage capacity....................... 30+ carriages!

Morning Tony,

Well - it may well have managed 30 on the flat but ...

Meanwhile, its 60 years young predecessor:

It needs a man's railway to properly test locos(!)

(Ref your 70054 anecdote)

I never mentioned it at the time but your 46245 came somewhere in between the two!

In practice, trains on the layout will be max 12 and all three coped with that so, to some extent, it's academic. Please don't feel the need to stuff more ballast in 46245. She's magnificent as she is. And the original HD had the advantage of slighter smaller wheels - re-shod with 24mm Romfords.

Edited July 20 by LNER4479

Tony Wright · July 20

8 minutes ago, polybear said:

Hello Tony,

What adhesive do you use to secure the Lead (knowing that PVA is a big no-no).

Many thanks

Kind Regards,

Brian

Good morning Brian,

Superglue or epoxy. Or, if it's inside a metal body, on occasions, low-melt solder.

Regards,

Tony.

Tony Wright · July 20

With 'Princess Coronations' being mentioned, some more images off dusty discs from the past..............

This is how a Hornby RTR 'Duchess' arrived on my bench.

First things to go were those plastic smoke deflectors.

Comet provided a detailing kit.

And, the rest, as they say..................

Complete, prior to patch repainting and the fitting of nameplates.

It certainly makes an interesting comparison with............

This scratch-built equivalent.

This was given to me by a friend who'd 'inherited' it from a deceased modeller's estate. It was incomplete, inasmuch as, although the frames were erected, there was no motion and no wheels. The bodywork was also incomplete, so I finished it off, and Ian Rathbone painted it. It's now the property of a friend.

Ian also painted............

This other (even more-modified) Hornby/Comet 'Semi' (the property of the same friend).

Hornby 'Duchesses' have certainly been popular..........

In all sorts of guises.

No wonder, when the real things make such magnificent spectacles...........

Shots such as this, taken in 2007, are impossible from this vantage point today because a decree went out that 'all the world will be fenced', and, anyway, Mother Nature has completely taken over now.

Even this view (taken 14 years ago) is impossible now. Though it's taken from the end of an overbridge, trees have encroached so much as to obliterate any chance of a picture today.

Still, at least trees aren't growing on the end of Grantham's platform ramps; yet!

Seeing those prototype pictures of DUCHESS OF SUTHERLAND at LB.................

Perhaps I should give my 'Semi' another run!

APOLLO · July 20

They also ran downhill (Down 't' brew) in Wigan !!

With steam to spare "Semi" (note smokebox) runs down the 1in 105 Boars Head Bank just north of Wigan quite a long time ago. Seems to be ~~46212 Duchess of Kent~~. Edited to add, it is 46242 City of Glasgow, see next post.

46229 Duchess of Hamilton southbound at Golborne, south of Wigan where HS2 was planned to join the WCML.

This one is not a semi. Both dad's photos.

Central wagon Wigan, the only one scrapped here, 46243 City of Lancaster. Note the yellow strips (banned south of Crewe). I note Hornby are releasing 46243 in blue livery this autumn. Will anyone spend £240 and reproduce this ?

This is the saddest book in my library.

.

By the time I started spotting, aged 11 in 1963 they had virtually gone. But we still had the (just a bit less) mighty Brits !!

Brit15

Edited July 20 by APOLLO

LNER4479 · July 20

20 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Seems to be 46212 Duchess of Kent.

Can't be, Brit15! 46212 was the last of the original Princess Royals, the only one named after a 'Duchess'

The loco your Dad has captured there is 46242, pre-Harrow. A very interesting image therefore.

APOLLO · July 20

Thanks, interesting and I stand corrected. Zooming in on the front number plate it seems it is 46242.

Location is definitely Whitley Crossing / Rylands Sidings just north of Wigan.

Brit15

Tony Wright · July 20

1 hour ago, LNER4479 said:

Can't be, Brit15! 46212 was the last of the original Princess Royals, the only one named after a 'Duchess'

The loco your Dad has captured there is 46242, pre-Harrow. A very interesting image therefore.

Yes Graham,

Prior to October the 8th 1952, 46242 had the 'utility' front end ahead of the outside cylinders (as in Apollo's picture), not the curved front valance and footplate characterised by the never-streamlined 'Big-uns'. After she was 'rebuilt' after the Harrow disaster of that date, she got the 'Duchess' front framing, unique for a previously-streamlined 'Semi'. I wonder how much was retained in the rebuilding? It's odd, but post-crash pictures appear to show her more badly-damaged than 46202.

The disaster is one of my earliest tangible memories (I was three days off being six years old at the time), looking in horror at the photographs in the papers.

By the way, I know you don't like that term 'Semi' (neither did Geoff Holt, who berated me for using it), but to all trainspotters in the north, that's what these fantastic locos were called. In fact, the epithet was shouted when one appeared, with exactly the same reverence as 'Streak!'. The name was applied to all members of the class, whether they had a sloping smokebox top or not.

Regards,

Tony.

Edited July 20 by Tony Wright
to add something

LNER4479 · July 20

There is a persistent and intriguing rumour - it may even be true? - that the 'new' 46242 that emerged post the accident was in fact an amalgam of the two locos. 46202's front end grafted on to the rest of 46242. That conveniently explains why 46242 emerged with the 'full front' configuration.

Crewe were apparently very reluctant to scrap 46202 but, if I understand it correctly, her mainframes were too badly damaged. The above rumour/story/explanation may therefore have been the best of a bad job. 46242 was also the younger loco.

John Isherwood · July 20

3 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

There is a persistent and intriguing rumour - it may even be true? - that the 'new' 46242 that emerged post the accident was in fact an amalgam of the two locos. 46202's front end grafted on to the rest of 46242. That conveniently explains why 46242 emerged with the 'full front' configuration.

Crewe were apparently very reluctant to scrap 46202 but, if I understand it correctly, her mainframes were too badly damaged. The above rumour/story/explanation may therefore have been the best of a bad job. 46242 was also the younger loco.

...... and hence 71000 - though it failed to enthrall in BR days; only showing its potential in preservation.

CJI.

Jesse Sim · July 20

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Jesse,

I think your assumptions are correct, though I don't know what the box to the right is (refrigerator equipment?).

Many published drawings are very sketchy when it comes to underframe detail on LNER carriages and (certainly in my case) some guesswork is required from interpreting photographs.

Which is what I had to do...................

When building this Tourist Buffet Car (which Geoff Haynes painted).

It was given to me in the form of etched brass sides and a floor pan. It was to be part of a putative range of etched brass kits to form all the Tourist stock types, but nothing came of it. All I did was buy the parts needed to complete it from Comet (roof, ventilators, ends, door furniture and underframe detail), Southern Pride (interior detail) and MJT (bogies).

I certainly wouldn't take it as gospel....................

However, from a very tight angle, as a 'layout carriage' in a 'layout train' (the third vehicle), I'm happy with it.

And, since you seem to like K2s............

Regards,

Tony.

Thanks Tony, I did start to saw the white metal battery boxes in half so as to create four seperate ones but I thought, before I guess and make the decision, I’d better ask the professionals first for their opinion.

Love me a K2, do either of them come in lined LNER black? 👀

Jesse Sim · July 20

5 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Battery boxes on the same side on that vehicle, by the looks of it.

When you say 'what's to the far right?' ... which photo?!! You've shown both! As has already been said, the smaller, additional box would have been the voltage regulator (possibly with fuses in as well?). Hanging down at the other end is the dynamo (with belt drive to the adjacent wheelset), providing power to keep batteries charged up when on the move.

Howdy RL,

I thought I had removed the second photo, that’s my bad. The extreme right of the top photo is what I wanted to know about, which by the sounds of a regulator box of a sort. I wonder where I could get one or would it be a scratch job perhaps?

Flying Fox 34F · July 20

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Still, at least trees aren't growing on the end of Grantham's platform ramps; yet!

Hello Tony,

Unfortunately, this photo cannot be recreated now, in fact since about 2019.

There is now a fence across the top of the ramp and Anti-Trespass guards on the platform edge.

Paul

Tony Wright · July 20

4 hours ago, Flying Fox 34F said:

Hello Tony,

Unfortunately, this photo cannot be recreated now, in fact since about 2019.

There is now a fence across the top of the ramp and Anti-Trespass guards on the platform edge.

Paul

Thanks Paul,

When I took the picture, I made sure from an official that it was OK for me to stand at the base of the ramp.

Not only that, I asked the crew if I could use a powerful flash (a Metz C60). Since the loco was stationary, there was not a problem, though using it if a train were moving fast in the dark would be reckless.

Regards,

Tony.

Tony Wright · July 20

6 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

There is a persistent and intriguing rumour - it may even be true? - that the 'new' 46242 that emerged post the accident was in fact an amalgam of the two locos. 46202's front end grafted on to the rest of 46242. That conveniently explains why 46242 emerged with the 'full front' configuration.

Crewe were apparently very reluctant to scrap 46202 but, if I understand it correctly, her mainframes were too badly damaged. The above rumour/story/explanation may therefore have been the best of a bad job. 46242 was also the younger loco.

Thanks Graham,

I've heard several rumours regarding the 'resurrection' of CITY OF GLASGOW, one being that it was just made-up from parts from the 'Duchess' pool at Crewe (in the same way that a new GRAND PARADE appeared from Doncaster not long after it was ostensibly wrecked in the Castle Cary disaster in Scotland). However, when it was steamed and run, the crew complained that smoke was entering the cab. On inspection, it was found that the repaired cab (for that was what it must have been?) did not sit correctly on the rear frames, and there were gaps where smoke/steam could get in. I don't know what to believe, because from the post-crash pictures, the cab just seems crumpled beyond repair/re-use.

I've also read that, for a time afterwards, crews were reluctant to take her if she were rostered again for that overnight Perth sleeper.

Who knows?

uax6 · July 20

4 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Howdy RL,

I thought I had removed the second photo, that’s my bad.

Arrrrrrghhh! Replace 'my bad' with 'my mistake' and you will have a Sir approved sentence..

I think you will have to make the small box on the right of the right hand battery box (unless Wizard or 247 have any castings) Its not a size I've seen before.

Andy G

Bucoops · July 20

5 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Howdy RL,

I thought I had removed the second photo, that’s my bad. The extreme right of the top photo is what I wanted to know about, which by the sounds of a regulator box of a sort. I wonder where I could get one or would it be a scratch job perhaps?

https://fk3d.co.uk/products/copy-of-gresley-coach-dynamo-regulator-box-for-gangway-brake-lner-oo-gauge-4mm-scale?_pos=59&_sid=286c1dcbf&_ss=r perhaps? I have no doubt Paul would reduce it to 4mm.

edit: ignore the link text - it does take you to a Buffet coach part but 7mm.

Edited July 20 by Bucoops

nzpaul · July 20

A link to Dave's (El Jobbo) workbench thread on the LNER Forum. It's not a Tourist Buffet but the layout of its private parts appears to be very similar.

https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=7183&start=1185

Paul

1471SirFrederickBanbury · July 21

19 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

With 'Princess Coronations' being mentioned, some more images off dusty discs from the past..............

This is how a Hornby RTR 'Duchess' arrived on my bench.

First things to go were those plastic smoke deflectors.

Comet provided a detailing kit.

And, the rest, as they say..................

Complete, prior to patch repainting and the fitting of nameplates.

It certainly makes an interesting comparison with............

This scratch-built equivalent.

This was given to me by a friend who'd 'inherited' it from a deceased modeller's estate. It was incomplete, inasmuch as, although the frames were erected, there was no motion and no wheels. The bodywork was also incomplete, so I finished it off, and Ian Rathbone painted it. It's now the property of a friend.

Ian also painted............

This other (even more-modified) Hornby/Comet 'Semi' (the property of the same friend).

Hornby 'Duchesses' have certainly been popular..........

In all sorts of guises.

No wonder, when the real things make such magnificent spectacles...........

Shots such as this, taken in 2007, are impossible from this vantage point today because a decree went out that 'all the world will be fenced', and, anyway, Mother Nature has completely taken over now.

Even this view (taken 14 years ago) is impossible now. Though it's taken from the end of an overbridge, trees have encroached so much as to obliterate any chance of a picture today.

Still, at least trees aren't growing on the end of Grantham's platform ramps; yet!

Seeing those prototype pictures of DUCHESS OF SUTHERLAND at LB.................

Perhaps I should give my 'Semi' another run!

You should see Virginia here in the states. Only the most skilled of Guerrilla warriors could get through the thick lineside shrubbery, which sometimes falls on to the mainline, once causing a ~2.5 hour delay for a train that was supposed to take only 2 hours in the first place!

Not too far away from me, there is a perfect, grassy hill over a large shunting yard which would be the perfect place to spend a few hours, but that's adjacent to a highway, and I haven't found a way to get there, yet. There's also a lovely viaduct that runs parallel with the road and has a slow goods line under it, but I haven't had the chance to stay in the beautiful place for a while now. While these photos aren't mine, I can say with some certainty that in the right light, it can look almost this good, and they're all <45 minutes drive from my house, and I really ought to just find a day to sit and watch the trains go by:

There's also Triple crossing and few other great places, but not many good places to view them from, unless your a professional photographer:

NZRedBaron · July 21

On 20/07/2024 at 03:22, polybear said:

Every time I see that film I wonder if they managed to get the gold or not - and if so then how.....

As it happens, I know the answer to this; if a sequel had been green-lit, the opening would have had the Italian Mafia use a helicopter to rescue the bus and take the gold from Charlie and the crew; and the rest of the film would have been Charlie and co trying to steal the gold back from them.

Tony Wright · July 21

Some little time ago, I mentioned that a principal criterion for my 'rating' a layout must be that it's based on an actual prototype. And, by implication, comparisons with prototype pictures must be made.

Seen before, I'm sure, but thousands of pages ago................

I found this picture in a bedroom drawer in The Willoughby Arms when I was a resident there, 20 years ago. It was dated 1953, but that can't be right because the A1 has its front numberplate attached to the top hingestrap (not occurring until 1955 at the earliest). It shows the Up Tees-Tyne Pullman racing south through Little Bytham.

Could I replicate this?

The physics dictate that it's impossible - prototype huge, camera small - model small, camera huge!

Nonetheless, I hope it illustrates my point. It also illustrates details on the model which are probably incorrect - the later BR-style ground signal as opposed to that rotating GNR one in the foreground, but the BR plan only shows the locations of signals, not their actual type.

Still, I think there's enough to make my picture 'recognisable'.

Has anyone else tried this sort of thing? I've also had a go on Grantham.................

John Besley · July 21

19 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Some little time ago, I mentioned that a principal criterion for my 'rating' a layout must be that it's based on an actual prototype. And, by implication, comparisons with prototype pictures must be made.

Seen before, I'm sure, but thousands of pages ago................

I found this picture in a bedroom drawer in The Willoughby Arms when I was a resident there, 20 years ago. It was dated 1953, but that can't be right because the A1 has its front numberplate attached to the top hingestrap (not occurring until 1955 at the earliest). It shows the Up Tees-Tyne Pullman racing south through Little Bytham.

Could I replicate this?

The physics dictate that it's impossible - prototype huge, camera small - model small, camera huge!

Nonetheless, I hope it illustrates my point. It also illustrates details on the model which are probably incorrect - the later BR-style ground signal as opposed to that rotating GNR one in the foreground, but the BR plan only shows the locations of signals, not their actual type.

Still, I think there's enough to make my picture 'recognisable'.

Has anyone else tried this sort of thing? I've also had a go on Grantham.................

Is it not possabile to sit the camara more or less on the track or slightly packed up and with the A1 parallel to the switch blade of the adjacent point as in the original photo, then a careful bit of cropping in photo editor I think you'd be almost the same...

Swop the box vans in the far distance siding on the left for a two or three open wagons, add in a couple of timber baulk with lighthouse of rail dumped on them just off the platform ramp

I reckon you'd nail it then...