Prototype Tim Mills' Photos

[mickoo]

But we call Royal Scots Royal Scots and Castles Castles, don't we , Mick? And Jubilees Jubilees and West Countries Battle of Britains. Hmm. P'raps you have a point.

(Mick is well aware that I normally call Duchesses Princess Coronations. I was speaking in the vernacular I suspect he was trying to elicit a reaction - weren't you, Mick?)

Thanks for the additional info on the Caprotti 5 Dave and Mick. It refines our knowledge yet further.

And Simon - remind me never to let you anywhere near my car.....

Brian

How many times have we written, re written and proof read the Princess Coronation instructions in fact the latest update was only two days ago

It depends on how you want to use the names, Duchess, Lizzies, Clogs, Super D's, Austin 7's, Spaceships, West Countries and Battle of Britains are nick names (the last two differ slightly...below) the others you list are all official names.

Nicknames change with period and often with region or geographical area, official names rarely do. If you went to NRM or any detailed reference library and searched for Duchess or Lizzie you'd end up pretty poorly served, but if you searched for Princess Coronation or Princess Royal you'd get a wealth of information, same for Castle, Royal Scot, Hall, Grange, yada yada yada.

The last two should really be grouped under Bulleid Light Pacific, that's the official term for that class, yet there are drawings in the SR archives that do make reference to West Country and Battle of Britain classes.



What we have here is 64 pages of historical information, accurate information, an archive for the future all being well; not just the locomotives, but stock, infrastructure, vehicles et al, we should at least have the courtesy to name things correctly where we can, or else we're just perpetuating the misinformation.

Imagine if one said, it's just a wagon, coach, car, van, bus, whatever mate, who cares what type it is! Some people would go apocalyptic, yet in the same breath some quite happily dismiss other things, I mean, it's only a name, what's all the fuss about.

On the other hand, if the last 1261 posts are just a rambling amble of train spotting images then feel free to call stuff whatever you like; when finished, just put the volume back on the fiction shelf with all the others.

Personally I've never viewed or posted information with a view that this was anything other than a historical and accurate archive of Tims photography and Brians dedication to collate and share it all.

 

[Overseer]

Cracked it. It's a Morris J2 van like this:
View attachment 160917
Dave

The J2 vans probably handled as well as the horse drawn wagon, apart from the turning circle which wasn’t as good. One good thing to come out of them was the BMC 1.5 litre diesel engine, hundreds or thousands are still powering narrow boats up and down the canals. Actually, the engine would have been pretty uninspiring on the road but the reliability in a boat is great.

 

[LarryG]

The brandnew minibus I drove for MacAlpines for 15 months was badged Austin and was petrol.

 

[Martin Shaw]

So long as a term is understood by all readers of it to mean the same thing and confusion doesn't arise then it really doesn't matter whether it's accurately correct or not. If I use the word duchess I either refer to a dukes wife or an LMS pacific locomotive, in the context of this forum its likely the latter and everyone bar none know what I mean. I can well understand why the latest set of instructions accurately call it the princess coronations, but really virtually nobody would have minded duchess. Hair shirts should be avoided if at all possible and common usage determine these things ultimately. Witness frogs which is a term unknown in the Permanent Way Institute.

I have some info on Caprotti steam chest valves which determines the shape of steam pipes, I'll find it tomorrow.
Martin

 

[simond]

My exploit was definitely petrol. I could barely spell disesil at 17…

 

[oldravendale]

No hair shirts here, Martin, but now that we are so far in to the collection a review of where we've been and are going is actually in order as this thread has matured somewhat over the preceding months.

Thank you, Mick for an enlightening and somewhat humbling post. Enlightening because it was never in my thoughts that I was creating an historical document from Tim's photos. Humbling because I realise now that some of the attributions and descriptions are rather lazy. And you are, of course, correct - we have spent many happy(?) hours poring over the Princess Coronation instructions so I'm well aware of the proper name.

You make a valid point, and one which you have supported throughout all the previous postings in correcting any errors of fact - most recently a certain A1 at Holloway. My intention when I started this thread, and as it will continue for some time to come, has been to bring to a group of friends on WT the results of many hours of pleasurable work to improve images, quite a few of which have been physically damaged and most of which have an element of over or under exposure with the associated issues of contrast. It was always Tim's wish that these images should be a primary source for model builders - he was not of our persuasion but marveled at the recreations most of our members can build in miniature.

In short, therefore, my intention in publishing these to our small but growing church was always as entertainment for many (hence the use of railway or spotter slang), research material for a few and memory stirrers for those of us of a certain age. I'd never previously thought of them as an historical document per se with the associated responsibilities. However, with that knowledge I'll try to smarten up my act! If this has validity as an historical document the recording of the nickname alongside the official title is surely of value in a social context too.

In view of the potential importance of the historical information attached to each photo I find myself in something of a quandary. I usually take BRDatabase as my main source and if there's missing info look for more data on RailUK. Usually that's it. Valuable as they are sometimes both those sources can have an accidental error and quite often they don't agree. If it's an identified special train I use Sixbellsjunction which is a remarkable source. In fact I should be cross checking with the Locoshed books for the time, published historical data about scrapyards, and shedbashUK in case there is a history of a particular loco at a particuar time, etc, etc, etc,. Frankly, to research every image in such depth would result in publishing perhaps one image a week and that was never the intention. As we've seen Tim's attributions are sometimes not entirely accurate either which is why it's so important to challenge them. There should, therefore, be an over riding health warning attached to all these photos that the info provided is the best available at the time but is subject to revision from primary sources.

Thank you to all who so assiduously critique the photos and provide additional info. Thank you also to those who enjoy the thread and supply me with the "Likes" - when doing stuff like this over long periods of time that is a real source of encouragement.

I so much appreciate your time in pointing out the somewhat wider horizon of this thread, Mick. I'll take the descriptions I attach somewhat more seriously in future. The description attached to the image of 46228 has now been edited appropriately.

Thanks to Dave, Mick and Martin for the additional bits of info about the Caprotti Black 5s. All to be added to the file on those two photos and encompassing exactly what this thread is about.

Overseer and Simon - thanks for the additional comments about the J2.

More photos to come very soon.

Brian

 

[oldravendale]

Here's another 94XX specially for Simon.

Old Oak Common lineside in April 1963 and 8433 (built as late as March 1953) bunker first on a freight. That lamp code advises that it's an express freight, or ballast train authorised to run at a maximum speed of 35 m.p.h. or empty coaching-stock train not carrying headlamps for 'group 1' (British Railways Standard Locomotive Headlamp Codes, 1961). Doesn't look like it but that's what the book says! 8433 moved to Old Oak from Swindon the previous month and was withdrawn in June 1965 (BR Database). It went to TW Ward, Briton Ferry for scrapping which had occurred by the end of October 1965 (Rail UK).



Old Oak lineside in April 1963. An unidentified Castle passes.



An atmospheric shot still in April 1963 at Old Oak and an unidentified 94XX panier tank attacks the flyover ramp alongside the canal retaining wall probably with empty stock. The shed is hidden in the gloom left centre of the photo.



Brian

 

[Martin Shaw]

With Brian's indulgence a piece about Caprotti valve gear and their steam pipes.

The LMS and BR between them built 145 Black 5s post war, 70 from Horwich and 75 from Crewe. H.G.Ivatt put the case for a try out of combinations of bearing types and British Caprotti valve gear in 1946 having been appointed CME. This meant that 20 Crewe built locomotives would be fitted with Caprotti gear, 10 with Timken roller bearings and 10 with plain bearings. There was insufficient space between the middle axle and the firebox front to incorporate the Timken cannon box so all frame components to the rear of the middle axle and the boiler moved back by 4” and the smokebox extended by the same amount. Whilst it only affected the roller bearing engines all of the last 110 locos had this increased wheelbase to simplify frame marking out.

The valve gear consisted of a gearbox on the leading axle to provide a rotating shaft drive forward to a transfer box fixed to the smokebox saddle to transfer the drive through 90 deg to the cam boxes on top of the cylinders. Attached to the rear of the cam boxes were the reversing gearboxes operated from the drivers screw control as per a Walschearts equipped engine. Whilst the Caprotti gear only needed a limited rotation of the control shaft to go forward or backward, the reversing gearboxes were arranged to also provide a gearing reduction so that operationally either type of engine reverser operated basically the same way so as not to cause confusion. The saddle casting incorporated the exhaust passages from the valve chests to the blastpipe. The exhaust valves were inside the inlet valves which explains the steam pipes needed to extend so far laterally.

The roller bearing engines (4748-4757) were first into traffic between Feb and Jun 48 although the last was delayed until Dec that year. These were equipped with steam pipes that exited the smokebox around the middle and had a prominent elbow 12” or so above the cylinder. Someone fairly senior recognised the aesthetic disaster and as a result the plain bearing engines (4738-4747) that entered traffic between Jun and Aug 48 had a revised arrangement where the steam pipe exited the smoke box at a steeper angle, to almost the cylinders before a less sharp elbow. This looked better but is still hardly a design triumph although difficult to see how it could be much changed. Sometime in the 50s these engines had a slightly revised manufacturing arrangement of the steam pipes that made them look subtly different. Therefore over the life of the 20 locomotives there are three possible arrangements of steam pipes although the variations are purely for manufacturing or aesthetic reasons, all 20 had exactly the same components for the Caprotti valve gear.

This gear wasn’t wholly successful, accessibility to the bits in between the frames was limited and there was a tendency for accumulated dirt and oil to cause the valves to stick open making the loco a complete failure. They were sluggish in acceleration by comparison and most of them were allocated to Longsight at one time or another for middling duties although they seem to have been used extensively on Manchester to Bournemouth trains so they can’t have been too bad. The experience of the 20 locos led BR to be disinclined to persist with Caprotti valve gear however Associated Locomotive Equipment Ltd, the suppliers, in conjunction with the Italian parent company offered a redesigned version of the gear and Riddles was persuaded to give it a try, which he did but limited to two locomotives.

These were 44686/7, the last two of the Horwich built engines in May 1951. It really only differed from the earlier version by virtue of deriving the valve motion from an two outside gearboxes fitted to a return cranks on the middle axle and doing away with the transfer box. The principle benefit of this was access to all the bits but doesn’t seem to have been any greater success. What they did bring was a visual difference around the steam pipes although this is largely due to the running plate being significantly higher to accommodate the revised valve gear arrangements. BR subsequently built a further 68 Black 5s to Stanier’s design so the Caprotti experiment, 22 locomotives out of a total of 841, can’t really be considered successful. I know there were 842 of them but of course 4767 had outside Stephenson gear.

Martin

 

[LarryG]

Re the unidentified Castle at Old Oak, my eye was drawn to the parcels train in the background and two blood & custard parcels vans. The furthest coach looks to be a very grubby demoted passenger carrying vehicle. It is quite possible the nearer van was one of many converted from WW1 ambulance coaches.

 

[oldravendale]

Cor, Martin! Just what this thread is about. Thank you and great stuff to add to the two photos.

And well observed, Larry. I'd missed that.

Brian

 

[oldravendale]

BTW, kind viewers, you may have noticed that I've now included my reference source in the descriptions. (Well, the one description so far!) To my mind that overcomes the issues attendant on trying to research every last nook and cranny. Yes, it's a cop out but any interested party can look at the basic data I've used and research further if they wish. Please continue to advise when things are incorrect and your sources so that I can correct all the data - in some cases the amount of info against a particular photo is huge thanks to individual research by people on this forum and we've been able to correct quite a few dates and loco IDs.

Somewhat later albeit rather randomly Tim kept far better notes of precise dates and specifics of location and loco ID. These earlier pictures continue to need quite a bit of luck in pinning down the details.

Brian

 

[Genghis]

These were 44686/7, the last two of the Horwich built engines in May 1951. It really only differed from the earlier version by virtue of deriving the valve motion from an two outside gearboxes fitted to a return cranks on the middle axle and doing away with the transfer box. The principle benefit of this was access to all the bits but doesn’t seem to have been any greater success.

Martin, very useful post, thank you.

I have highlighted this bit because I am sure that I read in one of the Essery and Jenkinson books that these two locos were thought to be superior to the others: a sort of 'Black 6'. BR of course did build some standard 5's as Caprottis (plus of course the Duke) so there must have been some perceived benefit?

David

 

[Peter Cross]

Cracked it. It's a Morris J2 van like this:
View attachment 160917
Dave

But we had one that turned left if you let go of the steering wheel. Reverse was somewhere under your left leg near to your testicules.

 

[oldravendale]

These three are all entitled Old Oak lineside April 1963 so I'm guessing were taken at the same time as the photos above.

First is what I believe to be a Castle but identification is impossible. Help to identify the tender type will be appreciated. It's making its way under the footbridge just outside the shed. My initial thoughts were that it's going on shed - in fact if going under that footbridge is definitely doing so - but it looks to have a rather full tender for that. Additionally there's a single lamp and I can't establish what a lamp in that position means - I'll guess it must be for a light engine movement. Help to find a definitive description of Loco lamp positions in BR days will be appreciated.



April 1963 and Old Oak Common Yard, ash crane and coaling facility included. 57XX 0-6-0PT 9659 in the foreground and an unidentified Castle (could it be the same as the one in the photo above?) behind. 9659 seems to have been a Slough engine from 1948 (SLS) It moved to Southall in March 1965 (BRDatabase) or April (SLS) and was withdrawn in June (BRDatabase, RailUK and SLS). It went to TW Ward Briton Ferry for scrapping which was complete by the end of October (BRDatabase and RailUK).



Still April 1963 in Old Oak Yard and Grange 6878 Longford Grange with a condensing pannier tank in the background. A nice detail of the ash crane in this one is a bonus (and I'll be happy to do a bit of extra work on this part of the image if it's of use). 6878 was a St Philip's Marsh engine in 1963 going to Llanelli in April 1964, then Ebbw Junction Newport in May and finally Worcester in June. Withdrawal came in November (BRDatabase). It went to Buttigiegs Newport for scrapping which was complete by the end of February 1965 (RailUK).



Brian

 

[Osgood]

The first one Brian - you’ve got your work cut out in Photoshop wombling all that litter - surely not chip papers from onlookers on the footbridge

Edit: Nor, of course, should you remove the litter - it Is an integral part of the image that itself portrays information.

 

[simond]

And there might be a debate about whether the things lying around in the shed photos constitute clutter or not.

 

[Dave Holt]

The single jet of steam coming from the chimney (brake ejector discharge?) suggests that both were fitted with double chimneys, so that might norrow it a bit?
Dave.

 

[Martin Shaw]

The first pic of the Castle, I'm pretty sure it's one of them, has a lamp over one buffer which isn't actually a valid headcode, but! The official headcode for a light engine is a lamp in the middle of the buffer plank which apart from the Southern Region seems to be otherwise universal. I was told by an ex WR man from Pontypridd shed that a loco lamp over a buffer indicated a tail lamp, the difference to tell whether it was the leading or trailing end of the movement. I have no doubt that young men in 1963 were little different from nowadays so swapping lamps around according to direction of travel was honoured in the breach and also I have read somewhere recently that on the WR an accepted alternative for a light engine headcode was a lamp over a buffer, make of the foregoing what you will. In respect of the Castle I think it's going tender first, the lay of the lines suggest so and the limit of shunt sign usually shows the termination of a wrong direction move which all points to that conclusion. I think it shows a tail lamp that hasn't been changed but could be a headcode lamp. I'll see if I have anything official lying around.
Martin

 

[mickoo]

Regarding the Castle (it could be a King....see below), It's possible we're missing the obvious, logically it should be going on shed, if it were going to Paddington then it would be the wrong way around to take a train out West The only caveat here is Ranlagh Bridge (see below below), they may run chimney first and then turn at that depot.

The tender looks very much like a Collett 4000G tender as fitted to all Kings and many Castles.

Terminus light engine movements (tank engines exempt) are usually pretty easy to work out, if the chimney faces the stops then it's a light movement out of the terminus, if the other way around then it's a light movement to pick up a train. I only know of three Terminus where there is a turntable closer to the station than the servicing depot, Kings Cross (Top shed servicing), Paddington (Old Oak Servicing) and Liverpool Street (Stratford servicing), all three have a more local table and facilities, bottom shed, Ranlagh Bridge and Liverpool Street for hot turn around.

To be fair, Top shed always sent out engines the right way around for trains leaving Kings Cross, they were not turned at bottom shed, only engines serviced at Bottom shed were turned there, it's to compact/busy to allow a free line to simply turn engines from Top shed.

If you zoom in on Brians picture you can see the cranked outside steam pipes, only fitted to Castles and Kings.



Regarding Paddington/OOC light engine movements, see attached images, copyright unknown but respected.

7007 at Platform 7, it's quite convoluted to get from here to Ranelagh bridge but this platform is a be pretty direct move from OOC and not crossing too many running lines, but like Brians image a healthy load of coal, the driver is casually leaning back and possibly looking up at the signals for the release, again, one lamp over the buffer.

Like Brians shot the engine is 'on the bubble', not the sort of state you want if going on shed for servicing, but perfect if you're getting ready to head an express out.

It also pays to cross all the running lines here rather than out at OOC, speeds here are slow so the impact to the timetable (clearing headway) is much less than it would be for making space crossing lines where trains are running at 50-70mph. From an operating departments view, you want conflicting light engine movements where running line speeds are lowest.



Next up 7029, again a healthy coal load and the driver is looking back as the engine is heading into Ranelagh Road, again it's on the bubble so I'd expect this to be turned and set back onto an express. There is a following image to this showing the engine moving back onto the turntable roads. The front lamp is central, the rear lamp is over the far buffer.



The upshot to all this rambling, I think the engine is heading to Paddington P7 then crossing over to Ranelagh bridge for turning before taking an express out. There is a nice run of Paddington arrivals/departures/light engine/station details in the GWRJ spread over several copies (I only kept these as although I'm not a big fan of the GWR, I most certainly am of Paddington), I'm sure the info would all be in there, I just don't have time right now to dig them out and read it all up at the moment.

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

I only know of three Terminus where there is a turntable closer to the station than the servicing depot, Kings Cross (Top shed servicing), Paddington (Old Oak Servicing) and Liverpool Street (Stratford servicing), all three have a more local table and facilities, bottom shed, Ranlagh Bridge and Liverpool Street for hot turn around.

Interesting - when you start studying the 1944-70 1:1,250 & 1:2,500 OS maps, local turntables also existed at Marylebone (Neadsen), Euston (Camden), St Pancras (Kentish Town), Charing Cross (Bricklayers Arms), Victoria (Stewarts Lane) and Waterloo (Nine Elms).

Fenchurch St (Plaistow), London Bridge, Cannon St, Blackfriars, Holborn Viaduct do not have local turntables.

London Bridge, Charing Cross and Cannon St would have been serviced by Norwood Junction, New Cross Gate and Bricklayers Arms. Blackfriars and Holborn Viaduct were electric services as was Fenchurch Street at the time Tim's 1963 photos were taken.