Flying Scotsman

Exactly.

 

The Flying Scotsman whistle as fitted ,was the same on all a A3s , us Midland line spotters used to smile at the weak sound they made when we visited Peterborough' /Huntingdon. The N2 1744/69523 based at the GCR but on loan to the NNR ,has a very similar sounding whistle .Both loco's were built in the 1920/23 period for the GNR/LNER .

 

We were talking earlier in the thread about some of Peter Handford's recordings, including some cracking A3 whistles properly tuned. I just found this,

http://www.transacord.co.uk/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=51

A snip to download digitally at £3.50, quality is excellent and some lovely A3 whistles as they should sound

 

That website is going to hit my bank balance. I've got everything that Transacord issued of Peter's work with the exception of one 78. Was going to try and digitise them but that site is going to save me a lot of work.

 

I did read it but you didn't mention it still being an A1 (A10) until 1947. I know you know that but others may not

 

I will also include that the Witte smoke deflectors change the look of the Scotsman a lot

Knut

 

Am surprised though that once you've paid, it can take up to five days for your download to be available.

 

98.5 mph

 

Oh really? I got 'North of Kings Cross' instantly. Listening to it now. There is a recording of a very slippery 60113 which should please @S.A.C. Martin

 

The whistle given to Bill Hoole (which was later given to the FR) was supposedly from 60016, but that is puzzling as Hoole retired in 1959 whereas 60016 continued for a few more years. A4 whistles appear fairly regularly in auction with varying degrees of provenance. Of particular interest recently was a whistle from 60017 plus BR receipt. This whistle had no finial whereas images of 60017 at New England shortly before withdrawal show it with a whistle with finial. This rather implies that Doncaster stores just reached for the first whistle to hand, and if someone wanted one from 16 or 17 or whatever, that is what they put on the receipt. There are at least two whistles said to be from 60014 in circulation, one with finial (which images show it with), which was presented to Ossie Nock, and one without. So generally, I think it is difficult to be certain that a whistle was carried by a particular loco.

The whistles stolen from the FR were from 60010 (CNR chime) and from 60013 (NZGR chime). (Locos of the LNER Part 2A p109)

 

Huh?

 

It's a shame not all of them are FLAC encoded, else my wallet really would have taken a punishment beating

Wonder if they had to deal with 'sticky shed syndrome' on the tapes? Just don't say "Ampex" in my vicinity any time soon...

 

Yes indeed, although she did run with a double chimney only for some time too, in BR days.

I suspect the recent article on Mallard in "Steam Days" is the main source of that particular quip.

 

Just contacted the company to ask why I can't download straight away.

 

Some unbelievers think that 4472 didn't do the ton, just as others think that Mallard didn't get the record. The same unbelievers seem to accept any speed claim for the GWR as gospel.

 

Double chimney fitted in early '59 and deflectors went on late '61. I'm surprised it ran so long like that, given the problems it was said to create.

 

reputedly , examination of the dyno roll does not support 100 mph.

 

not me ! lol .nor do I believe 114 for Coronation . I guess i'm just a cynic

 

I have always been a bit suspicious of the "drifting smoke" problem. If you want to eliminate drifting smoke entirely, fit an A4 type front end.

The V2s with double chimneys didn't have deflectors fitted, the Thompson A2/2s managed fine with the small wing deflectors, several A3s never got the full smoke deflectors as per Humorist or Flying Scotsman.

The original dyno roll for Flying Scotsman does not exist and that which is a copy was examined and then questioned by the author in Back track vol.32 (not Steam Days as incorrectly stated by myself earlier - I misremembered!)

The article makes the extraordinary claim of potential fraud regarding the 100mph, for which I find there to be no evidence besides his hearsay, I'm afraid.

The article is well written to the extent of pushing an agenda but does not convince me personally.

 

The smoke deflectors must have been fitted for a reason as I doubt Br would have done it for fun. Had the A3s lasted longer, I'm sure they would have all been so fitted.