A4 livery whole page article

Not a livery debate from me but a query as to why David Ward gets so much space on his livery opinions, both this time with no 7 and previously with the 'I'll block every move to repaint 6233 into BR Maroon for olympics'

I'm sure that we all have much to be thankful for in his previous role with BR but I do not feel that his opinion is any more important than mine or anyone elses, nor is he necessarily right with his sweeping big four opinion any more than the other DW is with his BR livery opinions. Do we need to dedicate so much space to such a pointless discussion, let's get no 7 on the mainline, it doesn't need a repaint yet!

 

There,s nothing like a livery debate to wind people up.

When I was dicussing the livery of the CCT i am restoring the pwers that be asked whether it was going to be green or red? tongue in cheek and with a straight face I said B.R. corporate blue with the large logo or I would not do it.

They thought I was serious and one of them went ballistic at me. It took a while to convince them I was only joking. Some people are most sensitive about this issue.

Anyone else got any anecdotes to tell?

Regards
Chris

 

Bought Heritage Railway for the first time in ages today to read on the train home from work. I am pleased to report that :

a) It lasted a full 48-minute commute
b) It is returning to its former forte of long articles about hopelessly-ambitious projects to create new steam lines, which always amuse me.
c) David Morgan, the "man you can't ignore", is still well worth ignoring.
d) The same story appears a number of times across the magazine in different guises
e) Some of the photographs are a bit piss-poor

 

Personally I think SNG looks very smart in BR Blue and I would love to see the loco in BR Green.

One livery issue that has annoyed me regarding the Beachy Head project was that when it was announced that the loco would first come out in lined black a number of people wrote in to Bluebell News mag and condemed it calling the choice a "Ropley or a Loughborough decision" The reason this is happening is because the loco would have been in lined black had it been saved and delivered to the Bluebell and also most people will remember seeing Brighton Atlantics in lined black rather than SR green or LBSC umber when it's first steamed. The loco will also carry SR green, both olive and malachite, and LBSC umber after about 4-5 yrs in lined black when the project is complete. Shame these people who whinged about the livery decision couldn't have been bothered to read the facts before having a moan.

 

If you like it in BR blue then why do you want to change it to Green? Plus theres already 2 other working A4's in BR Green!

 

Youhave a point there, all you need to change for the illusion is the number and the nameplates.

Regards
Chris

 

Why cant we have an A4 in LNER Garter Blue to go with the LNER Teak Gresley coaches. What would enthusiast think if the NYMR Gresley set was painted 'blood and custard' livery to match the engine?

 

By that I meant if the A4 has to be repainted in a few years time I would rather seen it in BR green than Garter Blue. But ultimately it's up to the guys paying the bills for the repaint and any repairs to decide what livery 60009 should be in.

 

Oh good, I said the thrust of my argument wasn't about liveries but why one person seems to be given a soap box to have a 'my opinion is more important than mere mortals'

As for stock, start a thread in th estock section, but a rake of Gresleys in Blood and Custard and a rake of Staniers with BR roundels would be very nice thank you!

 

I find it amusing that 'the man you can't ignore' tends to get his column somewhere near the end of the magazine in the bits that I normally don't bother to read. Still never read one of the columns where I thought 'hey, that guys got a good point'.

The last front cover was shocking for a national magazine. I doubt Steam Railway would have ran it.

 

I flicked through the magazine this morning and SYM, I wholeheartedly agree. Half a page on "Some guy thinks an engine should be a different colour." Well, rodger me. Have the BBC and Reuters been informed? An absolute non-story.

 

Good old David 'I AM RIGHT!!' Ward... The most impartial man on the planet don't you know!

Some years back at Didcot we gave Cookham Manor a repaint, as it had begun to look very tired. After initial rubbing down & application of primer, we broke out the undercoat - a fantastically luminous shade of Percy green. After a day or so the work was done, and thoughts turned to the top coat. Of course at this point the heavens opened, and the engine ended up staying in this matt LNER-esque form for a good 2 weeks.

Enter the inevitable punter: 'Ere mate, that green there... are you sure it's right?'

Myself: 'No, it should be gloss!!'

Actually speaking of CCT's, a few years ago we gave the 38 Mob's Python a good tarting up. It has a long, somewhat murky history. During one point in its life some genius had the idea of giving the thing a liberal coating of bitumastic. To make better this act of lunacy, it had later received a nice layer of GWS Best Fecal Brown, dredged from tins of antiquity. The result was a flaking brown mess, which oozed forth black bitu during hot weather. Not exactly the best of canvasses to start from.

Rubbing down was out of the question - the bitu merely smeared itself out into an irremovable tar. I think we did try using an angle grinder, although this was soon abandoned as a fire risk. The only option was to try and obliterate the bitumastic under a mass of paint. Fortunately a tin of grey filler paint was found lurking in the back of the stores. It had the consistency of half-set concrete, however 20 mins work with a drill and a tent peg soon changed this to more of a porridge. It was then ladled onto one side of the Python, so that the bitu had no chance of seeping through. Eventually it ran out, and we called upon the services of some lovely ochre-brown gloss to keep us going. This too soon died, and we were left with some sort of brown undercoat, which managed to last out long enough to do about a quarter of the vehicle. We didn't bother painting what was left.

So now the side is covered in at least 5 different shades of brown, with what can only be described as grey cement rendering along the bottom. And then we left it. For a year.

Railway people are obviously quite a religious lot, for over the ensuing months we heard quite a lot along the lines of 'oh my God', and 'Jesus wept' etc, as well as some more unsavory comments about our restoration abilities. Eventually we did get hold of some top coat, and slapped it on. One of the Mob came and lettered it, while another went round the window frames with some bright red paint that had been found knocking about. And when it was done, it looked quite nice.

Some old duffer: 'Hmmm... yes, sorry but shouldn't the window moldings be in Indian red...?'

Liveries - who needs 'em!?

 

I read the magazine for the first time this morning and though I actually agree with what he says (theres a suprise...) the fact his views are given a half-page of text combined with massive picture is just completely non-sensical! It's not even as though SNG would have made the news this month anyway probably. Clearly now he's no longer BR director he has little better to do with his time. And to think HR felt this was a more important story than...

- First moves on Norton triangle (an exciting prospect for the whole movement)
- The potential sale of historic Manx tram vehicles
- Return to steam of Braunton
- ELR 20th Anniversary celebrations
- Bluebell125 celebrations

All of which (to my mind) merit far more coverage than a former BR supremo and his views on what colour engines should or should not have. A similar problem exists in SR with Wilcock. Maybe we should lock them both in a room and let them fight it out with each other?

Incidentally, I feel the standard of photograph is this edition to be better than usual (lets see if you can guess why...)

 

Wouldn't happen to be the picture of 'C' would it? (I think thats right anyway)

 

A whole page was really a bit much. It seemed like a puff piece to fill a spare page in the magazine, but was placed rather near the sharp end of the issue if that was the role the item was intended to fulfill. The only worthwhile bit was the rather nice broadside shot of 60007, which to my eyes serves to argue the case for leaving the loco exactly as it is! Where were the photos showing A4s in LNER garter blue....? Yes, we all know what the livery looks like but some illustration should have been included to firm up the rather half-baked argument...still, better than giving the page over to advertising I guess!

No problem I think with running 60007 in early BR blue on the teaks - there was many instances of overlap where it took much longer for the carriages to be repainted in the new BR livery so the combination is not that incongruous anyway.

 

It would arguably be nice to have an example of the class working with the wheel valances, in the condition 4468 was in when it broke the world record but livery is owners perogative, always has been, always will be.

I will may accused rightly of going off thread but;
* Did all A4s run with corridor tenders?
* Am I right in thinking Mallard is the only one currently that does not have a corridor tender?

 

No, although I don't know why this was the case. Did the shed allocation (and thus likely diagrams) influence which locos were paired with corridor tenders?

Yep - although IIRC 60019's was converted from a non-corrdor tender(?).

 

I noticed that front cover of Clan Line. That was the worst front cover I have ever seen and in a way a bit of an insult to others who had taken far better photographs of that train.

 

In response to the question of corridor tenders - 5 were originally built for fitting to those A1 Pacifics ( 4472; 4476; 2573; 2577; 2580 ) that worked the through services between Edinburgh and Kings Cross and this proved so successful that a further 5 were built for A1s working the Anglo-Scots expresses.
When the A4s were first built their original tenders were exchanged shortly after construction for these 10 corridor tenders, a further 11 locos were built with corridor tenders from new and the last 14 were built without corridors. 60004 was built without corridor but subsequently received the corridor tender from W1 60700 when it was withdrawn from service.
The last 14 that were built included ( BR numbers ) 60001 / 02 / 04 / 05 / 06 / 07 / 18 / 19 / 20 / 21 / 22 / 31 / 33 / 34 but, after Nationalisation, the reallocation of locomotives between depots led to an exchange of tenders between class locomotives. In principle, however, locomotives intended for London - Newcastle / Leeds services did not need corridor tenders and locomotives allocated to Gateshead, which worked services to both Edinburgh and Kings Cross, also had no need of corridor tenders.

My grateful thanks to Gavin Morrison whose book Glory Days - A4 Pacifics ( pub Ian Allan ) provided much of the above info and detail.

 

David Ward needs to be told he ain't important any more and should not be given space to encourage his rantings...he's happy to do 6100 wrong, but sees fit to castigate others about their engines (4472, 60009 etc). Yawn.