Confused at Loughborough?

parts scattered around the place for 45305 and 48305....the similarity in number had not occured to me before... fortunately one of the standard 2 twins was away, I had just ridden behind it the day before....(the oither was stripped down in the works also)

 

Let's hope the day doesn't come when they have Scotsman, Tornado and the O4 in steam at a gala... 60163 63601, 60103!

 

Add 61306 to the mix then it all gets rather silly.

 

has anyone ever seen those 4 together in the same room? Is it a conspiracy?

 

We also have two pairs of consecutively numbered Mk1s (though not all on site currently) , 1525/1526 & 5007/5008, also honourable mention to 4948/4988. We did have 15207/15208 too but one of them is now a diesel brake tender so no longer counts. And GCRN have wagons DB900936/900937.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I did once here a story of a driver who oiled up one Bulleid when he was actually on a different one - can't remember which way round it was but the 2 were 34027 and 34072!

Steven

 

Having 4464, 4468, 4488, 4489, 4496 and 4498 didn;t seem to cause too many issues a few years back. Although admittedly they weren't in bits

 

One should never bully steam locos.

 

Corrected!

(Very embarassed and hiding from @Spamcan81 !)

Steven

 

Wasn't number confusion why the GWR Grange got to Leeds once up the GC? I heard that control were asked if 6858 (I think) was OK to take the train on to Sheffield and they assumed that the D prefix had been forgotten and that it was an EE Type 3/class 37 so they gave it the nod to continue

 

When 35027 Port Line was based at the Bluebell, it had the company of two locos whose BR number was only one digit different - 75027 and 31027. I'm not sure whether the MN and 4MT were ever in traffic together and thus cause confusion but as far as the P class is concerned, not only has it always run with its SE&CR number, 27, in preservation, but also it has been in bits since 1978, well before Port Line even left Barry scrapyard, so not much chance of muddling up the two locos here!

 

She'll not be in bits for too much longer as the new frames have arrived (tenuous reason to promote Project 27!) http://wainrightsfinestsecr27.blogspot.co.uk/

 

Control did not know nothing of 6858's exploits until its cylinders started damaging platforms at stations on the Penistone to Huddersfield line. It was removed from the train at Huddersfield.

 

I know it was at Hillhouse shed for about a week afterwards and it was worked back 9onto the WR via Standedge, Stalybridge-Stockport, and the electric line to Crewe

 

Just as well the DPS don't get confused between 55009 and 55019.

Is this thread actually going anywhere?

 

Or Scotland's 8F could be mistaken for a Black Five or a Peak!

 

Does it matter?

 

imagine if you had 34027, and 35027, both to the untrained eye could be mistaken for each other, especially if they were running in 67 condition with no nameplates and dirtied down .