Flying Scotsman

I'm in agreement with @Jimc : just because someone has a camera, doesn't make them a serious photographer. That situation has never been more so than now with everyone having a camera on their person. One of the wonders of Facebook when I complied, was how many individuals like to share images of what they ate for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Each to their own I say.

Back in the distant past when men in raincoats (I want to avoid saying anorak ) took their treasured SLR out into the field with trusty film of their liking, formed an orderly 'crowd' to take an image or two of a locomotive without intruding on the lens of their fellow enthusiasts. Modern technology means that cameras including DSLRs don't have to be held close to the eye of the beholder but can be held at arm's reach thus making the crowd less orderly than before. How many of us have tried to take an image of something which now has iPhones and iPads (other brands are available) littering the fringes of their shot? I'm not complaining btw - I'm pretty relaxed about how technology has allowed the changes we've all seen.

 

Haworth 1972

 

I think it is always refreshing when photographers find a new angle on a familiar subject …

Tom

 

No need for apologise Sam 60103! (I rather think I should appologise my comment!) I`m sure you have the best intention.
Just continue to participate and enjoy this fantastic interest!

Knut

 

Scotsman on the Cotswold Venturer on Saturday last, in the form I remember A3s from Scotland in the 60s .
It's quite sobering to realise that I first saw (and photographed) the loco, already preserved, nearly 55 years ago at Warrington Bank Quay on the Chester Festival Flyer. I was quite young ; honest !
The picture, near Besford, was taken on the way home from seeing Clun Castle earlier, which just by coincidence I also first saw nearly 55 years ago at Leeds while on the way to see grandparents in Hull.
Days like that do remind you just how lucky we are in this country to have the wealth of main line steam operation that we do, none of which could have been predicted in August 1968.

 

I too saw 4472 that day, 9th July 1967, at Salwick on the Fylde. I was very young as well!

 

Then this sort of proves your point.

A "very young" Mr Taylor took this. Better by far than any photo I've ever taken. Some have talent, some don't

 

If we cant have apple green, or single chimney or no smoke deflectors, could we at least get polished metal smokebox door fittings, may be not regulation BR but something the Odd Shed enthusiast or the Master Neverers would have done...

 

(Wonders to self whether they could get away with that by fitting a 30A shed plate)

 

And polished metal wheel rims.

 

Beat me to it ...

https://www.bluebell-railway.com/news/flyings-scotsman-returns-bluebell-railway-2022/

Tom

 

Interesting to note on a recent TV programme that 4472 / 60103 now carries fleet number 98872 confirming it to be registered as a Class 8P; equivalent to 4498 ? Don't think so !!

 

The latest issue of Trackside has arrived this morning, and despite confirmation that the loco will retain its current condition after overhaul, they don't seem to be backing down on a return to single chimney and Apple Green condition soon, saying the proposal for the return to that condition has been delayed due the tight timescale of the overhaul and meeting commitments already pushed back by Covid.

 

I have always assumed it goes back to the period in preservation when 4472/60103 carried an A4 boiler set
at 250psi. ( Many A3s carried A4 boilers under BR but operating at 220 psi.)

TOPS also of course reflects the vagaries of classifications under BR eg small GWR Prairie 2-6-2T No.4588
and BR standard 4 2-6-4 No.80080 both have 984… TOPS numbers. ( in practice the BR4 can develop an
IHP almost double the 4575)

Many GWR Classes ( again influenced by TE considerations ? ) were ( stand by for a ‘Gods Wonderful Railway’
onslaught ) over rated compared to locos from the other ‘big Three’.
eg 60xx ‘King’ 8. 78xx ‘Manor’ 5

The tractive effort formula has a lot to answer for.

Michael Rowe

 

All part of the "Pimp my A3" regime which tried to maximise power, thus allowing an extra coach & thus more income. Trouble was that the frames in particular suffered, & we are all well aware of the eventual fallout from that when she was stripped down at York for overhaul...

 

To be fair though, according to Simon Martin's research, A3's seemed to consistently and persistently suffer from frame fractures. The fact that 4472 ran from 1963 until 2000 ish without suffering frame failure does not necessarily mean that the owner at the time was entirely to blame when 4472's frames did suffer fracture. It might have simply been a matter of when, rather than if

 

Agreed - but it's never a good idea to put extra stress on already potentially fragile components, which is what was done by running the boiler at 250psi. Owner's perogative & all that, of course, but even so,,,

 

For clarity: this is a well known problem and reported in RCTS LNER book 2A. The A1s and A3s did indeed suffer more cracked frames than the A4s did, the latter having different stay arrangements to compensate for the heavier boiler and other changes.

True, but she also wasn’t being used in daily service in any way like she was as a BR and LNER loco, which would contribute to that.