Flying Scotsman

You are quite correct for A1 should have said LNER A3. i just had it mind that in its Apple green days FS was still an A1.
and my attempt to say its neither one nor tother but least it can still be both at some point got over wordy.

For zer record i Like ze Smake deflictors, und i'm nat German ezer

 

As I understand it, FS is going to be closer to being a "stock" A3 after this overhaul than it has been for many years (A3 vs A4 boiler for starters). And, we are told, the deflectors are a safety requirement for the mainline - which is perfectly understandable, and probably why they were fitted in the first place. And personally, I prefer late BR Brunswick green to Apple green almost every time, leading me to an early 1960s A3 with or without deflectors.

However - what about the tender?

Unless you decided to rebuild the tender to a non-corridor version FS won't be rights in BR livery either. So, for all of the enterprising purists out there, how about this: remove the existing corridor tender body when life-ex and use it as an interpretive tool at the NRM - and having had the pleasure of squeezing over the rags and spare oil cans that were in the corridor during FS's 1988 visit to Brisbane just to say I had, it's pretty educationally dark and narrow! - and build a non-corridor tender for the purpose. Or even give 4468 a corridor tender again...!

Runs for cover.....

Toby

 

That is why I have referred more than once to Alan Pegler's desire to present a typical A3, not an 'authentic 4472 in 1930something'. Therefore either corridor or non-corridor is fine - either is typical.

BR livery with double chimney & smoke deflectors is typical.
BR or LNER livery with single chimney is typical.
LNER livery with double chimney & smoke deflectors is NOT!

 

Good Point on the Tender tobbes... Does FS have a corridor at the mo ? Sure corridor tenders are, like Flying Scotsman itsself, synonymous with non stop runs, but without water troughs you have to ask is any water capacity sacrificed for this feature ?. and do many extra water stops have to be made as a result ?, so a bit of a swop around could make sense (though there is the cost of the blue paint and moving everything around etc etc to consider... and come to think of it Hasnt SNG got a corridor tender and seems to manage well enough...

 

Since both types have a 5000 gallon capacity there's no loss from running FS out there with a corridor tender. Of course with the water pick-up gear removed in most cases the opportunity to add a little water capacity has been made with a lot of main line locos.

 

could they do a swap with Mallards tender? is Mallard in its condition authentic with a non corridor tender?

sorry north eastern locos arnt my main steam interest (you dont say I hear ), mainly ex LMS,BR.

and how's this for rivet counting, in LNER green it shouldnt have overhead warning flashes. red style or modern yellow. Im joking, I can live with them haha. I can actually live with pretty much everything, but its nice to have a good debate and air our own preferences.

cheers

Mike

 

Mallard's current tender is non-corridor, as it had when new. Scotsman's is corridor. Both had both at various points in their careers.

 

And at the risk of being castigated at a rivit counter myself, the BR livery carried by 60103 in the '90s was incorrect anyway because the smokebox numberplate was carried directly over the top smoke box door strap, when infact the loco shoud've carried the plate on the top part of the smokebox door, above the strap.

The correct livery for 60103 (with deflectors and double chimney) would be with the smokebox plate DIRECTLY OVER the upper s/box door strap and with the upper handrail split with the upper lamp bracket. From what I can see in photographs, 60103 never had the burnished/silver painted door staps so that is another inaccuracy with the '90s cofiguration.

Prior to the fitment of the deflectors, photos of 60103 show the numberplate fixed ABOVE the handrail.

 

cheers Miff

its coming back to me, its that long since Ive read up on all this, one of the main reasons I remembered the corridor tender on Mallard was my dad had a hornby one in that configuration.

Mike

 

going to eat my hat as Ive just found a photo of it preserved with black painted smokebox straps and smokebox door number above the strap

http://www.train-photos.com/picture/number7879.asp

Mike

 

Craig, heres a pic which you described http://roysgallery.photos.gb.com/p54287249.html


however here it does have the number on the strap http://ronfisher.fotopic.net/p47812113.html

the latter being my personal favourite when in BR condition


Mike

 

now were talking http://www.steamlocomotives.photos.gb.net/p54855734.html

Mike

 

I had the hornby Flying Scotsman with a corridor tender. The tender had a bit of spring metal wrapped around one axle which scraped against sandpaper to make a 'chuff chuff' sound. Maybe we'll have to do that some day on the real one when the boiler finally expires!

best wishes, Tom

 

[off-topic] Reminds me of the letter which BR allegedly received about the unreliable tilt on the Advanced Passenger Train. It was from a boy who owned a Hornby model APT which also didn't tilt very well. In his letter, he explained that he put some cardboard under the outside of the track and that seemed to fix it. Not sure if BR took up this idea on the WCML.

Richard

 

Judging by how much of the recent WCML upgrade was classed as renewals, perhaps they did!

 

But did they use single-sheet cardboard or double (with corrugated liner). And what livery?

 

interesting shot of 60100 Spearmint with yellow cabside stripe

http://dwb.railsteamgallery.fotopic.net/p22465317.html

Mike

 

Page 94 of Heritage Railway - top of the page - Reader's Platform - yours truly - under the headline "Waterman Scotsman Bid 'in bad taste'"

Chuffed to see it in print. Obviously the loonier the post, the greater chance of seeing it in print!

 

So are they still on target to finish Scotsman in 2011 ?