What About The Bee

Hello Rana The two images on the left are derivatives of Bury (top) and Walker (bottom). That is, some other artist used those period pieces to create "new" art. All four do appear by the same artist. There was a suggestion that it was Alan Fearnley, active in the 1970s, but I could not find a definitive match. None are period art that I can attribute to a known source. I tried reverse image searching, but decided to stop. Plenty of folks using those images and none citing a source. Would you mind photographing the rear. There may be a clue there we can use. And thank you for posting them. You never know when we may get a lucky strike! Bee

Hi ThreeLink It is entirely possible that the small outrigger was to mount the third wheel. Those types of railway conveyances are known to exist. They suffer from the serious defect that the center of gravity can easily transition to outside of, instead of over, the rails. This in turn leads to nasty spills. Bee

I have not seen this from any other research. Dawson does not mention it. Neither does Thomas. Both are respected researchers of the LMR, Dawson still active. The details of the report are so odd that I thought the reporter was making a satirical joke. But then I saw it being reported on again, and in a way that showed the reporting was in earnest. The first report is in the Derby Mercury, dated 26 Aug 1829, over a year before Opening Day. It states: "Mr. Stephenson is about to try the experiment whether the strength of a man mounted on a velocipede can be advantageously applied to the propulsion of carriages on the railway. The velocipede will be attached to the carriage behind, and the rider will push himself and the carriage forward by the working of his legs" As I mentioned, I thought this a prank. For those who do not know, a velocipede is a very early bicycle. Before 1860ish, they didn't even have pedals. Before 1817, the vehicle could not even be steered, two fixed wheels connected. Even if a velocipede was experimented with, it must have been quickly discarded, as a man on a velocipede will have difficulty driving a railway carriage forward. A silly experiment that should have gone nowhere. But then, I saw a report in the Bristol Mercury, dated 1 Sept 1829. Although the railway as a whole was not open, the Wapping Tunnel itself was. Tourists could walk in the tunnel. For the lucky, tourists were placed in a carriage at the top of the tunnel, and pushed over the brink. Although this article doesn't state it, a brakeman both modulated the speed and brought the carriage to a halt at the bottom. I like to think of it as roller coaster joy riding. I have noticed a few reports of this activity. What makes this story authentic was the presence of notables. MP Huskisson arrives for his joyride in a very specific carriage. Open sides, with a cloth canopy. The canopy cloth, green. Described as "light". Two velocipede saddles affixed to the rear. Human propelled. Huskisson gets into a different waggon for the joyride but arrives in the velocipede carriage! Now I ask you, who had a velocipede powered carriage as an expected outcome? Not me, that's for certain. Needless to say, no images exists. Bee

Hello ThreeLink You raise a very good point about Huskisson. 18" or so is a substantial increase in platform height for human anatomy. Particularly so for Huskisson, aged 60 at the time of the incident. Add the normal platform height of other carriages, and note those other carriages have stirrups for assistance. Issac Shaw, capturing the details, does not show any stirrups on the ceremonial carriages. It makes one wonder how any of the Duke's suite managed to get on. Many aged members of the peerage¹ were in the ceremonial carriages. They didn't just leap on-board. It is no secret that I am mining the British press for details about the LMR. It was newsworthy² and many details are reported. Now, newspapers then are just as they are now. Sensationalism to sell papers. Huskisson's death is played to the maximum. A detail which is not important, but received extraordinary press attention at the time, was that Mrs. Huskisson was present and witnessed her husband's accident. The pathos was palpable. But in so mining the press, I have come to see that many were killed in a similar manner, both before and after Huskisson. For example, William Fewburn was run over by "Twin Sisters, the oldest locomotive on the railway" in a report dated 12 Feb 1831. His body parted in two, he expired on the spot. There are so many reports, that there is a heading for it in the press: "Accident on the Railway". I've not mined that vein yet, but could not but help noticing it in the many articles scanned. Is the death of Huskisson notable because it was unique? Not even close, he was really just a statistic³. Was it notable because of his station? Others who met their demise were not MPs. Was is because it happened in front of the Duke of Wellington, a very lofty rank in the peerage? Maybe. Was it notable because it sold papers? Absolutely yes. The ironic nature of his demise could not have been missed by the public. The LMR's champion in Parliament was Huskisson, and he met his demise at the hand of the LMR, on its most triumphant of days. He promoted the very thing that caused his demise. Bee ¹I've checked the list. While the peerage does include some lofty figures, none are members of the British Royal Family. ²For awhile anyway. The press could not sensationalize the mundane operations of the LMR. ³to paraphrase a particularly evil russian dictator.

Re: the fireman in the Range Release video. In that sequence, the fireman is on the right had side, but he is looking at the tank on the tender, towards the rear. In the newly released image, the fireman switches sides, but now looks to the front. In other words, it is the exact same fireman (now with paint) with his head turned in the same direction on his torso.

Hello Aussie Fred, Someone at Hornby had to approve that review, else it would not be permitted. I have submitted two questions to Hornby, using the "questions" tab next to the review. The first question was regarding the coupling type. When that didn't get updated, I wrote directly to Hornby Head of Development, requesting clarification. In an email to me, he stated that there will be a post for the finescale chain and that there would be a magnetic adaptor to couple to Accurascale Chaldrons. The web page still has not been updated, weeks in. [There will also be a matching magnetic coupling, on a chain with a NEM plug, to install in your rolling stock with a NEM pocket] The second question was in regards to the faithless review by "LennyC". I asked Hornby how a review could be published by a customer, when the model hasn't shipped from Hornby. Based on the number of downvotes, it is clear that the public agrees. Needless to say, that has not been responded to, as the review abides. Hornby should delete that "review" and pay more attention to future reviews as they come in. Bee

I am very hopeful of a Hornby model coincident with the 200th Anniversary of the Opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway. 15 Sept 1830 - 15 Sept 2030. I could make one on my own, yet this is exactly the type of model Hornby likes, a direct association with some type of event. Now ordinarily, I am extremely leary of the colors in an aquatint. In this case, however we can be very sure. A portion of an article in the Liverpool Albion, 21 Sept 1830 provides us with a great description, to include the two primary colors. They are crimson and gilt. For quite some time, I thought the portrayal above oversaturated and not true to life. Gilt has a luster hard to reproduce with paint, as any artist will tell you. Yet crimson is not. Other details such as the ducal coronets are faithfully drawn by Shaw, once again confirming his accuracy. An interesting detail is that the overhead canopy is 24', while the carriage itself is 32' long. The fore and aft "balconies" are also confirmed, with gilt balustrades But what of the Ottoman? The great weakness of the bogie thesis is the limited space between the floor and the chassis, where the swivel must reside. That is roughly 12 to 18 inches of vertical displacement, based on head heights. The ottoman voids that argument, as it "ran down the center of the platform". A "sitting ottoman" is simply a box, knee high, with a cushion on top. Any swivel machinery could easily be concealed in that void. By itself, the ottoman is just a detail. When considered with the other bogie swivel arguments, it adds to the tapestry of confirming discussion. Bee

The fireman is now seated on the opposite side of the tender. During range release, the video showed the fireman on the right facing forward, the engineman on the left. Now both are on the left Bee

Hi LT&SR_NSE The play of shadows on boiler from the valve gear and the engineman's legs leads me to the same conclusion you arrived at. It could be a CAD render but... Bee

Hello ChrisBWC There is always the possibility that a particular chain will function. It is what the LMR themselves used in early days, a chain. Yet the Hornby finescale chain post is very close to the chassis. Most all chain is made of wire, bent into loops. When I made my adaptor to the Accurascale Chaldrons, I used 0.8mm diameter wire. It did it not slide in between the post and chassis. After a bit of fettling, I got it to fit, but then it wasn't free to move until I reduced that wire even more. Bee

This is quite high on my want list. The Duke of Wellington was Prime Minister upon LMR Opening Day, and this special carriage was constructed for his attendance, just for the day. You may see it on the left, as drawn by Shaw, a known good observer. This carriage does not seem to fit the "standard" carriage as constructed by the LMR. Firstly, there are 4 axles. One of the principle claims of Patentee was the flangeless wheels on the center axle, by Stephenson, in 1834. Yet Opening Day was 1830. Flangeless wheels could not be a patent in 1834 if they existed in 1830. Yet four axles, with flanged wheels, will have problems with curves. Secondly, in an era of tiny wheel bases, this carriage is ridiculously long. We know from Armengaud that the early turntables had only 2 meters of track. The wheelbase of the early carriages in Ackermann shows the carriages were made to fit that 2 meters. So how in the world did the Duke's carriage travel from Liverpool to Manchester on that fateful day? I may have an answer. I am working on the log wagon in CAD, as depicted by Ackermann. That suffers from the exact same defect as above. How did this ever get around a curve? Francis Whishaw, The railways of Great Britain and Ireland practically described and illustrated, provides us with the answer to log wagons. "When timber is to be conveyed on the railway, it is placed on two trucks properly built for this purpose. Above the ordinary truck-platform are fixed cross pieces of timber, curved towards the middle, which is higher than the sides by about 2 inches; above these are cross-timbers 12 inches by 8 inches, and curved upwards as to their ends, which are 4 inches above the fixed cross-pieces. Each of these pieces turns on a swivel fixed in the middle of the cross-timber. This arrangement allows the wagons to have proper play in going round curves." While the Ackermann drawing does not show the swivel, it must be there nonetheless. Before I return to the Duke's special carriage, a brief aside into perspective and vanishing points. One of the hallmarks of accurate portrayals is mastery of perspective and the lines they create. Issac Shaw understood the task. Go to the first image and examine the track. A perfect illustration of the technique. Issac Shaw understood the task of accurate depiction. Did the Duke's special carriage have two bogies? I will refer to this as the annotated image. In the annotated image, there are three carriages shown. The green perspective line shows the height of the standard roof above rail. The Duke's roof could be raised simply to demonstrate importance. Alternatively, it could be raised to accommodate the folks under it. The yellow line is somewhat arbitrary, but shows the head heights of individuals. Pay close attention to top hats in the first and third carriages for perspective accuracy of the yellow line in the annotated image. Yet what of the Duke's carriage. Now the people in the Duke's carriage could be abnormally tall. Alternatively, it could mean that they are standing on a raised dias. A dias is associated with importance and the Duke of Wellington was the Prime Minister. A dias would be quite fitting for a person of his station. A raised platform, or dias, is also consistent with a swivel arrangement under the dias. Examine the axles, highlighted by the red dots. Now something jumps out at me here, it is the spacing of those axles. The front two as a set have very similar spacing to the separate carriage before it, closer to Northumbrian. Similarly, the rear two axles have the same spacing to the carriage ahead. The carriage ahead has that unique short wheelbase, used to ride on LMR turntables. Indeed, even the carriage just behind the locomotive Northumbrian has the short wheelbase, albeit clipped from annotated image. It appears that the LMR used two chassis sets to make the Duke's special carriage. It could have been a special chassis, of course, but it would have been far easier to just grab two chassis from stock. Summing up. Two chassis likely used to construct the Duke's carriage. All the wheels likely flanged, making curves difficult, but not if in a bogie arrangement. The height of the platform accommodating a swivel. The height of the persons in the Dukes carriage, proving a raised floor. The height of the roof, raised to accommodate the raised passengers. All consistent with permitting a bogie arrangement. Finally Issac Shaw provides accurate depictions, we cannot explain this away by stating a fanciful depiction. I think the LMR provided us with the first carriage with rotating front and rear bogies. The evidence, while not airtight, is quite suggestive. Your thoughts? Bee

Hello CA I did a brief search, and while not definitive, found nothing. Something did occur to me. R30166 is a class 91. The Driving Van Trailer, or DVT, for a class 91 is a mark 4. A mark 4 DVT very much resembles a class 91 locomotive. Perhaps another R30166, with some careful modeling, will produce the DVT in the livery you want. Bee

I do believe in covering all the details JJ! Bee

I'm not sure I'd want staff, remaindered in February, handling fragile models in May. While I do think the staff honorable, a former employee might just be a tad angry at their former employer after 90 days without work. That has a way of upsetting family finances. Charlie, at Chadwick Model Railways, had a different take in a recent video. While it was brief, Charlie stated that the thin margins that Hattons worked with crushed the smaller model shops, they were unable to compete. Further, he implied that Hattons closing was comeuppance for that. I literally have zero experience or history with Hattons to understand if Charlie was correct, or not. I just thought to see what the forum thought. Bee

5 October 1831 The LMR advises that the conveyance of sheep will commence

In an effort to be sure that the Duke of Cambridge was the first member of the British Royal Family to ride on any train, I took the search as far back as 1 January 1820. From a practical standpoint, this includes all but some very early railways and experiments. Those early railways were focused upon collieries, like Brunton's Horse to go by Steam, unlikely to have any passenger traffic. The search included all of the early Stockton and Darlington Railway period, where the potential for a royal ride existed. The British press acted like paparazzi to the Royal Family, reporting on their most mundane movements, lunches & etc. The press continues the behavior to this very day. This provides us with a degree of certainty, as if a member was to ride, it would be reported upon, especially so as the novelty would make it even more newsworthy. The Duke of Cambridge remains unchallenged in being "first". It does give me quiet satisfaction that the "first" railway to provide that ride was the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, taking the honors away from the London and Birmingham Railway. Touché! Of course, now I will have to acquire R40436 and place bunting on it, to distinguish it as the royal railway carriage of 1835. I do already have a Royal Mail carriage in R3956, while the LMR had ~4 of these Royal Mail carriages. Bee

When everything is going right, the only thing to be learned is price and quality. When things go wrong, that is when you see into the heart of your vendors. That is the moment of clarity. Bee

"As far as I know" Prophetic words. I undertook a broader survey, cast a wider net. I limited the terminal date of my search to the ride of the Duke of Sussex on the LBR. In doing such a broad search, many non-related items are returned because it just so happens to fit the criteria. For example, I observed notice of the first pigs to travel by railway, 21 May 1831, on the LMR. Another example is the running trials of the Braithwaite and Ericsson locomotive on the LMR and why it was rejected, insufficient steam. There were many reports of accidents in which the person fell on the tracks, with obvious results. Quite the rainbow of returns. And then, there it was. Move over, Duke of Sussex, your preeminence has been superceded. The Duke of Cambridge has taken your place. George, Queen Victoria's cousin, rode on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway on 1 October 1835. He was 16 at the time. The article reveals he rode both ways, but alas, not what type of carriage utilized. We may infer either a 6 inside glass or 4 inside royal mail, as Walker makes the 2pm train from Liverpool a 1st class train, showing only fares for those types carriages. I have yet to encounter any special carriage constructed for the British Royal Family by the LMR. There is the notable carriage used by the Duke of Wellington on the occasion of the LMR's opening day. I also did encounter an 1833 journey by the Duke of Orleans, arriving at Liverpool by railway. Yet this Duke, like Wellington, was not a member of the British Royal Family. Should you wish to know more about the Duke of Cambridge: https://www.rct.uk/collection/405100/george-duke-of-cambridge-1819-1904-0 Bee

Hi Simon In real life, buffers do not align precisely either. The manufacturer of the stock, the railway operator, the load, the country, etc; All these contribute to misalignment and interoperability issues. In modeling, our buffers are almost entirely cosmetic. Their alignment does not matter, because they never touch. The 'slight' misalignment will be strictly a matter of personal taste. Unless this leads to buffer lock, or other real issues, then misalignment is strictly how you want it to look. Bee

Spot on Paul. Your assessment is perfect. I actually enjoy correspondent videos. It helps me to see what they are doing and interested in. The locomotive outline does not have to be British or indeed even Hornby. "Let me see!" - Bee To all those who cannot abide by this foreigner power: Turn. The. Page. No one is forcing you to read it, watch it or do anything at all. Move on to the next post, one you may be interested in. Bee ¹to use a US term for another company's locomotive on your company's rail.

Hello Evan I do hope it is sorted. When you have a final result, would you mind updating us? You will not be the last person with this problem. Looking out for the next modeler to come along, your update will be useful. Bee

While I wait for the image to be approved, the Hornby Dublo Transformer No. 1 FUSE is product number BSS646. I note there is a commercially available fuse BS646 at 1 amp. That is one heck of a coincidence. Bee

Behold the grail. A box of 1 amp fuses for the Hornby Dublo No. 1 Transformer. Bee

Golly. On re-reading this for possibly the 1000th time, it occurs to me that the fuses may be on the 250V side, to "protect the Transformer". The only way to be sure is to carefully probe the unit under power. Pull whatever fuses are in the unit out. Apply voltage. And test. I take no responsibility for the actions of anyone in regards to this unit. Probing a unit under power is not for the unwary or uneducated. It can result in injury or death. 10 amps @250VAC can be lethal. Personally, unless I was super determined to use this old kit, I would merely display it boldly on the layout, wired up for purpose. And never turn it on A modern controller, discretely hidden, would drive my locomotives 'round. Bee

LT&SR_NSE You do a visual check on the mains chord, inspecting for insulation integrity. Check for leakage path from mains to case, mains to any exposed metals, etc. None of this requires the unit to be plugged in or power applied. Checking for functionality is different from checking for safety. Checking for functionality means you know what the device is to do. Hand me an 80 year old device and I may balk. Going Spare I expect that the transformer was protected from the mains by a fuse in the house circuit. The fuses on the output legs are to protect the controller and the motor in the locomotive. Thus 1 amp @12vdc. I thought I got super lucky as I found a catalog. And there is was. Fuses. Absolutely no specification! There is also a specific transformer instruction sheet which I had no luck locating. Bee