We know that ex L&YR Puggy No. 51217, was transferred from Burton Shed to Tweedmouth shed from 15th September to 18th December 1948 to work the line while the resident loco was having a refit.
Does anybody know when it was repainted into BR livery? This soon after Nationalisation I'd be inclined to think it may still have been numbered 11217 and either LMS on the tank, or no lettering at all - while some locos were repainted quite quickly there seem to have been a lot of small ones still carrying LMS or LNER numbers and lettering well into the summer of 1949 and a fair few beyond that.
Stuart
A fool is a person who makes false conclusions from right principles; whereas a madman, on the contrary, draws right conclusions from wrong principles [Encyclopedia Britannica 1797]
I have the attached photo in my collection. On the back it says "11217 at Seahouses, 1948", however there is nothing in the background to confirm that it is actually Seahouses, so unless anyone can identify the crew, we can never be sure.
While there's no background there does seem to be a fair bit of sand and the crewman standing on the left is wearing a pair of fishermans gum-boots, so I would say it was far too buccolic to be anywhere but Seahouses
Its also nice to know I guessed right about the livery
Stuart
A fool is a person who makes false conclusions from right principles; whereas a madman, on the contrary, draws right conclusions from wrong principles [Encyclopedia Britannica 1797]
What a shame that somebody decided to "improve", i.e, to white-out the upper background of that picture. A low platform and one or two other oddments in the background might have nicely confirmed the location as Seahouses. Even a view of a seagull or a puffin might have given a bit of evidence......
Most subjects, models and techniques covered in this thread are now listed in various categories on page1
Dec. 2018: Almost all images that disappeared from my own thread following loss of free remote hosting are now restored.
I was in Seahouses today and took the picture with me to show to someone I know who remembers the railway.
She thinks that the older of the men on the footplate could be Tom Willis (her grandfather) who was variously employed as Guard, Fireman, Driver, P Way man etc. etc. She said that the railway only employed about 5 staff at the end.
If it is Tom, then that would suggest that the photo is Seahouses.
Percy Main wrote:It doesn't look very well equipped in the buffer and coupling department for handling passenger trains.
There also does not seem to be a vacuum brake.
According to Alan Wrights book on the line, it was not used on passenger trains, but with the Armstrong Diesel out of action and the Y7 under repair, I have no doubt that it was unofficially used.
Little things like brakes and the rule book did not seem to worry the NSR.
I think they were a bit stricter than that in late LNER early BR days. I have not found any records of the on loan Sentinels which were not equipped with Vacuum brake being used on passenger turns.
I often wondered why Tweedmouth didnt try to borrow a Y9 from St Margarets a few were vacuum fitted for ECS working, i think they would have been ideally suited to the branch.
Hi interested in the area served by 52D. also researching colliery wagonways from same area.
52D wrote:
I often wondered why Tweedmouth didnt try to borrow a Y9 from St Margarets a few were vacuum fitted for ECS working, i think they would have been ideally suited to the branch.
Burton may simply have offered first.
Some years ago I remember finding a long chain of written correspondence from about that time relating to Walkergate Station. Some old sleepers were needed to replace a fence and letters were sent all over the place - or at least as far as Bishop Auckland, enquiring if anybody had any spare ones. I don't remember where they came from in the end but there were all sorts of replies asking what sort of condition was required and so on. A bit like emails today and with two or three posts a day probably just as quick.
I'd imagine therefore that Tweedmouth shed simply sent out a general request to everybody in sight asking if there was a spare 0-4-0 knocking about that could be borrowed for a couple of months.
As to the couplings etc. I'm inclined to agree that the lack of a vacuum brake is unlikely to have bothered a four mile long railway where the footplate crew wore fishermans ganseys under battle-dress jackets, and had sea boots on their feet.
Stuart
A fool is a person who makes false conclusions from right principles; whereas a madman, on the contrary, draws right conclusions from wrong principles [Encyclopedia Britannica 1797]
With regard to the lack of vacuum brake gear on the Pug, it should be remembered that the NSR handled considerable fish traffic when the herring fleet was in, following the shoals of herring down the coast. It woulds have been necessary to have additional loco power for this traffic and the Pug would have been ideal.
The NSR was for most of its life air braked. Bamburgh had westinghouse cylinders. Lady Armstrong had an air cylinder on the running plate. When the Y7 986 arrived it was vacuum fitted so that the pasenger stock at that time must have been vacuum fitted. Some photos show stock as dual fitted. According to Alan Wright Y7 982 was also on the NSR but having no train brakes was not allowed on passenger trains. He also specifically states that the L&Y Pug was used on goods and fish trains only. The passengers at that time were carried by Beecroft's taxis.
