Doncaster Details

[drmditch]

I'm attempting a model representing a J54. Not being used to Doncaster (at least in GNR days) engines, there are some details for which I would be grateful for infomation.

Firstly, from the evidence in RCTS Part 8A, these had leaf springs above the wheel bearings, and which can just be seen above the splashers. There is also a nice picture in Peter Tuffrey's book 'The GNR and LNER in Doncaster' of the frames and motion of No.602 converted to a mobile demonstration model.

However, the J54 shown in Fig30, (which is the engine I'm trying to model) appears to show these springs 'the wrong way up', ie with the shortest leaves at the top. I don't think it is just a trick of the light, but I can't see how this would work. All other pictures of J54s and related classes show what one would expect.

Secondly, if I read correctly then this engine (no.3637A) in the 1930s would have had backplate mounted injectors, and therefore the nice pipework shown on the LH side of GNR No.619 in Fig 31 would not be applicable , but I would be grateful for assurance.

The progress of my model is shown.......here...

[earlswood nob]

Afternoon all

I have looked through my books and cannot find another photo of 3637 apart from the one in the green book.

The springs do look as if they've been fitted upside down. I haven't found a photo with the same spring arrangement.

I notice that 3637a has the tall chimney. Perhaps they fitted to springs upside down to lower the overall height.

Earlswood nob

[john coffin]

I wonder whether there are in fact two springs, one on top of the other, there does appear to be a second spring underneath.

It really makes no sense, but maybe when the boiler was updated, there was a need to increase the spring rate, without
going to the expense of new springs, rather adding old ones. It is not something one would normally expect from Doncaster.

Paul

[billbedford]

It's a double spring, probably suggested by someone in the DO fresh from Horwich. Note the springs on this tender; http://www.lyrs.org.uk/images/uploads/L ... ackrod.jpg

[drmditch]

Many thanks Mr Bedford. I've found a good broadside picture of an LYR 4-6-0 showing the feature nicely. I'm not sure how much of the lower spring will be visible on my model, but at least I have the answer if someone accuses me of fitting the springs upside down!

The whole area of interchange between the various companies is fascinating. I wonder whether these springs on this particular J159( GN) were fitted after 1905? Or perhaps other people in addition to HNG transferred as well?

How splendid this forum is!

Thank you everybody for your interest.

[drmditch]

And a further request please. As far as I can see the filler cap for the saddle tank is quite flat, and I can't make out the details of the securing apparatus. Is there a useful picture of a similar arrangement anywhere?

[drmditch]

And a further request. Should a J15 (as in J54) have two lamp irons on the drivers (RH) side, and should there be two lamp irons on the LH side at the back?

[earlswood nob]

Evenin' all

The GNR had double lamp irons on the RHS at the front and the LHS at the back.

This continued after grouping and even the Hush-Hush loco had double lamp irons on its tender.

The filler cap poses a problem as on some pics of J54s, it seems flush with the top of the tank. On others it is raised a few inches and secured by a hinged strap with a clip at the front. The domeless boilers seem to have the flush filler more often than not.

Earlswood nob

[drmditch]

Thank you. Some of the pictures are unclear about the double lamp iron, but I shall have to include this renowned GNR feature!
I shall just have to produce an 'interpretation' of the clip for the filler cap. Presumably there must have been one, so as to avoid a sudden surge and overflow if the tank was nearly full and braking was sharp.

It's really very inconvenient that nobody thought to take pictures of such shabby,little, old-fashioned shunting engines from overhead!

I suppose it just shows how fortunate we are to have an actual example of a Darlington near equivalent, even if it is only the design that originated in the 1880s, rather than the actual locomotive.

[manna]

G'day Gents

Knowing Doncaster, and the amount of saddletanks it built, wouldn't the tank filler be perpetuated on the J52, and seeing that we still have a J52 in existents, there may be a picture of that.

manna

[john coffin]

Doncaster may have been slow to change things, but the catch mechanisms for tender filler caps for instance did change even during the time of Stirling, the drawings show that.
As for the saddle tanks, I have not had a chance to check all my drawings, but they do, from photos seem to be of different types,
some tall, the others almost flush with the saddle. It is likely that they would have had a kind of screw holding down the lever arm which
would have been hinged at the rear. Plainly they would not have had as high pressure water as when tenders were picking up from water
troughs, even when braking sharply, which would have been at a very low speed.

May find some time to check the drawings over the weekend, and will see what I can find.

Paul

[Hatfield Shed]

There is a good early photo of no 603 with a Stirling boiler (so one would hope original condition) I suspect from a full plate or half plate at worst, on page 2 of Dennis Lovett's 'North London Railway' (Irwell Press) photograph captioned as from the NRM's collection. The lens axis is slightly higher than the tank top, so the filler cover is seen to be near flush, with what looks like a hinge at the front and a low clip to hold it down at rear.

Now, the half tone screen printing renders these details too coarsely to make anything further visible under magnification, but the quality of the image suggests to me that rather more detail would be visible on a photographic print of the plate.

[drmditch]

Many thanks. I've rather assumed that it would be nearly flush with little protuberance from the hinge and the catch. What I've made so far can be seen ...... here......

It probably is too proud, (about 1.5" to scale) and I've put the hinge on the back - simply because every other tank engine I've seen has it that way. However, it really is just a 'low relief' representation at this point. It's nowhere near as complex as the Darlington tank filler lids and catches I made for my A8 (and are quite nicely represented by Bachmann on their J72.)

I've been trying to get this engine finished, so sorry not to have waited for more advice!

I would be grateful for advice regarding the reversing gear controls visible on the same link. (That isn't fitted yet!)

[john coffin]

Whilst I know you have almost completed it, I thought you might find it useful and interesting to know the following details that I have gleaned from the various Saddle tank drawings I have.

The early enclosed cab series from 855 onward have a short filler cap on top of the saddle, with the hinge at the front of the loco, and a spring
clip at the rear. the later locos, the J53's had a higher cap with the hinge again at the front, but with a screw hold down.
The later J52 had a taller filler with the taller filler, then the cap with the hinge at the rear of the loco and a different kind of hold down.

It is also useful to know that the brake lever was angled into the cab from the actuation lever at the rear of the loco frame, to it being at the
front of the coal space.

HTH
Paul

[drmditch]

Thank you Paul.

RCTS Part 8A, Page 46 states that the 'hand brakes were operated by the usual handle and vertical column'. This later gave problems with the enclosed cabs.

I had assumed this meant something like the later LNE standard. Figs 39 (enclosed cab) and 41 and 45 appear to show something like this. Fig 45 in particular (although it is of a J57 with open cab) might be showing the angle you mention.

Apart from presenting a very nasty projection into the cab space, I do not really understand how this could work. If the rotation of the handle took it over the bunker, was there not the risk of an aberrant lump of coal jamming it when most wanted?

Also, if it was an arrangement as Fig 45, and was on the fireman's side, I would have thought it would show in Fig 30, which is what my model is based on.

Are you suggesting that the handbrake was operated by a lever of some kind?