User talk:Chrisjones

Add topic
From Festipedia, hosted by the FR Heritage Group
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Chrisjones in topic England tender.

Thanks Chris - Unfortunately commitments in Scotland (a photoshoot and an AmDram show I am involved with) means that I will be unable to get to North Wales for this event or the RhE Subscribers Train (the same weekend) this year. --Stewart 22:09, 5 March 2007

Photo Credits[edit]

Chris - I do not propose to add any new information whilst reformatting. With respect to the Double Heading page, all the information provided was already there. As regards whether you seek credit or not for your photos or not that is a matter for you. However I suggest you consider at least some mention on the image pages associated with your pictures even if it is only for release purposes.

The appropriate licence tag is:

  • {{PD-self}} means you are releasing the photo for use with no restrictions.

Station Masters[edit]

Chris, good to see you have filled a gap in the Station Masters page. Where did you find the information? Interesting about the Parry bit too. Heritagejim (talk) 08:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As you do not wish credit, the following tag is probably not appropriate:

  • {{GFDL-self}} means they have to acknowledge you as the photographer.

Stewart 22:26, 5 March 2007

Photo Credits (2)[edit]


One of the things with the World Wikipedia is about accreditation, sources, and copyright. With our new software, we are going to endeavour to keep that required info. I am sure, you and other contributors, would be outraged if suddenly one of you photos appeared elsewhere to someone else's personal financial benefit.

I appreciate we have over a thousand images from the old system, which have no accreditation. This is unfortunate, and no easy way to rectify. At least now we can keep a track for future input.

I have made a suggestion whereby any photo uploaded has a title that starts something like "ABC YYYYMMDD ......." where ABC is the authors initials, and YMD is the obvious date of picture. this will at least start to ident the owner. You can appreciate that Prince over the years has been the star of a number of photos in varying locations by various people, and we cannot call them Prince1, Prince2, etc.

--Keith 22:28, 5 March 2007

Loco availability[edit]

Stewart - Can we lose the date off the list completely and just keep it up to date. Otherwise it'll end up like SZBs mods log with a load of out of date rubbish that none will want to read!

Chris j

Inclined to agree. The loco pages will indicate the history of the modifications, rebuilds, etc. It would also remove the risk of multiple entries conflicting. Just like the HNB SSR. --Stewart 17:48, 17 April 2007

Copyright on R.J.J. PLummer photo[edit]

Stewart - this is part of the FR archives - hence copywright is granted through Adrian


Appropriate tag will be added on this basis. --Stewart 23:53, 27 April 2007


Chris, I have just added the Princess pix, you uploaded, to the Princess Pictorial page.

It does pose a problem in pix one on that page, caption Palmerston and The Princess at the FR Duffws station around 1870. you can see a protective fairing behind the driver. by pix 2 caption The Princess at Harbour station around 1871., the fairing has gone - just questioning the accuracy of dates??? --Keith 22:27, 28 April 2007

Dating early Englands[edit]

Are well Keith - Peter Dennis & I believe the first cabsheets were removeable. Look at the photo of Princess at the F&B station in Blaenau c1880, or the c1878 view at Dinas.

Verdict - don't date by the cabsheet!

John Owens photos at TYG can be dated by the telegraph wires as being 1871. It is assumed he only made the one visit. Frith can only give me a c1870 on the Duffws picture. All dates I put in the Wiki I have discussed with Adrian


Evening Editting[edit]

Chris - I have an excuse editting at this time of day - it is still daylight here (in SW Ontario), however as I am listening to Classic FM it has gone 1am in the UK. I guess a case of insomneia (spelling!!). --Stewart 00:18, 21 May 2007

Picture of Portmadoc 1875[edit]

This is a John Thomas picture - probably taken at the same time as the Duffws pictures of JS, ME, LW, LG & WP - hence more likely to be 1880-82 - but I can't prove it!

Chris J - 25/7

Thanks Chris - Traced through to the source and put in the attribution to John Thomas. Date is another matter.
Having a day off today having just finished a period on night shift prior to heading to the FR tomorrow. --Stewart 15:12, 25 July 2007

Picture on Princess Page[edit]


Wern't me guv - Kfw is Kim Winter - but I am sure he wont mind - it does stick out on both pages, and as said all relevant details are on the image page. I will try and contact Kim directly before I leave for Port Sunday AM Meanwhile removed the Template used and reduced to more manageable size - hope this is ok for your purposes. not tried to format - will leave for you --Keith 17:44, 4 August 2007

Chris - The Template is one of mine. I do agree with your comment about the copyright - which can be left on the Image page. In reflection I will adjust the template accordingly. --Stewart 18:29, 4 August 2007

Not able to upload pictures[edit]

Sorry about that Chris. A testing failure on my part. If you try again, it should now work --Peter_Harrison 09:44, 10 October 2007

Prince on the WHR[edit]

Hi Chris, That's a superb photo of Prince at the summit on the WHR! - Tony_E. 19:46, 29 October 2007

Hi Stewart

In the interest of removing clutter, can I remove the side on view after restoration? The colour is poor and the more recently added 3/4 view at the same time(also by you!) is much better?


Chris - A belated reply, however I have no problems with you suggestion. The first picture was an early scan of a print I made, in my pre-Photoshop days, whilst the second one is a scan off the negative and given some attention via Photoshop. --Stewart (talk) 21:56, 10 December 2007

Map 3[edit]

As you will appreciate, they are as recieved from Graham Isherwood himself

I will forward your comment and see what he comes back with. They have been on wiki for some time, and I wonder if the book they are from has been corrected???

--Keith (talk) 2008-1-7T17:30:20

Correction - not ye though - just realised what they show.

Map 1 shows around the 1830-1840 mark, Map 2 around 1870,

Map 3 shows any alterations after 1880 - even additions to 1933 - therefore its a mix of changes (inc 1899) - mainly to the quarries which it was for showing. Some dates are shown. Dose this sarisfy your point??? --Keith (talk) 2008-1-7T17:39:59

Dinas Branch 1976[edit]


I have now placed the two cleaned/colourised Boyd maps on the all the pages. Before I started I ensured there were no errors on the originals. This shows the line crossing A.Barlwyd below the station? You said "above" - are you saying something is out of place??

And isnt the GyP extension on the 1899 route, and wasnt this the planned 1975 **(I dunno)

--Keith (talk) 2008-1-14T14:55:36

Dinas Branch above Dinas[edit]

Do you want copies of photos from the archives for this Keith? I have an old one ( c187?)and the Bleasdale looking up the valley

ChrisChrisjones (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2008

Chris Jim Hewett is leading on this rewrite, I am just reconfiguring pages from info already there. Adrian is also doing a section. Suggest hold off for a week but will pass message on --Keith (talk) 2008-1-16T16:54:20

Date for 1880 link line for triangle[edit]

The 1899 Dinas Branch diagramm shows the link line being 1888-1899 instead of 1880-1899. I'm a pain arn't I!

No! - a b***dy good sub ed that does read/check for mis-spells -= Keep it up by all means --Keith (talk) 2008-1-18T16:14:06

NWNGR Beddgelert Loco[edit]

Edit as you think fit, Chris. Dont know where original was from or who posted. Kim did the photo. Its not from "online", and not NGRISC where I just had a quick look. --Keith (talk) 2008-1-24T14:00:24

Palmerston Photos[edit]


The reason I had altered the photos on Palm front page was of the number we have. I am sorry that I removed yours, but this decision was based on the fact a head on shot occupying less than 10% of the photo didnt seem to warrant inclusion on the front page. Similarly the picture of the Renown, being the main focus, was moved to the gallery on the pictorial views.

In consequence, you have now removed a full shot working on the Farm completley, and duplicated photos on the gallery, which I am trying not to do.


--Keith (talk) 2008-2-1T13:54:13

reinstated the removed pix - but to gallery. Also played with gallery display, altered to 3 width and remove references to Palm in caption on every image!! - I think it is obvious, and makes it less cluttered. --Keith (talk) 2008-2-1T15:55:37

Little Wonder[edit]

Have looked at reformat and rather than do it myself ....... Suggestion only a
immediately after header picture - wording is going up the side on very samll font print. Otherwise - Nice Keith --2008-2-19T01:50:43 (UTC)

Merddin Updates response[edit]

Morning Chris

- - A response to your comments (written before any amends done though)

A few views on what you have done in creating a summary table for Merddin, take them or leave them!

- - always welcome - mostly taken aboard without qurestion

The heading of the picture being black writing on dark blue - its difficult to read. Maybe it would look better in black on white but with a heritage font?

- - Agreed - have problems getting right colour and being different to other table blocks - this will change

Merddins conversion to oil was completed in April 1973 (FR Mag refers)

- - just going on what the text said - now amended both

Merddin did not have a 9 year overhaul 1996-2005. It was left as too difficult until 2000 then the Society raised funds and many different volunteers contributed to its eventual rebuild. I'd leave that phrase out completely and just note it was rebuilt by 2005.

- - amended to reflect

Length - I wouldn't put dimensions in here as they have changed over time - it has now grown to 32 ft 6 "

- - The Boss (aka Peter Harrison) set the base one up and indicated more tech details would be an idea. BUT as you say they have changed over the life of the engine(s)

"Powered by" - why not just state "Fuel" (it is powered by steam!)

- - grunted, sorry granted - just my terminology which gets a bit carried away at times

On the historical side I will eventually this year decipher the Williams books for ME but JS is next. If you want the Bleasdale picure in then let me know

- - historical pix always welcome

--Keith (talk) 2008-3-5T07:10:48 (UTC)


I remember that C-y-B was the home of the Line Supt. T. Henry Hovendon from around 1860. Just rereading the entry for him just brings it together

Hovenden - employed by FR from 1841 - CyB built app 1860 for him as Line Supt. By 1884 (date of BOT return) is classed as General inspector.

Me thinks he was more of a Cheif Guard, and the BoT return was just a sop to say the FR had its own police force, like all the other railways.

It has been broached on group before (Sept 07) but more as to if the powers vested are still valid!

--Keith (talk) 2008-3-15T17:06:06 (UTC)

Location updates[edit]

Evening Chris

I am currently undertaking to ident all stations on F&W with a OSGR and Lat/Long. About 75% done as an offline list. I will be putting them into the info box on each page .... for a good reason

If you look on main wiki at say [1] you will see the co-ordinates in the info box there as a link. Clicking on them takes you to a mapping option, and thence to various maps. (some of which leave a lot to be desired.) We have the possibility of doing this on our wiki, and having the data there ready will be good planning.

Last night (Wed 23/4) I went through main wiki and corrected the locations of those I found - a number were well off the mark. If you look on Google Earth, the location for Harbour (a purple dot) is shown as being the far end of the Tax office!!! Boston Lodge Halt is located up the hill directly in line with the cob!!! I assume the corrections I have done will percolate through eventually. In the mean time, load the KMZ file in the e-group files section for the larger picture!!

--Keith (talk) 2008-4-24T19:31:59 (UTC)

Image Corruption[edit]


I had a look, an hour later, and found no problem. I dont understand why you thought to reload the picture - we now have 2 copies - perfect (for 80yr old pix) at Image:SickTal.jpg and Image:WPandTal-TyB.jpg. The only difference being your WP&Tal version is slightly darker/contrast higher.

I can only think your machine was running out of memory and giving you erroneous problems. I have just placed the two full size copies here and again at different sizes for examples (which can be deleted later)

Both appear ok on my machine - i.e. no errors

here with 200 px sized and framed left
here with 350 px sized and framed right

--Keith (talk) 2008-5-12T00:32:15 (UTC)

Chris - I've taken a look and there doesn't seem to be a problem on my PC. If it happens again, could you right click on the page, select "View source" then save the HTML. Once you've done that, right click on the picture, select "Save Target As..." and save a copy of the picture. If you could then send both the picture and the HTML to me, I'll take a look and see if it gives any clues as to what is going wrong.

Thanks --Peter Harrison (talk) 09:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the update Chris. Does that mean you are on an Apple Mac using Safari? --Peter Harrison (talk) 09:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]



I have always done the second line *Date xx *Photo xx format. It was originally to space a new line when using a large format description. It has just continued. Occasionally, I have occasionally started Bolding either the marker or the data i.e.

  • Date: 2 Apr 2008 *Photo: Keith
  • Date: 2 Apr 2008 *Photo: Keith

--Keith (talk) 2008-7-27T22:45:47 (UTC)

Loading Gauge[edit]

Good Idea, Chris. However, even though I have met and spoken to Fred on a couple of occasions, I dont know him that well. I will, however, seek him out next time down, and try for the pair (WH as well!) (That is assuming they are electronically available) --Keith (talk) 2008-8-27T12:26:08 (UTC).


Chris - ignore it - only blocking the IP will do it -have emailed Peter - but not in --Keith (talk) 2008-9-14T21:32:57 (UTC)

Ellis Lewis[edit]

Hi Chris, No, according to the Census I have the name correct and he has a brother John living at the same address. I pointed this out to Adrian some while back as he put the photo on the cover of HGJ a few years back.



Edited above as it screwed. Please dont leave a blank at begining of line - it puts the linr in a box that went way off screen --Keith (talk) 2008-12-9T09:52:31 (UTC)

Thomas Pritchard II[edit]

Chris, I have changed the wording slightly to make it clearer. It wasn't helped by Keith moving some key words. Do you think it reads OK now? I will probably edit the page again later as I think I may have more information on him.

Heritagejim (talk) 18:00, 10 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Problems uploading pictures[edit]

I'm aware of the issue. It is another problem created by our hosts when they "upgraded" their servers. I told them exactly what the problem is and how to fix it 9 days ago. It took them a week of inappropriate responses before they finally accepted that I was right and agreed to fix it but they have given no indication as to how long this will take. I have completely lost faith in our hosts and will be moving the site to a new host asap --Peter Harrison (talk) 12:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Arrival of first locomotives[edit]


I was quoting from Johnson, Peter (2007). An Illustrated History of the Festiniog Railway. Hersham: Oxford Publishing Co. ISBN 0-860936-03-1. OCLC 180463433.

Page 19 to bottom of Col 1 - If there is other reference, please enlighten by all means. --Keith (talk) 2009-2-5T17:39:02 (UTC)

I have no problem with any corrections to what I am currently entering in the "Day Logs". (or any other verified corrections for that matter) I have open, PJ book, in front of machine and am going through it looking for individual date references, then paraquoting and linking the item. I seem to remember Boyd quoting that someone took 4(?) days to transport from Caernarfon to Port. (even quoting a name(?), but I havent the book to hand) It does raise a question as to why it wasnt "sea delivered" for Port., but there again, there possibly wasnt much call for a ship/boat to do that particular journey. --Keith (talk) 2009-2-5T23:09:51 (UTC)

Day Logs[edit]


The idea of the Day Log is to record in more detail than the chronology tables. Admittedly there is some mix with chronology entries sometimes more than a single line, and oppositely some Day Logs that are only single line (this will not be the norm).

The idea behind DL's is to expand on the information, mostly of that day. As you may guess, I am going through PLJ's Illustrated history and just picking out fully quoted dates (i.e. not just "in Feb 1887", its got to be "on 17th Feb 1887"). And before anyone else comments, the intention is to go through other books, and the mags as well!!

Wihin DL's, fuller details of accidents can be recorded, as opposed to the Accident Record single line entry. Dates of Board meetings, where known, and what transpired - not covered in Chronology, and significant dates, that can be more expanded than the choronolgy.

Some of the multi line entries in the Chronology may even be pruned and the expanded detail placed in a Day Log.

Yes, it is a long job, but one I think is better this way, rather than adding to a table. --Keith (talk) 2009-2-12T13:51:05 (UTC)

Accident Report[edit]

Hummmm. errrrr. I am easy on this, BUT feel that the small number of NWNGR/WHR incidents would not really justify a second Accident record. I would prefer to keep them together but noting it is on the other railways (as has been done on this entry) I will enquire "on high" for some guidance on this, and whatever is decided I will implement.

Re the Tanygrisiau entry - I was trying to keep it on one line, with the pertinent information, the fuller details being in the Day Log entry. --Keith (talk) 2009-3-3T19:44:19 (UTC)

Sorry !!![edit]

Sorry Chris, I thought you had finished, and I started on AR Non FR. I wil leave off for an hour --Keith (talk) 2009-3-4T20:24:55 (UTC)

Sorry (x2)[edit]

forgive header - just altered to make sure you saw this sooner thant later

on the AR non FR - a couple of points a) I will split them - i.e instead of grouping two or there as each line, making them into individual. Looking at what you have put, your NGRISC edition is not much different than the previous that I have, albeit different page nos. b) where you have full NWNG wording, will reduce to initials if you dont mind --Keith (talk) 2009-3-4T22:39:09 (UTC)

WHRL shortform[edit]


WHHR = Welsh Highland Heritage Railway (previously WHR(P)) i.e. the operating company - akin in current FR terms to Ffestiniog Railway Company

WHRL = Welsh Highland Railway Limited - i.e. the old 64 company - holding company - akin in current FR terms to Festiniog Railway Company

WHHRL = possibly the full name of WHHR Limited, dont know for sure, but WHHR is the term used so as not to confuse with WHRL

A lot of stuff had been entered that referred to WHR(P), even before the 1997 date when the name was agreed to - these have been reverted to WHRL or WHR Ltd. Chris Dearden was worried about any mix up with WHLR (Welsh Highland Light Railway) - the Phase 1-3 construction company. --Keith (talk) 2009-3-15T23:14:13 (UTC)

Carriage 1- old Van 6 page[edit]


Yes! - I wasnt happy with the name when it was set up - but not sure how to actually "label" it as there have been so many "No. 1" vehicles in history!!

Given that I have plonked with "Van 1 - (1955)"

This is on basis that as other references are put in, we may have need for another Van 1 page in a different time frame. It would be better putting a year in, instead of its number previously - I think.... (I am still not happy with this new name, but cannot fathom a better way - can you?)

--Keith (talk) 2009-3-15T23:55:08 (UTC)


Hi Chris

We don't currently have a policy prohibiting nicknames. Jim, for example, is Heritagejim. Whether we should have such a policy is open for discussion. I don't have a strong view on the matter but tend towards allowing people to use any username they want (within reason) --Peter Harrison (talk) 09:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merddin page format[edit]

I take it you mean like the [edit] that appears above this.

If so this is a system default. You can switch it off by placing __NOEDITSECTION__ at the top of the file. This affects that file only, but for all users. (See the Help pages - Formatting Text - Magic words)

For your personal use (not affecting others), you can switch it on or off by "my preferences" (top right) Select Editing tab. Uncheck the box on line Enable section editing via [edit] links That will remove it from any files you look at. It doesnt affect anyone else.

Hope that helps.

As for the Merddin photo - when you get it, load it up, and have a play on the format. Normal suggestion is to use a test page (or sandbox) for trialling things like photo placing and formatting. You can create a CJ test page by clicking on this link User:chrisjones/sandbox --Keith (talk) 2009-10-28T05:31:12 (UTC)

Image:Little Giant1895.jpg[edit]


In line, and extrapolating a comment from Peter Harrison some time ago, I am trying to remove certain info from the picture displays within files, but retain the info on the image file. (not doing this as a direct project, but additional to other things - today has been a standardisation of "Tan y Bwlch" from the variations!!!

Taking this particular example, where it originally said "Little Giant at Portmadoc c1897-1904 (FR archives)", I would prefer to drop it to "Portmadoc c1897-1904". I take it to the extreme, as since its on a page of LG, with many other LG photos, we know which engine it is. The removal of the (FR Archives), or source attribution is because that information is, or more so should already on the image filem, and doesnt need to be repeated here. Some of the ones removed today are ones for the National Library of Wales and included the welsh translation of the name - you can imagine how large that was compared with the relevant detail.

Back to this pix, Image:Little Giant1895.jpg. If you click on the picture link here, or within the LG page it appears on, it will take you to the image file. I had already ensured the FR Archives comment appeared here. As this was one of the early pictures, it only has base information from the conversion of the original file. However, if you look at Image:Little_Giant_at_Duffws.jpg, you will see a proper formatted record. So if you need to change the attribution, please make the change there. If the pix appears in more than one place, it doesnt matter.

--Keith (talk) 2009-11-6T01:29:46 (UTC)

Better late than never, just refound the intial meassage to me about this. Have now amended the file. --Keith (talk) 2010-3-17T22:31:45 (UTC)

Former Staff / CSDPOL[edit]


I have amended the CSDPOL template to indicate " either a current , or recent Director, Staff member or Volunteer on the railways...." It in itself just records that the person whom it is for, has been/is involved with the railway. There is no invasion of privacy if nothing else appears in the file. Regards the individual you mention, as there is no "events" connected, I have marked it for removal. --Keith (talk) 2009-11-16T21:27:15 (UTC)

Accident Record (Non FR)[edit]

I appreciate that some of the entries are not actual accidents (like the recording of a possible "Mount" Inspection). The original list, appearing in WHHG issue 47 contains a number of errors/typos, and these are corrected here. (by email with author this am!) Currently there is really no where else to place these incidents - apart from day logs possibly.

Of the 16 entries, I make it that 9 Accidents (train off rails), 4 ops problems (hotbox, slipping), and 3 logging (Mount and entry before and after). I have to agree, that to stick by the page's purpose the non accidents have to go. The 7 non accidents (per above) have been removed. I think this would bring it back to the purpose.?? --Keith (talk) 2010-3-12T13:10:01 (UTC)

Bron Turnor[edit]

Awww Chris.... I wouldnt say I was getting over enthusiastic - just curious, and with what has been said on group to date, very interesting info. (though I wont be ringing Mr Jeston!!). However, until I did a detail comparison, (here), I wasn't sure what was going to happen. Seems the access road will alter, major time, whereas the crossing itself will probably not. --Keith (talk) 2010-7-12T11:26:23 (UTC)

TyB height[edit]

Chris, no prolem with that. Just the company site has said 430ft for some years, so that was the original figure used. With the changes last night, I saw both 430 and 434 quoted (by a duplication I had left in). Hence I reverted to 430. Now amended to 434! --Keith (talk) 12:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]



To tell the truth, I cannot remember. (it is 3 yrs since I last touched the page, and got fed up by the 1924 timetable! - hence only on a user page ( - at least I presume User:Keith/Sandbox_-_5_FR_2007 is the one you mean) I can only state they will be in one of the standard "publications". eg Boyd, Mitchell, Stretton, Johnson. I would agree that there may have been a copy error - I am prone to mistyping!!! Sorry I cannot be more exact --Keith (talk) 06:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Palmerston page[edit]


Answered to "infamy" mbox, repeated here

Firstly I wasnt sure which pic you meant. Then having looked at page history found the "Palmerston and The Princess c1870 at FR Duffws" pic previous being used.

I assume you want this back to head of page, with the info box. Not done anything till you confirm this is what you wanted. Will comply when you say --Keith (talk) 12:48, 21 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Chris, I realised that there might be a Station Master at HyL after I had made the last change but thought I would leave it until I made the next change.

Heritagejim (talk) 17:32, 26 March 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

William Williams[edit]

Hi Chris. I have renamed the page but, for future reference, you can actually do this yourself. If you are using the default Vector skin, you click on the down arrow to the right of "View history" and select Move. If you have any problems let me know. Peter Harrison (talk) 23:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stationmasters & Locmotive Superintendents[edit]

Hi Chris

To put a page into a category simply put [[Category:Category name of your choice]] somewhere on the page. You don't need to create the category first. Category links usually go at the foot of the page but they don't have to - you can put it anywhere on the page and the result will be the same. If the category doesn't exist you will get a red link in the list of categories at the foot of the page when you view it. Click on that and you can create a page for the category. It isn't essential to do so - you can still add pages to the category and they will be listed automatically. Creating a page simply allows you to say a little bit about what the category is for.

You can call the category anything you want - Pre-preservation officials would be fine, although you could qualify it as Pre-preservation FR officials to make it more specific - there could then be a separate category for WHR officials.

--Peter Harrison (talk) 12:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Chris

You have created the category Pre-preservation officials and added the page Personalities to it. You can now add any other page to that category by putting [[Category:Pre-preservation officials]] somewhere on the page - usually at the foot of the page. So go to Jim's page and edit it to add that text at the bottom of the page and it will appear in your new category.

Peter Harrison (talk) 12:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WHR locomotives page[edit]

Thanks Chris. I've tidied up. --Peter Harrison (talk) 22:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tractive Effort[edit]

This is an entertaining area...

I see all your calculations for the fairlies have used the 85% fudge factor, but EofM and DLG have superheat (DLG twice as much as EofM). The original FR locos were without superheat, so I think the fudge factor for them should be lower, perhaps 70%.

Also counting against them is the longer steam path in a fairlie.

Edward Harris (talk) 17:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Superheat and tractive effort[edit]

It's always going to be tricky...

I suspect that most of the modern copies of the formula us 85% as most mainline locos from the early 20th century onwards have used superheat.

This ( on line calculator suggests 80% for saturated and 85% for superheat.

Elsewhere people have pointed out that TE is a figure for starting from rest, and that superheat is meant to improve the locomotives efficiency, so as you can achieve the same power at lower cut offs.

I have removed it on some of our loco pages (I can't remember which ones now!) as I feel it's not really that helpful for comparing our locos even to each other, never mid other railways locos. It's useful is you are comparing Stars to Castles to Kings which are all developments of the same type of loco, but I think it is too simple a number for comparing our dear little locos. Having said that I do see a point in being able to compare the fairlies between each other, partly as they are almost unique to us!

You could ask Wol, but I suspect I know what he'll say... Hmmmm!

The Boat's crash.[edit]

Thanks for your change. Do we know where the Boat hit the up train?

Mark Temple MarkTemple (talk) 15:47, 15 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thanks Chris. I've put a block on the IP address and reverted the latest edit. If they repeat the behaviour when the block runs out I'll put a more permanent ban in place. --Peter Harrison (talk) 00:30, 16 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've blocked the new IP address. Unfortunately the only thing it has in common with the previous one is that it appears to be from someone based in the USA so there is no easy way to prevent any recurrence. Just have to stay vigilant. --Peter Harrison (talk) 21:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jim got there first and blocked the latest IP address. --Peter Harrison (talk) 23:04, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Loco information updates[edit]

All reverted and IP address banned as requested. --Peter Harrison (talk) 23:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure about Princess; it gives the length as 24ftb whereas Prince is 26ft 1in Heritagejim (talk) 09:00, 14 January 2017 (UTC) Reply[reply]

The rulebook has Prince as 26ft 1in and Palmerston as 24ft. If I remember correctly Prince got longer during the 70s rebuild whilst Palmerston was always shorter than the other Englands. Thus Princess is probably Somewhere in between, as it's not operational it's not listed in the rulebook. I'm going to remove the length for now as all the other lengths quoted on here come from the rulebook. Eheaps (talk) 11:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC). I agree, in not providing lengths with locos that are not in use. Nothing is ever the same for different England locos! Chrisjones (talk) 23:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Van 59 Handbrake Wheel[edit]

Is it correct that this came from Palmerston as the Van 59 page says? If not perhaps it should be corrected? MarkTemple (talk) 21:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Chris - thanks for finding the reference to FRM 38 page 26. A good spot. I have added it to the Van 59 page. MarkTemple (talk) 20:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Palmerston's Handbrake Wheel[edit]

Does anyone at Blodge know if Palmerston's handbrake wheel was still on Van 59 when it was sold to V of R?MarkTemple (talk) 16:24, 21 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you know if the handbrake wheel has been reused? MarkTemple (talk) 18:58, 21 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks very much. Perhaps it will appear on Pony. MarkTemple (talk) 19:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pickering Brake[edit]

Hi Chris

I'm the Project Manager for the replica Pickering Brake coach. Do you know where I could get hold of the original of the photograph in the WHR Carriages section of Festipedia.

Many thanks. Bob Menzies

Hi Bob

I'm afraid a copy came up on ebay, which we did not get. I took a copy of the scan from ebay and used it on Festipedia with permission. The photo is by R.Y.Pickering & Co Ltd of course. You might try Adrian Gray to see if we have a copy?



PS their archive is at the University of Glasgow

England tender.[edit]

I can't remember doing any final drawing, each piece I made was a direct copy of what was there before. Might be some useful pictures here:

Thank you Andrew, that looks useful Chrisjones (talk) 19:13, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Andrew Andrew Lance (talk) 15:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]