Building an Ace Kits "K"

[oldravendale]

That lump is a hydrostatic lubricator. If nothing else it provides a "lump" as you so poetically put it in a corner of the cab which adds to the general clutter although the third photo below shows that I've located it upside down. Nevertheless it looks to be the correct pattern, or very nearly so.

These three are the only photos I have of a backhead for the K. The only one which is really clear is the one for 1913 which is far too early for my needs. The others seem to indicate the locations of various components, although neither are too clear.

They all seem to indicate that the water gauges are about right for my model, although I'll spend a bit more time reviewing these. Nevertheless I suspect that the apparent difference in levels for the various control wheels and the water gauges is a matter of perspective rather than true location.

And I've just found my GA which includes the backhead. Why did I not refer to it before? Because it's the loco as built in 1913. It's rather unclear and needs the photos as clarification. The washout plugs on the backhead I've made are indeed rather low, but it confirms that the top mounting for the water gauges is slightly above the level of the regulator stuffing box - at least in 1913.

In short, I'm sticking where I am as the nearest interpretation I'm likely to achieve.

Copyright unknown for these images except the first, which are purely here for research.

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

Thanks both Martin and Brian for confirming the 'lump' as a hydrostatic lubricator.

Having seen the third photo above Brian I'd go with what you've laid out earlier.

 

[Steph Dale]

OK - so now we've resolved that one, how about another goose chase?

Any idea why the air reservoir under the cab is missing from 32347? Change from air to vac brake on the loco? AWS?

What are the dates of those photos, @oldravendale?

Steph

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

What goose chase - let the geese chase themselves?

The air tank is still there on 32437 as the end circular outline can just be seen behind the square U bracket.

 

[oldravendale]

I can offer no help to answer your questions about the air reservoir I have details of the dates.

32347 is dated 22 May 1954.

Info for 32352 is: "Taken 1951 at Eastleigh, this is part of an image in 'Southern Steam in Works', D. Bradford Barton Ltd 1978, reproduced only for education/research purposes." I seem to remember that Roger Scanlon provided this image as early research in to the backhead characteristics.

Great to send someone down another avenue, but it'll make no difference to the model as it exists now!

Brian

 

[Martin Shaw]

Just in from dinner with my good lady for birthday celebs tomorrow, drink has been taken, but I would suggest that the air reservoir which could either be the main or auxiliary has been removed for repair, or it's still there as Dave suggests. As far as I know they all retained air braking to withdrawal and equally I don't think any had AWS fitted. The Southern was a long way behind other regions in equipping it's lines with AWS.
Regards, hic
Martin

 

[oldravendale]

Appreciate your thoughts, Martin, hiccy or not.

Some of the Ks were definitely fitted with AWS. I have a list of those with and without somewhere, but for sure 32337 was one of those which never received AWS. 32339, 32341, 32345 and 32353 certainly had AWS from my own photos. There were almost certainly others.

Brian

 

[Martin Shaw]

I'm surprised at that Brian, I can't think of anywhere they might regularly have gone that had AWS, just goes to show how much I don't know, thanks.
Martin

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

I've just checked my records and the AWS was partial.

 

[oldravendale]

Hi again Martin.

I've not studied the distribution of AWS, but certainly quite a number - perhaps all, but it'd be necessary to look at individual records - of the West Countries/Battle of Britains and Merchant Navies were fitted with AWS. In fact AWS was on most tender classes on the SR, again from my own collection, S15, N, U and therefore almost certainly others. I believe that the move to AWS was prompted on the Southern in large part by the Lewisham Accident although it was being installed elsewhere, mainly routes which still relied on semaphore signalling, at the time.

Brian

 

[Martin Shaw]

Brian
I hope you'll forgive me trampling over your thread but I have had a sleep and a thought or two. The drive for fitting AWS came out of the tragic Harrow accident in 1952 and I suspect at a senior level in the BRB it was decided that all new locos would be fitted at construction, and the exisiting fleet would be fitted at works overhaul. The capital cost of fitting each loco wasn't particularly high and the expense would necessarily be spread over time, however for it to be effective a significant main route would need equipping in one go, and I suspect that it was this that controlled how quickly it was achieved. It's worth remembering that it took BR and its successors 40 years or so to complete.

I don't have info for this on the K class but I do have it for the Schools, another class removed at a stroke of the accountants pen in Dec 62. Just over 50% of the class had it fitted, all at a works overhaul, and as far as I can tell their normal work precluded regular running on AWS equipped lines. There is no doubt that the Lewisham accident will have focussed the SRs minds, however I believe that there was a strong view on the operating side that since a lot of train working, certainly in the inner suburban area, was under singler or double yellow aspects, routine cancelling of the warning rendered it less than effective, and this was the justification for spending capital in other directions that gave a better cost/benefit ratio.

The other thing that came to light regards Schools regulators which are mounted mid water gauge, I may have to go and rethink the matter somewhat, sorry if I have dragged you astray.
Regards
Martin

 

[oldravendale]

Hi Martin.

Certainly not trampled! Actually entirely relevant.

Funnily enough I had a chat with Steph yesterday who commented about the directions this thread has taken us. I said that it has all been fascinating. Without all the questions and comments the model of the K would not be half as accurate as I pretend it now is. The matter of AWS is also interesting as it is relevant to so many individual locos, and I know of at least one person building a K right now who will find these additional comments useful - although whether his is an AWS fitted loco or not I don't know. However, we agree that AWS was, in fact, not uncommon on the SR which fact alone may be of benefit to others.

Brian

 

[Martin Shaw]

Brian
I had a little run out today to visit a bookseller of my acquaintance, where we conducted some business. Whilst I was idly scanning the shelves I came across the RCTS publication "Locomotives of the LB&SCR Vol 3" which has the details of the later Brighton engines, so I thought of you and purchased it for next to nothing. It gives chapter and verse as far as is probably known, however one snippet was interesting. Apparently the Brighton boiler shops were in 1920 severely overstretched, so they sub contracted the boilers for the planned last 10 engines to, of all places, Derby on the Midland. As it transpired 339 got the first of these, 347 to 353 the next seven, and two boilers went into the overhaul pool. In the event the last three K class were cancelled. Whilst the B4X and K classes shared a boiler design I wonder whether there might have been detail differences between Brighton and Derby built ones that is adding to confusion about the cab layout. Nothing of course to support this other than idle speculation.
Regards
Martin

 

[oldravendale]

Wonderful extra stuff, Martin, and I wasn't aware of it even though published. I'm not especially a LB & SCR enthusiast, although I'm a great fan of the Ks so I don't have that book. You are correct - I wonder if there were indeed differences between the builds. If not I'll bet the Derby guys were wondering what they'd got themselves in to! Certainly, 337 being the first was built by the Brighton.

I believe that there are otherwise unexplained details differences between members of the class and this could well explain it.

Brian

 

[Steph Dale]

Martin,

Overstretched is an understatement. At that time Brighton works was practically in open revolt and at the very least in significant disarray. I've only found one K/B4x boiler diagram and as Derby was building similar boilers (i.e. parallel, belpaire) they would have been a good choice. I do wonder if there are detail differences though: @oldravendale, did you not note something about washout plugs wandering about?

Steph

 

[oldravendale]

The three photos I have, and the original drawing, show that the three wash out plugs at the back of the boiler are probably a bit higher than they were marked out on the etched backhead. Possibly! 337, 347 and 352 all appear to be similar.

Brian

 

[Steph Dale]

Aah, no; I remember that debate as it was only at the weekend...

Sorry, I thought there was something much earlier in the research/ build process. I'll get back in my box, it's nice and quiet and dark in here.

Steph

 

[Yorkshire Dave]

I'll get back in my box, it's nice and quiet and dark in here.

With a Thorens! Really?

 

[oldravendale]

Hands up all those who remember the saga of the "K". Those who don't can go to the back of the class and I'll talk to you later.

When we left this protracted conversation around January last year you will remember that the loco was completed, painted and proven to run really well. However I was concerned about the layout of the backhead. Having taken info from a number of sources, but still without a really good photo, I've finally cobbled it together. It's extremely unlikely to be entirely accurate but should pass muster within the dark and gloomy recesses of the cab.

Do I hear the distant sound of cheering?



It's now been washed and is ready for paint, so the saga of the "K" is very nearly over. There's still coal needed in the tender though.

Brian

 

[oldravendale]

Here's where I am with the "K" backhead, so very nearly ready to fit in the cab.

On my King Arthur thread is a photo of the backhead painted black. Now the regulator is painted - whether it was ever red in BR service is unclear - in fact based on my personal memory I'd say unlikely - but it adds a flash of colour to the inside of the cab. You may note that the dials now all have faces and the water gauge glasses are also completed. More about that in the Q1 thread.

This may, in fact, make it in to the cab on my next workshop session. Sadly (or not) that won't be tomorrow as it's "Gents' Lunch" day.



Brian