Barry scrap yard 1973

Discussion in 'Railway History & Nostalgia' started by crosscity, 14 Oct 2019.

  1. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Have you got any photos from around then 34081?
     
  2. Ash Bridge

    Ash Bridge Established Member

    Messages:
    3,467
    Joined:
    17 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Stockport, European Union.
    Well I'm 99% certain that light pacific is 34067 Tangmere.
     
  3. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Definitely looks like it. Another one that John Bunch was involved with...
     
  4. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
    I've had a look at a few pictures of 34067 at Barry which verifies your post. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction.
     
  5. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Member

    Messages:
    560
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2011
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
  6. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
    The identity of the Bulleid behind 35010 is still to be established plus the other locos in the line-up (if possible).
     
  7. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Oh blimey, thanks for that. To see how it looked in Sunshine livery a few decades later you just wouldn’t believe it was the same machine.
    Is that a Castle in front?
     
  8. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Member

    Messages:
    560
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2011
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    Think it's a Hall. The Prairie to the right of 34081 is 4110.
     
  9. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Ah ok.
    Which part of the yard is 34081 parked in there? Was there a specific area that was used to store sold locos that were about to be taken away?
     
  10. Spamcan81

    Spamcan81 Member

    Messages:
    560
    Joined:
    12 Sep 2011
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    She got moved around a bit and to be honest, I don't recall which bit of the yard she was in at that time. I do recall she was moved again before we collected her in late '76,
     
  11. Ash Bridge

    Ash Bridge Established Member

    Messages:
    3,467
    Joined:
    17 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Stockport, European Union.
    It's just possible that it is 35011 General Steam Navigation, still working on it at the moment....
     
  12. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
    I have looked at a few images of 35011 taken after mine and which you may have seen too. Although none are around 1973 there are some indicators that 35011 is most likely to be the one - including a chunk missing off the sole bar, a piece of panel hanging off under the cab number and a similar tender with the loco. In those images the loco is in a different place in the yard, so unless someone has a picture from 1973 it is unlikely that the other locos in the line will be identified. Thank you to Ash Bridge for pointing me in the right direction. Time for the next photo, I think.
     
  13. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Yes please! :lol:
     
  14. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    35027 Port Line might also be a contender.
    It was tenderless and had the same bit of missing solebar.
    Not easy this.
     
  15. Robin Edwards

    Robin Edwards Member

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    1 Dec 2013
    Last edited: 21 Oct 2019
  16. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
  17. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
    This is more compelling than 35011 - so I will go with 34010, but only as 'most likely'.
     
  18. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
  19. Robin Edwards

    Robin Edwards Member

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    1 Dec 2013
    The Merchant Navy has a longer firebox than the WC/BB light pacific and looking at the target Bulleid, I think the latter with shorter firebox has a greater shout. This image illustrates this perfectly between 34101 and 35022

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/97660...YvA-7B1LXx-7B1Kpp-7zVd7g-Qjhypg-7zYWGW-cuTiAL
     
  20. Robin Edwards

    Robin Edwards Member

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    1 Dec 2013
  21. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
    Definitely a Castle I would say. You can tell by the way the cylinders are slightly set into the solebar.
     
  22. Ash Bridge

    Ash Bridge Established Member

    Messages:
    3,467
    Joined:
    17 Mar 2014
    Location:
    Stockport, European Union.
    Yes I think you're correct to go for Robins suggestion; having looked again the GW tender behind 35011 seems to be a larger variant with higher sides than that behind Sidmouth, the one in your shot looks more in keeping with the smaller lower sided type.
     
  23. Cowley

    Cowley Established Member

    Messages:
    6,859
    Joined:
    15 Apr 2016
    Location:
    Devon
  24. Czesziafan

    Czesziafan Member

    Messages:
    191
    Joined:
    13 Jul 2019
    I went to Barry in August 73 but don't remember any numbers apart from D601 - the only time I can remember ever seeing one of the D6XX Warships. It was in a pretty dilapidated state and I seem to remember there was talk about that time of trying to save it but nothing came of it. Interest in diesels then was almost zero. I wish I had had the foresight to remove one of the brass bogie plates which were like miniature NBL diamond worksplates but you always regret the things you never did.
     
  25. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
    Just for you - my picture of D601 in August 73, also the only time I saw one.
    [​IMG]
    03Aug73. Railrover trip. Barry Scrap Yard. Warship Class 41 D601 ARK ROYAL. [Slide_0415]
    by Ray, on Flickr
     
  26. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
  27. markindurham

    markindurham Member

    Messages:
    296
    Joined:
    1 Nov 2011
    34068 was broken up at Eastleigh 31/3/64
     
  28. Bevan Price

    Bevan Price Established Member

    Messages:
    4,352
    Joined:
    22 Apr 2010
  29. crosscity

    crosscity Member

    Messages:
    387
    Joined:
    5 Dec 2011
    Location:
    Birmingham
    Most photographers did what I did - recorded the main subject, but not the secondary ones behind, or at the side. No one took pictures of every loco. When I went i just wanted to get a flavour of the scene which was exciting and very sad at the same time. I couldn't afford to use a few rolls of film, and I only carried one or two unexposed rolls anyway. This is why my queries have generated such interesting responses, and finding the answers so frustrating.

    There are so many pictures, but the locos in their raw rusty state, some with no numbers visible, can look like others of the same type. The locos were moved often, so for many of the 'targets' taken in different years, their surrounds bring in an element of doubt.

    The websites might give clues to my outstanding queries, so thank you for listing them.
     
  30. Robin Edwards

    Robin Edwards Member

    Messages:
    250
    Joined:
    1 Dec 2013
    Zooming in on the yellow paint just past where the front r/h buffer should be, I see 34058. I was confused on this one because there are images taken after 1973 showing 34058 to have front buffers although it is quite possible these were replaced to aid in shunting or as part of some cosmetic work carried out on a prospective purchase.
    There is also the faint semblance of this number on the smokebox door.
     

Share This Page