Another conundrum. Mike Parker owns this odd lantern and I photographed it at an HLC meeting. All the parts appear to be genuine Tilley and even the tank, whilst unique, does have the look of a Tilley manufactured product about it. It is certainly not a bodged job. I have handled this and it is made in the same way as a period Tilley and just appears to be an extended standard 1960 ish tank. Has to be about twice the capacity of a normal 1.5 pint tank. The yellow paint is an exact match with the Southern Rail BR49 lantens. It is not marked at all but I do think it may well be the real thing and made as a long burn special for BR Southern in the late 1950s or early 1960s. A sort of 1960s version of PL55. I don't know of another example but you have to think that if Tilley made it as a special then there would probably have been more than one. ::Neil::
Its a strange one that neil looks very much tilley its just them bad angles and strain on the frame dont look right if the studs had been straight up in the tank to take that frame would look right to me
Looks like a 169 to me dave and those little extensions look like stubby cut down extension bits on a BR49 is a odd ball one
Yes a 169 and I agree the bent legs look odd but then the whole thing is odd and at that time Tilley were not being run by engineers so a factory bodge is not impossible. I would dearly love to see another. Not to acquire so much as to confirm it is a proper model and not just a one off. ::Neil::
That frame on that tank just dont look right, if tilley produced that tank which i think they may well have it would have been quite a expense getting them made up, the tooling for the press or the forms for the metal spinners. So why just ram the 246 frame on it. Think something proper would have been designed for along the lines of a 246A maybe. Makes me think some one else has done that bit later. What we need to find is another tank like that with something better or some paperwork to get to the bottom of this one neil pete
Well maybe but Tilley were quite capable of doing a bodge job like that. The other thing you need to bear in mind is that they would also supply parts. For instance the Tilley London Transport hand lamp was not made by Tilley but they did supply all the parts for LT to make them up in their workshops. Could be that happened here as well. You are right we need paper but don't hold your breath. I would be happy to see one or two more of the lamps or as you say the same tank under something else. ::Neil::
Yes neil tilley did bodge some stuff is roughly made but its those studs in the tank if they was straight up i bet that 246 frame would fit but why set them off at that angle unless something else originally went on to it One good thing now its on here it may just prompt someone to post a answer eh cheers pete
Quick fix engineering I guess. To have the bolts vertical would have meant making a flat boss on the tank shoulder. No big deal for large volume production, you just make the tooling with the bosses incorporated. To do a short run you just drop the bolts in where they need to be on the tank and then discover that because of the roll over of the tank shoulder the frame has to be bent. Quick and dirty solution for a short run order would be my guess. Mind you that does rather beg the question of what else the damn tank was meant for. ::Neil::
The excellent tank looks earlier to me, the shape is different, but i have never seen the excellent in the flesh, only that one advert.
I don't think this tank is likely to be as early as an Excellent. From the shape of it with that small base rim flange and general shape it looks like an extended late 50s to mid 1960s tank. Given that the other two yellow BR type lanterns are all around 1960 I assume this one is also from about that date. From memory it is not date stamped but I can email the owner and ask. ::Neil::
OK I now own this lantern. Taken me years to wheedle it out of Mike Parker but succeeded today. The tank is for sure a Tilley product because I found the stamps in the base plate. Marked Made in England and 161XA. So made in the Hendon factory in January 1961. Really very difficult marks to see with the naked eye and even with the super enlargement of the camera it is not easy to see the Made in England stamp but the date is clear enough. Not marked as Tilley anywhere but those tank stamps are typical Tilley so I have no doubts. ::Neil::
And after a bit of fettling with new seals and a new vaporiser it lives. Only running at about half pressure here because the tank base is beginning to dish down and I don't want to make it any worse. ::Neil::
Hi Neil ! Out of curiosity what lamp have you swapped with Mike Parker to gain this BR lamp ? Or is it more the fact that Mike has a large bump on his head and difficulty in recollecting the first 10 hours after you left his house with your sack of swag ? ...mick
Oh no it was all very gentlemanly. Mike wants to thin out his pile so after some discussion on values these lamps and such were exchanged for cash. This was actually the cheap one but we had trouble determining a value for a unique item so in the end Mike was happy enough to make a profit and I got it for a fair price. I have been working on him for maybe five years to prise this one loose. I may yet work on him for another lamp which I saw last weekend but left for another day. ::Neil::
I know that this thread was last active in sept 2012, but it picked up my interest as a good (very good!) friend gave me a very similar model this weekend . I thought it was a normal BR49 but, like Niel's, has a large tank - which has also dished down (? a fault in this size of tank or over-enthusiastic Railwaymen overpumping?) Mine is not painted, and I've done nothing to it (and only plan to clean it up), but it has the 169 vapouriser, the short leg extensions, and the cock fitting for the paraffin preheater. Luckily, I received a BR49 preheater with the Hospital Lamp box I got 2 weeks ago, so guess where that is headed... Only problem is that the shroud is missing - as it is loose, I suspect a not unusual problem. Anyone know if there's a spare one anywhere? I will post photos after the weekend (I'm off to the 24hr Le Mans race - with AL620 and Hospital light...) and report further. The BR49 looks origional, not a bodge, and with Neil's I think augments the authenticity of this BR49 Big Tank variant. Can't wait to light up. Jonty
Could these lamps have been made or bodged, not for general railway use, but as specials for lighting the warning boards that advise drivers of emergency speed restrictions ? I recall reading of a serious railway accident caused by "all the lamps on the speed restriction board being out" The lamps being incandescent gas lights supplied by a propane bottle. The enquiry report stated that a reserve propane bottle and an automatic changeover valve should have ensured that the lights burnt without interruption, but that for some reason this did not function. The report noted that the accident would not have occurred with the previously used oil lamps, since each lamp would have been self contained and not reliant on any common fuel supply. A modified Tilley lamp with an extended burn time would seem to be ideal for such a purpose, since the lights need to burn all night without attention. I doubt that wick lamps would have been bright enough.
I can't agree with your supposition on use of extended burning tilley lamps to illuminate trackside warning notices.The railways had specific wick type lamps for this purpose usually running on a 7 day cycle but able to last 8 days.With the use of reflectors the gave off perfectly adequate illumination. Al
Fixed railway signals were indeed lit by long burning wick lamps, designed for weekly filling but with a longer burn time to give a margin. The light output was only about 1CP, but with a carefully designed lens and reflector that was accurately aligned with the engine drivers sightline, they were visible from surprising distances. Emergency speed restriction boards were very different. They consisted of two white or yellow lights and an illuminated sign or panel that showed the reduced permitted speed. The lights had to be much brighter than those in fixed signals for several reasons. Firstly they had to catch the eye of driver, in completely unexpected locations. Secondly they were placed beside the track at short notice, and not accurately aligned with drivers sightline. Also the speed restriction notice had to be clearly lit, quite unlike a fixed signal that merely had to give a point of light. The units that I have seen consist of a large steel enclosure, painted white internally. Two Fresnel lenses in a horizontal line at the top, and below these a rectangular opening into which dropped the interchangeable sign denoting the speed. An LPG incandescent mantle was placed behind each lens, and the stray reflected light lit the number panel. Earlier versions used "oil lamps" which I suspect were pressure lanterns in view of the bright light needed.
It is of course possible but I rather doubt it. The rail companies used wick lamps because they were reliable. They don't go out because of a loss of pressure or a blocked jet. It was this matter of reliabillity that kept pressure lamps off rolling stock and signals in general. I think these long burn lanterns were used because a standard tank lantern would only run for 9 hours which is OK for a normal 8 hour shift but as an emergency lantern the long burn types would last out a long winter night without the need to re fill. PL55s were designed for the same reason in the 1930s and the need for such lanterns was still there in the 1960s. ::Neil::
I agree with your explanation for PL55/Large tank BR49 use Neil. The British Railways instructions for cleaning, filling&trimming, lighting oil lamps, shows a section for various wick lamps including Illuminated Permanent Speed Indicators,Warning Signals.Pressure Lamps are dealt with separately and can be viewed on this forum under the Lamp Reference Library. Al
Flicking through the Gallery and read through this thread. Looking at the angle of the frame legs I have a question....... if the brass extensions were removed and a 606 vapouriser used would the cage legs fit as they do on an X246A and loose the odd looking bends?
I guess that would probably work but I am not going to try. So far all of these I have seen came with a 169 and the leg extensions so I have no interest in creating a non authentic version. ::Neil::
