Castle Aching

[ChrisN]

So, you propose following the example of the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway and run 4th class carriages with no seating or roofs and just a handrail round the sides for passengers to hold on to? Or perhaps the latter would also be considered an extravagance?

 

Jim

 

Jim,

Ah, so you have seen the 450s, 478s and upgraded 470s, then!

[Caley Jim]

(tempted to add ‘Presbyterian’, but I don’t wish to start a “Discussion”)

Or a disruption! We Presbyterians used to be very good at these on the 19th century!

 

Jim

[corneliuslundie]

So it's bloomers (size to taste, or is it small for a distant and large for a home?) waved out of the station master's office window then, rather than those expensive things on posts? I hope the stationmaster is married to ensure a regular supply.

Jonathan

PS Not sure that one can nest questions, but hey, ho.

[Alex TM]

Or a disruption! We Presbyterians used to be very good at these on the 19th century!

 

Jim

We still are!

[Caley Jim]

We still are!

Nowadays it's more just a matter of changing allegiance rather than setting up on your own!

 

Jim

[Hroth]

So it's bloomers (size to taste, or is it small for a distant and large for a home?) waved out of the station master's office window then, rather than those expensive things on posts? I hope the stationmaster is married to ensure a regular supply.

Jonathan

PS Not sure that one can nest questions, but hey, ho.

 

I don't see why they couldn't be a standard store item:  Bloomers. Large. Signalling, for the use of.  Similarly for the Smalls.  Perhaps they could be supplied in suitable colours to prevent misinterperetation of Large Bloomers at a distance for Small Bloomers?

 

Isn't it getting unseasonably warm in here?

[Adams442T]

I was so sure that it would be Jennifer Agutter!  Imagine my disappointment when it was just a venerable Railway engine..........................

[Edwardian]

I was so sure that it would be Jennifer Agutter!  Imagine my disappointment when it was just a venerable Railway engine..........................

 

Hope this makes amends ....

[Regularity]

I don't think so ...

 

Mix of Midland Suburban and homemade ends. All roofs from the Ratio Suburbans.

Very nice.

 

The problem with the GWR 4 wheelers is that they look so GWR. The MR suburbans, however, have a much more archetypal late-Victorian feel to them, and lend themselves far more to cutting and shutting.

[Edwardian]

Very nice.

 

The problem with the GWR 4 wheelers is that they look so GWR.

 

I agree.  Also, they are quite modern (1890s).  A lot of the second hand stock on many LRs was older and of an older style.

 

The giveaways are the GW grab handles and the roof profile.  The same is true of the Triang clerestories.

 

I leave the grab handles on the Triangs - the GW style contrasts with that of the neighbouring GE, so that's an advantage, to my mind - and I replace the ends and roof to arc profile

 

EDIT: As I said above, the Triangs are reserved for the most modern WNR stock and are to 'mainline' standards.  Even the 4-wheelers were 'mainline'; see E&M/M&GN for an example of a small railway with 4-wheel mainline stock.  One of the things to note is that the compartment sizes are relatively generous; the equivalent accommodation derived from Ratio GW 4-wheelers would make for shorter vehicles than my Triang hacks, which illustrates the fact that the Ratio GW 4-wheel coaches represent purpose-built branch line stock.  

 

The WNR has no suburban stock, where, again, accommodation was traditionally tight and coaches compact, and for branch sets the WNR makes do with cascaded older coaches still in service, so it doesn't need a 'modern' (1890s-built) branch set such as the Ratio 4-wheelers represent.

 

Thus, there is a logic to these rolling stock choices, no doubt a faulty logic, but a logic nonetheless.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Edwardian

[ChrisN]

I agree.  Also, they are quite modern (1890s).  a lot of the second hand stock on many LRs was older and of an older style.

 

The giveaways are the GW grab handles and the roof profile.  The same is true of the Triang clerestories.

 

I leave the grab handles on the Triangs - the GW style contrasts with that of the neighbouring GE, so that's an advantage, to my mind - and I replace the ends and roof to arc profile

 

EDIT: As I said above, the Triangs are reserved for the most modern WNR stock and are to 'mainline' standards.  Even the 4-wheelers were 'mainline'; see E&M/M&GN for an example of a small railway with 4-wheel mainline stock.  One of the things to note is that the compartment sizes are relatively generous; the equivalent accommodation derived from Ratio GW 4-wheelers would make for short vehicles than my Triang hacks, which illustrates the fact that the GW coaches were purpose-built branch line stock.  

 

The WNR has no suburban stock, where, again, accommodation was traditionally tight and coaches compact, and for branch sets the WNR makes do with cascaded older coaches still in service, so it doesn't need a 'modern' (1890s-built) branch set such as the Ratio 4-wheelers represent.

 

Thus, there is a logic to these rolling stock choices, no doubt a faulty logic, but a logic nonetheless.

 

Are the Triang clerestories Seconds and Brake Thirds?  Would this be why they have more room?  I know, that the Ratio composites have two sizes of compartments, the smaller of which is 2nd class and I think is bigger than the third class compartments.  (If you insist I will go upstairs and measure them.)

[Compound2632]

Very nice.

 

The problem with the GWR 4 wheelers is that they look so GWR. The MR suburbans, however, have a much more archetypal late-Victorian feel to them, and lend themselves far more to cutting and shutting.

 

No! No! No! And again, No! The panelling style of the Ratio Midland suburbans is that introduced to the Midland in 1902 by David Bain; the deep waist panels are distinctively un-Victorian. To my mind, the Ratio/Triang Great Western sides are much more generic; the thing that marks these carriages out as distinctively Great Western are the three-arc roofs - ditch those in favour of a single arc and you're away.

 

The Ratio Midland suburban sides could be the cut up to make North Eastern Railway carriages of David Bain's design, as these did also have the deeper waist panelling.

 

Apologies for banging on about this; I've no wish to cause offence.

 

My diploma from the Finescale Police Academy is hanging on the wall.

[Compound2632]

Are the Triang clerestories Seconds and Brake Thirds?  Would this be why they have more room?  I know, that the Ratio composites have two sizes of compartments, the smaller of which is 2nd class and I think is bigger than the third class compartments.  (If you insist I will go upstairs and measure them.)

 

I understand that the compartment sizes of the brake carriages are right for GWR third class of the period but the non-brake carriages just has compartment sizes stretched to fit a whole number of compartments in the length. Neither represents an genuine diagram.

 

I should confess to having a train of Triang* clerestories in D&SJR claret livery, marshalled BT/T/C/C/BT. The brake thirds are straight out of the tin; the first/second composites are the non-brake carriages marked up as 2/2/1/1/1/2/2 and the third is a 7-compartment carriage made out of the passenger ends of two brake thirds. It was supposed to be an 8-compartment third but I made a counting error when slicing... The brake ends make a nice 4-wheel brake on a Ratio underframe. The D&SJR did adopt a three-arc roof profile thanks to the open-minded and forward-thinking design policy of its Locomotive, Carriage & Wagon Superintendent, Zebedee Drummond.

 

*Actually Hornby, the faux-LNER ones. The plastic is less brittle and more amenable to slicing; they can be had very cheaply if you go to the right dealers. Sadly the chap I used to get them from no longer has a shop.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Compound2632

[ChrisN]

I understand that the compartment sizes of the brake carriages are right for GWR third class of the period but the non-brake carriages just has compartment sizes stretched to fit a whole number of compartments in the length. Neither represents an genuine diagram.

 

When I (Eventually), bash mine into proper Exx diagrams it will be interesting to see how different the length is from true.  However, as I am not going to exhibit them, and I will allow no one into the railway room with a measuring instrument I do not think it will matter.

[Compound2632]

When I (Eventually), bash mine into proper Exx diagrams it will be interesting to see how different the length is from true.  However, as I am not going to exhibit them, and I will allow no one into the railway room with a measuring instrument I do not think it will matter.

 

It was with some temerity that I asked the owner of Westcliff if his splendid carriages were of Triang origin - he confessed they were; very fine models the looked. At the same Expo-EM there was a chap demonstrating cut-and-shuttery; I asked him about the possibility of mixing the Triang and Ratio sides; he said it was a no-go as the depth of the panelling was different.

Edited October 19, 2018 by Compound2632

[Edwardian]

Are the Triang clerestories Seconds and Brake Thirds?  Would this be why they have more room?  I know, that the Ratio composites have two sizes of compartments, the smaller of which is 2nd class and I think is bigger than the third class compartments.  (If you insist I will go upstairs and measure them.)

 

I understand that the compartment sizes of the brake carriages are right for GWR third class of the period but the non-brake carriages just has compartment sizes stretched to fit a whole number of compartments in the length. Neither represents an genuine diagram.

 

Yes, that's right.

 

The brake coach compartment widths are very close to GW third class compartments of the period.

 

The non-brake coach spacing is close to GW second class spacing - IIRC there was one all second diagram - and, therefore, not the most useful.

 

I use these for second class accommodation and have to 'stretch' them for first.  Both the 4 and 6-wheel hacks have accommodation for all 3 classes; the WNR had not abandoned Second Class in 1905.

 

The 4-wheelers might be divided up and run with some older 6-wheelers to make 2 trains. 

 

The WNR 6-wheelers will probably run as a 5-coach rake comprising two 3-compt. Brake Thirds, a 6-compt. Third, a 5-compt. Second and a 5-compt (3/2) First/Second Composite.  That gives the following accommodation - 12 Third compts., 7 Second and 3 First, which I hope is reasonable for an 'express'(!) service to Birchoverham Next the Sea.

 

 

No! No! No! And again, No! The panelling style of the Ratio Midland suburbans is that introduced to the Midland in 1902 by David Bain; the deep waist panels are distinctively un-Victorian. To my mind, the Ratio/Triang Great Western sides are much more generic; the thing that marks these carriages out as distinctively Great Western are the three-arc roofs - ditch those in favour of a single arc and you're away.

 

The Ratio Midland suburban sides could be the cut up to make North Eastern Railway carriages of David Bain's design, as these did also have the deeper waist panelling.

 

Apologies for banging on about this; I've no wish to cause offence.

 

My diploma from the Finescale Police Academy is hanging on the wall.

 

Yes, I was agreeing with the comment about the Ratio GW 4-wheelers.

[Compound2632]

Perhaps they could be supplied in suitable colours to prevent misinterperetation of Large Bloomers at a distance for Small Bloomers?

 

The Extra Large Bloomers are said by some to have been painted red - and have often been illustrated as such - the standard Southern Division livery was green. There's some doubt as to whether this was really the case.

 

We've been shown the difference between Webbified Small and Large Bloomers; here's a drawing of a Small Bloomer in original condition with the four-wheel tender attached to some allocated to the West Midlands. This drawing is particularly interesting as the artist was not a railway artist; it could dated to May 1865, or at least after June 1862 when the branch to Sutton Coldfield was opened. It opens a whole can of Bloomer worms since, in a comment, Harry Jack says "it has a Ramsbottom smokebox door, but the dome, splasher, tender, safety valves etc indicate a Southern Division Bloomer. The oval numberplate shows that it was drawn before the renumbering of April 1862, so such an engine wouldn't have had a Ramsbottom smokebox door, then. And a Ramsbottom door wouldn't have had that L-shaped McConnell door handle."

[Regularity]

My diploma from the Finescale Police Academy is hanging on the wall.

I don’t remember awarding you that.

[Compound2632]

I don’t remember awarding you that.

It's a spot-on rivet counter's delight 1:1 scale model of yours...

[Regularity]

Maybe we should write it up for MRJ...

[Hroth]

...

My diploma from the Finescale Police Academy is hanging on the wall.

Is that one of those things that can be obtained from the internet for an appropriate fee?

 

Along the lines of:

 

Certificate         £100

Diploma            £200

Higher Diploma £400

 

And so on?

[Regularity]

I am not above a little bribery and corruption, in the same way as the sea is not above the sky...

 

(To bring it back to H2G2T2. Well, why not? I am sure some think I am a Vogon, and my poetry really is terrible.)

[St Enodoc]

Is that one of those things that can be obtained from the internet for an appropriate fee?

 

Along the lines of:

 

Certificate         £100

Diploma            £200

Higher Diploma £400

 

And so on?

It's all a question of degree...

 

Reminds me of a certain Asian country I once worked in (for the avoidance of doubt, not Singapore) where a driving licence cost $50 - or, if you didn't want to take the test, $500.

Edited October 19, 2018 by St Enodoc

[Edwardian]

We creep forward with the drill hall.  We are all going out for the day today (horses, not trains, alas), so I doubt I'll have that much more to report by the end of the weekend.

 

It has been a busy week and a half at work, made busier by the need to catch up post-'flu (still full of sniffles), so I lost even my usual weekend modelling time.  Never mind.

 

Some compensation will come on Tuesday, when I will bunk off work to spend the day amongst Preservationalists. I anticipate quite a bit of pre-Grouping interest will be encountered, so I look forward to reporting from the field in due course. 

 

 

[Compound2632]

Superb. I'm in no position to quibble over the width of the corbelling! 

 

I'm sure a day with the horses will provide modelleing inspiration too - how are horses handled in and out of horseboxes? I'm sure the same principles apply for road or rail vehicles. And do take a measuring stick to provide a reference dimension for scale horse-droppings.