Peterborough North

[JeffP]

 

 

Or am I doing "the right thing" by trying to get things as close as possible to being correct?

 

As close as POSSIBLE.

 

If it's no do-able, just don't do it.

 

We who watch are still enjoying, so should you be.

 

[PhilH]

 

and realised that a hobby is good, but an obsession is not?

 

 

I think you've answered your own question there.

[Oldddudders]

This is but one example of what I'm letting myself in for if I pursue this path. Please give me an honest answer folks. Is it time I clawed my way back to the real world, and realised that a hobby is good, but an obsession is not? Or am I doing "the right thing" by trying to get things as close as possible to being correct?

"It's only a hobby" is a wonderful copout on occasions. In your case, Gilbert, I believe you have invested an enormous amount of effort, time and - not least - money in achieving a remarkable layout, that seeks to represent a clearly defined place and a time. That said, you aren't limitlessly rich, so expenditure cannot be limitless either. Only you know how much it will bug you, now the facts are known, to be running a compromised 5.35. Is it spoiling your ship for a (rather expensive) happ'orth of tar? I suspect it is.

[westerner]

I must agree with MIB, Al and David. Although I model a fictional line in South Devon and am only now learning what LNER speak means by O and N and A etc I find your layout inspirational, but I would hate to think that in trying to achieve perfection you lose the enjoyment of Peterborough North

[The Stationmaster]

 

Finally going to bed late last night with my head spinning, I began to doubt my sanity. It comes down to this. I can't possibly model every train in the 1958 summer timetable, so whatever I do won't be "right". There were seven Newcastle services each way, of which I have two. I can't store any more, apart from the fact that I couldn't possibly afford them all. So I have four trains to represent 14. One of mine is the Northumbrian, and that does have the correct Triplet set for that train. Two of the other three trains which have Triplets have the standard diagram, which is what I have, but the fourth one had the set from the Silver Jubilee, which had detail differences. That was in the 5.35 Down service. Can you guess which train my set is supposed to represent? Of course you can - the 5.35. The other two sets with Triplets by the way had formations which were nothing like that of the 5.35. So, I either commission a Silver Jubilee triplet, expensive, or I model one of the other trains which would need new stock. also expensive, or do i just say that the Silver Jubilee set is in works, so a standard set has been substituted?

 

This is but one example of what I'm letting myself in for if I pursue this path. Please give me an honest answer folks. Is it time I clawed my way back to the real world, and realised that a hobby is good, but an obsession is not? Or am I doing "the right thing" by trying to get things as close as possible to being correct?

 

It is always an interesting exercise to look at 'real' information but it can be misleading and it can set traps (even for the wary let alone others).  In this instance it seems pretty clear, from the information which you have given, that it was a time of change and that some changes happened quite quickly.  But the big question is when did those changes occur and unless you have all the amendments to a publication, and all the operating notices which preceded at least some of those changes, we simply cannot date them accurately.  For example - sorry it's a different Railway - I have several GWR through coach programmes from the 1940s, I also have some dated amendments to them but they also include undated hand written amendments.  I've got a full set of General Appendixes covering the Western from the late 1930s to the late 1970s with all the amendments - but I still can't accurately date when some of the changes were originally published and took effect and I know that some did long before they went into a printed amendment.  In another example I've got a document which deals with coach working at a major station but I've also got a copy of the amendments which applied to it from the day it came into force - i.e. it had been altered between editing/printing and actually coming into operation.

 

I think you can guess where I'm heading - unless you have all the information, right down to daily train notices, you might never be absolutely correct - and the original sources might not even exist any more.   

 

You would need a mountain of information to get it right for any articular day in any year and a slightly smaller mountain to get it right for a particular month in that year - and you might never find all of it.  So inevitably you have to compromise, it is unavoidable in much of modelling.  You've got a smashing railway which looks superb but it includes compromises, as long as the trains generally 'look right' or even better look correct (even if they are not precisely correct,;and who is to know that?) I think sanity comes before all else and you're hardly going to be criticised; go with what you see might be a compromise - and one day you might even find a photo which proves it isn't.

[Mallard60022]

I think you could reach a solution here about 'all those trains'. Did you ever go spotting at PBN for 24 hours? I doubt it unless you were very brave or very..........!

So, the trains you should/could/might run are those you would have seen (say) one afternoon  or one morning or during a few hours from 10ish to 4ish. 

Thus you have a great excuse to limit your coach and wagon stock but have a great excuse to expand the loco fleet by a few here and there but only if it is within the budget.

I'd be more than happy to just spend three or four hours 'spotting at PBN' so how about it mate?

The PBN Supporters Club salute you Mr B.

 

P

Edited October 25, 2013 by Mallard60022

[Armchair Modeller]

Even if you had all the official information, trains would still break down or be late. Extra coaches may have been added to cope with demand. Something might have been changed to suit a one-off problem in the carriage sidings. A broken window or failed brakes may have resulted in a carriage being temporarily withdrawn. The Nether Wallop Pigeon Fanciers Association may have unexpectedly required two vans to get their birds to a remote part of Yorkshire. Trying to achieve 100% accuracy - or even worse, claiming to be accurate just is not credible.

[Clive Mortimore]

 

This is but one example of what I'm letting myself in for if I pursue this path. Please give me an honest answer folks. Is it time I clawed my way back to the real world, and realised that a hobby is good, but an obsession is not? Or am I doing "the right thing" by trying to get things as close as possible to being correct?

Hi Gilbert

 

Now let’s be blunt, for starters you picked the wrong Peterborough station. And the wrong time period, circa 1910 at the Great Eastern station would have been wonderful, all those lovely blue locos, and them pretty red ones from the Midland....downside are them black things from the North Western. Mind you their coaches looked smart.

 

Any how you chose the other one, still the wrong period,   should have been after the rebuild, about 1977 when everything was in blue grey livery and the HSTs were all in the same formation much simpler.

 

Seriously I admire your quest to get the formations correct for your time period. You mention that some trains will double up as other services owing to storage space, so some will be wrong by design but they will look correct.  Most of us couldn't tell if the coaches were right or wrong as long as the train looked like one that we have seen behind an A4 in a photo. While doing so please keep feeding us your inspirational photos.

[jonny777]

This is an almost impossible question to answer. After all, you are already making a compromise by omitting the ex-Midland tracks and their trains. Therefore, I think you can relax when it comes to following the strict coach formations on your passenger trains.

 

It would be nice to strive towards a slow accumulation of stock to run a more accurate portrayal of a "day in the life" of North station in 1958, and I don't see why you should not do that, but I would not let it deter you from running a timetable as accurately as you can for a certain part of the day and not worrying about it.

 

I am someone who can look at your photographs and can be immediately transported back to my first serious childhood trainspotting venture, coincidentally also in 1958. I was not taking a blind bit of notice of the train formations then, and as long as the mix of Thompson, Gresley and BR Mk1 look about right then your layout photos are my time machine, and I am permanently grateful for them. Thankyou.

[BMacdermott]

Hello Gilbert

 

I'll be making my own comment later as I am out. I think you will find it in agreement with the foregoing but will add some weight to the argument.

 

Regards

 

Brian

[Welly]

I've never known Peterborough North in 1958, that's because I was born 13 years later! However I have always admired your efforts to get the formation and the stock right for that year which makes it stand out even more. After such a long time, various details will be forgotten - eg that mystery signalling(?) apparatus at the north end of one of the through platforms and I doubt the details of such formations will be remembered completely accurately so I think you have reached as high as you can get.

 

Keep the photos coming!

[BMacdermott]

Hello Gilbert

 

I agree with pretty much all of the foregoing. There is no possibility of getting a full set of photos of every daylight hour train on a particular day nor is there is much likelihood of getting a full set of guards’ journals.

 

Even those can have errors, as they were sometimes written by lamplight or perhaps numbers were inadvertently transposed. I have a set from the S&D which were kept by a man I know to have shown ‘due diligence and professionalism’ for his work, but those contain the odd error here and there.

 

Even if a carriage number is given, there would be no way of knowing if it was red & cream or maroon etc unless you have photographic evidence from elsewhere.

 

Sadly, a sample page from a WR Through Carriage Working Programme illustrating Stationmaster’s comment of how the amendments were amended won't load here; I'll send it to you via email shortly.

 

As you know, I am a great fan of CWNs etc, but I only take them as ‘documents of interest’ – not ‘fact’. I liaise very closely with ex S&D Driver, Peter Smith. He can cite numerous examples of Bournemouth area loco rosters which state a booked movement as (whatever) but he knows full well that the movement was never undertaken as booked because local men worked to their own convenience. On occasion, ‘Head Office instructions’ would actually be impossible to comply with!

 

Perhaps 1958 per se is too limiting? Why not consider “Peterborough North as it was in the late 50s”. When I see your photos, I am in no doubt where I am geographically and chronologically (give or take a year or two). If you were modelling, say, the Lyme Regis branch, then a particular year (or month) might be reasonably practical.

 

Your layout has given us all so much pleasure – but it is only right and proper that you should have the greatest pleasure from it. As the Californians used to say back in the 60s: Hang loose, man!

 

On the subject of longer trains, I have taken the weights out of all my RTR coaches and wagons as well as many tenders of steam locos. A Hornby Gresley gangwayed coach out of the box weighs around 145 grams. Of that, 35 grams is a chunk of metal which can be removed. In other words (ignoring axle and flange friction etc) you can run four ‘de-weighted’ coaches for the same general effort as three ‘weighted’ ones.

 

Brian

[Flood]

Two of the other three trains which have Triplets have the standard diagram, which is what I have, but the fourth one had the set from the Silver Jubilee, which had detail differences. That was in the 5.35 Down service. Can you guess which train my set is supposed to represent? Of course you can - the 5.35. The other two sets with Triplets by the way had formations which were nothing like that of the 5.35. So, I either commission a Silver Jubilee triplet, expensive, or I model one of the other trains which would need new stock. also expensive, or do i just say that the Silver Jubilee set is in works, so a standard set has been substituted?

According to Robert Carroll's notes it was the 2.00pm down to Newcastle which had the Silver Jubilee triplet set.

 

From the Summer 1958 ECML carriage working the 2.00pm states a triplet set with 48 second class seats and 34 first class. The 5.35pm states a triplet set with 42 second class seats and 36 first class (the same as the 9.40am and 1.45pm FO).

 

Hopefully that solves that particular problem (I'm sure you still have a few more!)

Edited October 26, 2013 by Flood

[great northern]

According to Robert Carroll's notes it was the 2.00pm down to Newcastle which had the Silver Jubilee triplet set.

 

From the Summer 1958 ECML carriage working the 2.00pm states a triplet set with 48 second class seats and 34 first class. The 5.35pm states a triplet set with 42 second class seats and 36 first class (the same as the 9.40am and 1.45pm FO).

 

Hopefully that solves that particular problem (I'm sure you still have a few more!)

You have just made me very happy indeed. :danced: :)   I hadn't noticed the significnace of that at all. It looks as though yet again something changed materially between my period and Tony Wright's. Tony and the Stoke team did a lot of research before deciding on formations, some of it through official records, but a lot was taken from photographic evidence. Never mind, my 5.35pm is now right. What's more, in the fullness of time another Triplet will be winging its way towards me thanks to the generosity of one of our regular contributors, and that one can, as I had intended form part of the 9.40am. The 2.00pm was the one I didn't want to do. as it is atypical. Oh bliss!

[Flood]

The reason I happen to know this is because I am actually looking to model the 2.00pm some time in the next 12 months (complete with a Marcs Models triplet set, the Mk1s are the easy part).

 

Just to wet your appetite a little I found this photo recently:

 

http://railphotoprints.zenfolio.com/p182316852/h1e730201#h127b1caa

 

The consist matches the 2.00pm perfectly, someone may even be able to tell the triplet set just from the contour of the coach sides but they do seem considerably closer coupled compared to the Mk1 stock suggesting they are articulated (or perhaps I am just kidding myself).

Edited October 31, 2015 by Flood

[great northern]

Please forgive me if I reply to all of you who have been so generous in your help and support in this single post. It would I think be tedious to repeat basically the same things over and over again. I'll start with a bit of clarification of one or two things. The time span of the layout is between July '58 and the end of February '59. The latter date is important because it was when the M&GN was shut down. I've chosen a time of considerable change - only a handful of A4's still had single chimneys, whereas the A3's were only just beginning to get double kylchaps, my favourite C12's were on their last legs - and that is to name just a few. I can live with a certain amount of stretching of the truth, but I'd be uncomfortable with any more. The other problem is that to do so would bring in the possibility of yet more locomotives - I'm not sure where that might end, if at all. My sequence runs from 0715 to 2145, with a bit of cheating, all of the sleeping car trains are missing for a start. If I narrowed it down I'd lose a lot of very interesting trains, which i don't want to do.

 

There is I can assure you no danger of my becoming disenchanted with the layout. I love it, as it does everything I hoped it would, and more. It was just that I realised that I might be taking things too far, not helped by having sat at the PC for four solid hours, at the end of which I couldn't think straight at all. The contributions you have made have been so very helpful, and the vast majority have expressed the same or very similar views. In particular the words of Mike (The Stationmaster) were hugely significant in bringing it home to me that I shall never know what was "right". as it could and did change regularly. Flood's post above reinforced that at exactly the right time. I shall therefore cease chasing the impossible, while still imposing upon myself a certain amount of discipline. The reason this layout gives me so much pleasure and satisfaction is that for the first time ever I made sure I planned it properly before it was started. I shall retain that discipline, while keeping a sense of proportion. Doing that will be much easier thanks to all of the replies that have come in, so once again my thanks and gratitude to everyone. I feel a real sense of community in this thread. Most of us have not met, and probably never will, but your help support and encouragement is nevertheless a very tangible thing. The photos, and my ramblings, will keep coming, but I'll try to lay off the angst from now on.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Just catching up with your angst Gilbert.

 

The late, great Eric Treacy, when writing about his photography summed it all up like this:

 

For pleasure. Whose? Mostly mine!

 

Treacy was a perfectionist but nobody (thankfully) can produce the perfect photograph, though Treacy created many truly wonderful ones, full of railway atmosphere. He brought (and still brings) pleasure to thousands.

 

So with your layout Gilbert. You know you've made many compromises but don't be too bothered by some because what you've created IS the essence of P'boro North in 1958. It couldn't be anywhere else, even if a single piece of rolling stock wasn't on the layout. But your perfectionist streak (not an A4) is with the coaching stock. It might niggle you but nobody knows what the true position on any particular day was.

 

Your layout has brought pleasure to thousands via the internet because it captures the everyday scene of a large station in steam days.

 

For pleasure. Whose? Gilbert's and his many followers.

[Tony Wright]

Great Northern seems to be getting into a bit of a self-inflicted angst with regard to running the 'correct' trains. He should not worry in the slightest for what has been created on his PN is very impressive, and very realistic. He mentions me and the Stoke team with regard to what we did in creating 'accurate' sets for a latter day ECML steam depiction. I might add that there were (had to be at the time) fundamental differences in approach. Gilbert's time period is far stricter than Stoke's; 1957-'62 was Stoke's steam-era depiction (my personal trainspotting heyday) because I wanted to run the W1 and production 'Deltics'. This is historical 'nonsense', though it's just possible that had 60700's boiler been not life-expired and the 'Deltics' been delivered on time they might just have coincided. BR's carriage working documents were used for making up the principal trains, but they date from 18 months to two years later than Gilbert's in the main. Thus, our earliest records show only two Newcastle sets having triplet catering in them - the ex-1938 'Scotsman' and the ex-'Silver Jubilee' ones. Gilbert also mentions our study of photographs in liaison with the documents. Those carriage make-up books represent an ideal, but there were many exceptions. Take 'The Elizabethan' for instance. One 1961 shot in my collection, of 60024 taking the Down train up Holloway bank has, after the Aberdeen Mk.1 pair, a standard Thompson TK, then a Gresley TK, then another standard Thompson before the PV or Mk.1 stock (which the train SHOULD have been made up of) appears. Irwell's latest Yearbook shows the Up train 'Deltic'-hauled in 1962, and what a mix it is. A standard Thompson BG (not one of the trio with extended bodysides, though it COULD be because some of the covered-solebar cars had them removed due to rot), then a Mk.1 FK (obviously without Ladies' Retiring Room, though there SHOULD have been one somewhere in the set), then a GRESLEY RF, then a mixture of PV Thompsons and Mk.1s as far as can be ascertained. Another 'mixed bag' is 'The Scarborough Flyer'. Season to season I cannot find any two shots of that train which remotely resemble each other.   

 

I might add that is considerably 'easier' now than it was in 1996 to make up 'accurate' ECML trains. Until the advent of the Bachmann Mk.1s, every carriage on Stoke was kit-built or adapted. That we had Dave Lewis (of Southern Pride) as part of the team was a great help because amongst us Dave designed and we built dozens of appropriate vehicles - the pressure-ventilated Thompsons, Gresley steel stock, general Thompson stock and the Newton-Chambers car carriers. It's nice to see examples of some of those employed on PN. The same could also be said of the locos, though, apart from my test-building and writing the instructions for DJH's Thompson Pacifics, the team generated no loco kits, though most of Stoke's loco fleet was kit-built of scratch-built out of necessity. 4mm RTR locos at the time were pretty grim. But, if nothing else, it proved what a like-minded group of mates could produce.

 

So, my friend, I say don't worry too much if your trains are 'dead right' or not. You've provided a lot of enjoyment amongst your 'followers' on the thread so just keep it up. For mine to be 'right' on Little Bytham (apart from my insistence on full-length sets - up to 13 cars), I'd need a shed ten times as big to accommodate the necessary fiddle yard. I just get by by running several 'typical' sets for the various destinations, along with the dedicated trains. If this is anathema to the purists, then I apologise, but at least (like Gilbert's) they are 'based' on records or observations, and you don't get the 'nonsense' of a 'local' train with a Buffet Car in its formation nor a RFO in a train with no Kitchen Car. Both these anomalies appeared on a prominent layout recently in a model railway magazine.   

[great northern]

After all those helpful and supportive replies, the least I can do is provide a few more photos for you, especially as the first one features a goods train which has been assembled in accordance with Andy Rush's advice. This is the 1230am Inverkeithing to KX Goods Class C, now nearly 14 hours into its journey. It has just changed locos at New England, so a dead common local V2 is at the head of the train. Fortunately we young spotters didn't know things like that, so would not be aware that there was now a possibly rare York or even Newcastle engine on shed, and would not be tempted to try to gain unlawful entry. Mind you, the fact that it was a hell of a hike to get there might have put us off as well. Actually, one of the spotters is so bored he seems to be nodding off.

 

A view of the other side.

 

Here's one of my occasional excursions to show the scene from Spital Bridge, and a full view of the whole length of the layout.

 

Things now get a bit crowded, as Gannet arrives with the Down Heart of Midlothian, without headboard as it almost always was, Book Law readies itself to take over, and the V2 wends its way towards journey's end.

 

And a close up to finish with. For once the duck egg blue walls nearly do the job I wanted them to do as a backscene, but look how many different shades of blue there are, or appear to be.

[Coldgunner]

Been on a trawl through local historic photo's, I thought I'd post some here. These are all located on http://www.peterboroughimages.co.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I shan't post any more as there are potentially hundreds! But do check out the Peterborough Images website.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Coldgunner

[westerner]

Seeing those archive photos makes me realise how well Gilbert has done. Photos instantly recognisable from Gilbert's excellent modelling.

[jwealleans]

What is that green shed on a wagon in the colour shot?

[LNER4479]

Mobile generator?

[great northern]

Seeing those archive photos makes me realise how well Gilbert has done. Photos instantly recognisable from Gilbert's excellent modelling.

That's very kind of you Alan, but Peter Leyland deserves a great deal of the credit. I knew what was needed, but I couldn't have hoped to do the station buildings in particular, and the project couldn't have taken place without them. Fortunately I asked a master craftsman, and he achieved a standard which I reckon no-one could better, and very few could come close to equalling.

 

Thanks to Coldgunner for a very good spread of images, which I reckon cover 60 years from 1910 to nearly 1970. As he says, it is an excellent website, and well worth a closer look.

[great northern]

What is that green shed on a wagon in the colour shot?

It is in the District Engineers siding, so could it indeed be a shed, purpose built for some location, and to be transported there by rail? It does look very shed like indeed, very similar to the one almost directly in front of it, but lacking a window.