Jump to content
 
  • entries
    9
  • comments
    25
  • views
    6,143

Dating

Argos

Entry posted by Argos

693 views

 Share

No not that kind......... :nono:

 

Whilst wading through my kit pile for Three Shire's Head, I became aware of the conflicts imposed by my chosen dateline of 1890-1900.

Like any 10 year period this decade saw large changes in the appearance of the railway, loco classes vanishing and new ones appearing. Existing classes rebuilt with new features etc.

 

I was finally prompted into action by a comment by Tony Koester in the editorial for this years Model Railroad Planning annual (I have been know to venture into the dark side of North American Railways). The comment was "modelling 1950-1960 means you are really modelling 1960 but doing a lousy job of it". :umbrage:

 

But which year to select? :read:

 

Opening up a trusty spread sheet I began dumping dates and information from researching in my library, the output is shown below. Not all the sources concur so I have tried to cross reference where possible. The date of 1892 stands out as most of the loco classes I want to model (shaded light grey) were existent at date. The only one I miss out is the NSR 2-2-2T operating on local passenger trains in the Uttoxeter area but withdrawn in 1891. If I set the date at 1891 I miss out on the Webb rebuilds of the 4-4-0t Metro tanks (Similar to the Metropolitan Railway A & B class, at least until Webb got his mitts on them). I rather like these and never seen them modelled. Of course I could always instigate rule 1.....

 

Anyway, list below, hopefully other may find this useful.

Please highlight any errors. :good:

 Share

6 Comments

Recommended Comments

  • RMweb Gold
Mikkel
  • RMweb Gold

An interesting and nicely structured approach. Also shows how some locos were stalwarts over many years, and how the NSR loco roster didn't vary much!

 

Setting dates is always a bit of a challenge, I find. My own approach is to build the layout itself (structures etc) to a particular year, so that the scene is reasonably consistent. I then have running sessions where the stock either (i) fits the year or (ii) expands the period a bit or (iii) expands the period wildly!

 

Some nice stock you have planned, it will be quite a layout.

Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Argos
  • RMweb Gold

Cheers Mikkel,

 

the NSR did build a variety of engines through the period although most were a versions of 0-6-0 tender engines which I don't need for my future plans.

 

As regards the stock, I've probably got enough to build to keep me active well into retirement (and I'm still at least 20 years away!).

At least I know they will fit and I enjoy gathering research material ready for the fateful build day.

Link to comment
Brassey

That's some loco build list; paticularly in 7mm!  I have a similar list but in 4mm for the LNWR/GWR joint line Summer 1912.

 

Looking forward to seeing progress.  Good luck.

 

Peter

Link to comment
Buckjumper

I have this same conundrum. The real PITA of representing more than one company is that you're rarely going to get a complete historical record for a particular year which covers all the eventualities you need (or would like!) to model.

 

Once I accepted that anachronisms are inevitable (and that was a bitter pill to swallow!) I decided that within a scene each train would be faithful to a year, even if something else it passed was a temporal anomaly. I think I once likened it to each train existing in it's own alternate reality - the setting being the unifying factor.

 

Even so I've made a feather-edged split of two periods, c1890 - c1897 and c1898 - c1905-ish, so that the timey-wimey stuff isn't too wibbly-wobbly.

Link to comment
Guest Simon Dunkley

Guest Simon Dunkley

Posted

I have used a similar approach in the past, but it can be depressing to find out that some of the items you would like to model were scrapped several years before others were drawn, let alone built.

 

However, if your layout is a "might have been", then it is not unreasonable to infer that some extra stock might have been needed to provide the surface, and that this need was matched by not scrapping, say, a NSR 2-2-2ST until a couple of years later - antiquated relics often saw out their days on backwaters, and had your line been built, then who knows what would have happened...?

 

Much as it pains me to say so in public, Adrian has hit the nail squarely on the head with his comments above.

 

Simon

Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Argos
  • RMweb Gold

Cheers Simon and Backjumper.

 

The template was always going to be used as a framework, once you turn the clock back prior to 1900 detail becomes sketchy anyway.

Even current authoritative reference got it wrong, I believe the Railway magazine declared the LNWR Bloomers were still operational two years after the last one had been scrapped.

 

I wanted it as a guide to help me select purchases, in the past I fallen for spur of the moment "bargains" only to find them out timeline. Having the guide does add some focus.

 

A lot of the detail above will only be relevant for a future layout on the drawing board but I want to develop my stock with an underlying plan in mind.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...