Nick Holliday
-
Posts
2,614 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by Nick Holliday
-
-
21 hours ago, Ian Smeeton said:
1st PDF won't open for me but the others will.
Perhaps a note to the planners might elicit a response and check.
Regards
Ian
Those drawings only show the extension of the platforms, and contain nothing appertaining to the new station buildings, as sought.
-
I’m afraid I think my comments might have thrown a spanner into the works, but I’m now chucking in a complete toolbox, with a few suggestions:-
Rather than having a continuous circuit on which most trains circulate forever in the same direction, why not take advantage of the ability of N Gauge stock to negotiate fairly tight radius curves, and have return loops of around 3 foot diameter at opposite ends. (The EEMRC layout Hinksey Yard is only 2’ 9” wide, and the curves at each end don’t cause many problems.) This means that southbound stock from the depot subsequently automatically appears a bit later heading north, before completing the circuit and heading south again. Judicious provision of additional tracks around these loops would allow the sequence of trains to be varied.
The ”external” fiddle yard looks as if it could be a nuisance, especially if the 2 foot space is only used to gain access to it, with a second operator necessary. The Bounds Green depot is fundamentally a real-life fiddle yard, so I would suggest it could be used as such, reducing the need for a hidden one. I would get rid of the Hertford Loop fiddle yard as it is not fit for purpose, and propose another return loop arrangement, so that the non-local trains can be replicated without length restrictions. There is also space on the opposite side for another fiddle-yard/depot – perhaps Hornsey?
For some reason the plan of Bounds Green depot itself, as drawn, is actually considerably deeper than it is in real life, which has exacerbated the access problems, so I have prepared a more scaled version using dimensions off NLS and Google maps.
If the empty spaces along the station and fiddle yard could be done away with, and the layout taken to the edge of the room, to maximise its size, the mainline tracks running along the edge could be left simple, bereft of pointwork, which would minimise the need to be able to gain easy access, although some arrangement might be necessary at extreme corners of the room.
I apologise for another crude plan; I don’t have the relevant software or the skills and time to use it properly, so I offer this rough draft as a seed pearl for the experts, if they think it has merit.
The reversing loop shown dotted would be at a lower level than the Hertford Loop, so the only gradients will be between Bowes Park and Wood Green/Alexandra Palace. It might be possible to include an non-scenic link between the two mainline loops across the proposed entrance, with a lifting section for access, to accommodate situations where, in real life, the trains are not turned, such as those which always have a loco at one end and a driving trailer at the other, and the orientation doesn’t change.
I apologise for the length of this entry, but I feel that this project has tremendous potential to be an outstanding layout, and opportunities are being overlooked.
-
1
-
-
I have been following this topic since the beginning, as I was intrigued to see how a scheme for such generous accommodation might develop, which it has, although not always in expected ways. However, even having re-read all the eight pages of posts, there seem to be so many imponderables that haven’t been properly addressed which make it hard to offer any further ideas, as they could impact on how things might be improved.
Firstly, it would be a good if the possible stock to be used could be defined. As a Luddite the various Eras that have been bandied around are fairly meaningless to me, and seem to be open to interpretation anyway. A straight-forward date-range could be the answer, with an outline of the stock that will be used – such as whether most main line trains are to be locomotive hauled (diesel or electric, and steam has been mentioned) or EMU’s, and the anticipated length of typical trains, for main-line, local and goods services.
I haven’t understood how the layout is to be perceived. There seems, at the moment, to be a large oval of track, albeit four lines, around which long trains will orbit, few, if any, stopping at the station (Wood Green/Alexandra Palace) whilst there is a vast depot, the majority of which is undercover, which will see a train of stock arrive (off the Hertford Loop) heading south, to be, presumably, shunted into one of the sheds, to reappear sometime later, to head southward to Kings Cross, although fundamentally circulating in an anti-clockwise direction until arrangement can be made to reverse it in a fiddle yard. The only breath of fresh air is the use of the Bowes Park reversing siding, but the full impact of the Hertford loop has been lost by turning it into a small branchline, whereas there is potential for using it for freight, specials and diversions off the main ECML, but pointless with nowhere to go but a three coach fiddle yard.
It would be useful to know what you feel is the most important aspect of the layout to you – construction, operation, rolling stock, scenery or whatever; at the moment it feels as if you want to create a diorama of the area, with trains just running through it for effect.
I also cannot see how the layout is going to be operated to its full potential, unless it is going to be fully automated. There is a vast central operating well, where I would expect it to be run from, but the two fiddle yards are hidden behind backscenes, or only accessible from outside the layout. This does suggest that there will be several operators involved, and I wonder if the two-foot wide access along the main line is meant for rows of spectators, who can sit and watch as a parade of trains go past, as otherwise it is a tragic waste of space. I also wonder how operators are supposed to access the central well. You have already mentioned that you have a disability of some sort, and we are all getting older, and using a duck-under gets less attractive with every day.
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Camps Junction said:
Hi Chris just one thing, Doing ERA 5 or 6, BOWES PARK didnt exist till 1983, Any thoughts on this?????Drew
Bowes Park station opened in 1880, and the 1914 OS map shows the central reversing siding. Certainly by the time I was commuting through it, the siding could take a substantial set of coaches and a large diesel loco. As far as I am aware, it had to be able to handle a typical ECML train, although there was a second crossover before the platforms which could deal with longer trains, but at the risk of disrupting the suburban traffic on the Hertford Loop.
-
On 03/04/2024 at 11:29, Oldddudders said:
317 Gerald Loder spent much of its early career as a Portsmouth engine, so this was obviously a special trial on Forest Hill bank with a challenging load - B2s were not a success at their intended task of replacing Gladstones. Oddly, the LBSCR shelter seen here was in use on other locos, and never seemed to get any windows. Since I imagine that location was important for the chaps manning the kit to understand how hard the loco needed to work at any given point this meant standing up. A pic in Jeremy English's Atlantic book shows two bowler-hatted individuals posing behind the screen - on a static No 39 - which didn't even come up to chest height. A challenging experience even at 50 mph!
No. 317 was the fourth B2 to be rebuilt with a C3 boiler and other improvements to become B2X. As the first conversions were not quite as successful as was hoped, various tweaks would have been tried, and this run was probably testing the efficacy of the latest attempt. The loco still has its brass number plate, which helps to fix the date. Ex-Gerald Loder was actually allocated to Brighton shed in 1906, before being rebuilt in 1908, and was at St. Leonard’s in 1922.
-
1
-
-
I’m not entirely sure, but I think you might have more luck if you search for Wood Green or similar. There is a thread on the LNER forum that may be of interest. https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10153&start=30
Although there seem to have been carriage sidings and a large shed on the site of the old GER goods yard, from around 1929, the current depot facilities only appeared in the seventies to handle the HST’s and I suspect that is when the Bounds Green name first appeared.
-
17 hours ago, t-b-g said:
Edwinstowe is a good example of railway practice from that period of avoiding facing points whenever possible. The extra signalling and need for facing point locks plus the fact that they were regarded as less than ideal by the railway inspectors of the day meant that they were not used unless unavoidable by most companies.
I am not a signalling expert, but it is fascinating to see how they managed a fairly complex station layout using, as far as I can see, only one facing point lock - Lever 25 I think. However, this parsimony did reduce the potential flexibility, as the only way a passenger train can leave the Back Platform is on the Down line, for which signal 4 controlled its departure. Although the pointwork at the east end (Lincoln) end does allow trains to depart from the back platform in the Up direction, there are no signals or facing point locks that would allow loaded passenger trains to do so. It is also interesting that all the pointwork in the goods yard was under the control of the signal box, but that may be LD&ECR practice.
I assume that the Midland services from Mansfield terminated in the Up platform, and then, once empty, would pull ahead and then reverse over the crossover into the back platform, the loco then running around the train, to be ready to depart on the Down line.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:
I'm intrigued. I could pass on the Terriers - though Stroudley's work as a whole on the Brighton was revolutionary - but the biography sounds interesting. What's the book?
If you want a book that goes into Stroudley's life and achievements in a rather more detailed way, I can recommend this one. Although the writer doesn't claim it is a biography there is an excellent introduction to his life, fascinating details of some of the minutiae of loco fittings, and even a summary of his inventiveness in the maritime sphere.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Southernman46 said:
To lay planks across so that wagons could be unloaded from sidings further out ............. sounds daft but I'm sure I've see a photo somewhere .......... referred to as the "London" flap ??
That may have happened, but as I understand it, the flap, the presence of which severely weakened the structural integrity of the wagon, was an early example of health and safety, and/or labour pressure. As the height of coal wagons increased in the Edwardian era, the workers employed in London to unload the wagons objected to having to lift the coal over the higher sides, and, to appease them, the flap was introduced to reduce the height accordingly to something like that of the five or six plank wagons they were used to. Perhaps labourers north of Watford were made of stronger stuff, or were less organised.
-
2
-
1
-
2
-
-
14 hours ago, Flying Pig said:
Actually, it appears to be a goods loop as posted in the OP, but the 25" OS sheet from 1915 shows no facing connection, just a very long headshunt/siding (with some sort of industry at the western end). Note that it is connected to the eastbound running line within the double track section, thus avoiding a facing point. Was it later converted to a loop? Even if so I would be inclined to leave out the left hand crossover and extend it offscene so it doesn't look so cramped.
I would be very tempted to indulge in my favourite planning trick and concentrate on the west end of the station, ending the scene at or even before the platform ends at the other end of the station (obviously the points would need to be included but not necessarily on scene. This would allow more space for the goods yard, which really looks rather constrained as is, even though at the cost of some scenic modelling.
As far as I am aware, the headshunt was never converted into a loop, and the 1920 Wagstaff signalling plan probably shows the station at its maximum extent. I would suspect that the frequency of passenger service was such that any running around of goods trains could be easily undertaken during the interval. As can be seen only two facing points locks were needed, although it looks like there was one on the point at the west end of the up-platform, which would be required if services from Guildford were terminated and reversed from this platform, as someone suggested.
The headshunt actually extends up to Cranleigh gasworks. This was quite a rarity on the Brighton system, as only about a dozen, out of the ninety gasworks served by the LBSC had a siding connection - the LBSC obviously didn't receive the Peter Denny memo from Railway Modeller!
-
1
-
-
I realise that there is something missing from my scheme. At the moment, the movement of stock has empties from Kings Cross travelling north ( clockwise) and then reversing (anti clockwise) into the depot. After their stay in the depot they would then head back south to Kings Cross, to return later, on the prototype, heading back north. (Clockwise) However, on the layout there is no way for the southbound train to reverse its direction, so the trains have to circulate anti-clockwise for ever, although something could be incorporated in @Chimer ‘s fiddle yard, or is there room for a reversing loop using tighter radius curves in a hidden area.
-
Having commuted for a number of years on the Hertford North line into London, I always thought that the arrangement at Bowes Park would be ideal for an exhibition layout. At least in the 1980's empty stock came off the GNR mainline, on the branchline, crossing the mainline in the process. They then proceeded past Bowes Park station and moved into a central siding between the two local lines. Then, under monitoring, they would reverse back to London, on the south-bound local line to enter into the depot. I would be inclined to make use of this prototypical manoeuvre, perhaps re-locate your mainline station and relocate your depot along the long side of your layout. I have prepared a very crude sketch of what I might do, with the main station possibly located on the shorter side. You will need to consider gradients, which is when the location B of the main station would make things easier. I have suggested a flyover bridge across the mainlines such as occurs at Harringay further south.
Apologies for having turned your schematic upside down, started sketching without thinking!
-
There’s an interesting article in the October 2023 issue of BackTrack magazine, I K Brunel and the Cheltenham and Gloucester Railway, which describes how the great man surveyed the line, to comment on the various current proposals. He seemed to cover a prodigious amount of ground, riding over 30 miles of country every day.
-
9 hours ago, DIW said:
Ooh - looks like I've stumbled across Andy York's invisible ink!
A little bit harsh. I’d started my answer before you posted, but I had to find the link. We were only minutes apart! Perhaps you should patrol the jokes threads.
-
1
-
-
Not quite as ornate, but probably not likely in 4mm, but Fretcetera do something similar.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Although brickworks such as at Fletton were established in the 1870’s the mass mechanical production didn’t really start until the 1920’s, so until then more local production would hold sway. It shouldn’t be forgotten that the majority of station buildings such as at Arley were built at the same time as the railway, around 1866, so rail transport might not be particularly effective. On many railway building projects, the contractors established small brickworks if they came across suitable clay, The colour of the resulting bricks would probably match other locally prepared wares used in non-railway buildings.
-
1
-
-
Ashlar masonry involves the stone blocks being regularly and squarely cut, so that they can be laid effectively as large bricks, with thin and even jointing. The face of the blocks is usually flat, or sometimes it is left with an as-quarried rougher surface, or the edges chamfered to give a more interesting surface. The stonework in the OP is ashlar, but the faces have been extensively, and expensively, treated, with vermiculation, striations and other architectural embellishments.
-
1
-
-
If you are going to prepare your own bespoke livery, perhaps in the style of Edwardian railways, try to think "Edwardian Sign Writer", as they tended to avoid lower case text, except in special circumstances, and used much bolder styles - no Arial etc. fonts. You might get some inspiration from a thread here on pantechnicons, such as
or here
This is my very crude first attempt, with too little thought given to the actual style of lettering!
-
5
-
-
Have you seen this website?
Might be useful, even if the site's name is a bit off-putting.
-
I would suggest correcting the name in the title might get a better response.Sorry, checking maps you did mean Bramley, but used Bromley in your text.
-
15 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:
Where you messing around with Beyonce?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Me,_Myself_and_I_(Beyoncé_song)
More likely to have been Joan Armatrading’s Me, Myself, I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ibds7i_jLWw
-
3
-
-
I appreciate that there has been a lot of design development, and this latest offering seems quite a promising scheme, but I believe it could do with a little more tweaking to make it even better. One area which I think needs a bit of polishing is the commencement of the bi-directional central track. At the moment trains need to run over a short section of track in the wrong direction. Probably acceptable on the real thing, although it looks clumsy, but it means that running through in one direction would impact on traffic running in the opposite direction.
As it stands, a train running clockwise (green main line) would have to cross over onto the anti-clockwise line (purple) before reaching the through line, and, at the other end, an anti-clockwise train, running on the purple line, crosses onto the clockwise line before reaching the bi-directional line. This could be avoided by moving the points slightly, as below.
Another fairly simple modification would be alter the angle of your branch terminus so that it is not running parallel with the baseboard edge, as this will probably look better. (I think you may need a headshunt to protect the mainline as well)
Without knowing exactly how you intend to treat the main station's platforms, it is difficult to understand why the branch line connection is where you've shown it, rather than perhaps a little further to the right, and I suspect that the connection to the clockwise line should also be more direct, with a diamond crossing across the bidirectional line.
Personally I would minimise the "maintenance depot" section, as it usually contributes little to the operational complexity of a layout, unless you have a large fleet of locos that you want to have on display. Similarly, I wonder if the four finger-sidings for "industry" will add much to the mix, but that would depend upon what type of industry you are thinking of. I would be inclined to re-dedicate the industrial area to a small loco depot instead, and create a larger general goods and merchandise style yard where your maintenance depot is. That way you could include a goods shed, loading bay, a coal yard (not staithes!) etc. which could justify a wider range of goods stock, and increase the shunting potential with more locations to spot wagons. I realise that that all sounds a trifle cliched, but those sort of facilities were what the railways were usually providing.
-
1
-
-
If the transfers are for OO Gauge (4mm) shouldn't the title be 1:76.2? A small but subtle difference. 1:72 is more commonly the scale for war gamers, I believe.
-
1 hour ago, bécasse said:
I have seen suggestions that narrow gauge locos working along the western front were sometimes repainted locally into an overall colour that blended best with local topography. However I don't think that there were any operational standard gauge railways that came within visual distance of the German front lines (except very briefly during the 1918 spring offensive) so that would not have been an issue. Neither would attack from the air have been a significant threat although it probably happened occasionally.
Caley739 makes an interesting point and he is probably right, grey being used for dedicated new-builds and repaints.
J N Maskelyne, in his book on London, Brighton & South Coast Railway locomotives, published in 1928, has this to say:
Twelve of the LB&SCR "E4" Class were sent to France, during the Great War, for service behind the lines. These engines were Nos. 470, 481,498, 504, 506, 516, 518, 562, 563, 564, 565, and 580. They left England during November, 1917, and, for some time they worked on the ammunition dump at Audruicq. Early in 1918, however, they were sent right up to fighting line and worked on the gun-spurs in the neighbourhood of Arras. They were to be seen at almost any time of night or day at such places at St. Pol, Frevent, Doullens, Candas, Canaples, Albert, Gombremetz and Acq. They were painted dull slate grey all over, and had the initials “R.O.D” painted in white letters some two feet in height, on the side tanks while the numbers were painted in similar sized figures on the bunker sides. A small oval cast iron plate, bearing the legend "L.B. & S.C.R, England," was fixed inside the cab on the back weatherboard. After the Armistice in November, 1918, these engines were put to work on the ordinary local passenger services in the areas mentioned, work which they continued to do until they were gradually released for shipment home to England during the spring and early summer of 1919. They were the only L.B. & S.C.R. engines be sent abroad during hostilities. Nos. 470, 479, 503 and 517 of Class “E4” were fitted with the Automatic Vacuum Brake apparatus in addition to the usual standard Westinghouse Air Brake and could be used in consequence for working other company's stock when necessary.
-
1
-
1
-
RCH 1907 Private Owner Wagons - with added 2024 range.
in Rapido Trains
Posted
The photo of Moger No. 232 appears in Simon Turner’s PO Wagons of the South East, (Lightmoor Press) and the rather unusual squared off lettering is correct for that batch of wagons, all other photos show more normal lettering, as the Dapol wagon.
I seem to recall that some wagons, not necessarily Moger’s, were repainted with pre-grouping companies’ initials several years after grouping - old habits die hard, or perhaps the sign writer copied what was still visible of the previous livery.