Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Neutral

About BackRoomBoffin

  • Rank
    Registered Member

Recent Profile Visitors

14 profile views
  1. I was wondering - as the station would be owned by a joint committee with it's own identity - whether it was a stylised monogram combining GW and M in some way?
  2. The 'truncated main line' idea is a good one capable of versatile usage -- I have relatives who live in the Harz mountains in Germany whose nearest standard-gauge station (I think) spent most of the 60s, 70s, and 80s as a terminus and has been a through line again since the 90s (due to the East German border)… sadly there were not any narrow gauge tracks on the West side of the border and they find the tourists generally go over the mountains in search of steam engines, these days...
  3. If you go to the site you should be able to toggle through different basemaps from different eras (If I'm lucky I've attached it); this shows that some time after 1900 (possibly during WW1) the turntable was replaced by an extended station building (unless they put the turntable under cover, but I don't think so); I've deliberately 'cheated' in that I've added the crossover to create a shunting problem, and I don't think the goods siding extended as far as I've suggested. So again, it's 'inspired by', but … Rule One. Yes, I've included a link to that image above but it didn't embed … If it were me, I'd continue to move into a parallel imaginary reality and pretend that a) the road was never built and it's the 30s (allowing autocoaches and railcars, alongside the more modern 57xx and Jinty available RtR) and b) avoid having to model the full suspension bridge by pretending that it was never completed and the towers remained in their incomplete, rugged form as c1850. (That means that is is a fictional town that isn't Bristol, it just happens to resemble it...). Of the three suggestions I've made, this is the one with the biggest 'wow', but the vertical space it would take up, and the scenery, would be beyond my abilities, I suspect. But it's tempting; and the trackplan is a micro-layout, it's just everything else...
  4. Ok, so having dared myself and drawn attention, here goes. The protypical location is Hotwells station, a GW / Midland terminus on the Bristol Port and Pier Railway (closed c1920 to build a new road). This was a tramway / railway / ferry interchange in the Avon Gorge, with 1 platform, directly below the Clifton Suspension Bridge. More info about which here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotwells_railway_station A map can be seen here: http://maps.bristol.gov.uk/kyp/?edition= (this is a historic mapping site for Bristol City Council … type 'Portway' into search bar at top left, and look for a map using the options at right that will show you sometime between 1890 and 1920 … you'll see two different track plans). http://maps.bristol.gov.uk/knowyourplace/media/her_pc/18833.JPG It's taken me a while to get this 'right', but it combines some of the features discussed above - slanting the angle to get more in, not having a side access through the 'bookshelf wall', and 'less is more' (only four points and a cross over). But if one did model this location as accurately as possible, you'd need 2-3ft of height for the cliffs! I've called this compressed plan 'Goram's Hollow', adapting the name of St Vincent's Rocks, which is the name for the cliff formation overlooking the site. (Goram and Vincent were two legendary local giants). I'd suggest the tramline at front is unpowered.
  5. And one more ... coming tonight (when I get home from work) ... my last attempt: a prototypical GWR/MR branchline terminus based on an actual location in minimal space with passenger facilities, quirky shunting, entry road at the front of the layout, and something Keith could definitely see from sitting position if on an upper shelf. This is fun.
  6. Keith, I actually do have an idea that might address your point but am not allowing myself any more doodling time this week... (not that I've ever managed an actual finished layout). An issue with N has always appeared to me to be what you do to use height effectively, without the layout looking ridiculous. But there are / were stations in locations with really interesting height contrast...
  7. Yes, I really only intended the 'mainline railway' (which is a light railway really, considering the nature of that curve) at front to have minimal passenger services - an autocoach, or just one Victorian 4-wheeler and a brakevan. It's a shunting layout disguised by a station. More goods-only fun... (This could get distracting - this whole thread has taught me Anyrail!) I remember seeing a picture in Railway Bylines of a railway yard in Kent (I think) where the yard was alongside a canal wharf but the railway track exited through a tunnel which had originally taken the canal onwards but had since been filled in and rails added. And so the attached sprung up. Maybe it's where the good-only line mentioned previously is going to...
  8. Hi, how about this plan... The concept is a goods-only light railway that - at one end of its route - makes a junction with a 'mainline' company's rural branch line on a somewhat awkward corner… The original 'mainline' company's feelings towards the minor line ranged from apathy to antipathy, and they required the light railway to fund most of the station and keep most of the engineering works to 'their side' of the boundary line. That's resulted in some odd shunting that makes the driving staff swear from time to time. It's very loosely based on Cliff Common on the DVLR. (Well, when I say 'based on' I mean I looked at it for inspiration and then monkeyed about with the idea significantly). I have to admit I wasn't thinking about it sitting in a book case, and it's just using the shelf as a plank. Is this an error?
  9. Same as I said to Huw … clearly I wasn't having a good evening for sentience. I think of my two proposals, I'd personally, as someone who studied Victorian political history (ie so I'm weird) prefer the 1844 Railway Reform Act … with a general brief to do 'something' related to it, based on a scene located somewhere in the UK (not Ireland, which had its own railway legislation) in a period anytime _after_ 1844. You could then have liberty to do anything related to third class travel, carriages with roofs, the sale of tickets or the carriage and stowage of luggage (the act allowed people to up to a certain amount of luagge for free).
  10. Er, ah, that's what I think I thought I meant when I thought it...
  11. Oh, and it's the 175th anniversary of the 1844 act instituting the minimum price of a 'penny a mile' for cheap travel on 'parliamentary trains'. I'm not sure if a competition consisting entirely of third class coaches would imbue much excitement though. (A ticket office build-challenge competition)? Anyway, I feel I missed out, and want to join in if you do something. But it'll have to be small...
  12. As a lurker, can I point out that 2019 is the 100th anniversary of the first parliamentary Bill being brought for the Stockton and Darlington railway, and that (as a forexample of something that might be S&D related) Locomotion No 1's cylinders were 9 x 24in...
  13. Hi all, I have been drooling over this thread for some time, and finally plucked up courage to post! I'm really interested in the context of imaginary designs... I'd like to propose that: a) The Grouping happened differently, because the Liberal party didn't split in two immediately after WW1, so railway rationalisation happened in the context of a government that was more left-wing, pro-state, and actively setting up 'home rule' governments in Wales and Scotland (as the Liberals had considered doing pre-war if they managed to keep Ireland in the UK through devolution ... we won't talk about that). ​b) Therefore, Scotland and Wales got their 'own' Groups, but with more government intervention - as devolved-government-managed Joint Boards (or the SRJB and WRJB for short). ​c) The Welsh one was basically the Barry, Taff Vale and Cambrian slammed together, but the Scottish was more interesting, with all 5 main Scottish companies merged under one management (as envisaged in the actual grouping) ​d) Due to inter-company rivalry and the urgent need for new construction fast, actual design work on a range of 'Scottish Stanards' was not done by any actual engineer from a Scottish railway, and English consultants were hired in instead. These were Robinson (ex of the GCR) and Holcroft from the SECR (who was always ready for a jaunt). ​e) There was a heavy leaning on proven designs, particularly ones that were 'public domain' due to the recent war effort. ​Therefore the standard locomotives were... - The 'ROD' 2-8-0 (loads going cheap) ​- The Woolwich 2-cylinder Moguls (ditto) as a standard goods type, with a 2-6-4T passenger tank variant as also seen on the Metropolitan ​- The existing 'River Class' HR/CR 2-cylinder 4-6-0s as a standard mixed-traffic type, with uprated boiler (very Robinson-esque design) ​- The NBR Atlantics (already partially based on a Robinson design) for general passenger usage, with further rebuilding to a 3-cylinder type (Robinson had experimented with a 3-cylinder 4-4-2 when on the GCR and Holcroft liked 3 cylinders, probably no conjugated valve gear, though). ​- a 4-cylinder 4-6-0 for the main lines (basically they nicked the drawings for the Lord Nelsons) - a new light 4-4-0, 0-6-2T and 0-6-0 shared with the Welsh railways ​This all goes well enough (I would argue), but the neighbouring LMS and LNER start to show them up with stronger, fast types on the ECML and WCML. By the later 30s, Bulleid from the LNER is hired as a further consultant. Any suggestions as to what he builds if that is the fleet, and what problems the SJRB would be meeting by then that would need a genius to solve?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.