Jump to content

GoingUnderground

Members
  • Content Count

    2,070
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

999 Good

Profile Information

  • Location
    I'm still in a hole. Should I stop digging?
  • Interests
    Need you ask? London Underground, the GC Woodhead Route with its EM1s and EM2s, and Swiss Railways, particularly the RhB. Oh and skiing, but at my age it gets harder to lose the weight each year to get into my ski pants. Ideal railway, well apart from the Underground, it must be the Gornergratbahn - where else can you ski and go train spotting at the same time.

Recent Profile Visitors

2,848 profile views
  1. You have been too selective when you quoted me. I chose my words very carefully and what I actually said was that Triang were the first and only to produce an EMU and a DMU. Note the word "AND". The R.156/R.225 EMU appeared in Summer 1957 and R.157/R.158 DMU was launched 9 months later in Spring 1958. HD had the EMU based on the Midland Region Class 501 in SR livery even though the original only ran on the Euston Watford DC lines and Broad Street Richmond routes. They never produced a DMU. Trix had the Class 124 DMU by 1966 which was their only UK outline DMU.
  2. Some landowners were bought off whereas others encouraged the lines and some even had stations named after them. I wasn't trying to paint any sort of "golden past". Life was pretty harsh for many and still is for some. There will always be crooks around and in WW2 they took advantage of the situation. When people were being killed and maimed, on and off the battlefields and being bombed out of their homes, indulging in a bit of petty crime must have seemed pretty trivial in comparison, especially as the chances of being caught must have been lower with so much effort devoted to the
  3. The Trix Western was made to 3.8mm scale which was why it looked smaller. The Transpennine was also made at 3.8mm scale as it needed to use the 3.8mm coaches. The coaches were made at 3.8mm as it was hoped to offer them to Trix Express in Germany, but that never happened leaving Trix with a range that was underscale for OO and Triang and HD owners wouldn't buy them because they would have looked wrong when run with Triang or HD locos. There were only 4 Trix locos made to true OO gauge 4mm scale. These were the AL1/Class 81 which was not originally a Trix model; and the last 3 locos
  4. Possibly they have, unless they follow horseracing. A Guinea used to be an actual gold coin worth 1 Pound. But the value varied because of changes in the price of gold and was fixed at 21 shillings. The last gold guinea coin was minted in 1814. I suspect that folks have forgotten Guineas much as they've forgotten Farthings, Three-Penny bits, Sixpences, Half-Crowns, Crowns and the most recent to go Half-Pennies , all gone in my lifetime. But thank you, Guineas were another example of making things sound cheaper than they actually were. Auction houses also used to use Gui
  5. And it was continuing problems with the points that was the downfall of System 6. They started buying in Roco-made points to buy time whilst they sorted out the problems with the System 6 points. Roco offered to make the rest of the track. Margate were upset with the design that Roco offered as there was no locking together of the track pieces/sleeper ends which had been unique since the earliest Rovex track, and only 2 Clip fit slots in the ordinary straights and curves. But the decision had been taken and there was no going back. The new track was not publicised in catalogue in t
  6. System 6 first appeared in the 16th edition 1970 catalogue. But had some singular omissions - the two diamond crossings and the Y point. The diamond crossings didn't appear in the catalogue until 1972, and when the Y point finally appeared the geometry was different to the Super 4 version.
  7. Thank you everyone for your input. Obviously the main focus has been on Triang Vs HD. But Trix did have some effect on Triang despite being the laggard. Series 3 track was introduced in response to Trix's fibre base track as it was cheaper to make than Standard track. Also Triang's choice of UK outline loco for their new catenary system was constrained by Trix launching the EM1 in 1959. Hence Triang went for the EM2, a remarkably good model even today. The comments made about the availability of spares iand availability of local service agents are interesti
  8. That may have been true in the early 1950s, but I don't think it was by the end of the 1950s judging by me and my friends. Lines Bros had an excellent reputation in making good toys. And their range was vast. It will have taken time to build the reputation of Triang Railways and lay to rest the acetate problems following the introduction of polystyrene i nthe mid 1950s..
  9. Everywhere is NIMBYland. No one wants anything new near them unless there's something in it for them personally. I put it down to the emphasis on self and individual rights away from community, society and personal responsibility for the last 40+ years.
  10. And ironic that they're voting against HS2 when many of the older houses in the area probably only exist because of the Metropolitan Railway which made commuting to London possible from Amersham and Chesham. They don't call it "Metroland" for nothing.
  11. Not a lot, but there's a paragraph on the line and a photo of Staines West station in 1963 in Frank Hornby's "London Suburban An illustrated history of the capital's commuter lines since 1948" published in 1995 by Silver Link Publishing, ISBN 1 85794 039 3.
  12. A recent topic started me thinking, a dangerous habit I know, but it prompted me to wonder why Triang Railways ended up as the market leader in less than 10 years after it was launched in 1952, bypassing Trix in the process. Whilst I am a Triang enthusiast through and through, this is definitely not an attempt to knock Dublo or Trix. Pat Hammond's, Michael Foster's, and Tony Matthewman's books describe the history of the three systems, but neither Hammond nor Foster really offers an explanation for the reversal of their fortunes. Matthewman does say that in the case of Trix it was
  13. Thank you. A good reminder to those of us in the UK that there's more than just Hornby tinplate. I'm not familair with Rossignol (unless it's as skis). What gauge are these, and when would they have been made?
  14. I have a question for Andy which is on-topic. Your original post was to try to find the underlying unique part numbers for the two Mainline locos. Now that we seem to have revealed the extent of shared and reused catalogue numbers before the days of computerisation and barcodes how do/will you deal with the shared and reused numbers when recording your collection? For what it's worth, for my small collection I use a spreadsheet with an additional column for a new description when the model changes, e.g. new livery of an existing model, or new model when the number is reused - a bit
×
×
  • Create New...