Jump to content
 

Great Southern Railway (Fictitious) - Signalling the changes...


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

Forgive me, father, for I have sinned... I have started on a post-grouping (and even post-nationalisation - some might even call it "modern image") project, as can be seen here: 

Unfortunately, I don't think there is a cure for that (yet)!  Perhaps if you stood in front of the National Gallery on the Mound and viewed a procession of non-descript multiple units trundling in and out of Waverley it might help.  :devil:

 

Jim

  • Like 2
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Caley Jim said:

Perhaps if you stood in front of the National Gallery on the Mound and viewed a procession of non-descript multiple units trundling in and out of Waverley it might help.  :devil:


Oh, now that's just cruel and unusual punishment! ...although that HST they repainted in BR Blue/Grey did look very nice...

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:


Oh, now that's just cruel and unusual punishment! ...although that HST they repainted in BR Blue/Grey did look very nice...

My object all sublime

I shall achieve in time

To let the punishment fit the crime

The punishment fit the crime.....

(Gilbert & Sullivan - The Mikado)

 

 

Jim

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

Forgive me, father, for I have sinned... I have started on a post-grouping (and even post-nationalisation - some might even call it "modern image") project, as can be seen here: 
 

 

 

Ah - invalid saloon. Very pre-Grouping, that. However, it does invert the usual pre-Grouping process whereby a luggage compartment would be converted to lavatory accommodation. (Don't repeat that to your partner, they would very reasonably take umbrage at being equated with luggage.).

 

I had to post this here as it's such a pre-Grouping comment that I thought it would confuse the Mk I-ites.

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm back from my holidays, and have a couple of days left until the house moving will be finished. The big move is tomorrow when the bed and remaining furniture will be moved into the new place. Just before I went away for Christmas, a box of flexitrack was moved over to the new flat, and so, being a little bored this evening, I added to the mock-up...

20191228_224334.jpg

 

I couldn't resist a couple of little close-ups too. I'm hopeful the finished layout will have plenty of interesting places to take pictures from/into/through.
 

20191228_224705.jpg

 

20191228_224735.jpg

 

20191228_224045.jpg

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Just a minor suggestion, but when you come to lay cork or whatever, lay it between the platform faces, rather than putting them on top of the cork.

It will look better as it will better hide the joint, but also they are a bit high for pre-grouping stations which were often a bit lower.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Could be as low as 1'6" at a country station - sloping down towards the rails at as much as 1:24. In later years, most such platforms were raised so as to slope away from the rails. I'll refrain from posing a photo of the accident at Wellingborough in 1898; tragically, the down fast platform was the only one that had yet to be raised - it was 2' above rail level, which Lt. Col. Yorke described as "much below the modern standard".

Edited by Compound2632
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 29/12/2019 at 07:57, Skinnylinny said:

That's a good (and important) point! I'll definitely want to raise the trackbed a little for that reason. From memory I want between 2'3" and 2'6" above rail height for a typical pre-grouping platform? So 9-10mm in 4mm scale.

 

23 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Could be as low as 1'6" at a country station - sloping down towards the rails at as much as 1:24. In later years, most such platforms were raised so as to slope away from the rails. I'll refrain from posing a photo of the accident at Wellingborough in 1898; tragically, the down fast platform was the only one that had yet to be raised - it was 2' above rail level, which Lt. Col. Yorke described as "much below the modern standard".

 

Agree, I'm pondering this for CA.

 

The platform would have been built in the 1850s, so would be relatively low (wooden extension later), and I'm not minded to raise it, so consideration must be given to use and height of lower coach foot boards.

 

Any views?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Any self respecting 4 and 6 wheel coach must have footboards and on my (imaginary) minor Norfolk railways they have double footboards for extra pre-grouping excellence points.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

On the different heights, Wainfleet, Lincs used to have a low platform that necessitated the use of a set of steps. Back in the 70’s, my sister fell between the platform and a 1st gen DMU because she stumbled on the step. The opposite platform was higher as it had been built later when the line was doubled. Both platforms are now The same height, with the original station building now slightly below the new platform level.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Annie said:

Any self respecting 4 and 6 wheel coach must have footboards and on my (imaginary) minor Norfolk railways they have double footboards for extra pre-grouping excellence points.

Well, if you insist...

 

I've been enjoying the new workbench immensely. This evening has seen me replacing the medium-sized Mainline-style tension-locks on my ex-Thomas "Emily" 6-wheelers with short, narrow Bachmann ones (a straight unscrew, screw in replacement swap) and fitting some Lanarkshire Models and Supplies below-bufferbeam vac pipes, as well as fitting them to my 4-wheel clerestory full brake.

 

In the course of unpacking a box while glue was setting, I came across an old project, which has now been resurrected - a GSR non-clerestory 4-wheel luggage van. This has been bashed from the luggage section of a Mainline LMS PII brake-end many years ago, and is looking a little rough around the edges. It does however have full-length footboards, as its underframe is a shortened Hornby GWR Toad underframe. I'm not so sure about the end gangway connections though - they seem a little out of place on so short a vehicle. Then again,if an LMS 6-wheel Stove R can have them... This might end up running in the corridor train used for the London commuter services from Linton.

20191230_195956.jpg

 

There's a definite difference between the two designs. I considered (and even tried) painting the panelling on the shorter carriage in white but it didn't look right, especially around the ducket. More pondering required there, I think.

 

20191230_204531.jpg

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Re. platform heights, see this. Not so easy getting out in a full-length skirt.

 

For those not able to get the film, the platform height at Cockermouth in 1899 was a good 18" below the footboards of the carriages (LNWR 6-wheelers); several women are seen having to make an unassisted jump, one carrying a small child. 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Re. platform heights, see this. Not so easy getting out in a full-length skirt.

 

7 hours ago, Annie said:

That is just so annoying.

 

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

For those not able to get the film, the platform height at Cockermouth in 1899 was a good 18" below the footboards of the carriages (LNWR 6-wheelers); several women are seen having to make an unassisted jump, one carrying a small child. 

 

For Annie, a still of The Great Descent.

 

6176651_LNWRCockermouth01.jpg.50c10a8088496999130cde023d6b6cbb.jpg

 

I note that the platform height is inconveniently set between the upper and lower footboards.

 

This suggests to me that this is something to be avoided. Either I set platforms really, really low, so as to suit the lower footboards, or, I should  ensure that the platforms are high enough to avoid such a significant drop from the upper board. 

 

I do want it to be visibly lower than we're used to; one of those subtle indicators that we're in Another Country when compared with the classic ('30s-'50s) steam era look.  

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even on Blackstone West I need to consider this. I want the 'original' section of platform to look as if it was extended upwards, but have the surface sloping down with the station building at the original height.

 

Then I think there will be a brick extension, at later height and visibly newer. Finally a new (four year old at the time being modelled) concrete extension to coincide with electrification.

 

Platform two would be entirely new, and thus concrete throughout.

 

I hope this will make the platform that bit more interesting to look at than just going for one texture and style throughout.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Yes I agree the platform heights have to be given some thought when footboards are in use.  On the tramways on my rambling little empire double footboards reign supreme and the low platforms in use on the tramways match up with them nicely.

Out on the other lines platform adjusting when I install a new station occupies a fair percentage of the task.  Most of the platform models available have white edges and are too high, but there are a precious handful of pre-grouping platforms I can use.  90% of the coaches on the layout are either 4 or 6 wheelers with the bogie coaches belonging to the GCR and since they whizz along the joint line on through trains they don't really count when it comes to footboard matters.  I don't run single footboard coaches on the tramways, - they stay on the secondary lines.  However I do agree, - a lower platform height says 'pre-grouping' very clearly and definitely not the 'modern image' 30's-50's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

 

This suggests to me that this is something to be avoided. Either I set platforms really, really low, so as to suit the lower footboards, or, I should  ensure that the platforms are high enough to avoid such a significant drop from the upper board. 

 

I do want it to be visibly lower than we're used to; one of those subtle indicators that we're in Another Country when compared with the classic ('30s-'50s) steam era look.  

Although it pains me to suggest aping anything the so called premier line did, why not use this as your exemplar? Yes its awkward  for passengers, but, well, the real thing could be like that.  For a minor railway network like that of Castle Aching the cost of rebuilding platforms might mean it was well down the list of priorities unless compelled by legislation.  

Regards

Duncan

Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

How did you do that?

 

Assuming Edwardian is running Windows, the Print Screen button on the keyboard (often labelled PrtScr, PrSc or something equally cryptic) will take a screenshot of what's on the computer screen at that instant. 

 

Then one can open Paint, paste the screenshot in (it's already been copied onto the clipboard), crop, edit and save. 

 

20191230_214819.jpg.9bb0dcd49b6713eef71f84d3b902fb85.jpg

 

By the end of the evening last night I had done more small tasks than I've done in a long time. I have continued work on the horsebox, although I'm not happy with the ride height - the Hornby donor chassis has very deep solebars so I will have to try a kit-bashed alternative. 

 

20191230_213025.jpg.9b8da82a83699dbcf4308aa04f091f59.jpg

 

I'm currently sat on the floor in the middle of my old bedroom. It is now empty and devoid of all my belongings, and it feels strangely sad. However, the new flat is already feeling very much like home, and I'm looking forward to living there full time.

 

Onwards and upwards! (not literally though - both old and new flats are on the first floor)

Edited by Skinnylinny
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
12 hours ago, Edwardian said:

For Annie, a still of The Great Descent.

 

6176651_LNWRCockermouth01.jpg.50c10a8088496999130cde023d6b6cbb.jpg

 

Long ankle length skirts are pretty much my default clothing style so I very much feel sorry for that woman passenger.

  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the move is finally over! Handed in the keys yesterday after finishing cleaning and taking the last car-load of belongings (a couple of small boxes of things that had to stay until the end and things that appeared out of nowhere) to the new place, followed by a very sedate new year party (board games followed by all going to bed at 20 past midnight!). Now begins the hopefully-less-stressful task of unpacking.

20200101_222000.jpg

I've now got all of the GSR's coaching stock on the layout mock-up (although I do need to build another full-third and figure out what I'm doing with the corridor coach - does it need a matching rake? Why would they have been built? It was mainly done as an experiment in modelling...

Having the workbench as a dedicated space seems to be really helping with the modelling motivation. It's actually in a room that's a combination kitchen/dining/living room, which means I've already found myself thinking "Oh, I'll just paint/file/do a couple of minutes on something" while food's cooking. Hopefully this will translate into more things being built.

Now, where's all of my goods stock...?

  • Like 10
  • Friendly/supportive 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...