Schooner's (Mostly Maritime) Musings

[Schooner]

A correction:

On re-reading, it seems my previous post might have been misleading: South of South Dock Station, the line did indeed cross the entrance lock on a single-track swing bridge and there is indeed an adjacent footbridge. However, the elegant item in the photograph bridges Millwall entrance lock, which opens to the West on to Limehouse Reach. A little modeller's license which I should have made clear. I'll edit the above in a tic...

 

I'm glad we're all for the footbridge, it's lovely. I like many aspects of dropping to single track across the lock as well...the only major caveat being the loss of that distinct sense of a bi-directional passenger line next to a bi-directional goods line, which seems important to the sense of the place. As for the bottleneck providing an interesting operational feature, that's both very true and could be very useful...although with the MER running 15-minute services and there being signficantlymore goods services than I have storage roads for I wonder if this would be more hassle than fun, and given other developments (a revised trackplan is in the oven, to be presented to the table once rested) I'm wary of detrackting (unintentional, it's staying) too much from the Primary Scene. I have to keep reminding myself that the 'main stage' is South Dock Station and its environs - the rest of the layout is really just there for moral support!

 

Thank you for your thoughts all, much appreciated.

 

Some findings on the GER:

Following up the link in the above, I got hold of an 1882 timetable:

A nice thing to be able to refer to, and pleasing for the lack of surprises - it seems we've got the MER pretty down

 

Th ere's also a very plain answer (for the GER at least) to the question of whose wagons went into the docks, whose to their own quayside depot:

(It is made clear in the section for the "Victoria and Albert Docks" (sic) a railway truck alongside may "send direct" to/from a ship. Apropos of nothing, "wagon" is used in one clause; "truck" the other. I'll stop worrying about which is correct )

 

Very good, that's that then!

 

It was just in a section on the conduct of "Merchandise Traffic to and from London" - this must be a section of all timetables, so I'll persue those in future. If a Parishoner happens to be checking something in a WTT of relevant date, regardless of Railway Company, I'd be grateful if they wouldn't mind a quick flick through the front pages and sharing any mentions of the Docks.

 

So, GER wagons:

Some snippets from the excellent GER Society website:

• "Round ended opens, with outside wooden framing and used for general merchandise, were probably the most numerous...Bolsters and batten wagons dealt with round and cut timber; there were few coal wagons, some low sided trucks and a limited supply of covered vans and goods brakes."
• GER standard goods stock (90% of goods fleet), from Massey Bromley's report of August 1878:

Open goods trucks                6372

Covered                                  731

Timber                                    357 (Bolster)

Batten                                      160

Cattle                                    2208

Machine trucks                         68 ('Leiston Lorries' - low bed flats, production starting 1860)

• "The effect of this replacement rate would be to leave most of the Gooch period wagons still running as well as a few hundred pre-1850 wagons."
• "The early 1880’s saw both a demand for an increased stock and a need for some new types for which conversion of existing wagons would no longer suffice.

  Firstly, a strong traffic in wool was the cause in 1880 of 50 wool wagon s being ordered to transport the sheeted bales. Supplied by Brown, Marshalls they had steel frames, the first wagons to be so supplied. As a long, single plank wagon it was used for a wide range on commodities besides wool, thus ensuring a long and useful life." 7mm etch by Ragstone Models

 

I'm assuming British wool in to the London markets - but possibly Australian wool, via the Docks, out to British textile mills? If so that'd be handy, as the wool trade is the thread that draws the various ideas behind the layout together*.

 

Modelling the wool trade, some inspiration:

The following, to my amazement, show Cutty Sark loading wool at Circular Quay, Sydney in the mid-1880s:

 

Almost certainly whilst under the command of the photography-keen and very successful Captain Richard Woodget (of the Cutty Sark from 1885-1895), to whom the vessel owes her reputation and preservation.

 

These bales were then unloaded in London (photo c.1900 - note the different style of bales, also the jigger-crane (hyrdaulic?) in the background:

I'll do some work over the coming days to locate the pic, which has many of the signs of being staged, but is the best I've found so far.

 

Of wool being transported by rail in the UK, I've come across very little, but so there's at least one pic of something railway related here's a wool train in the country of origin:

 

That'll do for now, time to face my fears and watch Bath - Exeter

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

*Being chiefly an abiding interst in late Victorian logistics, a rather more involved interest in commercial sail of the same period, and a burgeoning interest in railways of the same. There's a 1:75 model of Cutty Sark, she visited South West India Dock to unload wool as the iconic Manning Wardles took over duties on the MER, the only passing station on which sits in one of the most interesting and modellable parts of the Dock network. Ideal.

Edited November 1, 2020 by Schooner

[Stephenwolsten]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

 

 

Of wool being transported by rail in the UK, I've come across very little, but so there's at least one pic of something railway related here's a wool train in the country of origin:

 

 

Hi, there is a picture of wool being handled by rail at Liverpool docks on page 6 of my thread called Atlantic Dock.  Stephen.  

 

Edited October 10, 2020 by Stephenwolsten

[Schooner]

Thank you Stephen, it's a wonderful photo:

Do you have a date for it? Just looking at the wool bales... You've embarked on quite the project! Great to see he various elements start to come together now, and most informative to see your solutions to the challenges of modelling dock scenes  

 

On the Port of London railway network there's nothing of note to share yet. Currently 36 days into a 20-day trip, so work is rather getting the upper hand at the moment. There's been time for a little reading (early MER motive power), a touch of SCARM (footbridge shenanigans) , and a thought on a warm-up project (Harlequin's take on the Inglenook, perhaps set on a rural canal wharf). More useful updates when we get in (current sweepstake favourite: "Home by Christmas - lol").

 

Till next time, take care

 

Schooner

[Schooner]

Just a quick update on the current trackplan, as it's been fairly settled for a while now and I think I'm safe to start the process of reality-checking (starting with a query on couplings, here):

 

So...ummm...it's grown a little, sorry @Northroader:

 

The increased size has some ramifications for reach and access, both positive and negative. However, it allows for the main development - the addition of the Grain Depot* to the left hand. It also allows for a more coherent demonstration of the three systems (MER, line to Millwall Docks, West India Dock quays). The swing bridge is still double-track (I feel dropping to single track loses that sense of the different systems). Whilst it does take up a fair bit of space, I just couldn't get single-track versions to hang together nicely. Moving from a lifting section to a duck-under would enable (with some judicious compression and a little forced perspective) the bridge and gubbins be modelled, and leave space for low-relief lock gates at the back and footbridge at the front.

 

It would need to be housed in a c.10'x14' shed to accomodate the layout and modelling/layout admin space...still within shouting distance of reason  With these changes I'm feeling the 'pure' design aspects of this approach coming to a a natural close. I'm messing about with another couple of ideas by way of a break, without particular intent (see below), and intend to return to Docklands following some sound advice:

On 01/06/2020 at 12:26, Edwardian said:

As an alternative approach, I think this sprawling mass of docks and railways could be tamed if made into a series of boxed and framed linked scenes.

 

Research will continue regardless.

 

*Largely to provide an excuse for those Millwall internal-use grain trucks  Two would be stored empty in the siding extending 'up' from the loops, loaded on one of the Foreign quays (top of the lower dock, where the model of the Cutty Sark model will be), split and unloaded/stored full individually in the two 'horizontal' stub sidings that go into the Depot (or taken as a pair to the Mill siding, top right past the Thames barge model), once empty they would be re-combined and returned to the storage siding. Railway Co. grain wagons would arrive empty to be loaded alongside the platform in the loops, then returned to the network. A workable nod to the real thing, I think. Trainz version in the works to double check.

 

Sorry, a lot of text. Here's a nice flavour picture:

Poplar basin, showing coal quay (fore), GNR shed (left, both closer and further), GWR (rear) with West India warehousing behind, and LNWR on the right. A further LNWR facility is out of shot to the right.

 

The other SCARMage has been:

The gradual development of a Brentford Dock inspired layout for the same space (orginally, 12'x8'):

 

Of which the only bit of real interest is that little Inglenook variation at the bottom. Depending on all sorts, it might be on the cards for the Winter...

Oh, that reminds me. Thank you @Annie:

 

Also the first steps of a large 00 rendition of Henley-in-Arden - the whole shooting match c.1910 whilst there were passenger services to both through and terminus stations, and the branch through to Lapworth remained open. All that and a bag of chips! 

 

As ever, all opinions actively sought on any of the above. Thanks to visitors all for your time, and Parishoners for providing some top educational and entertaining threads and posts over the past few weeks. Prime pre-Grouping

 

Cheers, have a good weekend

 

Schooner

Edited November 1, 2020 by Schooner
Butchering the Queen's. A reminder. Missing link.

[Annie]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

Oh, that reminds me. Thank you @Annie:

 

I love that beautifully composed screenshot Schooner.  Commissioning those goods wagons was a bit of a challenge with gathering information and here I must thank Stephen (Compound) for his research into the wagons built by the Saltney Wagon Works.  The state of decent GWR wagons available for Trainz was pretty darn poor so it was good to help with improving that situation not to mention having them in the right colour as well.

[Northroader]

[Nearholmer]

Did Brentford really look like that computer-graphic?

 

I ask, because I've always had it down on my list of less than picturesque-looking districts.

[Schooner]

@Nearholmer No, I don't believe so! The area has some redeeming qualities, but Brentford itself... 

This shows the Dock in 1921 looking East after the first remodelling, and hence doesn't correspond too closely to the map linked from NLS above, but still to be seen are the end loading dock, wooden goods shed and boat/wagon works siding on the North (left side in the photo) side of the dock.

 

As far as the grapic goes, we're looking at the lower half of the layout - a run down and re-purposed canal wharf. I was just trying to think of an excuse for the Inglenook track plan and thought it might fit the bill. I love the Inglenook as a puzzle, but without a place for the wagons to serve it always seems rather pointless... Connecting it to a Brentford-dock inspired scene provides a solution. Old run-down canal wharf, re-purposed as a small yard for a big new dock nearby. Inglenook puzzle provides the 'required' empties/marshals outbound wagons. 

 

I wasn't going to...but...the story of the layout is something like:

c. 1810: Bucolic bliss in the area of Ingleford (obviously) village disrupted by the construction of canal linking industrial hinterland with tidal river and city. Road access to local market town now via humpback bridge [scenic break to traverser]

c.1850: Canal bought by the GWR, siding put in on short spur from hub town [to the left on the layout]. Broad gauge.

c.1880: Canal run into the ground, extra sidings built on the wharf for stock storage [kickback sidings, standard gauge, original spur siding still baulk]. Main line extended and doubled to the growing manufacturing town [to the right on the layout] that Ingleford has now become.

c.1890: All the real-world pressures that lead to the real Brentford dock are at play, and a new dock with direct river access is built by the GWR [top half of layout]. Symbiotic relationship sees Ingleford boom.

c.1910: The scene as modelled: Canal good for building materials and the occasional coal load only; wharf now an empty stock storage yard for the nearby dock; sense of a lost way of life, empty stables, derelict warehouse, rotting barge etc. The access is a facing connection off the busy commuter line, itself running under a brand-new rail extension [lower left scenic break], probably on an embankment, from the rapidly growing town (and large rail yards) nearby. To contrast with the new dock [top of the layout], which is all trackwork and mod-cons, powered cranes and transhipment sheds.

 

The only real question (!) is whether the tidal river is the Thames...or the Severn...?

 

Early days though, and it's just a little diversion  

 

On the research front, tonight's little tidbit:

This shows the barrel field at London Dock. Questions were previously asked about the post and bell, left foreground. The answer may be...

Just behind No. 12 Warehouse, Rum Quay, in the Import Dock, stands a tall iron post over forty feet high, surmounted by a bell. Both post and bell have a history attaching to them. The post is an iron mast from a sailing-ship and was seized by the Dock Company because charges had not been paid. The bell sounds directly back into a past when wind-jammers abounded in these Docks, and when fire-fighting methods were of the crudest description. Every morning and every evening for a space of ten minutes this bell and others within the dock area were rung as a signal that all fires, lamps and candles, were to be extinguished.  A.G.Linney's 'The Peepshow of the Port of London' is on order, although it will be a while till I get my sticky mitts on it. High hopes though, looks brilliant

 

Cheers all,

 

Schooner

Edited November 2, 2020 by Schooner
So. Many. Mistakes.

[Nearholmer]

Does Ingleford have a three-layer bridge like the Brentford Branch, where the railway goes under the canal, which is itself under a road? Put that on a layout and it would be decried as fantastic and impossible.

[Schooner]

Give it time...

[Annie]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

I wasn't going to...but...the story of the layout is something like:

c. 1810: Bucolic bliss in the area of Ingleford (obviously) village disrupted by the construction of canal linking industrial hinterland with tidal river and city. Road access to local market town now via humpback bridge [scenic break to traverser]

c.1850: Canal bought by the GWR, siding put in on short spur from hub town [to the left on the layout]. Broad gauge.

c.1880: Canal run into the ground, extra sidings built on the wharf for stock storage [kickback sidings, standard gauge, original spur siding still baulk]. Main line extended and doubled to the growing manufacturing town [to the right on the layout] that Ingleford has now become.

c.1890: All the real-world pressures that lead to the real Brentford dock are at play, and a new dock with direct river access is built by the GWR [top half of layout]. Symbiotic relationship sees Ingleford boom.

c.1910: The scene as modelled: Canal good for building materials and the occasional coal load only; wharf now an empty stock storage yard for the nearby dock; sense of a lost way of life, empty stables, derelict warehouse, rotting barge etc. The access is a facing connection off the busy commuter line, itself running under a brand-new rail extension [lower left scenic break], probably on an embankment, from the rapidly growing town (and large rail yards) nearby. To contrast with the new dock [top of the layout], which is all trackwork and mod-cons, powered cranes and transhipment sheds.

 

The only real question (!) is whether the tidal river is the Thames...or the Severn...?

 

Early days though, and it's just a little diversion  

Brilliant, - I love it.  Very much looking forward to seeing how your ideas develop.

[Northroader]

 

Ingleford sounds rather like Sharpness Dock to me.

[Edwardian]

On 10/10/2020 at 16:13, Schooner said:

A correction:

On re-reading, it seems my previous post might have been misleading: South of South Dock Station, the line did indeed cross the entrance lock on a single-track swing bridge and there is indeed an adjacent footbridge. However, the elegant item in the photograph bridges Millwall entrance lock, which opens to the West on to Limehouse Reach. A little modeller's license which I should have made clear. I'll edit the above in a tic...

 

I'm glad we're all for the footbridge, it's lovely. I like many aspects of dropping to single track across the lock as well...the only major caveat being the loss of that distinct sense of a bi-directional passenger line next to a bi-directional goods line, which seems important to the sense of the place. As for the bottleneck providing an interesting operational feature, that's both very true and could be very useful...although with the MER running 15-minute services and there being signficantlymore goods services than I have storage roads for I wonder if this would be more hassle than fun, and given other developments (a revised trackplan is in the oven, to be presented to the table once rested) I'm wary of detrackting (unintentional, it's staying) too much from the Primary Scene. I have to keep reminding myself that the 'main stage' is South Dock Station and its environs - the rest of the layout is really just there for moral support!

 

Thank you for your thoughts all, much appreciated.

 

Some findings on the GER:

Following up the link in the above, I got hold of an 1882 timetable:

A nice thing to be able to refer to, and pleasing for the lack of surprises - it seems we've got the MER pretty down

 

Th ere's also a very plain answer (for the GER at least) to the question of whose wagons went into the docks, whose to their own quayside depot:

(It is made clear in the section for the "Victoria and Albert Docks" (sic) a railway truck alongside may "send direct" to/from a ship. Apropos of nothing, "wagon" is used in one clause; "truck" the other. I'll stop worrying about which is correct )

 

Very good, that's that then!

 

It was just in a section on the conduct of "Merchandise Traffic to and from London" - this must be a section of all timetables, so I'll persue those in future. If a Parishoner happens to be checking something in a WTT of relevant date, regardless of Railway Company, I'd be grateful if they wouldn't mind a quick flick through the front pages and sharing any mentions of the Docks.

 

So, GER wagons:

Some snippets from the excellent GER Society website:

• "Round ended opens, with outside wooden framing and used for general merchandise, were probably the most numerous...Bolsters and batten wagons dealt with round and cut timber; there were few coal wagons, some low sided trucks and a limited supply of covered vans and goods brakes."
• GER standard goods stock (90% of goods fleet), from Massey Bromley's report of August 1878:

Open goods trucks                6372

Covered                                  731

Timber                                    357 (Bolster)

Batten                                      160

Cattle                                    2208

Machine trucks                         68 ('Leiston Lorries' - low bed flats, production starting 1860)

• "The effect of this replacement rate would be to leave most of the Gooch period wagons still running as well as a few hundred pre-1850 wagons."
• "The early 1880’s saw both a demand for an increased stock and a need for some new types for which conversion of existing wagons would no longer suffice.

  Firstly, a strong traffic in wool was the cause in 1880 of 50 wool wagon s being ordered to transport the sheeted bales. Supplied by Brown, Marshalls they had steel frames, the first wagons to be so supplied. As a long, single plank wagon it was used for a wide range on commodities besides wool, thus ensuring a long and useful life." 7mm etch by Ragstone Models

 

I'm assuming British wool in to the London markets - but possibly Australian wool, via the Docks, out to British textile mills? If so that'd be handy, as the wool trade is the thread that draws the various ideas behind the layout together*.

 

Modelling the wool trade, some inspiration:

The following, to my amazement, show Cutty Sark loading wool at Circular Quay, Sydney in the mid-1880s:

 

Almost certainly whilst under the command of the photography-keen and very successful Captain Richard Woodget (of the Cutty Sark from 1885-1895), to whom the vessel owes her reputation and preservation.

 

These bales were then unloaded in London (photo c.1900 - note the different style of bales, also the jigger-crane (hyrdaulic?) in the background:

I'll do some work over the coming days to locate the pic, which has many of the signs of being staged, but is the best I've found so far.

 

Of wool being transported by rail in the UK, I've come across very little, but so there's at least one pic of something railway related here's a wool train in the country of origin:

 

That'll do for now, time to face my fears and watch Bath - Exeter

 

Cheers,

 

Schooner

 

*Being chiefly an abiding interst in late Victorian logistics, a rather more involved interest in commercial sail of the same period, and a burgeoning interest in railways of the same. There's a 1:75 model of Cutty Sark, she visited South West India Dock to unload wool as the iconic Manning Wardles took over duties on the MER, the only passing station on which sits in one of the most interesting and modellable parts of the Dock network. Ideal.

 

More fascinating stuff!

 

I note Cutty Sark's bowsprit shipped inboard, a point to capture on your model.

[Schooner]

On 02/11/2020 at 12:16, Edwardian said:

 

More fascinating stuff!

 

I note Cutty Sark's bowsprit shipped inboard, a point to capture on your model.

I'm glad you think so. Re Cutty Sark - absolutely! Whilst ship models are typically represented as extrusions of builders' lines drawings (fair enough, historically they were exactly that, with many more boats built from half-model than from plans...anyway...), and the ship herself is hermetically sealed, I thought it might be nice to try to show her as a living, working thing. There is, after all, "something human about a sailboat...".

 

This is a niche thread in a niche, 'tho vibrant, sub-forum (although why the latter should be true I don't understand), so the support and interest of others is gratifying - thank you  

 

Just as well I find it all so interesting, as getting in from the last trip allowed my laptop enough internet to force-update.

 

This resulted in the loss of nearly all the information it held*, including the folders for this project. After a restorative weekend off, enough mojo has been accumlated to start re-tracing steps and re-stocking the inspiration/information caches. Whilst I'm cross at myself for not keeping better notes, I'm very glad I started this thread!

 

*Strangely, some remains. For example SCARM exists, but without authentication or saved files...tedious.

 

To get us back on track, some odds and sods I had left open on my phone...

 

Miscellaneous bits of limited relevance: 

Illustration depicting a signalman moving the points at Tilbury Docks "c.19th Century". I'm sure m'learned Parishoners will be more familiar with similar engravings and practice, but the information in the above is new to me and would, I think, be the basis of a nice little scene. Is there anything in the image to be wary of?

 

Southampton in 1852, so not of immediate use. However, note the quayside with discrete piles of goods for each vessel, likewise against the warehouse, and the blokes rolling the truck along. Another tempting scene. Although...it looks a little wide for a London & Southampton, standard gauge, wagon... I was under the impression that the GWR didn't reach Southampton 'till the end of the century, and even then only with the LSWR's support...?

 

Closer to the right area, Poplar Dock also c.1852:

Note the chaldron-type wagons on the coal quay. The central focus is the steam collier (first of that type) John Bowes, which raises questions of accuracy as she is shown above ship-rigged whilst her build survey and other depictions, including at launch, show her schooner-rigged...

 

For reference, Poplar opened as a railway dock in 1851, but looks under construction above. Presumably adopting the form shown below:

Note the original coal quay (East)  trackwork...which translates nicely into Peco geometry:

...just in case...  (Just a quick proof of concept, not very accurate. Works, though).

 

Ciao for now,

 

Schooner

Edited November 9, 2020 by Schooner
Spejjing

[Edwardian]

Great to see those pictures of John Bowes.

 

Here is John Bowes at the Bowes Museum.

 

 

She took coal from Marley Hill via the Pontop and Jarrow Ry.  Marley Hill's 1850s engine shed is still in use as such and the line crossed the NER's Tanfield branch here:

 

[webbcompound]

3 hours ago, Schooner said:

 

Note the original form of coal quay (East)  trackwork...which translates nicely into SCARM:

 

 

 

 

Interesting layout. Each loop contains a hydraulic wagon hoist, the full wagons enter on one track, are fed past the hoists and deposited on a different track. Must have required considerable pre-planned co-ordination (though obviously the same every time). Perhaps each hydraulic tower had its' assigned gang of shunters/pointsmen to achieve this.

Edited November 9, 2020 by webbcompound

[Schooner]

4 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Here is John Bowes at the Bowes Museum.

Very nice! Interesting to see the model (uniquely) adopt both bowsprit and jib-boom*. Amazing how even a well known and documented prototype spawns all kinds of variations...

Lovely follow-up too, added to the list

 

3 hours ago, webbcompound said:

Interesting layout.

It is! I wondered about it as a basis for the layout, but felt it was closer to 'moving diorama' territory, which my modelling skills wouldn't be able to support. I'm keeping an eye out for info on how the quay was worked, and there's a plan to work a digital mock-up to see what patterns emerge. Anything useful will be shared here.

 

I'm afraid I forgot the only relevant bit of information. Much as this photo provided the first truly relevant image, showing wagons in the place of interest at the time of interest, I've finally found a desciption of operations of the same. In the BoT accident reports, hosted by The Railways Archive, is a snippet small but perfectly formed: at 10.42pm on the wet and dark night of the 1st of September, 1883, signalman George Cawston of Millwall Junction box "...made the road for an engine and one waggon of goods to come out of the down siding to go to the Docks, across both lines." This is of interest to me because it's the only primary account of goods workings around the period of the layout (March 1884) yet discovered. The junction in question is here, right in front of the signal box. The description of the working ties in with my assumption that the goods line was bi-directional and largely independent of the MER passenger line right from the junction, which is good to know. Mr Cawston started a three-hour shift at 10pm, which ties in nicely to the NLR 1919 Target Workings that we've seen previously, detailing a "c.2.0 a.m." finish for the NLR shunter. It's nice that new information corroborates previous best-guesses  

 

It was of interest to the Board of Trade because shortly afterwards, at 10.54pm or so, an up L&B train pulled out of Millwall Junction station, took that facing point (whose rod had broken at the weld at the crank under the box) across the down line and into the Dock sidings. The siding was clear, the down line not so much. The down train caught the second carriage of the up as it crossed the line. Happily, both trains were nearly empty and moving slowly - there were no reported injuries. Of note, in case a boxed-scene approach allows for Millwall Junction, which it surely should, both trains were formed as follows:

"tank-engine, third-class break, one third-class, one second-class, two first-class, and one third-class carriage, and one third-class break-carriage".

 

So we're not totally devoid of pics, the tank engines were probably (I think) Robert Sinclair's V Class 2-4-2WTs:

 

...although it's not impossible that a Jones and Potts 2-2-2, rather like the below, was involved as they were still in service in 1883...

 

For completeness' sake here's an as-built (1889 condition) Buckjumper 2, the definitive Blackwall Tank:

 

C'mon Hornby, Hattons and Bachmann, I'm waiting... 

 

*The pedant's name for the spar that is seen shipped in the Cutty Sark photos in Sydney, and totally de-rigged across the fo'c'sle deck (to keep the pendantry consistent) in the photo of Loch Torridon unloading wool in South West India Dock

Edited November 10, 2020 by Schooner
The usual

[Northroader]

Nancy Blackett was always saying “Jib-booms and Bobstays”.

[Edwardian]

 

A 7-coach set is not as long as I feared for an inner suburban train of the period.  Contemporary Brighton trains in the charge of Terriers could be anything from 8-11 4-wheel coaches.

 

It seems that you could make those GER trains out of David Eveleigh's GER 4-wheel coaches, which were of 1870s vintage and would have served such routes, so are the perfect choice. 

 

Link

 

He may lack a Second.  He may be prepared to draw one up.   

 

Guy Rixon does the 'castings' via Shapeways. He also does the characteristically bulbous door vents. 

 

Link

 

These feature gas lamp tops, but, as new suburban GER stock was fitted with Pintsh gas lighting from 1877, the 1870s stock was probably in the process of conversion by 1883 and, I suggest, likely to be gas by 1889. 

 

Finally, I should think for your era, the coaches would still be young enough to be finished in varnished teak.

 

By the way, John Bowes also available in Lego...

 

 

 

 

[Phil Traxson]

10 hours ago, Schooner said:

Very nice! Interesting to see the model (uniquely) adopt both bowsprit and jib-boom*. Amazing how even a well known and documented prototype spawns all kinds of variations...

Lovely follow-up too, added to the list

 

It is! I wondered about it as a basis for the layout, but felt it was closer to 'moving diorama' territory, which my modelling skills wouldn't be able to support. I'm keeping an eye out for info on how the quay was worked, and there's a plan to work a digital mock-up to see what patterns emerge. Anything useful will be shared here.

 

I'm afraid I forgot the only relevant bit of information. Much as this photo provided the first truly relevant image, showing wagons in the place of interest at the time of interest, I've finally found a desciption of operations of the same. In the BoT accident reports, hosted by The Railways Archive, is a snippet small but perfectly formed: at 10.42pm on the wet and dark night of the 1st of September, 1883, signalman George Cawston of Millwall Junction box "...made the road for an engine and one waggon of goods to come out of the down siding to go to the Docks, across both lines." This is of interest to me because it's the only primary account of goods workings around the period of the layout (March 1884) yet discovered. The junction in question is here, right in front of the signal box. The description of the working ties in with my assumption that the goods line was bi-directional and largely independent of the MER passenger line right from the junction, which is good to know. Mr Cawston started a three-hour shift at 10pm, which ties in nicely to the NLR 1919 Target Workings that we've seen previously, detailing a "c.2.0 a.m." finish for the NLR shunter. It's nice that new information corroborates previous best-guesses  

 

It was of interest to the Board of Trade because shortly afterwards, at 10.54pm or so, an up L&B train pulled out of Millwall Junction station, took that facing point (whose rod had broken at the weld at the crank under the box) across the down line and into the Dock sidings. The siding was clear, the down line not so much. The down train caught the second carriage of the up as it crossed the line. Happily, both trains were nearly empty and moving slowly - there were no reported injuries. Of note, in case a boxed-scene approach allows for Millwall Junction, which it surely should, both trains were formed as follows:

"tank-engine, third-class break, one third-class, one second-class, two first-class, and one third-class carriage, and one third-class break-carriage".

 

So we're not totally devoid of pics, the tank engines were probably (I think) Robert Sinclair's V Class 2-4-2WTs:

 

...although it's not impossible that a Jones and Potts 2-2-2, rather like the below, was involved as they were still in service in 1883...

 

For completeness' sake here's an as-built (1889 condition) Buckjumper 2, the definitive Blackwall Tank:

 

C'mon Hornby, Hattons and Bachmann, I'm waiting... 

 

*The pedant's name for the spar that is seen shipped in the Cutty Sark photos in Sydney, and totally de-rigged across the fo'c'sle deck (to keep the pendantry consistent) in the photo of Loch Torridon unloading wool in South West India Dock

Question! Why is the front coupling rod missing on the Buckjumper? Some where deep in the recesses of my mind I've read of this being done but can't remember why or when, perhaps to do with negotiating tight curves?

[burgundy]

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

A 7-coach set is not as long as I feared for an inner suburban train of the period.  Contemporary Brighton trains in the charge of Terriers could be anything from 8-11 4-wheel coaches.

A Terrier plus 8 carriages comes in at just over 36 inches in 4mm scale!

Best wishes 

Eric 

 

[Edwardian]

2 minutes ago, burgundy said:

A Terrier plus 8 carriages comes in at just over 36 inches in 4mm scale!

Best wishes 

Eric 

 

 

As good an advert for modelling pre-Grouping as you'd want, in every way.

 

I was thinking more of the cost and time involved than the real estate.

 

On Castle Aching I should be able to fit a tender engine and 5 6-wheel coaches (not close coupled) and still have 18" of spare platform!  

[Schooner]

2 hours ago, Phil Traxson said:

Question! Why is the front coupling rod missing on the Buckjumper?

"No official reason for this has been given, though over the years suggestions have varied from enabling the locos to traverse sharper curves, to protecting both the flanges and rails. Neither explanation rings true as the practice generally ceased under the LNER except on the tight curves of Ipswich docks with no discernible difference. Whatever the reason their low tractive effort of 11,100lbs and high axle weight over the leading and trailing wheels would have made the locos quite free-running four-coupled machines, and with their relatively light loads of four to five four-wheeled coaches, were unlikely to experience the embarrassment of slipping." Source.

 

1 hour ago, burgundy said:

A Terrier plus 8 carriages comes in at just over 36 inches in 4mm scale!

Yum! And good information, thank you...although whatever form the layout takes I'm likely to remain jealous of your close coupling

[Nearholmer]

A couple of Terriers were tried in 2-4-0T format at about the same time, IIRC the idea being to reduce frictional losses when carrying out duties (the first LBSCR motor trains) where full TE wasn’t needed. They were converted back fairly swiftly because it didn’t materially help, and I wouldn’t mind betting because there were odd occasions when the lack of those driven wheels became an annoyance - some poor adhesion conditions probably.

[burgundy]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

A couple of Terriers were tried in 2-4-0T format at about the same time, IIRC the idea being to reduce frictional losses when carrying out duties (the first LBSCR motor trains) where full TE wasn’t needed. They were converted back fairly swiftly because it didn’t materially help, and I wouldn’t mind betting because there were odd occasions when the lack of those driven wheels became an annoyance - some poor adhesion conditions probably.

A Terrier with balloon trailer is alleged to have done 60 mph on the main line, which must have been quite lively on the footplate. Frictional losses do not seem to have been a particular problem!

Best wishes 

Eric