Bermondsey (Canal Road) - 1940s South London in 4mm

[Chris116]

1 minute ago, sem34090 said:

Well they have D78 bogies in the boiler shop... one of them is currently home to Talyllyn Railway No.1's boiler...

 

As for uniforms, how about 1910s Metropolitan:

"Suits you, Sir..."

 

I'd best not push it too much, given you're of a higher rank in the great traffic department ladder.

 

I was thinking of the remains of my old (2010ish) Underground uniform. I still have enough to make it look right!

[sem34090]

I was wondering about batteries in a '38TS DM...a bit more heritage, and Southern, and soon to be available...

 

With a 2010s LU uniform you could demonstrate the decline in uniform standards to the point we, in circa-1950 uniforms, seem to manage to attract more passenger questions than the 'real' staff when travelling home...

 

Or is that just me?

[Chris116]

I worked for LUL from 2001 and retired in 2016. The first uniform I had was the bright blue one which meant you could be easily seen by both other staff and the passengers. The second uniform I has was the dark blue which meant we blended in with the passengers and so when working on the platform had to wear a Hi-viz to be seen by other staff! Although it was probably smarter, I felt it was not as good for the job as the bright blue. Around the time I retired they changed to the present uniform which I described to a member of higher management as a clowns outfit! I am so glad I never had to wear it as I hate it. The uniform that most heritage lines wear is based on 1930's to 1950's BR and looks smart.As you say we get almost more questions than the staff on National Rail. I have even been talking to the guard on an SWR service and a passenger came up and we stopped talking, they asked the question and when the guard started to answer the passenger interrupted them saying that they were talking to me as I worked for the railway! 

[sem34090]

11 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

I worked for LUL from 2001 and retired in 2016. The first uniform I had was the bright blue one which meant you could be easily seen by both other staff and the passengers. The second uniform I has was the dark blue which meant we blended in with the passengers and so when working on the platform had to wear a Hi-viz to be seen by other staff!

Typically sound choice by management there.

Quote

Although it was probably smarter, I felt it was not as good for the job as the bright blue. Around the time I retired they changed to the present uniform which I described to a member of higher management as a clowns outfit! I am so glad I never had to wear it as I hate it.

It is decidedly vile - In September 2015 I went to a lecture during the LTM's Acton open day that month where they were lauding the new uniform, even then I thought it looked hideous.

Quote

The uniform that most heritage lines wear is based on 1930's to 1950's BR and looks smart.As you say we get almost more questions than the staff on National Rail. I have even been talking to the guard on an SWR service and a passenger came up and we stopped talking, they asked the question and when the guard started to answer the passenger interrupted them saying that they were talking to me as I worked for the railway! 

In one instance at Alton an SWR cleaner asked me if I was an (SWR) inspector!!! Of all the places for that confusion to arise Alton is the last one I'd expect...

I also once got priv. rate travelling home, but in that instance I think it was kindness on the guard's part.

Woking is the place I've been asked the most questions, though I got quite a few at Gatwick too (And they weren't even from the authorities!) I'm wondering if both are down to their airport connections - Other countries tend to still have decent railway uniforms. 

 

Clapham Junction is the worst for people looking at me as if they've seen a ghost... it's probably the oil lamp and battered suitcase that does it.

(That one was actually on loan, but I have an LSWR one and a BR(S) one. I'd yet to acquire the suitcase at this point.)

Edited May 12, 2020 by sem34090

[Sophia NSE]

2 hours ago, sem34090 said:

As for uniforms, how about 1910s Metropolitan:

"Suits you, Sir..."

 

Anyone want to build a time machine so I can have this job and uniform?

[sem34090]

Surprisingly enough you're not the first lady I know to have said that.

 

I've always thought it to be surprisingly progressive, with an uncharacteristically short skirt for the period and a generally practical nature whilst still possessing an aesthetically pleasing silhouette (The jacket is, or appears to be, structured). Of course, this isn't, most likely, down to progressive minds within the Metropolitan but more down to a need for practicality in this rather physically demanding role, and the simple fact that a long skirt would be a serious safety concern when working around the conductor rails. Such a skirt, when wet, would be potentially lethal - I believe the leather gaiters (They're not long boots, though they look like it at first) were provided for similar reasons, as insulation.

 

I once read, in a feminist-orientated article about women working on the railways, that no company designed a uniform for women until 1950 but this is blatantly untrue. Indeed most companies seem to have, particularly in the First World War, but for me the Metropolitan's blue stands out in terms of practicality and appearance. Is this the famed 'male gaze' at work, I wonder.  Incidentally, there seem to be many more photographs of the ladies' uniform online than the men's, and the two appear to be very different.

 

The Imperial War Museum (strangely not the LTM, as far as I know) have one of these uniforms in their collection -

I'm almost tempted to model it (Not literally! I mean to produce a model of a lady wearing it in 4mm scale.) now that a Metropolitan layout is in the works... just need to do the 1914 Electric stock to go with here...

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by sem34090

[Chris116]

The sad thing about the work done by many women during WW1 was that as soon as the men came back from war the ladies lost their jobs in most cases both on the railways and elsewhere. 

[Chris116]

1 hour ago, Sophia NSE said:

Anyone want to build a time machine so I can have this job and uniform?

Come to the Mid Hants and after training as platform staff you can then go on to train as a guard. We have ladies doing a very wide range of jobs and more volunteers of either sex are always welcome. 

[sem34090]

It wasn't much different after WWII either...

 

That said, the small numbers of women who worked on the railways throughout their history seem to have been somewhat forgotten.

 

On the bright side, the work of women during WWI was a major contributor to their gaining/no longer being able to be denied the vote. Some women, anyway. Everyone seems to forget that near-universal suffrage for all wouldn't come until 1928 - You had to be a middle-upper class woman (or a man) to vote in 1918.

21 minutes ago, Chris116 said:

Come to the Mid Hants and after training as platform staff you can then go on to train as a guard. We have ladies doing a very wide range of jobs and more volunteers of either sex are always welcome. 

Interestingly, though, most seem to adopt a variation of the male uniform rather than referring to period ladies' uniforms. Perhaps that's down to practicality.

 

If not then I'm sure Chris would be more than happy to take up my earlier suggestion...

(Naturally, I am joking...)

Edited May 12, 2020 by sem34090

[Sophia NSE]

12 hours ago, Chris116 said:

Come to the Mid Hants and after training as platform staff you can then go on to train as a guard. We have ladies doing a very wide range of jobs and more volunteers of either sex are always welcome. 

If I lived closer I definitely would!

[Annie]

14 hours ago, sem34090 said:

Surprisingly enough you're not the first lady I know to have said that.

 

I've always thought it to be surprisingly progressive, with an uncharacteristically short skirt for the period and a generally practical nature whilst still possessing an aesthetically pleasing silhouette (The jacket is, or appears to be, structured). Of course, this isn't, most likely, down to progressive minds within the Metropolitan but more down to a need for practicality in this rather physically demanding role, and the simple fact that a long skirt would be a serious safety concern when working around the conductor rails. Such a skirt, when wet, would be potentially lethal - I believe the leather gaiters (They're not long boots, though they look like it at first) were provided for similar reasons, as insulation.

 

I once read, in a feminist-orientated article about women working on the railways, that no company designed a uniform for women until 1950 but this is blatantly untrue. Indeed most companies seem to have, particularly in the First World War, but for me the Metropolitan's blue stands out in terms of practicality and appearance. Is this the famed 'male gaze' at work, I wonder.  Incidentally, there seem to be many more photographs of the ladies' uniform online than the men's, and the two appear to be very different.

 

The Imperial War Museum (strangely not the LTM, as far as I know) have one of these uniforms in their collection -

I'm almost tempted to model it (Not literally! I mean to produce a model of a lady wearing it in 4mm scale.) now that a Metropolitan layout is in the works... just need to do the 1914 Electric stock to go with here...

 

Oh that is a lovely uniform.  The amateur  privatised railway companies should take note since their present uniforms are an utter crime.  No wonder people approach preserved railway staff wearing a proper uniform and overlook the actual railway staff since they mostly seem to look like scruffy council binmen.

[coline33]

Just in case anyone has missed this.   Free card kits of Back, Rail and Town scenes plus brick paper can be found on the Wordsworth Model Railway website.   

[coline33]

For those interested in the London trams, the "Brixton Hill tram depot and its Trams" RMweb forum has been broadened out into the trams themselves.   But not only the trams that were to be found inside the depot but also those that passed outside plus some that nearly got to Brixton Hill as an annex to Streatham (Telford Avenue) depot.   Currently on the forum there is a series on getting the best out of the parts in the Tower Trams E/1 kits.

[Artless Bodger]

On 14/04/2020 at 16:09, Engineer said:

Agree with the post just now, it is the section of tramway on the Embankment close to Blackfriars Bridge, confirmed by the curvature of the track and presence of shelters.  Looks like the tram is descending from Blackfriars to the river side 'inner rail or anti-clockwise line towards  Westminster, thereafter to Peckham Rye.  Can't offer any suggestion on the background other than there would be street furniture and buildings in the distance.  Clearly, the tram body is M Class [readily converted from the Tower E/1], 3 side windows up and down, and can just make out the unusual and bulky truck side.  It's the right type for the 84 which traversed Dog Kennel Hill.  Livery of the tram, and the type, puts the image at maybe late 1920s to early 1930s.  Not much later, routes like the 84 were taken over by the new HR/2 types.

I've just come across this thread, and am intrigued by the debate on the photo. If that is an airship in the sky, and the date as suggested, late 20s - early 30s, R101 passed over London on its last flight on the evening of October 4, 1930, to crash later on a hill outside Beauvais.

[sem34090]

You know, I'd completely forgotten about our own airships, so busy was I contemplating German zeppelins that I forgot about R101!

[coline33]

Oh no, not airships!!!   One of the proposals I had to pursue and scrutinise in 1980 was the Airship Industries proposal to have an airship base in the Royals Docks for the transport of containers back and forth over the Channel.   It was an excursion into the unknown despite the fact that I had been posted in 1958 to RAF Cardington where I had learnt the pre-WW2 airship experiences including those of our own craft.  However, the actual economics of container carriage were exceptionally favourable but when you came to the ground operation, well?   You can just imagine London dockers losing those straining ropes trying to prevent an airship being blown into the post-WW2 high rise blocks of flats that then surrounded the Royal Docks!!!

[Rudititanic]

9 hours ago, sem34090 said:

You know, I'd completely forgotten about our own airships, so busy was I contemplating German zeppelins that I forgot about R101!

 

Very unlikely to be R100 or R101 - doesn't look the right shape (too short & rounded).  There were previous British airships, but smaller and still not quite the same, so I still think a barrage or advertising balloon is the best bet.  

[Rudititanic]

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/view-of-double-decker-trolley-on-the-streets-of-london-news-photo/459782695

[coline33]

That Getty scene is definitely circa 1930 and not 1940.   LPTB withdrew the last Dog Kennel Hill Ms from Camberwell depot in the autumn of 1933 to take over the Bexleyheath services. 

[PhilJ W]

Could the airship have been the Hindenburg?

[Artless Bodger]

2 hours ago, Rudititanic said:

https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/view-of-double-decker-trolley-on-the-streets-of-london-news-photo/459782695

Looking at this photo, I'm thinking the river is on the right, the twin lamp standards on the right distance are on Blackfriars Bridge, so on the left should be the City of London School and other fairly tall buildings, the light bulbous object and the cigar shaped 'airship' are either parts of those buildings or artifacts of the long exposure - the background to the photo is not very uniform. I wonder if you would see much sky to the left?

[PhilJ W]

Its possibly a steel framed building under construction it's certainly no airship. It is near Blackfriars Bridge the lights of which can be seen in the background and the distinctive passenger shelter is on the left. The tram tracks take a sharp right onto the bridge behind the tram. 

[PhilJ W]

Further to my post above. The lights to the right rear are Blackfriars Station (the photographer is facing north east). It was as I surmised a steel framed building Unilever House built in the early 30's, built on the site of De Keysers Hotel demolished in 1931.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Keyser's_Royal_Hotel

Edited June 27, 2020 by PhilJ W

[coline33]

M 1704 is in LCC livery before it gave way to the full LCC red and cream that it was in when LPTB took over in July 1933.   The demolition of the Royal Hotel could have been under way with the car in this livery but by the time Unilever House was finished the lower deck waist corner panels on 1704 would have turned red.

[PhilJ W]

It could have been the hotel being demolished. That would make the date 1931.