Wright writes.....

[Bulwell Hall]

3 hours ago, robertcwp said:

Regarding Holker Hall at Nottingham Victoria, look at the lady in the carriage on the right:

 

6911_NottVic by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

She obviously recognises quality when she sees it!

 

Just saying.......

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

In my view, a layout that depicts a variety of operations is the best. The express stopping to connect with a branch train waiting in the bay. The adding or removing of vehicles. The express thundering through. All add their own bit of railway atmosphere. The pick up goods. The occasional special, perhaps horse boxes. Most of all the mineral traffic that many routes were built for.

 

The layouts I have enjoyed most are the ones that get the balance right. An express going by looks great but you need the "counterpoint" of the other workings to emphasise the "specialness" of the express.

 

A loco fussing about in a yard being passed by an express is much more interesting than one express then another express.

 

 

Good afternoon Tony,

 

It's not your fault, and it's only an 'accident' of the time of birth. By that, I mean you're not old enough to have done what I did (at Retford).

 

That is disregard what's happening in the sidings (movement in which was quite rare) and watch the succession (indeed, procession) of steam-hauled expresses racing through!

 

I know you found Roy Jackson's Retford dull and boring to operate, but that's what it was really like. Apart from the stopping east/west services and the two-hourly Leeds stoppers on the main line, it was one long distance, non-stop express after another. A 'watch the trains go by' layout without equal in my view. 

 

To many as well, Little Bytham would appear boring to operate. A few stoppers, and sporadic shunting by the pick-up, with everything else (95%?) just bowling through non-stop, those expresses going south at very high speed. However, since I'm definitely NOT a layout operator, it suits me down to my boots. 

 

To me, the greatest 'satisfaction' in this great hobby is to set a road, clear the appropriate signals, open the throttle and watch a locomotive I've made (most important) hauling a train I've also made (also important), easily, quietly, smoothly and quickly. How can any 'interesting' shunting activities beat that? 

 

Each to their own, I suppose. 

 

 

It would be wonderful to claim that I also painted this loco, but I'm not in Mr. Rathbone's league.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Tony Wright

[Woodcock29]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

In my view, a layout that depicts a variety of operations is the best. The express stopping to connect with a branch train waiting in the bay. The adding or removing of vehicles. The express thundering through. All add their own bit of railway atmosphere. The pick up goods. The occasional special, perhaps horse boxes. Most of all the mineral traffic that many routes were built for.

 

The layouts I have enjoyed most are the ones that get the balance right. An express going by looks great but you need the "counterpoint" of the other workings to emphasise the "specialness" of the express.

 

A loco fussing about in a yard being passed by an express is much more interesting than one express then another express.

 

 

I run similar on my layout. In the mainline LNER storage I have 16 trains. Four expresses, one local passenger, two loaded coal, one empty coal, one fitted fish, one fitted fruit, one horse box train (there's a racecourse behind my secondary route station), one parcels, two through goods, one permanent way train, one pickup goods. 

 

Then on the branch there is one branch passenger shuttle, one outwards goods and one inwards goods. On the secondary route there are two local passenger trains (one of which makes three runs) and two local goods. The horse box train and the permanent way train end up on the secondary route. On their return four of the horse boxes go out on local passenger workings.

 

One express passenger has a loco change as does the empty coal train.

 

Just for pure fun the U1 waiting in the banker siding goes on shed for refuelling and servicing! The banker doesn't actually get used on a train!

 

In the future I plan to include servicing of the gas works and the coaling plant once (it's built) and at the secondary route station there are also two local industries to service  - a meat works and one I haven't decided on yet.

 

There's also 10 trains on the high level LMS route.

 

Andrew

[t-b-g]

11 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Tony,

 

It's not your fault, and it's only an 'accident' of the time of birth. By that, I mean you're not old enough to have done what I did (at Retford).

 

That is disregard what's happening in the sidings (movement in which was quite rare) and watch the succession (indeed, procession) of steam-hauled expresses racing through!

 

I know you found Roy Jackson's Retford dull and boring to operate, but that's what it was really like. Apart from the stopping east/west services and the two-hourly Leeds stoppers on the main line, it was one long distance, non-stop express after another. A 'watch the trains go by' layout without equal in my view. 

 

To many as well, Little Bytham would appear boring to operate. A few stoppers, and sporadic shunting by the pick-up, with everything else (95%?) just bowling through non-stop, those expresses going south at very high speed. However, since I'm definitely NOT a layout operator, it suits me down to my boots. 

 

To me, the greatest 'satisfaction' in this great hobby is to set a road, clear the appropriate signals, open the throttle and watch a locomotive I've made (most important) hauling a train I've also made (also important), easily, quietly, smoothly and quickly. How can any 'interesting' shunting activities beat that? 

 

Each to their own, I suppose. 

 

 

It would be wonderful to claim that I also painted this loco, but I'm not in Mr. Rathbone's league.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

 

 

Possibly the biggest crowd round any layout that I ran at a show was when I was a guest operator on "Gresley Beat" a few times. A real crowd pleaser and the star of every show it went to. Yet as an operator, running Leighton Buzzard was massively more enjoyable and there were several times when the day ended and I didn't want to stop!

 

As you say, each to their own.

[t-b-g]

5 minutes ago, Woodcock29 said:

I run similar on my layout. In the mainline LNER storage I have 16 trains. Four expresses, one local passenger, two loaded coal, one empty coal, one fitted fish, one fitted fruit, one horse box train (there's a racecourse behind my secondary route station), one parcels, two through goods, one permanent way train, one pickup goods. 

 

Then on the branch there is one branch passenger shuttle, one outwards goods and one inwards goods. On the secondary route there are two local passenger trains (one of which makes three runs) and two local goods. The horse box train and the permanent way train end up on the secondary route. On their return four of the horse boxes go out on local passenger workings.

 

One express passenger has a loco change as does the empty coal train.

 

Just for pure fun the U1 waiting in the banker siding goes on shed for refuelling and servicing! The banker doesn't actually get used on a train!

 

In the future I plan to include servicing of the gas works and the coaling plant once (it's built) and at the secondary route station there are also two local industries to service  - a meat works and one I haven't decided on yet.

 

There's also 10 trains on the high level LMS route.

 

Andrew

 

Sounds like my sort of railway!

[CCGWR]

18 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Tony,

 

It's not your fault, and it's only an 'accident' of the time of birth. By that, I mean you're not old enough to have done what I did (at Retford).

 

That is disregard what's happening in the sidings (movement in which was quite rare) and watch the succession (indeed, procession) of steam-hauled expresses racing through!

 

I know you found Roy Jackson's Retford dull and boring to operate, but that's what it was really like. Apart from the stopping east/west services and the two-hourly Leeds stoppers on the main line, it was one long distance, non-stop express after another. A 'watch the trains go by' layout without equal in my view. 

 

To many as well, Little Bytham would appear boring to operate. A few stoppers, and sporadic shunting by the pick-up, with everything else (95%?) just bowling through non-stop, those expresses going south at very high speed. However, since I'm definitely NOT a layout operator, it suits me down to my boots. 

 

To me, the greatest 'satisfaction' in this great hobby is to set a road, clear the appropriate signals, open the throttle and watch a locomotive I've made (most important) hauling a train I've also made (also important), easily, quietly, smoothly and quickly. How can any 'interesting' shunting activities beat that? 

 

Each to their own, I suppose. 

 

 

It would be wonderful to claim that I also painted this loco, but I'm not in Mr. Rathbone's league.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

 

 

It is an interesting point you make Tony, as you say each to their own. My point of view is that that style of 'operating' i.e. watching trains go by with little shunting (even though totally prototypical on a layout such as Little Bytham) is typically British. I belong to a social operators group here in South Australia which are mostly made up of American and Australian modellers and their view of operating is very different as are their layouts which are often point to point with no continuous run. Shunting and goods waybills are crucial to the operating of their layouts with very few trains simply set to run past the viewer and back into storage. The British layouts over here are very similar in style to yours in operating.

 

Regards Connor   

[t-b-g]

5 minutes ago, CCGWR said:

 

It is an interesting point you make Tony, as you say each to their own. My point of view is that that style of 'operating' i.e. watching trains go by with little shunting (even though totally prototypical on a layout such as Little Bytham) is typically British. I belong to a social operators group here in South Australia which are mostly made up of American and Australian modellers and their view of operating is very different as are their layouts which are often point to point with no continuous run. Shunting and goods waybills are crucial to the operating of their layouts with very few trains simply set to run past the viewer and back into storage. The British layouts over here are very similar in style to yours in operating.

 

Regards Connor   

 

The best bits of operating Buckingham are when the goods comes into Grandborough Junction for sorting. All the wagons are marked for destinations and each destination has a siding. You take all the wagons that came in, all the wagons there and make up trains for different places plus take wagons across to the goods yard as a "trip" working. An express going through may give the emotional stimulation but it is the shunting moves and the interaction with the other stations that gives the mental stimulation. You don't just enjoy watching it, you have to think about what you are doing too. You don't want to block something in that might be needed soon, you need to be off the main line before the next train is due. To me, that sort of operation is a big part of what I enjoy.

 

I fully accept that others have no interest in such things but in my view, that is their loss!

[Legend]

20 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Two of his layouts have been in the mags over the years.

 

First was 'Hanbury' RM March 1983 ROTM (photography by Brian Monaghan!)

Then 'Strathmore Route' Model Rail May 2001 (my favourite of them all to operate)

 

Those mammoth operating sessions were actually on the previous layout to 'Hanbury', dismantled in 1975 (house move) and never made it to the mags.

 

Current layout (Aberdeen) is ready for photography and is on the 'to do' list now lockdown is starting to lift.

 

I hadn't made the link . I've written here before about my love of Hanbury, I think it was in a thread about layouts you remember . I still have the article and it stood out because of its descriptions of operations . Hanbury and Oakstown I think . I also liked it because I felt it was something I could achieve with Superquick Buildings, Hornby overall roof , Hornby Dublo Locos and Coaches . The whole thing just blended together . Loved that layout .  I also kept a copy of the Strathmore Route in Model Rail, again because of the atmosphere it created but also the operation . Indeed I went out and bought the Model Rail dvd which had the layout in it purely for that layout . I never knew it was the same person who did both but it figures because clearly there is synergy! Please pass on my thanks to your Dad . I already had the railway bug , that was because of my Parents who took me day trips and fed my hobby . However your Dads layouts have been an inspiration since 1983.  Will now look forward to Aberdeen.  Love these layouts and in particular the operation of them.

 

My own layout is a roundy roundy and I do occasionally just watch the trains go past . However it was built with notions of Hanbury so that I can have trains leave three terminal platforms , go round the layout several times stopping in the 3 through lines , where occasional trains reverse , with others continuing to an outer loop were there is another station . Mine is called Manorbridge (after a 1973 article in MRC my first model railway mag)  and Kyleakin , just because I like the name!  It was built with operation in mind , but also to capture the atmosphere of layouts like Hanbury

 

[robertcwp]

Regarding A3s on the GC, was this one a poor performer or just filling in on a local?

60050_Denham_1951 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Incidentally, Andrew mentioned that consideration was giving to putting A2s on the GC. I recall reading that there were clearance issues with the post-war pacifics, and possibly also the A4s, that prevented their use over the electrified section of the Met & GC Joint between Harrow and Amersham Rickmansworth. Possibly something to do with the negative conductor rail as the pacifics worked over third rail lines in the Newcastle area. Something must have been different about the A3s that meant it wasn't a problem for them.

Edited July 15, 2020 by robertcwp
Correction.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, CCGWR said:

 

It is an interesting point you make Tony, as you say each to their own. My point of view is that that style of 'operating' i.e. watching trains go by with little shunting (even though totally prototypical on a layout such as Little Bytham) is typically British. I belong to a social operators group here in South Australia which are mostly made up of American and Australian modellers and their view of operating is very different as are their layouts which are often point to point with no continuous run. Shunting and goods waybills are crucial to the operating of their layouts with very few trains simply set to run past the viewer and back into storage. The British layouts over here are very similar in style to yours in operating.

 

Regards Connor   

Thanks Connor,

 

I've mentioned before, but I have never operated a real railway in any shape or form. 

 

I have always been a spectator; listening to signal box bells and, after a period of time, getting to know what to expect dependent on the time of day. 

 

As Clem has said, at the time I'm talking of (late-'50s/early-'60s), it was the 'greatest free show on earth'. A show which I watched daily, and the memory has gripped me ever since. 

 

Thus, as a spectator, I don't have much interest in operating a model railway. But why not? Obviously, it's mentally-stimulating to many who post on here, but it's not to me. I have other priorities. 

 

1. It's far more important that I build things. Above all else, this is my principal motivation. Though what I build has to 'operate perfectly' (others who've seen Stoke Summit, Charwelton and Little Bytham are the judges of that), as long as I know that that's the case, then I'm satisfied.

 

2. Because I always build (as part of a group) actual prototype-based layouts, then the 'operation' of those also has to be prototypical. Thus, the likes of Little Bytham would be of no interest to those who prefer 'shunting puzzles'. 

 

3. I derive little or no pleasure when operating the work of others, unless it's the work of a group of which I'm a member, where I've been a contributor. That's why, whenever I'm handed the controls of 'other' layouts, I politely decline. Tony Gee tells of my reluctance to operate Buckingham (which although an outstanding creation in terms of its long-term influence, is not my personal cup of tea, because it's fictitious).  Indeed, many fictitious layouts are created because any real location wouldn't satisfy the operators' requirements. 

 

4. We all get our various model railway 'kicks' in different ways. In my own case, this is to watch what I've made behaving just like the prototype (as near as is practicable, because my locos don't emit smoke or make chuffing noises), in most cases bowling by at high speed. It's a great spectator sport. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Teague]

I have found the discussion on 'operating' vs 'running trains' really interesting.

My layout represents a fictitious place, but when I 'designed' it (I use the term loosely!), I wanted to allow for "watching the trains go by", which I guess equates to "running trains", and / or shunting the yards or loco scheds - which, together with following an operating sequence probably equates to "operating".

Because I had the room to do so, the layout also incorporates fiddle yard storage for a lot of trains, but what I have found so far, is that what I do is "run trains".

This may be because there is so much left to do on the layout, rolling stock, scenery etc, that I don't find the time to get engrossed in an operating session, or it might just be that having allowed for all options, I have settled on what turns out to be my preference - who knows!

One other aspect that may be relevant is that, although the trainset is large, I designed it to be controlled by one person - yet if one one is to truly "operate" it, then perhaps it needs 2 or 3 operators to maintain any kind of pace or flow.

I have no idea as to the answer to these points but the discussion has certainly set me thinking!

Tony

[Tony Wright]

29 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

Regarding A3s on the GC, was this one a poor performer or just filling in on a local?

60050_Denham_1951 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Incidentally, Andrew mentioned that consideration was giving to putting A2s on the GC. I recall reading that there were clearance issues with the post-war pacifics, and possibly also the A4s, that prevented their use over the electrified section of the Met & GC Joint between Harrow and Amersham. Possibly something to do with the negative conductor rail as the pacifics worked over third rail lines in the Newcastle area. Something must have been different about the A3s that meant it wasn't a problem for them.

What a great picture, Robert,

 

Apart from the loco/train, what's caught my eye is that run of point rodding, with equal gaps between the runs. Just as it was on Little Bytham. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[robertcwp]

1 minute ago, Tony Wright said:

What a great picture, Robert,

 

Apart from the loco/train, what's caught my eye is that run of point rodding, with equal gaps between the runs. Just as it was on Little Bytham. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I hadn't noticed the point rodding. Shows how we look at different things. I did notice the 94XX pannier on the left. 

[MJI]

Enginemen seem to like the BR 5MT, but I think it is this type of locomotive which has produced some of the best, very few duff ones.

 

These are all well respected.

Hall

Black 5

B1

5MT

 

Even the Diesel equivalent is one of the best with the 37.

[Jesse Sim]

I hope I’m not to late to the party, I think I’m missing an ‘o’ there somewhere.....anyway, regarding operating layouts, I love watching trains go round, especially, and I’m finding it more now, when you have something you’ve made running. 
 

I love operating LB, which I picked up the whole operating in about an hour, I love operating Johns layout, Grantham I had a small turn in the middle of Warley - privileged is an understatement as it was the layout that stuck with me to build LNER. But the most interesting and fun I’ve ever had operating a layout was Buckingham, thanks again Tony and Tony for the chance. Another similar layout like Buckingham is Charles Rudders Uley Junction. Both are end to end, one being ancient, If that’s the right word, DC and a real operating sequence, nothing will work unless you pull the right lever. Uley being DCC, sound, with the same sequence. 
 

 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

Regarding A3s on the GC, was this one a poor performer or just filling in on a local?

60050_Denham_1951 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Incidentally, Andrew mentioned that consideration was giving to putting A2s on the GC. I recall reading that there were clearance issues with the post-war pacifics, and possibly also the A4s, that prevented their use over the electrified section of the Met & GC Joint between Harrow and Amersham. Possibly something to do with the negative conductor rail as the pacifics worked over third rail lines in the Newcastle area. Something must have been different about the A3s that meant it wasn't a problem for them.

 

Good afternoon Robert,

 

I don't know if consideration was given to using A2's, what I said was, there was a lot of speculation in the railway press that A2's may be deployed. I believe that a Thompson Pacific was recorded at Marylebone. I don't recall if it was connected in the press with this speculation or if it was at a later date, I would have to go back and have a look. 

 

A4's certainly ran out of Marylebone. When the Starlight specials started running, it was normal for Top shed to provide additional motive power as required. As many as eight Starlights were reported deparing Marylebone on occasion. I believe either New Zealand or Australia was recorded on these services in the Sheffield area and also think some Peppercorn A1's. It's many years since we looked into this, so it would require a trawl back through the relevant documentation to find all the details. There was also a special Pullman service that was A4 hauled, Ian Alan I think.

 

The presence of A3's on ords was quite normal and nothing to do with performance. At first it was rampant and attempts were made to rein it in, while more efficient engine workings became available. There were still a couple of such workings, either because of the lack of a return express working, or as a positioning turn for trains requiring top link motive power.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Headstock
add,

[robertcwp]

38 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon Robert,

 

I don't know if consideration was given to using A2's, what I said was, there was a lot of speculation in the railway press that A2's may be deployed. I believe that a Thompson Pacific was recorded at Marylebone. I don't recall if it was connected in the press with this speculation or if it was at a later date, I would have to go back and have a look. 

 

A4's certainly ran out of Marylebone. When the Starlight specials started running, it was normal for Top shed to provide additional motive power as required. As many as eight Starlights were reported deparing Marylebone on occasion. I believe either New Zealand or Australia was recorded on these services in the Sheffield area and also think some Peppercorn A1's. It's many years since we looked into this, so it would require a trawl back through the relevant documentation to find all the details. There was also a special Pullman service that was A4 hauled, Ian Alan I think.

 

The presence of A3's on ords was quite normal and nothing to do with performance. At first it was rampant and attempts were made to rein it in, while more efficient engine workings became available. There were still a couple of such workings, either because of the lack of a return express working, or as a positioning turn for trains requiring top link motive power.

I have seen footage of an A4 at Marylebone, and not for naming ceremony. They and the A1s could have reached there via the GW & GC Joint Line if the Met & GC Joint was off limits.

[Clearwater]

Reading the Marylebone debate with interest but what were the starlight specials?

 

David

[Headstock]

15 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

I have seen footage of an A4 at Marylebone, and not for naming ceremony. They and the A1s could have reached there via the GW & GC Joint Line if the Met & GC Joint was off limits.

 

The special trains notices for 1953, indicate that the Starlights were indiscriminately pathed via both routes. For example, trains ran via High wycombe on Friday the 29th of May and via Rickmansworth on Saturday 30th of May.   

[Bucoops]

4 hours ago, Bulwell Hall said:

She obviously recognises quality when she sees it!

 

Just saying.......

 

That would certainly explain the somewhat offended look she has on her face?

 

Just replying....

[Headstock]

48 minutes ago, Clearwater said:

Reading the Marylebone debate with interest but what were the starlight specials?

 

David

 

Good evening David,

 

the Starlight specials were cheap, third class only, Anglo Scottish, overnight bookable, return excursion trains. They proved to be so popular that multiple trains were run overnight. The patron was housed in third class gangwayed compartment stock of the latest type. Theoretically they had access to the hotel executives pet project, the Cafeteria car. The service ran out of Cafeteria cars, the more trains that were required to run on a night, resulting in a rather ad hock food and drink service operating out of the van compartment of one of the third class brakes. On arriving at a destination, such as Edinburgh, the Patreon had 8 or 15 days to holiday in the city before returning by Starlight at the end of this time. 

 

The Cafeteria cars were rather fascinating catering carriages on the GC scene, well worth modeling. That in the first Northbound train being an ex 12 wheel GN Restaurant car conversion and the Southbound Scottish train having an ex GER Restaurant car conversion.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Headstock
add info.

[drmditch]

Re: Type of Operation.

 

I attend exhibitions selectively, and have never felt any interest (with one small exception) in, or the consistent competence for  building anything for exhibition.

It is also good to see how people do things, and get ideas for my own railway.

 

The aspects of a railway which attract me are:-

 

- Does the layout look interesting overall, and does the standard of track and infrastructure look effective?

- Does it represent trains going from somewhere to somewhere else?

- Is the operation interesting and reliable?

      Depending on what is represented, I would rather see a well-modelled branch terminus being operated well, (within my limited knowledge) than long main lines with easy-to-assemble kit

      buildings and long uninteresting express trains rushing round and trains of inaccurate goods and mineral wagons running at far to high a speed.

- Does the operation in itself cover a variety of railway activities and services, and is there something to observe and learn from?

- Does it suit my 'partisan' preferences?

      (NER/LNER and NEA - and pre-1948 please!)

 

Of the older layouts I remember, Tebay was one of the most interesting.

I saw Stoke and Charwelton a couple of times; both excellent but not as interesting.

I only saw the Leicester layout once at the end a day with little running, but it looked superb.

 

Grantham has to the best of the existing railways I have seen, and hope to see again

Shap is very good, not as interesting, but it's role as part of a permanent large railway is a very good idea.

 

I'm full of admiration for all these talented people who can build railways to entertain us all!

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

Not much done today on the L&Y 0-6-0 - too busy with other things.

 

 

More tomorrow...................................  Though there is a test match on! 

[dibateg]

Clem: - 'Anyway, to cut the story short, the Halls used the Bulwell Common-Basford North-Bagthorpe triangle to turn after that. The Halls used to come up on the Poole-Bradford on Saturdays about 4pm if I remember correctly and run back light engine about 4-50 ahead of the 5-15 to Marylebone usually headed by a Scot in 1964.'

 

I'm not building a Hall for Basford North! Anyway, in the era I'm modelling, I think they changes at Leicester...

 

Tony

 

[t-b-g]

4 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

I hope I’m not to late to the party, I think I’m missing an ‘o’ there somewhere.....anyway, regarding operating layouts, I love watching trains go round, especially, and I’m finding it more now, when you have something you’ve made running. 
 

I love operating LB, which I picked up the whole operating in about an hour, I love operating Johns layout, Grantham I had a small turn in the middle of Warley - privileged is an understatement as it was the layout that stuck with me to build LNER. But the most interesting and fun I’ve ever had operating a layout was Buckingham, thanks again Tony and Tony for the chance. Another similar layout like Buckingham is Charles Rudders Uley Junction. Both are end to end, one being ancient, If that’s the right word, DC and a real operating sequence, nothing will work unless you pull the right lever. Uley being DCC, sound, with the same sequence. 
 

 

 

You will be welcome back any time Jesse. Ancient about covers it!