Wright writes.....

[Dave John]

Ok, as requested a kind of description . These are pics of the D1 chassis under construction. 

 

 

From above 

 

From below

 

 

 

 

 

The compensating beam bears on the top of the bogie plate close in to the bogie pivot which has a bit of sideplay , but not much. The adjustment screw has a domed end where it bears on the bogie plate.  The bogie is itself compensated. 

 

When running as a chassis only I noticed that at speed the bogie tended to lift a bit on the inside rail as it hit a curve.  So I used a burr to form a dish on the upper surface of the bogie plate where the dome of adjustment screw sits . 

 

The idea is that as the bogie begins to turn the compensation point rides up the surface of that dished bit, but more weight gets transferred from the beam to the bogie thus countering the tendency to lift. 

 

A more built up pic

 

 

 

 

Note the slightly dirty trick of tapering the frames in, and the use of a tube as the compensation beam pivot which makes fitting the brakes easy. 

 

Now it may be argued that it's all a bit of a palaver and completely pointless. I wouldn't argue with that, but here it is running. Not bad for what is a fairly light weight loco. 

 

 

 

Apart from anything else I just enjoy messing about with things like this and playing about with ideas. All it takes is a few bits of brass and time and it must be said I have plenty of bit of brass. 

[t-b-g]

15 minutes ago, Dave John said:

Ok, as requested a kind of description . These are pics of the D1 chassis under construction. 

 

 

From above 

 

From below

 

 

 

 

 

The compensating beam bears on the top of the bogie plate close in to the bogie pivot which has a bit of sideplay , but not much. The adjustment screw has a domed end where it bears on the bogie plate.  The bogie is itself compensated. 

 

When running as a chassis only I noticed that at speed the bogie tended to lift a bit on the inside rail as it hit a curve.  So I used a burr to form a dish on the upper surface of the bogie plate where the dome of adjustment screw sits . 

 

The idea is that as the bogie begins to turn the compensation point rides up the surface of that dished bit, but more weight gets transferred from the beam to the bogie thus countering the tendency to lift. 

 

A more built up pic

 

 

 

 

Note the slightly dirty trick of tapering the frames in, and the use of a tube as the compensation beam pivot which makes fitting the brakes easy. 

 

Now it may be argued that it's all a bit of a palaver and completely pointless. I wouldn't argue with that, but here it is running. Not bad for what is a fairly light weight loco. 

 

 

 

Apart from anything else I just enjoy messing about with things like this and playing about with ideas. All it takes is a few bits of brass and time and it must be said I have plenty of bit of brass. 

 

Lovely work.

 

I think there seems to be a view, even amongst the worst Luddites, that 4-4-0 types benefit from some form of help in the weight distribution and balance.

 

Many pre-grouping locos are also so small that the notion of packing them full of lead doesn't really work.

 

Your models really illustrate everything I like about the railways in that period. Railways at the height of their elegance, when having the smartest livery was a marketing tool to make your trains more attractive that those of the other company.

 

There is no doubt that your solution to the problem does the job! 

[Chuffer Davies]

44 minutes ago, Dave John said:

 

 

The compensating beam bears on the top of the bogie plate close in to the bogie pivot which has a bit of sideplay , but not much. The adjustment screw has a domed end where it bears on the bogie plate.  The bogie is itself compensated. 

 

The idea is that as the bogie begins to turn the compensation point rides up the surface of that dished bit, but more weight gets transferred from the beam to the bogie thus countering the tendency to lift. 

 

 

Note the slightly dirty trick of tapering the frames in, and the use of a tube as the compensation beam pivot which makes fitting the brakes easy. 

 

Now it may be argued that it's all a bit of a palaver and completely pointless. I wouldn't argue with that, but here it is running. Not bad for what is a fairly light weight loco. 

 

Apart from anything else I just enjoy messing about with things like this and playing about with ideas. All it takes is a few bits of brass and time and it must be said I have plenty of bit of brass. 

I am in awe!  Such neat modelling and such a beautiful train set too.  
 

I fully approve of your compensation scheme, I would have done something similar perhaps.  The one item I have to question is your suggestion that as the domed bolt rides up the edge of the dished indentation this increases the pressure on the bogie.  I would argue that the downward pressure must be constant as the weight of the loco is constant.  Your argument would indeed be correct if this was a sprung chassis.

 

There will, however, be increased side force on the rubbing plate introduced by the dish in its surface as the domed head tries to lift out of the hole.  Unfortunately I would predict that this would tend to act in the opposite way to that desired and increase the risk of the inside wheels lifting.  I’m guessing that either the additional weight of the superstructure is sufficient to overcome this, or your curves are sufficiently gentle that your bogie isn’t actually moving laterally.  
 

Irrespective of my theorising your  model runs to perfection, so what do I know!
 

Frank

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

That is music to my ears Sandra! I always thought the GC line trains coming in and out via the curves at the flat crossing or via Whisker Hill curve were the interesting part of the operation.

 

The layout only had a couple of "stoppers" on the GN line too, along with, from memory, one up and one down freight that did anything other than go straight through.

 

The possibilities for interesting operation were never really exploited. All those tracks, points and sidings were crying out for more use.

 

I do have one or two ideas to suggest about ways to increase capacity on the GC without major rebuilding. When the time is right, perhaps I can run them by you and see what you think. You probably have enough on your plate to keep you busy now!

I can only speak from memory, Tony,

 

But that tells me there were far more GC stoppers at Retford than GN ones. The pattern always seemed to be the same - eastbound services using platform 1 and westbound services using platform 3. The only GC line train which used platform 2 was the Down 'Master Cutler', but this had come off the GN. 

 

Again from memory, most of the GN stoppers were Leeds trains, so were mainly A1-hauled. These always used platforms 1 and 2. 

 

I have to say, most of the sidings rarely seemed to be used, and there was far more freight going east/west. One interesting move might be a group of light engines heading back to the GC shed, after their days' work was over.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Yet another lockdown loco has been finished. Well, almost................

 

 

 

 

 

This was the Crownline J17 kit bought FROM the estate of the late Roy Jackson last autumn. Its build has featured on here.

 

I painted it yesterday, and numbered/lettered it this morning. The finish is Halfords satin black car acrylic, sprayed directly from the rattle can. In my view it gives an excellent finish, which is very robust. 

 

Ian Wilson's (Pacific Models) front numberplate is perfect. 

 

Weathering awaits (it won't stay pristine).

 

Knowing what I do now, I should have built it in EM. Still, it can be altered easily. 

 

 

[t-b-g]

12 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I can only speak from memory, Tony,

 

But that tells me there were far more GC stoppers at Retford than GN ones. The pattern always seemed to be the same - eastbound services using platform 1 and westbound services using platform 3. The only GC line train which used platform 2 was the Down 'Master Cutler', but this had come off the GN. 

 

Again from memory, most of the GN stoppers were Leeds trains, so were mainly A1-hauled. These always used platforms 1 and 2. 

 

I have to say, most of the sidings rarely seemed to be used, and there was far more freight going east/west. One interesting move might be a group of light engines heading back to the GC shed, after their days' work was over.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

On the layout, there were hardly any stoppers on either route.

 

Some of the best looking moves were when there was one train in a platform, with something else going past, either a goods or an express, on the main. The long slow lines allowed for goods to come in and stand "awaiting a road" onto the main at Babworth (northbound) or by North Box (southbound). Nortbund goods trains had restrictions on where they could stop, to avoid he rear of the train messing up the operation of the crossing.

 

Whether these sorts of things happened in real life or not I can't say, I wasn't there. But it looked really good on the model the odd times when it happened.

 

One of my favourite moves was christened the "Red Arrows move. A southbound goods would be signalled through on the main and as it passed the goods yard, another southbound goods would start out of the yard and they would go through the main and Pl. 1 side by side. They would then split, with the one in Pl. 1 peeling off left onto the GC and the other heading south.

 

Whether it ever happened i real life I have no idea but it looked fantastic on the model!

 

Somewhere, I have an old trainspotting book that was my dad's. There is one page that details a few hours at Retford in 1958. A year late for the correct period but hopefully not too much different. I will have to dig it out some time and scan it. dad didn't just write the numbers down, he noted which type of train locos were on and whether it was up or down, plus anything unusual about it, such as a rare livery. 

 

The light engines on the GC were included in he Retford operations. The "mini virtual shed" against the far wall was put in for the purpose. It was a working that allowed the GC operators to improvise, with an "as and when required". If there was a lull on the GN route, hopefully they would pick up on it and trundle one or more light engines going to or from the much busier GCR shed.

 

 

[FarrMan]

23 minutes ago, Chuffer Davies said:

I am in awe!  Such neat modelling and such a beautiful train set too.  
 

I fully approve of your compensation scheme, I would have done something similar perhaps.  The one item I have to question is your suggestion that as the domed bolt rides up the edge of the dished indentation this increases the pressure on the bogie.  I would argue that the downward pressure must be constant as the weight of the loco is constant.  Your argument would indeed be correct if this was a sprung chassis.

 

There will, however, be increased side force on the rubbing plate introduced by the dish in its surface as the domed head tries to lift out of the hole.  Unfortunately I would predict that this would tend to act in the opposite way to that desired and increase the risk of the inside wheels lifting.  I’m guessing that either the additional weight of the superstructure is sufficient to overcome this, or your curves are sufficiently gentle that your bogie isn’t actually moving laterally.  
 

Irrespective of my theorising your  model runs to perfection, so what do I know!
 

Frank

I fully agree with you, Frank, especially the first and last paragraphs. It appears to work well, and the effort to develop and produce such wonderful intricate engineering is well rewarded with the outcome. I agree with you, Frank, that the movement of the domed bolt up the side of the dished indentation will increase the sideways force on the bogie, which will increase the overturning effect which causes the inner bogie wheels to lift. All the reaction to sideways motion will be taken on the rail, by the tyre moving across the rail until the flange makes contact, when it will be mainly on the flange. All the sideways forces on the bogie will be above this level, i.e. the centre of gravity of the bogie itself, the sideways force from the body via the bogie pivot, and the resistance of the domed bolt riding up the side of the indentation. The last of these can be minimized by polishing the bolt head and the dished indentation, but the other two can't except by minimizing overall weight, which is the opposite of what you need for hauling capacity. This is why the outer rail is canted on the real thing, just as superelevation is usually applied to curves on roads. As applying a suitable cant to the outer rail is not easy in model form, the next best option is probably to add weight to the bogie, either to the bogie itself, or by increasing the proportion of body weight that the bogie carries. The latter could be done by moving the pivot of the compensation beam forward, but that would reduce the weight on the front driver with resulting loss of haulage power.

 

I can theorise as much as I want, but I certainly cannot produce such a lovely model with such lovely engineering as you have Dave. Well done.

[t-b-g]

30 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Yet another lockdown loco has been finished. Well, almost................

 

 

 

 

 

This was the Crownline J17 kit bought FROM the estate of the late Roy Jackson last autumn. Its build has featured on here.

 

I painted it yesterday, and numbered/lettered it this morning. The finish is Halfords satin black car acrylic, sprayed directly from the rattle can. In my view it gives an excellent finish, which is very robust. 

 

Ian Wilson's (Pacific Models) front numberplate is perfect. 

 

Weathering awaits (it won't stay pristine).

 

Knowing what I do now, I should have built it in EM. Still, it can be altered easily. 

 

 

 

I know I gave you a hard time over the J17 earlier Tony but it really did end up looking very nice indeed.

 

Did they appear at Retford? If so, it would be a good one to have in EM.

 

I wonder if Roy was intending it for Dunwich or Blakeney originally rather than Retford?

[robertcwp]

This file sets out where I have got to so far in summarising the passenger workings through Retford in the Summer of 1957. It covers only the Monday to Friday workings and is derived from the public timetable. I have added in 1956 times for parcels trains, unadvertised relief trains, etc based on the 1956 East Coast and GN Main Line carriage workings. There are bound to be a few errors, and possibly more.

 

I found it easier to use the 24-hour clock. Without the WTT, passing times of trains not stopping at Retford are not known but, as an example, I believe The Talisman was allowed around 1 hour 45 minutes from King's Cross to passing Retford. 

[Tony Teague]

Wow!

That's impressive....and will need quite a fiddle yard!

[robertcwp]

1 minute ago, Tony Teague said:

Wow!

That's impressive....and will need quite a fiddle yard!

And would take 24 hours to run the sequence!

 

Realistically, a representative sample of trains is all that can be achieved.

[Headstock]

18 hours ago, robertcwp said:

The GC side of Retford does pose some challenges on the coaching stock front. 

 

The Harwich-Liverpool usually had a Gresley RKB around the time Retford is set, although I have seen photos of an ex-GER catering car in the train around that time. It certainly wasn't the Tourist buffet car that was in the set when I last saw it on Retford. The snag with the Gresley RKB is that it was a 1953 rebuild of what had begun life as a Diag 16 restaurant third. There were only three of them. I don't think there is a kit available and I'm not aware of any etched sides. 

 

Several of the Cleethorpes-Sheffield-Manchester trains had attachments which varied over the course of the day and some attached or detached vans or carriages at Retford.  Going by the 19556 workings, as I don't have 1957, both the Mark I and Thompson sets called at Retford at least once without having any additional carriages attached. 

 

Then there were the Western Division Link E sets, of which about eight visited Retford on a typical weekday in the Summer of 1956. These were shown in the workings with two different formations, either an ordinary Gresley third and brake third either side of a composite or a steel-panelled twin either side of a Thompson composite. Again, there were various attachments. 

 

There were also some non-gangwayed sets.

 

Finally, here is the Joker in the pack. Take a look at working 219 from Summer 1956:

ER_West_1956-Summer_0074 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

Every other week, this was a set of WR stock with British Standard gangways (hence the BS at the end of the carriage types). The WR workings were the same in 1957 so it's possible, likely even, that the ER ones were too. This working also applied in Winter 1956-7.

 

Why? The answer is in Sunday working 446. It was an unbalanced Sunday Swansea-Sheffield working, which was ER and WR stock alternately. So every other week, the ER had a set of WR stock to play with. 

 

What I don't know is the type of WR stock as I cannot find any photos.

 

Good afternoon Robert,

 

I have grave misgivings about using a 1956 CWN's for 1957, especially as regards the GC and cross country workings. There was a radical reorganization of sets involved in train workings in 1957. It would be more sensible to model 1956 if historical accuracy is important. 

[robertcwp]

5 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon Robert,

 

I have grave misgivings about using a 1956 CWN's for 1957, especially as regards the GC and cross country workings. There was a radical reorganization of sets involved in train workings in 1957. It would be more sensible to model 1956 if historical accuracy is important. 

I have misgivings too. However, Retford is set in 1957 and I don't have any 1957 Summer carriage workings. If I could find some, it would help a great deal.

[PMP]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

I have misgivings too. However, Retford is set in 1957 and I don't have any 1957 Summer carriage workings. If I could find some, it would help a great deal.

There was a bit of flex in Roy’s approach to the dates. One train he wanted to represent on the GN to GC was the class 40 hauled Master Cutler which wouldn’t be possible before 1958. We’d had discussions on doing it with me using one of the RTR 40’s.I still have the core class 40 components to do that if @sandra would like to include that in due course. Here’s the HJ 47 that used to sit in the GN shed, it was one I’d done a similar makeover on, at Roy’s request. 1963 (I think) earliest possible appearance .

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by PMP
Dates(not fruit)

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

I have misgivings too. However, Retford is set in 1957 and I don't have any 1957 Summer carriage workings. If I could find some, it would help a great deal.

 

Robert,

 

do you have Summer 1958?

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

I know I gave you a hard time over the J17 earlier Tony but it really did end up looking very nice indeed.

 

Did they appear at Retford? If so, it would be a good one to have in EM.

 

I wonder if Roy was intending it for Dunwich or Blakeney originally rather than Retford?

I deserved a hard time Tony!

 

It made the loco so much better, and is yet another example of the value of constructive criticism. As such, many thanks.

 

Did J17s appear at Retford? If they did, I never saw one. The one I've chosen is based on a picture of the loco at Spalding on a M&GNR service; some distance from its Norwich home. 

 

I don't have a 1957 Locoshed book, but a year before all the J17s were shedded in the 30, 31 or 32 districts, so highly unlikely at Retford. 

 

I think what I'll do is build the J6 for Retford. Much more-appropriate.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[robertcwp]

35 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Robert,

 

do you have Summer 1958?

Not for the GC. I have the ECML and GN Main Line, which were very different to what they would have been in Summer 1957 as there was a big timetable change in September 1957.

 

I now have 1,200 carriage working books, either as originals or copies, and still the Summer 1957 GC, GN Main Line and East Coast books will not turn up. 

[robertcwp]

31 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

I don't have a 1957 Locoshed book, but a year before all the J17s were shedded in the 30, 31 or 32 districts, so highly unlikely at Retford. 

 

 

 

 

Ian Allan did a reprint of the Summer 1957 combined volume a few years ago and handily included the Locoshed book.  65533 was 31C King's Lynn then.

[Headstock]

40 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

Not for the GC. I have the ECML and GN Main Line, which were very different to what they would have been in Summer 1957 as there was a big timetable change in September 1957.

 

I now have 1,200 carriage working books, either as originals or copies, and still the Summer 1957 GC, GN Main Line and East Coast books will not turn up. 

 

From memory, Clive Carter, rather than S Banks had the summer 57 CWN's, from which I made notes pertaining to my own interests. It was all rather disappointing, from a modeling point of  view but radical from an 'all change' point of view. For example, the South Yorkshireman lost its Thompsons, the articulated sets were broken up and the only exciting thing about your WR set, was the W prefix and suffix on the side of the MK1's. I get the impression that the big four came to some sort of ending in 55/56, in so many ways, The 58 CWN's would have more in common with 57 I suspect.

 

I think that I've seen a 58 CWN's but didn't take a lot of interest, I remember it because I'm sure it was now a Midland region CWN'S. I thought that only 53 was missing, at least from the Summer publications.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Headstock
add info

[robertcwp]

5 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

From memory, Clive Carter, rather than S Banks had the summer 57 CWN's, from which I made notes pertaining to my own interests. It was all rather disappointing, from a modeling point of  view but radical from an 'all change' point of view. For example, the South Yorkshireman lost its Thompsons, the articulated sets were broken up and the only exciting thing about your WR set, was the W prefix and suffix on the side of the MK1's. I get the impression that the big four came to some sort of ending in 55/56, in so many ways, The 58 CWN's would have more in common with 57 I suspect.

I thought it was 1958 that Clive Carter had, or at least that is one of the years he listed formations for in his unpublished book on LNER/ER train formations, but he may also have had 1957. I have pretty good coverage of the GC from nationalisation to Winter 1956-7 but nothing for the rest of the 1950s apart from one amended set of workings for September 1959, which only covers some workings.

 

Looking at the WR 1957  Summer programme, the Sunday Swansea-Sheffield is not identified as BR Standard stock, whereas some other inter-regional trains are. It might nevertheless have been changed to BR standards though. 

 

From photos, it appears that the 5-carriage Thompson sets, or at least one of them, were still going in the area in 1959 (I have a photo of one at Brigg on a Cleethorpes-Sheffield train) and the 1960-61 winter working still show a couple of sets, although on services via Doncaster rather than Retford. Retford was still seeing 5-carriage Mark 1 sets, with attachments, on Cleethorpes-Manchester trains, so they should be OK for 1957 too. There were still a couple of sets with steel twins but not through Retford. A major reason was probably that many services on the GC side through Retford had gone over to DMUs by then, possibly around 1958. The 1959 timetable shows lots of trains marked diesel, which in practice meant DMU.

[robertcwp]

39 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

I think that I've seen a 58 CWN's but didn't take a lot of interest, I remember it because I'm sure it was now a Midland region CWN'S. I thought that only 53 was missing, at least from the Summer publications.

ER Western Division books I have or have copies of from Nationalisation are:

 

23/05/1949
26/09/1949
05/06/1950
18/06/1951
30/06/1952
21/09/1953
14/06/1954
20/09/1954
19/09/1955
11/06/1956
17/09/1956
14/09/1959 (amended workings for Sheffield District)
12/09/1960
 

Also LNER wartime and post-war ones for:

 

03/05/1943
07/05/1945
16/06/1947
06/10/1947
 

Two of the above came from John Marsh of Shipley MRS.  Several others have turned up more than once. Summer 1956 and Winter 1954-5 have appeared from at least three sources. 

 

The LMR Midland Division marshalling books for Summer and Winter 1958 do not include London Extension trains, much to my disappointment.

 

I had a look at the amended September 1959 Sheffield District workings and it is basically a reissue of the Summer workings minus the Summer dated trains and Summer strengthening carriages as the Summer timetable was extended that year due to the printing strike. It includes trains via Retford, or what was left of them as hauled workings rather than DMUs. The two sets I'm doing for the layout are still there.

 

[Tony Wright]

I think there's a potential problem in trying to make Retford (or any layout) too time-specific. By that I mean, unless one has a comprehensive record of every train and every loco on a particular date and location, and builds everything accordingly, then there are bound to be anomalies.

 

I know that Roy had a 'flexible' attitude to the actual year which Retford represented. For instance, the prototype Deltic featured, which means it's no earlier than 1959. There was also the excellent 'Anglo Scottish Car Carrier' with the Newton Chambers cars, which means 1961 at the earliest.

 

Since it would be impossible to represent every loco and every train (even in such a vast place), then why not enjoy some flexibility in the timescale? As long as every train has the correct (for its period) loco, then I can't see a problem. LSGC seems to represent a decade's operation, and I've not heard anyone complain about that. 

 

Anyway, some prototype samples. Please (all) observe copyright restrictions........

 

 

Obviously pre-'58, because the Up lattice bracket is still intact. 

 

 

1960, and PRETTY POLLY has a double chimney and the (useless) fin deflectors. Just visible above the third carriage is the new signal. 

 

 

60063 on the GN shed. Clearly later than 1957 because ISINGLASS has a double chimney. 

 

Useful detail in the buildings, though.

 

 

I think this must have been taken shortly after the lattice bracket was flattened by a derailed goods train. That might well be its baseplate in the right foreground.

 

Anyone up for making Retford's point rodding? 

 

More to follow....................

 

 

 

 

[robertcwp]

1 minute ago, Tony Wright said:

Anyone up for making Retford's point rodding? 

 

The point rodding on Little Bytham looks excellent so you clearly have a first-class CV for the job! 

[Tony Wright]

More Retford prototype shots.

 

 

I don't know if this freight will carry on along the main line (following the faster train signalled) or take the curve towards Gainsborough after passing through the station.

 

 

This one is taking the road from the GN to the GC, eastbound.

 

 

And this light engine O2/3 is taking the curve from the westbound GC to the northbound GN. The bracket signal is the replacement plate and angle Up starter. 

 

Note the DMU parked in the Up lay-by.

 

 

A Sheffield-Lincoln service behind Retford's 'Rocket'. There's a model of this loco on Retford (as there is on Little Bytham). 

 

 

There was certainly more freight on the GC. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

12 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

The point rodding on Little Bytham looks excellent so you clearly have a first-class CV for the job! 

Andrew Hartsthorne had started the rodding at Babworth, but I don't mind carrying on.

 

I'd be delighted were Andrew to be involved again. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.