Wright writes.....

[PMP]

37 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

 The original phrase, describing how black the boys were afterwards, used a racial term which is thankfully no longer acceptable in society.

I’ve got that one and vividly recall reading it aloud to one of the kids, and being a sentence or two ahead saw the ‘N’ word approaching and was able to literary  body swerve it! I’m always surprised it hasn’t come up in mainstream media.

Edited August 2, 2020 by PMP

[Tom F]

2 minutes ago, PMP said:

I’ve got that one and vividly recall reading it aloud to one of the kids, and being a sentence or two ahead saw the ‘N’ word approaching and was able to literary  body swerve it! I’m always surprised it hasn’t come up in mainstream media.

 

In the Reverend's autobiography it is mentioned and how it was amended to 'black as soot' (I think from 1970s reprints onwards).

[sandra]

Tony,

 

I have read the debate about the operation of Retford with great interest. My feeling on the matter is that operation should be enjoyable and I think that for operation to be enjoyable there should be some variety and even some challenges. When I operated Retford it did tend to be a parade of trains both on the GN and the GC. I longed to see more trains going from the GN to the GC  or using the line from Whisker Hill. I felt that goods trains could have been turned onto the goods avoiding line or perhaps reverse into the lay-by siding at the south end of the station. Or goods trains could be turned onto the up slow so that an expresses could pass by. But this rarely happened.

 

I think the problem is that Retford is quite a demanding layout to operate and few of the operators were experienced enough to cope with the more difficult manoeuvres. Quite a few people I spoke to expressed the view that it should be DCC as that would greatly simplify operation. I can assure everyone that it will not be converted to DCC. I did suggest to Roy that the operators get together to have at least one practice session before a running day but he was not keen. I think the solution is to have a hardcore of operators who do know exactly how the railway works. I have only owned it for just over two weeks and I am still trying to fully understand how it operates.

 

Physically I want the station to be as close as possible to how it looked in the summer of 1957. Similarly I would like the timetable to be based as closely as possible on the summer 1957 timetable. It would be impossible to represent the full timetable, the fiddle yards would have to be enormous and a vast amount of new stock would have to be built. So the timetable will have to be a compromise both on the GC and the GN. I do not want to be too restrictive in the stock that operates on the railway, I am prepared to tolerate some stock which is out of period but not too much and of course visitors can run what they wish. I do wish trains to be in period within the set. No Gresley W1 pulling blue and grey coaches.

 

I think the GC fiddle yard may have to be expanded and I would be interested to hear Tony  G’s suggestions on this also Andrew has said that some of the roads could be split in two and again I certainly agree that this would help. Quite a few photographs seem to show freight trains going south on the GN and then turning left at Retford to go onto the GC. I wonder if it’s worth considering putting in a crossover so that such trains could return to the GN fiddle yard. Again I’m trying to add variety.
 

These are my thoughts on the problems of operating Retford but I’d welcome any comments anyone has to make on the subject.

 

Sandra

[sandra]

3 hours ago, robertcwp said:

I have a semi-Retford-related question for the experts who follow this forum. 

 

Yeadon (OK I know he's not totally reliable) has A1 60114 in Doncaster for 'General' 6/3/57 to 5/4/57. 

 

Yeadon states that Doncaster applied the later BR emblems to tenders on shopping after April 1957 (although the new emblem had been launched publicly in 1956). This suggests that 60114 might have been a bit too early for the later emblem, as it was shopped in early March.

 

An Eric Treacy photo (hence no date or details of train, etc) shows 60114 at York on what appears to be the up Heart of Midlothian (without the headboard). 60114 has the earlier cycling lion emblem. The visible stock is mostly maroon, which did not appear to a significant extent on the ER until around September 1956. There is still full daylight (it would have been around 6.00 pm) and fairly lengthy shadows.

 

The visible stock suggests that the photo is from no later than the September 1957 timetable change.

 

The question is whether anyone knows when 60114 gained the later emblem.

 

Grateful for any suggestions.

 

The photo is in 'The Best of Eric Treacy' and may also be in other books, given the amount of duplication of his material that there is.

Robert,

According to the “Tornado” website she (he) retained the early crest in April 1957 and only gained the late crest in October 1958. As Retford is set on the summer of 1957 I think these means that relatively few locomotives should have the later crest.

Sandra

[robertcwp]

7 minutes ago, sandra said:

Robert,

According to the “Tornado” website she (he) retained the early crest in April 1957 and only gained the late crest in October 1958. As Retford is set on the summer of 1957 I think these means that relatively few locomotives should have the later crest.

Sandra

Thanks, I hadn't thought to look there. I strongly suspect that the photo is from the Summer 1957 timetable, which is handy from the point of view of Retford.

[Michael Edge]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

In view of the recent conversations about how 'accurate' our layouts might be, particularly with regard to timescales and appropriate stock, I'd like to pose a question, please.

 

 

It was built by our elder son, Tom as a teenager. Made from a Judith Edge kit, it's in EM gauge and, apart from few test track trips hasn't really run.

 

Now, here's the question. These Hunslet 0-6-0 diesel mechanicals were shedded at various locations, including depots in the Eastern Region and the North Eastern Region. Thus, could one ever have appeared at Retford? Perhaps to or from Doncaster Plant? 

 

It works beautifully and it would be a shame not to use it (when painted of course). 

 

Some were shedded on the ex-Furness system, so did they ever appear at Carlisle? (Mike Edge might know). 

 

I should also point out that it's one of the finest kits I've ever seen.

 

At one show, where Tom was demonstrating as a 'student modeller', one punter was quite dismissive of the model. When Tom asked why he didn't think much of it, the guy just stated that 'Your dad must have made it to be this good'. What an ignorant clot (or is that tautology?). My only involvement was to buy the wheels and motor/gearbox for him. I did nothing on it. 

 

 

Paint it and run it anyway, it's really good. Could be on its way from Leeds to wherever on delivery, it was usually done by rail in those days - although this one would have been a bit slow. Some of the first batch worked in East Anglia but I don't think any would have got to Carlisle, the Scottish ones were all from the second batch.

[robertcwp]

27 minutes ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I have read the debate about the operation of Retford with great interest. My feeling on the matter is that operation should be enjoyable and I think that for operation to be enjoyable there should be some variety and even some challenges. When I operated Retford it did tend to be a parade of trains both on the GN and the GC. I longed to see more trains going from the GN to the GC  or using the line from Whisker Hill. I felt that goods trains could have been turned onto the goods avoiding line or perhaps reverse into the lay-by siding at the south end of the station. Or goods trains could be turned onto the up slow so that an expresses could pass by. But this rarely happened.

 

I think the problem is that Retford is quite a demanding layout to operate and few of the operators were experienced enough to cope with the more difficult manoeuvres. Quite a few people I spoke to expressed the view that it should be DCC as that would greatly simplify operation. I can assure everyone that it will not be converted to DCC. I did suggest to Roy that the operators get together to have at least one practice session before a running day but he was not keen. I think the solution is to have a hardcore of operators who do know exactly how the railway works. I have only owned it for just over two weeks and I am still trying to fully understand how it operates.

 

Physically I want the station to be as close as possible to how it looked in the summer of 1957. Similarly I would like the timetable to be based as closely as possible on the summer 1957 timetable. It would be impossible to represent the full timetable, the fiddle yards would have to be enormous and a vast amount of new stock would have to be built. So the timetable will have to be a compromise both on the GC and the GN. I do not want to be too restrictive in the stock that operates on the railway, I am prepared to tolerate some stock which is out of period but not too much and of course visitors can run what they wish. I do wish trains to be in period within the set. No Gresley W1 pulling blue and grey coaches.

 

I think the GC fiddle yard may have to be expanded and I would be interested to hear Tony  G’s suggestions on this also Andrew has said that some of the roads could be split in two and again I certainly agree that this would help. Quite a few photographs seem to show freight trains going south on the GN and then turning left at Retford to go onto the GC. I wonder if it’s worth considering putting in a crossover so that such trains could return to the GN fiddle yard. Again I’m trying to add variety.
 

These are my thoughts on the problems of operating Retford but I’d welcome any comments anyone has to make on the subject.

 

Sandra

I think some 'guest' trains are fine, especially from those who have made a contribution to the layout, but having a sequence that is purely Summer 1957 would also be good. The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that Roy was right to choose 1957. The last year before diesels really began to make inroads, the first Summer of the Talisman, the last Summer before a big timetable change that affected the look of many of the trains and the scope for mixed liveries, with maroon having been launched on the ER the previous September with The Talisman.

 

I think Roy's approach was to represent the trains in one direction only, so a full sequence reflecting the timetable would not work but running the trains that are there in the correct order for the day would.

 

With the exception of the Harwich-Liverpool train and relief, specials and summer Saturday trains, all the passenger services via the GC appear to have run via Retford station, so the connections ought to see plenty of use. 

 

If we could find the Working Timetables, they might well give an indication of which trains used the goods lines or recessed to allow others to pass, or ran from GN to GC or vice versa. Even if only some trains can be represented, such moves would be good to see.

 

Linking the GC and GN off scene seems like a good idea. 

 

Never having operated the layout, I write from a position of ignorance here, but is there scope to have signallers and drivers, with the drivers driving according to the signals (once the final ones have been installed)? Many years ago, I was a member of a club where the terminus on their layout operated that way and it seemed to work reasonably well. 

 

From a practical point of view, couplings merit some thought. Screw couplings look nice but for attaching and detaching moves in the station, they could be fiddly. Some form of automatic coupling, with a means of remote uncoupling, would be better in that regard but would adversely affect the look of the stock. Then, for attaching and detaching, is it practicable to move the tail lamp?

 

As Sandra will know, I use Sprat & Winkle couplings on my layout which, amongst other things, has a terminus with an overall roof, making remote uncoupling essential. They can be made to work on curves down to 2' 6" so there would be no issue in that regard on Retford, with its more generous curves off scene. They are not 100% reliable, but they work most of the time, and would probably work better if installed more precisely than my trial and error approach.

[APOLLO]

Talking of large complex layouts to operate, this one seems to be quite an easy one., scale miles of single track.

 

Relax and take a hobo ride on the Fresno O scale layout - the scenery is superb - I hope they don't have any derailments (like I have !!) given the length of trains and height above the floor of certain sections.  I don't know the time period modeled, they seem to run a mix of steam & diesel, perhaps early 50's.

 

 

Brit15

[robertcwp]

On the subject of guest trains and Rule 1, my (ridiculously long) period for my layout at various times covers c1958-80. That hasn't prevented me from going 19-21 years out of period and ordering a complete Hornby Coronation Scot set. I already have a 6221 to haul it. If they did a Coronation or Silver Jubilee (if only...) I'd have those too.

 

With the Coronation Scot, Hornby is well aware that the stock ran through to the 1960s so BR crimson and cream and maroon are suitable liveries, as is the post-war version of LMS carriage livery as the stock re-entered service before crimson and cream was introduced. The kitchen cars were standard anyway. The LNER streamliners could also run in BR liveries although extra doors would be needed for the stock other than the Silver Jubilee for post-1951. A potential challenge is that in the Coronation/West Riding Limited/Spare Set, excluding the observation car, the only two carriages which appeared to be the same in a set were the two kitchen thirds.

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I have read the debate about the operation of Retford with great interest. My feeling on the matter is that operation should be enjoyable and I think that for operation to be enjoyable there should be some variety and even some challenges. When I operated Retford it did tend to be a parade of trains both on the GN and the GC. I longed to see more trains going from the GN to the GC  or using the line from Whisker Hill. I felt that goods trains could have been turned onto the goods avoiding line or perhaps reverse into the lay-by siding at the south end of the station. Or goods trains could be turned onto the up slow so that an expresses could pass by. But this rarely happened.

 

I think the problem is that Retford is quite a demanding layout to operate and few of the operators were experienced enough to cope with the more difficult manoeuvres. Quite a few people I spoke to expressed the view that it should be DCC as that would greatly simplify operation. I can assure everyone that it will not be converted to DCC. I did suggest to Roy that the operators get together to have at least one practice session before a running day but he was not keen. I think the solution is to have a hardcore of operators who do know exactly how the railway works. I have only owned it for just over two weeks and I am still trying to fully understand how it operates.

 

Physically I want the station to be as close as possible to how it looked in the summer of 1957. Similarly I would like the timetable to be based as closely as possible on the summer 1957 timetable. It would be impossible to represent the full timetable, the fiddle yards would have to be enormous and a vast amount of new stock would have to be built. So the timetable will have to be a compromise both on the GC and the GN. I do not want to be too restrictive in the stock that operates on the railway, I am prepared to tolerate some stock which is out of period but not too much and of course visitors can run what they wish. I do wish trains to be in period within the set. No Gresley W1 pulling blue and grey coaches.

 

I think the GC fiddle yard may have to be expanded and I would be interested to hear Tony  G’s suggestions on this also Andrew has said that some of the roads could be split in two and again I certainly agree that this would help. Quite a few photographs seem to show freight trains going south on the GN and then turning left at Retford to go onto the GC. I wonder if it’s worth considering putting in a crossover so that such trains could return to the GN fiddle yard. Again I’m trying to add variety.
 

These are my thoughts on the problems of operating Retford but I’d welcome any comments anyone has to make on the subject.

 

Sandra

 

I like your thinking very much Sandra. I am sure you have plenty to do at the moment but when we can get together, I will suggest a few possibilities. It will be a lot easier with the layout in front of us, rather than trying to put it into words.

 

I have been trying to remember what happened to the one goods train that did turn left onto the GC line. It made its way back somehow and from memory it my have come back later in the sequence as a train from the Sheffield direction, round Whisker Hill curve then south on the up main. Whether that was a made up move invented just to get it back or whether real goods trains came round that route I cannot say.

 

I also suggested a "rehearsal" before running days, with the people who were going to be running the layout on the day getting plenty of opportunity to work the sequence and get to know it. There were only a few complex moves and lever combinations to master and you need to know which controller is the one to use for each move.

 

I always found the full instructions on the sequence were more of a hindrance than a help. They were too detailed for me, listing each lever, when to pull it and when to put it back. I found that if you were learning how to run the layout, you were better off learning the levers, rather like a real signaller would. If you pulled a wrong lever, you would know firstly what that lever does and what impact it will have on the move you are trying to do and secondly you would know if it was over by mistake or if somebody else had left it over for a reason.

 

There are 69 levers at Buckingham and I could reel off what each one does, if anybody is having problems sleeping! Retford has more but most moves only use around 30% of them, so learning them shouldn't be difficult. 

Edited August 2, 2020 by t-b-g
Spelling

[robertcwp]

3 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

There are 69 levers at Buckingham and I could reel off what each one does, if anybody is having problems sleeping! 

A much better cure for insomnia would be for me to reel off train formations including correct orientation of carriages in a set.

[Willie Whizz]

2 hours ago, Hawin Dooiey said:

The original books are untouched ‘thankfully’....more likely the awful TV series that has amended things. I was admiring some of my first editions the other day.

 

Oh to have grown up in the 1950s!

 

I just ordered a copy of ‘Tootles the Taxi’ (anyone else familiar with it) illustrated by the same artist of Awdry’s books 12-17. 

 

Oh wow, 'Tootles the Taxi'! - the second book I read at Infants School (the very first being - yes - 'The Three Railway Engines'!  I bought the same Ladybird Book for my daughter who is now 40 around the same age. and  I'm amazed to hear it's still available.

[PMP]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

 

From a practical point of view, couplings merit some thought. Screw couplings look nice but for attaching and detaching moves in the station, they could be fiddly. Some form of automatic coupling, with a means of remote uncoupling, would be better in that regard but would adversely affect the look of the stock. Then, for attaching and detaching, is it practicable to move the tail lamp?

There is already at least one electromagnetic uncoupling point to remove a van as tail traffic. It was quite reliable, however the distances involved for the driver to see the accurate position of the train to uncouple was in the order of 12ft if not more, so difficult to get a high reliability on it.
I’d strongly suggest not  trying to attach lamps to traffic on the scenic sections, due to the potential for damage to occur to signals/buildings/passing traffic etc and the impracticality of trying to get a lamp onto a pin at arms length or more. There’s also the potential for a dropped lamp to cause derailments.  A more practical solution would be to have lamps fitted to both the rear coach and the tail traffic, (or neither) and put up with the discrepancy. The three links overall work ok on the layout as it was operated, but if more coupling moves are required, auto couplings are worth investigating. I use Dinghams and they are discreet and use the buffer beam hook mounting slot.

Edited August 2, 2020 by PMP
Revised distance

[Tom F]

Just now, Willie Whizz said:

 

Oh wow, 'Tootles the Taxi'! - the second book I read at Infants School (the very first being - yes - 'The Three Railway Engines'!  I bought the same Ladybird Book for my daughter who is now 40 around the same age. and  I'm amazed to hear it's still available.

 

What wonderful memories! It's only available second hand. Managed to track it down for £10

 

Apologies Tony.... Back on topic

[jrg1]

4 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hello Tony

 

The low cab version which Tom has modelled were East Anglia based when new. About 1966/7 they were reallocated to various LMR sheds in the North West, only to be withdrawn soon afterwards. One did escape the mass deportation to the North West and ended up as an exile on the Isle of White and out lived its brothers.

 

The tall cab versions (there were two) were allocated to the NER and ScR. The Heljan model is suitable for a NER loco.

They were used on the Isle of Axholme, so getting closer to LB.

[MarkC]

Regarding real locations and dating the operating period:-

 

As some will know/recall, my long term project is a 4mm scale model of Scalby, on the Scarborough & Whitby line. Now, only 1 train at a time can run through the station, so, whilst I will have models of the Camping Coaches in the goods yard, which should, in theory, limit me to the LNER and BR period, I am accumulating examples of  every class of loco & stock,  including DMUs, that we know ran on the line during the period 1885-1967, and the research has been fascinating. Some surprising examples have come to light - such as a Stanier 2-6-4T and, most amazing of all, a Class 124 Trans-Pennine DMU! The sheer variety has been great for allowing me to justify a very interesting collection of trains

 

As for the presence of the Camping Coaches whilst NER liveried locos and stock pass by, I hope that I will be forgiven by the purists - but Rule 1 will apply!

 

Mark

[St Enodoc]

9 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

(I can hear St Enodoc laughing at me having just written 'fully sceniced' - well we'll just have to see, at least I can dream about what it might look like one day.)

[St Enodoc]

7 hours ago, robertcwp said:

Couldn't agree more. If you want to operate a layout properly, it needs practice. Start with the easy moves and build up.

 

I think a lot of potentially good exhibition layouts fail to meet expectations because operators do not have enough practice away from shows. Sometimes, this is because the layouts cannot be set up in full. It may also be because there is a lack of interest and willingness to invest time in practice sessions.

As well as knowing how to operate the layout, operators need to understand how the prototype was operated too.

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, robertcwp said:

On the subject of guest trains and Rule 1, my (ridiculously long) period for my layout at various times covers c1958-80. That hasn't prevented me from going 19-21 years out of period and ordering a complete Hornby Coronation Scot set. I already have a 6221 to haul it. If they did a Coronation or Silver Jubilee (if only...) I'd have those too.

 

With the Coronation Scot, Hornby is well aware that the stock ran through to the 1960s so BR crimson and cream and maroon are suitable liveries, as is the post-war version of LMS carriage livery as the stock re-entered service before crimson and cream was introduced. The kitchen cars were standard anyway. The LNER streamliners could also run in BR liveries although extra doors would be needed for the stock other than the Silver Jubilee for post-1951. A potential challenge is that in the Coronation/West Riding Limited/Spare Set, excluding the observation car, the only two carriages which appeared to be the same in a set were the two kitchen thirds.

I wonder whether Hornby would ever consider the LNER steamliners, Robert.

 

I rather doubt it, despite the survivors lasting well into the BR maroon period.

 

From photographic evidence, it would seem that the stock ran (for a short period) in its original colours in early BR days, but never again as dedicated sets. 

 

There are a few ex-streamliners currently on Retford, some awaiting completion, including a RTO/RBT (is that the right description?); odd, because I think these ran in Scotland post-War.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I have read the debate about the operation of Retford with great interest. My feeling on the matter is that operation should be enjoyable and I think that for operation to be enjoyable there should be some variety and even some challenges. When I operated Retford it did tend to be a parade of trains both on the GN and the GC. I longed to see more trains going from the GN to the GC  or using the line from Whisker Hill. I felt that goods trains could have been turned onto the goods avoiding line or perhaps reverse into the lay-by siding at the south end of the station. Or goods trains could be turned onto the up slow so that an expresses could pass by. But this rarely happened.

 

I think the problem is that Retford is quite a demanding layout to operate and few of the operators were experienced enough to cope with the more difficult manoeuvres. Quite a few people I spoke to expressed the view that it should be DCC as that would greatly simplify operation. I can assure everyone that it will not be converted to DCC. I did suggest to Roy that the operators get together to have at least one practice session before a running day but he was not keen. I think the solution is to have a hardcore of operators who do know exactly how the railway works. I have only owned it for just over two weeks and I am still trying to fully understand how it operates.

 

Physically I want the station to be as close as possible to how it looked in the summer of 1957. Similarly I would like the timetable to be based as closely as possible on the summer 1957 timetable. It would be impossible to represent the full timetable, the fiddle yards would have to be enormous and a vast amount of new stock would have to be built. So the timetable will have to be a compromise both on the GC and the GN. I do not want to be too restrictive in the stock that operates on the railway, I am prepared to tolerate some stock which is out of period but not too much and of course visitors can run what they wish. I do wish trains to be in period within the set. No Gresley W1 pulling blue and grey coaches.

 

I think the GC fiddle yard may have to be expanded and I would be interested to hear Tony  G’s suggestions on this also Andrew has said that some of the roads could be split in two and again I certainly agree that this would help. Quite a few photographs seem to show freight trains going south on the GN and then turning left at Retford to go onto the GC. I wonder if it’s worth considering putting in a crossover so that such trains could return to the GN fiddle yard. Again I’m trying to add variety.
 

These are my thoughts on the problems of operating Retford but I’d welcome any comments anyone has to make on the subject.

 

Sandra

Good morning Sandra,

 

'I can assure everyone that it will not be converted to DCC.'

 

Such music to me ears on this lovely day! 

 

As mentioned, you have such a groundswell of support for what you've done (doing) that the will of many is there to help you in every way they can, including the operation of Retford. Though operation has never been 'my thing', I'd like to think I could be self-disciplined enough to try driving it. As you know, it was where I spent my happiest trainspotting moments (did they really begin 65 years ago?), and I'd love to relive them in model form. 

 

I think 1957 is a good aim for consistency, when BR maroon was becoming more prevalent on the prestige stock. That said, carmine and cream remained well into the early-'60s, with a wonderful mixture of the two.

 

I think once you meet up with Tony Gee and discuss the sequence, progress towards 'better' operations will be rapid. 

 

Regarding auto-couplings, I use Sprat & Winkle with success, though seeing the magnets' positions on LB is a bit easier than on Retford.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Atso]

Just catching up properly with this thread. Great news that Retford's future is secure and well done to Sandra for taking on such a huge project. I felt sad that I never got the opportunity to meet Roy and see Retford but I am glad that, at least, I might oneday have the opportunity to see the layout. Best of luck releasing the spirit of Roy's (and now your) vision.

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, jrg1 said:

They were used on the Isle of Axholme, so getting closer to LB.

Many thanks,

 

And closer to Retford, too.............

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[robertcwp]

16 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I wonder whether Hornby would ever consider the LNER steamliners, Robert.

 

I rather doubt it, despite the survivors lasting well into the BR maroon period.

 

From photographic evidence, it would seem that the stock ran (for a short period) in its original colours in early BR days, but never again as dedicated sets. 

 

There are a few ex-streamliners currently on Retford, some awaiting completion, including a RTO/RBT; odd, because I think these ran in Scotland post-War.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I didn't think they would consider the Coronation Scot stock but they did. That train includes four types they had not done before including a new length of underframe for the open first.

 

It's odd that there is a kitchen/brake twin as I think you are correct, they ran mostly in Scotland, being attached to sleepers for service of breakfast or supper, but I don't think they worked south of Newcastle or Edinburgh, depending on the service.

 

I had hoped it might be a kitchen/second twin, which would have been handy for the King's Cross-Glasgow train. I can't remember whether Roy had that train on the layout but, if he did, I don't have any photos or footage of it.

[robertcwp]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

As well as knowing how to operate the layout, operators need to understand how the prototype was operated too.

Indeed. I mentioned to Sandra that I had no idea how the moves I referred to in a previous post whereby a PMV was detached from a GN train and added to a GC one were actually done in practice.

[Tony Wright]

5 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

I didn't think they would consider the Coronation Scot stock but they did. That train includes four types they had not done before including a new length of underframe for the open first.

 

It's odd that there is a kitchen/brake twin as I think you are correct, they ran mostly in Scotland, being attached to sleepers for service of breakfast or supper, but I don't think they worked south of Newcastle or Edinburgh, depending on the service.

 

I had hoped it might be a kitchen/second twin, which would have been handy for the King's Cross-Glasgow train. I can't remember whether Roy had that train on the layout but, if he did, I don't have any photos or footage of it.

I didn't take a huge amount of notice of what/which stock was in the GN fiddle yard last week, though there used to be (probably still is) a Kitchen/Second twin in the 'West Riding', as well as a TO/BTO (SO/BSO in 1957).

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited August 3, 2020 by Tony Wright
to add something