Wright writes.....

[PMP]

22 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Paul,

(snip)

 

Could this be more of a generational thing? Certainly, with regard to Bassett Lowke, it would seem that most of the collectors are getting on (have you ever been to a Bassett Lowke Collectors' Society Convention, held every two years in Tewin near Welwyn? I felt like a child!). It would seem that collections keep on coming back on to the market, increasing the supply to satisfy a diminishing demand. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I think that’s right, I never got to go to the Tewin event, I think it was a owners group private meeting.  I think BL and early Hornby and German tinplate will retain their value as so little was made (b/l) or stayed pristine (Hornby etc). I think people cottoned on to that hence the Wrenn collectors. However because more people were aware of the ‘value’ of old trains there were more collectors looking to get pleasure+return from those models. As those chaps pass their collections come on the market, but contemporary RTR eclipses them by a country mile, so there’s relatively little interest for layout stock, except for other fewer collectors. When you look at a Dublin/Wrenn Castle vs a contemporary Hornby release, why choose the old one? We know they ran well, but so do the contemporary releases which also look like museum quality, vs the historic ‘toy’ appearance.

Edited September 13, 2020 by PMP
Last para

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

1. There's been a diminishing of folk actually making things, particularly locomotives and, to a lesser extent, rolling stock (ironically, Covid might have had the opposite effect, but I can't tell first-hand). This might be because of improved RTR (which, to be fair, is now often better than what many could make for themselves; and, it's usually considerably cheaper). 

As far as locos are concerned I think the improvements in RTR have cut down making it yourself. For my own particular modelling area and timescale I can only think of two regular performers not available RTR or announced by the mainstream sources. Those would be the Johnson 2F and Stanier 3P. Some of the others are a little long in the tooth but mostly not too bad with e bit of embellishment.

Coaching stock has improved a lot but from my point of view there is a big hole with LMS Open stock, which I have built using Comet sides, and Period 1/2 stock some of which was around from 1925 to the mid-1960s. I've also just started on some Gresley Opens for my ER excursions set.

Wagons have also improved a lot, but we still only have a generic 5 plank and tank wagons. Again many are a good basis for a bit of improvement but to get the variety I want I have a lot of kits from Parkside, Cambrian and Chivers amongst others. Some are from now-defunct sources but can be picked up if you look and wait.

 

2. The number of new kits being made available (again, particularly locomotives) has also diminished (cause and effect?). 

I think full loco kits have diminished although I don't usually build complete locos myself, only a bit of alteration to RTR. The range of carriages and wagons that it is possible to build if you are doing about WW2 to 1964 is quite extensive.

I think modern methods such as 3-D printing may change the market with made to order copies of things people have produced for their own modelling.

 

3. Far more layout I see at shows and in the press seem to be much the same; again, with regard to locos and rolling stock. And, in several cases, there's a proliferation of RTP buildings/structures. The corollary of this is the smaller number of scratch-/kit-built items, and this is not just in OO. 

I would agree that what is on display is now quite repetitive. I am not 'turned on' by a layout full of 16T minerals with a 9F and a standard brake van or lots of the same 12T box vans

 

4. The general standard of layouts in general at shows has never been higher in terms of presentation/appearance/lighting. However, I wish I could say the same for the running on some of them. Many of these layouts represent the BR steam/diesel transition period. That's why it's refreshing (at least to me) to see, say, a pre-Grouping depiction where, out of necessity, much more will have been made. More and more layouts are controlled currently by DCC (which doesn't always improve the running!) and many now have (annoying?) sound, often too loud!

Standards of construction have gone up. Maybe this is because improved RTR stock has given more time for the infrastructure. Operationally some excellent looking layouts are abysmal. My particular bugbear used to be badly loaded wagons. I remember one particular layout I have seen at least three times and has featured in the mags which has a conflat loaded with an A type container firmly fixed at one end. To me in instant fail. I enjoy pre-1948 layouts as they need a lot more work both in finding information and building sufficient stock of the right types.

My pet hate is DCC sound fitted TMD layouts with 12 Class 66 all in different liveries which wouldn't be around together in timescale or location. I seems a pre-requisite of these layouts to show how clever you are by setting all of the locos to produce maximum noise at the same time.

Besides that sort of thing why do we have to have lots of DCC train noise and no background sounds? just listen to those great old Transacord discs. Railways in reality have urban or rural background noise, traffic, station staff talking to the crew during a stop, block bells from the signalbox window............

 

5. Though I have no 'hard' evidence (other than talking with the manufacturers) most kits (particularly those for locos) are never finished to complete satisfaction. This is substantiated by the number I've seen bought off eBay (not by me; it's as mysterious as nuclear physics!), where many are just a mess. When I say 'complete satisfaction', I admit, that's subjective, but many I've seen don't run well, are glued together and are painted with tar! 

It took me a long time of fiddling with kit bashing and painting to get to an acceptable level of modelling. Some people just don't have the patience to do it.

When I made the model of my Grandad's Lineman's Cabin which appeared on Black Country Blues it took me a whole day to produce the three window frames to a standard that I thought was needed for a layout under the glare of publicity like that was. There is only one known photo which I took in 1967 and no drawing to work to, so getting it to look right was a long process over about two months.

 

6. There is more of a reluctance now for folk to 'alter' what they've bought (in case it decreases the value?). 'Oh, I've just spent £XXX on that model and by improving/altering/renumbering/renaming/weathering it it'll be devalued. Anyway, if I keep it mint/boxed it'll appeal to collectors'. What has happened to the notion of 'improving' something?

I don't like that collector approach myself. very little of what I have is pristine, my first modification job was to weather a Hornbt Dublo 8F. My railway runs in the days of Urban Grot, so I want the trains to fit in with that.

 

7. Where 'personal' alterations to RTR stuff have taken place (particularly with regard to weathering), the results can be stupendous. This is an area where things are better than they've ever been (at least in my view).  For someone to be almost 'apologising' for not building kits is nonsense. 

Nonsense, when weathering like this brings a pair of (modified) Bachmann RTR locos to life; the work of Tom Foster. 

I certainly think that a lot of RTR can be improved by slight additions and subtle weathering as long as it is not overdone and in the right shades for the type of stock and period. 

The colour of 'track dirt' has changed over the years with the change in traction, materials carried and type of brakes. You get a different type of grot from old fashioned Iron on wheel rim brakes to that from modern composite disc brakes, and of course fitted freight stock with the brake pipes actually connected was a rarity before the 1960s. 

The stock on the railway was also a mixture of new build, complete overhaul and local patch up. My stock is evolving from pristine through about ten stages to unidentifiable grot. For example 16T minerals were still being built in my setting so were between ex-works and about 15 years old so are painted up accordingly and mixed in with 7-planks varying from done up quite well to ex PO with a few bits of name showing, mostly a dirty coal dust colour with a few unpainted new planks around.

 

8. More folk seem to be paying to have their modelling done by others for them, even to the extent of not being able to fit decoders themselves! 

A case of upbringing and changing times? My Grandfather who was the biggest influence on me worked for a cycle builder before WW1. After the was he joined the LNWR in the days when most of the railway on the ground you built up as you went along. Training with him I learned a lot about metalworking and woodworking, and how to keep things running by repairing and making copies of broken parts. He could make something out of nothing so it seemed. The fence at the bottom of his garden was built c1956 from matchboarding recovered during the replacement of Vauxhall and Duddeston signal box. It was still standing over 40 years later. Some window frames and  floorboards made cold frames for the garden. In my shed I am still using a stool which he made in the early 1950s. Following his lead I still do most things myself, decorating, gardening, minor household repairs, etc where I possibly can. 

 

9. An encouraging sign is that there are some fine, younger modellers out there; and I stress the term 'modellers'! Those who actually make things for themselves, are keen to learn and, most importantly, are 'not afraid'. 

I've seen some good stuff around recently. A few of the younger generation are embracing modern technology to make more detailing such as trackside and on-track equipment found on the modern railway.

 

10. in actual terms, RTR items are not more expensive than they ever were (under £200.00 for a forthcoming RTR Hornby A2/3 - half that of a complete kit!). That said, kit components seem to be increasing in price.

Relative to other prices locos have probably not gone up very much especially when you compare the quality of current offerings. Hornby Dublo's late offering of the rebuilt WC retailed at £5 15s 6d in old money. That is the equivalent of about £125 today.

I have noticed an increase in price of some components for my home-spun stuff. Wheels from the big manufacturers have increased out of all recognition and the last pack of wheel bearings I bought had gone up by about 50% 

 

11. The age profile in the hobby has never been at a higher average, which probably means a glut of items coming on the market in the not-too-distant future; at lower prices? Supply and demand?

I think there has definitely been a levelling off in the price of older stuff e.g. fairly common Hornby Dublo items go quite cheaply, although boxed good condition rare stuff still seems to fetch silly prices if two or three people are chasing it.

 

12. Some clubs might not survive for much longer, and not just because of Covid. Which asks the question, how many exhibitions will return?

I think that's a bit of chicken and egg. Clubs promote exhibitions and exhibitions financially sustain clubs.  I think some clubs will go under as the costs of running a venue are too great these days. There are also too many counter attractions. Society is based too much these days on 'Instant Gratification', hence the rise in the amount and quality of RTR.

 

13. We've never had it so good!

As far as what is available RTR we definitely haven't, and with on-line shopping the range of materials and ready made components available is probably as good as ever.

 

Sorry for a long-winded reply, but I think the original post raised many good points and these are some of my own views.

 

Eric

 

 

You've raised some excellent points, Eric,

 

Can you check on the equivalent price of £5 15s 6d, please? I thought it was more than £125.00 in today's money. 

 

I wonder what a current Hornby rebuilt 'WC' costs today? More than £125.00. That said, the difference in 'accuracy' between the two models is as far apart as possible in my view.

 

Many thanks.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Teague]

8 hours ago, TheSignalEngineer said:

1. There's been a diminishing of folk actually making things, particularly locomotives and, to a lesser extent, rolling stock (ironically, Covid might have had the opposite effect, but I can't tell first-hand). This might be because of improved RTR (which, to be fair, is now often better than what many could make for themselves; and, it's usually considerably cheaper). 

As far as locos are concerned I think the improvements in RTR have cut down making it yourself. For my own particular modelling area and timescale I can only think of two regular performers not available RTR or announced by the mainstream sources. Those would be the Johnson 2F and Stanier 3P. Some of the others are a little long in the tooth but mostly not too bad with e bit of embellishment.

 

I'm personally not sure about the notion that almost everything is now available RTR.

My layout covers SR 1938 - 48 and I recently analysed what ex-LB&SCR locos were available in various forms for this era, and I found that of 25 ex-LB&SCR locos that existed in the SR fleet at nationalisation, only 5 have ever been available RTR (of which 3 are 'sort of' current). 

Kits are or have been available for 19 classes (but some of these duplicate those available RTR), and there remain 6 types for which no RTR or kit solution is available.

Since I have set myself the aim of having in my fleet, at least one of every type that SR had on its books at nationalisation, this does present some challenges - and what I have shown above does not include SR and ex-LSWR, ex-SECR, ex-LCDR or ex-SER built locos!

So I still see plenty of room for kits, including new ones or equally, new 3D printed models.

Tony

[t-b-g]

11 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I'm personally not sure about the notion that almost everything is now available RTR.

My layout covers SR 1938 - 48 and I recently analysed what ex-LB&SCR locos were available in various forms for this era, and I found that of 25 ex-LB&SCR locos that existed in the SR fleet at nationalisation, only 5 have ever been available RTR (of which 3 are 'sort of' current). 

Kits are or have been available for 19 classes (but some of these duplicate those available RTR), and there remain 6 types for which no RTR or kit solution is available.

Since I have set myself the aim of having in my fleet, at least one of every type that SR had on its books at nationalisation, this does present some challenges - and what I have shown above does not include SR and ex-LSWR, ex-SECR, ex-LCDR or ex-SER built locos!

So I still see plenty of room for kits, including new ones or equally, new 3D printed models.

Tony

 

Pre-grouping prototypes, especially those that didn't last into later BR steam times or preservation, are really the last bastion of the "If I want one I have to make it or pay somebody to make it for me" modellers.

 

Even then, now that the more common later classes have been covered, the RTR people are gradually looking further back into history. 

 

 

[Compound2632]

22 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I'm personally not sure about the notion that almost everything is now available RTR.

My layout covers SR 1938 - 48 and I recently analysed what ex-LB&SCR locos were available in various forms for this era, and I found that of 25 ex-LB&SCR locos that existed in the SR fleet at nationalisation, only 5 have ever been available RTR (of which 3 are 'sort of' current). 

Kits are or have been available for 19 classes (but some of these duplicate those available RTR), and there remain 6 types for which no RTR or kit solution is available.

 

 

I'm sure a similar analysis for any division of the LNER and even LMS (especially in Scotland) would yield similar or poorer results for the last ten years of Grouping and, indeed, the first ten or fifteen years of nationalisation.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Compound2632
of not on.

[Bucoops]

With regards to RTR availability, the big hole in my eyes is pre-grouping coaching stock. My very blinkered view is of the GE mainline and I can't think of anything pre-grouping available RTR. There will be the generic Hattons ones at some point but of course by their very nature they are inaccurate.

 

I know at nationalisation there was still a very large percentage of pre-grouping coaching stock in service - so manufacturers, with livery changes could, do about 60 years of coverage with one set of tooling. A longer timespan than many post-grouping coaches which they do make! So I don't really know why the manufacturers haven't cottoned on to this.

[Compound2632]

11 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

I know at nationalisation there was still a very large percentage of pre-grouping coaching stock in service - so manufacturers, with livery changes could, do about 60 years of coverage with one set of tooling. A longer timespan than many post-grouping coaches which they do make! So I don't really know why the manufacturers haven't cottoned on to this.

 

For example: late LNWR carriages - 57 ft elliptical-roofed stock - were in service well into the 1950s. But that on its own wouldn't help recreate a balanced scene (need more LMS P1 stock for that) and wouldn't be much help for anyone wanting to model pre-Grouping LNWR earlier than c. 1917. The same is true of the one instance of genuine pre-Grouping carriages RTR, the SECR Birdcages stock, where the late period 60 ft stock has been modelled; as far as I'm aware that is incompatible with the popular "full Wainwright" liveried locomotives that have been produced.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Compound2632
of not og

[micklner]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

You've raised some excellent points, Eric,

 

Can you check on the equivalent price of £5 15s 6d, please? I thought it was more than £125.00 in today's money. 

 

I wonder what a current Hornby rebuilt 'WC' costs today? More than £125.00. That said, the difference in 'accuracy' between the two models is as far apart as possible in my view.

 

Many thanks.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

No idea what year .

 

In 1960 = £134.00 today

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I'm personally not sure about the notion that almost everything is now available RTR.

My layout covers SR 1938 - 48 and I recently analysed what ex-LB&SCR locos were available in various forms for this era, and I found that of 25 ex-LB&SCR locos that existed in the SR fleet at nationalisation, only 5 have ever been available RTR (of which 3 are 'sort of' current). 

Kits are or have been available for 19 classes (but some of these duplicate those available RTR), and there remain 6 types for which no RTR or kit solution is available.

Since I have set myself the aim of having in my fleet, at least one of every type that SR had on its books at nationalisation, this does present some challenges - and what I have shown above does not include SR and ex-LSWR, ex-SECR, ex-LCDR or ex-SER built locos!

So I still see plenty of room for kits, including new ones or equally, new 3D printed models.

Tony

Hi Tony

 

I started on the same quest but with diesels many years ago. After having either converted types to another class, for example class 33 to class 27 or scratchbuilt the ones that there wasn't a conversion possible, wallop in no time my efforts were deemed useless as every other train set user could do the same in RTR. What they will never have is the fun getting there on their own. 

 

 Some homemade locos zooming around my train set

 

[Headstock]

I model the BR period and I stick to one rule. Right locomotive, on the right train, in the right location. It immediately blows a massive 16'' shell hole through what is available RTR. I would also add, that despite the image portrayed, there is still a large percentage of RTR stock, were a kit is the better option in terms of accuracy. I'm quite happy to use RTR when required, or at least chop it up and make it more acceptable.The situation is better now than it was twenty years ago, back then RTR could supply about ten percent of my stock requirements. Two decades later, that has risen to about twenty  percent. I doubt if one hundred percent coverage will ever become available. Judging by the current rate of release, I shall not be waiting, in fact I will be a long time dead.

Edited September 13, 2020 by Headstock
removal of mysterious spot

[Tony Teague]

5 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Tony

 

I started on the same quest but with diesels many years ago. After having either converted types to another class, for example class 33 to class 27 or scratchbuilt the ones that there wasn't a conversion possible, wallop in no time my efforts were deemed useless as every other train set user could do the same in RTR. What they will never have is the fun getting there on their own. 

 

 Some homemade locos zooming around my train set

 

 

Very nice - and all the better for being your own work!

[t-b-g]

10 minutes ago, Headstock said:

I model the BR period and I stick to one rule. Right locomotive, on the right train, in the right location. It immediately blows a massive 16'' shell hole through what is available RTR. I would also add, that despite the image portrayed, there is still a large percentage of RTR stock, were a kit is the better option in terms of accuracy. I'm quite happy to use RTR when required, or at least chop it up and make it more acceptable.The situation is better now than it was twenty years ago, back then RTR could supply about ten percent of my stock requirements. Two decades later, that has risen to about twenty  percent. I doubt if one hundred percent coverage will ever become available. Judging by the current rate of release, I shall not be waiting, in fact I will be a long time dead.

 

I think you are right. Rolling stock will never be fully covered RTR. There are just too many variations and the chances of more than one or two of each type (for example, a Gresley Corridor Brake 3rd) being produced RTR are slim.

 

You could take this "right train" etc. to a highly impractical level, if you decide that you want all your locos and carriages to be the actual ones that appeared on those services on a particular day.

 

Has anybody done that?

 

I set my sights much lower in the make up of trains. If I have a train that could be right and has a loco that could well have hauled it, then that is close enough for me!

 

When you model pre-grouping and have to make everything, it is hard enough already without trying to research and identify which carriages were on which service on a specific day.

 

 

[Bucoops]

On 12/09/2020 at 11:29, Bucoops said:

 

 

 

 

 

I need to stop quoting myself - although a picture of the amazing Quads at the North Norfolk Railway never gets old in my eyes! Mind you, they are in intensive use at the moment as they are ideal for social distancing so not quite looking their normal pristine selves.

 

I've found a picture of the Oval-ish buffers on a GE shortie and the housings are different to the non-corridor stock. They look more like the housings for the clipped round ones, which makes sense as they have the collars to extend them when the buckeye is not in use

 

https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/lnercoach/e28affb

 

So I have a set of these on order to see how they look

 

https://www.roxeymouldings.co.uk/product/1144/4mb040-lbscr/secr-oval-coach-buffers/

 

 

[Northmoor]

Re: how the collectors market will fare in future, perhaps the collectible whisky market offers an analogy.  From my "research", Single Malt Scotch (which is where the majority of collecting is) can be divided into three categories:

1.  Less than £60-ish: "Supermarket" whisky, no reflection on the quality as most is excellent whisky, but being sold in supermarkets is indicative of the volume available and 90% of it will be opened and consumed.  It never becomes really valuable because there is so much of it.  Think of these as the Triang Princess, which some comedians on eBay still list as "Rare and Collectable".
2. £60-£500-ish: Older-aged and low volume specials but will still get consumed because it is still affordable to drink for a lot of people (not everyone though).  Probably less than 10% of these will survive and that's 10% from a much smaller pool of available bottles.  This is what seems to climb in value.  These are perhaps analogous to a wagon that was only in the range for a few years or hard to keep in perfect condition (like one of the Tri-ang wagons from an action set, which needs to still have all it's rockets etc.).
3. Over £500-ish: Very few people will actually consume whisky at this price, except high profile incidents which make the newspapers, probably city boys on bonus week.  There is only a very small volume bottled and as the supply doesn't decline much through consumption, it only changes hands through collectors, which is a fairly fixed market.  This is equivalent to high price/low volume "Special Editions" perhaps like JLTRT, or the market in Bassett-Lowke.  It's already out of the price range of most people and no-one will play with/damage/destroy it and reduce the volume of supply.  Crucially and unlike whisky (although drinking fashions rise and wane), the number of people interested in it is falling as those who collect for nostalgia depart this earth.  Therefore collectors who hope to make money out of these collections are likely to be disappointed with the return on their investment.

[Headstock]

32 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

You could take this "right train" etc. to a highly impractical level, if you decide that you want all your locos and carriages to be the actual ones that appeared on those services on a particular day.

 

Has anybody done that?

 

 

I have been able to do that in some cases, as my research has uncovered the numbers of carriages working on a particular service. With others I may know that there was only one, two or three etc of a type deployed. I have also quite deliberately settled on a particular place and time, that has natural restrictions on the total stock levels available. That makes my philosophie more realistically achievable.

 

Tracking Locomotives is much easier, The hardest research there, is more focused on individual workings of services by certain sheds, and the individual locomotives in their fleets. Being able to speak to drivers and firemen was invaluable in that regard. What that means is that many locomotives are built for and allocated to specific services and would never be seen on others, others locomotives have more leeway. By following the prototype, I have no need of such things as removable lamps for the vast majority of movements. 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Headstock
add info

[Headstock]

41 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

 

I need to stop quoting myself - although a picture of the amazing Quads at the North Norfolk Railway never gets old in my eyes! Mind you, they are in intensive use at the moment as they are ideal for social distancing so not quite looking their normal pristine selves.

 

I've found a picture of the Oval-ish buffers on a GE shortie and the housings are different to the non-corridor stock. They look more like the housings for the clipped round ones, which makes sense as they have the collars to extend them when the buckeye is not in use

 

https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/lnercoach/e28affb

 

So I have a set of these on order to see how they look

 

https://www.roxeymouldings.co.uk/product/1144/4mb040-lbscr/secr-oval-coach-buffers/

 

 

 

Good morning Bucoops'

 

what's a GE shortie?

[Bucoops]

8 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Bucoops'

 

what's a GE shortie?

 

Hi Andrew,

 

It's the nickname given to the 52'6" vestibuled/gangwayed stock built by the LNER for the GE area. Example diagrams are 9 (Composite), 25 (Third), 146 (Brake 3rd), 154 (full brake - what I'm building at present) etc.

[Headstock]

23 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

 

Hi Andrew,

 

It's the nickname given to the 52'6" vestibuled/gangwayed stock built by the LNER for the GE area. Example diagrams are 9 (Composite), 25 (Third), 146 (Brake 3rd), 154 (full brake - what I'm building at present) etc.

 

Oh silly me, I forgot what you are building. Is this the same thing?

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/45695255852/in/photostream/

 

One little detail, the second toplight in from both ends, is the pivoting type with rain guard, as in the dia 120 BY.

 

If so, it looks like this particular example has the bog standard retractable clipped buffer. I must admit, I sometimes cock these up, as BG'S were often deployed on the hook with gangways sealed, the Pullman buffing gear deactivated and the buckeyes down. I keep fitting the retacted casting, then having to remove them, drill them out and fit the extended buffers for screw link couplings.

 

 

Edited September 13, 2020 by Headstock

[65179]

5 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

I have been able to do that in some cases, as my research has uncovered the numbers of carriages working on a particular service. With others I may know that there was only one, two or three etc of a type deployed. I have also quite deliberately settled on a particular place and time, that has natural restrictions on the total stock levels available. That makes my philosophie more realistically achievable.

 

Tracking Locomotives is much easier, The hardest research there, is more focused on individual workings of services by certain sheds, and the individual locomotives in their fleets. Being able to speak to drivers and firemen was invaluable in that regard. What that means is that many locomotives are built for and allocated to specific services and would never be seen on others, others locomotives have more leeway.

 

I find this sort of stuff fascinating; frequently getting in the way of doing any modelling.  As someone born post-1968 I find the lack of predictability of the steam era particularly interesting.  With no restriction on traction knowledge a driver could be presented with (virtually) anything.  My fondness for the railways of Manchester past blossomed when I read R E Rose's The LMS and LNER in Manchester. His description of the sheer variety of locos that could turn up on the fitted and partially fitted goods workings to York and particularly Colwick was a different world to me compared with the BR heading towards sectorisation I saw in the then present.  The anecdote (from elsewhere) about a GC section driver blocking the entrance to Gorton depot by derailing a J6 (edit to provide correct information: actually one of the J1s allocated to Gorton/Trafford Park during WWII) as he wasn't familiar with the GN controls (edit: loco went walkies because the regulator wasn't fully closed) is even more peculiar to modern ears.

 

Accuracy with regards to modelling can go too far.  Limit your choice of locos to a particular day and you'll find your favourites didn't run! Been there, got the t-shirt.

 

Simon

Edited September 13, 2020 by 65179
To correct duff info

[jwealleans]

27 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

It's the nickname given to the 52'6" vestibuled/gangwayed stock built by the LNER for the GE area.

 

Modellers nickname, i suspect.

[t-b-g]

44 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

I have been able to do that in some cases, as my research has uncovered the numbers of carriages working on a particular service. With others I may know that there was only one, two or three etc of a type deployed. I have also quite deliberately settled on a particular place and time, that has natural restrictions on the total stock levels available. That makes my philosophie more realistically achievable.

 

Tracking Locomotives is much easier, The hardest research there, is more focused on individual workings of services by certain sheds, and the individual locomotives in their fleets. Being able to speak to drivers and firemen was invaluable in that regard. What that means is that many locomotives are built for and allocated to specific services and would never be seen on others, others locomotives have more leeway. By following the prototype, I have no need of such things as removable lamps for the vast majority of movements. 

 

It comes down to "running trains" and/or "operating a railway" once again.

 

We need changeable lamps on Buckingham as the locos work what are in effect "diagrams" that often include different types of train throughout the day.

 

Some of the locos can work up to 4 different classes of train. Even the station pilot gets a run out on the main line with a permanent way train.

 

I sometimes don't know which is closer to the real thing. A procession of trains, with the same loco always heading, say North, on the same train but never going back again but accurately portraying what a trainspotter would have seen from the lineside on a particular visit (they would no be there long enough to see most trains go back again), or the Buckingham approach with trains working back and forth along a line, working traffic to and from different destinations and working different types of trains in the process.

 

They both have their merits and their limitations.

 

I know which I prefer. 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

7 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

It comes down to "running trains" and/or "operating a railway" once again.

 

We need changeable lamps on Buckingham as the locos work what are in effect "diagrams" that often include different types of train throughout the day.

 

Some of the locos can work up to 4 different classes of train. Even the station pilot gets a run out on the main line with a permanent way train.

 

I sometimes don't know which is closer to the real thing. A procession of trains, with the same loco always heading, say North, on the same train but never going back again but accurately portraying what a trainspotter would have seen from the lineside on a particular visit (they would no be there long enough to see most trains go back again), or the Buckingham approach with trains working back and forth along a line, working traffic to and from different destinations and working different types of trains in the process.

 

They both have their merits and their limitations.

 

I know which I prefer. 

 

 

I quite agree Tony. I'm lucky enough to have the space for a layout that does a bit of both.

[Headstock]

5 minutes ago, 65179 said:

 

I find this sort of stuff fascinating; frequently getting in the way of doing any modelling.  As someone born post-1968 I find the lack of predictability of the steam era particularly interesting.  With no restriction on traction knowledge a driver could be presented with (virtually) anything.  My fondness for the railways of Manchester past blossomed when I read R E Rose's The LMS and LNER in Manchester. His description of the sheer variety of locos that could turn up on the fitted and partially fitted goods workings to York and particularly Colwick was a different world to me compared with the BR heading towards sectorisation I saw in the then present.  The anecdote (from elsewhere) about a GC section driver blocking the entrance to Gorton depot by derailing a J6 as he wasn't familiar with the GN controls is even more peculiar to modern ears.

 

Accuracy with regards to modelling can go too far.  Limit your choice of locos to a particular day and you'll find your favourites didn't run! Been there, got the t-shirt.

 

Simon

 

I find this sort of stuff fascinating; frequently getting in the way of doing any modelling.  As someone born post-1968 I find the lack of predictability of the steam era particularly interesting.  With no restriction on traction knowledge a driver could be presented with (virtually) anything.

 

I'm not totally sold on the unpredictability angle.  When talking to footplate crew it sounds like that, as they are picking a few anecdotes from across many years, Looking at observers records (observers make notes rather than spotters who cross things out) the norm was for the same locomotive to turn up on the same working day after day, there were exceptions, obviously and time and area can make a difference. Fitted freights between York and Woodford were pretty predictable for example. Ninety percent of the time it would be a York B16, occasionally a B1, V2 or a Thompson A2. The B16 is the one you should be modeling, representing the typical not the favourite the rare or the special.

 

The anecdote (from elsewhere) about a GC section driver blocking the entrance to Gorton depot by derailing a J6 as he wasn't familiar with the GN controls is even more peculiar to modern ears.

 

I would imagine a J6 was not so common around Manchester. Around Nottingham, a range of GNR O-6-0 tender engines were as common as muck. Anecdotally, the J6 seems to have been well liked, apart from the open cab when running in reverse.

 

Accuracy with regards to modelling can go too far.  Limit your choice of locos to a particular day and you'll find your favourites didn't run! Been there, got the t-shirt.

 

Not my thing, the right engine for the train will always my favourite.

[t-b-g]

3 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I quite agree Tony. I'm lucky enough to have the space for a layout that does a bit of both.

 

The best of both worlds!

 

It is nice sometimes just to watch trains run and we can do that on the new enlarged Narrow Road, which is an end to end with 5 stations and a total scenic run of around 140ft but also has an optional continuous run, so we can just send them round when we want to.

 

That usually only happens when we have visitors who are not really railway minded or we are working on the layout rather than operating the sequence.

[St Enodoc]

1 minute ago, t-b-g said:

 

The best of both worlds!

 

It is nice sometimes just to watch trains run and we can do that on the new enlarged Narrow Road, which is an end to end with 5 stations and a total scenic run of around 140ft but also has an optional continuous run, so we can just send them round when we want to.

 

That usually only happens when we have visitors who are not really railway minded or we are working on the layout rather than operating the sequence.

Lovely! I'd like to see that one day...

 

On the Mid-Cornwall Lines, your (our) favourite category is represented by the numerous clay trains, branch passenger and freight trains, railbus shuttles, and so on while the "trainspotters" are catered for by, for example, the three named trains, the TPO and the sleepers, each of which makes only one trip per direction per day. If they're allowed out really late at night they'll see a fully-fitted express freight in each direction too...

 

Great fun!