Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Mine (assuming CLUMBER) has the earlier BR device, so the lion faces (correctly) in the direction of travel both sides of the tender, it not being subject to the tenets of Heraldry. Since Retford's period is 1957, it might well be right, though it could just as well be wrong.

 

Hello Tony,

 

Funnily enough, I was reading about this earlier today. The BloodandCustard website (https://bloodandcustard.org) says that the stipulation of the College of Heralds that the later BR crest face always in the left direction only came about in 1959, meaning that the later crest would have been applied with the lion facing in the direction of travel for a few years at least (see the 'Tale of the Lion' section).  

 

I would be interested to hear if others think this is correct - I had always assumed that the 'backwards facing' lion was something that came in with the later crest from 1956. 

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon John,

 

Mine (assuming CLUMBER) has the earlier BR device, so the lion faces (correctly) in the direction of travel both sides of the tender, it not being subject to the tenets of Heraldry. Since Retford's period is 1957, it might well be right, though it could just as well be wrong.

 

The reason I asked Geoff Haynes to apply the earlier device was because I first saw CLUMBER in 1955, near Kiveton Park (my brother and I were tiddler fishing alongside the adjacent Chesterfield Canal with a favourite uncle). It would definitely have still had the earlier BR device then. 

 

It raises the question (in a way, at least to me) as to how 'accurate' we should make our models; accurate to within a very tight timescale - even just a day? My motivation for making my models is entirely self-indulgent; they're recreations of what I saw as a trainspotter from the mid-'50s up until the early '60s. Thus, several locos have the earlier BR device, while many (most?) have the later one. Some even have electric warning flashes (no earlier than 1961) because that's how I saw them - KINGFISHER, for instance, or SILVER LINK and MALLARD, during the last summer of steam haulage of 'The Elizabethan'. How this squares with Little Bytham's main line depiction of the summer of 1958 is a matter of 'conscience', but since all three were built for Stoke Summit (which had a more-fluid timescale) I'm certainly not going to scratch-off the flashes and spoil Ian Rathbone's superb painting. If visitors are 'outraged' by this, then that's up to them. I'm also quite happy to have the prototype DELTIC blasting round, even though it didn't come to the ECML until 1959. 

 

Thus, do the following images render Little Bytham far too inaccurate?

 

1651412109_600140nDownexpress.jpg.7853ca163b38f3cff91fb00700e39ddd.jpg

 

By the time 60014 received her electric flashes (April '61), Little Bytham Station had been demolished. 

 

1711624699_A460024Pro-Scalekit.jpg.b90067f5f443eedff1a763dd9571ef89.jpg

 

The same would have been so for 60024.

 

2127727997_A4s60024.jpg.b9a89321a2c57ceced2cc39210058e1f.jpg

 

Eric Kidd's 60024 (left) is more accurate for the summer of 1958, even down to the black background to the nameplate.

 

396382077_Mallard16.jpg.b73309f275c6ce7234ebdf5ba65c5153.jpg

 

Actually, this rendition of 60022 is even more 'inaccurate', since it's representative of the last year of her BR life (1962/'63), running with a streamlined corridor tender (complete with lower strip). In 1961, MALLARD towed a 1928-type corridor tender. 

 

2076995876_weatheredDELTIC01.jpg.c1d5666b3b17e97d2729d44c7fb5dce3.jpg

 

502807353_weatheredDELTIC04.jpg.579340f3e5ae18ff3714f289ca079cba.jpg

 

And, there's no way I'm not going to run the prototype DELTIC, especially since it's been expertly weathered by Geoff Haynes. 

 

Comments appreciated (by all), please.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It is your trainset! I you are happy running locos and stock that span a few years in time and you don't try to con people into thinking they are all correct for a certain date, I don't see how anybody can object.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 14
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I use a soft date range. Much easier than choosing one day.

 

My recent models

 

C83 third

IMG-20211021-WA0005.jpeg.add25fdc8eaf55a69d88e45e9dcc061b.jpeg

 

D127 I think BTK

IMG-20211022-WA0001.jpeg.89c1026cd19f65f4b8b99c26c607552f.jpeg

 

 

Swindon cross country DMU

1545680927_2021-09-2213_28_28.jpg.1377bc9e8c6cf4eb62ce17d8c51b8c70.jpg

 

As soon as needle arrives the blue will be added to the DMU. It already has another grey coat and yellow ends.

  • Like 13
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

It is your trainset! I you are happy running locos and stock that span a few years in time and you don't try to con people into thinking they are all correct for a certain date, I don't see how anybody can object.

 

I think for some people the challenge of ensuring everything is correct for a very specific time and date is enjoyable one. 

 

However, there is no wrong answer here, everyone is correct in the way they look at the hobby and derive pleasure from it. Representing a range of years is just as valid a philosophy. As with most of our hobby, it's a case of 'how far do you go'. :)

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of the trades "Era" dating system and think it can be improved. Lots of research goes into each model and I think, as far as possible a date, where known (or range of dates)  as to when each models livery etc would be valid could be stated. Perhaps info on photos used by the models manufacturer. Yes a bit of a task, but I think it would help many.

 

On my OO loft layout I like to run steam, green & blue diesels, blue / grey & maroon coaches. This gives 1965-68, Blue/grey Mk 1's started to appear in 1965 (after the 1964 XP64 stock & D1733). I do however use modellers licence to include some earlier steam (eg K3) and later diesel (Brush Kestrel) - never seen together.

 

Lots of info on the "Why was this rarely modelled" thread re this "era"

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/52572-why-is-this-so-rarely-modelled/

 

Brit15

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My layout gives me lots of choices - as it's single track with no passing facility (Scalby, on the Scarborough & Whitby), I can only run one train at a time. So, I am accumulating examples of every locomotive, multiple unit & stock that ran on the line. The trick will be, of course, the correct locomotive on the correct train! 1885 - 1967, to include the notorious "Scrappies' Special" :sungum:

 

My research has thrown up some VERY unusual & interesting workings too :good:

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, LNERandBR said:

 

I think for some people the challenge of ensuring everything is correct for a very specific time and date is enjoyable one. 

 

However, there is no wrong answer here, everyone is correct in the way they look at the hobby and derive pleasure from it. Representing a range of years is just as valid a philosophy. As with most of our hobby, it's a case of 'how far do you go'. :)

 

 

Absolutely and it is very much down to the individual. Some folk get great satisfaction in the research required to ensure that only things that appeared on the date they are modelling appear on their layout. It takes a certain discipline to say "No, I can't run that because it was withdrawn 3 weeks ago". I can't bring myself to not have a particular loco that I like just because it doesn't fit my chosen timeframe. My answer is to have several layouts set at different times in different places, so I don't mix those items that are totally wrong.

 

There is the "other side" to the discussion. As far as I know, every loco and every item of stock on Buckingham is something that could have appeared in 1907 on the Great Central Railway somewhere. A couple of passenger vehicles in the earlier brown and French grey livery are pushing it slightly but it isn't impossible. So in terms of period "togetherness" it is pretty good. Yet the locos that run on the layout are from several different parts of the GCR system and would never have been seen together. Yet it is a fictional line, so who can say that locos from other parts were not transferred in from elsewhere, as often happened on the real railways.

 

It has always bothered me that the push pull train on Buckingham is worked by an ex LD&ECR 0-6-0T. As far as I know, they spent their lives as shunters, never worked a passenger train and were never fitted for push-pull working. Then, one time a visitor explained it to me. There were not enough of the usual 2-4-0T locos to work the services and the GCR had just taken over the LD&ECR (quite correct that happened in 1907) so the new owners replaced the Warsop yard shunters with their own locos (Class 9F, better known as LNER N5) and fitted one of them with push pull gear especially for the Verney Junction Branch. Several Southern locos had that happen to them, why not the LD&ECR tank.

 

So now I don't feel so bad when it appears! 

Edited by t-b-g
Spelling
  • Like 10
  • Round of applause 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

if it's of interest, Peter's Spares were selling cast replacement motor cradles for the T9s. I bought one and it worked very well. I think I may even have bought a second one as an insurance against future failure.

Just fitted one. The first T9 I repaired by packing the motor up on bits of plasticard and supergluing it all together once I'd got the gears meshing.

 

I'm ordering one for each of my as-yet unaffected T9s for peace-of-mind.

 

John

 

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, ArthurK said:

Slide1166.jpg.fc6ee1e74862c1df355b1b6d63257c5b.jpg

 

I also bought a Trix A4 (second hand) , Tender drive with traction tyres. As remarked above it would pull anything I could find to put behind it. Trouble  was the loco wheels had a tendency to lock. It was quite as sight to see it at high speed without the the wheels turning.

 

I gave it a respray  as "Capercaillie" it was the only Gateshead A4 built with double chimney. 

 

ArrthurK

 

That brought back a very strong memory suddenly, Arthur.  Mine used to lock up the drivers too, and while fathoming out what was catching (I was about 11 or 12 at the time) that was when I learned that cranks are 90 degrees (or 120, but lets not go there on this model!) and why!  A revelation to me back then, that I had totally forgotten.  Thank you for the aide memoire!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

It is your trainset! I you are happy running locos and stock that span a few years in time and you don't try to con people into thinking they are all correct for a certain date, I don't see how anybody can object.

Thanks Tony,

 

Most of the date-anomaly items date from Stoke Summit's 'steam' days, when WMRC deliberately chose the dates from 1956-'64 (actually, it was my choice!). That way, it gave us the option to run the W1 and the production Deltics (as well as the prototype). However, great care was taken to ensure each loco hauled the appropriate stock - a Deltic on the XP64 'Talisman', for instance, never a Pacific, and always a Pacific on the 'Queen of Scots' with its traditional Pullman cars. 

 

Of course, that 'fluidity' doesn't suit Little Bytham so much (the station was demolished in 1959, a year before the Mk.1 Pullmans appeared and two years before A3s were appearing with German blinkers alongside the production Deltics). There's no way I'm ripping the station up to accurately run such things. 

 

Since the team built LB, however, anything I've made for it (give or take) has been representative of 1958 (though I refuse to build an A4 with a single chimney because they just look puny in comparison to those with a double pot). I also (unless I run 'funny trains) only operate locos/stock which would have run through LB on a regular basis. Thus, and sadly, apart from the occasional Scottish Pacific on a running-in turn or a 64B A4 on the 'Lizzie', I have nothing from north of the Border. Neither, apart from a couple of B16s, do I have anything ex-NE. 

 

You're right, it is my trainset and all I do is take myself back to my halcyon 'spotting days. When I first started 'copping' locos, the W1 was still running, and when I finished I was underlining Deltics. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited by Tony Wright
typo error
  • Like 9
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon John,

 

Mine (assuming CLUMBER) has the earlier BR device, so the lion faces (correctly) in the direction of travel both sides of the tender, it not being subject to the tenets of Heraldry. Since Retford's period is 1957, it might well be right, though it could just as well be wrong.

 

The reason I asked Geoff Haynes to apply the earlier device was because I first saw CLUMBER in 1955, near Kiveton Park (my brother and I were tiddler fishing alongside the adjacent Chesterfield Canal with a favourite uncle). It would definitely have still had the earlier BR device then. 

 

It raises the question (in a way, at least to me) as to how 'accurate' we should make our models; accurate to within a very tight timescale - even just a day? My motivation for making my models is entirely self-indulgent; they're recreations of what I saw as a trainspotter from the mid-'50s up until the early '60s. Thus, several locos have the earlier BR device, while many (most?) have the later one. Some even have electric warning flashes (no earlier than 1961) because that's how I saw them - KINGFISHER, for instance, or SILVER LINK and MALLARD, during the last summer of steam haulage of 'The Elizabethan'. How this squares with Little Bytham's main line depiction of the summer of 1958 is a matter of 'conscience', but since all three were built for Stoke Summit (which had a more-fluid timescale) I'm certainly not going to scratch-off the flashes and spoil Ian Rathbone's superb painting. If visitors are 'outraged' by this, then that's up to them. I'm also quite happy to have the prototype DELTIC blasting round, even though it didn't come to the ECML until 1959. 

 

Thus, do the following images render Little Bytham far too inaccurate?

 

1651412109_600140nDownexpress.jpg.7853ca163b38f3cff91fb00700e39ddd.jpg

 

By the time 60014 received her electric flashes (April '61), Little Bytham Station had been demolished. 

 

1711624699_A460024Pro-Scalekit.jpg.b90067f5f443eedff1a763dd9571ef89.jpg

 

The same would have been so for 60024.

 

2127727997_A4s60024.jpg.b9a89321a2c57ceced2cc39210058e1f.jpg

 

Eric Kidd's 60024 (left) is more accurate for the summer of 1958, even down to the black background to the nameplate.

 

396382077_Mallard16.jpg.b73309f275c6ce7234ebdf5ba65c5153.jpg

 

Actually, this rendition of 60022 is even more 'inaccurate', since it's representative of the last year of her BR life (1962/'63), running with a streamlined corridor tender (complete with lower strip). In 1961, MALLARD towed a 1928-type corridor tender. 

 

2076995876_weatheredDELTIC01.jpg.c1d5666b3b17e97d2729d44c7fb5dce3.jpg

 

502807353_weatheredDELTIC04.jpg.579340f3e5ae18ff3714f289ca079cba.jpg

 

And, there's no way I'm not going to run the prototype DELTIC, especially since it's been expertly weathered by Geoff Haynes. 

 

Comments appreciated (by all), please.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's your railway-if that's the way you want to present Little Bytham, fine!

I cannot imagine anyone visiting the layout and pointing out electrification warnings and nameplate backgrounds spoil the effect-unless they are didactic clowns.

Surely the aim is for an overall convincing effect that LB does superbly in my estimation.  

And if you want to run Paddleboxes and GWR, so what? They are all fine models, and have LB as an excellent backdrop.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, Mark90 said:

Hello Tony,

 

Funnily enough, I was reading about this earlier today. The BloodandCustard website (https://bloodandcustard.org) says that the stipulation of the College of Heralds that the later BR crest face always in the left direction only came about in 1959, meaning that the later crest would have been applied with the lion facing in the direction of travel for a few years at least (see the 'Tale of the Lion' section).  

 

I would be interested to hear if others think this is correct - I had always assumed that the 'backwards facing' lion was something that came in with the later crest from 1956. 

 

Mark

Thanks for the link! Hours of reading fun ahead.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

What has always puzzelled me was that BR weren't backed by the government to tell the Heralds to get stuffed! Their decision might be correct from a pure heraldry perspective, but so what, from a common sense perspective it has always struck me as beeping daft that the lion was not allowed to be sensibly forward facing on both sides.

 

Edited by john new
  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/10/2021 at 23:31, Tony Wright said:

....

 

341690768_A460034Bachmann01.jpg.236c54d18721d1ef6dbc7c7b9088d1db.jpg

 

This one has the same Bachmann body-modifications, but it has a South Eastern Finecast chassis. The tender is also from SEF, modified to represent one of the trio with the back end cut-down in order that the A4s could take water on the SR and LMR in the '48 Exchanges. Again, the painting is Ian Rathbone's work.

 

My goodness me, this shot was taken quite some time ago! 

 

 

 

 

One of the finest examples of attractive perspective I have ever seen in 00 model photography, in my opinion.

 

Could we possible have a current photo with similar perspective, and of course the extra detail which now graces the landscape?

 

Your thread continues to be a 'must look' , thankyou.

 

Cheers

  • Agree 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon John,

 

Mine (assuming CLUMBER) has the earlier BR device, so the lion faces (correctly) in the direction of travel both sides of the tender, it not being subject to the tenets of Heraldry. Since Retford's period is 1957, it might well be right, though it could just as well be wrong.

 

The reason I asked Geoff Haynes to apply the earlier device was because I first saw CLUMBER in 1955, near Kiveton Park (my brother and I were tiddler fishing alongside the adjacent Chesterfield Canal with a favourite uncle). It would definitely have still had the earlier BR device then. 

 

It raises the question (in a way, at least to me) as to how 'accurate' we should make our models; accurate to within a very tight timescale - even just a day? My motivation for making my models is entirely self-indulgent; they're recreations of what I saw as a trainspotter from the mid-'50s up until the early '60s. Thus, several locos have the earlier BR device, while many (most?) have the later one. Some even have electric warning flashes (no earlier than 1961) because that's how I saw them - KINGFISHER, for instance, or SILVER LINK and MALLARD, during the last summer of steam haulage of 'The Elizabethan'. How this squares with Little Bytham's main line depiction of the summer of 1958 is a matter of 'conscience', but since all three were built for Stoke Summit (which had a more-fluid timescale) I'm certainly not going to scratch-off the flashes and spoil Ian Rathbone's superb painting. If visitors are 'outraged' by this, then that's up to them. I'm also quite happy to have the prototype DELTIC blasting round, even though it didn't come to the ECML until 1959. 

 

Thus, do the following images render Little Bytham far too inaccurate?

 

1651412109_600140nDownexpress.jpg.7853ca163b38f3cff91fb00700e39ddd.jpg

 

By the time 60014 received her electric flashes (April '61), Little Bytham Station had been demolished. 

 

1711624699_A460024Pro-Scalekit.jpg.b90067f5f443eedff1a763dd9571ef89.jpg

 

The same would have been so for 60024.

 

2127727997_A4s60024.jpg.b9a89321a2c57ceced2cc39210058e1f.jpg

 

Eric Kidd's 60024 (left) is more accurate for the summer of 1958, even down to the black background to the nameplate.

 

396382077_Mallard16.jpg.b73309f275c6ce7234ebdf5ba65c5153.jpg

 

Actually, this rendition of 60022 is even more 'inaccurate', since it's representative of the last year of her BR life (1962/'63), running with a streamlined corridor tender (complete with lower strip). In 1961, MALLARD towed a 1928-type corridor tender. 

 

2076995876_weatheredDELTIC01.jpg.c1d5666b3b17e97d2729d44c7fb5dce3.jpg

 

502807353_weatheredDELTIC04.jpg.579340f3e5ae18ff3714f289ca079cba.jpg

 

And, there's no way I'm not going to run the prototype DELTIC, especially since it's been expertly weathered by Geoff Haynes. 

 

Comments appreciated (by all), please.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I suspect there’ll be inaccuracy in all our modelling regardless of how hard we try; the issue is the acceptance of the level of inaccuracy. Like everything, it’s a balance. I can understand the desire to model a specific date but then other issues can arise, such as how to model the weather or even the time of day – if you want to be that precise, or pedantic.

 

For me, I want to model a period from 1950 through to about 1965, based on Midsomer Norton on the Somerset & Dorset (a commonly modelled location, a bit twee to some but I lived close enough in my mid-teen years for it to be considered home) and I have managed to assemble and collect stock to cover that time.  Within that time span I’ve also broken it down into the early 50s, mid 50s, etc., so that I can create variety and more interest, to me at least. I will try to be reasonably prototypical within those times, for example I have a Bachmann Evening Star but it won’t be seen running with a Maunsell 3 carriage set in Crimson and Cream, and it won’t be assisted by a Midland 2P. But I probably will have an early BR emblem Standard Class 5 running with a late emblem BR Standard Class 4, where historically that didn’t happen.  I spent a long time looking at Robert Carroll’s CWN documents for S&D services, in comparing photos of trains (I have an extensive S&D library) to the CWN they were frequently different. So my formations are only a close representation of what might have been; they also need to cover multiple services so what might be right for one wouldn’t be for another.

 

To edit slightly Headstock’s post’s postscript, to me its more about trying to get the right [type] of loco on the right [type] of train, in the right location [at roughly the right time]. That being said, I do have a recently acquired WD 2-8-0 (from Tony); I’m only aware of two of them running on the S&D – one as a test/clearance trial working and the other a goods train. I’m being a bit hypocritical – but I wanted one!

 

What I have found, is that while doing this collecting of stock, the research has moved my interest period to the left; I’m far more taken with the early 50s than the early 60s. This is probably due to there being a greater variety of stuff running, in particular coaching stock.

 

I don’t have a layout (and sometimes wonder if the big roundy-roundy will ever materialise!) but am well advanced in the design and purchase of bits and pieces to make a reasonably scaled rendition of a terminus layout based on the S&D plan at Bridgwater – it’ll be more of a test track and learning ground for modelling technique rather than a layout ‘proper’. And more by luck than judgment I’ve managed to assemble a fair amount of rolling stock that would fit the S&D era of about 1920-1921; for some reason I’m also drawn to this period, perhaps more so than the period I’ve been collecting stuff for, for so long! Bizarre!

 

While I try to get things as right as my knowledge, time and budget allow me, I’m well on the side of compromises and inaccuracies if that makes one happy.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

One of the finest examples of attractive perspective I have ever seen in 00 model photography, in my opinion.

 

Could we possible have a current photo with similar perspective, and of course the extra detail which now graces the landscape?

 

Your thread continues to be a 'must look' , thankyou.

 

Cheers

Thanks Rob,

 

I'll give it a go over the weekend (I'm at the LNER Society's AGM in Grantham today). 

 

The sky in the shot is real, but I've been crude with my application of it. Anyway, I'll see what I can do, especially as so much has been changed/completed since the picture was taken. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Iain.d said:

To edit slightly Headstock’s post’s postscript,

 

Pure evil!

 

You can't edit my postscript, it is already edited for charm, focus and intent. Change one aspect and it becomes perverted and corrupt.

 

Get your own postscript lazy bones!

  • Like 1
  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, john new said:

What has always puzzelled me was that BR weren't backed by the government to tell the Heralds to get stuffed! Their decision might be correct from a pure heraldry perspective, but so what, from a common sense perspective it has always struck me as beeping daft that the lion was not allowed to be sensibly forward facing on both sides.

 

The only reasonable explanation for not doing so (though not in so many words) would be if BR had commissioned the College of Heralds to design the thing in the first place.

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Well I am having a blue era layout in garage and an early 60s in boys old bedroom.

 

But I will be silly sometimes and run on other layout.

 

All of my big steam locos are examples still running or were in 80s.

 

Just need a Castle or two to complete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
19 hours ago, LNERandBR said:

I think for some people the challenge of ensuring everything on someone else's layout is correct for a very specific time and date is enjoyable one. 

 

However, there is no wrong answer here, everyone is correct in the way they look at the hobby and derive pleasure from it. Representing a range of years is just as valid a philosophy. As with most of our hobby, it's a case of 'how far do you go'. :)

 

Made a small edit above, but your original comment is completely true.  It can made for a very rewarding Sunday afternoon or evening, trawling the Web and your own railway library.  When your significant other asks what you've been doing all that time, the answer is simple: Research!

 

You can only build a layout for yourself (others' pleasure should be just a bonus), because there will always be some armchair expert who spots you're running a loco that only operated on that line on every third Wednesday when the rake of coaches was the other way round and a fish van was added, bla, bla, bla.   Some of these <deleted> even like to loudly announce these errors at exhibitions.  I once spotted two N2s with the same number, about ten feet apart, on The Gresley Beat; did I mention it (until now, oops)? NO!  It was trivial in the context of the whole, superb layout.

 

Re: Eras/Epochs, British Railways is very difficult to capture absolutely correctly because 1948-1953, 1953-1958, 1958-1963 and 1963-1968 (and every other short period) all looked very different, everything was changing so fast.  Locomotives and rolling stock were being built, modified and withdrawn, liveries came and went and as Tony shows with the example of LB, many stations and lines were closing in the 15 years before the Beeching report which it's all blamed on.  You can probably do no better than pick a 3-5 year period and hope to get it about right.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

You think BR had a lot of change. As pregrouping modelers we are lumped together in one era 1805-1923.

it is not as if much changed in that time period from a welsh bet to locos withdrawn in 1967, through broad gauge etc.

it seems to allow me Rocket along side a Gresley A1. How many would spot the issues at an exhibition? How many would keep it to themselves?

richard 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Rob,

 

I'll give it a go over the weekend (I'm at the LNER Society's AGM in Grantham today). 

 

The sky in the shot is real, but I've been crude with my application of it. Anyway, I'll see what I can do, especially as so much has been changed/completed since the picture was taken. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I was hoping to go too but could not make it :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Northmoor said:

 

 

You can only build a layout for yourself (others' pleasure should be just a bonus), because there will always be some armchair expert who spots you're running a loco that only operated on that line on every third Wednesday when the rake of coaches was the other way round and a fish van was added, bla, bla, bla.   Some of these <deleted> even like to loudly announce these errors at exhibitions.

But one can have a lot of fun at their expense when running a very unusual working. Let Mr <Gobby Expert>  sound off, then simply produce a photograph of said working actually happening...

 

:triniti:

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Round of applause 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 minutes ago, MarkC said:

But one can have a lot of fun at their expense when running a very unusual working. Let Mr <Gobby Expert>  sound off, then simply produce a photograph of said working actually happening...

 

:triniti:

 

That is fun, I used to spot at an area with lots of different region trains, and a common steam special stop over place.

 

Seen ECML aircon sets, SR mark 1s with a 33, lots of MR and WR sets, 45 46 47 from all over, a few 50s, most of Tyseley, SVR and Didcot mainline registered locos.

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...