Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

14 minutes ago, Manxcat said:

 

Some more................................

 

 

How could I forget Alloa?

 

 

Excellence in P4. Blackgill.

 

 

And also excellence in narrow gauge. Purgatory Peak. 

 

 

[Brocp]

No love for Lime Street? For me it's every bit as good as any of the brilliant layouts shown in these last few pages.

[Anglian]

If time spent watching a layout is indicative of its inspirational qualities then in my selection I'd have to include Keith Armes' Chipping Norton. I knew the site having visited a few months before seeing the model and spent hours watching the layout at the Central Hall MRJ show. This layout worked absolutely faultlessly and it was very beautiful. Bliss Mill at the one end of the scene perfectly balanced the entire composition. 

 

Tony,
The new views for your most recent photographs are wonderful. The sense of light airy space is brilliantly captured.

 

 

Edited July 7, 2019 by Anglian

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Brocp said:

No love for Lime Street? For me it's every bit as good as any of the brilliant layouts shown in these last few pages.

I think Lime Street has been mentioned,

 

Unfortunately, I don't have any pictures of it. 

 

However, just up river is Mike Edge's masterpiece, Herculaneum Dock.

 

 

 

 

 

And there was I, thinking that the bridge work on Little Bytham was complex!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[bbishop]

8 hours ago, Brocp said:

No love for Lime Street? For me it's every bit as good as any of the brilliant layouts shown in these last few pages.

 

Lime Street is a most magnificent model.  But is it an exhibition layout or a working diorama?  The problem lies in the prototype track plan, which really only allows one movement at a time, a problem on a 50 foot (?) layout.  I spent a couple of hours looking at it last Warley; not for the operation, merely for the quality of the modelling.

 

Bill

[Joseph_Pestell]

24 minutes ago, bbishop said:

 

Lime Street is a most magnificent model.  But is it an exhibition layout or a working diorama?  The problem lies in the prototype track plan, which really only allows one movement at a time, a problem on a 50 foot (?) layout.  I spent a couple of hours looking at it last Warley; not for the operation, merely for the quality of the modelling.

 

Bill

 

To some extent, any terminus to fiddleyard layout is going to be a bit limited as to the number of movements that can happen simultaneously. But I don't think that disqualifies them from being inspirational layouts.

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Anglian said:

If time spent watching a layout is indicative of its inspirational qualities then in my selection I'd have to include Keith Armes' Chipping Norton. I knew the site having visited a few months before seeing the model and spent hours watching the layout at the Central Hall MRJ show. This layout worked absolutely faultlessly and it was very beautiful. Bliss Mill at the one end of the scene perfectly balanced the entire composition. 

 

Tony,
The new views for your most recent photographs are wonderful. The sense of light airy space is brilliantly captured.

 

 

I don't have pictures of Chipping Norton, Tim,

 

Although I'd certainly put it up high on the list of inspirational layouts. Thanks for mentioning it. 

 

What the last few pages have shown is the very large number of highly-thought-of layouts, in all scales and gauges. It could well be that we're at the 'zenith' with regard to fantastic layouts right now, or have been for quite some time. 

 

There's no doubt that, with regard to scenic materials especially, what we have to work with now has never been better. Years ago, scenery was not important at all on some systems - operation being paramount; correct operation as well. Norman Eagles' clockwork Sherwood Section in O Gauge was a good example of this, and Jack Ray's magnificent Crewchester focused on operation. Contrast those with Barry Norman's superlative essay in S Scale, Lydham Heath. Operationally, the last-mentioned was very limited but for visual 'realism' it probably has few equals. Though the Sherwood Section's locos and stock were quite realistic, the layout itself was not. Not at all! Though I have pictures of the layouts just mentioned (or at least some of the stock of the clockwork ones), they're on my old computer and I need someone who knows what they're doing to access them!

 

Frank Roomes' Lutton in O Gauge, though the scenic work was 'adequate', focused very much on operation. Could it be that in the quest for realism, operation (or reliable operation - by that I mean no derailments or stuttering) has been compromised to some extent? 

 

The late Colin Scoffin's work in EM Gauge has not been mentioned yet, yet reliable running was paramount to his philosophy, and his scenic work was all right (not in Barry Norman's class, of course, but who is?). His influence on Roy Jackson was immense, and Roy followed in Colin's path (and also forged his own) with regard to reliable running. In all of this it should not be implied that Barry Norman's layouts didn't run - they did, perfectly, but 'operationally' their scope was more limited. 

 

Some prize-winning layouts I've seen, though they look fantastic in pictures, don't run well at all. The builders of one well known layout told me that they 'couldn't live with the over-scale flanges and narrow gauge of Little Bytham' when they visited. Yet, when I saw their more-accurate (with regard to gauge) layout at a couple of shows, there were derailments all the time (and it's far smaller than LB). Strange, isn't it, that all down the decades Peter Denny managed to combine realism with excellent (and complex) operation on Buckingham, yet some more modern modellers (though their scenic work is superior) can't?

 

One 'down-side' (if I can call it that) of the improvement in scenic modelling has been the greater reliance on modern RTR locos and stock, making some layouts much less-interesting to me (a personal view, of course).

 

 

No one can deny that Pete Goss is one of the finest scenic modellers of this (or any) generation. Here's his magnificent viaduct at Knaresborough (World's End). Though my own scenic modelling is nowhere near this standard (nor ever will be), I wouldn't dream of running an RTR A4 and stock!  

 

 

 

Thank you for your comments on the recent LB pictures. I think it'll be worth my while seeking out 'more unusual' viewpoints, though, as mentioned, not on those tight MR/M&GNR curves.

 

 

Ugh!

 

However, I might seek out some more unusual angles................

 

 

 

Like these? These two were taken some time ago (note the mock-up nature still of some of the structures, and bare bits), and a fair bit of squeezing in the big camera is necessary, but I might well try again. 

 

Finally, with regard to 'realism' and 'inspiration'. 

 

 

I think this is one of the finest models it's ever been my privilege to photograph. Barrie Kelsall's Barmouth Bridge in O Gauge.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited July 8, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Teague]

9 hours ago, Brocp said:

No love for Lime Street? For me it's every bit as good as any of the brilliant layouts shown in these last few pages.

 

45 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I think Lime Street has been mentioned, Unfortunately, I don't have any pictures of it. 

 

 

24 minutes ago, bbishop said:

 

Lime Street is a most magnificent model.  But is it an exhibition layout or a working diorama?

 

If I may assist!

 

 

 

 

I too am a fan of Lime Street.

 

 

I agree with Bill's observations about the limit on operations, but for me it is the sheer scale of the ambition, the detail involved, and the quality of what has been achieved over what is a very long build - 30+ years.

 

 

Apologies if some of my pictures are not quite up to standard, but all were taken hand held and without the benefit of additional lighting.

 

Tony

 

 

[Tony Wright]

19 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

To some extent, any terminus to fiddleyard layout is going to be a bit limited as to the number of movements that can happen simultaneously. But I don't think that disqualifies them from being inspirational layouts.

Joseph,

 

Thanks for your comment, but I don't think anyone is 'disqualifying' any 'limited operation' layout from being inspirational. 

 

I agree with Bill's comment on Lime Street. I also agree that it's inspirational and also a great example of brilliant modelling. Which to me begs the question; should operation of a layout be as 'realistic' as how it looks?

 

Having spent many hours as a trainspotter at the real Liverpool Lime Street, there were many (long) occasions when nothing arrived and nothing departed, in some cases near half an hour. Would this 'correct' operation (working to real time from a real timetable, and thus very accurate) be tolerated (on any layout) at a show? I doubt it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[micklner]

Lime Street is a fantastic layout, the only minus point is when I saw it at Ally Pally the operators are siting in front of the layout . Strange idea, as a result viewing is very limited for the public.

[Clem]

11 hours ago, Manxcat said:

The eagle eyed amongst you may note a raging continuity error in the video. Enjoy it anyway.

Yep got it. Nice backing music. Grapelli and Rheindhart I presume? Little number in C. (not A7th).

[Tony Teague]

22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Joseph,

 

Thanks for your comment, but I don't think anyone is 'disqualifying' any 'limited operation' layout from being inspirational. 

 

I agree with Bill's comment on Lime Street. I also agree that it's inspirational and also a great example of brilliant modelling. Which to me begs the question; should operation of a layout be as 'realistic' as how it looks?

 

Having spent many hours as a trainspotter at the real Liverpool Lime Street, there were many (long) occasions when nothing arrived and nothing departed, in some cases near half an hour. Would this 'correct' operation (working to real time from a real timetable, and thus very accurate) be tolerated (on any layout) at a show? I doubt it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Tony

 

Although I am a Lime Street fan I totally agree with what you say, and perhaps Pendon has the same "flaw", but then I suspect that neither of their builders started out by choosing a location (real or imaginary) that had a timetable that would suit exhibitions.

 

Tony

[uax6]

I think that there is a lot to be said for the 'old style' minimum detail outside the fences layouts, but, and this is a big but, they would have to be layouts that are designed to be operated.

Having been very privileged to have worked Franks Lutton (when I was a nipper, no more than 12 years old... I think he died in around 1992?) I can say that the two things that struck me were all those years ago were:

1. With stud contact the locos never stalled anywhere, the heavy skate and small contact area of the studs (what I seem to remember these were brass nails) making sure of good pickup, along with lovely squeals as curves were rounded. The auto coupling system was a bit complicated, but it did work.
2. As you were operating to a timetable, you didn't have time to sit around and look outside the fence, there were trains to run! So the limited scenic treatment was never an issue.

Looking at it in the context of where I am sat at the minute (a signalbox on the real railway) it was very much like what I do here day in day out (except that there is a lot more time between trains!), in as much as I am still only concerned with what goes on inside the fences....

 

Is this limited scenic treatment a by-product of this? Franks was a Railwayman (Reme (He carried a very creased photo of a blown up bridge in his pocket from the war and would show it and say 'this is what we had to deal with, and this was an easy one!'), then London Transport and the railway inspectorate (I believe, I was never of the age to ask the sort of questions that I would now), infact Lutton was used up until Franks death as a training aid for the rail operators side of Reme), and therefore everything outside the fence wasn't his concern. Lutton was designed to be operated, and that it was. I think that he had visitors most week nights... Poor Peggy having to deal with the endless streams of them! We had Thursday nights, once a month.

 

I'd love to see more photos of Lutton (both the 4mm and 7mm versions) and I would dearly love to find some of his rolling stock, I just don't know were any of it went. 

 

Andy G

[johnarcher]

12 minutes ago, uax6 said:

I think that there is a lot to be said for the 'old style' minimum detail outside the fences layouts, but, and this is a big but, they would have to be layouts that are designed to be operated.

Having been very privileged to have worked Franks Lutton (when I was a nipper, no more than 12 years old... I think he died in around 1992?) I can say that the two things that struck me were all those years ago were:

1. With stud contact the locos never stalled anywhere, the heavy skate and small contact area of the studs (what I seem to remember these were brass nails) making sure of good pickup, along with lovely squeals as curves were rounded. The auto coupling system was a bit complicated, but it did work.
2. As you were operating to a timetable, you didn't have time to sit around and look outside the fence, there were trains to run! So the limited scenic treatment was never an issue.

Looking at it in the context of where I am sat at the minute (a signalbox on the real railway) it was very much like what I do here day in day out (except that there is a lot more time between trains!), in as much as I am still only concerned with what goes on inside the fences....

 

Is this limited scenic treatment a by-product of this? Franks was a Railwayman (Reme (He carried a very creased photo of a blown up bridge in his pocket from the war and would show it and say 'this is what we had to deal with, and this was an easy one!'), then London Transport and the railway inspectorate (I believe, I was never of the age to ask the sort of questions that I would now), infact Lutton was used up until Franks death as a training aid for the rail operators side of Reme), and therefore everything outside the fence wasn't his concern. Lutton was designed to be operated, and that it was. I think that he had visitors most week nights... Poor Peggy having to deal with the endless streams of them! We had Thursday nights, once a month.

 

I'd love to see more photos of Lutton (both the 4mm and 7mm versions) and I would dearly love to find some of his rolling stock, I just don't know were any of it went. 

 

Andy G

A good illustration of what has been said about different tastes. Personally I'd probably walk straight past that type of layout (however good the operation), but have spent quite a lot of time looking at good scenic or structure modelling on others which only had occasional movement.

 

I'd, for instance, find Lydham Heath far more fascinating.

 

Oh yes, thanks for the mention of Lydham Heath Tony, I can't think why I didn't mention that in my post, especially with the Bishop's Castle picture. I just missed it unfortunately, the Bishop's Castle museum closed just when we moved to this area.

[uax6]

But I think the other point is this: Lutton was in a spare bedroom, never designed to be taken out for people to see. It probably would never have worked in an exhibition context, but for a layout at home it was fascinating to work...

 

Andy G

[Clive Mortimore]

We all have our own ideals when it comes to model railways. Like Andy I am not too fused over seeing things on the other side of the fence if the layout is one designed with operation as its main objective. At a busy location when trainspotting did you notice what colour knickers Mrs Jones at number 3 had on her washing line?

 

I really admire those who can set the railway in the landscape and still make it operationally interesting.

[johnarcher]

1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said:

. At a busy location when trainspotting did you notice what colour knickers Mrs Jones at number 3 had on her washing line?

 

I really admire those who can set the railway in the landscape and still make it operationally interesting.

Ah, but you didn't know Mrs Jones as well as I did. Happy days.

[glo41f]

Tony asked:- "Was it the 'finest' model railway show ever staged?"

 

I have to say that it was as far as I am concerned. I was there as an operator but was able to see most of the exhibits and came away inspired, I do not think that I will ever see such a display again though the Risex shows are proceeding well.  These  =days I find model shows very "samey" with nothing much to distinguish one layout from the next. At the recent Quorn GC show there was a plethora of Traction Maintenance Depots for example.

 

I think perhaps we may have had the best of it. 

 

Martin Long

[St Enodoc]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Could it be that in the quest for realism, operation (or reliable operation - by that I mean no derailments or stuttering) has been compromised to some extent?

I think that you're absolutely right there Tony. You've mentioned before, and I've seen for myself, very "pretty" layouts where the signalling layout is a total work of fiction.

 

One of my favourite layouts to operate - I only had the chance once, nearly 40 years ago - was Thame in S scale, by Leslie Bevis-Smith and the MRC. After a few minutes working the fully-interlocked lever frame while others drove the trains, it was easy to forget that the railway in front of you was only 1/64 full size!

 

That was truly inspirational, and a large part of the reason for my passion for operating with the signalmen and drivers as separate beings, as you know.

 

Edit: I also remember Ray Hammond's Embridge, with its working point rodding.

Edited July 8, 2019 by St Enodoc
Added info

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

did you notice what colour knickers Mrs Jones at number 3 had on her washing line?

Well they can't have been red or all the trains would have stopped (cf Jenny Agutter...).

[Chamby]

A couple of pics of Lime St, taken at Warley last year.  It’s a superb model, yes it is inspirational, architecturally superb but not easy for the observer to see much going on within the station, at least from the viewing public’s point of view, the moving vehicles caught the eye more because they were easier to see! 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by Chamby
Clarification

[Michael Edge]

5 hours ago, bbishop said:

 

Lime Street is a most magnificent model.  But is it an exhibition layout or a working diorama?  The problem lies in the prototype track plan, which really only allows one movement at a time, a problem on a 50 foot (?) layout.  I spent a couple of hours looking at it last Warley; not for the operation, merely for the quality of the modelling.

 

Bill

It's not the track plan which restricts movement on Lime Street, it's the control system and route setting - also possibly not enough stock. They have improved things a lot, they can now make two movements simultaneously and (at my suggestion) began stopping incoming trains at the signals in the tunnel. I agree though that it isn't nearly as busy as I remember it in the 1950s.

[Clive Mortimore]

31 minutes ago, Chamby said:

A couple of pics of Lime St, taken at Warley last year.  It’s a superb model, yes it is inspirational, architecturally superb but not easy for the observer to see much going on within the station, at least from the viewing public’s point of view, the moving vehicles caught the eye more because they were easier to see! 

 

 

 

 

I hope my mock up can demonstrate differing approaches that we as modellers can have. As I stated earlier today I prefer to model inside the fence and try and concentrate on operation. I too am building a terminus station. The modelling on Lime Street is fantastic, no argument.  From my point of view, I cannot see the trains. As a trainspotter I wanted to see the trains, as a commuter I wanted to see the train that was taking me home and as a holiday maker I wanted to see the train that was the start of my week's adventure. So with Sheffield Exchange I am not having an overall roof, just the side walls and the supports down the middle platform. No station building as I want to place the viewer on the concourse, so they become the holiday maker, the commuter or the trainspotter. 

 

 

There are some practical aspects, I can get at the trains if need be, there is less modelling and not having a station building means my fat tum can squeeze past the end and get to the control panel.

 

My approach and that of the Lime Street crew are both right, right for ourselves. We should be building layouts for ourselves to enjoy and if others enjoy operating or viewing them all the better.

[St Enodoc]

5 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

I hope my mock up can demonstrate differing approaches that we as modellers can have. As I stated earlier today I prefer to model inside the fence and try and concentrate on operation. I too am building a terminus station. The modelling on Lime Street is fantastic, no argument.  From my point of view, I cannot see the trains. As a trainspotter I wanted to see the trains, as a commuter I wanted to see the train that was taking me home and as a holiday maker I wanted to see the train that was the start of my week's adventure. So with Sheffield Exchange I am not having an overall roof, just the side walls and the supports down the middle platform. No station building as I want to place the viewer on the concourse, so they become the holiday maker, the commuter or the trainspotter. 

 

 

There are some practical aspects, I can get at the trains if need be, there is less modelling and not having a station building means my fat tum can squeeze past the end and get to the control panel.

 

My approach and that of the Lime Street crew are both right, right for ourselves. We should be building layouts for ourselves to enjoy and if others enjoy operating or viewing them all the better.

That's a qualified "agree" from me Clive, as if you're building a layout for exhibition I think you should take into account the expectations of the paying audience - which are generally that they want to see moving trains.

 

As you say, we can do what we like in the privacy of our own homes.

[StephenB]

I can see the logic in Clive’s approach to leaving out bits of scenery that get in the way of seeing the trains. Certain well known modellers advocate ‘view blockers’ to do just the opposite. Each to his/her own.

 

Stephen