Wright writes.....

[Porcy Mane]

Nice 1950 view of Bestwood Park & Bestwood Junctions on BFA.

 

https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EAW031324

 

 

Both are clearly marked on OS maps.

 

P

Edited August 20, 2019 by Porcy Mane

[Tony Wright]

Thanks for all the recent info regarding the 8F locations.

 

It'll help make the next volume from Irwell on the class more accurate. 

 

It just shows how much of a fantastic resource RMweb is. 

Edited August 20, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[MJI]

Celebrities. I know people who knew them but never direct, an Uncle met all the Princes and confirmed a common opinion of the middle brother.

 

My dad PDIed a car for a well known racing driver called Nigel, I once chatted to the uncle of an England rugby player who was driving a 1960s singers car.

 

Railway wise I suppose .David Shepherd is the most well known.

[down the sdjr]

Hi Tony, I have been sent here by Polybear to see if you can fix my kit built loco, Romford wheels with a broken crankpin. I hear its donations to cancer research. I donate every month as i lost my Mother and Father to cancer as did my wife. if you can show me how to fix it i would love to donate more.

Thank you.

Paul.

[Clem]

Tony, may I ask why you wished to know where Bestwood Junction was? Ahhh, my neck of the woods.....  Bestwood Junction on the GN Leen Valley line was the junction going South between the  GN line to Colwick and the line built in 1898 to link with the new GC line to Nottingham and the London extension. There had already been a junction there facing the other way, for the Bestwood Colliery branch and up until 1898 this junction was known as Moorbridge Junction after 1898 the new signal box was renamed Bestwood Junction. The Leen Valley was a very busy line - all freight after 1933 - with most of the traffic going to Colwick - the left hand fork of the Junction. After Mapperley Tunnel on the Nottingham 'back line' closed for safety reasons in April 1960, it cut the route into Colwick and pretty well all traffic then took the left fork into Bulwell Common on the GC line. It was this closing of Mapperley Tunnel that accelerated the closure of the ex-LNER lines around Nottingham.

 

I should add that in the aerial photo (great photo!) above the junction at the bottom of the photo is heading South - the one to the left to Colwick and the one in the centre to Bulwell Common and Nottingham Vic. The junction to the top of the photo is the original Moorbridge Junction, the line to the right to Bestwood Colliery with the main line up to Annesley and beyond, the left fork. The line to the centre left is the Midland Railway to Mansfield with its own branch to Bestwood coming off and veering right under the GN to the colliery.

 

I know, I know.... too much information.  The missus usually stops me when I go on too much.

Edited August 20, 2019 by Clem
Referenced the aerial photo

[polybear]

3 minutes ago, down the sdjr said:

Hi Tony, I have been sent here by Polybear to see if you can fix my kit built loco, Romford wheels with a broken crankpin. I hear its donations to cancer research. I donate every month as i lost my Mother and Father to cancer as did my wife. if you can show me how to fix it i would love to donate more.

Thank you.

Paul.

 

Hi Tony,

I mentioned your exhibition Loco Clinic - do you have any forthcoming dates and locations that Paul may be able to attend?

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, Lecorbusier said:

Ignorant as accused m'lud!!!

 

You wouldn't have any examples of their work by any chance? Always interested in finding out about such things.

 

I found a stash of my old Railway Modellers from  late 77 - 79 whilst rumaging in a box in Mum & Dad's garage a couple of months ago .... I was amazed at the sheer number of adverts for model shops ... and a large number actually stocked kits!!!! London had a whole host and large number actually in the centre. Given that I am told there is currently a decline in vendors  attending shows nowadays ....in favour of a solely internet presence (wizard springs to mind) they do seem lost halcyon days.

I've shown many images of Peter Denny's work on here, Tim,

 

I've also shown views of Borchester and Hitchin. Many shots of the last two were taken on transparency, so are in Warners' archive somewhere, though I do have the B&W negatives; somewhere. 

 

The decline of 'proper' model shops has been inexorable and, I suppose, inevitable. With far less of a need to make things nowadays, especially in OO and N with regard to RTR/RTP stuff (and also a growing trend in O Gauge), who wants to buy (in numbers) kits, wheels, gearboxes, motors, chimneys, domes, any number of detailing bits (for non-steam as well) and all manner of materials once essential to the craft of railway modelling? A few, obviously (like me, and many others on this thread). However, certainly not enough to sustain a traditional model shop or shops, as used to be.

 

At the Pickering Show last weekend, one chap asked me nicely to explain what I was doing (I was demonstrating loco kit-building). He looked with incredulity as I explained. 'But you can get something like that ready-made, for less money' he said, as I showed him the DJH A1 I was building. And, he's right, but that's not the point, nor ever will be in my case.

 

Are actual builders of things in railway modelling becoming more of a dying breed? My experience is that there are plenty out there who'd like hand-built models (which aren't available RTR), but they can't (or won't) make them themselves. If it keeps professional model-makers going, then that's a good thing, but the owners of what the builders have made, then just have possessions - not personal creations, for which, in my view, there is no substitute. 

 

I certainly don't see today a natural successor to the likes of a Denny, Dyer or Collins, though could there ever be? The footprints left by the greats are huge! One could argue that such is the Cornucopia of model railway materials these days, that there's no need to be as self-reliant or inventive any more. In that respect, something has been lost forever! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

18 minutes ago, down the sdjr said:

Hi Tony, I have been sent here by Polybear to see if you can fix my kit built loco, Romford wheels with a broken crankpin. I hear its donations to cancer research. I donate every month as i lost my Mother and Father to cancer as did my wife. if you can show me how to fix it i would love to donate more.

Thank you.

Paul.

Good evening Paul,

 

Please send me a PM, and I'll get back to you. If possible, why not visit me, bring the model and I'll see if I can fix it?

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Wright]

16 minutes ago, Clem said:

Tony, may I ask why you wished to know where Bestwood Junction was? Ahhh, my neck of the woods.....  Bestwood Junction on the GN Leen Valley line was the junction going South between the  GN line to Colwick and the line built in 1898 to link with the new GC line to Nottingham and the London extension. There had already been a junction there facing the other way, for the Bestwood Colliery branch and up until 1898 this junction was known as Moorbridge Junction after 1898 the new signal box was renamed Bestwood Junction. The Leen Valley was a very busy line - all freight after 1933 - with most of the traffic going to Colwick - the left hand fork of the Junction. After Mapperley Tunnel on the Nottingham 'back line' closed for safety reasons in April 1960, it cut the route into Colwick and pretty well all traffic then took the left fork into Bulwell Common on the GC line. It was this closing of Mapperley Tunnel that accelerated the closure of the ex-LNER lines around Nottingham.

 

I should add that in the aerial photo (great photo!) above the junction at the bottom of the photo is heading South - the one to the left to Colwick and the one in the centre to Bulwell Common and Nottingham Vic. The junction to the top of the photo is the original Moorbridge Junction, the line to the right to Bestwood Colliery with the main line up to Annesley and beyond, the left fork. The line to the centre left is the Midland Railway to Mansfield with its own branch to Bestwood coming off and veering right under the GN to the colliery.

 

I know, I know.... too much information.  The missus usually stops me when I go on too much.

Thanks Clem,

 

It's for information to go in the next Irwell book of the 8Fs.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Lecorbusier]

6 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I certainly don't see today a natural successor to the likes of a Denny, Dyer or Collins, though could there ever be? The footprints left by the greats are huge! One could argue that such is the Cornucopia of model railway materials these days, that there's no need to be as self-reliant or inventive any more. In that respect, something has been lost forever! 

Sounds like a great subject for a special edition of BRM or similar publication .... or even a limited edition book? Though it may be that we are also running out of people with the requisite knowledge and memory! I am not aware of a history of the greats of railway modelling. I would have thought it could support a limited print run.

 

Or perhaps that is just a silly idea.

[The Johnster]

The game has changed, and the brilliant space saving layouts that the likes of Peter Denny and Frank Dyer inspired us with would not be regarded as viable projects now; too much compression and sharp curvature!  We are perhaps in a ‘post Iain Rice’ era in which those who have room build layouts like Little Bytham and those who have to shoehorn things in go for Rice-esque minimum spacr projects like Arun Quay or the sheep railways that would have (perhaps unjustifyably) have been considered not to have enough operating potential back ‘in the day’.  

[St Enodoc]

7 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

The late great Roy Jackson used to use that line whenever the talk turned to ladies.

 

"But can she paint and line carriages?" was one question he would ask.

 

The other would get me an instant lifetime ban! 

I didn't know that Tony - thanks for the explanation!

 

Depending on the ladies' attributes, of course, the correct answer would be "Who cares?".

[PMP]

I don’t know how we can be in a ‘post Iain Rice’ era, he’s still alive!

 

In my experience there no real change in layout styles relating to space. Some use it incredibly effectively like Tony with Little Bytham, others nowhere near as well. You only have to look at the layout design section of the forum to see hopelessly impractical designs for a variety of reasons, through to a few good ones. Few people have any concept of space required, or think of changing to alternative scales when designing their schemes and it often shows in the final results. With set track still being the biggest seller by a country mile, the hobby clearly is ‘happy’ with too tight curvature, and building layouts around it. 

 

[t-b-g]

I am a huge fan of Messrs. Denny and Dyer but I would like to think that the hobby has progressed in some respects since the heyday of Buckingham and Borchester.

 

There are many people who have built better locos, track, signals, carriages etc.

 

There are many layouts that are closer to the prototype in terms of things like length and curvature.

 

I would say is that in terms of atmosphere and design for intricate and intensive operation, not many layouts have equalled or surpassed those two.

 

The type of modeller that would build that type of layout doesn't seem to be around much nowadays. The lone worker, producing pretty much everything themselves. Perhaps it is because the trade support is so much greater than it used to be that such all round modelling is rarely necessary any more.

 

I also think that the hobby is more sociable than it used to be. Joint projects or groups, either informal or clubs, seem to be behind a good number of impressive layouts. Pooling resources and skills does seem a good way of getting a project up and running in a shorter timescale than a lone worker could achieve.

 

That is certainly how I work best. I would love to be like Peter Denny or Frank Dyer but my productivity levels would mean that nothing was ever finished, so working with others on joint projects produces quicker results.

 

Having said that I am having a go at a purely solo effort, with everything scratch or kit built. Not a hugely ambitious layout but just something to see if I can actually see a project through to completion myself. 

 

 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

There are many people who have built better locos, track, signals, carriages etc.

 

There are many layouts that are closer to the prototype in terms of things like length and curvature.

 

I would say is that in terms of atmosphere and design for intricate and intensive operation, not many layouts have equalled or surpassed those two.

I agree Tony. There are a few, but certainly not very many, who've done all those things and made the whole far greater than the sum of its parts.

[great central]

Just to add a little more to the Bestwood junction/Bestwood Park junction information if I may.

Bestwood Park junction does still kind of exist, it's a loop on the Robin Hood line used sometimes to regulate a late running service on the single line section between Bulwell and Kirkby in Ashfield. It does have one timetabled train per day as a northbound service, the 19.55 from Nottingham if memory serves, is held there awaiting the passage of a southbound one. This is to do with timetabling from Nottingham.

It also serves as the junction to the mothballed, if not now officially closed, line to Calverton colliery part of the trackbed having been converted to a foot and cycle path.  The line had been 'unoficially lifted' in bits over several years anyway. 

A little known fact about the junction I've seen in print written by one of our former club members many years ago was that between the wars there was a plan for a joint LMS/LNER line starting there and heading north through the then relatively recently developed coalfield. Intended as a relief to other north/south mainlines as it could be reached easily from both the GC and Midland mainlines as well as the east coast, all of which carried much which would have been required during a time of war.

Also a friend and club member has very recently had a book covering the GN 'back line' published by Book Law, although I haven't yet seen a copy he has undertaken very thorough research into the reasons for closure and it seems that maybe Mapperley tunnel wasn't as bad as painted at the time, especially given that, at least until a short time ago, it was still open at one end and not even fenced off.

[Clem]

56 minutes ago, great central said:

Also a friend and club member has very recently had a book covering the GN 'back line' published by Book Law, although I haven't yet seen a copy he has undertaken very thorough research into the reasons for closure and it seems that maybe Mapperley tunnel wasn't as bad as painted at the time, especially given that, at least until a short time ago, it was still open at one end and not even fenced off.

Hi GC, yes I have a copy of 'The Back Line'. Excellent book and a brilliant read.  My only quibble with it was Hayden's consistent inability to get the O4 sub classifications right - e.g. describing O4/8s as O4/4s in several places. It's an irritating error that creeps into quite a few ex-LNER books. I remember seeing O4/8s described as O1/7s in one book! I can't understand what it is about the O4 sub classes that  seems to confuse railway authors!

 

Talking of the joint LNER/LMS venture, this certainly was the case for the new double track branch line to Calverton Colliery although I think it was very early nationalisation before it was built.

 

I remember visiting the Midland's Bestwood Park Junction in the late 80s and it was surprising how much remained at that stage. But a combination of the re-opening of the line to passenger services (the Robin Hood Line) and the arrival of the tram wiped most of it away, although if I'm not mistaken, some of the sidings remain under dense overgrowth. 

 

That whole stretch from Bulwell to Annesley must have been fascinating in the earlier years with the GC, the GN and the Midland snaking around each other for a few miles, each crossing the other more than once! The GC and GN came together at Annesley to share the Annesley tunnel, only to separate once again on the North side into three lines at Kirkby South Junction, the GN Leen Valley, the Mansfield Railway and the GC main line to Chesterfield and Sheffield. It's a shame we've lost so much.

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, t-b-g said:

I am a huge fan of Messrs. Denny and Dyer but I would like to think that the hobby has progressed in some respects since the heyday of Buckingham and Borchester.

 

There are many people who have built better locos, track, signals, carriages etc.

 

There are many layouts that are closer to the prototype in terms of things like length and curvature.

 

I would say is that in terms of atmosphere and design for intricate and intensive operation, not many layouts have equalled or surpassed those two.

 

The type of modeller that would build that type of layout doesn't seem to be around much nowadays. The lone worker, producing pretty much everything themselves. Perhaps it is because the trade support is so much greater than it used to be that such all round modelling is rarely necessary any more.

 

I also think that the hobby is more sociable than it used to be. Joint projects or groups, either informal or clubs, seem to be behind a good number of impressive layouts. Pooling resources and skills does seem a good way of getting a project up and running in a shorter timescale than a lone worker could achieve.

 

That is certainly how I work best. I would love to be like Peter Denny or Frank Dyer but my productivity levels would mean that nothing was ever finished, so working with others on joint projects produces quicker results.

 

Having said that I am having a go at a purely solo effort, with everything scratch or kit built. Not a hugely ambitious layout but just something to see if I can actually see a project through to completion myself. 

 

 

 

 

Interesting thoughts, as always, Tony,

 

Regarding Frank Dyer's loco-construction, though he was not actually-mentioned by name, he 'reviewed' a DJH A1 for the erstwhile Model Railways many years ago when Cyril Freezer was the Editor. I have to say, I was not very impressed. The cab was wonky and some of the joints between the parts weren't as neat as I would have expected. When painted, the numerals were the wrong size, and I'd certainly seen much better-built DJH A1s. Yet Cyril praised Frank's approach; almost as if his reputation went before him. 

 

But that 'reputation' was well-deserved, because the likes of Frank Dyer (and certainly Peter Denny) were among the pioneers who showed the likes of me how model railways should be built - 'built' being the operative word. Those guys did everything, were self-reliant, inventive and complete, all-round craftsmen. They proved that model railways (in OO and EM) could be made to work - reliably, accurately and interestingly. That Buckingham still works on all those levels is a testament to Peter's pragmatic and personal approach. 

 

You mention that the hobby has 'progressed', and it has, but by how much, particularly with regard to good running? A friend brings along locos on a regular basis which have been built by others, some 'professionally-made'. I spend the evenings tinkering with them to make them work. Tight gears, dodgy pick-ups, rough-running, an inability to go round curves, shorting and noise are endemic in these creations. I do what I can, and he donates to CRUK in response. He also brings along some modern RTR locos which need attention. Last Monday, I handed one back, having given up with it. Why? Even after reading the instructions, I couldn't get inside it to see what was wrong. Despite undoing all the visible screws (causing the bunker to fall off!), all I got were ominous cracking noises. It jerked along, then the gears went out of mesh, and all I got was a useless whirring sound! Progress indeed!

 

This same friend looks on in incredulity at the running on LB. Yet good-running can be achieved if everything is 'done properly', and everything is compatible. Would that were the case with so many 'modern' layouts I see.  Poor-running seems to be accepted. A shrug of the shoulders is given when things fall off, or even pre-prepared notices are displayed apologising why things don't work!

 

Some of the most visually-beautiful creations don't work at all. Scenically, they are light years beyond Buckingham or Borchester, but things fall off, locos stutter and the general running is rubbish. So much for progress! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, PMP said:

I don’t know how we can be in a ‘post Iain Rice’ era, he’s still alive!

 

In my experience there no real change in layout styles relating to space. Some use it incredibly effectively like Tony with Little Bytham, others nowhere near as well. You only have to look at the layout design section of the forum to see hopelessly impractical designs for a variety of reasons, through to a few good ones. Few people have any concept of space required, or think of changing to alternative scales when designing their schemes and it often shows in the final results. With set track still being the biggest seller by a country mile, the hobby clearly is ‘happy’ with too tight curvature, and building layouts around it. 

 

Thanks Paul,

 

Space, or lack of it, has always been the principal limiting factor in designing/constructing model railways. 

 

The team which built Little Bytham used the available space effectively because it was almost enough. I say 'almost', because it's actually just over a foot short of dead scale. It would have needed a length of a little over 33' to be absolutely correct length. In defence, visitors have to be told that it's a twitch short!

 

That's why I (and the rest of the team) wouldn't have countenanced building an ECML prototype layout in 4mm in less than 30'. Why? Too short, too compromised and too tight visible curves at the ends. Not only that, compromised running.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[PMP]

That’s the reason I mentioned effectively Tony, you and the team have accepted and ‘managed’ the compromises to get the best from the space you have, and keeping the essence of the location. Some of the worst designs I’ve seen around shows and published are micro layouts, rule 1 not withstanding. If you’re short on space, or simply like micro’s nothing wrong with that at all, but many seem cramped to excess to get everything desired or as much track in. 

Often, less is more, as Rod Hall’s Llanaster, Iain Rice’s Butley Mills and many others have shown over the years, whilst still retaining plausibility. I built  Shelfie as a micro layout, the design changed massively, as I realised the original concept was flawed, the final result was an improvement, but still doesn’t really ‘work’. The use of space is possibly my equivalent to your ‘train headcode lamps’, it’s one of the first things to get my attention looking at a layout! 

Edited August 21, 2019 by PMP

[Lecorbusier]

42 minutes ago, PMP said:

I built  Shelfie as a micro layout, the design changed massively, as I realised the original concept was flawed, the final result was an improvement, but still doesn’t really ‘work’. The use of space is possibly my equivalent to your ‘train headcode lamps’, it’s one of the first things to get my attention looking at a layout! 

Difficult though it may be to discipline oneself but, given a situation of limited space, arguably it is the space that should dictate the design/subject. I know we all have a subject and layout we would like to build .... and so try to work out a way of achieving it ..... but arguably in most instances this is putting the cart before the horse.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Lecorbusier

[t-b-g]

Those last few posts sum up very nicely how the hobby has progressed in some areas and not others.

 

Many modern modellers have the skill and ability to build individual models to a better standard than Messrs. Dyer and Denny.

 

Few surpass them in use of sometimes small space, design and operational interest.

 

The early "Stony Stratford" or "Leighton Buzzard" or even the present "Leighton Buzzard" are hard to beat as minimum space layouts.

Without the later gasworks, the present Leighton Buzzard was less than 6ft long but can entertain an operator for long periods without boredom setting in.

 

I never saw the orignal Borchester but I was astonished first time I saw Borchester Market at how much well designed railway was fitted into such a small space. Sure the curves were tight but I always find that if you are inside a curve, it never looks as bad. So for the operators the curves are much less of a problem.

 

The difference between the layout being operated by Frank Dyer and his team or the later owners was very marked. One team knew the layout inside out and had lots of practice and the layout was run in a very slick fashion. A new team, new stock and unfamiliarity led to much head scratching and big gaps while they tried to work out how to do the next move or even what the next move should be 

 

Retford is/was a good example of what I am getting at. Technically superb in terms of quality of locos and stock, trackwork etc. Not designed by a keen operator and the control systems were awkward, had been modified many times without a deal of consistency and took time to master. So when the layout was run properly (not just to run a few trains round) maybe once a year there were huge conferences between operators (many hadn't touched it since he last run and were not aware hat things had been altered!) as to how to set up the next move and great gaps between trains. Several times I suggested regular "route learning" running sessions behind closed doors for operators to learn the layout well but they never happened.

 

One of the great experiences of the hobby for me is to see an extensive layout being run well be a team of operators all working in harmony with each other. If it is a layout with lots of good model making rather than lots of RTR, that is a big bonus.

 

Sadly it is a rare thing! 

[BlackRat]

Time, and railway modelling moves on.........

 

Denny's Merco smokey brick paper has been replaced by laser etching, cutting, 3d printing etched brass (tho thats old hat now) all techniques being developed .......and as much a revolution as brick paper when it first came out.

 

Static grass has replaced hanging basket liner, which in itself replaced dyed sawdust in the same way foam replaced lichen.

 

2019 pioneers, there are lots out there and no doubt someone somewhere is working on the next revolutionary techniques!

[Evertonian]

Often remarked upon how quickly the thread topics move along when you haven't logged on for a couple of days, I'm just catching up

with the (rather sad to me) news of "Maindee East" offered for auction today I think (?) . 

 

Too late now of course, but I would have thought a good opportunity for a South Wales based industrial museum, if there is one, or Swindon

Council as operators of the GWR Steam Museum to have acquired this showpiece of modelling at a reasonable price if the price guide accurately

reflects the ultimate sale price. I suppose that in these days of council's pleading poverty a forlorn hope although funds seem to be forthcoming

regularly for status symbol limos and suchlike fripperies.

 

Wouldn't it have been a great legacy of Steffan's inspirational work to see it on permanent display.

 

Chris Knight

[t-b-g]

15 minutes ago, BlackRat said:

Time, and railway modelling moves on.........

 

Denny's Merco smokey brick paper has been replaced by laser etching, cutting, 3d printing etched brass (tho thats old hat now) all techniques being developed .......and as much a revolution as brick paper when it first came out.

 

Static grass has replaced hanging basket liner, which in itself replaced dyed sawdust in the same way foam replaced lichen.

 

2019 pioneers, there are lots out there and no doubt someone somewhere is working on the next revolutionary techniques!

 

Times and techniques my have moved on. But 1950s brickpaper can still hold its own.