Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I'll not need to alter LB at all, Jamie; the two layouts will never combine!

 

There never was an actual 'junction' at Little Bytham for the Edenham branch. It crossed Station Road and ran into the goods yard, but transshipment was only possible by a couple of wagon turntables - there was no way that the GNR would be interested in Lord Willoughby's railway, even if Ian's alternative history suggests this. The Bytham 'station' for the line was The Willoughby Arms, in those far-off days called The Steam Plough. 

 

Evidence of the Willoughby railway is still to be seen. The remains of a bridge still crosses the River Glen, the embankment still stretches across the valley and the bridge carrying the Witham Road over the old line has recently been repaired. Part of the old formation nearer Edenham is now a 'green' lane.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Good Afternoon Tony,

 

An interesting project, please pass on my best wishes to Ian, I haven't seen him in ages. That would have been a great alternative history, requiring a level/flat crossing with the M&GN perhaps?

The two publications I have on the Little Bytham to Edenham line, both refer to one of the Willoughby loco's (Ophir I think) running on the GNR line to reach Bytham brickyard, the points into that being controlled by the old signal box at Lawn Lane.

Who knows if it's true? As you say, I only know of wagon turntables as a definite link.

When the road was resurfaced at that end of Bytham in the 60's, there were still some of the railway lines buried underneath. I believe they were finally dug out before the resurfacing was completed.

 

Kind Regards,

Lee

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lee74clarke said:

Good Afternoon Tony,

 

An interesting project, please pass on my best wishes to Ian, I haven't seen him in ages. That would have been a great alternative history, requiring a level/flat crossing with the M&GN perhaps?

The two publications I have on the Little Bytham to Edenham line, both refer to one of the Willoughby loco's (Ophir I think) running on the GNR line to reach Bytham brickyard, the points into that being controlled by the old signal box at Lawn Lane.

Who knows if it's true? As you say, I only know of wagon turntables as a definite link.

When the road was resurfaced at that end of Bytham in the 60's, there were still some of the railway lines buried underneath. I believe they were finally dug out before the resurfacing was completed.

 

Kind Regards,

Lee

 

Good afternoon Lee,

 

I think the story of one of Lord Willoughby's locos running on the GN main is probably apocryphal. It would have been too heavy and too big to fit on one of the wagon turntables. By all accounts the two Edenham locos weren't all that reliable; just as well then that the Lord had William Stroudley and Daniel Gooch as weekend mates! 

 

At the time, of course, the GN main line (the towns line of 1852) was only double track. It shows foresight that when the MR/M&GN girder bridge was built it was made wide enough to accommodate the quadrupling 14 or so years later. 

 

It's interesting to postulate on what would have happened had the Edenham line still have been in existence when the M&GNR was built. As it happened, it just cut through the abandoned formation. At the point of intersection, the Edenham line was higher, though not at a great enough height to give clearance. So, either the M&GNR would have been in a deeper cutting or the Willoughby line raised................

 

1929788056_MGNR08.jpg.526b64f7c81875d48c36ebddb3aa78d2.jpg

 

Looking westwards along the abandoned M&GNR in 2009, the crossing point is just in the furthest pool of sunlight. 

 

1835963202_MGNR09.jpg.c557a29dd2fd4fd2b2dc1ca8d9e64033.jpg

 

I know it needs the eye of faith to believe this picture, but this is the formation of the Edenham line (looking south westwards). I'm standing about six feet above the M&GNR, so the lack of crossing height is apparent. 

 

My companions when I took this picture were Ian Wilson and a dead badger!

 

676135512_WithamRoadBridge02.jpg.3b9148036f6cfc23febad24569e74b58.jpg

 

It's wonderful that the Witham Road bridge over the Edenham line has been repaired and will stand for future generations. This is looking north east, with the trees on the far horizon marking the top of the cutting through which the M&GNR ran. The Lord's line ran straight from this position, though mature trees have now obliterated its passage from here. 

 

Isn't Little Bytham a real 'railway' village? On four separate occasions, in two different centuries, it's seen railways built or expanded. In that same time period, it's seen two lines abandoned. From where your parents live, one cannot travel any more than half a mile without crossing a railway or the remains of one. What a great place to abide, because we're the same!

 

Best regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited by Tony Wright
to add something
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Thanks Tony, my comment was very much tongue in cheek.  I remember  discussing the line with you in the Willoughby Arms. It looks like a very nice little layout.

 

Jamie

I took as tough in cheek, Jamie.

 

My reply should have hinted at that.............

 

It would certainly be an interesting project had the Willoughby line survived until 1958. A separate bay platform would have been needed after the quadrupling, with level crossing gates at an angle across Station Road of 45 degrees, adjacent to the Willoughby. I wonder if the occupants of the adjacent bungalow know that a railway used to once run through what is now their front room! 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, grob1234 said:

What a lovely layout that is. Very natural, and a nice selection of stock.

 

My V2 is sitting a little high, I think. I've sorted out the fore/aft ness, so I'm happy with that.

 

I'm just reluctant to start removing material from the Comet frames, and I'm equally reluctant to remove material from the brittle body. Trouble is, its about 6 scale inches too high by my reckoning. My intuition says I could probably 'get away' with taking a mm or so off the contact parts of the frames.

 

IMG_7130.JPG.319d40c0b2349e23ec98035227613294.JPG

Hi Tom.

Can I recommend you use the relationship of the cylinders (especially the piston rod) to the driving wheel centres to work out where the discrepancy actually resides.   If you take metal from the top of the frames I would anticipate that this will cause the cylinders to drop as well, but I had thought from your earlier posts that you'd already sorted out the relationshp of the cylinders and the wheels? 

Measure twice, cut once as the saying goes.

 

Best of luck Tom,

 

Frank 

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chuffer Davies said:

Hi Tom.

Can I recommend you use the relationship of the cylinders (especially the piston rod) to the driving wheel centres to work out where the discrepancy actually resides.   If you take metal from the top of the frames I would anticipate that this will cause the cylinders to drop as well, but I had thought from your earlier posts that you'd already sorted out the relationshp of the cylinders and the wheels? 

Measure twice, cut once as the saying goes.

 

Best of luck Tom,

 

Frank 

 

I hadn't thought about the cylinders needing to drop as well when the body drops. 

 

I suppose it's more important for a loco of this type for the tender to be at the correct buffer height so it relates to the coaches correctly.

 

I'd prefer a sweet running loco with a slightly high front buffer beam than a rubbish one thats the correct height... I'll sleep on it before I get the angle grinder out.

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, grob1234 said:

What a lovely layout that is. Very natural, and a nice selection of stock.

 

My V2 is sitting a little high, I think. I've sorted out the fore/aft ness, so I'm happy with that.

 

I'm just reluctant to start removing material from the Comet frames, and I'm equally reluctant to remove material from the brittle body. Trouble is, its about 6 scale inches too high by my reckoning. My intuition says I could probably 'get away' with taking a mm or so off the contact parts of the frames.

 

IMG_7130.JPG.319d40c0b2349e23ec98035227613294.JPG

Good evening Tom,

 

I think the front buffer beam on one of the pair of Mike Trice V2s I built might be a fraction high as well....................

 

155461393_MikeTriceV227.jpg.9bebf299889873f88174e690ea694dae.jpg

 

The whole body seems to sit at the right height, but the front 'beam does look a twitch high from this side-on angle. 

 

Of course, this is the one where I shattered the resin 'beam and made a brass replacement.

 

1786205760_MikeTriceV2229.jpg.63547a85d8c1328b167ffeee8595ae57.jpg

 

I shattered part of the firebox on this one, and the front steps, though the front buffer beam remained intact. This one appears to be the right height.

 

I'm slightly puzzled because the fixing positions of chassis/body are the same.

 

I know these have been seen before, but not in this context.

 

Both are being painted by Geoff Haynes. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Tony Wright
to add something
  • Like 8
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is more appropriate?...........................

 

Ian Wilson is pondering on the most-suitable station building for his Edenham project.

 

1502982231_Edenham22.jpg.26888e068233cbdd23009cae773fc32d.jpg

 

This 'modest' affair was the first try. 

 

915126684_Edenham21.jpg.81a2c8c6b1a3cbb11973a8065116ad88.jpg

 

However, perhaps a more-grandiose one is appropriate (as befits a private railway to a great country seat, even though the Castle is just over a mile away?). 

 

This is based more on the station/stationmaster's house which served the little station at Thurlby (the house still stands) on the long-closed Bourne-Essendine line.

 

Any thoughts, please?

 

Note the Sprat & Winkle-fitted wagons, the work of Rob Kinsey and me..................

 

 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the bigger building looks more like the GNR station buildings you see around the railways of Lincolnshire. 

 

The Station Master would most likely live in the top floor rather than having a seperate house.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Which is more appropriate?...........................

 

Ian Wilson is pondering on the most-suitable station building for his Edenham project.

 

1502982231_Edenham22.jpg.26888e068233cbdd23009cae773fc32d.jpg

 

This 'modest' affair was the first try. 

 

915126684_Edenham21.jpg.81a2c8c6b1a3cbb11973a8065116ad88.jpg

 

However, perhaps a more-grandiose one is appropriate (as befits a private railway to a great country seat, even though the Castle is just over a mile away?). 

 

This is based more on the station/stationmaster's house which served the little station at Thurlby (the house still stands) on the long-closed Bourne-Essendine line.

 

Any thoughts, please?

 

Note the Sprat & Winkle-fitted wagons, the work of Rob Kinsey and me..................

 

 

 

I think that - given the premise on which this layout is built, but having regard for the harsh reality that the branch did not actually survive - only the most basic of terminal facilities could have been justified. Even Lords had finite resources, and those that didn't go bankrupt must have had a degree of hard financial common sense.

 

Surely something far more 'Colonel Stephens' would be more appropriate - this rural environment could never have generated more than a trickle of passenger business? There would not have been a stationmaster, surely - just a yard foreman / shunter and a guard / conductor?

 

John Isherwood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought his Lordship would have wanted to make something of a statement with "his" station.  Are there any buildings of a particular architectural style  elsewhere on the estate?  Or perhaps something similar in style to the Willerby Arms as it was when a station?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Something substantive, but no bigger than necessary.  So the stationmaster would have three bedrooms at first floor level (more above?), two reception and kitchen below.  Booking office, booking hall, ladies' waiting room in a single story building and gents' facilities in a lean to.  The variable would be any company offices, which could be above the passenger area.  Bill

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, 2750Papyrus said:

I would have thought his Lordship would have wanted to make something of a statement with "his" station.  Are there any buildings of a particular architectural style  elsewhere on the estate?  Or perhaps something similar in style to the Willerby Arms as it was when a station?

There is certainly precedent (or precedence, which is correct, Sir?) for grandiose, or at least generously-proportioned rural stations built for the local aristocracy.  Think of Blake Hall on the Epping-Ongar branch, or Great Longstone on the Midland Main Line through the Peak.  The latter was actually designed as two separate stations on the same platform!  

 

Rob

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, grob1234 said:

What a lovely layout that is. Very natural, and a nice selection of stock.

 

My V2 is sitting a little high, I think. I've sorted out the fore/aft ness, so I'm happy with that.

 

I'm just reluctant to start removing material from the Comet frames, and I'm equally reluctant to remove material from the brittle body. Trouble is, its about 6 scale inches too high by my reckoning. My intuition says I could probably 'get away' with taking a mm or so off the contact parts of the frames.

 

IMG_7130.JPG.319d40c0b2349e23ec98035227613294.JPG

At a rough guess - and it is only a guess, I place the problem with the frames. They are likely dimensioned for an etched brass footplate, whereas your body has a thickness to the footplate. Thus,  the underside of the footplate sits atop the frames level with the underside of the valance (or thereabouts). Take enough pff the top of the frames and it will sit at the correct height. Just a guess. Best of luck,

Marcus

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Which is more appropriate?...........................

 

Ian Wilson is pondering on the most-suitable station building for his Edenham project.

 

1502982231_Edenham22.jpg.26888e068233cbdd23009cae773fc32d.jpg

 

This 'modest' affair was the first try. 

 

915126684_Edenham21.jpg.81a2c8c6b1a3cbb11973a8065116ad88.jpg

 

However, perhaps a more-grandiose one is appropriate (as befits a private railway to a great country seat, even though the Castle is just over a mile away?). 

 

This is based more on the station/stationmaster's house which served the little station at Thurlby (the house still stands) on the long-closed Bourne-Essendine line.

 

Any thoughts, please?

 

Note the Sprat & Winkle-fitted wagons, the work of Rob Kinsey and me..................

 

 

Hi Tony

 

i definitely think the first photo with the smaller station building looks more authentic.

 

Giving the layout that old branch line terminus look.
 

The large brick built structure Just looks to modern and overwhelming in my opinion.

 

Regards

 

David

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Which is more appropriate?...........................

 

Ian Wilson is pondering on the most-suitable station building for his Edenham project.

 

1502982231_Edenham22.jpg.26888e068233cbdd23009cae773fc32d.jpg

 

This 'modest' affair was the first try. 

 

915126684_Edenham21.jpg.81a2c8c6b1a3cbb11973a8065116ad88.jpg

 

However, perhaps a more-grandiose one is appropriate (as befits a private railway to a great country seat, even though the Castle is just over a mile away?). 

 

This is based more on the station/stationmaster's house which served the little station at Thurlby (the house still stands) on the long-closed Bourne-Essendine line.

 

Any thoughts, please?

 

Note the Sprat & Winkle-fitted wagons, the work of Rob Kinsey and me..................

 

 

I haven't been up to the Willoughby line cutting for over 30 years, so I can't even recall the different track bed levels. It's a real shame more wasn't accurately documented through its brief history, the two books that have been published sadly have a few easily avoidable mistakes.

Where the line ran over the river at Bytham, and up and under the Witham road bridge, plus at various points into Grimsthorpe Estate, the land was farmed by a late friend of my Dad's, Geoff Foreman. He chatted to one of the author's at length about the lines route, and the author disagreed and published his view. Evidently, his plough dragging up sleepers wasn't evidence enough! Whether this was the original route, or the slightly revised 'gentler' route, I can't recall. There being the problem, I can't remember accurately the chat from 30 odd years ago, so what chance precise detail from 1860!

You would have liked Geoff, he had a headful of local railway history, you would have never got him away from the Bytham layout! He had loads of GNR and M&GN 'goodies' as well, would love to know what happened to them.

Daniel Gooch is recorded as having driven the line several times, but Stroudley's influence seems a bit more questionable.

In terms of Ian's buildings, given Lord Willoughby being about skint by the time the line was completed, the modest, small building is more likely. However, if the GNR took over in 1880 (?) who knows what they may have built there?

What about both, with the smaller one, being the run down, old original building, now used as a store/shed/stable, and on the opposite side?

If Ian wishes to stretch history slightly further, is there space for the proposed Kirkby Underwood extension, winding away into the distance?

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lee74clarke said:

I haven't been up to the Willoughby line cutting for over 30 years, so I can't even recall the different track bed levels. It's a real shame more wasn't accurately documented through its brief history, the two books that have been published sadly have a few easily avoidable mistakes.

Where the line ran over the river at Bytham, and up and under the Witham road bridge, plus at various points into Grimsthorpe Estate, the land was farmed by a late friend of my Dad's, Geoff Foreman. He chatted to one of the author's at length about the lines route, and the author disagreed and published his view. Evidently, his plough dragging up sleepers wasn't evidence enough! Whether this was the original route, or the slightly revised 'gentler' route, I can't recall. There being the problem, I can't remember accurately the chat from 30 odd years ago, so what chance precise detail from 1860!

You would have liked Geoff, he had a headful of local railway history, you would have never got him away from the Bytham layout! He had loads of GNR and M&GN 'goodies' as well, would love to know what happened to them.

Daniel Gooch is recorded as having driven the line several times, but Stroudley's influence seems a bit more questionable.

In terms of Ian's buildings, given Lord Willoughby being about skint by the time the line was completed, the modest, small building is more likely. However, if the GNR took over in 1880 (?) who knows what they may have built there?

What about both, with the smaller one, being the run down, old original building, now used as a store/shed/stable, and on the opposite side?

If Ian wishes to stretch history slightly further, is there space for the proposed Kirkby Underwood extension, winding away into the distance?

 

Good morning Lee,

 

Many thanks for all that; and thanks to others for their comments.

 

You mention the Kirkby Underwood extension, which then (if built) would have linked up with the GNR Bourne-Sleaford line. I think Ian's idea was that it had been built beyond Edenham, but then been subsequently closed at the time the Bourne-Sleaford route was run down; leaving a 'withered arm' beyond the A 151. All interesting supposition. 

 

Even with the most-inventive history, I can't ever have seen the GNR being interested in the Willoughby line, even if it had been extended. When built, in 1852, the towns line was the equivalent of a railway motorway (it contains Stoke Bank, of course). When Lord Willoughby had his line entering Little Bytham, it would be like a country lane meeting a motorway at a 'T' junction, to continue the analogy. I think another problem was that the Edenham 'branch' would have been a north-facing junction, rather than south-facing (from which more traffic would have been generated, particularly passenger; in the same way that the junction for the Bourne line at Essendine was north-facing - a puzzle). 

 

Certainly, had the GNR taken it over (and the LNER and BR continued with it), any structures would have been far more substantial than those provided by the Grimsthorpe Estate (hence Ian's larger building idea). 

 

Anyway, it all leads to a fascinating model (which I'll be working on again this morning). The idea was to make it suitable for exhibitions but by the time (if) they ever return, Ian and I (both having been born in 1946) will probably be too old to take it out!

 

Finally, and a link with the local railways, can there ever have been a grander station building than that at Bourne? It could claim to be the oldest railway station in the world. How many others sold tickets in an Elizabethan manor house? The Red Hall.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 31A said:

Regarding the potential station buildings for the Edenham layout, I think the second picture, with the larger station building looks quite good and reminiscent of the situation at Horncastle:

 

http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/h/horncastle/

 

Thanks Steve,

 

Yes, a substantial building for a little-used line.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All this discussion of Lord Willoughby and his railway reminded of a piece of music by the Elizabethan composer John Dowland.The piece, My Lord Willoughby's Welcome Home I saw performed by the late Julian Bream at the Sydney Town Hall in 1969.I remember Bream in his introduction to the piece saying that Lord Willoughby was not home very often but when he was quite a fuss was made of him. Was Dowland's Willoughby an ancestor of the one who owned the railway I wonder?

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Which is more appropriate?...........................

 

Ian Wilson is pondering on the most-suitable station building for his Edenham project.

 

1502982231_Edenham22.jpg.26888e068233cbdd23009cae773fc32d.jpg

 

This 'modest' affair was the first try. 

 

915126684_Edenham21.jpg.81a2c8c6b1a3cbb11973a8065116ad88.jpg

 

However, perhaps a more-grandiose one is appropriate (as befits a private railway to a great country seat, even though the Castle is just over a mile away?). 

 

This is based more on the station/stationmaster's house which served the little station at Thurlby (the house still stands) on the long-closed Bourne-Essendine line.

 

Any thoughts, please?

 

Note the Sprat & Winkle-fitted wagons, the work of Rob Kinsey and me..................

 

 

Maybe a similar building to the now public house at the other end of the line would give a nice match and provide a 'house' style?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Tony,

 

Great to see Ian's project coming to life - do I recognise the solitary somersault signal?(!)

 

I'm inclined to agree with those who prefer the second style of main station building. I think, as already mentioned, that there's plenty of 'Lord Muck of the Manor' examples up and down the country. More importantly, it's a far more individual building for Ian to indulge in compared to the rather predictable RTP example shown - it's his (Ian's) project to have fun with after all!

 

The blended photographic backscene looks very effective in the latest photos.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LNER4479 said:

Hello Tony,

 

Great to see Ian's project coming to life - do I recognise the solitary somersault signal?(!)

 

I'm inclined to agree with those who prefer the second style of main station building. I think, as already mentioned, that there's plenty of 'Lord Muck of the Manor' examples up and down the country. More importantly, it's a far more individual building for Ian to indulge in compared to the rather predictable RTP example shown - it's his (Ian's) project to have fun with after all!

 

The blended photographic backscene looks very effective in the latest photos.

Good afternoon Graham,

 

'do I recognise the solitary somersault signal?(!)'

 

I hope so, since you made it (beautifully). It won't surprise you to know that it will not be operated by a Veissman motor................

 

I'll post some further pictures later today/tomorrow.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Lee,

 

Many thanks for all that; and thanks to others for their comments.

 

You mention the Kirkby Underwood extension, which then (if built) would have linked up with the GNR Bourne-Sleaford line. I think Ian's idea was that it had been built beyond Edenham, but then been subsequently closed at the time the Bourne-Sleaford route was run down; leaving a 'withered arm' beyond the A 151. All interesting supposition. 

 

 

 

Finally, and a link with the local railways, can there ever have been a grander station building than that at Bourne? It could claim to be the oldest railway station in the world. How many others sold tickets in an Elizabethan manor house? The Red Hall.  

 

 

Tony

Not so grand but probably older. The original building that was used as the ticket office at Ingatestone dated from 1557. 

Bernard

  • Thanks 1
  • 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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.