Castle Aching

[Northroader]

The West Pinfold layout is using an Andrews design for the main station building, so NER not GNR.

(deep breath)

134/201 , 12/10 scrapped.

135.         10/03

136           1/06

137.          12/12

138.          11/02

139.            5/12

162.            9/02

163.            12/04

164.             1/03

165.             3/05

186.             11/07

187.              9/03

188.              4/11

189.              5/02

185.              5/05

190.              11/02

191.              10/02

192.               6/02

193.               6/02

194.               9/06

166                10/02

167.                10/06

168                  4/05

170/ 200         -/04

195.                 11/04

196                   10/04

197.                  12/04

198.                   3/06

199.                    -/04

they all had duplicate numbers (“0” prefix) around 1900 

[Edwardian]

4 minutes ago, Northroader said:

The West Pinfold layout is using an Andrews design for the main station building, so NER not GNR.

(deep breath)

134/201 , 12/10 scrapped.

135.         10/03

136           1/06

137.          12/12

138.          11/02

139.            5/12

162.            9/02

163.            12/04

164.             1/03

165.             3/05

186.             11/07

187.              9/03

188.              4/11

189.              5/02

185.              5/05

190.              11/02

191.              10/02

192.               6/02

193.               6/02

194.               9/06

166                10/02

167.                10/06

168                  4/05

170/ 200         -/04

195.                 11/04

196                   10/04

197.                  12/04

198.                   3/06

199.                    -/04

they all had duplicate numbers (“0” prefix) around 1900 

 

Thanks on both counts.  Where resides that list?

 

I see that, of those I have illustrations of in late condition, only 1888 survived to spring 1905, and yet I suspect would have been modified further from the condition in the drawing. I might just model the condition of 165 and stick a survivor's number on it (!) 

[Nearholmer]

“It is really hard to know the extent to which CMEs/Superintendents worked on aesthetics themselves or whether Chief Draughtsmen were the real designers.”

 

That is is a really interesting sentence, because, intentionally or accidentally, it conflates design and aesthetics.

 

When designing a machine, managing the appearance is only one, sometimes minor, part of the process. Ideally Part 1 of the design process is about function, although ‘the best’, as we all know, involves wonderful blends of form and function ..... not mentioning William Stroudley at all; his biography isn’t called “Master Craftsman of Steam” for nothing.

 

Getting back to the individual or team question: it depends a lot  on span of control. Even a workaholic control-freak with an iron constitution (which seem to have been part of the JD for a Victorian or Edwardian CME) can only be into so much detail, so as railways got bigger, and CMEs sometimes got lumped with all sorts of accountabilities outside the core of the DO and main works, they absolutely had to delegate. 

 

They could, and did, and do, delegate with stylistic variation: some were ‘even delegators’, who ran a sort of cabinet government of accountable subordinates; some delegated huge chunks, but kept their pet bits under personal control; most at least steered a general design direction, but not necessarily one they personally devised; some neglected parts of their span, only to get caught out by doing so; some, I think, had main board posts with all that goes with it, most didn’t.

 

And, then there was J C Craven, who seems, by some accounts, to have abused his family and his staff, but had a lot of his job done for him in later years by his son.

 

One perennial issue was whether, on a big railway, the CME handed locos over at the exit of main works, or whether they handed  locos into traffic at the running-shed departure road. I think the Midland might have changed it’s mind on that one a couple of times. Running-sheds, especially if there were lots of them, were a large managerial responsibility in themselves, so could consume The Chief’s time.

 

In short, I believe (no, I know!) that it is impossible to generalise about how much detail of locomotives a CME was into.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 7, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Northroader]

It’s lifted out of GERS booklet, “0-4-4 tank Locomotives” by Geoffrey Pember, 1979, ISBN 0 906669 00 6. I haven’t come across any other similar ones for other classes, mores the pity.

 

edit 0137, one of the last to get a 160lb. Boiler, so like the line drawing of 165 with cab and coal rails, didn’t go until 1912.

edit no 2: the photo of no. 135 shows an older, three ring boiler with a central dome, the 160 lb. boilers had two rings, with the dome placed forward to miss the middle join, so copy the 165 drawing and give  it an 0137 number.

p.s. With your high standards, would you regard giving a wagon a number lifted in part from a bank note as sinful? Forgive me, father, for I was high at a Methodist conference on the Norfolk Coast.

Edited October 7, 2019 by Northroader

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Northroader said:

would you regard giving a wagon a number lifted in part from a bank note as sinful? 

 

Surely only if you could demonstrate that the number of the banknote you used was not the same as the number of any other known banknote...

Edited October 7, 2019 by Compound2632

[nick_bastable]

Returning from a late sojourn in the land of Homer the member who had been apprised of the latest news via the CA  Observer is pleased to note some sanity has been restored, slowly the member sank into his seat to resume the business of monitoring the proposed CA railway

 

Nick

[wagonman]

1 hour ago, Nearholmer said:

“It is really hard to know the extent to which CMEs/Superintendents worked on aesthetics themselves or whether Chief Draughtsmen were the real designers.”

 

That is is a really interesting sentence, because, intentionally or accidentally, it conflates design and aesthetics.

 

When designing a machine, managing the appearance is only one, sometimes minor, part of the process. Ideally Part 1 of the design process is about function, although ‘the best’, as we all know, involves wonderful blends of form and function ..... not mentioning William Stroudley at all; his biography isn’t called “Master Craftsman of Steam” for nothing.

 

Getting back to the individual or team question: it depends a lot  on span of control. Even a workaholic control-freak with an iron constitution (which seem to have been part of the JD for a Victorian or Edwardian CME) can only be into so much detail, so as railways got bigger, and CMEs sometimes got lumped with all sorts of accountabilities outside the core of the DO and main works, they absolutely had to delegate. 

 

They could, and did, and do, delegate with stylistic variation: some were ‘even delegators’, who ran a sort of cabinet government of accountable subordinates; some delegated huge chunks, but kept their pet bits under personal control; most at least steered a general design direction, but not necessarily one they personally devised; some neglected parts of their span, only to get caught out by doing so; some, I think, had main board posts with all that goes with it, most didn’t.

 

And, then there was J C Craven, who seems, by some accounts, to have abused his family and his staff, but had a lot of his job done for him in later years by his son.

 

One perennial issue was whether, on a big railway, the CME handed locos over at the exit of main works, or whether they handed  locos into traffic at the running-shed departure road. I think the Midland might have changed it’s mind on that one a couple of times. Running-sheds, especially if there were lots of them, were a large managerial responsibility in themselves, so could consume The Chief’s time.

 

In short, I believe (no, I know!) that it is impossible to generalise about how much detail of locomotives a CME was into.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One could consider the effect of Holcroft's interventions on Churchward' designs.

 

 

[Hroth]

3 hours ago, nick_bastable said:

Returning from a late sojourn in the land of Homer the member who had been apprised of the latest news via the CA  Observer is pleased to note some sanity has been restored

 

Don't speak too soon, its only the beginning of October. 

[Northroader]

That’s Homer Simpson?

[Hroth]

2 minutes ago, Northroader said:

That’s Homer Simpson?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homer_(disambiguation)

 

 

Talking about designers and attaching their names as the authors of creation, even the Illiad and the Odyssey isn't firmly nailed down as being by one great poet.

 

And then there's the modern great Architects, who create massive buildings, structural engineering projects and atrocious blocks of flats and housing estates.

 

They may have an "idea" and wave some airy sketches about, but its their draughtspeople, stress calculators, material analysts, accountants and loads and loads of lawyers who take the sketches and usher the final creation blinking into the light of day.

 

Sometimes it doesn't completely work out and cough Sir Thomas Bouch cough has to carry the can...

[nick_bastable]

A pleasure to see  how a member spent their holiday can create such diverse comments 

 

Nick

[Hroth]

7 minutes ago, nick_bastable said:

A pleasure to see  how a member spent their holiday can create such diverse comments 

 

Nick

 

Hope you had a wonderful time, the weathers been dreadful here!

 

 

[Hroth]

Spotted this browsing Amazon last night...

 

"Points of Danger"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Points-Danger-Railway-Detective-Book-ebook/dp/B079SWNSRR/ref=sr_1_2?crid=WP0W654SLLBH&keywords=railway+detective+series+edward+marston&qid=1570518372&sprefix=railway+%2Caps%2C150&sr=8-2

 

One of the Railway Detective series, this time set in the East Anglia of the 1860s, with Murder on a train!!!!!

 

tiptoes out....

 

[MarkC]

10 hours ago, Northroader said:

That’s Homer Simpson?

D'oh!

[Compound2632]

26 minutes ago, Hroth said:

"Points of Danger"

 

 

I've read a few of Edward Marston's Railway Detective series - entertaining light reading if you don't mind predictable and formulaic plots and stock cardboard characters. I'm not entirely convinced that he is uniformly successful in evoking period but the railway side of things is generally, as far as I can tell, at least rooted in fact. I've been reading these in a library edition that has annoying cover art - based around photos of far too modern trains, on preserved lines. Looking on line, I see there's a paperback edition with cover art that is more apposite.

[Hroth]

I read one or two of the first books in the series, one involved a man being hurled off the Sankey Viaduct into the waters of the St Helens Canal below, it didn't specify if the train was coming from Liverpool or Manchester....  However the cover was in period, as was the cover of the first, being an adaptation of the famous painting of an express at Paddington (the one with the crook being arrested as he boards the train).

 

I've currently got one in the reading stack that I found in a charity shop, it's one of the more recent, set in 1860s Dorset, the cover is illustrated with a very Collettian Pannier Tank...

[corneliuslundie]

For as glimpse of the relationship at Swindon see Holcroft, H: "An outline of Great Western locomotive practice" (Ian Allan, 1957)

Jonathan

[Hroth]

Just got an email from Hattons, their latest venture into RTR manufacturing is a range of RTR 4 and 6 wheel coaches of late Victorian (and later liveries) vintage.  They are obviously a huge step up from Hornbys little 4 wheeler or the Railroad "GWR Clerestory" set,   and priced at £30 unlit and £36 with internal lighting per unit (4 or 6 wheeler), they seem pretty competitive.

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=594

 

What does the Parish Council think of this new move?

 

 

Edited October 9, 2019 by Hroth
keyboard dyslexia correction. It just kept bugging me!

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, Hroth said:

What does the Parish Council think of this new move?

 

 

But others are being more positive.

[Nearholmer]

I think 00 people have never had it so good, should be grateful for that fact, and stop nit-picking.

 

This mirrors very closely the approach taken in my 0 scale biscuit-tins on wheels world, where generic, but highly plausible, six-wheelers have proven very popular indeed (especially with me!), and I would be surprised if they are not similarly popular in 00 - interestingly, the price is the same, although clearly plastic 00 ones will have more detail.

 

Given that there were eight-zillion variations of the real thing, generic-ness is the most viable option for a maker, because the alternative, slavish adherence to one prototype, would trip them up by limiting the appeal.

[Hroth]

I've been following the discussion on the Hattons thread.

 

Yes, some people will be irritated by panelling/LOA/width/underframe being NOT SO for the livery being carried, however it should be admitted that they are a valid attempt to produce something that has recognisable proportions for Victorian passenger vehicles, even if they don't fit an exact particular diagram or pattern.

 

What is better?  A single rake of vehicles that follow the exact design practices of a single company and are priced to boot and can't be used to fulfill a similar role for any other company, or a combination of "typical" features that allows an approximation to a number of companies and can be sold in sufficient numbers to bring the price down to the point where buying a rake of them doesn't hurt.

 

The mainstream manufacturers have had decades to do something like this, and all we have is the Hornby 4 wheeler.

 

Hattons may be being brave to go for it, but I think they'll get a lot of support.

 

And looking at the rake sheet, a "Precedent"?  Is that what's next after the 66s?

 

[Edwardian]

11 minutes ago, Hroth said:

 ..... looking at the rake sheet, a "Precedent"?  Is that what's next after the 66s?

 

 

So far as I am aware, it's not the next National Collection model due to be produced, nor, indeed, the one after that ..... There are, however, a couple of suggestive inclusions in that graphic! 

 

49 minutes ago, Hroth said:

Just got an email form Hattons, their latest venture into RTR manufacturing is a range of RTR 4 and 6 wheel coaches of late Victorian (and later liveries) vintage.  They are obviously a huge step up from Hornbys little 4 wheeler or the Railroad "GWR Clerestory" set,   and priced at £30 unlit and £36 with internal lighting per unit (4 or 6 wheeler), they seem pretty competitive.

 

https://www.hattons.co.uk/newsdetail.aspx?id=594

 

What does the Parish Council think of this new move?

 

 

 

My twopenneth

 

 

So, I am thinking of using this train pack and adding a further 4-wheel, 5-compt coach, repainting to WNR livery and re-lettering to form:

 

6-wheel 3-compt. Brake 3rd / 4-wheel 5-compt. 3rd / 4-wheel 5-compt. 3rd /  6-wheel 4-compt. 1st/2nd lav. composite / 4-wheel 3-compt. Brake 2nd

 

[woodenhead]

Well with my OO stock boxed up and plans in my head for a re-opening of my N gauge boxes I am rather caught out by this Hattons move.

 

I've a year I suppose to make up my mind but this seems like a brilliant move by Hattons and perhaps an indication how they can subtly game change.

 

If Bachmann had proposed this or the NRM (to go with their Atlantic/Terrier etc specials) people might have been up in arms and Hornby with their little cash cows don't appear to be upping their game on these sorts of coaches so it's the outsiders who can reap the rewards.

 

I don't think it will damage finescale modelling as that market already has a tried and tested regimen of kit and scratchbuilding to support it, but maybe people like me can have pre-grouping coaches and test the water as it were before diving in or be happy with generic models that give you a smile.

 

 

[St Enodoc]

On 07/10/2019 at 08:15, Andy Kirkham said:

 

At the risk of pontificating on a subject I know little,I have the impression  that Boulton & Paul, along with Blackburn enjoyed a kind of charmed existence, continuing over many years to receive government orders for new designs despite producing nothing but duds.

Nothing wrong with the Blackburn Buccaneer - and, right on cue:

 

 

Edited October 8, 2019 by St Enodoc

[Hroth]

Perhaps the only disappointing aspect about Hattons announcement is the due date, 2021...

 

Of course, that does give the opportunity to set up a saving cashbox.  Given a minimum of say 14 months between now and a possible appearance, slipping even a tenner away each month should make the eventual arrival more or less painless.

 

My trio of SECR locos will now have something to occupy themselves with, but at least there's time to plan that little branch line that they'll all play on...