Scratch-built card and styrene structures (based on real buildings around London Bridge)

[grahame]

Some gross simplification to get something knocked up to represent the balustrade - etched road railing instead of rounded balusters and none in the Montague Close facing side as it mostly hidden by Bridge House (Allan Dawes said don't model what can't be seen). But I need to do something about the gap along the bottom before any painting:

 

 

G

[grahame]

I was a little concerned that the model was looking rather clunky and messy, and rather over simplified (missing various friezes and architectural features). I'd assumed that being at the back it would need, and be okay, with less details but in all over grey primer it looked a bit too basic. However, having got a few blocks of colour on (although by no means complete) things are looking a little better and I'm happier. I'm sure that some more detail painting and weathering will improve it further (for example I've yet start painting the window surrounds - which can be laborious and tedious) and adding doors and windows will help:

 

 

The brickwork is quite a dark colour purposely. The current bright yellow brick finish is probably due to recent cleaning and I'm sure that in the 80s it would have been a lot dirtier due to the effects of steam engines and smoky chimneys that are now banned. Hopefully it's in keeping with the limited colour pallet I try to maintain to harmonise the building.

 

G.

[grahame]

This is not a very good photo but it gives an idea of how the various buiding relate (they're in their roughly correct places) and shows how much the Number 2 London Bridge building is tucked away at the back. The railway viaduct runs right to left across the front and will obscure the lower level (to above the white section of Colechurch House and the Lady Chapel of Southwark cathedral):

 

 

And another better one:

 

 

G

Edited November 4, 2018 by grahame

[chaz]

Just looked in to see how you are getting on. Brilliant stuff!

 

I think you are doing it to make the rest of us feel inadequate - yes?

[grahame]

Windows fitted and some weathering powers on to tone down the bright look. Next the double front doors . . . . . and then to re-consider and research the roof options.

 

 

G.

[Siberian Snooper]

Wow, that looks really good. As most of us have never been able too see the roof, I don't think anyone would knit pick what ever you decide to do.

[grahame]

Wow, that looks really good. As most of us have never been able too see the roof, I don't think anyone would knit pick what ever you decide to do.

Thanks, although it me that is most likely to be nit-picking or have a crisis of conscience.

 

But then I've simplified, compressed, taken liberties with history and generally bashed the models far from their original look that it ought not really matter. I just hope that it all looks vaguely like it should and captures some of the prototype atmosphere and style.

 

G.

[grahame]

Thinking about it, I prefer a pitched roof from when the building was re-built after the fire - it will look a little more traditional wharf style. It was certainly around in 1921 and would have at least lasted until the 1970s refurbishment and possibly beyond then - perhaps then succumbing to be replaced by a glass box apartment style structure in the late 80s (although I can't be sure. So I've erected a card tent ready to cover with self-adhesive Redutex roofing sheets:

 

 

Snag is what do I cover it with: tiles or corrugated. Tiles would have been heavy and expensive although probably more likely when the building was re-built in the late 1880s and a corrugated covering would possible look more traditional for a wharf and offer a little different roof interest amongst the other buildings (or would it?)

 

G. 

 

 

[KNP]

Thinking about it, I prefer a pitched roof from when the building was re-built after the fire - it will look a little more traditional wharf style. It was certainly around in 1921 and would have at least lasted until the 1970s refurbishment and possibly beyond then - perhaps then succumbing to be replaced by a glass box apartment style structure in the late 80s (although I can't be sure. So I've erected a card tent ready to cover with self-adhesive Redutex roofing sheets:

 

DSCN0179.JPG

 

Snag is what do I cover it with: tiles or corrugated. Tiles would have been heavy and expensive although probably more likely when the building was re-built in the late 1880s and a corrugated covering would possible look more traditional for a wharf and offer a little different roof interest amongst the other buildings (or would it?)

 

G. 

 

Or lead with rolled joints?

[Lecorbusier]

Thinking about it, I prefer a pitched roof from when the building was re-built after the fire - it will look a little more traditional wharf style. It was certainly around in 1921 and would have at least lasted until the 1970s refurbishment and possibly beyond then - perhaps then succumbing to be replaced by a glass box apartment style structure in the late 80s (although I can't be sure. So I've erected a card tent ready to cover with self-adhesive Redutex roofing sheets:

 

DSCN0179.JPG

 

Snag is what do I cover it with: tiles or corrugated. Tiles would have been heavy and expensive although probably more likely when the building was re-built in the late 1880s and a corrugated covering would possible look more traditional for a wharf and offer a little different roof interest amongst the other buildings (or would it?)

 

G. 

Do you want me to see if there are any pictures in the study library of the building? What era are you modelling ... or is it flexible?

[grahame]

Rusty corugated now applied although some ridge protection is yet to be added, but now I'm not so sure. I used it as I've plenty and can't think what else it will be used on, but it seems bright and orangy (just like many paint their track rail sides). I think I'll give it a coat or two of dark wash to tone it down:

 

 

G.

 

 

[Lecorbusier]

Rusty corugated now applied although some ridge protection is yet to be added, but now I'm not so sure. I used it as I've plenty and can't think what else it will be used on, but it seems bright and orangy (just like many paint their track rail sides). I think I'll give it a coat or two of dark wash to tone it down:

 

DSC_7039.JPG

 

G.

Looks wrong to my eye ... would Cubbitt have put corrugated on top of such a grand building? From my reading, only the below bridge portions were actually warehousing with the upper levels being for clerical?

[grahame]

Do you want me to see if there are any pictures in the study library of the building? What era are you modelling ... or is it flexible?

 

It's the late 70s to late 90s but that period does cover a lot of change - for example the introduction of NSE and the London Bridge City developments.

 

G. 

[grahame]

Looks wrong to my eye ... would Cubbitt have put corrugated on top of such a grand building? From my reading, only the below bridge portions were actually warehousing with the upper levels being for clerical?

 

Yeah, I agree - it doesn't look 'right'. I don't think corrugated was even 'invented' at the time it was built and the colour is far too in ones face. I'll change it to grey slate tiles. I hope it peels off easy enough and I can at least use it as a template.

 

The 1921 photos are aerial so it's difficult to discern what the pitched roofs are made of.

 

G.

[KNP]

Rusty corugated now applied although some ridge protection is yet to be added, but now I'm not so sure. I used it as I've plenty and can't think what else it will be used on, but it seems bright and orangy (just like many paint their track rail sides). I think I'll give it a coat or two of dark wash to tone it down:

 

DSC_7039.JPG

 

G.

 

Looks wrong as such an ornate building would have had a more traditional roof.

[Lecorbusier]

Yeah, I agree - it doesn't look 'right'. I don't think corrugated was even 'invented' at the time it was built and the colour is far too in ones face. I'll change it to grey slate tiles. I hope it peels off easy enough and I can at least use it as a template.

 

The 1921 photos are aerial so it's difficult to discern what the pitched roofs are made of.

 

G.

This photo gives some hint

[grahame]

Yep, this is more dignified, restrained and traditionally in keeping. Just to make and add the ridge tiles and perhaps some moss.

 

 

 

[grahame]

This photo gives some hint

aerial photo.jpg

 

Thanks. That's obviously a later pic than this 1921 view: https://britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EPW006813 but both show it having a pitched roof. And that pic is pretty close to my 'period' as it includes New London Bridge House which was built in the mid 1970s.

 

Presumably the location marked in red is Winchester Palace. If so, is it still viewable?

 

G.

Edited November 5, 2018 by grahame

[grahame]

The ridge is probably a little too high but I'm not going to bother to change it now. After all it is tucked away at the back corner of the layout and I guess most people will not give it more than a cursory glance - if they ever get to see the layout :

 

 

G.

 

 

 

[phil_sutters]

This photo gives some hint

aerial photo.jpg

I have the same photo from the Aerofilms survey 1983 in book form. The colour is better defined. It looks like a slate grey with lighter ridges.

[chaz]

Yep, this is more dignified, restrained and traditionally in keeping. Just to make and add the ridge tiles and perhaps some moss.

 

DSC_7040.JPG

 

 

You don't hang about do you? Yes, it's an big improvement.

[grahame]

The ridge tiles are now made, painted, glued in place and matt varnished. That means I'm now casting around for the next project and need to undertake some more research . . . . .

 

G.

[grahame]

I've started thinking about the road surface at the back corner of the layout and the complex junction of Borough High Street/London Bridge/Duke Street Hill and Railway Approach - and which is made additionally tricky by the various levels and slopes. I've cut a piece of card to cover the entire area up the back of the viaduct. Yes, I realise it is sitting over the pavements but it is only temporary to ascertain heights and shape - and as a road surface it will eventually be fitted under. But next I need to work out the traffic lanes, pedestrian islands and central reservations as well as the exact size:

 

 

Note I've also knocked up a rather plain structure to represent the building behind Bridge House and Bank Chambers and fill what will otherwise be a gap behind between them and the backscene board. And the white feature at the front (in the pic) is just a piece of foamboard to roughly represent the railway viaduct wall.

 

I'm now off to hospital for a follow-up appointment.

 

G.

[grahame]

Cripes. Not only is it a fiddly junction but the layout seems to change quite regularly. Even in the last few years (on Google and Bing street-view and maps) pedestrian railings have come and gone, islands sprung up, moved and disappeared and the road markings altered. I need to try and get a handle on how it was in the 80s/90s - which will probably also no doubt prove very difficult:

 

 

G.

 

 

[Ian Smeeton]

Have you had a look at https://ncap.org.uk/

 

There are numerous flights at different times over different areas, may give you someting more accurate timescale-wise.

 

Regards

 

Ian