Oxford 2017 - Announce - 'Oxford Structures'

[dibber25]

I'm considering buying the station building to represent a fictitious London area branch line terminus set in the Network SouthEast era.

(BTW I own a set of platform lamps in NSE red with "North Southall" signs from an earlier initiative which was scrapped years ago)

 

As Oxford Rail modelled the GWR-style building in its post-1960s state without chimneys and slate roofs, this looks ideal for my intentions.

 

I notice that Hanwell & Elthorne is the same style as the Oxford model, but two storeys as the platform is at a higher level than the entrance. (CJL)

[dibber25]

I have, today, received the signal box. The reason it has a porch door is because the porch itself is a solid part of the moulding. It has a hollowed out area for the window but that is all. Both the signal box and the station are really nice models for the money and will repay a little detailing. I have fitted chimneys and slated the station roof so far. Adding a few poster boards really transforms the model, as does obliterating the caramel brown colour - Moreton was mostly cream when I saw it in 1965. In fact there's little or no evidence of 'chocolate' anywhere on my photos of it. Next job is to tackle the entrance porch on the station. (CJL)

[Karhedron]

Oddly enough, the most recent repaint of the MiM signal box has actually added chocolate where I have never seen it before. Maybe someone was feeling nostalgic.

 

[The Stationmaster]

Oddly enough, the most recent repaint of the MiM signal box has actually added chocolate where I have never seen it before. Maybe someone was feeling nostalgic.

 

 

An improvement but I wish they'd do something about those absolutely appalling windows - hardly beyond the wit and ability of most double glazing manufacturers to do a Reading style signalbox window.

[sidmouth]

001 by Martin Creese, on Flickr

 

Shirley Signal Box had UPVC windows but adopting the classic GWR pattern

[phil-b259]

An improvement but I wish they'd do something about those absolutely appalling windows - hardly beyond the wit and ability of most double glazing manufacturers to do a Reading style signalbox window.

 

Of course double glazing manufacturers can produce fancy windows - but it will cost extra. It also requires a bespoke order to be created with the factory, and given the job of replacing the windows was contracted out by NR to whoever has the property services contract at the moment, they are hardly likely to go for anything that is more costly and difficult to sort out than the norm.

[The Stationmaster]

Of course double glazing manufacturers can produce fancy windows - but it will cost extra. It also requires a bespoke order to be created with the factory, and given the job of replacing the windows was contracted out by NR to whoever has the property services contract at the moment, they are hardly likely to go for anything that is more costly and difficult to sort out than the norm.

 

Actually it doesn't cost much extra Phil - well within the sort of excesses NR seems to put into the cost of some jobs and definitely within a 10% tolerance on an accurate estimate. (I know, when we built the house we were given prices for some variations) from an independent double glazing manufacturer.  And the Shirley example clearly shows that it can be done.  In my view what happened at Moreton, and various other places including the horror at Craven Arms was most likely down to sheer lack of care and imagination rather than budgetary constraint.  And let's face it both of those examples are on the NR Zone (or whatever it's called this month) which has been delivering (a word used very advisedly) GWML electrification where they are quite happy to sell off brand new material for scrap rather than keep it for uncompleted parts of the scheme.

[dibber25]

Actually it doesn't cost much extra Phil - well within the sort of excesses NR seems to put into the cost of some jobs and definitely within a 10% tolerance on an accurate estimate. (I know, when we built the house we were given prices for some variations) from an independent double glazing manufacturer.  And the Shirley example clearly shows that it can be done.  In my view what happened at Moreton, and various other places including the horror at Craven Arms was most likely down to sheer lack of care and imagination rather than budgetary constraint.  And let's face it both of those examples are on the NR Zone (or whatever it's called this month) which has been delivering (a word used very advisedly) GWML electrification where they are quite happy to sell off brand new material for scrap rather than keep it for uncompleted parts of the scheme.

 

Off topic, for which I apologize. It simply, represents a growing 'attitude' to the few remaining historic structures on the GWR. We have talk in another thread of 'blowing up' a Brunel overbridge because it's inconvenient for getting the OHLE under it. There's no longer any interest in 'form', it's only function that matters today. One wonders how many modern constructions will be around in even 100 years' time, never mind 500. For the most part GWR design continued the flair and style that began with Brunel, albeit that quality of construction and such things as adequate footings were sacrificed to cost-savings in the late 19th/early 20th century. With only single examples of Brunel station designs left, it is interesting to try and find extant examples of some later GWR designs. While Toddington (a preserved station) is a rare surviving example of a '1902' design, try finding - anywhere - the '1890s' hipped roof/peaked canopy design which once existed across the system. Pembroke Dock, maybe, but even that is unusually executed in stone rather than brick. (CJL)

[RussellD]

Off topic, for which I apologize. It simply, represents a growing 'attitude' to the few remaining historic structures on the GWR. We have talk in another thread of 'blowing up' a Brunel overbridge because it's inconvenient for getting the OHLE under it. There's no longer any interest in 'form', it's only function that matters today. One wonders how many modern constructions will be around in even 100 years' time, never mind 500. For the most part GWR design continued the flair and style that began with Brunel, albeit that quality of construction and such things as adequate footings were sacrificed to cost-savings in the late 19th/early 20th century. With only single examples of Brunel station designs left, it is interesting to try and find extant examples of some later GWR designs. While Toddington (a preserved station) is a rare surviving example of a '1902' design, try finding - anywhere - the '1890s' hipped roof/peaked canopy design which once existed across the system. Pembroke Dock, maybe, but even that is unusually executed in stone rather than brick. (CJL)

I think Bramley station in Hampshire on the Reading-Basingstoke line still exists? https://www.google.co.uk/search?rlz=1C1ARAB_enGB467&biw=1366&bih=637&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=I0i9WsmbBcjQgAaIr7HIDA&q=bramley+station+hampshire&oq=bramley+station+h&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0i24k1l2.18637.18929.0.20632.2.2.0.0.0.0.113.223.0j2.2.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.2.223...0i30k1j0i8i30k1.0.gQ4w5k5D1fI#imgrc=_ 

[dibber25]

I think Bramley station in Hampshire on the Reading-Basingstoke line still exists? https://www.google.co.uk/search?rlz=1C1ARAB_enGB467&biw=1366&bih=637&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=I0i9WsmbBcjQgAaIr7HIDA&q=bramley+station+hampshire&oq=bramley+station+h&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0i24k1l2.18637.18929.0.20632.2.2.0.0.0.0.113.223.0j2.2.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.2.223...0i30k1j0i8i30k1.0.gQ4w5k5D1fI#imgrc=_ 

 

I think you're right. Interesting that Bramley, and the Brunel station at Mortimer, only survive because, at the time of Beeching they were administered by the Southern Region whose bulldozers were a good deal less active than those of the Western Region. (CJL)

[The Stationmaster]

I think you're right. Interesting that Bramley, and the Brunel station at Mortimer, only survive because, at the time of Beeching they were administered by the Southern Region whose bulldozers were a good deal less active than those of the Western Region. (CJL)

 

I think you're probably right on that Chris as any Brunelian 'chalet' structures on the other section of the Berks and Hants disappeared at a rapid rate.  There were some very odd things on the western which told a far more mixed story than just one of demolition - for example Twyford survives more or less completely intact on all four platforms, footbridge and recent (unfinished) depredations of the Relief Line platform canopies valancing apart.  Tilehurst even gained back in the very late 1980s a new building on the Up Relief platform brick built to as closely as possible match the traditional structure on the island platform but it has of course lost its gorgeous footbridge in the electrification scheme. Various other buildings survive dow the Thames Valley although some, e.g. Goring. have been very unsympathetically 'modernised' as happened at Moreton-In-Marsh. 

[Mikkel]

History is a funny thing. If I remember Vaughan correctly, a lot of the Brunelian designs disappeared with the quadraupling of the lines in the 1900s, often replaced by the  very same 1898 and 1902 designs that we now recognize and cherish as archetypical GWR. 

[dibber25]

History is a funny thing. If I remember Vaughan correctly, a lot of the Brunelian designs disappeared with the quadraupling of the lines in the 1900s, often replaced by the  very same 1898 and 1902 designs that we now recognize and cherish as archetypical GWR. 

 

Yes, that's absolutely right. The GWR got rid of more Brunel buildings than BR did, although to be fair, there weren't so many left for BR to deal with. They came pretty close to eliminating entirely, one or two of his most distinctive styles, particularly the small 'roadside' stations, with only Culham still standing. At Moreton-in-Marsh, as early as the 1870s the GWR replaced the Brunel/Fowler OW&WR building with the one that's the subject of Oxford's model. That building has now stood for over 140 years, where the Brunel timber original lasted scarcely 20 years. (CJL)

Edited March 30, 2018 by dibber25

[fezza]

Sadly a lot of Brunelian structures went as traffic levels increased - my favourite example was the original 1848 station in Florence. Looked like a GWR branch line terminus in Italy!

[caradoc]

Off topic, for which I apologize. It simply, represents a growing 'attitude' to the few remaining historic structures on the GWR. We have talk in another thread of 'blowing up' a Brunel overbridge because it's inconvenient for getting the OHLE under it. There's no longer any interest in 'form', it's only function that matters today. One wonders how many modern constructions will be around in even 100 years' time, never mind 500. For the most part GWR design continued the flair and style that began with Brunel, albeit that quality of construction and such things as adequate footings were sacrificed to cost-savings in the late 19th/early 20th century. With only single examples of Brunel station designs left, it is interesting to try and find extant examples of some later GWR designs. While Toddington (a preserved station) is a rare surviving example of a '1902' design, try finding - anywhere - the '1890s' hipped roof/peaked canopy design which once existed across the system. Pembroke Dock, maybe, but even that is unusually executed in stone rather than brick. (CJL)

 

I agree that our railway heritage should be protected wherever possible, but the overbridge at Steventon is not just inconvenient for OHLE, it requires a 65mph (IIRC) speed restriction for electric trains on an otherwise 125mph line, or else complex arrangements for lowering and raising pantographs, which frankly is just unbelievable. I am sure that if overhead electrification had been developed in Brunel's day he would have had no hesitation whatsoever in demolishing such structures.

Edited April 26, 2018 by caradoc

[ndg910]

We are custodians of our heritage for future generations. Just because something is in the way and money is tight is not a reason to simply demolish something. I don’t know much about Steventon footbridge but we had similar issues with structures on the North London Line when it was electrified in the 90s, Brondesbury Park footbridge being a classic example. We lowered the track and platforms and made the footbridge suit the design to avoid demolishing the structure. The same happened elsewhere and it wasn’t possible everywhere but the historic significance was fed into the overall design. That should be NR’s driver. When significance is overwhelmed by cost pressure that’s when our heritage is lost.

[caradoc]

Fair enough, but the overbridge at Steventon is not only in the way but there is also no practical alternative to replacing it; Or else, as we have now, a ridiculous speed restriction on a crucial part of our national rail system. Is this one particular brick arch bridge really of any special architectural or historical significance anyway ?

[Karhedron]

That's a good point. The Steventon bridge was built to serve a purpose. If its continued existence in its current form hinders that purpose, should it still be retained?

 

Progress and preservation frequently come into conflict, I hope a compromise can be found.

[dibber25]

That's a good point. The Steventon bridge was built to serve a purpose. If its continued existence in its current form hinders that purpose, should it still be retained?

 

Progress and preservation frequently come into conflict, I hope a compromise can be found.

 

Compromise is always difficult in such circumstances as there's only really 'black and white' solutions. In my book, the answer would be to dismantle and rebuild the bridge on raised bases to give the increased clearance, (or build a replacement in the same style but taller). Sadly, the inevitable solution will be to blow it up and replace it with some modern eyesore which we all have to accept, whether its desirable or not). This bridge, however, has been discussed ad nauseum in another thread where the views are so strident I will no longer read it. It would be a pity if this thread about about Oxford's new range which has great potential, should get similarly diverted. Check out MR249 in a few weeks time to see what I've done with the new Oxford 'Moreton-in-Marsh'. I like it so much, its going on my layout. (CJL)

[leeadavo]

Any news on when the Goods Shed is due for release?

[County of Yorkshire]

Any news on when the Goods Shed is due for release?

 

It's currently going through a redesign after it failed its HSE inspection. The key failing was that any persons entering through the Goods Office door on a cold day would be immediately immolated in the fireplace.

 

CoY

[Seanem44]

I have, today, received the signal box. The reason it has a porch door is because the porch itself is a solid part of the moulding. It has a hollowed out area for the window but that is all. Both the signal box and the station are really nice models for the money and will repay a little detailing. I have fitted chimneys and slated the station roof so far. Adding a few poster boards really transforms the model, as does obliterating the caramel brown colour - Moreton was mostly cream when I saw it in 1965. In fact there's little or no evidence of 'chocolate' anywhere on my photos of it. Next job is to tackle the entrance porch on the station. (CJL)

I think I'll be picking one up and doing the same thing.  How is the paint on the model?  In photos online it looks a little washed out or thin.

[dibber25]

I think I'll be picking one up and doing the same thing.  How is the paint on the model?  In photos online it looks a little washed out or thin.

 

The paintwork on the canopy and doors is neither chocolate and cream nor light and dark stone, but somewhere between the two, and the 'brown' on mine was hand-painted and shaky. It didn't matter because most of it needs to be painted over in a shade appropriate to your chosen era. It's hard to tell how the brickwork is done but I think it maybe by some sort of offset litho or Tampo printing process - it's a bit patchy but looks pretty convincing. (CJL)

Edited April 30, 2018 by dibber25

[Seanem44]

The paintwork on the canopy and doors is neither chocolate and cream nor light and dark stone, but somewhere between the two, and the 'brown' on mine was hand-painted and shaky. It didn't matter because most of it needs to be painted over in a shade appropriate to your chosen era. It's hard to tell how the brickwork is done but I think it maybe by some sort of offset litho or Tampo printing process - it's a bit patchy but looks pretty convincing. (CJL)

Good to know. 

 

So while complete, it's not "complete" it seems.  Yeah, I'll be adding chimneys and painting to suit the 40s.

 

Thanks for letting me know.  I didn't know if the website photos were preproduction or not because the paint just seemed, like you said, shaky.

 

So mid/dark brown for the trim... cream for the awning, etc...

 

Also...  that brickwork...  should this be a more muted or greyish color?

Edited May 1, 2018 by Seanem44

[The Johnster]

Saw my first of these in the flesh, or anyway resin, at Lord and Butler's last week, and thought it was very good for the price, but let down by some sloppy window frame painting, exactly the sort of thing RTP buyers who lack confidence in their own ability to paint the model are out to avoid.  It would have upset me had I just finished a scratch build of Moreton in the Marsh.  It does look a little 'bright', but could easily enough be toned down with a wash of my patent weathering mix, recipe a secret even from me as I've long forgotten what went in there; it just gets topped up now and then with mucky colours.  Peter Lord pointed out an odd bit of surface on the canopy that he didn't like much; I'd have just put a bit of green flock over it as moss.

 

I have a few RTP resin buildings from Hornby and Bachmann, and my station building, designed to look a bit like Abergwnfi, is a pair of Hornby NER waiting rooms cut and shut together with a home made roof; I have yet to put Abergwynfi type chimneys on them and may in fact use stove pipes.  The other RTPs are huts.  The station building has of course been repainted in WR brown/cream and all have been weathered up a bit.  I am very happy with them, and wish Ox well with this range, though I have a very long term plan to replace the station building with a scratch built one that I can illuminate from the inside; this I feel is one of the main drawbacks of resin cast buildings.  

 

My aim is to evoke a wet day in the South Wales Valleys, the result of an afternoon in the 'Refresh' at Cwmmer Afan in 1969 when the appearance of the railway buildings internally lit in the mid-afternoon gloom struck me as a very good way of modelling such a scene.  A rainy day in a narrow valley is a very gloomy experience indeed, and I reckon background noises of rainwater gurglesucking in drains and gutters would set it off brilliantly!  

 

But the buildings will need scale thickness of walls and internal detail to carry it off.

Edited May 1, 2018 by The Johnster