'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement

[gr.king]

One way to measure the vertical freedom would be to put the coach on a flat plate and see what maximum thickness of plasticard can be slid under the middle wheels without raising the outer ones. But a mil or so should be ample, I agree.

[Compound2632]

7 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

It wouldn't meet modern disability access requirements of course.

 

Very little about the traditional steam railway was.

 

There were some instance of light railways where carriages with lower footboards lingered on beyond the period when they generally disappeared but I'm not sure this applies to the Great Western halts - were not these opened in conjunction with railmotor or auto train operation? 

 

The Leadhills and Wanlockhead Light Railway was, I think, one such. It is many years since I visited the museum there but I have a vague recollection that the Caledonian carriages used on the line had a third, even lower, footboard fitted?

[melmerby]

The ground level halts on the ex GWR were mainly provided by the South Wales companies in the early years of the 20th century.

The GWR itself seemed mainly to provide proper platforms even if some were low height.

Some were replaced by by full height platforms within a few years, most seem to have been done by the late 20s, a few such as Nantgarw Halt HL lasting into BR days.

The openings of many halts seem to coincide with the introduction of Railmotor services by the various companies, presumably as a way of taking on motor buses, just starting to spread about.

[Miss Prism]

http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/s/stane_street_halt/stane_street_halt_old.jpg

 

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The Leadhills and Wanlockhead Light Railway was, I think, one such. It is many years since I visited the museum there but I have a vague recollection that the Caledonian carriages used on the line had a third, even lower, footboard fitted?

They have some pictures in their  gallery

e.g.

https://www.leadhillsrailway.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Early_postard_of_Leadhills_Station.jpg

 

 

https://www.leadhillsrailway.co.uk/galleries/historic-pictures-gallery/

Edited September 25, 2022 by melmerby

[Jon Harbour]

What amazing old photos. Wonderful.

[Compound2632]

16 hours ago, melmerby said:

 

Looking at this, I think it was not just a case of adding an extra lower footboard but replacing the original lower footboard with a pair, splayed outwards. I think these old carriages must be narrow-bodied - less than the usual late-Victorian 8 ft over side panels. 

 

I do hope passengers were routinely told to stand well back so no-one got their feet cut off as the train came in.

[Chris116]

27 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Looking at this, I think it was not just a case of adding an extra lower footboard but replacing the original lower footboard with a pair, splayed outwards. I think these old carriages must be narrow-bodied - less than the usual late-Victorian 8 ft over side panels. 

 

I do hope passengers were routinely told to stand well back so no-one got their feet cut off as the train came in.

They would not have been told to stand back as standing back is common sense and if you got hit everyone else just thought you were careless.

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Looking at this, I think it was not just a case of adding an extra lower footboard but replacing the original lower footboard with a pair, splayed outwards. I think these old carriages must be narrow-bodied - less than the usual late-Victorian 8 ft over side panels. 

 

I do hope passengers were routinely told to stand well back so no-one got their feet cut off as the train came in.

That photo would have been taken before common sense was abolished and when folk took notice of what was going on around them. 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Dunsignalling

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Chris116 said:

They would not have been told to stand back as standing back is common sense and if you got hit everyone else just thought you were careless.

 

2 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

That photo would have been taken before common sense was abolished and when folk took notice of what was going on around them. 

 

Looking at the photos just got my H&S antennae twitching! Different generation - not devoid of common sense, just a more acute appreciation of risk, especially legal peril!

[woodenhead]

35 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

That photo would have been taken before common sense was abolished and when folk took notice of what was going on around them. 

Was that on the 23 June 2016?

[phil-b259]

20 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Was that on the 23 June 2016?

 

Long before that... (and yes I know thats a humorous comment BTW)

 

The issue basically stems from USA style litigation taking hold in UK courts at some point during the 1980s and 1990s. As any lawyer will tell you the law acts on absolutes.

 

'Common sense' is not an absolute as each persons interpretation of it will be different - so case law holds that the defence of 'Common sense' is null and void so will be dismissed as totally irreverent to todays proceedings*.

 

Thus any activity which can be perceived to generate risk by the court needs the risk to be mitigated against by the person that introduces the risk however tiny that risk may be. Not addressing a risk when it has been identified is negligence and as such large compensation (if not fines by safety bodies) inevitably results.

 

The fact that Victorians may have preferred 'common sense' to litigation might sound appealing - till you realise just how many people were killed or maimed each year precisely because employers / manufacturers used the 'common sense' argument rather than actually caring about the risks to the people they interacted with - particularly their employees...

 

* Note 'Common sense' is not the same thing as what has been termed the 'Duck Test' where judges can take the approach of 'what would an average person call this' to issues - mainly those relating to commercial transactions or terms and conditions

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by phil-b259

[Compound2632]

Well, a search of Railways Archive fails to turn up any accident reports for the Leadhills branch, so we can conclude there were no fatal accidents to members of the public due to these footboards.

[MarkC]

I see that the LNER 6-wheelers are now OOS for preorder, but expect to be available in October 2022, not November 2022. Good news on delivery - fingers crossed.

[D3489gibson]

1 hour ago, MarkC said:

I see that the LNER 6-wheelers are now OOS for preorder, but expect to be available in October 2022, not November 2022. Good news on delivery - fingers crossed.

Good news on delivery yes, bad news on the wallet 😒 Even moreso for me as I've ordered SR, LNER, GNR, SE&CR, and I think, a few LB&SCR 😬

[ChicagoNick]

Thanks everyone for all the responses to my question about the ground level platforms.. This is a fantastic forum.

 

Anyone know the cv (if there is one) to reduce the light intensity inside the carriages. I used the Hattons 18 pin.. super easy to install. Checked the Hattons DCC page but doesn't list it. I found taking off the roof easy also if you start at an edge with a fingernail and work across.

 

The lighting is nice and bright and really shows off the interior.. won't get away with shoving Victorians and Edwardians in the same compartment ..

 

[RJS1977]

2 hours ago, ChicagoNick said:

The lighting is nice and bright and really shows off the interior.. won't get away with shoving Victorians and Edwardians in the same compartment ..

 

 

Though much as rolling stock liveries didn't all change overnight on 1/1/1923 or 1/1/1948, I'm pretty sure Victorians didn't all suddenly start looking different on 22/1/1901 (just as we didn't suddenly start looking different on 8/9/2022) - there would have been a gradual evolution in fashions, particularly among the gentlemen, whose suits would have been expected to last a decade or so.

 

Although of course "Victorians" covers almost as long a period of time as "Second Elizabethans", and a Victorian from 1901 probably looks almost as different to a Victorian from 1837 as an Elizabethan from 2022 does compared to one from 1952.

[ChrisN]

10 hours ago, RJS1977 said:

 

Though much as rolling stock liveries didn't all change overnight on 1/1/1923 or 1/1/1948, I'm pretty sure Victorians didn't all suddenly start looking different on 22/1/1901 (just as we didn't suddenly start looking different on 8/9/2022) - there would have been a gradual evolution in fashions, particularly among the gentlemen, whose suits would have been expected to last a decade or so.

 

Although of course "Victorians" covers almost as long a period of time as "Second Elizabethans", and a Victorian from 1901 probably looks almost as different to a Victorian from 1837 as an Elizabethan from 2022 does compared to one from 1952.

 

It is always worth looking at pictures of the time period you are modelling to see what people were wearing.  Older men and women tended to change their dress more slowly than younger people, and the further away from London the less the dramatic changes were.

 

I have yearly fashion plates from the 1850s up to the early 20th century, so in theory the fashion changed every year, but also in Victorian times there was a great trade in second, third and even fourth and fifth hand clothes.

[phil-b259]

13 hours ago, ChicagoNick said:

 

The lighting is nice and bright and really shows off the interior.. won't get away with shoving Victorians and Edwardians in the same compartment ..

 

 

Which is totally unprototypical!

 

Rather than worry about your passengers fashions I would concentrate on lowering the light levels  (a thin wash of a darkish paint over the LEDs say) bringing it more in keeping with the rather feeble light given out by Oil, Gas or even battery fed electric lamps.

[Compound2632]

17 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Which is totally unprototypical!

 

Rather than worry about your passengers fashions I would concentrate on lowering the light levels  (a thin wash of a darkish paint over the LEDs say) bringing it more in keeping with the rather feeble light given out by Oil, Gas or even battery fed electric lamps.

 

I dare say those who grew up in Victoria's reign were looked upon as being thoroughly Victorian by their Edwardian offspring! (Vide Lytton Strachey, Eminent Victorians.) But I like the argument that by lowering the lighting level to a more prototypical glimmer, one saves having to model the passengers in any detail.

[Chris116]

On 27/09/2022 at 10:59, phil-b259 said:

 

Which is totally unprototypical!

 

Rather than worry about your passengers fashions I would concentrate on lowering the light levels  (a thin wash of a darkish paint over the LEDs say) bringing it more in keeping with the rather feeble light given out by Oil, Gas or even battery fed electric lamps.

Last Saturday while doing a daytime Guard duty on the Mid Hants Railway I did a quick experiment. As I walked down the platform I looked through the windows of a BR MK1 coach with the lights off to see how bright the inside of the coach looked. I then switched the lights on and again looked at the inside of the coach. Interestingly the lights made no difference. Later in the day but still with the sun shining I put the lights on while in the cutting leading to Medstead and Four Marks. Looking at the tables and floor there was very little change in the level of light.

In daylight conditions, if you see that the lights are on then they are probably too bright!

Edited October 1, 2022 by Chris116

[Edwardian]

2 hours ago, ChrisN said:

 

It is always worth looking at pictures of the time period you are modelling to see what people were wearing.  Older men and women tended to change their dress more slowly than younger people, and the further away from London the less the dramatic changes were.

 

I have yearly fashion plates from the 1850s up to the early 20th century, so in theory the fashion changed every year, but also in Victorian times there was a great trade in second, third and even fourth and fifth hand clothes.

 

Once upon a time we did a test on Castle Aching. Photographs of farm workers and villagers were posted and parishioners invited to guess the decade. 

 

Generally the clothing appeared (or was) Victorian or Edwardian, yet the pictures were taken in the 1920s and 1930s. 

 

The Castle Museum in York has a good example of a shop selling second hand clothes, often once fashionable and 'high-end', to the late Victorian poor. 

[Nick C]

27 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Generally the clothing appeared (or was) Victorian or Edwardian, yet the pictures were taken in the 1920s and 1930s. 

Even today, in the era of fast fashion, is there really that much difference in the style of clothing worn by 'normal' people compared with 20 or 30 years ago? I'd imagine the average farm worker of both September 1992 and September 2022 would be wearing jeans, wellies and a warm woolly jumper...

[Compound2632]

23 minutes ago, Nick C said:

Even today, in the era of fast fashion, is there really that much difference in the style of clothing worn by 'normal' people compared with 20 or 30 years ago? 

 

From my personal point of view no, except that I've gone up two sizes in trouser waist measurement...

[Michael Hodgson]

36 minutes ago, Nick C said:

Even today, in the era of fast fashion, is there really that much difference in the style of clothing worn by 'normal' people compared with 20 or 30 years ago? I'd imagine the average farm worker of both September 1992 and September 2022 would be wearing jeans, wellies and a warm woolly jumper...

Yes, but weren't green wellies all the rage back then - even in farmyards?