Schooner's (Mostly Maritime) Musings

[ChrisN]

I have found a photo on Wiki.  It is a double sided signal.

 

The request stops on the Cambrian would have been served by the normal trains, but this being the Cambrian, nothing went very quickly, although eventually there were expresses to Aberystwyth.

[Schooner]

Quick sketch of what I was on about with the 'request stop but not a halt' thing:

PAX platforms light grey, goods platforms in dark. Not to scale or remotely proper, just a little something indicative of possible station development until someone sensible took over modernisation.

 

Format predicated on the idea that maintaining throughput of traffic from end to end will have been (?!) very important - high average traffic speed, not high line speed. Assuming most traffic is speed limited by the curvature of the line, no massive difference between goods and passenger workings, then the important thing will be to keep things moving rather than push for a particularly fast service or section of line...?

 

[MrWolf]

The Bishop's Castle Railway wasn't a light railway though, it just never developed having only got as far as Lydham Heath rather than making a connection at Montgomery, so all that 1860s infrastructure just disappeared into the weeds. The remains of one of the station signals survives though.

 

https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co209332/signal-bishops-castle-railway-signal

 

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by MrWolf
Link

[Northroader]

The Bishops Castle signals were peculiar, in that the ones at Horderley and Eaton were placed at through stations, close to a level crossing, and so could have functioned as a signal as we know it. However, the ones at Lydham Heath and Bishops Castle were placed close to the stopblock end, and could only be used to tell the driver he could go no further, and obviously couldn’t be cleared to a proceed indication. Doubtful if any of them were ever used, although the post of one of them supported a wireless aerial later on.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Northroader

[Compound2632]

On 20/04/2023 at 05:28, MrWolf said:

Wikimedia commons 

 

Interesting as an early example of something now commonplace - an ungated crossing (presumably) with a cattle grid. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by Compound2632
typo.

[Annie]

36 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Interesting as an early example of something noe commonplace - an ungated crossing (presumably) with a cattle grid. 

Similar to how things were done with the ungated crossings on the Elsenham & Thaxted Light Railway.

[Schooner]

Maps

Would anyone (everyone would be bestest, but looking at keen beans @Mikkel @magmouse @kitpw and co) mind opening

https://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/MWJR/WtNrVYT6xW

and confirm it

• opens a map in a new browser window
• that map is titled MWJR
• it shows a blue squiggle, which might look vaguely familiar, in central-Southern England
• you can look but can't touch - no direct editing possible

 

aaaaand then what happens if you follow open this:

https://www.scribblemaps.com/create/#id=WtNrVYT6xW

 

?

 

With a little luck that should open the same map within the ScribbleMaps editor...?

 

If that works, this would allow us to put together a pre-Grouper's Map as an iterative process, sending the link from modeller to modeller for their additions.

 

The alternative would be to start a group map - a collaborative thing. This sounds like it would be better, but would require participants to register (for free, I think, but still this may be a barrier for some) and, IIUC, be added to an 'approved' group from the start. These don't sound ideal if there's a more free-wheeling approach we can take :)

 

This may be true for others, just starting to have a play, but Scribblemaps seems to make it easy to upload extras like spreadsheets (co-ordinated WTTs, anyone?!) or images (so we could take our base as an edited map with the all the folds opened out fully, although this would be most convincing at larger/local scales) etc, which could all be handy.

 

My gut instinct is to see if there's a tuly high-resolution scan of an early (say 1850s?) national railway map available, and simply update it in an image editor. This could be done individually in turn, or via a collective working space like Miro (I must be one of the few who still have no idea how any of those work, enlightenment welcome). Once we're all done any gaps in the real national network can be filled as appropriate, and we're good to go with our c.1900 or whatever pre-Grouper's Railway Map of Britain. 

 

Even taking grabs from NLS (which they usefully facilitate, just right click and Save Image As...)

...would work okay. If I've got this right, gains here are simply a case of the larger/higher resolution the monitor the better. So the above from my laptop computer isn't ideal, but does I think prove the concept...?

[Nick C]

16 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Maps

Would anyone (everyone would be bestest, but looking at keen beans @Mikkel @magmouse @kitpw and co) mind opening

https://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/MWJR/WtNrVYT6xW

and confirm it

• opens a map in a new browser window
• that map is titled MWJR
• it shows a blue squiggle, which might look vaguely familiar, in central-Southern England
• you can look but can't touch - no direct editing possible

 

aaaaand then what happens if you follow open this:

https://www.scribblemaps.com/create/#id=WtNrVYT6xW

 

?

 

With a little luck that should open the same map within the ScribbleMaps editor...?

 

 

Yes, to all of those. 

[magmouse]

7 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Maps

Would anyone (everyone would be bestest, but looking at keen beans @Mikkel @magmouse @kitpw and co) mind opening

https://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/MWJR/WtNrVYT6xW

and confirm it

• opens a map in a new browser window
• that map is titled MWJR
• it shows a blue squiggle, which might look vaguely familiar, in central-Southern England
• you can look but can't touch - no direct editing possible

 

aaaaand then what happens if you follow open this:

https://www.scribblemaps.com/create/#id=WtNrVYT6xW

 

?

 

With a little luck that should open the same map within the ScribbleMaps editor...?

 

If that works, this would allow us to put together a pre-Grouper's Map as an iterative process, sending the link from modeller to modeller for their additions.

 

The alternative would be to start a group map - a collaborative thing. This sounds like it would be better, but would require participants to register (for free, I think, but still this may be a barrier for some) and, IIUC, be added to an 'approved' group from the start. These don't sound ideal if there's a more free-wheeling approach we can take :)

 

This may be true for others, just starting to have a play, but Scribblemaps seems to make it easy to upload extras like spreadsheets (co-ordinated WTTs, anyone?!) or images (so we could take our base as an edited map with the all the folds opened out fully, although this would be most convincing at larger/local scales) etc, which could all be handy.

 

My gut instinct is to see if there's a tuly high-resolution scan of an early (say 1850s?) national railway map available, and simply update it in an image editor. This could be done individually in turn, or via a collective working space like Miro (I must be one of the few who still have no idea how any of those work, enlightenment welcome). Once we're all done any gaps in the real national network can be filled as appropriate, and we're good to go with our c.1900 or whatever pre-Grouper's Railway Map of Britain. 

 

Even taking grabs from NLS (which they usefully facilitate, just right click and Save Image As...)

...would work okay. If I've got this right, gains here are simply a case of the larger/higher resolution the monitor the better. So the above from my laptop computer isn't ideal, but does I think prove the concept...?

 

Oooh! Good work!

 

8 minutes ago, Schooner said:

• opens a map in a new browser window
• that map is titled MWJR
• it shows a blue squiggle, which might look vaguely familiar, in central-Southern England
• you can look but can't touch - no direct editing possible

 

Yes to all those.

 

8 minutes ago, Schooner said:

aaaaand then what happens if you follow open this:

https://www.scribblemaps.com/create/#id=WtNrVYT6xW

 

Yes, I can open that and edit. I've added a label showing a notional location for Netherport, but I haven't saved it, as I am not sure of the ramifications of me saving the map as 'anonymous' because I am not logged in. I don't want to mess up your work so far.

 

In terms of process, having to 'pass the baton' between users seems rather limiting, as well as the risk of confusion leading to one person accidentally over-writing someone else's changes, thinking it is their turn.

 

I think for anyone participating in this, having to create a log-in seems like the price of entry for using an online, collaborative platform, though I appreciate others may have a different view. Having to be in the group from the start seems like a very dull limitation, though - we should check if that is really the case.

 

For me, whatever approach we take, the important thing is that we can work collaboratively and interactively. To be of any real value, we will want to respond to what other people have done - otherwise, we might as well just each make our own map.

 

Nick.

 

 

 

 

[kitpw]

8 minutes ago, Schooner said:

and confirm it

• opens a map in a new browser window
• that map is titled MWJR
• it shows a blue squiggle, which might look vaguely familiar, in central-Southern England
• you can look but can't touch - no direct editing possible

It does... ditto, ditto, ditto, in that order.

10 minutes ago, Schooner said:

With a little luck that should open the same map within the ScribbleMaps editor...?

It does... one click on the link.

 

Well found!  I'll have a closer look later on  (I seem to have un-retired and have a deadline to meet this week).

 

Kit PW

 

[Schooner]

2 minutes ago, kitpw said:

...this week

Heaps of time yet, good luck!

[Schooner]

Good, well it seems Scribblemaps is an option - thanks for the confirmations all :)

 

@magmouse Brill, thanks for having a scuffle and making sure things actually can be added/altered! No stress this end if you want to go further with adaptations - it was just a very rough trial to see what worked and how.

 

Otherwise, agreed all round really. Baton-passing isn't ideal, but would at least be simple via the link-sharing route. I'd didn't investigate group options beyond see that there was an option for groups, so that sounds like the next thing to poke...

 

If that works, checking map layers/viability of importing our own would be next step to getting a pretty and informative (maps must surely be both) I guess. With all that in place we're away, laughing, on a fast camel...as they say...somewhere or other...

 

Loooooong term thought just popped into my head of a bit of a coffee-table compendium - maps of the system, schematics of individual routes/companies, trackplans of stations, photos of layouts, write-ups of same...hmmm...

[magmouse]

7 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Loooooong term thought just popped into my head of a bit of a coffee-table compendium - maps of the system, schematics of individual routes/companies, trackplans of stations, photos of layouts, write-ups of same...hmmm...

 

Oh, yes. I think I can find time for that in my next reincarnation but one.

 

Meanwhile, in case anyone is looking for maps of real railways in the pre-grouping period, and isn't already aware, take a look at this brilliant resource:

 

https://www.railmaponline.com/UKIEMap.php

 

Nick.

[MikeOxon]

I checked your links all work for me, too.

 

I recall discussing something along these lines a few years ago:

One problem is that some of our 'railway fantasies' may be in conflict with one another!  For example, in my parallel universe, a (actually proposed) branch was built to Witney from the OW&W Cotswold Line, via North Leigh, and so the Fairford branch never go built.  I suppose we could create a new junction in Witney between the two schemes!

 

 

Mike

[Schooner]

5 minutes ago, MikeOxon said:

One problem is that some of our 'railway fantasies' may be in conflict with one another! 

Indeed! Not least as many will occupy similar space - this map is likely to have many folds to open up.

 

Here the restriction to pre-Grouping will come to our aid though I think, in the smaller numbers and, dare I say it, greater period interest/coherence among adherents than is perhaps the average. We also have the benefit of most models being of individual stations and, rarely, goods facilities/sheds. This means that some fudges can be made on the map if need be without, I hope, treading on anyone's dreams toes - on anyone.

 

Hopefully, this is a way to resolve/rationalise any conflicts - eg there's no Fairford Branch in mine either, just the through route from Cirencester to Oxford. This could well have a junction at Witney...or Witney might have two stations...or, knowing of the OW&W plans, maybe the MWJ didn't bother stopping there...any which way, no cause for alarm there until someone decides to build a Z-scale Railway in Landscape of the whole area, or Annie has a go in her infinitie trainset! Mind you, there are Kit's Revised RCH Junction Diagrams to contend with I suppose...!

 

I've assumed where possible that 'my' engineers would have taken the same route as the real, in this case GWR, engineers, assuming we had the same end in sight. That doesn't mean that it's, to stick with the example, 'the Fairford Branch with funny trains' or whatever, but simply that to join locations A and B with radius and gradient restrictions would lead - I'm assuming - to similar routing?

 

25 minutes ago, MikeOxon said:

 

I recall discussing something along these lines a few years ago:

I really like the suggestion of wagon exchange via photograph on that thread, as with a bit of squinting at wagon numbers I'm sure many of us in many scales could put similar enough wagons in our arriving/departing trains...

[ChrisN]

15 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Indeed! Not least as many will occupy similar space - this map is likely to have many folds to open up.

 

Here the restriction to pre-Grouping will come to our aid though I think, in the smaller numbers and, dare I say it, greater period interest/coherence among adherents than is perhaps the average. We also have the benefit of most models being of individual stations and, rarely, goods facilities/sheds. This means that some fudges can be made on the map if need be without, I hope, treading on anyone's dreams toes - on anyone.

 

Hopefully, this is a way to resolve/rationalise any conflicts - eg there's no Fairford Branch in mine either, just the through route from Cirencester to Oxford. This could well have a junction at Witney...or Witney might have two stations...or, knowing of the OW&W plans, maybe the MWJ didn't bother stopping there...any which way, no cause for alarm there until someone decides to build a Z-scale Railway in Landscape of the whole area, or Annie has a go in her infinitie trainset! Mind you, there are Kit's Revised RCH Junction Diagrams to contend with I suppose...!

 

I've assumed where possible that 'my' engineers would have taken the same route as the real, in this case GWR, engineers, assuming we had the same end in sight. That doesn't mean that it's, to stick with the example, 'the Fairford Branch with funny trains' or whatever, but simply that to join locations A and B with radius and gradient restrictions would lead - I'm assuming - to similar routing?

 

I really like the suggestion of wagon exchange via photograph on that thread, as with a bit of squinting at wagon numbers I'm sure many of us in many scales could put similar enough wagons in our arriving/departing trains...

 

The links work for me.  I have two restrictions, 1) any involvement would have to be in non modelling time, and 2) my station although on a real railway, actually lives in a fold in the map, which also holds the Naf Valley, and the Twll Ddu railway.

 

Also, there have already been exchanges.  I have a LSBCR train, not yet completed of a carriage wagon, Saloon First

 

 

and a Stroudley Brake Third

 

 

I have still to make an old enough horsebox.  This train has brought Sir Jon and his family from @BlueLightning's Oak Hill to Traeth Mawr to visit the Young Englishman.  I think there might be other passengers who may turn up, but as yet no freight.

[Schooner]

1 hour ago, ChrisN said:

1) any involvement would have to be in non modelling time

I imagine this is largely universal. For me, I think of this sort of thing as a way to maintain engagement with the layout when time is short or mojo has gone on holiday.

 

1 hour ago, ChrisN said:

2) my station although on a real railway, actually lives in a fold in the map, which also holds the Naf Valley, and the Twll Ddu railway.

This is a significant limitation of the Scribblemaps approach. Two mitigating factors:

• Scale - at the national-overview level, folds in the map are easily tucked into the wider (real) geography
• Setting - we're among friends, and I would hope plenty of leeway will be given to all our schemes to allow them to nestle in comfort in their home landscapes

2 hours ago, ChrisN said:

 

Very...

2 hours ago, ChrisN said:

This train has brought Sir Jon and his family from @BlueLightning's Oak Hill to Traeth Mawr to visit the Young Englishman.

...nice :)

[Schooner]

At risk of seeming easily distracted, I don't want to close these tabs without logging them somewhere. Here, in fact.

 

We start off with a cracking photo I've not come across before of Bath station-

 

Oh, actually, before getting in to that, a quick plug for a thread I've just started in what I hope is the appropriate spot but which may be of interest to readers here/readers here may well be able to help with :) Does pretty much what it says on the tin - I'm wondering how viable it'll be to move a big brass lever and have a little loco move off...

 

 

Right, to Bat-wait, hoooow many pixels?!

Thanks Telegraph, I've never read the steps before.

 

That said, I notice the other photos (unlocked via the free trial subscription, hence their immediate posting before I forget and then wonder where my money's gone every month) are not so high resolution. Still some fun, interesting and useful ones tucked in the mix. I won't waste time with captions, just open in new tab and read the address! It'd be handy if you mentioned things which stand out to you as I'm such each of us will pick up different things:

Sorry for starting off in the future as it were, but that seems fitting considering whose Universe.

 

Nicest ever image of Slough? Nice riveted metal wheel guides too. Fixed, do we think (nailed into the wooden edging?), or abandoned?

 

I just enjoyed the  Dutch-gable-Tudorbethan and top hat combo. Big, but not unmodellable...

 

Speaking of large but modellable (stop it)

I thought the little slice of Lincolnshire above charming, but also possibly of use to @Edwardian to add to his stash of trainshed inspiration.

 

Real thrills, accept no imitations

...even if it does mean a slip post-Grouping

 

Is that an implied through train to India I spy?

 

Right, so, after our brief jaunt around some of the larger older stations in the land, to Bath!

B*gger, that's from Bath, sorry. Interesting though - nice pole, and is that a bright reflection of the very light roadbed on the not-tumblehome-but-I-can't-remember-the-word...turnunder? of the coaches? Photo embedded from an excellent photographic archive hosted by what looks to be a particularly lovely project.

 

Heading South, as the above is, we would eventually get something which recently caught my eye and made me think of @Annie in a sequence of events which could be documented thus:

http://www.tramwaybadgesandbuttons.com/page148/page149/styled-94/files/2---3red.jpg

Ah, no embedding from there. Well, you'll have to do as I did and look at the webpage for more trammy goodness.

 

The TG lead me to this article, with its title which reminded me of our resident Kiwitopian:

https://guernseypress.com/news/features/2020/09/18/the-end-of-an-era-or-start-of-an-error/

 

In this article we find the most excellent indeed

An almighty large file, open up in new tab just to appreciate the details on the travelling crane if nothing else. Whilst you may share my interest in what I'd initially taken to be stu'n's'l booms being, in actual fact, stu'n's'l yards, or terror at just how much running rigging they felt needed to be made of chain*, there's plenty of more general detail to be taken in. Whilst the height of harbour wall may suggest that @KNP's lovely Little Muddle has undergone rapid expansion, we are in St Peter Port, Guernsey.

 

*Trad vessels built of natural materials have a really effective built-in safety system: bits break. Crucially, little bits break, which relieves strain on the big bits. You might blow a sail or lose a topmast, which is bad, but thereby save blowing a plank or dropping the whole rig, which would be worse. Metal fittings allowed boats to be pushed harder for longer with greater confidence and less chance of these 'minor' failures - saving time and money, but increasing the likelihood of serious, possibly terminal, excitement...choices and consequences!  Stories abound of the faster/more mental packet Masters padlocking these chains in hard weather so the crew could not ease sheets or drop gear whilst they were off the deck. Lawks.

 

Anyway, whilst the Little Russel  is the site of many a drenching, it was not the bath I wanted to share with you.

 

So to speak.

 

Nope, not that one either.

 

Not even. Although Bath was a lot more fun in those days, with bay, central carriage sidings, elevated box and TT-access-only goods facilities at each end.

 

No, the interesting Bath Sta-

 

Oh, one final (honest!) thing. For once in this thread it might be more fun not to open images in a new tab to have a guess at the setting if you don't recognise it.

 

So, the Bath Station I've come across and wanted to share with you, dear pre-Groupers, is this one:

Photographed here about 1910. It's even an Inglenook! If that's not a form of heaven then I don't know what is*. It was even laid in 00** from construction (1877) to regauging at 2'6" 1896-98. The line took on the build contractor's Black Hawthorn 0-4-0ST

and yet it also had proper tender locos:

Is that a 2-4-0 (second only to moguls) with 4 wheel tender? Yes please! An initial poke at the internet is coming up with a lot of conflicting information on the loco stud.

 

The line crossed almost 100 bridges...

...seen above before re-gauging, and sometimes rolled its trousers up and went for a paddle down on the beach, too:

Ever since seeing what would have otherwise been a fairly standard BLT totally lifted by its setting (A mythical lump of French Polynesia IIRC. I've looked for it, but cannot currently find the layout, will return to link it when I do), I've been keeping an eye out for a setting which really inspires. There have been many contenders, this is the first one to really tick all the boxes. I think it's the wider gauge and the excuse for a stupidly long post which swung it :)

 

Cheers all, have a good weekend!

 

 

*'tho I remain open to finding out

**Very nearly closer to 00 than 00 is to scale. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by Schooner
First of many...

[Schooner]

Quick addendum:

 

The railway above was laid in 3'6"...

 

...or 16.67mm at 1:64...

 

Stop it, I like it.

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Schooner said:

Right, to Bat-wait, hoooow many pixels?!

 

That's rather higher resolution than the version Warwickshire Railways has:

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/lnwrbns_str1779.htm

Evidently The Telegraph can afford NRM / SSPL reproduction fees!

[Schooner]

8 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Evidently The Telegraph can afford NRM / SSPL reproduction fees!

Just the once, sadly. If I made it clear what it was to be put towards perhaps I should let the subscription stand!

[Mikkel]

On 21/04/2023 at 15:19, Schooner said:

Maps

Would anyone (everyone would be bestest, but looking at keen beans @Mikkel @magmouse @kitpw and co) mind opening

https://www.scribblemaps.com/maps/view/MWJR/WtNrVYT6xW

and confirm it

• opens a map in a new browser window
• that map is titled MWJR
• it shows a blue squiggle, which might look vaguely familiar, in central-Southern England
• you can look but can't touch - no direct editing possible

 

aaaaand then what happens if you follow open this:

https://www.scribblemaps.com/create/#id=WtNrVYT6xW

 

?

 

With a little luck that should open the same map within the ScribbleMaps editor...?

 

If that works, this would allow us to put together a pre-Grouper's Map as an iterative process, sending the link from modeller to modeller for their additions.

 

The alternative would be to start a group map - a collaborative thing. This sounds like it would be better, but would require participants to register (for free, I think, but still this may be a barrier for some) and, IIUC, be added to an 'approved' group from the start. These don't sound ideal if there's a more free-wheeling approach we can take :)

 

This may be true for others, just starting to have a play, but Scribblemaps seems to make it easy to upload extras like spreadsheets (co-ordinated WTTs, anyone?!) or images (so we could take our base as an edited map with the all the folds opened out fully, although this would be most convincing at larger/local scales) etc, which could all be handy.

 

My gut instinct is to see if there's a tuly high-resolution scan of an early (say 1850s?) national railway map available, and simply update it in an image editor. This could be done individually in turn, or via a collective working space like Miro (I must be one of the few who still have no idea how any of those work, enlightenment welcome). Once we're all done any gaps in the real national network can be filled as appropriate, and we're good to go with our c.1900 or whatever pre-Grouper's Railway Map of Britain. 

 

Even taking grabs from NLS (which they usefully facilitate, just right click and Save Image As...)

...would work okay. If I've got this right, gains here are simply a case of the larger/higher resolution the monitor the better. So the above from my laptop computer isn't ideal, but does I think prove the concept...?

 

Well I had somehow missed all that, apologies. Thanks for finding that. It looks fun, I will have a go when time and mojo allows.

 

 

[Schooner]

God save the King!

[Schooner]

Normal service resumes:

Topsham, around 1910ish as the passenger tug showing her stb bow is Countess of Devon, ex-Lord Kitchener

1902-1926

 

The search for quay wall and shed references for the 7mm layout has begun. All suggestions considered.

[Michael Crofts]

On 15/05/2023 at 23:58, Schooner said:

 The search for quay wall and shed references for the 7mm layout has begun. All suggestions considered.