Peterborough North

[great northern]

The difference the powders make to the previous Saharan scene is remarkable. My compliments. 

 

It might be a good idea to dust over a light coating of matt varnish, just to finally seal it (wiping the rails immediately after). I don't have an airbrush, but somebody else must. 

 

Going back to 'The Northumbrian' consist. Shouldn't the Cravens SO be ahead of the catering triplet in the Down train? I haven't looked back, but, from memory, it appeared to be behind the trio in your picture. I've found no picture of any of the triplet sets post-'57 without the BR roundel. When I'm next over, I'll put some on for you. The set I've been part of the building of is on Wright Writes. 

Thanks Tony. It has worked out as well as I could have hoped, so far.  By sheer coincidence, I have spent some time this evening examining all of my fixed rakes, making full notes, and comparing them with the details in the 1958 book. Some are spot on, a few are nearly so, but some others, oh dear!  I suspect that my struggles with coupling incompatibility have a lot to do with it, but I shall now try to get things in the right order if I can. My other struggle has been to identify a couple of "typical" West Riding expresses which could represent all the un-named services. Unfortunately, they all seem to differ considerably, but I shall keep trying.

[great northern]

The combination of the new bridge and some correct coloured ballast proved irresistible, so I just kept pointing the camera at different angles. Here then are more views of 60119, some more successful than others.

Don't think much of this one.

OK as a layout photo, except for the unfinished bits, but nothing like the prototype, of course.

A wider bridge means more shadows.

This will be improved when a strategically placed building prevents so much of the train being in shot. That's quite enough for now.

[Tony Wright]

Thanks Tony. It has worked out as well as I could have hoped, so far.  By sheer coincidence, I have spent some time this evening examining all of my fixed rakes, making full notes, and comparing them with the details in the 1958 book. Some are spot on, a few are nearly so, but some others, oh dear!  I suspect that my struggles with coupling incompatibility have a lot to do with it, but I shall now try to get things in the right order if I can. My other struggle has been to identify a couple of "typical" West Riding expresses which could represent all the un-named services. Unfortunately, they all seem to differ considerably, but I shall keep trying.

Gilbert,

 

I wouldn't lose too much sleep 'worrying' about whether all your passenger rakes are correct. I don't!

 

As you know, the making up of correct prototype train formations was something WMRC insisted upon with the making of Stoke Summit and Charwelton; up to a point. For every BR document regarding the making up of a prototype train, I can show you a prototype picture of the same train where there is a difference. 'The Northumbrian', apart from the featured Gresley triplet set should be made up of Mk.1s during the period represented, yet pictures exist with Thompson substitutes in the rake. 

 

Though I'd like to think that my 'Elizabethan', 'Queen of Scots', 'Talisman'(s) and 'Flying Scotsman' rakes, among others, are 'correct', most of the non-named trains on LB are 'representative'. I know Keith Pirt would have taken most of his pictures on a Saturday, but they are marvellous guides for making up some most-mixed rakes.

 

The main thing for me is to represent what I saw as a youth, when I (like you) saw this magnificent main line under steam-power. If some of the trains I run aren't 100% correct in their formation, I just get on with it. Watching them just bowl by with a favourite 'namer' on the front is enough.  

[great northern]

Gilbert,

 

I wouldn't lose too much sleep 'worrying' about whether all your passenger rakes are correct. I don't!

 

As you know, the making up of correct prototype train formations was something WMRC insisted upon with the making of Stoke Summit and Charwelton; up to a point. For every BR document regarding the making up of a prototype train, I can show you a prototype picture of the same train where there is a difference. 'The Northumbrian', apart from the featured Gresley triplet set should be made up of Mk.1s during the period represented, yet pictures exist with Thompson substitutes in the rake. 

 

Though I'd like to think that my 'Elizabethan', 'Queen of Scots', 'Talisman'(s) and 'Flying Scotsman' rakes, among others, are 'correct', most of the non-named trains on LB are 'representative'. I know Keith Pirt would have taken most of his pictures on a Saturday, but they are marvellous guides for making up some most-mixed rakes.

 

The main thing for me is to represent what I saw as a youth, when I (like you) saw this magnificent main line under steam-power. If some of the trains I run aren't 100% correct in their formation, I just get on with it. Watching them just bowl by with a favourite 'namer' on the front is enough.  

The thing is that now I know they are wrong, I shan't rest until I have at least tried to get them right. If it can't be done, and it may well turn out to be coupling incompatibility is the cause, then they will have to stay as they are. I fully accept by the way that I am guilty of obsessing over this, while failing to note such things as missing shackles. Does anyone know whether such things can be acquired separately, by the way. If so, i'll get some, and glue the little ******** in place.

[great northern]

Yet more photos of 60119 this morning.

It is noticeable in the middle image that the loco manages to block out the bridge extension, but I did manage in turn to get a bus having a piggyback on an A1. In case you are getting a bit tired of looking at 60119, here's a WD for a change.

There is some desert in the background of that last shot, so I'm off now to get rid of it.

[trw1089]

Hi Gilbert

 

If by shackles you mean dummy couplings, I have quite a few left over if you need some. Mostly the plastic ones, as the combined metal hook and coupling ones from Bachmann can be bodged a bit to still have the hook and a bit of coupling plus a working front Kadee.

 

I can send some over when I send your books back or sooner if required.

 

The rear 3/4 shot of Patrick Stirling with the new bridge and recoloured ballast is superb. Certainly very evocative of the prototype.

 

Cheers

Tony

[Tony Wright]

The thing is that now I know they are wrong, I shan't rest until I have at least tried to get them right. If it can't be done, and it may well turn out to be coupling incompatibility is the cause, then they will have to stay as they are. I fully accept by the way that I am guilty of obsessing over this, while failing to note such things as missing shackles. Does anyone know whether such things can be acquired separately, by the way. If so, i'll get some, and glue the little ******** in place.

Thanks Gilbert,

 

If the locos with missing shackles don't ever need them to haul trains, I'd be tempted to glue the (Bachmann) 'dummies' permanently in place - I've done that in the past with the RTR locos I used to own. I'll ask Dennis Lovett if they're available as spares.

 

Peter's new bridge looks most impressive, framing 60119. May I make an observation or two, please?

 

Might it be better to 'black out' the area beneath the bridge to the left, so that you wouldn't then see the train, and give a greater sense of 'realism'? 

 

Secondly (and am I being guilty of being obsessive here?), it's wonderful to see PATRICK STIRLING carrying the incorrect '6' and '9' on its front numberplate (the only A1 so to do until withdrawal), but what 'spoils' the scene to me is how the loco footplate and tender soleplate don't line up at all - a feature of both Bachmann's A1s and A2s at source. It takes just a few minutes to fit washers beneath the cab and remove the anomaly. Whist doing that, ask Tim to fit the wiggly pipes on the smokebox and at the back of the firebox this side. They're really prominent in prototype pictures. The incorrect 'lean' to the eccentric crank on this side might also be addressed. 

 

Things like (correct) details on locos (as a loco-builder) are just as important to me as running the correct consists, but are we 'obsessive' in different ways? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[The Stationmaster]

Gilbert,

 

I wouldn't lose too much sleep 'worrying' about whether all your passenger rakes are correct. I don't!

 

As you know, the making up of correct prototype train formations was something WMRC insisted upon with the making of Stoke Summit and Charwelton; up to a point. For every BR document regarding the making up of a prototype train, I can show you a prototype picture of the same train where there is a difference. 'The Northumbrian', apart from the featured Gresley triplet set should be made up of Mk.1s during the period represented, yet pictures exist with Thompson substitutes in the rake. 

 

Though I'd like to think that my 'Elizabethan', 'Queen of Scots', 'Talisman'(s) and 'Flying Scotsman' rakes, among others, are 'correct', most of the non-named trains on LB are 'representative'. I know Keith Pirt would have taken most of his pictures on a Saturday, but they are marvellous guides for making up some most-mixed rakes.

 

The main thing for me is to represent what I saw as a youth, when I (like you) saw this magnificent main line under steam-power. If some of the trains I run aren't 100% correct in their formation, I just get on with it. Watching them just bowl by with a favourite 'namer' on the front is enough.  

 

Something which be interesting to know from the era before very firmly fixed formations is just how frequently trains ran absolutely to the letter of their Carriage Working Programme/Notice?  When I think of the amount of time an army of people put into assessing needs for strengthening or replacing booked vehicles and then publishing it in Weekly Notices which were then often amended by items in Daily Notices it becomes very easy to understand why formations didn't appear to be as somebody had once thought they were supposed to.  And that's before vehicles were knocked out/substituted when crippled or vehicles containing kitchens were taken out for heavy cleaning and had to be substituted for several days.

 

The only way you can accurately represent many passenger train from the 'mainline steam era' is to have not only all the relevant Notices for a particular day but any wires (telegrams) regarding very late notice changes plus details of any cripples knocked out and substituted;  I doubt that level of information still exists.

[bigwordsmith]

Gilbert just spotted the. cravens coach

 

is that a kit or resided RTR?

[great northern]

Thanks Gilbert,

 

If the locos with missing shackles don't ever need them to haul trains, I'd be tempted to glue the (Bachmann) 'dummies' permanently in place - I've done that in the past with the RTR locos I used to own. I'll ask Dennis Lovett if they're available as spares.

 

Peter's new bridge looks most impressive, framing 60119. May I make an observation or two, please?

 

Might it be better to 'black out' the area beneath the bridge to the left, so that you wouldn't then see the train, and give a greater sense of 'realism'? 

 

Secondly (and am I being guilty of being obsessive here?), it's wonderful to see PATRICK STIRLING carrying the incorrect '6' and '9' on its front numberplate (the only A1 so to do until withdrawal), but what 'spoils' the scene to me is how the loco footplate and tender soleplate don't line up at all - a feature of both Bachmann's A1s and A2s at source. It takes just a few minutes to fit washers beneath the cab and remove the anomaly. Whist doing that, ask Tim to fit the wiggly pipes on the smokebox and at the back of the firebox this side. They're really prominent in prototype pictures. The incorrect 'lean' to the eccentric crank on this side might also be addressed. 

 

Things like (correct) details on locos (as a loco-builder) are just as important to me as running the correct consists, but are we 'obsessive' in different ways? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Thanks again Tony. If shackles are available, I promise to get some, and fit them. As to the bridge, I've always worked on the principle that I should present photographs of the model as it is, having acknowledged that in the available space it isn't possible to be prototypically correct. That of course applies most strongly when we look at either end of the layout. The South end isn't as bad as the North, but still way too tight a curve, so I think all I should do is to take what steps I can to make the best of what is there. I have some ideas, but they will involve asking Peter to do some more buildings, so the results won't be seen for some time.

 

I doubt there is anyone else who knows as much as you do about the detail on individual Pacifics, and I'm sure everyone understands that you will always get them right. I'd do the same if I had your skill and knowledge. Tim is gradually working his way through A4s and A3s at the moment, but given the demands on his time and my pocket it will take some time. Then perhaps we can start on the A1s, on which I have been casting a judgmental eye for some time. Keep telling me about these things though please, as they fascinate me, whether I can do anything about them or not.

[great northern]

Something which be interesting to know from the era before very firmly fixed formations is just how frequently trains ran absolutely to the letter of their Carriage Working Programme/Notice?  When I think of the amount of time an army of people put into assessing needs for strengthening or replacing booked vehicles and then publishing it in Weekly Notices which were then often amended by items in Daily Notices it becomes very easy to understand why formations didn't appear to be as somebody had once thought they were supposed to.  And that's before vehicles were knocked out/substituted when crippled or vehicles containing kitchens were taken out for heavy cleaning and had to be substituted for several days.

 

The only way you can accurately represent many passenger train from the 'mainline steam era' is to have not only all the relevant Notices for a particular day but any wires (telegrams) regarding very late notice changes plus details of any cripples knocked out and substituted;  I doubt that level of information still exists.

Thanks Mike. That rather puts it all into perspective, does it not? Am I right in thinking that, where it was possible to reserve seats on a train, every effort would be made to find a like replacement when that became necessary?  So, if an open carriage had been specified by the passenger, he or she would get that, though the type of carriage might be different. I remember Andy Rush telling me that if the choice of replacement for a failed MK1 was between a high mileage and rough one, or a good Gresley or Thompson, the latter would be chosen every time, provided that could be done quickly enough to avoid delaying the departure of the train.

Gilbert just spotted the. cravens coach

 

is that a kit or resided RTR?

 Southern Pride kit, Peter, built by Ian Willets.

[Mallard60022]

Thanks Mike. That rather puts it all into perspective, does it not? Am I right in thinking that, where it was possible to reserve seats on a train, every effort would be made to find a like replacement when that became necessary?  So, if an open carriage had been specified by the passenger, he or she would get that, though the type of carriage might be different. I remember Andy Rush telling me that if the choice of replacement for a failed MK1 was between a high mileage and rough one, or a good Gresley or Thompson, the latter would be chosen every time, provided that could be done quickly enough to avoid delaying the departure of the train.

 Southern Pride kit, Peter, built by Ian Willets.

In the 'old days', could one book a type of coach (other than 1st/2nd)?

Re what Mike said, I have been researching my 'formations' for SOSJ and the CWN often is not what actually ran if photo's are anything to go by. Minefield, but unlike that, great fun.

 

Phil

[great northern]

Several hours of further dabbing and spreading have seen the desert retreat still further.

This seemed a sufficiently nice view to justify spending some time on shopping it.

There's still some way to go, but I'm getting there.

[stewartingram]

I take it that diversions were on via Spalding to March, Cambridge & Hitchin? No rail replacement buses back then!

 

Stewart

[The Stationmaster]

Thanks Mike. That rather puts it all into perspective, does it not? Am I right in thinking that, where it was possible to reserve seats on a train, every effort would be made to find a like replacement when that became necessary?  So, if an open carriage had been specified by the passenger, he or she would get that, though the type of carriage might be different. I remember Andy Rush telling me that if the choice of replacement for a failed MK1 was between a high mileage and rough one, or a good Gresley or Thompson, the latter would be chosen every time, provided that could be done quickly enough to avoid delaying the departure of the train.

 

 

A chap I used to work with had been Yardmaster at Old Oak Common passenger yard (different railway obviously) but he always said the important things - as ordained by GW/WR Carriage Working Notices etc - was to find a vehicle with the right number of seats.  When I was managing a large passenger yard with quite a lot of hauled stock in the early 1980s the priority was to try and find something, anything, to replace a crippled vehicle but by then 'loose' spare coaching stock was on a par with hens' teeth when it came to actually finding some and we had very few trains other than seasonal ones which had reservations in hauled stock.

 

However I do know, from the time I was working in the same office, that the WR passenger rolling stock controller usually did his best to try and match what had to come out with a similar vehicle and on occasion (early 1970s) he would even arrange to move empty vehicles around the Region (on booked services) to get them into a train needing a replacement - which of course meant the train conveying a 'light' vehicle also had an 'odd' formation.

[Mallard60022]

Several hours of further dabbing and spreading have seen the desert retreat still further.

ballast 1.JPG

ballast 2.JPG

ballast 3.JPG

ballast 4.JPG

ballast 5.JPG

This seemed a sufficiently nice view to justify spending some time on shopping it.

ballast 6.JPG

ballast 7.JPG

ballast 8.JPG

There's still some way to go, but I'm getting there.

Great improvement G. Keep up the excellent regrading.

Phil 

[St Enodoc]

Something which be interesting to know from the era before very firmly fixed formations is just how frequently trains ran absolutely to the letter of their Carriage Working Programme/Notice?  When I think of the amount of time an army of people put into assessing needs for strengthening or replacing booked vehicles and then publishing it in Weekly Notices which were then often amended by items in Daily Notices it becomes very easy to understand why formations didn't appear to be as somebody had once thought they were supposed to.  And that's before vehicles were knocked out/substituted when crippled or vehicles containing kitchens were taken out for heavy cleaning and had to be substituted for several days.

 

The only way you can accurately represent many passenger train from the 'mainline steam era' is to have not only all the relevant Notices for a particular day but any wires (telegrams) regarding very late notice changes plus details of any cripples knocked out and substituted;  I doubt that level of information still exists.

Couldn't agree more Mike, other than to add that if you really want that level of precision you will need a photograph taken at the location and on the day that you are modelling.

[great northern]

Still more pictures of 60119, though it has moved on a bit.

But that's the lot for Patrick. We can have another look at that filthy WD though.

I must admit that I'm having a job adjusting to the new ballast colour when it comes to photoshopping. I've grown used to toning the colour down to minimise the yellow effect, so now I'm juggling with colour intensity to get things looking right.

[trw1089]

I was just thinking how the new ballast colouring completely changes the hue of photos. It first really hit me with the earlier Dub D pic, but those last three really do change the whole colour temperature of the photos now, giving them a “cooler” look than the warmer yellow/tans that used to dominate. To me it also tends to look much closer to the hue of prototype photos which tended to be dominated by greys and darks.

 

I’m just so glad that it all appears to be working out though, as it must have taken some courage to have a go at the main scenic area. It certainly makes a big improvement on the desert appearance in my opinion.

 

Cheers

Tony

[great northern]

I was just thinking how the new ballast colouring completely changes the hue of photos. It first really hit me with the earlier Dub D pic, but those last three really do change the whole colour temperature of the photos now, giving them a “cooler” look than the warmer yellow/tans that used to dominate. To me it also tends to look much closer to the hue of prototype photos which tended to be dominated by greys and darks.

 

I’m just so glad that it all appears to be working out though, as it must have taken some courage to have a go at the main scenic area. It certainly makes a big improvement on the desert appearance in my opinion.

 

Cheers

Tony

You've put it into words a lot better than I did, Tony. I think I have a combination to deal with, both the new ballast colour and the sun, which is now so low that it comes in to the room horizontally. That shot of the WD I now see is almost sepia in tone. I'll keep experimenting!

[great northern]

Here is the WD again, about to disappear under Crescent Bridge, and no doubt to be signalled onto the Up slow.

More light at this end of the room by lunchtime, and so a somewhat different hue. Now to get rather cold on the golf course.

[Indomitable026]

Still more pictures of 60119, though it has moved on a bit.

119 10.JPG

119 11.JPG

But that's the lot for Patrick. We can have another look at that filthy WD though.

WD 2.JPG

I must admit that I'm having a job adjusting to the new ballast colour when it comes to photoshopping. I've grown used to toning the colour down to minimise the yellow effect, so now I'm juggling with colour intensity to get things looking right.

 

Excellent work as always - your ballast colouring is a game changer as the sand has always stood out.

 

That WD shot now looks perfect.

[bigwordsmith]

Several hours of further dabbing and spreading have seen the desert retreat still further.

ballast 1.JPG

ballast 2.JPG

ballast 3.JPG

ballast 4.JPG

ballast 5.JPG

This seemed a sufficiently nice view to justify spending some time on shopping it.

ballast 6.JPG

ballast 7.JPG

ballast 8.JPG

There's still some way to go, but I'm getting there.

 

 

 

Much improved Keep up the good work!

[great northern]

The next occurence is the arrival of ECS behind Green Arrow. This train will now wait at platform 6 for rather a long time.

I shall certainly make sure that last coach is not visible, as soon as can be arranged. It was ***** cold on that golf course, and I dropped my banana in the mud.

[great northern]

The stock for the 3.00pm Grimsby needed to be brought in from Nene sidings, so with a bit of cheating I thought I'd see how close I could get to this prototype shot, reproduced courtesy of peterboroughimages.co.ok

Wrong carriages, wrong lamp, still no shackle, and I couldn't get the right lighting, but not bad really.

 

That brings us to the next train on the Up, and it is one of the highlights of the day.

There is still some sand to annihilate, so I'm off to do it.