Grantham - the Streamliner years

[LNER4479]

That D2 looks great! How is it coming on?

 

Just about to solder the boiler to the superstructure for keeps - wish me luck!

[LNER4479]

....and a few hours later

 

 

Footplate valancing carrying cradle removed (hurrah!) and a quick clean up for the camera. Smokebox door just positioned for the photos and no front bogie yet per se

 

Always did enjoy late night soldering sessions... ah well, time for bed!

Edited September 14, 2012 by LNER4479

[ianwales]

 

Always did enjoy late night soldering sessions... ah well, time for bed!

 

Lucky you. some of us are working nights!!!

 

Ian

[LNER4479]

Lucky you. some of us are working nights!!!

 

Ian

 

Busy night then was it?! (lol)

[61070]

John,

Do Behave!! :jester:

 

Kind Regards,Derek.

 

Hello there Derek - I hope you are keeping well. I'll have to watch myself; you never know who's on the lookout for mischief on these forums!

Edited September 14, 2012 by 61070

[61070]

The people pictures are fantastic, John (61070). Did I gather correctly that they were taken by your father? They seem to be in a similar style to others on the LNER Forum thread. Your father clearly had a real eye for capturing the character of a person in a natural 'pose'; they're a wonderful social record. Did his subjects always know they were being photographed I wonder?

 

Yes, I keep meaning to getting round to joining the GNR Society; I am aware that they're currently running a series of articles on the track layout and signalling through Grantham over the years so yet more useful information there even though much of mine is already been decided.

 

'Robert'

 

Yes, my father took nearly all the photos I've posted myself on the 'Returning to Grantham' thread - the exceptions are some of Roy's which he allowed me to include. Dad enjoyed taking 'candid' people photos so, unless the subjects are obviously posing for their portraits, most of them would have been unaware. You can see, for example, that the photo of the guard next to the door of the down side refreshment room was taken 'secretly' from around chest level, without raising the camera to his eye and lining up the shot. Hence the rotation I've needed to carry out to bring the verticals into alignment (I've not cropped it square all round so as to retain as much as I can of the detail you're interested in). Since showing many of the photos to former Grantham railwaymen I've been able to put names to most of the people - some of whom, like the porter sitting on the box, could only be recognised by people who knew them really well because you can't actually see his face very well. Note the the box has a 'FRAGILE' sticker on it!

 

Thanks for your tip about the GNR Society's features on track and signalling through Grantham. I've been on their website recently but I didn't pick this up.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing more pictures of the layout 'as and when'.

 

John

Edited September 14, 2012 by 61070

[61070]

Happy to help...

Mike

 

Mike - just a quick note to say that my copies of Grantham and Railways, The Grantham Rail Crash of 1906 and Grantham in Focus (Vol.1) have arrived, and they are providing more fascinating detail for me. I'm specially grateful to have the key to the station buildings in Grantham and Railways. It will be of great value for improving the captions of my photos.

 

John

Edited September 14, 2012 by 61070

[JCL]

listening to the lorry engines changing down gear as they approached the corner

 

I'm guessing you must be a light sleeper!

[jwealleans]

...or a nervous one?

[foster104]

Robert,

Your layout is right up my street, great thread and I love the social history aspect to the discussion being generated.

Quick question: how would you rate the complexity of the LRM D2 kit? I am considering either that or their J3 as my first attempt at loco kit building.

 

Andrew

[LNER4479]

Hello Andrew,

 

Thank you for the interest shown. Yes, I find the social aspect of the background research really fascinating - there's almost a danger that you spend too much time on it and forget to get on with building the layout!

 

The LRM D2 is a beautifully engineered kit and is going together lovely. Just last night I offered up what I'd done so far to the buffer beam of an RTR loco and the height at the front end was spot on. I re-checked with a six-inch rule against the drawing and it's less than 0.5mm out so that'll do for me. My point here being not so much my skill, as accurately cut parts in the first place.

 

Is it suitable as a first kit? I'm not so sure. It is quite complex - generally I find that etched kits are compared to white metal. For example, to form the smokebox requires no less than three layers on top of the basic boiler 'tube' shape (which at least comes pre-formed). Each of these layers not only needs to be carefully aligned but also soldered on so they are even with no additional thickness added by stray solder. The final outer wrapper piece is half etch (which at least makes it easier to manipulate) with a complex reverse curve shape to form at the bottom to match the profile of the smokebox front plate.

 

The other factor is that, being quite a diminutive loco, it's all a bit 'tight' when it comes to the chassis (etched nickel silver) and the clearances with the body superstructure. I've had to modify the interior cab space in order to fit it all in, something which of course is not reflected in the instructions.

 

I hope I don't sound like some sort of expert or somehow dismissive of your ability (which of course I have no knowledge of). If you have done a lot of etched brass soldering already and are confident with your technique then it may be OK for you (I can see how tempting it is, given your RMWeb picture icon!) All I'll say is that this is my fourth kit from the LRM stable (if you count the first two actually being Geo Norton kits) and it's working out a lot better than the first one I built 20 years ago! And my first ever kit, a Millholme models LMS 2P, still sits in its box, complete but never otherwise having ever run successfully.

 

Unless you are very sure then I think the classic advice would be to try a whitemetal 0-6-0 tank loco as a first kit (generally a lot more room to play with in terms of the chassis and overall simpler construction). Maybe a J52 to stay with the GN theme? Jonathan (previous post to yours) also does a lot of kit building and may have an opinion to add.

 

 

Hope this helps you decide and be pleased to hear how you get on.

 

'Robert'

Edited September 19, 2012 by LNER4479

[micklner]

J3 personally , or any other 0-6-0 type. Any 4-4-0 or 0-4-4 T are notorious for getting the balance right to ensure good running. You need as much weight as possible over the drivers usally just where the motor sits !!.

[jwealleans]

There are plenty of more knowledgeable people on here who can advise on kit building, so browse the forum and see what they say as well. If I were starting afresh, I think the best advice I could give myself would be to get hold of one of the Mainly Trains chassis kits which go under an RTR body. They do one for the J52 (which I haven't built) as well as for J71 and J72, which I have. The hardest part of building a loco (IMO) is the chassis and drivetrain. If you can get those right then you won't have a problem. These kits are well designed and straightforward and also mean you don't have to get bogged down in building a body at the same time.

 

You'll also find plenty of advice on tools and equipment on the forum. Since I started building two different chassis jigs have become available. I have one (the HH one) and wouldn't be without it, but they aren't essential. Comet and others do frame alignment jigs which will do the job. A chassis jig will make it quicker, that's all.

 

Finally, when you do take the plunge, put up a thread and ask for advice. You won't be short of it. See 'Grasshopper John's thread for proof of that.

 

Edit - Just noticed there's a J72 bodyshell on Ebay for £2.00. There's a starting point for you.

Edited September 20, 2012 by jwealleans

[foster104]

Thanks a lot for the feedback. It is so tempting to go straight for a kit because the prototype is so appealing, yet what you're all saying makes sense - something more realistically achievable is a better bet to build experience and confidence to take the next step in the future.

 

I had also read elsewhere that 4-4-0s and 0-4-4Ts can be difficult to balance.

 

My previous soldering experience was probably 15 years ago now with a few whitemetal wagon and building kits. I'm sure my best bet is to refresh myself with a few more of those before attempting a loco. If I am going to make it a project for this winter, I better get on with ordering something, because I will have to wait for it to get mailed to Canada!

 

Thanks again for the feedback, I don't want to hijack the thread with another 'what kit should I build?' tangent. Looking forward to seeing further updates on Grantham.

[61070]

I've recently come across this view of platform 5. It's a photo by Ben Brooksbank and it can be found here: http://www.geograph....k/photo/2878811 .

 

It's main value is that it shows in some detail the up starting signal on that platform which, in my experience, is seldom seen in photographs. In fact it's enabled me to identify the location of one of my Dad's shots also attached (and which I might title 'still life with signal balance weights'!) that had me puzzled for quite a while. It's interesting to see that a few lengths of channel point rodding have been fashioned into a rudimentary protective enclosure to protect bystanders from being struck by the mechanism when it moved. On a Yard Box diagram from later years the main signal arm is described as 'fixed' and the disc signal was operated by lever no. 31. Hope this helps with a bit more detail.

 

 

Edited October 6, 2012 by 61070

[LNER4479]

John, you're an absolute star!

 

You just solved Grantham's biggest single signalling 'mystery' for me. I've been puzzling for ages why on earth there wasn't some form of starting signal for a southbound departure away from platform 5. So much so that I have actually allowed for one on my Yard Box panel as i wanted to portray such a move whether there was a signal or not (it's a glorious looking departure on the model). And it turns out there was a signal all along. I absolutely agree re how such detail can get 'missed' on photos. I'm also interested to see the associated shunt signal; again, I'd planned to include one of those. Presumably this was to allow a shunt move along the down relief to inside the main signal south of the station? It could alternatively be for a shunt into the carriage sidings, but I'm wondering if the ground signal to the left of the locomotive is also for platform 5? Unconventional, but the adjacent road was a carriage siding I believe so can't understand why there was a signal there otherwise. Happy to be corrected over these details by you or anyone else 'in the know'.

 

Thanks so much once again. You've quite made my day!

[61070]

I'm very glad to have helped. Strangely, I don't remember that signal at all from our visits in the 1960s, though clearly it was there. In those days I took a particularly keen interest in signalling (I wanted to be a signalman!) so it's all the more puzzling that I don't recall it. I've checked a few sources of photos to see if the top of the post is visible anywhere, but without success so far. It appears too tall to have been originally intended for the two signals it carries in the photo. Perhaps it was built to carry a somersault arm, which was mounted a couple of feet higher so as to give adequate clearance from platform level when 'off'?

 

In terms of what moves were governed by which signals in the photo, would the shunt signal - the lower one on the lattice post - be used (for example) to signal the locomotive forward in preparation for running round? Is it showing 'off' in the photo? (I say that because, in comparison with the ground disc signal on the left, the white rectangle is inclined.) Not sure about the ground disc signal on the left. I think the second (and possibly also the third) track out from the platform was part of the carriage sidings, but weren't these sidings accessible also from running lines at the South Box end (i.e. they did not end with buffer stops)? If they were accessible from both ends, would this mean that they needed to be signalled in some basic manner? However, really I hesitate to comment on anything too specialised in the signalling field because, as in many fields of railway engineering, I've learned that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing! There are, however, a number of signalling experts on the LNER Forum and we could ask for some views there. A track diagram would help, if you have one.

Edited September 24, 2012 by 61070

[ianwales]

 

On a Yard Box diagram from later years the main signal arm is described as 'fixed' and the disc signal was operated by lever no. 31.

 

 

Hi John

 

The "fixed" main arm could be because according to an early diesel era photo I have shows the connection between the up and downmain and platform 5 had been removed some time towards the end of steam so the main arm would be fixed because the route it refered to was no longer available. Does anyone know when these alterations to the track layout were made?

 

Ian

[LNER4479]

Thank John,

 

I’ve now had a chance to look at the geograph site and it describes this train as arriving from Pinxton (via Nottingham Victoria) so it would appear that this train has terminated at Grantham. All signals are ‘on’ (ie at danger) as all balanceweights are in the lower position. Hereafter I’m second guessing.

 

I agree with you therefore that the crew are preparing for the run round. Note that there is no lamp on the front of the loco, so looks like the crew have already removed it (electric lamps were not trusted on their own!). In terms of the track layout, I believe that in BR days a crossover existed (behind the camera man) such that the loco could draw forward (probably under the control of the shunt signal at the bottom of the post) into the carriage sidings then set back over the crossover to gain the line alongside as the route back to the shed. In which case then yes that would make the adjacent ground signal applicable to that line (for the move in the reverse direction).

 

However, in my pre-war era, I don’t believe that crossover existed – it is certainly not there in the 1900’s track layout in the ‘Grantham and Railways’ book – so the operational arrangements on my layout will be different. Somewhat to my surprise, the 1930’s timetable shows the Nottingham services to have been quite intense, essentially an hourly service. This would point to platform 5 being quite intensively used; perhaps a fresh loco from the shed simply backed onto the stock to form the return service and the incoming loco then made its way to shed directly afterwards? That would certainly be a simple way of operating the layout at an exhibition.

 

This picture (from post 53 – sorry, it’s a repeat!) shows the area under discussion. In BR days, the additional crossover I refer to would have connected the dead-end siding (where the unfinished coach is sat against the buffer) to the carriage siding to its right to create the run round.

 

In terms of the connections to the mainlines (in front of the A4) being removed Ian, my guess is late 1960’s/early 1970’s. Certainly the trackwork shown here can be readily seen in any of Colin Walker’s early 1960 pictures and, as I would describe it as ‘steam era’ trackwork (eg the mainline trailing cross-over formed by the two single slips was used as part of the mainline loco change operation), it would have been retained until steam finished.

 

I’m feeling bad about this being a ‘repeat’ picture so here’s another one of the same area viewed from the other side (taken two years ago).

[S.A.C Martin]

Love those pictures, you really get a good sense of the scale! On a separate note, is that the Yorkshire Pullman in the second picture, headed by the express blue A4? What vehicles make up that set, if you don't mind me asking?

[LNER4479]

Love those pictures, you really get a good sense of the scale! On a separate note, is that the Yorkshire Pullman in the second picture, headed by the express blue A4? What vehicles make up that set, if you don't mind me asking?

 

Ooh cripes, they're all just straight-out-of-the-box Hornby's. However, I've tried to assemble them in a realistic/convincing formation. I've not really read up on my Pullmans and I understand they can be a bit of a minefield. I'm also aware that a lot of the Pullmans that Hornby have produced are actually ones used on the Southern region so might not have been seen on the East Coast route at all.

 

However, all that being said, here is a (rather poor quality) picture of the rake in full which is indeed intended to represent the Yorkshire Pullman:

 

The leading brake vehicle is one of the newer 12-wheel brake vehicles. All pictures of the train in the 1930's show a 12-wheel brake leading leaving London so was obviously a regular in the formation. However it was a different style to this one (larger brake area) so even this vehicle isn't 'right'. Then there are a mix of saloons. Hornby have produced the four basic variants viz first, first kitchen, third, third kitchen and I have one of each. I have therefore tried to position the kitchen vehicles so that they abuts an adjacent full saloon (ie food/drinks located centrally in middle of two vehicles). I've absolutely no idea if this was how they did it but it seems logical to me! Fifth vehicle is then a more normal 8-wheeled brake, leaving the last two vehicles (brake and saloon) as the additional (Bradford?) portion.

 

Now then all you Pullman experts out there, please feel free to shoot me down in flames! Seven vehicles is about right for this train on Grantham; if the real one was longer then I apologise. Also, I think I've read somewhere that, once the West Riding started operating then the Yorkshire Pullman was reconfigured (as presumably it was considered that the Yorkshire folk now had a decent prestige train!), but again more details would be welcome.

 

Oh the loco? I recently acquired a 'Sir Sam Fay'. Bit too exotic to turn down. I guess it's 'representing' one of larger ex-GC B2 (I think!) class that worked these trains in the 1920's. Just to prove that I don't always intend being too fastidious when it comes of stock/era!

[61070]

In terms of the connections to the mainlines (in front of the A4) being removed Ian, my guess is late 1960’s/early 1970’s. Certainly the trackwork shown here can be readily seen in any of Colin Walker’s early 1960 pictures and, as I would describe it as ‘steam era’ trackwork (eg the mainline trailing cross-over formed by the two single slips was used as part of the mainline loco change operation), it would have been retained until steam finished.

 

The connections referred to were still in place in July 1964: http://www.lner.info...=2283&mode=view (you can't see much of the trackwork, but the ground signal is a clue), but were gone by 6 Feb 1966 - as this photo taken on the latter date shows:

[Jack P]

Wow. Just WOW. I litterally have no words, I hope one day I can have a layout as big as this!

[LNER4479]

Well folks I've been 'sitting on this' for a little while now, not daring to 'count my chickens' in case it was too much to hope for - but I can now reveal that last week we took possession of our new house.

 

I say 'we' because with the full blessing of my fantastic wife, our property search had a very simple remit: 'large room with a house attached'(!) Accordingly, we have purchased a former methodist chapel & school room (combined). This had already been converted by the previous owners which means it is directly liveable in (that was my part of the bargain!). However, very thoughtfully, the previous owners had converted the former school room area only (spacious two-bed bungalow) and left the chapel building untouched (but for the removal of the ecclesiastical accoutrements). The guy's hobby was restoring classic cars so used it as his garage (and very handily installed a load bearing concrete floor so it's dead flat)

 

This means that I have taken possession of a space measuring... wait for it ... some 42ft by 28ft in which to indulge my own hobby. For someone who has always tended towards large (prototype) layouts it is surely as much as I could ever want. 30 years ago, I could often be found doodling imaginary layout concepts within a space this size; now - god willing - that dream is a reality (I was actually going for 40ft by 20ft so I've exceeded my brief a little!!)

 

There is actually a little bit of work to do yet before Grantham can be moved in (for one thing the floor is heavily oil-stained in places!) but I'm hoping that it will be in there by Christmas (2012!) and work can actively resume on the layout itself.

 

It's a busy time at the moment, as you can imagine, but I'll try and get a couple of pictures posted to give you an idea.

 

Yessss!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edited October 1, 2012 by LNER4479

[Danemouth]

 

 

This means that I have taken possession of a space measuring... wait for it ... some 42ft by 28ft in which to indulge my own hobby.

 

You jammy devil :)

 

Regards,

 

Dave