Wright writes.....

[Enterprisingwestern]

My own take on the Bachmann BBC, done before I badgered Justin into doing the upgrade kits.

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/74937-bogie-bolster-a-1950s60s-how-to-protect-load-from-chains/page-2

 

They do scrub up rather well, even if I say so myself!

 

Mike.

[Tony Wright]

Can this be the new renaissance?

 

Is wagonology finally coming in out of the cold?

 

Can we look forward to layouts at exhibitions where specific-period, superbly crafted layouts; with exquisite locos and coaches; do NOT have a random selection of RTR wagons, covering most of the history of British railways, bunged together to represent the freight operations?

 

... or is this just a flash-in-the-pan, and will most of the great and good in the hobby revert to their primary interests, and cast Nelson's blind eye in the direction of their freight stock?

 

We can but hope !!

 

After all, the RTR producers take their cue from us modellers - if we continue to accept dubious models in dubious liveries, why should they bother to produce accurate models?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

PS. It seems that at least one of the newcomer manufacturers has got the message - CEMFLOs anyone?

I've certainly learned a lot, John,

 

Just from the last few days. 

 

I think the main problem with regard to incorrect freight stock is just old fashioned ignorance. Ignorance of the prototype and (axiomatically) ignorance of the models.

 

I think the readers of this thread are in a minority. Why? Because 'accuracy' is important to us; accuracy born out by trying to make our models as realistic as we can.The vast majority of folk in this hobby are (in my view) just purchasers. They buy what they like, what they fancy and what they can afford. It is not for nothing that, even at some high-quality shows, the 'box-shifter' is by far the most-numerous trader.

 

A good friend used to work in a model shop (in its day, one of the best - for builders - in the country). One day, a husband and wife came in and purchased a 'red' locomotive. Why a red one? Because they'd purchased a 'blue' one the month before! And, so it went on, until the shop closed - had it run out of colours? 

 

Tony Gee makes an interesting point that most folk at shows don't seem to know the difference between kit-built, scratch-built or RTR locos and stock. 

 

I've told this tale before, I'm sure, but at one show, a friend and I commented (within earshot of an operator) about a goods train on a prototype-based layout which, even in a wildest dream, could not have been accurate. It was hauled by an RTR blue Class 20 and consisted entirely of brand new, brightly-coloured PO, long-wheelbased four wheeled wagons. 'Ah, he's a club member and that's what he likes' was the comment. So much for democracy! 

 

Am I a hypocrite? Probably. However, though some of my freight stock is anachronistic, the make-up of the goods trains is based on observation of prototype pictures and consultation of the appropriate WTT. And, everything is weathered.

 

I wonder as well about close-perception/inspection. I have five 'long' goods trains running on LB, ranging in length from 48 to 35 individual wagons. There are further 'shorter' ones, ranging in length from 20 to 30+ wagons, then a couple of short ones (up to 15), and finally the pick-ups - up to 13/14 wagons-long. With the spares floating around (another 25-30 wagons) that does represent quite a few vehicles - not as many as you have, I admit. Since I've built only a small percentage of this total, it's easy for me to cop-out, I know. The ratio is about 75% kit-built to 25% modified proprietary. It'll be the latter category which contains the more mistakes. The question is, do I notice, in a rake of nearly 50 wagons, that the type of brakes on one or two of these aren't quite dead right? Or, that a wheelbase might be 2mm out? I'm not making an excuse, just asking myself questions (which others might ask of themselves). It's clear, given my interest, that if there's an 'error' or two regarding the motive power, it won't be tolerated. That said, some little time ago, two dear friends (2mm modellers of the greatest distinction) came to see LB and run trains. Great fun was had. A long empties was run - once with a modified RTR 2-8-0 and the second time with an old kit-built equivalent. I asked which they thought was the 'better'. 'Oh, the one you built - definitely!' was the response. 'But it's got no brakes' said I. 'I hadn't noticed' was the final comment. 

 

I'll try and do better! 

[queensquare]

I like wagons, I have over 200 now the majority of which are either kit or scratch built. The bolsters being loaded with logs at Tucking Mill (seen again later by the sawmill at the colliery) are scratch built, most of the PO wagons are Association kits with a sprinkling of RTR, mainly the excellent but sadly no longer available Mathieson wagons.

 

Jerry

 

 

Edited December 22, 2018 by queensquare

[petrovich]

I've certainly learned a lot, John,

 

Just from the last few days. 

 

I think the main problem with regard to incorrect freight stock is just old fashioned ignorance. Ignorance of the prototype and (axiomatically) ignorance of the models.

 

I think the readers of this thread are in a minority. Why? Because 'accuracy' is important to us; accuracy born out by trying to make our models as realistic as we can.The vast majority of folk in this hobby are (in my view) just purchasers. They buy what they like, what they fancy and what they can afford. It is not for nothing that, even at some high-quality shows, the 'box-shifter' is by far the most-numerous trader.

 

A good friend used to work in a model shop (in its day, one of the best - for builders - in the country). One day, a husband and wife came in and purchased a 'red' locomotive. Why a red one? Because they'd purchased a 'blue' one the month before! And, so it went on, until the shop closed - had it run out of colours? 

 

Tony Gee makes an interesting point that most folk at shows don't seem to know the difference between kit-built, scratch-built or RTR locos and stock. 

 

I've told this tale before, I'm sure, but at one show, a friend and I commented (within earshot of an operator) about a goods train on a prototype-based layout which, even in a wildest dream, could not have been accurate. It was hauled by an RTR blue Class 20 and consisted entirely of brand new, brightly-coloured PO, long-wheelbased four wheeled wagons. 'Ah, he's a club member and that's what he likes' was the comment. So much for democracy! 

 

Am I a hypocrite? Probably. However, though some of my freight stock is anachronistic, the make-up of the goods trains is based on observation of prototype pictures and consultation of the appropriate WTT. And, everything is weathered.

 

I wonder as well about close-perception/inspection. I have five 'long' goods trains running on LB, ranging in length from 48 to 35 individual wagons. There are further 'shorter' ones, ranging in length from 20 to 30+ wagons, then a couple of short ones (up to 15), and finally the pick-ups - up to 13/14 wagons-long. With the spares floating around (another 25-30 wagons) that does represent quite a few vehicles - not as many as you have, I admit. Since I've built only a small percentage of this total, it's easy for me to cop-out, I know. The ratio is about 75% kit-built to 25% modified proprietary. It'll be the latter category which contains the more mistakes. The question is, do I notice, in a rake of nearly 50 wagons, that the type of brakes on one or two of these aren't quite dead right? Or, that a wheelbase might be 2mm out? I'm not making an excuse, just asking myself questions (which others might ask of themselves). It's clear, given my interest, that if there's an 'error' or two regarding the motive power, it won't be tolerated. That said, some little time ago, two dear friends (2mm modellers of the greatest distinction) came to see LB and run trains. Great fun was had. A long empties was run - once with a modified RTR 2-8-0 and the second time with an old kit-built equivalent. I asked which they thought was the 'better'. 'Oh, the one you built - definitely!' was the response. 'But it's got no brakes' said I. 'I hadn't noticed' was the final comment. 

 

I'll try and do better! 

I wonder if this was posted elsewhere on this BRM forum how many people would look up the words axiomatically, anachronistic and something as simple to us as the acronyms WTT and RTR. 

 

Regards

 

Peter

[2750Papyrus]

The latest copy of the Great Northern Railway Society new letter contains a 2 page article on Little Bytham, reprinted from the Eastern Region Magazine of April 1962.

 

Apparently, the church of St Medard is uniquely dedicated to the 6th Century Bishop of Noyon. 

[Lecorbusier]

Can this be the new renaissance?

 

Is wagonology finally coming in out of the cold?

 

Can we look forward to layouts at exhibitions where specific-period, superbly crafted layouts; with exquisite locos and coaches; do NOT have a random selection of RTR wagons, covering most of the history of British railways, bunged together to represent the freight operations?

 

... or is this just a flash-in-the-pan, and will most of the great and good in the hobby revert to their primary interests, and cast Nelson's blind eye in the direction of their freight stock?

 

We can but hope !!

 

After all, the RTR producers take their cue from us modellers - if we continue to accept dubious models in dubious liveries, why should they bother to produce accurate models?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

PS. It seems that at least one of the newcomer manufacturers has got the message - CEMFLOs anyone?

I suppose it all depends on where you are coming from John and what your priorities might be.

 

For myself - still a relative newcomer to all of this - I feel like I am on one hell of a journey .... will the learning curve ever flatten out?

 

I do find that having chosen a particular railway, followed by a particular location, then followed by a particular period, one thing does follow on from another. I also find the research and thinking in many ways almost as interesting if not quite as enjoyable as the modelling itself.

 

Most on here know this of course .... but, if you want to model such a specific subject then it sets multiple hares running .... so with goods/mineral traffic (as with so much else) I find myself researching all sorts of obscure things to get an idea of train make up, the kind of private owner wagons which might have run, what iteration of wagon/livery might have been present etc etc. You find yourself dipping in and out of all sorts of fascinating social and industrial areas that you had no idea existed - particularly to one who grew up in a post coal era.

 

As an aside, I also find it a never ending affirmation of human nature how many people are willing and happy to help, share and explain - from my perspective it is a great hobby on so many levels.

[St Enodoc]

It looks similar but there are several different types. When I get home at the weekend I'll check the spec of the stuff I use. It will be good if it is available easily again.

The Flexinol wire looks as though it is the same stuff as I used. Mine came from ProRail (Jacques le Plat) in Belgium and was 0.125 mm diameter. C&L used to sell some that was 0.15 mm diameter.

[grahame]

I hope this post is not out of place on this thread (there's no trains in view) but it is of some scratch-built structures for a layout and is N/2mm.

 

I had to re-set up a temporary scene to take a photo to help illustrate an article I was asked to write for DEMU's UPDate magazine. It's of a view that can't be seen from a low angle once the centre triangular viaduct section (between the two bridges) is put in place. The scene is not complete (traffic lights, signs, street lights, and other details yet to be added) but here's how it looked with a sky added in behind. It looks a little fuzzy (the original isn't) but by clicking on the pic you can get a larger better version although you might need to scroll right to see it all.

 

 

G

 

 

[Tony Wright]

I hope this post is not out of place on this thread (there's no trains in view) but it is of some scratch-built structures for a layout and is N/2mm.

 

 

Why would creativity of this standard be out of place on this thread, Grahame?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[grahame]

Why would creativity of this standard be out of place on this thread, Grahame?

 

 

 

I'm pleased that (modelling) creativity is the criteria for posting. It's just that I'm a little in awe of some of the other postings and wonder if modernish non-railway models (although for a layout) in N/2mm would be of interest. 

 

Anyway, I hope people enjoy my efforts and find the contribution worthwhile.

 

G.

[queensquare]

I'm pleased that (modelling) creativity is the criteria for posting. It's just that I'm a little in awe of some of the other postings and wonder if modernish non-railway models (although for a layout) in N/2mm would be of interest. 

 

Anyway, I hope people enjoy my efforts and find the contribution worthwhile.

 

G.

 

I very much enjoy your posts. Your modern, urban, south London models are the polar opposite to my scenes of Somerset almost a century ago but both portray the railway in the landscape which is where 2mm/N really excels.

 

Jerry

[Clive Mortimore]

I've certainly learned a lot, John,

 

Just from the last few days. 

 

I think the main problem with regard to incorrect freight stock is just old fashioned ignorance. Ignorance of the prototype and (axiomatically) ignorance of the models.

 

I think the readers of this thread are in a minority. Why? Because 'accuracy' is important to us; accuracy born out by trying to make our models as realistic as we can.The vast majority of folk in this hobby are (in my view) just purchasers. They buy what they like, what they fancy and what they can afford. It is not for nothing that, even at some high-quality shows, the 'box-shifter' is by far the most-numerous trader.

 

A good friend used to work in a model shop (in its day, one of the best - for builders - in the country). One day, a husband and wife came in and purchased a 'red' locomotive. Why a red one? Because they'd purchased a 'blue' one the month before! And, so it went on, until the shop closed - had it run out of colours? 

 

Tony Gee makes an interesting point that most folk at shows don't seem to know the difference between kit-built, scratch-built or RTR locos and stock. 

 

I've told this tale before, I'm sure, but at one show, a friend and I commented (within earshot of an operator) about a goods train on a prototype-based layout which, even in a wildest dream, could not have been accurate. It was hauled by an RTR blue Class 20 and consisted entirely of brand new, brightly-coloured PO, long-wheelbased four wheeled wagons. 'Ah, he's a club member and that's what he likes' was the comment. So much for democracy! 

 

Am I a hypocrite? Probably. However, though some of my freight stock is anachronistic, the make-up of the goods trains is based on observation of prototype pictures and consultation of the appropriate WTT. And, everything is weathered.

 

I wonder as well about close-perception/inspection. I have five 'long' goods trains running on LB, ranging in length from 48 to 35 individual wagons. There are further 'shorter' ones, ranging in length from 20 to 30+ wagons, then a couple of short ones (up to 15), and finally the pick-ups - up to 13/14 wagons-long. With the spares floating around (another 25-30 wagons) that does represent quite a few vehicles - not as many as you have, I admit. Since I've built only a small percentage of this total, it's easy for me to cop-out, I know. The ratio is about 75% kit-built to 25% modified proprietary. It'll be the latter category which contains the more mistakes. The question is, do I notice, in a rake of nearly 50 wagons, that the type of brakes on one or two of these aren't quite dead right? Or, that a wheelbase might be 2mm out? I'm not making an excuse, just asking myself questions (which others might ask of themselves). It's clear, given my interest, that if there's an 'error' or two regarding the motive power, it won't be tolerated. That said, some little time ago, two dear friends (2mm modellers of the greatest distinction) came to see LB and run trains. Great fun was had. A long empties was run - once with a modified RTR 2-8-0 and the second time with an old kit-built equivalent. I asked which they thought was the 'better'. 'Oh, the one you built - definitely!' was the response. 'But it's got no brakes' said I. 'I hadn't noticed' was the final comment. 

 

I'll try and do better! 

Hello Tony

 

I think we have established wagons are not your area of expertise over the past few days. Can I make a suggestion, over the next few months if visitors to Little Bytham who are knowledgeable in wagonary were to make a note of which wagons are out of place and time, which are poor representations (RTR and kit), which are in the wrong liveries etc. Then in March you look at the findings of all of those who have visited, where all or most have said wagon xyz is wrong you can then do what you want. Where there are a few or even one person stating wagon qpr is not correct then post on here so we can discuss the pros and cons of the wagon and you can then decide what to do.  I am sure there are quite a few that are suitable with slight modification.

[Craigw]

I'm pleased that (modelling) creativity is the criteria for posting. It's just that I'm a little in awe of some of the other postings and wonder if modernish non-railway models (although for a layout) in N/2mm would be of interest. 

 

Anyway, I hope people enjoy my efforts and find the contribution worthwhile.

 

G.

 

Grahame,

 

I just like to see what i consider good modelling.

 

Yours fits very well into my criteria.

 

Keep posting!

 

Regards.

 

Craig W

[Headstock]

I'm pleased that (modelling) creativity is the criteria for posting. It's just that I'm a little in awe of some of the other postings and wonder if modernish non-railway models (although for a layout) in N/2mm would be of interest. 

 

Anyway, I hope people enjoy my efforts and find the contribution worthwhile.

 

G.

 

I must say that I'm in awe of your architectural and landscape modeling, simply superb. If you keep going you should reach the outer suburbs by 2050.

[Enterprisingwestern]

I think the main problem with regard to incorrect freight stock is just old fashioned ignorance. Ignorance of the prototype and (axiomatically) ignorance of the models.

 

Am I a hypocrite? 

 

Hypocrisy, ignorance, pragmatism, they all come into play in the real world let alone our model world, it just depends what you can live with I suppose, but whilst not wishing to sound too hyper-critical, I would have thought that someone who dislikes wrong style pony wheels, stock without lamps and coaches with the wrong bodyside profile would apply the same standards across the board, baseboard that is!

 

Mike.

[grahame]

Here's a potential discussion subject concerning architectural structure modelling - low relief buildings and, I guess, what does the team think?

 

I'm not a great fan of low relief as they tend to encourage rather repetitive straight and regimented lines of features, such as a backscene board with a row of low relief buildings butted up against it, a road in front of the buildings, a parallel cutting with retaining walls on the other side of the road, a straight railway line in the cutting, and so on. But they are popular on model railway layouts as space savers and can help transitioning from 3D modelling to the 2D backscene. And, of course, with urban modelling they are difficult to avoid including.

 

Consequently I've made quite a few for what will be the back of the layout. I've tried to make sure that the road in front is not dead straight (it isn't in real life) but the building each have a straignt front edge so some are at an angle. Here's a few examples (again none are complete) of my efforts based on real buildings along Tooley Street:

 

Hays Galleria

 

Dominion House

 

Aston Webb House

 

St Olafs House

 

 

G.

 

 

[vulcanbomber]

I must admit I enjoy doing buildings most of all, Unfortunately I've just added my last one to the layout

 

 

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony

 

I think we have established wagons are not your area of expertise over the past few days. Can I make a suggestion, over the next few months if visitors to Little Bytham who are knowledgeable in wagonary were to make a note of which wagons are out of place and time, which are poor representations (RTR and kit), which are in the wrong liveries etc. Then in March you look at the findings of all of those who have visited, where all or most have said wagon xyz is wrong you can then do what you want. Where there are a few or even one person stating wagon qpr is not correct then post on here so we can discuss the pros and cons of the wagon and you can then decide what to do.  I am sure there are quite a few that are suitable with slight modification.

I hope 'quite a few are suitable', Clive, with or without 'slight modification'.

 

Despite wagons not being my area of expertise, I think I've learned a lot over the last few days. Enterprising Western has implied (not inferred) that I don't apply the same standards of modelling across the board. This is probably true, though it's difficult to apply 'uniform' standards across the board where ignorance of what (some of) those standards are is present. And, as I've implied, if some wagons are incorrect (kit-built or modified RTR), I think it's fair for me to abdicate some of that responsibility for 'lower' standards, because much is the work of others. 

 

I must say, your idea has merit, and opening up what runs on LB to 'absolute' scrutiny should certainly expose what's wrong. It's a pity that some of those who pass comment don't open up their own modelling to such scrutiny, but such is the nature of hypocrisy. 

 

Meanwhile, some thought-proving images.........

 

 

 

What a wonderfully-mixed train, at Doncaster in the late-'50s/early-'60s. Note the overhanging load and the 'barrier' wagon. Not also the SR bogie van in the consist. These vans, both bogie and four-wheeled, were ubiquitous in the period LB is modelled.

 

 

These's an ex-SR bogie van in this fitted freight's consist, along with cattle vans at the front. Can anyone see anything wrong with the goods stock here, please? Almost everything in this train is built from kits (not by me). 

 

 

Empty mineral pass Doncaster Station in the early-'60s. Most of these would seem to be more modern steel types. What does the triangle denote on the first wagon, please?

 

 

Because LB is representative of the late-'50s, more wooden-bodied types are included in my longest empty rake. Most of these wagons are modified RTR, with just a few kits (none of my work). Any howlers visible here?  

 

 

The same O4 as in the previous prototype pic, but this time heading south through Donny Station on Up full minerals. Again, most of these wagons would appear to be steel-bodied. 

 

 

For the same reasons already cited, my longest full mineral has more in the way of wooden-bodied wagons in it, some ex-PO. Apart from the diagonal stripe being on the wrong end of the leading Hornby mineral, what's wrong here? This train is almost all built from kits - again none of my work. 

 

 

It must be worth a go at modelling a train like this! Anyone like to identify the wagons, please?

 

 

 

The most-important goods train on LB is the afternoon Scotch Goods. This has been made-up largely by observation of prototype pictures. Again, it's largely not my work, and it's assembled from a 50-50 mix of kits and RTR. You might pick out an old Mopok BR CCT there, though - one of only three vehicles I've made in this train.

 

Naturally, I built all the model locos shown.

 

Comments please.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited December 22, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Steamport Southport]

The yellow triangle was to signify that it was a 24.5 ton rather than a smaller 21 ton mineral wagon. 

 

The 24.5T version was slightly higher which hindered their loading/unloading at some destinations.

 

 

https://www.ltsv.com/w_profile_042.php

 

 

 

 

Jason

[cctransuk]

 

freight 02 63593 on empty minerals.jpg

 

Empty mineral pass Doncaster Station in the early-'60s. Most of these would seem to be more modern steel types. What does the triangle denote on the first wagon, please?

 

It helps to distinguish 24.5T steel mineral wagons from the similar but lower 21T wagons.

 

O4 on Down empties.jpg

 

Because LB is representative of the late-'50s, more wooden-bodied types are included in my longest empty rake. Most of these wagons are modified RTR, with just a few kits (none of my work). Any howlers visible here?  

 

Wagons 10 & 12 appear to be steel general merchandise wagons, rather than mineral wagons.

 

O4 on Up full minerals.jpg

 

For the same reasons already cited, my longest full mineral has more in the way of wooden-bodied wagons in it, some ex-PO. Apart from the diagonal stripe being on the wrong end of the leading Hornby mineral, what's wrong here? This train is almost all built from kits - again none of my work. 

 

I spy a 21T hopper in there - not impossible but unusual.

 

freight 04 60524 on mixed freight.jpg

 

It must be worth a go at modelling a train like this! Anyone like to identify the wagons, please?

 

A pipe or tube open; a 12T general merchandise wagon; a WARWELL converted to a bogie bolster (available RTR in 4mm. scale); anda long raft of single bolster wagons.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Lecorbusier]

As mentioned before I have been having a first attempt at scratch building some wagons ... this one is a 3 plank Midland wagon to diagram 305.

 

 

The body has been made using Plasticard. It has Bill Bedford brake gear and sprung W irons with Gibson Wheels. The brake lever and guard are from 51L. Leaf springs, Grease axle boxes and sole bar details courtesy of Wizard Models as are the Midland wagon Buffers. The draw bar hook assembly is Alan Austin's and I made up the 3 link couplings from 0.4 wire.

 

It's a bit rough and ready in places and as with everything one builds oneself you tend to focus on the mistakes/faults .... but I think when sprayed up, painted and weathered it will be ok. I have weighted it to 40 grams using lead sheet below the floor and it runs nice and smoothly. It was very enjoyable to make.

 

 

[Compound2632]

Very nice. As you're striving for perfection, a niggle: the numberplate was well-nigh universally (and definitely on these Drg 1143 wagons) to the right of the V-iron (or in the corresponding place on the non-brake side) with the load /ticket plate just to the right of the crown plate of the left-hand axleguard, as in the photo of No. 119497.

[cctransuk]

It's a pity that some of those who pass comment don't open up their own modelling to such scrutiny, but such is the nature of hypocrisy.

 

I hope that this comment is not directed at me - I'm sure it isn't as I do occasionally post images of my modelling to RMweb.

 

Nonetheless, here are a few cruel images which demonstrate that, whilst I try to produce reasonably accurate model wagons, they certainly deserve the description 'layout' vehicles. They also indicate that I need to have a mass weathering session!

 

 

 

 

A pair of ex-GWR O30 steel general merchandise open wagons; one retrofitted with vacuum brakes; (Cambrian kits).

 

 

 

A BR 1/645 STURGEON permanent way department wagon; (Cambrian kit).

 

 

 

An ex-LMS 2080 WW2 conversion from a timber-built mineral wagon into a FLATCASE wagon; used for carrying military equipment packed in shipping cases; (probably an ABS kit).

 

 

 

A Cowans Sheldon 6.5T hand crane (Tri-ang RTR) and match wagon (ancient Ian Kirk kit).

 

 

 

 

An ex-LMS 12t merchandise van; (Cambrian kit).

 

 

 

 

An ex-LMS 2000 6W STOVE passenger brake van; (detailed Hornby Dublo body on scratchbuilt chassis).

 

 

 

 

An ex-GWR F23 slip coach; (cut-and-shut from Airfix RTR B-set coaches).

 

That'll do for now - I'll see if I can find any more images of my output after the seasonal celebrations.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

 

 

 

[Rail-Online]

Tony,

 

The Bachmann 'sloping side' steel minerals as seen in at least one of you rakes are not the best models in the world as the joint between the slope and vertical parts is not in the correct place (too high up the sides) - very obvious when you compare them against a Parkside kit built version.

I think I spy a Mainline RTR ex PO coke wagon behind 63585.  If so check the wheelbase - it should be 9ft but Mainline (also early steel underframed Bachmann) stretched them to 10ft to use a standard underframe and made the body fit by more stretching.

 

Cheers Tony

[Headstock]

 freight 01 61170 on mixed goods.jpg

 

What a wonderfully-mixed train, at Doncaster in the late-'50s/early-'60s. Note the overhanging load and the 'barrier' wagon. Not also the SR bogie van in the consist. These vans, both bogie and four-wheeled, were ubiquitous in the period LB is modelled.

 

They are certainly ubiquitous on model railways, I wonder if it is just that they more easily identified in photographs. Has anybody noticed the eight LMS vans in the same photo? A much more common type, yet missing completely or in paltry numbers on many a model railway.

 

 

 

freight 04 60524 on mixed freight.jpg

 

It must be worth a go at modelling a train like this! Anyone like to identify the wagons, please?

 

 

I'll have a punt at Herringbone, what a name. Leading wagon, an ex LNER tube wagon, behind that, an ex LMS or BR 5 plank GM open with morton fitted brake gear and wooden ends. Behind the single bolster wagons, a steel mineral with pressed steel end doors, a raft of other minerals (unidentified), two 'flat wagons' and a SR designed 12 ton van, probably plywood.