Wright writes.....

[Chuffer Davies]

Hi Tony et al,

I just wanted to expand on something Andrew (Headstock) has mentioned because I think several of the contributors to this blog may be interested.  Shipley club's Leicester South (GC) layout doesn't get out much these days as it has already attended most of the shows that are likely to be able to invite it to exhibit.  It will however be our feature layout at the Bradford Industrial Museum when the club takes part in Bradford Museum's Model Mania event over the week starting Tuesday 15th October and finishing on Sunday 20th October.  The layout will be on static display Tuesday through Friday but will then be stocked and operational for the weekend. 

 

This will be the only opportunity until September next year to see this layout (and Andrew's stock) in operation and so you may feel inspired to make the trip.  Entry to the museum is free and the opening times over the weekend are 11:00 AM until 4:00 PM .  The address is:

Moorside Mills,

Moorside Road,

Eccleshill,

Bradford

BD2 3HP

 

I hope we might see and have a chat with some of you there.

 

Frank 

[Clem]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

I was looking at the CWN's for your neck of the woods for the mid 50's. There are some really nice trains, the d 210's were still operating as pairs and there was some really nice 51'11/2''  third class twins, I think steel, running in pairs with a CL in the middle. Also some variations on three sets and I think a long distance gangway set. I just need to untangle the workings and I should be able to provide some pointers and options.

Any information on passenger sets would be most gratefully accepted, Andrew. Here's one or two of photographic examples which absolutely back up your info:

First - an A5 with a pair of steel panelled D310s at Basford North with a D210 in the siding to the right.

 

A J6 on a pair of D210s 'back to back' on Bennerley Viaduct near Ilkeston. Not sure what the end vehicle is?

An L1 at Hempshill with a very interesting Gresley combination of what I think is a Diagram 294 steel panelled BT (4), a D50 CL and a D210 at the back. And finally at Sutton-in-Ashfield on the GN Leen Valley line, a Diagram 210 with a Gresley BT (5) on the very short lived Nottingham-Victoria-Sutton service revived for a few months only in 1956.

 

I'm not sure of photographers of these but usual copyright rules apply. The 5.06pm Grantham-Derby service was an interesting one as it had through carriages from Kings Cross added to the usual non-gangwayed set. It was a Grantham turn.

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Clem said:

Any information on passenger sets would be most gratefully accepted, Andrew. Here's one or two of photographic examples which absolutely back up your info:

First - an A5 with a pair of steel panelled D310s at Basford North with a D210 in the siding to the right.

 

A J6 on a pair of D210s 'back to back' on Bennerley Viaduct near Ilkeston. Not sure what the end vehicle is?

An L1 at Hempshill with a very interesting Gresley combination of what I think is a Diagram 294 steel panelled BT (4), a D50 CL and a D210 at the back. And finally at Sutton-in-Ashfield on the GN Leen Valley line, a Diagram 210 with a Gresley BT (5) on the very short lived Nottingham-Victoria-Sutton service revived for a few months only in 1956.

 

I'm not sure of photographers of these but usual copyright rules apply. The 5.06pm Grantham-Derby service was an interesting one as it had through carriages from Kings Cross added to the usual non-gangwayed set. It was a Grantham turn.

 

Afternoon Clem,

 

one slight note of caution, I'm looking at the 1954/55 CWN's sept-June. You are looking at a selection of photographs and information spanning a much larger timescale. In particular, one image before and three images after the break up of the articulated sets. For example, the L1's didn't come to your neck of the woods until the later 50's. The 5.06 pm off Grantham is not in the 1955 WT, possibly because the service ran at a different time. There is also no through carriage, if the running of this was from a later time period, it may be the rump of what was an complete through train in earlier years. If it is from an earlier period, it may have been discontinued later on. All things to check up on.

 

There are plenty examples of van traffic though, for instance, the 4.08 pm Grantham to Derby BT-CL, T (10) ex GC, CL-BT, conveyed 2 x BG (SX) 1X BZ (SX)  and 1 x vanfit (SX), attached Grantham, all detached at Nottingham Victoria. They seem to have been rostered to regular back and forth workings between Nottingham and Peteborough North.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Headstock
add f

[Willie Whizz]

On 24/09/2019 at 20:14, Headstock said:

 

Re BT 7, The roof is being constructed the old fashioned way, a plasticard skeleton of braced formers based on the end profile that will then be skinned. It may be of some interest to you that circa 1954/55 (and before),  there were three, three sets working the 4.05 PM Nottingham-Grantham and the 6.10 PM return on alternate days. The sets were formatted as BT(4) Thompson / CL (3-4) Thompson / BT (7) ex 60' GC.

 

Lovely stuff, Andrew, but can I ask where the photo of the J11 in your earlier post was taken please, if you know?  It doesn't immediately remind me of the Nottingham-Grantham line as above, but it does rather remind me of Kirkby South Junction, where the Mansfield Railway met the GC main line.

[Clem]

48 minutes ago, Headstock said:

one slight note of caution, I'm looking at the 1954/55 CWN's sept-June. You are looking at a selection of photographs and information spanning a much larger timescale. In particular, one image before and three images after the break up of the articulated sets. For example, the L1's didn't come to your neck of the woods until the later 50's. The 5.06 pm off Grantham is not in the 1955 WT, possibly because the service ran at a different time. There is also no through carriage, if the running of this was from a later time period, it may be the rump of what was an complete through train in earlier years. If it is from an earlier period, it may have been discontinued later on. All things to check up on.

Hi Andrew - my fault remembering things incorrectly off the top of my head as usual. It was the 5-35pm Grantham-Derby and here's a picture of it in 1957.  Sorry about the quality. Grantham's 64178 at the head.

The L1s first arrived at Colwick in 1955 but you're correct that the picture above dated from a little later in 1957. To be fair, I do stretch the era of my layout a bit. Although based on 1955, I do allow some stuff on the layout slightly outside, from 1953-56.

 

[Clem]

1 hour ago, Willie Whizz said:

Lovely stuff, Andrew, but can I ask where the photo of the J11 in your earlier post was taken please, if you know?  It doesn't immediately remind me of the Nottingham-Grantham line as above, but it does rather remind me of Kirkby South Junction, where the Mansfield Railway met the GC main line.

Yes, I'm  sure it's approaching Kirkby South Junction from the North on the GC main line.

[Headstock]

2 hours ago, Willie Whizz said:

 

Lovely stuff, Andrew, but can I ask where the photo of the J11 in your earlier post was taken please, if you know?  It doesn't immediately remind me of the Nottingham-Grantham line as above, but it does rather remind me of Kirkby South Junction, where the Mansfield Railway met the GC main line.

 

Evening Willie,

 

I think your right. I was looking for the original, It has the information but I can't find it at the mo. There was some interchangeability between the sets working the GC and GN lines. The photo of one of these sets equipped with an ex GC carriage it is relevant to both lines.

 

2 hours ago, Clem said:

Hi Andrew - my fault remembering things incorrectly off the top of my head as usual. It was the 5-35pm Grantham-Derby and here's a picture of it in 1957.  Sorry about the quality. Grantham's 64178 at the head.

The L1s first arrived at Colwick in 1955 but you're correct that the picture above dated from a little later in 1957. To be fair, I do stretch the era of my layout a bit. Although based on 1955, I do allow some stuff on the layout slightly outside, from 1953-56.

 

 

I thought it was later than that for L1's, at least working on the GC lines around Nottingham Leicester. It's way out of my time period so I am probably wrong.

 

Not much of interest in what was the 5.30 pm off Grantham in 1955, T (8) / CL (3-4) / BT (4), no through carriages. It did attach a loco stores (6 wheel BZ) van in the early morning at Nottingham Victoria. The van was ex Gorton works, due to travel via Sheffield, Nottingham, Grantham and finally Doncaster. There are lots of strengtheners (one, two or three thirds) being added to Derby bound trains at Grantham on Saturdays but so far no through carriages. Robert Carol may be able to help with  the 1957 Western division CWN's, they may provide more info, after that it would be Midland region CWN's I assume. Of course it could just be a dodgy capton, such things are not exactly rare in railway land.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Headstock
add space

[Headstock]

2 hours ago, Clem said:

Hi Andrew - my fault remembering things incorrectly off the top of my head as usual. It was the 5-35pm Grantham-Derby and here's a picture of it in 1957.  Sorry about the quality. Grantham's 64178 at the head.

The L1s first arrived at Colwick in 1955 but you're correct that the picture above dated from a little later in 1957. To be fair, I do stretch the era of my layout a bit. Although based on 1955, I do allow some stuff on the layout slightly outside, from 1953-56.

 

 

Have you tried working out the formation? it looks like a MK1 non gangway carriage, two CL's ?, a brake, a big van and three Gresley gangway carriages.

[Tony Wright]

With all the mentioning of Gresleys, I thought I'd take a few pictures of some of the many which are at work on LB.

 

Unless otherwise stated, these are all my work..............

 

 

An old Kirk BG which someone else had started by just making the body. 

 

 

An MJT/Hornby conversion for a BTK and a ROCOM ex-GE line 'shorty' TO. 

 

A Comet BTK built by John Houlden, a Comet CK built by Tony Geary and a Tourist Buffet (painted by Geoff Haynes). 

 

 

A pair of end-door TKs built from Comet kits by Tony Geary.

 

 

A further pair of end-door TKs, one a Kemilway/Hornby conversion and the other Kirk. 

 

 

A Comet RF built by Tony Geary.

 

 

An MJT/Hornby TO

 

 

And an MJT/Hornby RF and an MJT/Hornby RTO.

 

And finally, a Comet triplet set.

 

I offer these as nothing more than 'layout coaches'; made to work, often (in the past) under exhibition conditions, where the odd bump and scrape are inevitable. 

 

There are many more, none of which is original Hornby gangwayed Gresleys. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by Tony Wright

[micklner]

MJT sides on a Hornby base. Messy job to do the chassis narrowing.

 

[Clem]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

Have you tried working out the formation? it looks like a MK1 non gangway carriage, two CL's ?, a brake, a big van and three Gresley gangway carriages.

I agree with that. Two of the gangwayed Gresleys seem to be in maroon - too late to be teak I think. They are seconds and composites, probably two of one and one of the other. The van is intriguing. Without a clearer photo it's hard to identify it. the rear non-gangwayed brake appears to be a Thompson possibly a D340.

 

26 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

With all the mentioning of Gresleys, I thought I'd take a few pictures of some of the many which are at work on LB.

Hi Tony. Sorry for taking over the thread a bit today. I've learnt a bit though. I can't disagree with Andy (TGH) that until you can stock up your layout with accurate stock, you have to compromise with some RTR to pad out working trains . I call them place-holders. As well as stock, they also come in the shape of buildings with a number of card kits and even a Hornby Dublo double arm signal whilst I build the lattice posted double arm that will go in its place.

 

I'm never anything but amazed at how quickly you seem to work and how little you rely on this concept of place holding bearing in mind the massive volume of locos and stock running on LB. Also today I've been left in awe of Andrew's work and finishing on the Diagram 210 in teak (my favourite passenger vehicles).

 

Just to round it up, here is a Hornby TK (D115) that I modified by filing the tumblehome shape in at the ends, removing the middle lower beading and replacing it with micro strip. It's just a shame that I found out later that the window/panelling layout was incorrect - not by much but nevertheless wrong. I'm still running it. 

 

[Tony Wright]

4 minutes ago, Clem said:

I agree with that. Two of the gangwayed Gresleys seem to be in maroon - too late to be teak I think. They are seconds and composites, probably two of one and one of the other. The van is intriguing. Without a clearer photo it's hard to identify it. the rear non-gangwayed brake appears to be a Thompson possibly a D340.

 

Hi Tony. Sorry for taking over the thread a bit today. I've learnt a bit though. I can't disagree with Andy (TGH) that until you can stock up your layout with accurate stock, you have to compromise with some RTR to pad out working trains . I call them place-holders. As well as stock, they also come in the shape of buildings with a number of card kits and even a Hornby Dublo double arm signal whilst I build the lattice posted double arm that will go in its place.

 

I'm never anything but amazed at how quickly you seem to work and how little you rely on this concept of place holding bearing in mind the massive volume of locos and stock running on LB. Also today I've been left in awe of Andrew's work and finishing on the Diagram 210 in teak (my favourite passenger vehicles).

 

Just to round it up, here is a Hornby TK (D115) that I modified by filing the tumblehome shape in at the ends, removing the middle lower beading and replacing it with micro strip. It's just a shame that I found out later that the window/panelling layout was incorrect - not by much but nevertheless wrong. I'm still running it. 

 

An interesting 'place-holder', Clem.

 

It does look more convincing. However (as always an 'however'), even with the correct position of the horizontal (middle) beading,  I think there should be a bit more cream below the central beading. It's more evident on Tony's cars than on John's in the pictures I posted earlier. Though there's more of a pronounced tumbleholme at the nearer end, the doors are still 'flat'. Still, I think this is a bit more than just a 'place-holder', and I'm sure it'll stimulate others to improve their own Hornby gangwayed Gresleys. 

 

'I'm never anything but amazed at how quickly you seem to work and how little you rely on this concept of place holding bearing in mind the massive volume of locos and stock running on LB.'

 

In response to the above (very flattering) comment, it must be remembered that I always work in a like-minded group, and I've been building stuff for (eventually) LB for over 40 years!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

With all the mentioning of Gresleys, I thought I'd take a few pictures of some of the many which are at work on LB.

 

Unless otherwise stated, these are all my work..............

 

 

An old Kirk BG which someone else had started by just making the body. 

 

 

An MJT/Hornby conversion for a BTK and a ROCOM ex-GE line 'shorty' TO. 

 

A Comet BTK built by John Houlden, a Comet CK built by Tony Geary and a Tourist Buffet (painted by Geoff Haynes). 

 

 

A pair of end-door TKs built from Comet kits by Tony Geary.

 

 

A further pair of end-door TKs, one a Kemilway/Hornby conversion and the other Kirk. 

 

 

A Comet RF built by Tony Geary.

 

 

An MJT/Hornby TO

 

 

And an MJT/Hornby RF and an MJT/Hornby RTO.

 

And finally, a Comet triplet set.

 

I offer these as nothing more than 'layout coaches'; made to work, often (in the past) under exhibition conditions, where the odd bump and scrape are inevitable. 

 

There are many more, none of which is original Hornby gangwayed Gresleys. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Evening Tony,

 

it's a shame that LB isn't capable of being exhibited, it's still miles ahead by a large margin.

[Headstock]

30 minutes ago, Clem said:

I agree with that. Two of the gangwayed Gresleys seem to be in maroon - too late to be teak I think. They are seconds and composites, probably two of one and one of the other. The van is intriguing. Without a clearer photo it's hard to identify it. the rear non-gangwayed brake appears to be a Thompson possibly a D340.

 

Hi Tony. Sorry for taking over the thread a bit today. I've learnt a bit though. I can't disagree with Andy (TGH) that until you can stock up your layout with accurate stock, you have to compromise with some RTR to pad out working trains . I call them place-holders. As well as stock, they also come in the shape of buildings with a number of card kits and even a Hornby Dublo double arm signal whilst I build the lattice posted double arm that will go in its place.

 

I'm never anything but amazed at how quickly you seem to work and how little you rely on this concept of place holding bearing in mind the massive volume of locos and stock running on LB. Also today I've been left in awe of Andrew's work and finishing on the Diagram 210 in teak (my favourite passenger vehicles).

 

Just to round it up, here is a Hornby TK (D115) that I modified by filing the tumblehome shape in at the ends, removing the middle lower beading and replacing it with micro strip. It's just a shame that I found out later that the window/panelling layout was incorrect - not by much but nevertheless wrong. I'm still running it. 

 

 

Evening Clem,

 

you know that I'm a dullard when it comes to Gresleys, what's the window thing.

 

I have a slight suspicions about what your train is, I would like to no more about the through carriages and were the information about them came from. I think that a friend of mine may have a 57 CWN, I will be working all day tomorrow but I may speak to him tomorrow night. If I'm right, I may know exactly what that van is.

 

That is also a rather atractive bit of point work.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Headstock
space

[Clem]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

I have a slight suspicions about what your train is, I would like to no more about the through carriages and were the information about them came from. I think that a friend of mine may have a 57 CWN, I will be working all day tomorrow but I may speak to him tomorrow night. If I'm right, I may know exactly what that van is.

 

That is also a rather atractive bit of point work.

Hi Andrew, that  sounds intriguing. Looking forward to hearing more about the van. 

 

The location is 'The Hall' siding. It's where the horses for the racecourse were unloaded (on the far side where, behind the train, there is a platform. On this side, I assume it is a lay-by presumably used for race specials stock. The Racecourse station (for passengers) is about half-a-mile behind the photographer who was P. J. Lynch (just looked it up). The date of the photo was June 16th 1957.

[Clem]

7 hours ago, Clem said:

Hi Andrew, that  sounds intriguing. Looking forward to hearing more about the van. 

 

A thought that occurred to me regarding the van in the middle of the train: Milk was taken every morning from stations West of Derby to London Kings Cross from the 1880s and I'm not sure sure exactly when it stopped although once source has suggested through working stopped in the late 1940s. I know there was still continuing milk traffic into the 50s (see below). If the source has it wrong, I'm wondering if this van was a returning empty from King's Cross.  So a couple of photos showing firstly the afternoon Derby-Uttoxeter milk pulling away from Derby with a single van as late as 1959 and a  photo taken at Breadsall of the 9-10am Derby to Nottingham train on March 11th 1950 with a very interesting formation of stock. So here I'm wondering about the leading van (Diagram 120?). Note also a Diagram 312 Gresley steel panelled twin behind the van is interesting. The engine is a Grantham engine so the train may very well go on to form the next Grantham train. I may very well be barking up the wrong tree with all this but I'm looking forward to hearing what Andrew (Headstock) has managed to find out. (Both photos from Mark Higgingson's book on 'The Friargate Line').

 

 

 

[Headstock]

11 minutes ago, Clem said:

 

A thought that occurred to me regarding the van in the middle of the train: Milk was taken every morning from stations West of Derby to London Kings Cross from the 1880s and I'm not sure sure exactly when it stopped although once source has suggested through working stopped in the late 1940s. I know there was still continuing milk traffic into the 50s (see below). If the source has it wrong, I'm wondering if this van was a returning empty from King's Cross.  So a couple of photos showing firstly the afternoon Derby-Uttoxeter milk pulling away from Derby with a single van as late as 1959 and a  photo taken at Breadsall of the 9-10am Derby to Nottingham train on March 11th 1950 with a very interesting formation of stock. So here I'm wondering about the leading van (Diagram 120?). Note also a Diagram 312 Gresley steel panelled twin behind the van is interesting. The engine is a Grantham engine so the train may very well go on to form the next Grantham train. I may very well be barking up the wrong tree with all this but I'm looking forward to hearing what Andrew (Headstock) has managed to find out. (Both photos from Mark Higgingson's book on 'The Friargate Line').

 

 

 

 

Morning Clem,

 

I don't have time to answer all.

you should really be exhibiting this line as well, the passenger traffic is amazingly interesting. Or at least shoot more videos in you railway room/shed.  One thing is for sure, you are going to need a hole bunch of BZ's.

 
I've had more time to look at the CWN, I found the through carriages from KX in 1955. It confirms what I thought, they are running as their own train all the way. Only three carriages TK (8) MK1, CK (3-3) Thompson. BTK (4) Gresley comp door. BG attached Grantham, detach Derby and BZ attached Grantham, detach Nottingham. Departure from Grantham is at 11.02 am. It's more than likely that your photo shows a later change to this working. The van in your photo is definatly a 30 odd footer, probably a BZ.

 

There are two articulated sets (steel) running with BY's permanently attached as part of the formation! Amazing, I don't think that I've ever seen that on ordinary passenger trains before. It's the equivalent of the Elizabethan with it's dedicated BG's. Why was all the extra van capacity needed on every trip? Sets were combined at Grantham on some workings in a way that could also put a van in the middle of a train and you also had strengtheners added to trains that had add extra carriages outside a van.

 

A link to a nice shot of BZ's lined up at Nottingham Victoria, extream right is an ex GER 6 wheeler, now running as a stores van, I've modeled that one.

 

http://www.railuk.info/gallery/steam/br_lner/61156.jpg

 

 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Headstock
add link

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Tony,

 

it's a shame that LB isn't capable of being exhibited, it's still miles ahead by a large margin.

Good morning Andrew,

 

Right from the start of building (in 2008), it was decided that LB would not be an exhibition layout; for a variety of reasons...................

 

1. Though built in the main my members of WMRC, it's 100 miles away from Wolverhampton, which would have made dismantling (here) before a show and re-erecting (here) after a show extremely difficult.

 

2. And perhaps, more-important than 1., the team which built LB is essentially the same one which built Leighford, Stoke Summit and Charwelton (I can see parallels here with Evercreech, Tebay and Leicester South). That gives a mass of experience, of course, but it comes with the caveat of us all getting older. Probably none of the team is now capable of exhibiting 30'+ layouts. Several members are on 'older-age' medication because of conditions inherent with 'getting on', and various 'replacement' bits have had to be installed! I have no wish to be 'ageist' in this, but merely stating facts. 

 

3. The complexity of having (essentially) one big and one small trainset in one footprint would have meant a very awkward arrangement of boards to join together. Fine as a 'one-off' (which we've done), but not something to be taken apart/put back together with ease and speed. At my demise, it'll all come apart, but I'll not be caring a jot! 

 

4. It would take a team of at least ten operators to work at a show - five on/five off - Up driver, Down driver (with four main lines, quite hectic!), signalman (er), fiddle yard operator and M&GNR operator (actually better with two); meaning it would be too expensive to invite. 

 

'it's still miles ahead by a large margin.'

 

Miles ahead of what may I ask, please?

 

It satisfies my needs as being prototype-based, within a whisker (on the GN) of being dead-scale (or as near dead-scale) as OO will allow, is the product of teamwork and works exceptionally well. Does this put LB 'miles ahead'? I doubt it, compared to some fantastic layouts (in all scales/gauges) I've had the privilege of photographing. 

 

Actually, in some ways Little Bytham is an exhibition layout. A glance at my visitors' book (which only needs filling-in on a first visit) reveals hundreds of folk who've come to see it. The number of names could be trebled if visitors signed the book every time they came! It is indeed a privilege to have so many guests come to see LB.  

 

 

I've been most-interested in the recent comments/pictures by you and Clem (and others) regarding train formations/CWNs. Most of the trains on LB have been arrived at by consulting the relevant CWNs. However, in my view they represent an 'ideal'. On consulting hundreds of pictures, I've now come to the conclusion that making-up trains, as far as possible, should be done from prototype photographs. For instance, the other day I was round at Gilbert Barnatt's delivering some carriages to run on Peterborough North. We looked at a fantastic picture of the Down 'Flying Scotsman', taken in the summer of 1958, about to come under Crescent Bridge. From the elevated position, the whole 13-car consist was clear. It included a full BR Mk.1 Kitchen Car, and, right at the end, a Thompson BG. According to the relevant CWN, neither of these things should be present! In fact, in the WTT it was made clear that a BG was not to be included! Just to add more spice, one of the Mk.1 cars was still in carmine/cream. By 1958, no CC cars would have been in the FS at source. 

 

Isn't research wonderful?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

  

[Clem]

52 minutes ago, Headstock said:

Morning Clem,

 

I don't have time to answer all.

you should really be exhibiting this line as well, the passenger traffic is amazingly interesting. Or at least shoot more videos in you railway room/shed.  One thing is for sure, you are going to need a hole bunch of BZ's.

 
I've had more time to look at the CWN, I found the through carriages from KX in 1955. It confirms what I thought, they are running as their own train all the way. Only three carriages TK (8) MK1, CK (3-3) Thompson. BTK (4) Gresley comp door. BG attached Grantham, detach Derby and BZ attached Grantham, detach Nottingham. Departure from Grantham is at 11.02 am. It's more than likely that your photo shows a later change to this working. The van in your photo is definatly a 30 odd footer, probably a BZ.

 

There are two articulated sets (steel) running with BY's permanently attached as part of the formation! Amazing, I don't think that I've ever seen that on ordinary passenger trains before. It's the equivalent of the Elizabethan with it's dedicated BG's. Why was all the extra van capacity needed on every trip? Sets were combined at Grantham on some workings in a way that could also put a van in the middle of a train and you also had strengtheners added to trains that had add extra carriages outside a van.

 

A link to a nice shot of BZ's lined up at Nottingham Victoria, extream right is an ex GER 6 wheeler, now running as a stores van, I've modeled that one.

 

http://www.railuk.info/gallery/steam/br_lner/61156.jpg

Morning Andrew. Hmm... that's a lot to take in. The amount of work involved in getting the required variety the line demands is a bit scary as I'm a lone modeller and not the fastest of workers. However, on the positive side... what an opportunity to have such an interesting line to model. Of course, I'll have to compromise whilst working towards a better reflection of how the line should be. I have 2 BZ kits in to build (one will be started pretty soon) so far but it and a couple of BGs but it sounds like I'm going to need more and source a Gresley BY or two also if possible. Some scratch building will be required as well if that variety is to be met. It does reflect my memory of the line whereby many passenger trains seemed to be supplemented by vans of one sort or another. 

 

However, I do also need to get down to building buildings. I'm half way through a signal box which needs to be finished and all the buildings on 'West' end of the layout need doing along with station entrance and scenery..... Plenty to do this Winter, then.....

[Lecorbusier]

8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Actually, in some ways Little Bytham is an exhibition layout. A glance at my visitors' book (which only needs filling-in on a first visit) reveals hundreds of folk who've come to see it. The number of names could be trebled if visitors signed the book every time they came! It is indeed a privilege to have so many guests come to see LB.  

 

I suspect that those visiting might return the compliment .... I know I have been invited and hope to make the visit one day.

 

Seeing models at a show is fantastic, and due to time and distances that is often the only option ... but the opportunity to spend real focused time with a good layout - I would suggest that takes things to another level.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Lecorbusier

[jacko]

1 hour ago, Lecorbusier said:

I suspect that those visiting might return the complement .... I know I have been invited and hope to make the visit one day.

 

Same here. Twice now at the Glasgow show Tony has very graciously invited what amounts to a total stranger to visit and help operate the layout.  Someday I will make that journey because it's one of the few layouts I really want to see in the flesh.

 

Graeme

[Headstock]

10 hours ago, Clem said:

Morning Andrew. Hmm... that's a lot to take in. The amount of work involved in getting the required variety the line demands is a bit scary as I'm a lone modeller and not the fastest of workers. However, on the positive side... what an opportunity to have such an interesting line to model. Of course, I'll have to compromise whilst working towards a better reflection of how the line should be. I have 2 BZ kits in to build (one will be started pretty soon) so far but it and a couple of BGs but it sounds like I'm going to need more and source a Gresley BY or two also if possible. Some scratch building will be required as well if that variety is to be met. It does reflect my memory of the line whereby many passenger trains seemed to be supplemented by vans of one sort or another. 

 

However, I do also need to get down to building buildings. I'm half way through a signal box which needs to be finished and all the buildings on 'West' end of the layout need doing along with station entrance and scenery..... Plenty to do this Winter, then.....

 

Evening Clem,

 

don't panic, you don't have to build every train. Sixteen passenger trains in each direction would be slight overkill I think.  Don't forget, some are identical sets and many completed two round trips in a day.

[Headstock]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Andrew,

 

Right from the start of building (in 2008), it was decided that LB would not be an exhibition layout; for a variety of reasons...................

 

1. Though built in the main my members of WMRC, it's 100 miles away from Wolverhampton, which would have made dismantling (here) before a show and re-erecting (here) after a show extremely difficult.

 

2. And perhaps, more-important than 1., the team which built LB is essentially the same one which built Leighford, Stoke Summit and Charwelton (I can see parallels here with Evercreech, Tebay and Leicester South). That gives a mass of experience, of course, but it comes with the caveat of us all getting older. Probably none of the team is now capable of exhibiting 30'+ layouts. Several members are on 'older-age' medication because of conditions inherent with 'getting on', and various 'replacement' bits have had to be installed! I have no wish to be 'ageist' in this, but merely stating facts. 

 

3. The complexity of having (essentially) one big and one small trainset in one footprint would have meant a very awkward arrangement of boards to join together. Fine as a 'one-off' (which we've done), but not something to be taken apart/put back together with ease and speed. At my demise, it'll all come apart, but I'll not be caring a jot! 

 

4. It would take a team of at least ten operators to work at a show - five on/five off - Up driver, Down driver (with four main lines, quite hectic!), signalman (er), fiddle yard operator and M&GNR operator (actually better with two); meaning it would be too expensive to invite. 

 

'it's still miles ahead by a large margin.'

 

Miles ahead of what may I ask, please?

 

It satisfies my needs as being prototype-based, within a whisker (on the GN) of being dead-scale (or as near dead-scale) as OO will allow, is the product of teamwork and works exceptionally well. Does this put LB 'miles ahead'? I doubt it, compared to some fantastic layouts (in all scales/gauges) I've had the privilege of photographing. 

 

Actually, in some ways Little Bytham is an exhibition layout. A glance at my visitors' book (which only needs filling-in on a first visit) reveals hundreds of folk who've come to see it. The number of names could be trebled if visitors signed the book every time they came! It is indeed a privilege to have so many guests come to see LB.  

 

 

I've been most-interested in the recent comments/pictures by you and Clem (and others) regarding train formations/CWNs. Most of the trains on LB have been arrived at by consulting the relevant CWNs. However, in my view they represent an 'ideal'. On consulting hundreds of pictures, I've now come to the conclusion that making-up trains, as far as possible, should be done from prototype photographs. For instance, the other day I was round at Gilbert Barnatt's delivering some carriages to run on Peterborough North. We looked at a fantastic picture of the Down 'Flying Scotsman', taken in the summer of 1958, about to come under Crescent Bridge. From the elevated position, the whole 13-car consist was clear. It included a full BR Mk.1 Kitchen Car, and, right at the end, a Thompson BG. According to the relevant CWN, neither of these things should be present! In fact, in the WTT it was made clear that a BG was not to be included! Just to add more spice, one of the Mk.1 cars was still in carmine/cream. By 1958, no CC cars would have been in the FS at source. 

 

Isn't research wonderful?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

  

 

Evening Tony,

I do realize that it was never the intention to exhibit LB in the traditional manor but it is built to a standard that is in the tradition of other layouts that you have been involved in in the past. Exibition standard?

With regard to  miles ahead........  LB is a 'cast of thousands' layout, were by all the stars, the heroes and the villains are present in a manor that you would expect if you were stood by the lineside back in the day, as such it transports you as well as any time machine. That is an incredibly rare thing these days, as layouts are increasingly built around what is available and the same much smaller cast of characters is doing the rounds. You and your friends layouts were ahead of the game back in the day, LB remains so, in fact the 'competition is becoming less and less for that type of layout.

 

A word on CWN's, yes they were an ideal. However the East coast main line in the late fifties were notoriously bad at following the marshalling instructions. Prior to fifty five they were pretty good. The London extension and Western division generally, with a smaller and more standardized carriage pool, were superb at matching the formations to the CWN's. It's part of the reason that modeling the London extension is such a joy, all the trains have become like friends and I can quite often tell what they are from a single photo*. An important point, incase someone reads your comments and thinks that they may be applicable to all areas and eras of BR or even the Eastern region.

 

not aplicable to the later fifties into the sixties, when everything whent to hell in a handcart.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

Having promised to provide a list of the ex-Gamston stock, I'm afraid there's now no need. It's all gone! 

 

I wasn't sure until today how much would be left, but it's all sold - for a fair price, meaning a generous donation to CRUK.

 

I'm sorry if this disappoints some potential buyers, but a few friends had first refusal. And they didn't refuse! 

[mullie]

Can anyone help with the following question please?

 

I want to add point rodding to my EM test plank but as the track work is PCB sleeper based, if I want to use MSE parts which I would always be inclined to do, how can I avoid a short with any wire under the track? Is there something I can coat the wire with or could I use plastic rod instead and if so which size and where do I get it from.

 

Why add point rodding to such a small layout - because I can!

 

Any advice gratefully received. There is no plastic based track on the layout.

 

Martyn