Wright writes.....

[Michael Edge]

If you have any detail close up photos of the bridge that side on picture and basic dimensions are easily enough information to draw it with.

[jamie92208]

Have you tried the Network Rail plan office in York regarding copies of the original bridge? Nowadays they tend to be a lot more helpful than in previous years. BUT never turn up in person. You are unlikely to get in and will be unwelcome.

 

 

Hi Jamie

 

On page 46 of Nigel Digby's book "A Guide to the Midland and Great Northern Joint Railway" there is a photo of bridge 43 of a similar view to the one Apollo gave the link to and the text states the bridge had a span of 97ft 6 ins. The bridge was the property of the Midland Railway so any search at the NRM might be more fruitful if done under the MR Bridge 43 on the Saxby Junction to Bourne line not the M&GNJR. 

That's very useful as we measured it at 390mm yesterday so that's exact.  The scan of the plan shows ?7' 6" with the first figure unreadable.  I had guessed at 87'6" and was starting to work out a fiddle factor.  Now I have been saved that job.

 

If you have any detail close up photos of the bridge that side on picture and basic dimensions are easily enough information to draw it with.

Thanks Mike.  It's detail/close up shots that I'm really after.  I'm getting info of the scans that Tony's provided and a lot of the design is very similar to parts of greyhound bridge at Lancaster so I'm gradually getting my head around what are H girders and which at T or L girders or even just plates.  Then as you say with one or two known dimensions I can work the rest out.

 

Thanks again everyone.

 

Jamie

[copleyhill007]

Network Rail hold a vast number of plans.

Try https://nr.mediastorehouse.com

[jamie92208]

Network Rail hold a vast number of plans.

Try https://nr.mediastorehouse.com

 

I've just done a search of the site and come up with a blank.   the actual plan that was scanned is labelled MR Saxby & Bourn Line and was signed off by the EOSD which was the Engineers Office Thanks

 

Jamie

[Clive Mortimore]

Hello Tony

 

I have a question regarding the Midland signal box on Little Bytham. It is painted in LMR maroon and cream. Would it have been repainted in BR days into ER green and cream?

 

I ask this because the ex Midland boxes around Sheffield were after the regional boundary changes, and the MR boxes on the NER were daubed in their sky blue and ivory scheme. Where was the regional boundary on the MR line to Bourne?

[Denbridge]

I've just done a search of the site and come up with a blank.   the actual plan that was scanned is labelled MR Saxby & Bourn Line and was signed off by the EOSD which was the Engineers Office Thanks

 

Jamie

the website only has a selection of the total plan index. It would be worth dropping them a line.

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony

 

I have a question regarding the Midland signal box on Little Bytham. It is painted in LMR maroon and cream. Would it have been repainted in BR days into ER green and cream?

 

I ask this because the ex Midland boxes around Sheffield were after the regional boundary changes, and the MR boxes on the NER were daubed in their sky blue and ivory scheme. Where was the regional boundary on the MR line to Bourne?

Good question Clive,

 

As far as we know, the ex-MR 'box at Little Bytham was painted in maroon/cream in BR days. We have no colour pictures of it (do any exist?), and it was burnt down in the hot summer of 1959 (after it was closed) because of local youths mucking about with matches. Certainly, Saxby Junction (where the line begins/ends westwards) was always Midland Region, and (as far as we know) all the 'boxes/stations between that and Little Bytham were painted in MR colours. All the installations were ex-MR as well (the line was built in 1897). Bourne (the next station to the east) was always ER. The 'boxes and signalling were all ex-GNR, whereas from LB westwards, all was ex-MR. It could well be that LB represented the boundary between the ER and MR in BR days, as it represented the boundary between the MR and the M&GNR in pre-Grouping days. The whole lot was closed before the general boundary changes occurred, anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

Even with some ER locos passing, red/cream suits it best.

 

 

Tony Gee is completing the MR signals right now. 

 

 

Airfix signal box anyone? 

 

 

As an aside, what's interesting about the girder bridge is that the original drawing shows it spanning just two lines of the GN main line. It was obviously built wide enough to accommodate four tracks, which occurred in 1911. 

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by Tony Wright

[jamie92208]

As to the four tracking one of the photos that has been referred to above actually shows it with just the two tracks but with the trackbed widened for the other two to be installed. It would be interesting to know when the act of parliament for the four tracking was passed.  Obviously it would have been in the planning stage for some time and the MR and GNR would obviously have communicated thus they forward planned and had the new bridge built with clearance for 4 tracks.

 

Jamie

[Atso]

Those are some wonderful pictures of the M&GN section of Little Bytham Tony. We didn't have enough manpower to operate that section of the layout on our visit but I do very much hope to see it operating one day.

 

I've been playing with the track plan for Hadley Wood and have taken inspiration from your layout by providing kickback sidings to accommodate twenty trains (plus storage for random locos and stock), making the most use of the sixteen inches of width available (the layout will be twelve foot by three foot). In order to remove the need to reverse trains around the curves, a couple of the lines will be used to perform this operation and not be used for storage. I've provide a turntable (as I have one!) to allow hands off turning and replacement of locos to add some variety during the (yet to be decided) sequence. I've noticed that the LNER society has a WWT for the GNR section between Kings Cross and Doncaster for part of 1937 so I'll be joining on the 1st July (to get a full years membership) to purchase this.

 

My initial thoughts on the track plan; to the left is heading south to New Barnet and the right is north to Potters Bar. The 'Railway Tavern' (that failed to ever get a license and was apparently a private dwelling by the period modelled) the the first of the houses have been moved forward a bit so that I can include them bu otherwise the layout will be to scale.

 

 

To anyone who may be able to help, I have a question about ground signals. Photographs of the goods yard appear to be non-existence, although the head shunt appears quite often as it runs parallel with the down main. There is a gate across the line more or less in line with the signal box at the end of the down platform. Would there have been ground signals or would movements have been visually/verbally controlled by the signal operator (I would say signalman but apparently the box was treated as a ground frame from the mid 30s with Greenwood locking it out when not in use). If ground signals would have been present, where would their most likely placement have been? I've found no photographs that indicate the presence of ground signals at all.

 

Sorry for the off topic post.

Edited May 4, 2018 by Atso

[Jack P]

What a lovely finish you have achieved on those two Jack! Very nice!

 

That is very high praise from you tom, much appreciated. Your work is very inspirational! 

 

No need to apologise, Jack,

 

The shade of green is very attractive.

 

As are the two models. You should be very pleased at having achieved such a natural finish. What's most important is that you've done all this yourself. 

 

I cannot argue with your logic, and the current Hornby Schools is a splendid starting point.

 

Schools.jpg

 

This is my own Schools, built from a SE Finecast kit, and painted by Ian Rathbone. I built it to run on Charwelton, but since that layout has been sold, the loco now lives in its box. 

 

When I built it, the Hornby Schools of the time was really awful - tender drive, armoured valve gear, ghastly wheels, etc. Not that that would have made any difference, even if the current one were available. I cannot stand traction tyres and I wanted by Schools to be as detailed as possible in OO, including the bogie splashers over the rear wheels. To include these, I effectively made this loco as an 0-8-0, restricting the bogie movement to the minimum and making the frames electrically-dead. Of course, it won't go round Settrack radii, though it'll go round 3 feet curves. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Tony, thank you, and that is a fantastic model! 

 

I am getting there with the weathering, not quite where I want it, but close.

 

One of my big pet peeves about the Hornby Model is the lack of that splasher, was it part of the SEF kit or did you make it from scratch? I have been considering making my own, but as I need enough for 5 locos and i'm worried about the possible hazards of shorting on the wheels, Maybe 3D printing would be the way to go for such a small part. Just to add, it's really a shame your schools lives in its box!

 

It's already been two pages since I've posted, but there are lots of interesting sentiments shared, glad to be part of such an active discussion!

[davidw]

Lovely work Grahame,

 

Thanks for posting......

 

I take your point about models being judges in monetary terms; not, perhaps how they should be judged. Including, in my book, personal satisfaction at having created something. What value can be put on that? As Jon has pointed out, building a kit can be incredible value per money, in terms of 'enjoyment' costs per hour (I do try to be aware of the enjoyment factor, when the motion on a loco solders-up solid for the umpteenth time!).

 

That personal satisfaction, however humble the model, will always be greater in my opinion than the satisfaction a person might get from just 'owning' a model, whether it be RTR or the work of others. Those who modify/improve/weather their own RTR things can gain just as much personal satisfaction as the kit-builder (many do both), but it's the personal input which is the most valuable.

 

And, as someone has posted, the prices of RTR items are continually going up. Perhaps, one hopes, it'll be a cost imperative that makes folk return to making kits. Who knows? It's certainly happening in the plastic wagon business.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

I obtained a retooled Thompson TK off ebay for a bargain a while back and also had comet Thompson RF sides ( and a number of others). It's not quite complete. Branding for 'Resturant car', running number, heavy duty bogies, curtains, couplings and interior is left to complete. I'm looking out for another donor for a pantry 3rd. I could have built a complete comet coach, but the combination of Bachmann donor and comet sides is a far lighter alternative.

 

 

 

Many, many pages back there was a discussion of whether Bachmann would produce Thompson catering vehicles I've choosen to make my own. The pictures weren't taken on a great camera, but I'm delighted a very satisfying result!

Edited May 6, 2018 by davidw

[St Enodoc]

Those are some wonderful pictures of the M&GN section of Little Bytham Tony. We didn't have enough manpower to operate that section of the layout on our visit but I do very much hope to see it operating one day.

 

I've been playing with the track plan for Hadley Wood and have taken inspiration from your layout by providing kickback sidings to accommodate twenty trains (plus storage for random locos and stock), making the most use of the sixteen inches of width available (the layout will be twelve foot by three foot). In order to remove the need to reverse trains around the curves, a couple of the lines will be used to perform this operation and not be used for storage. I've provide a turntable (as I have one!) to allow hands off turning and replacement of locos to add some variety during the (yet to be decided) sequence. I've noticed that the LNER society has a WWT for the GNR section between Kings Cross and Doncaster for part of 1937 so I'll be joining on the 1st July (to get a full years membership) to purchase this.

 

My initial thoughts on the track plan; to the left is heading south to New Barnet and the right is north to Potters Bar. The 'Railway Tavern' (that failed to ever get a license and was apparently a private dwelling by the period modelled) the the first of the houses have been moved forward a bit so that I can include them bu otherwise the layout will be to scale.

 

image.jpg

 

To anyone who may be able to help, I have a question about ground signals. Photographs of the goods yard appear to be non-existence, although the head shunt appears quite often as it runs parallel with the down main. There is a gate across the line more or less in line with the signal box at the end of the down platform. Would there have been ground signals or would movements have been visually/verbally controlled by the signal operator (I would say signalman but apparently the box was treated as a ground frame from the mid 30s with Greenwood locking it out when not in use). If ground signals would have been present, where would their most likely placement have been? I've found no photographs that indicate the presence of ground signals at all.

 

Sorry for the off topic post.

Steve, the kickback idea sounds good but just make sure you have enough room to clear the "kickback" points before the train pokes its head out on to the scenic section...

 

There's a signalling diagram for Greenwood in 1932 at https://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=335. No sign of any ground discs.

[Atso]

Steve, the kickback idea sounds good but just make sure you have enough room to clear the "kickback" points before the train pokes its head out on to the scenic section...

 

There's a signalling diagram for Greenwood in 1932 at https://signalbox.org/diagrams.php?id=335. No sign of any ground discs.

 

Thank you so much for finding this St Enodoc! The date of the diagram also clears up another question I had which was: when was the signal mounted on the bridge removed? As it was at least 1932, I'll be leaving it off the model and going with the simple layout of one semaphore (upper quadrant by the 1930s?) and one colour light signal.

 

The Kickback sidings each have a dedicated road for the formation to act as a head shunt for formations to reverse onto before moving back into the sidings. This helps as I'm not keen on the idea of a train reversing around a 12" radius curve. The picture below shows which lines will be used for this (highlighted in red). The four shortest lines at the ends, above the lower red line, are simply dumping areas for odd bits of stock.

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by Atso

[2mm Andy]

the website only has a selection of the total plan index. It would be worth dropping them a line.

 

If I recall correctly, the website is their way of making the drawings available, ie. you contact them to see if they have the records, and if they have, they add them to the website for you to order (in whatever format you want). 

 

I have used the NR record centre (and their predecessors at York, Birmingham and Waterloo) in a professional capacity for quite a few years, and they have always been pretty helpful, but they are tremendously busy most of the time.

 

Andy

[DaveF]

Good question Clive,

 

As far as we know, the ex-MR 'box at Little Bytham was painted in maroon/cream in BR days. We have no colour pictures of it (do any exist?), and it was burnt down in the hot summer of 1959 (after it was closed) because of local youths mucking about with matches. Certainly, Saxby Junction (where the line begins/ends westwards) was always Midland Region, and (as far as we know) all the 'boxes/stations between that and Little Bytham were painted in MR colours. All the installations were ex-MR as well (the line was built in 1897). Bourne (the next station to the east) was always ER. The 'boxes and signalling were all ex-GNR, whereas from LB westwards, all was ex-MR. It could well be that LB represented the boundary between the ER and MR in BR days, as it represented the boundary between the MR and the M&GNR in pre-Grouping days. The whole lot was closed before the general boundary changes occurred, anyway.

 

Signal boxes 10.jpg

 

43127.jpg

 

61530 02.jpg

 

61745.jpg

 

Even with some ER locos passing, red/cream suits it best.

 

MR signals 02.jpg

 

Tony Gee is completing the MR signals right now. 

 

Signal boxes 09.jpg

 

Airfix signal box anyone? 

 

 

As an aside, what's interesting about the girder bridge is that the original drawing shows it spanning just two lines of the GN main line. It was obviously built wide enough to accommodate four tracks, which occurred in 1911. 

 

462 Little Bytham Bridge No 43 small.jpg

 

 

As to the four tracking one of the photos that has been referred to above actually shows it with just the two tracks but with the trackbed widened for the other two to be installed. It would be interesting to know when the act of parliament for the four tracking was passed.  Obviously it would have been in the planning stage for some time and the MR and GNR would obviously have communicated thus they forward planned and had the new bridge built with clearance for 4 tracks.

 

Jamie

 

 

Going back to the bridge over the ECML I have just been looking in "Building a Railway Bourne to Saxby"  by Stewart Squires and Ken Hollamby which is a Lincolnshire Record Society publication, published by the Boydell Press in 2009, ISBN 978-0-9015038-62

 

On page 32 it has a photo of the bridge looking towards the village of Little Bytham.  It states the span was 97 feet 6 inches and it weighed 152 tons.

 

On page 33 there is a drawing showing the cross girders.

 

it also states that the drawing is held in the archive at the Midland Railway Study Centre in Derby, Ref: 1986-1407/11.  I wonder if they also have the rest of the drawings.

 

 

 

David

[Compound2632]

I wonder if they also have the rest of the drawings.

 

Try searching the catalogue: http://www.midlandrailwaystudycentre.org.uk/catalogue.php.

[jamie92208]

Going back to the bridge over the ECML I have just been looking in "Building a Railway Bourne to Saxby"  by Stewart Squires and Ken Hollamby which is a Lincolnshire Record Society publication, published by the Boydell Press in 2009, ISBN 978-0-9015038-62

 

On page 32 it has a photo of the bridge looking towards the village of Little Bytham.  It states the span was 97 feet 6 inches and it weighed 152 tons.

 

On page 33 there is a drawing showing the cross girders.

 

it also states that the drawing is held in the archive at the Midland Railway Study Centre in Derby, Ref: 1986-1407/11.  I wonder if they also have the rest of the drawings.

 

 

 

David

 

 

Try searching the catalogue: http://www.midlandrailwaystudycentre.org.uk/catalogue.php.

 

Thanks for both of those.   I've done a search without success and have contacted Dave Harris to see what he can do.  The whole collection has recently been moved to temporary storage whilst the Silk Mill is refurbished but they hope to be in action from the temporary premises.

 

thanks.

 

Jamie

Edited May 4, 2018 by jamie92208

[St Enodoc]

Thank you so much for finding this St Enodoc! The date of the diagram also clears up another question I had which was: when was the signal mounted on the bridge removed? As it was at least 1932, I'll be leaving it off the model and going with the simple layout of one semaphore (upper quadrant by the 1930s?) and one colour light signal.

 

The Kickback sidings each have a dedicated road for the formation to act as a head shunt for formations to reverse onto before moving back into the sidings. This helps as I'm not keen on the idea of a train reversing around a 12" radius curve. The picture below shows which lines will be used for this (highlighted in red). The four shortest lines at the ends, above the lower red line, are simply dumping areas for odd bits of stock.

 

Hadley Wood Trackplan 3-05-18 - Kickback siding kickbacks!.jpg

You're welcome.

 

That kickback arrangement, including the turntable, is similar to the original set-up on Leeds MRS's old model of Hartford Junction.

[Atso]

You're welcome.

 

That kickback arrangement, including the turntable, is similar to the original set-up on Leeds MRS's old model of Hartford Junction.

 

Thanks again,

 

Interesting to hear about Hartford Junction. Did it work satisfactorily? What happened to the layout?

[Barry O]

Thanks again,

 

Interesting to hear about Hartford Junction. Did it work satisfactorily? What happened to the layout?

We had major problems with the plywood we used (quite simply it delaminated) and we never got a satisfactory fiddle yard to get a flow of trains which was a shame as it had a lot of potential.

 

It took a while but we have moved on....see the Chapel en le Frith thread on RMWeb.

 

Baz

[Atso]

We had major problems with the plywood we used (quite simply it delaminated) and we never got a satisfactory fiddle yard to get a flow of trains which was a shame as it had a lot of potential.

 

It took a while but we have moved on....see the Chapel en le Frith thread on RMWeb.

 

Baz

 

I'm sorry to hear of the problems Barry. I've just had a quick flick through the Chapel en le Frith thread, what a wonderful layout! I'm now following the topic and will be reading in detail when I have a moment (or day!).

[Clearwater]

 

Progress. Now doesn't short on my admittedly not very extensive test track. Will have to see how it runs on our 6' by 4' second and third radius track tomorrow. Filed back the splasher interior and added some insulation tape to both the inside top of the firebox and the wire from the pick up pad. Seems to have cured and will also run on the second radius track in the foreground. Thanks for the advice! Next task is to work out how to get the boiler and firebox a scale foot lower, add the front bogie and brave testing the connecting rods.

 

It is an inordinately satisfying feeling when the @*$# thing actually runs under its own power!

 

David

Edited May 5, 2018 by Clearwater

[Tony Wright]

That is very high praise from you tom, much appreciated. Your work is very inspirational! 

 

 

Tony, thank you, and that is a fantastic model! 

 

I am getting there with the weathering, not quite where I want it, but close.

 

One of my big pet peeves about the Hornby Model is the lack of that splasher, was it part of the SEF kit or did you make it from scratch? I have been considering making my own, but as I need enough for 5 locos and i'm worried about the possible hazards of shorting on the wheels, Maybe 3D printing would be the way to go for such a small part. Just to add, it's really a shame your schools lives in its box!

 

It's already been two pages since I've posted, but there are lots of interesting sentiments shared, glad to be part of such an active discussion!

Jack,

 

The little splashers are supplied in the kit, in etched nickel silver.

 

As I intimated, clearances are very tight, hence my arranging my Schools as a (sort of) 0-8-0. The whole wheelbase isn't very long, and negotiates 3' curves with ease. 

 

Those little bogie wheel splashers are one of those details which 'make' a model to me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

I obtained a retooled Thompson TK off ebay for a bargain a while back and also had comet Thompson RF sides ( and a number of others). It's not quite complete. Branding for 'Resturant car', running number, heavy duty bogies, curtains, couplings and interior is left to complete. I'm looking out for another donor for a pantry 3rd. I could have built a complete comet coach, but the combination of Bachmann donor and comet sides is a far lighter alternative.

 

Thompsonrf2uii.jpg

 

Thompsonrf3u.jpg

 

Many, many pages back there was a discussion of whether Bachmann would produce Thompson catering vehicles I've choosen to make my own. The pictures weren't taken on a great camera, but I'm delighted a very satisfying result!

Good morning David,

 

When I assisted Bachmann (in a very small way) with the development of their latest Thompson cars, the question of catering cars was mooted. I went over to Barwell on three occasions to discuss the project and lent models, photographs and drawings. By the time of my involvement, the decision had been taken to produce the five cars in the range, because, at least in part, 'they were the most numerous'. When I pointed out that this was obvious, because the maximum number of catering cars in a full-length express would only be three (if one included a full Kitchen Car, with RFO and RSO either side), it was stated that it was a pity a catering car (probably an RF) were not included in the range. I also pointed out that it was also a pity no open car had been included in the range. Even if not, a Mk. 1 TSO (from the range) would have gone well alongside the RF. Since no RTR manufacturer has ever produced an LNER catering car in OO (other than Hornby's Buffet Car, which is only right for LNER or very early BR days), then, again, it would appear an opportunity had been missed. 

 

The fact that the latest Bachmann Thompsons are exceptional models is obvious, because at every stage diligent research had taken place (precious little of that excellence is to do with me). If I'd been in at the start, I might have been able to get one of the brakes changed to an RF, but, even then, heavy-duty bogies would have added to the cost. 

 

If sales are really good (I assume they've sold well? They should do!), then it might well be that a Thompson catering car is on the horizon (though I've not been approached - not that I should be). Who knows? 

 

Oddly (at least to me, though I do understand the 'sales' parameters of producing the 'least-popular' liveries first), the livery in which I feel these exceptional cars would have sold by the bucket-load in - BR maroon - is yet to be produced. 

 

At the Bristol Show over the weekend (of which more, later) a trade stand had a Lawrence/Goddard Thompson TK in LNER livery for sale, at well over three times the price of a Bachmann RTR equivalent. It was nicely done, but far less-detailed. Interesting?  

 

Finally, I count it a great privilege to be invited to assist RTR manufacturers in the research/development of their new products. Right now I'm helping three. My lips are sealed!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[micklner]

Have they sold? The LNER "Teak" version is already being offered as a bundle of 5 by Rails and they have only just been delivered. That would suggest the "livery" is not appealing ?. I haven't seen any , photos do not do them any favours. IMHO.