Freelance Layouts

[relaxinghobby]

Here is my version of a freelanced loco, a before and after picture of what can be done with the Bachmann junior Billy engine with it's upwardly stretched over tall body.

I have also given the freelance treatment to the Bachmann Emily, which is based on the real GNR Stirling No 1 at York Museum. She's the right length but a bit fatter and a very good runner.
I only had to swap the face for a proper smoke box door and disguise the shiny plastic look with the application of some semi-matt varnish.

So my plank is of a pre-grouping railway, perhaps a loop off of a mainline somewhere through the industrial area of a big city. It's mostly redbrick and could be called Metcalf City.
I have freelanced an old Airfix 4F backwards into a sort of 2F which has come out looking like the new C class from Bachmann. My choice is for the pre-grouping era when many small railways bought their locos and rolling stock from the commercial loco builders. I have the book by Russell about absorbed GWR engines mainly from the South Wales coal railways, it is full of plans of the standard products of the then commercial loco builders such as Robert Stephenson and Beyer Peacock etc.
For pre-grouping freelance coaches there are those generic Hornby clerestories, and wagons from the PO kits of Cambrian Models.

Whilst web browsing or reading RMweb I save pictures of prototypes I like into a folder called 'my diagram book' for future modeling and kit bashing.

Edward Beal's modeling books and freelance West Midland Railway was an influence me, I admire the narrow gauge modelers who kit-bash there own locomotives, even if it is cut up version of the Airfix/Dapol pug kit.

I prefer the imaginative approach to modeling that freelances allows, but it has to be seasoned with enough realism from books such as Russell book of GWR plans.

[Guest]

 

I prefer the imaginative approach to modeling that freelances allows...

 

Hear, hear!

[HSB]

A very interesting and effective reworking, relaxinghobby.  It certainly gives food for thought.

[Suzie]

Ahh. The big five, where as well as the East coast LNE and West coast London and Scottish route there would be the upgraded Midland route to Scotland via the Settle and Carlisle and the Waverley with a challenge to match the timings of the other routes resulting in some early main line electric traction.

 

I think that BR Blue has beaten the thought out of us that there could ever be anything other than the one uniform nationalised railway.

 

I even feel I have to slavishly reproduce International Underground to be as authentic as possible even though no one has heard of it (well done Bachmann) and no one really cares other than me.

[Guest]

Okay, I think it's fairly obvious to anyone by now that I am a freelancer. I have a major ongoing project that this new 3D Printing lark will do wonders for in helping to bring it about. Still the learning the finer points of things like mesh editing and suchlike so no images yet.

 

However...

 

I have to admit I've let my imagination off its leash on more than one occasion. The last time involved the Riddles Standard classes - in my view, the finest locos ever to grace Britain's rails. No, I'm not going to run for cover: that is my sincerely held opinion that I do acknowledge is not shared by all. Sorry and all that but there it is. What, I wondered, if Riddles had been given a wider brief? Say, forget the mixed traffic concept and build dedicated passenger and freight classes using common boilers for each power class. Nearly happened, didn't it? The Britannias and the aborted 2-8-2? Oh, take it a stage further, run it down through most of the power classes. A freight version of the Duke with 5'3" wheels? Of a Clan? Of a class 5? Class 4 (tender and tank) with 5' wheels?

 

And the 9F, what about the 9F? There we hit a problem. I've often thought the idea of basing a power class on tractive effort was, well, a little strange. Better, I thought, to use grate area instead since grate area equals coal burnt equals IHP rating equals DBHP rating - all else being equal, of course. So I'd keep the 9F, excellent loco that it was, but put it down to 7F - pretty much in line with a Brit/2-8-2 but with a power curve slightly flatter than that of the Mike. That would then leave the 9F classification free. What, I wondered, would fill it?

 

Try this. Assume a number of Stanier 8Fs became surplus to requirements and were withdrawn. There would be an awful lot of 4'8½" wheels floating around. Use them under a slightly extended Duke boiler (same grate area and using the same flanging blocks - a useful economy) as a 2-10-2. That is one beast I would like to have seen! Especially if coupled with an 8-wheeled tender - say an extended BR1C, which I would also use on the class 8 engines.

 

So there you have it, my flight of fancy - well, one of many, actually. I'm sure someone will come along and list a whole raft of reasons why it could never have happened and I actually hope they do. Spirited discussion can never be a bad thing. But whatever is said by whoever, I'm not dropping the idea. The only person I should be setting out to please is me, something that is often forgotten in this most excellent hobby of ours..

[queensquare]

The north Somerset Light Railway is very much a freelance might have been - actually  an 'almost was' in the Colonel Stephens mould. See my Tucking Mill thread.

 

Jerry

[Edge]

I once drew up a scheme for another 'Big Five' company; The NWR (guess at the provenance there)

 

It was a while back, but i seem to recall that they formed in the grouping and were based around Carlisle, but got as far south as brum (my hometown, and the planned layout was a fictional Birmingham terminus for the railway), and even ran trains through to London on the WCML under a track-share agreement with the LMS

 

It was a rather impressive history, and i drew up a fair few fictional engines for the line (awful pencil drawings mostly) but my skill was never quite up to the task on hand to actually make them. Incidientally, 'Locos that Never Were' is both a stonking good read, and a good resource for making freelance projects believeable.

[Iain Popplewell]

Here is my version of a freelanced loco, a before and after picture of what can be done with the Bachmann junior Billy engine with it's upwardly stretched over tall body.

post-6220-0-44276700-1363985600_thumb.jpg

 

I have also given the freelance treatment to the Bachmann Emily, which is based on the real GNR Stirling No 1 at York Museum. She's the right length but a bit fatter and a very good runner.

I only had to swap the face for a proper smoke box door and disguise the shiny plastic look with the application of some semi-matt varnish.

 

So my plank is of a pre-grouping railway, perhaps a loop off of a mainline somewhere through the industrial area of a big city. It's mostly redbrick and could be called Metcalf City.

I have freelanced an old Airfix 4F backwards into a sort of 2F which has come out looking like the new C class from Bachmann. My choice is for the pre-grouping era when many small railways bought their locos and rolling stock from the commercial loco builders. I have the book by Russell about absorbed GWR engines mainly from the South Wales coal railways, it is full of plans of the standard products of the then commercial loco builders such as Robert Stephenson and Beyer Peacock etc.

For pre-grouping freelance coaches there are those generic Hornby clerestories, and wagons from the PO kits of Cambrian Models.

 

Whilst web browsing or reading RMweb I save pictures of prototypes I like into a folder called 'my diagram book' for future modeling and kit bashing.

 

Edward Beal's modeling books and freelance West Midland Railway was an influence me, I admire the narrow gauge modelers who kit-bash there own locomotives, even if it is cut up version of the Airfix/Dapol pug kit.

 

I prefer the imaginative approach to modeling that freelances allows, but it has to be seasoned with enough realism from books such as Russell book of GWR plans.

 

Thank you.You have totally vindicated my OP.It,s great to find someone who's doing exactly what I intend to do,. and so successfully proving the concept works.Your No. 6 looks beautiful.Tremendous stuff keep it up.

Edited April 13, 2013 by iainp

[Donw]

One of the issues is the loco and coaching stock. In the US many railroads used standard designs from major manufacturers. In the UK it was more common for lines to build their own locos yes some like the Cambrian and Furness did buy in some Sharp Stewarts but also had some home brewed ones. You could invent a pre-group line and develop your own stock but given the small number modelling pre-group it is not likely to appeal to many. Come the grouping would you invent a fith group. You could imagine a railway absorbed by grouping some stock of its own design with newer group designs.

Early BR offers less chance as odd pre-group designs were often scrapped early.

However looking to present day we have operating companies buying in stock from manufacturers. Limited life franchises. It would be easy to invent a new franchise repaint and alter models to give your own flavour. I for one have no idea whether there actually is a Great Central frachise to give one example, so it could be quite believable.

Don

[Guest]

Speaking of locos that never were but might have been, I remember reading of a proposal to modify the Stanier Duchesses in the early 1950s. It involved attaching an 8-wheel/12ton tender and modifying the grate for stoker firing. The tender was to have been of the type intended for the abortive 4-6-4/4-8-4 proposals, and would have looked much like a stretched 10-tonner with four axles at 5'6" spacing instead of three at 7'6". All told, that would have made an impressive machine even more so.

 

Agreed on Edge's comment about the Robin Barnes book. It is well worth the space on your bookshelf.

[Poggy1165]

I would suggest that to produce a free-lance layout that is convincing is far harder than to follow a prototype. For example, if you model the Bishop's Castle or the Maryport and Carlisle, you have a pattern before you, and all (all!) you need to do to make it convincing is to bring the model as close to the template as you can. Others, with a good knowledge of the prototype, will say 'Wow, what a good model of the Bishop's Castle/Maryport and Carlisle/Whatever.'

 

Whereas for a truly free-lance layout the pattern is in your head, where no one else can see it. Unless you know a great deal about the technical and historical aspects of railways and are an exceptional modeller as well, you have a real task on your hands to create a convincing layout. There is a dangerous risk of just creating a melange of models you happen to like.

 

Not that there's anything wrong with that, if that's what floats your boat.

[scots region]

David, what about a DOG MK2? With three-cylinders and Walcharts Valve gear?

[Guest]

David, what about a DOG MK2? With three-cylinders and Walcharts Valve gear?

 

 

I like your thinking and I can see where you're coming from, if only from an aesthetic point of view. Walschearts is much more interesting to watch in action than British Caprotti. Alas, I think British Caprotti would have become more widespread in use if steam had continued, even on a series production Duke. It was an excellent, robust and thoroughly workmanlike valve gear. As I understand it, the Caprotti 5MTs were particularly strong engines. But you're right, it's an interesting thought.

[relaxinghobby]

Here's how I go about designing a freelance engine, or how to wrap up a commercial ready to run chassis and keep it looking like an authentic steam engine of the chosen era.
I have this chassis, made by who I don't know, there is no makers name but probably a US H0 model.

It has about the same wheel base as the Midland and South Western Junction Railway 2-6-0 Galloping Alice. A colonial style loco meant for a South American railway but it ended up being sold by the makers to The MSWJR, which later became part of the GWR, who then was sold it off to a private coal hauling colliery line. The rear over hang of the motor will put it halfway into the tender.

Or I could go for the outline of the big 2-6-0 saddle tanks made by Beyer Peacock for the Spanish railways, or one of the long boiler tanks used by the NER on colliery sidings, both types had big overhangs at the back, justification for hiding that big motor magnet with a cab.

Any way a bit more fiddling around with temporary cardboard footplates and spare parts from my junk collection and we see how it will turn out?

[Ozexpatriate]

While I am a great admirer of layouts with a high fidelity to an exact place and time (and they have the advantage of containing details to model that might not be thought of in an imagined setting), I plan to build a freelanced layout.

 

I want to be more or less true to a period and create a regional feel, rather than a specific location. I want to build a mainline with a branch. It will take a lot of room and time. By necessity and scope it will contain a lot of selective compression including short trains and short platforms. That and the additional research hurdle of living far away drives me into freelancing.

 

Plus, living in the US, I feel less compulsion to build a fidelity model.

There are also far more fanciful approaches to freelancing, although usually with a specific geographic focus (unlike a lot of British-built US layouts which seem to be set in some kind of generic "America".)

 

My feeling is that pure freelancing is a bit on the decline, though.

I will be doing the inverse of a British modeller's generic "America". I plan something that hopefully has a "West country" feel. In some ways this will make it harder to look 'right' as opposed to a big train set, but that's the plan.

 

I think there is a trend in the US for more faithful representations of a real place - with the usual accomodations for selective compression of course, but freelanced locations with RTR stock remain popular here.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Ozexpatriate

[scots region]

I like your thinking and I can see where you're coming from, if only from an aesthetic point of view. Walschearts is much more interesting to watch in action than British Caprotti. Alas, I think British Caprotti would have become more widespread in use if steam had continued, even on a series production Duke. It was an excellent, robust and thoroughly workmanlike valve gear. As I understand it, the Caprotti 5MTs were particularly strong engines. But you're right, it's an interesting thought.

 

If you're interested, I've had an idea for a bit of an Alternative history rattling around for a while now. Basically Labour gains its first majority government in 1918 and opts to reform the Railway Operating Department into a national system. I've even got an idea for the first 'Standard' of this earlier BR, the fowler 2-6-4t, maybe the 2-6-0 as a standard mogul, I'd also imagine the Robinson 2-8-0 has a shot as standard freight.     

[Guest]

If you're interested, I've had an idea for a bit of an Alternative history rattling around for a while now. Basically Labour gains its first majority government in 1918 and opts to reform the Railway Operating Department into a national system. I've even got an idea for the first 'Standard' of this earlier BR, the fowler 2-6-4t, maybe the 2-6-0 as a standard mogul, I'd also imagine the Robinson 2-8-0 has a shot as standard freight.     

 

Am I interested? I suspect I wouldn't be the only one on this forum. Fire away, what else have you come up with?

 

I remembered reading somewhere that there was indeed a proposal to nationalise the railways after WW1. I even remembered where I read it. So, from E.S. Cox - British Railways Standard Steam Locomotives, p.18:

 

"In later times mention can be made of a standard series of locomotives for British Railways as whole which was considered at the end of World War 1, when it was in the balance as to whether nationalisation or large-scale amalgamation would fall to the lot of the individual railways which had served the country up to that time."

 

What you're proposing is not so wild as some might think. It could have happened. Would like to hear more in terms of what you think would have formed a viable standard stud of the time.

[relaxinghobby]

 

So on any railway the locomotives are one of the prime signature objects that show which railway it belongs to. Apart from the colour scheme, the shape of the chimney, domes and cab design show us who's loco it is.
Referring to my rough sketches there are variations on the shape and design of the various parts of the loco, that are added onto the basic cylinder shape of the boiler and squareness of the water tanks. The chimney, short and wide (i ) on large boilered engines but taller on the small boilered 19 th century engines that I am mostly interested in. ( ii, iii, iv). The domes also vary is size and shape, the more you look back in history the more elaborate they where, those glorious brass confections they have on the Isle O'Man 2-4-0 tanks are my favourite ( v ). The safety valves varied over the years as the technology improved; ( vi ).

In my 0-6-0 project ( see entry above ) I will have to choose what shape saddle tank to use, there was the round sort ( vii), the square with rounded corners type(viii) or the plump bulging type as seen on the Hornby pug (ix ). I will also have to choose the basic cab type, square with coal bunkers in front of the spectical plate ( xi ) which was popular on the old NER and industrial types, or with rear bunker and Stroudley rounded edge roof ( xii ), wrap over sheet roof type, from side to side ( xiii ) or front to back type ( xiv ) with bunker inside the cab which was popular in the middle of the 19th century. On tender engines the cab side could vary with different shape cut outs ( xv ) to the latter sort with the roof over lapping the tender in the colonial style and later with window as the Flying Scotsman.

A further guide to the locomotive designer is the smoke box, the modern look with the stepped footplate as in ( xvi ) or the earlier rounded types in ( xvii and xviii ). Wing plates where popular in Victorian times as in ( xix ) which could be incorporated with front wheel sandboxes.

The footsteps are another area for the designer to express their art, the simple and cheap stirrup type ( xxi ), look hard at photos of LNWR locos to see these, or the eligant curved style of Sharp Stewart ( xxiii ). Then there are the tanks, on older and smaller locos with flat foot plates the tanks could be square topped as in ( xv ) or round topped and a narrower cab as in ( xiv ) think of the preserved Stroudley Terrier tanks. ( xv ) Also shows a rear bunker extension which was often used by the GWR to enlarge the capacity of their bunkers and in ( xiv ) sheet metal or rails are used to increase the upward volume of the coal bunker.

In the 20th century the hopper bunker was introduced and as outside valve gear became more popular the lower edge of the tanks could be at different heights to clear all the moving parts and the footplate almost disappeared completely. If we look at overseas railways there is even more variety in the design of these major components of the locos and if we look forward at to the 21st century when steam may return, with perhaps large bunkers for biomass ( sticks and straw ) or cylindrical tanks for fuel oil may appear.

I hope this shows some of the options open to the freelance modeler to design their own locos.

Edited April 12, 2013 by relaxinghobby

[Guest]

Cracking stuff, relaxinghobby! As you say, there were certain signature features that readily identified a loco's origin. Settling on those is indeed a good start to setting out to design your own. I look forward to seeing more.

[Iain Popplewell]

Dear Relaxing Hobby.

 Great to have a further post from you.I was beginning to think this free-lance thread was going to suffer an early and untimely death.Very interesting how you select your freelance locomotive features.

  I find personally that locomotive features almost select themselves.Certain rtr locomotives beg for buying and others exclude themselves.I have a prejudice against Belpaire fireboxes  for instance and love round "porthole" windows.The Worsdell's era of the NER  was just wonderful to me.Any locomotives I buy and adapt will reflect this.At the moment,(Actually for the last twelve months in one case) I have  a NER class P and Class T awaiting building.I'll probably build these as accurately as I can IE. circa 1910 although the purists will turn in their graves at the livery.

 The forthcoming L/Y 2-4-2 tank looks promising and I'd probably substitute a Worsdell safety valve cover for instance.

  The great thing about allowing yourself a degree of free-lancing into your modelling I find is that you can stamp your own individuality into your layout and models.

  As other people have said free-lance modelling is not easy, but I believe it's a liberating option and well worth consideration before following the more usual, less imaginative and predictable options.

Edited April 16, 2013 by iainp

[Norm81]

I guess having a BR Blue Class 60 counts as freelance? Although it's probably more a what might have been, likewise for my plans to build Class 142 centre cars.

[Iain Popplewell]

Is a repaint  of a class 60 freelance or not, who's bothered, that's the beauty of freelancing.A centre car for a class 142 has never existed to my knowledge.So far! and so I suppose would classify  as a freelance model.How many layouts though could boast both models running together only yours.

 

Gan an build em both ya canny bugga!

Edited April 16, 2013 by iainp

[Satan's Goldfish]

Would re-paints of existing loco's maybe also fall under ficticious liveries?

 

I always thought the West Anglian Mainline to Kings Lynn would be a lot more attractive if class 86 loco hauled services had been retained once the whole route was electrified. Bring it into privetisation and modernise the stock a little and then you've got class 86/90 and mk2/3 push-pull sets in WAGN livery, or even a new 'freelance' seperate operator.

 

Does that still count?

 

Also, there's been a good selection of freight operators come and go in recent years, it would be very easy to create a freelance operator to fit in around other modern stock.

[Guest]

Would re-paints of existing loco's maybe also fall under ficticious liveries?

 

I always thought the West Anglian Mainline to Kings Lynn would be a lot more attractive if class 86 loco hauled services had been retained once the whole route was electrified. Bring it into privetisation and modernise the stock a little and then you've got class 86/90 and mk2/3 push-pull sets in WAGN livery, or even a new 'freelance' seperate operator.

 

Does that still count?

 

In my view, yes! Freelance covers a multitude of sins, from changing liveries to imaginary locations to designing your own locos and stock. Giving your imagination a little free rein can be very satisfying, I find.

[SM42]

At one time in our club (many years ago) we did have a moment when it was assumed that the mass withdrawals of modernisation scheme locos did not happen and BR stuck with it and made them a success. They were then dragged kicking and screaming into the BR (TOPS)  blue era. 42101, 52041 are two of the TOPSisfied locos I remember.

 

Andy