Nick Gough

Another little quandary - how did the Cholsey goods/loading platform accommodate the change in height from side loading to end loading? GWR goods platforms were supposed to be set at 3'6" above rail level - according to the official structure gauge. However, this height is lower than the top of the buffer beam, on the stop block, which must be around 6" higher. Of course, it is difficult to find any prototype photos of this issue. I have a GWR drawing of an arrangement where the height of the platform drops suddenly next to the stop block: I suspect this could be done fairly easily with a brick platform face, but I can't see this being achieved easily with the sleeper walls and gravel/grit surface at Cholsey. NEVER model a model they say! When I saw the model of Hungerford, at the recent Abingdon show, I was interested to see that this has a separate ramp, leading up to the end loading point, set into the platform surface: I believe this layout has been well researched so I presume this is how the real Hungerford looked. It seems a reasonable solution for Cholsey though I don't know what material this ramp would actually have been constructed from. So, cutting a rectangular piece of 60 thou plastikard: Painted grey and glued in place: I think this works reasonably well: (At least until someone can tell me how it should have been done!)

Looks good and perfectly at home at Henley.

Could it be the other end of here? Happy birthday to your good lady!

Does that help?

The SVR has a design to modify the existing locks. Several coaches have been fitted with the modified locks in recent months. Further ones will be done in due course. There are a number of GWR coaches on the Valley that already have slam locks because the GWR bought some from an outside maker in the late '20s/early '30s, but then reverted to the old type until BR days.

Thought I was looking at photos of Stoke Courtenay for a moment!

I could happily spend a while here, on the sea wall, watching the trains go by.

Thanks to all for the comments. That confirms that I wasn't just seeing what I wanted to see. Rail built buffer stop it will be.

Buffer Stop I am trying to decide on what design of buffer stop I should use for the loading platform. Should it just be a plain beam, attached to the end wall? Like on the Hungerford model: Or should it be a rail built version?: I have scanned part of a much larger, long distance photo and highlighted the area where I think the buffer stop is. I would be grateful for any views, and thoughts of what type it would be.

The platform walls have received a coat of 'creosote' and most of the platform edging is in place:

Or an adult version of Camberwick Green/Trumpton/Chigley? (No, I don't mean an X-rated one!)

The two main sections of the goods/loading platform joined together: I have cut long, thin strips of balsa to represent the sleepers forming the platform edge: I think it's just possible, in the next photo, to see the transverse grooves cut in the lower strip for the individual sleeper ends:

The next plate, in the book, may have been taken on the same date: The loco in both photos appears to be a Hall. I am fairly confident that Plate 199 is post-war. The Dynamometer car is carrying it's later number - I believe it was changed from 790 around 1946 to accommodate a new build batch of Hawksworth C82 Thirds. It's not clear in the scan but, in the original, the tender appears to carry the G crest W insignia. The mention of "'Castle' class trials", in the caption, relates to plate 197 which is another view of 4074 Caldicot Castle (to @Harlequin's post above) from a test in 1924.

This photo is to be found in the book, "Thro' The Lens - A Pictorial Tribute to the Official Work of the GWR Photographers" Though this one isn't dated, all the photos are pre 1948.

A look inside an indicator shelter, as recorded by an official GWR photographer. Note that there appears to be a sheet of something behind the nearest man, presumably to protect him from the heat of the smokebox: