bécasse

Just about every possible combination of fpl or no fpl and ground signal or no ground signal existed at various locations on the Southern alone, including places where loaded passenger vehicles worked (albeit at very low speed) over facing release points which weren't even detected. The only "golden rule" that I have been able to establish is that (the rare) release crossovers which were facing to arriving trains were at least detected and would normally have had an fpl and probably a ("running shunt") ground signal as well. Where fpls were fitted to release crossover points it does seem to have been normal to omit the locking bar.

Sorry, I have only just seen this one. I assume that the worm was fixed to the motor shaft using 600-series Loctite, in which case heat will break the Loctite bond, how much heat depending on which of the 600-series was used. I still use 601 and boiling water is sufficient - almost fill a plastic cup with boiling water and just dip the worm in. I should add that I got the idea when I saw someone apparently dipping a motor into a plastic cup of tea at an exhibition. Curious, I asked what he was doing and it was explained to me - it works, too, I have successfully used the technique myself on several occasions.

It sounds to me as if one of the magnetic poles has come loose inside, either completely or, more likely, after fragmenting. I have had it happen in the past with a Mashima 1220 and was initially puzzled by very similar symptoms. Given that the motor clearly wasn't going to be usable, I dismantled it and found that one of the magnetic poles had split along its length with the smaller fragment actually loose inside the can.

There are some photographs within volume 31 of the James Gray collection, accessible on the internet here http://regencysociety-jamesgray.com/volume31/index.html .

I remember coming across one in about 1966 somewhere between Leamington and Stratford, it might have been Claverdon or Wilmcote, whose board had been repainted white with the lettering in black. The new modern image signs were only just starting to appear at the time and this one looked very odd. Perhaps it was the first place where they found the old GWR signs near-impossible to dig out and this was a local improvisation. I later saw plenty of the ex-GWR with white letters on black, but this was the only one that followed the colour scheme but not the styling of the new signs.

Apologies, I wrote without checking that the stock number had been quoted correctly, it is Bachmann 44-0045 that is a model of Catford Bridge down side building (the up side building was much more substantial), even though Bachmann don't state its parentage. http://www.hattons.co.uk/107466/Bachmann_Branchline_44_0045_Brick_built_Surburban_Station_building_with_canopy/StockDetail.aspx I have edited my original post so that no one else is mislead!

Yes, I can't find my 2000 diary, but it isn't in my 1999 one, so 2000 it was.

It would have been at Wembley in 1999 - a one off. I can't remember whether CF was there or not but certainly possible given the strong MRC involvement in the show.

I used to live in Catford and used Catford Bridge station from time to time. To my surprise, looking at photos of the Bachmann 44-0045 station building, it does seem to be based closely on Catford Bridge down side building which I believe still exists. edited to correct stock number

Normal EM wheel sets will run on plain P4 track though.

This would have been decided before the construction of the vehicles was authorised in the first place. Nobody just ordered new carriages (or locos), authority, usually from the board of directors, would have been required and that would only have been given where a need (and, hopefully, a resulting financial payback) could be demonstrated.

Yes it is (unless it was another company's with the same purpose) - good to see that one has survived.

Ignoring the modern LED-based versions, there were two types of banner distants. I would have expected the "black with fishtail on white" type to be a simple copy of the normal banner repeater, it would obviously have been possible to have incorporated slotting if there were a normal banner repeater above but, in my view at least, that would have been expensive overkill (which was generally avoided in the old days). There was also a type of banner distant which was an actual distant mounted below a semaphore stop arm - the Southern was fond of them at the entry to long tunnels - and these were yellow painted with a black chevron and black background; these obviously did have to be slotted with the stop signal mounted above them, although the examples I remember were motor-worked which made this easy.

It looks to me as if the frames are less far apart there - hence the extra side play. It is obviously well disguised even from this angle.

All trains, passenger or goods, were propelled up the line from Holywell Junction. Passenger trains were limited to two carriages. Goods trains were limited to three loaded or five empty wagons with a 20-ton brake van at each end of the train. I have never seen a photograph of a goods train on the branch but they certainly ran. I suspect that the modus operandi was that the train came to a stand short of the lower loop points which were then unlocked by the staff and reversed so that the train could be propelled into the loop with the lower van clear of the trap points. The loco would then uncouple and drop back, the loop points normalised and relocked (releasing the staff), and the loco would proceed through the platform to the buffer stops. The top end loop points would then be unlocked by the staff and reversed, and the loco would drop down on to the upper end brake van which it would then shunt into the platform where it would be left with its brakes firmly applied. Any wagons to be cleared from the yard would then be shunted (carefully) on top of this van, each wagon's brakes also being secured in turn (remembering that there was no trap point below the platform). The newly-arrived wagons would then be shunted into their required positions in the yard. Finally, what had been the lower end brake van would now be shunted on top of the formed train in the platform, and then, with the top end points relocked, the loco would drop down the loop and the lower end points unlocked to enable it to shunt onto the lower end of the formed train standing in the platform. Once coupled up and with just sufficient brakes released, and with the lower end points relocked normal, the train would return to the junction with, of course, the staff. Seemingly, the same loco worked both passenger and goods trains, the goods operating during a morning lull in passenger train operations. Fly shunting would probably have been permitted into the two siding yard (which was level) but certainly not on either the loop or platform road.

Assuming that you have already removed the wheels and thus just have the axle with the gear on it, place a washer which is a little larger than the gear wheel behind the gear and pull that. I actually have some washers in which I have filed a ⅛" slot so that they will slide over an axle behind plastic centred wheels (Alan Gibson Workshop ones, for example) - it is much safer using the GW models wheel/gear puller on the washer than on the wheels themselves.

Although such a signal may well not have existed in any actual new 1960s installations, it is also almost certainly true that none of those installations were as constrained for space as this one is. Placing a signal at this point will add considerably to the operational potential of the place. That extra potential wouldn't be necessary if traffic was limited to 2-car dmus shuttling in and out plus, perhaps, the early morning arrival of a short van train carrying newspapers (and, in reality, by the early 1960s that may well have been just about all the traffic comprised of), however if there was more traffic around or anticipated the operators would almost certainly have insisted on the flexibility the extra signal offered. Including it in the original c/l scheme would have been relatively cheap, the much greater cost of adding it later would never have been justified (although it might just have been within an officer's signing capability). Sheerness was a very constrained terminus where c/l signals were installed in 1959 as part of an electrification scheme. It isn't 100% comparable, different Region and multiple-aspect signals for a start, but the arrangements allowed just any move that could be made to be made. http://www.signallingnotices.org.uk/scans/2378/2378.pdf

I agree that a row of stretchers (⅓ of a brick width out from the face) topped with a row of upright headers (a further ⅓ of a brick width out from the row of stretchers - or ⅔ of a brick width out from the face) is commonly found as corbelling for GWR brick platform faces but I don't think that it was what was done at Badminton or other contemporary stations. I can't find a clear high-resolution photo, but I believe that what was done involved three rows of stretchers with the upper two rows both ⅔ of a brick width out from the face. What seems very strange to me is that these two rows don't seem to have staggered bonding, the upper brick being laid directly above the lower. Unfortunately the overhanging coping stone always makes it difficult to see this area clearly in photos and since the same would apply to a model (even in 7mm scale) I would be inclined to just use two rows of "stretchers" cut from a Slaters' #0404 brick sheet. The three stretcher row arrangement produces corbelling that is around 1½" taller than the upright headers above stretchers arrangement. This could have resulted from the platform being raised by that amount during its (steam-age) lifetime but I suspect that it was original. Chris Leigh (THE DIBBER) poked inquisitively around Badminton station at about the time it was taken out of use so it is just possible that he may have some photos or notes that help to resolve the issue.

Paper labels in the windows gave the class designation of nondescript stock in service unless they were in, say, a first class only train (typically for race traffic). Antimacassars were provided when in use as first or second (boat train only) class stock and I believe that, in theory at least, floor mats were provided when in use for first class. I suspect that tables could be provided for any class. Electric multiple units also changed class designation when in use for race traffic - first class only 4-COR units between Waterloo and Ascot, for example.

It is all very well talking about the retailer being responsible for the return of funds if the project doesn't deliver but that can only happen if the retailer has sufficient funds, otherwise they just go bust. Of course, if you paid with a credit card and the amount topped £ 100, you would probably be reimbursed by the credit card company, but yet another retailer would be lost to the hobby.

British Rail-owned Seaspeed operated hydrofoils between Portsmouth Harbour and Ryde Pier Head and Cowes during a brief period in the 1970s(?).

Indeed, but read in conjunction with contemporary 25" OS maps they are very useful indeed, especially as they will show any running line slips which the OS maps don't. There is a 1962-63 25" OS map on the old-maps.co.uk website which was clearly the result of a total resurvey and likely, therefore, to be accurate for about 1961.

Don't forget that any O5 wagon surviving after 1939 had to have been fitted with the DC1X brake conversion, so that the brake handle on the side of the wagon without brake-blocks was at the right-, not left-hand side.

The Signalling Record Society website does have low resolution signalling diagrams for both Brockenhurst A and Bockenhurst B boxes, rather unusually neither are dated but I suspect that they are probably early 1960s, just before the changes for electrification. https://www.s-r-s.org.uk/html/cdsrps.htm

One of the stronger pva (white) adhesives may be adequate, especially if you put a tiny cut across the bit that goes into the hole. It won't be as strong as a solvent weld would be, of course, but buffers take their main load in compression.