BMacdermott

Hello John A query on focused choices...did you mean Item 2 LMS 9ft wb 5-plank? Brian

Post deleted.

Post deleted.

Hello Gilbert & everyone Following on from Gilbert's suggestion of running some Mini-Polls concerning locos that have some relevance to Peterborough North, I am pleased to say that Chris Knowles-Thomas and I have created three such polls for you. If Gilbert gives 'the green light', they will run on from the rolling stock polls as: No.9: Freight Locos (predominantly) No.10: Passenger Locos (predominantly) - Tank No.11: Passenger Locos (predominantly) - Tender Note that I say 'predominantly' - some in each will be mixed traffic but it would add too much complexity to split them up into 'exact categories'. And - let's face it - there are many occasions where freight locos worked passenger and vice versa. Brian

Hello everyone Just an ‘appetiser’ for tomorrow’s Mini-Poll... Nine of the 12 items are Opens. In a small addition to our usual ‘vote for any or all’ format, you will find items 13 and 14. These will be ‘focused choice’ selections for which you will need your thinking caps on! I hope you will find it challenging and interesting. If it goes according to plan – famous last words! – it will add a ‘focused dimension’ to the results. Brian

Hello Andy I forgot to say that the current Mini-Polls have items that do have (or might have had) some connection with Peterborough North. But that's not to say that future possibilities can't explore wider territory. Brian PS: PM sent just now

Hello Andy That would require an OK from Gilbert. If it was agreed, I have to say that the subject is not my area of knowledge and it would be up to others to provide me with 'the raw data' from which I could construct a Mini-Poll in context with the others. Brian

Hello Gilbert I'm certainly happy to do that. Give me a few days to look at what options we have. There are many ways 'to slice cakes' and I try to keep our 'maximum loads' to about 10 or 12 items. Brian

Hello everyone I have been looking at the content of our forthcoming Mini-Polls and - unless Gilbert says 'no' - I will revamp them with one extra. The plan will then be as below from Monday... No.5: More 4-wheel Wagons & Opens (as previewed but now includes more Opens following discussions) No.6: Container Wagons & Containers (new entry following suggestion from Chris) No.7: Bogie Freight Stock (as previewed) No.8: Departmental Stock (as previewed) Brian

Many thanks for the kind comments, Chris - appreciated. Notice I said 'Containers'...not 'Container Wagons'. There will, however, be one actual Container Wagon in Mini-Poll No.6. It has been 'shunted out' of No.5 as your Yardmaster has had to re-marshal all vehicles due to a sudden influx of Open Wagons! Brian

Results - 00 Rolling Stock Mini-Poll No.4: Freight Stock – 4-wheel (Pre-1951) Hello everyone Many thanks to the 15 voters who took part. The Comments Received are appended on a PDF as usual. High Polling 11 Goods Van 12-ton, Sliding Doors, Vertical Plank Sides, Horizontal Plank Ends, Small Shutters (Diags.14-17) 9 Goods Van 12-ton, Sliding Doors, Plywood (Diags.172, 176, 195 of 1943-1948) 8 Cattle Wagon, 10ft wheelbase (1920s) 8 Single Bolster Wagon (inc BR Diags.1/400, 1/401, 1/402 & 1/405 of 1949 on) Middle Polling 7 Fish Van 10-ton, 12ft wheelbase, as built (Diag.134 of 1938) 7 Fish Van 10-ton, 12ft wheelbase, as rebuilt, Recessed Doors, Painted White (Originally Diag.134 of 1938) 6 Banana Vans (there are too many to list individually) 5 RCH Coal Wagon 5-, 6-, 7- & 8-plank (1887-1907) Low Polling 4 Tube Wagon Unfitted, 30ft 6ins & 32ft 0in (BR Diags.1/447 & 1/448 of 1951 and 1954) 2 Bulk Grain Hopper Wagon 22½-ton (Diag.73 of late 1930s) 2 Low Machinery Wagon, Lowmac 4-wheel, 21-ton (inc BR Diags.2/240 etc of 1949/51) 2 Low Machinery Wagon, Flatrol 4-wheel, 20-ton (inc BR Diag.2/512 of 1949) The results seem to make some logical sense…broadly speaking: · The High Pollers are more likely to be ‘go anywhere/generally useful’ types; · The Fish and Bananas in the Middle are perhaps more appealing to ‘main line modellers’; and · The more ‘specialised’ ones fall into the Low Polling. We will be back on Monday with 00 Rolling Stock Mini-Poll No.5: More 4-wheel Wagons plus Some Containers. This is a change to the previewed title in order to reflect our discussion about Open Wagons. You will find a couple of ‘coal types’ there too, so it will be interesting so see if they poll higher than the RCH types above. Interestingly, we have seen very few new tool steam era wagons recently, but post-1964 types seem to be coming to market at a rate of knots! Brian Mini-Poll No.4 Comments Received.pdf

Hello Andy Your votes are perfectly valid against the stated criterion of 'realistically wish to buy'. Part of the agreed purpose of these Mini-Polls is to 'tease out' comments that might indicate a direction of thought of the voters. All the comments received are edited into one PDF and this is open to the makers to read. It is up to them to set their prices but - if they are too high or don't seem to offer value for money against the competition - they will fail to sell. Brian

Thanks Bloodnok That is exactly the parameter within which to work with these Mini-Polls. Brian

Thanks Phil and Jon It does seem to follow that the overall focus of modellers is on locos - they are 'right out front' and look impressive with the all the smoke and steam. Coaches are sometimes 'attractive', but wagons are down the pecking order and - as Jon rightly says - getting the right information gets progressively harder the farther you go back in time. The Locos>Coaches>Wagons 'hierarchy' is something we have seen in The 00 Wishlist Poll Results over the years. The following is totally unscientific and was (almost literally) done 'on the back of a fag packet', but a look at the 2019 Results in relation to just LNER items which might have been seen at Peterborough North bears this out... Locos - an average of 136 votes each item Coaches - an average of 113 votes each item Wagons - an average of 110 votes each item Brian

Final Call for Votes - 00 Rolling Stock Mini-Poll No.4 Hello everyone A reminder that your 'Polling Station' closes at 1700 today. Results are expected during tomorrow, Friday 11 June. Although we have had much discussion about these vehicles, the 'turnout' is not as high as one might expect. Are there any 'underlying reasons'? Do you have too many wagons already? Do wagons not appeal to you? Do you find the complexity perplexing? I'd be interested to hear. If you haven't already voted, here’s what to do… 1. You may vote for any or all of the items listed. 2. They must be items you would realistically wish to buy if made RTR. 3. Submit your entries on this thread simply as (for example): 2, 4, 7, 9, 12 – with comments and explanations following. 4. If you vote by PM, please only list your selection of numbers without explanations. 1. Banana Vans (there are too many to list individually) 2. Bulk Grain Hopper Wagon 22½-ton (Diag.73 of late 1930s) 3. Cattle Wagon, 10ft wheelbase (1920s) 4. Fish Van 10-ton, 12ft wheelbase, as built (Diag.134 of 1938) 5. Fish Van 10-ton, 12ft wheelbase, as rebuilt, Recessed Doors, Branded ‘XP’/‘Insul Fish’, Painted White (Originally Diag.134 of 1938) 6. Goods Van 12-ton, Sliding Doors, Vertical Plank Sides, Horizontal Plank Ends with Small Shutters (Diags.14-17 of 1926) 7. Goods Van 12-ton, Sliding Doors, Plywood (Diags.172, 176, 195 of 1943-1948) 8. Low Machinery Wagon, Lowmac 4-wheel, 21-ton (inc BR Diags.2/240 etc of 1949/51) 9. Low Machinery Wagon, Flatrol 4-wheel, 20-ton (inc BR Diag.2/512 of 1949) 10. RCH Coal Wagon 5-, 6-, 7- & 8-plank (1887-1907) 11. Single Bolster Wagon (inc BR Diags.1/400, 1/401, 1/402 & 1/405 of 1949 on) 12. Tube Wagon Unfitted, 30ft 6ins & 32ft 0in (BR Diags.1/447 & 1/448 of 1951 and 1954) Brian

Hello everyone In the light of Graham's comments and the notes just arrived from Chris, I will be slightly revamping Mini-Poll No.5 to include what I can without knocking off balance what is already listed. Brian

Hello everyone Chris has kindly sent the additional notes. Brian Additional Notes from Chris Knowles-Thomas SR Diag.1379. 8-plank. 9ft wb. Unfitted. Diag.1380. 5-plank. 9ft wb. Unfitted Diag.1400. 8-plank. 10ft wb. Unfitted. Diag.1377. 8-plank. 10ft wb. AVB. Diag.1375. 5-plank. 10ft wb. Unfitted. Wartime design; also supplied to LNER & LMS. BR Diag.1/039. 5-plank. 10ft wb. AVB (& unfitted?). Corrugated steel ends, sheet rail. Diag.1/044. 5-plank. 10ft wb. Unfitted. Corrugated steel ends. Diag.1/041. Steel. 10ft wb. AVB & unfitted. NB. I have concentrated on straight 'High Goods' wagons but there are shock absorbing variants which could be added. Also note that under the 1955 Modernisation Plan, BR equipped multitudes of previously unfitted wagons with AVB if their wheelbase was 10ft+.

Hello everyone Chris has asked me to post his initial comments on his behalf. More to follow, I believe. Brian Notes from Chris Knowles-Thomas Firstly (notwithstanding the pre-1923 spec POs and BR single bolsters), your Mini-Poll No.4 was largely orientated to LNER wagons. As the LNER is the only company (in my view) to have any decent 'high goods' opens on the RTR market I think you were justified in not including any. That said I agree with Graham's broad thrust – we are poorly served as regards General Merchandise Opens (and to a lesser extent vans). As Graham says the majority of wagons (apart from minerals) in 1948 were opens and ordinary vans. On top of that, of the vans and opens alone, only 31% were vans while 69% were general merchandise opens. As far as the RTR market is concerned there are only 2½ high goods (ie 5-/6-planks or so) which are worth considering in my view: * LNER 6-plank by Oxford, presumably Diag.3. Very nice, though it ought to have Morton brake gear rather than the 'Either Side' it has. * LNER Steel by Bachmann, Diags.186, 190, 194. Again, very nice. * LMS 5-plank currently (only?) by Hornby, Diag.1892. This is the venerable Airfix (?) moulding as far as the body is concerned. I give it half because: a) Hornby don't give it the obvious LMS or BR liveries, only spurious PO ones, and b) it could do with a decent underframe. Incidentally the LMS built these both unfitted and with AVB. The fitted ones had 8-shoe brakes which has never (?) been offered RTR. Ramsay describes this as a hybrid LMS/GWR Open but to me it looks more LMS. It does look a lot like some late LNER and SR 5-planks as well. There is a Dapol 4-plank which Ramsay describes as based on a GWR design. If so, how accurate it is I don't know and I doubt that they survived to 'modern' times. To be continued…

Hello everyone Subsequent to our recent wagon discussions, I asked The Poll Team if they had any comments. I believe Chris Knowles-Thomas will reply directly here shortly, but John Lewis has asked me to post his notes below on his behalf. Brian Notes from John Lewis I do not have figures for post-WW2, but c.1930 the number of PO wagons was approximately equal to the number of railway company owned ones, so you would be advised to buy/make a coal wagon every time you made/bought a company owned one, and I am sure this applied to a post-WW2 layout. I think it is important to realise that there was no such thing as an ‘average railway’. An average is made up of (lots of) individual figures, some of which will differ wildly from the average (the 'outliers’). You have to consider what traffic flows you want to have on your railway and decide what wagons and coaches would be needed for it. Having decided that, you ought to think about what would have been truly common user and what would belong to the pre-WW2 company that operated your railway. In BR days the coaches would be ones from the pre-Nationalisation company, except to which BR coaches had appeared (or if you want BR coaches). In certain cases, there might have been through coaches from other railways, which could complicate matters. In the case of railway company wagons, I think the figures were something like: 5 x LMS 4 x LNER 3 x GWR 1.5 x SR. But this would only really have applied pre-WW2 to common user wagons; vacuum fitted wagons in general were not common user and might have been expected to be most common on their owning company. The majority of (ex-) railway owned wagons would have been ordinary opens followed by ordinary covered goods, plus whatever you wanted to cater for the traffic flows on your line. On and after 1939 things changed and all, except specialist wagons like oil and chemical tanks, were taken over by the Government, later by BR, and became common user. This included PO coal wagons which, as the war went on, started appearing anywhere in the country, a process that continued after the war. If you are modelling this era. you also need to factor in the construction of 16-ton mineral wagons in place of PO coal wagons. I hope this is of some use. The generalisations are rather crude!

Thanks Tony No problem at all - just a little 'cross wiring' (to coin a bit of a pun in relation to the Retford situation!) Perhaps I can clarify a point whilst writing? There is a possible misconception that any of the Polls we have run in the past - as well as any of the current Mini-Polls - have simply been 'a list of stuff'. They have been carefully balanced along with much detail. They are - and were - for modellers and collectors. In the case of the Mini-Polls on Gilbert's thread, they are aimed at getting people to think constructively about what might have been seen at Peterborough North in steam days and what might be useful to him and others in RTR form. They are drawing much considered, well thought out and friendly debate. However, even with those, I have had to include the following rider in each introduction: If you vote on the thread, please feel free to explain why you have chosen your selection – hopefully, that will promote some interesting debates – but please do not take it as an excuse to start up the old chestnut of ‘kits vs RTR’! Experience has shown me that as soon as we start a RTR discussion, it won't be long before someone chimes in with accusations of us 'having it in' for the kit makers or telling us we are responsible for 'duplication'. We haven't 'got it in' for the kit makers - in fact, we used to refer readers of The Guide to any item that had a kit existing - and no-one has ever supplied a shred of evidence for duplication. There are many folk in our community who would like to 'make things' but now can't due to ill health or for one of a myriad of other valid reasons. The RTR market is seemingly booming and that can only be good for us all in the long run. Hope that helps. Brian

Many thanks John All votes duly logged and acknowledged with the 'Thx' tick. I didn't list the LNER 6-plank as it is already made RTR by Oxford. Having had some good chats earlier in the thread with Graham (LNER4479), I have made some alterations to the content of Mini-Poll No.5 (next Monday) to include more 'Opens''. Brian

Thanks Mark Any idea if they were 'regulars' at PN? Brian

Hello John I have just re-read your post on Tony Wright's thread. My apologies...I have mis-read it as you wanting to see RTR models made, whereas you were referring to Parkside Kits. I haven't logged your votes above on the basis that you are not interested in duplications and any votes here must be on the basis of what you would realistically buy if ever made. Apologies again. Brian

Hello everyone A picture on page 119 of Rail Centres: Peterborough shows three Stanton wagons in 1965 (according to the caption). Are these LMS Diag.1806 Cement Hoppers? Were they 'regulars' at PN? Brian

Hello John Banana Vans are available for your vote over on Gilbert's Peterborough North thread. Brian