D9012

Paul, your efforts and those of Mr Larkin and others should be celebrated and never underestimated. In my earlier post I made the point the books are fantastic, and also that things can go wrong in any book. There then came a lot of nonsense, which I won’t repeat. You say David is not an academic, which, if you don’t mind me saying, is doing him a slight disservice. He may not be so by trade, but the extent of his services to railway history warrant a higher moniker (and your own efforts aren’t half bad, either 😉😉😉)

Thanks Dave. That’s a almost a compliment 😂

Thank you Mr Bacon😂

I’ll add, that none of this will put me off buying Mr. Larkin’s books - as no one else has done anything like them, they are invaluable. I was simply asking a question to understand some context.

Oh good grief did I not say at the beginning that they are fantastic books?

Dear Clive Mortimore My apologies that spellchecker got your name wrong. and my name is Alan Cooper that’s one L two Os and one P I use D9012 here because RMWEB invited me to create a user name, and it amused me to do so, like a great many others on here. Do you belittle them too? You are not alone in having your name spelt wrong, as me and my wife both know, but I’m not small minded enough to be upset by it, nor to be upset by 3 additional exclamation marks. But you leapt in with “give us the benefit of your knowledge “ when you could have enquired much more politely whether I had anything else to add, when quite probably, from your association with Mr Larkin, you knew full well that I wouldn’t have such information. RMWEB is a good resource for people to learn from each other, and I find BOTH your answers distasteful and not in the spirit of theses forums.

Sorry, I disagree. I think it was balanced to acknowledge points raised, but asks for context “it would be interesting to know”. In state at the beginning the books are fantastic.

Thanks Mark for pointing out the non-pool answer - such an obvious answer for that one in some ways, but I’d missed it. as for Clive Mortimer , I am sure David and the rest of us would happily like to see what further information you have on the subject. please note I have great respect for anyone who publishes a book. Do you answer all questions in such a sarcastic, ignorant and offensive manner? I asked a fair question because I DIDN’T KNOW. That’s what questions are for, to learn from the answers - you sound like a very ignorant and pompous English teacher I had at school. the rest of you who’ve replied, I thank you all most courteously - it is appreciated.

I have volumes 2 to 5 of these books, and the range of photos and information is fantastic. But I’d agree with others, there’s a number of proof/typo errors that are not necessarily covered by errata. So just for information purposes here - there are simple things like the wagon data panels being shaded yellow, a panel may be unshaded in error. I’ve seen paragraphs repeated. A 6 digit wagon number shown as 7 digits. These are all things that may go wrong in any book Of the steel minerals, the Hurst Nelson batch split UK/France suggests 888 were built, quoting numbers for the UK batch - adding up to 680 - and the French batch were given a range of 308. Is this a typo? As by deduction there were 208 wagons BUT a bigger question from me is, are these books meant to be definitive based on available records? THe steel minerals to 1/100 slope sides do NOT include any reference to the 700 built for Stewart’s and Lloyds, of which Bachmann has produced a model, and there are 1923 spec wooden wagons built in the late 1930s featuring in Bill Hudson’s books which look very much like they should be included (it seems quite unlikely an owner would lose all 50 wagons before 1948) in the appropriate volume but there’s no mention. It would be interesting to know!!!!

Electrical planning for Hackney For a couple of years (I'm very slow) I’ve focused my efforts on the electrical needs of the layout to support the operational aspects I envisage. Virtually every aspect has been learned from scratch by reading much of what I’d archived from magazines, articles on the web (Brian Lambert’s electrical tutorials are fantastic!) and from checking various aspects with EBMRS club members, as I’ve been a complete novice. I’ve now graduated from complete novice to simply knowing a little bit, and I’m sure my approach would well be considered naïve! But I’m enjoying the journey and have a far better understanding now. Having constructed a plan, I’ve drawn it all out – all 60 pages of it – and this helped identify aspects I’d not considered, or focused my mind so that I came up with better solutions. I spent ages looking through various electrical suppliers’ web pages for their ranges of switches and so on, and I’ve finally got confident enough that I recently ordered all the wire and connectors I’m likely to need. When I finally finished the electrical plan I started thinking about the control panel requirements. The layout could - could! – get 6 or 7 trains moving at once, but I’ve planned for 4 controllers. There’s only one of me (at the last count), but I’ll be able to simply set up 3 trains to keep circuiting whilst I shunt or organise the fiddle yard with the 4th controller. The fiddle yard has 13 through storage tracks and 7 dead-end tracks, the controls for which are organised into 4 eastern and 4 western groups through 2-pole 6-way turret switches. The scenic side is also divided into 8 sections, up and down main, up loop, up and down tube lines, branch, reception yard and coal yard, again with turret switches. The principle I’ve planned is that each turret switch is split, one pole for the positive track feed and the other pole to control LEDs, with positions being ‘off’, then controllers A, B, C and D in turn. The LED side will show on a panel of LEDs to demonstrate that a particular controller and section are in use. This all means that I can assign any section to any controller, with the LED display helping to avoid any confusion. I hope. Then there’s the switches. There’s a lot of points, most will be Seep motors so need a CDU, but the scenic side are constructed from C&L components and I opted for Cobalt Omega motors for these; the wiring is therefore different for the two types. I’ve designed the system to light LEDs on a track panel to denote which route each point is set for, through the turret switches so the LEDs are only illuminated when a controller is selected for the various sections. I haven’t decided on how I’ll operate signals yet, but have considered the need for a switch on the control panel for each one; and so far, so good… Up to this point I have a need for a control panel that will have 4 controllers, 16 rotary switches, 64 LEDs to show control/sections in use, 34 switches for fiddle east, 17 switches for fiddle west, 50 switches for the points and signals on the scenic section, 25 isolation section switches, 2 track diagram panels and 160+ LEDs on them to indicate routes set. The original intention was to include all the track and signal switches on the diagram adjacent to the part it operated. Then I planned it all out and realised the control panel would, if done ‘properly’, fill over half the operating well in the layout with little room for me. Hmmm, I thought. Or maybe something a little more pithy, so I had to re-jig the idea. I considered dividing the panel in two, having them on wheeled stands, or having them on drawer runners beneath the layout, but no, it still wouldn’t work. The picture attached shows the draft plan for the control desk for the scenic section, and you will see that I have colour coded the switches to match the colours used on the track plan, picture also attached. My solution was helped by a question from a fellow club member. He asked me if I knew of any signal box diagrams so that he could produce something for his layout, and I found a fantastic one of Gowhole Goods Junction on the Midland Railway, dated 1964. The link is www.lymmobservatory.net. Ping! If I separated the controls from the plan, I’d have one desk for the scenic side and one desk for the fiddle side. The fiddle track diagram would go on the wall, opposite the control desk, and the scenic side diagram on a frame opposite the control position, much like a real signal box, hurrah! All it needs is a bit of trunking to take the wiring for the LEDs, and all the switches will be in numerical order on the control desks, in similar vein to a ‘box. All it needs is a bit of route learning to help it along, and as I’ve devised it, no problem. I’d always wanted the track diagrams to look ‘the part’, and if you look at box diagrams you’ll see the tracks are often drawn in a number of colours or simply black. I’ve determined the coloured tracks represent the track circuits, for which the signal will have a Rule 55 white diamond plate on the post. So, as with Bob, I’ve taken that principle for my own needs and applied a colour for each of the 8 section switches. My drawing for the scenic track diagram is attached. I don’t have a CAD program, but I used Excel spreadsheets and the drawing objects within it to produce lines, curves, shapes and so on, and coloured them accordingly. You’ll see (if you enlarge it) each point and signal is numbered, and each track is named, using Gowhole as my inspiration. I’ve a few tweaks to make to it, but when I’m ready I’ll see about getting it printed in one piece and laminating it between one clear and one white sheet of acrylic. I’ve already found one company that can provide cut-to-size sheets, and I reckon the two diagrams can be built for around £70 in total. The acrylic should be able to take the LED bezels ok, and I’ll build it into a slim frame to protect the electrics. In all, I’m very pleased with the progress I’ve made and very much looking forward to having a working diagram!

I thought it would be interesting to have a brief overview of the movement of oil by train, as i’ll have at least one block train on Hackney. This information has been garnered from the HMRS-published book by Alan Coppin, ‘Oil on the Rails’, an interesting read. The first recorded imports of oil date back to 1860, and the RCH first considered the construction of rail oil tanks in 1868. The oldest refinery in the UK was Pumpherston, adjacent to the new town of Livingstone. It was built in 1884 (but closed in 1914) and was the first of 25 refineries to have been built in the UK. As of 1999 only 12 remained. Shell and BP owned 5 each, Esso, Burmah and Wiggins 2 each, and one each for Mobil, Briggs, Philmac, Fina/Total, Gulf, Amoco, Philips, Texaco and Conoco. There were a number of important rail distribution centres. Purfleet and Ardrossan could accommodate 100 wagons, Bowling 150, Hull 200, Thames Haven, Llandarcy and Manchester 300 each, Avonmouth 350 and Stanlow an enormous 750 wagons. Apparently a train could leave Stanlow every 30 minutes! Oil trains were, unsurprisingly, subject to some route restrictions. Block trains were normally between 20 and a maximum of 56 wagons, though limited to 20 in Scotland and only 16 on the far north line. Class A trains required 2 barrier wagons at each end. The motor industry really started to expand after the First World War and by 1940 there were 6,905 oil tanks in service; by the end of WW2 it had grown to 9,136, and by 1960 about 12,000. In 1954 there were around 80 block trains daily, but most oil tanks were moved in general goods trains. By this time there had been 120 oil companies recorded in the RCH handbook, with 245 depots at 195 locations. The highlights were Trafford Park, Manchester, with no less than 17 separate rail depots, 11 depots at Netherfield and Colwick and 9 at Stanlow. The trains on the North London line seemed to be principally between the Thames estuary and Avonmouth. The book has around a dozen drawings of RCH wagons from 1907 onwards, covering 10T to 35T. The most common we’d have seen in the ‘50s would have been 14T tanks, though there were some 20T tanks around. The 14T tanks barrels were originally held in place by ropes and stays, but from 1942 an anchor mount was developed. The photo of the Shell wagons shows the pre-war arrangement 35T tanks were introduced from 1957 for class A and class B fuels, plus a creosote tank for BR and a bitumen tank in 1959, but the 14T anchor mount design was still being built into the 1960s. 100T bogie wagons didn’t appear until 1966. The 3rd photo appears to show bitumen tanks (though I’m not certain) and the final picture shows two Esso 35T tanks in different liveries. The black tank is a Class B (it has a hand-wheel on the roof) and would be heated for more viscous payloads. The other is silver and is a Class A for the more readily flammable liquids. Pictures from Creative Commons sources. First picture is 9F 92136 slogging up Lickey Bank, banked by an unknown loco(s).

For quite a few years I had been collecting kits, stock and materials, but it has not been until I researched Finchley Road for a club layout that I got drawn into the North London Line – the scale and variety of traffic is astonishing and I kick myself for having missed the opportunity to trainspot on the route in my youth. I managed to travel between Broad Street and Willesden only twice in about 1979/1980. I like the run-down element of the east end of London in the fifties & sixties, and whilst I want something that reflects the character of the area I didn’t want to slavishly model a location. The National Library of Scotland is a fantastic on-line resource of OS mapping going back to the 19th century, and I followed the North London route around on those old maps looking for a section with natural over-bridge breaks. I settled on Hackney Graham Road, the location of an ex-Great Eastern goods and mineral yard between Dalston and Hackney Central. I can model, representatively but at a scale distance, the actual bridges of Greenwood Road and Navarino Road at the west end, and the Cambridge to Liverpool Street railway line bridge at the east end. The entire concept of the layout is to ‘borrow’ the location and adapt it for my own purposes. For instance, I will include a number of houses and The Navarino Arms from Navarino Road, the rear of all 9 terraced houses from Navarino Grove, and a handful of buildings from besides the railway overbridge. There was an allotment garden between Navarino Grove and the goods yard which I shall represent. Furthermore there are a selection of buildings from Cottrill Road and Spurstowe Terrace to be included, though long-demolished. So much for the real place; I am making significant changes for my model. I have used an original 1911 proposal for an additional line between Feltham and Barking as justification to have a junction by Navarino Road which links with the Midland route, and have also created a tube line extension from the Moorgate area to Ilford with a station based on the famous Arnos Grove tube station. This helps to disguise the tracks leaving the scenic section. The original Graham Road goods yard is rebuilt to have some raised coal drops and 4 reception sidings which disappear under the Liverpool Street line. These sidings are used to service the coal yard and to handle trip freights to & from Wenlock Basin on the Regents Canal near to Farringdon; potentially there is a link to the Snow Hill line there. On the layout these use a dedicated single line which is presumed to follow the tube line beyond the station. The layout in summary • 16’ by 8’ with access along one side, operation from a central well. • Fiddle yard is 13 through loops, an access loop and 7 stub sidings. There are also 4 reception sidings and a passing loop which are two thirds in the fiddle area capable of holding trains. The longest train could be up to 10 coaches or 30 wagons. • There are up and down main lines, with a double junction at the west end. There is the single line to Wenlock Basin and up and down tube lines, and the reception sidings and passing loop mentioned above. The coal drop facility should hold around 30 wagons under cover. • Uses Peco code 75 track in the non-scenic area, C&L track in the scenic area. Operation I shall be able to operate a range of trains in a similar fashion to Hackney, but again it’s a bit of fun playing with history. Before the war there were regular services between St Pancras and Tilbury, between Broad Street and Southend and between Broad Street and Poplar. I shall make some representation of these. There was also a plan put forward to join up Alexandra Palace with Palace Gates via a tunnel, so I have suggested there could have been a circular service between Woolwich, Broad Street and Ally Pally. All these variations make for a stupidly busy scene. I reckon on having controls for up and down trains, shunting and the fiddle yard, and whilst there is only one of me I should be able to set freight trains running slowly around whilst I shunt as required Ongoing Construction Baseboards are 6mm ply, with side frames of a ply + 25mm pine block + ply sandwich, then criss-crossed with diagonal ply strip bracing as required for each board considering where points are positioned. The scenic boards are 3’6” deep (as I can access from both sides) and being this wide I have used 3 bolts to join them and keep them in line. Supports are 4 sets of frames about 8’ long and 30” wide with angle bracing, adjustable feet as used on kitchen cupboards, and with the lower bracing used to support old doors used as shelves. I’ve worked out magnet positions for uncouplers and started to fit them, and have been systematically working through each track to ensure the isolation gaps are correct – in the fiddle yard I’m using Peco plastic fishplates for this purpose. The track ends at baseboard joins are largely on copperclad sleepers, where I’ve had some repairs and cleaning to do. I’ve also started drilling pilot holes for the Seep motors. And I’ve worked out the principles of the point rodding

Like perhaps many of you I have started more than one layout only for circumstances to contrive its demise before getting too far. The aim for this grand scheme is to address all those years of under-achievement, but there have already been challenges – not the least of which is a 250-mile house move. Originally the layout was to have been in the garage, but it quickly became a dumping ground. And it was cold, damp and dusty. I do not recommend garages to anyone contemplating a model railway! Once the house was sorted it was agreed I would have a dedicated shed in the back garden. We found a ‘value’ company on the web, I dug foundations, family came around to help, and on the weekend the shed was delivered (as a very big kit of parts) it started to rain and continued raining for about 4 months. I managed to keep the worst of the water off, but couldn’t erect the shed until the following spring when it had aired off. I had the panels for a 20’ by 10’ shed all around the garden drying out! The shed was eventually completed, including finishing the interior in Midland Railway chocolate and cream, based on interior photos of station buildings on the Keighley and Worth Valley Railway. My wife made some curtains, and my mate Dave (RMWeb Chris P Bacon) sorted the electrics and flooring - it was well lit, heated and insulated and was warmer than the house in winter! The layout got set up, track laid almost to completion and after about 3 years a sudden change in family circumstances led to a move to the south-west, a new home and an opportunity to move the layout indoors to a dedicated room, providing 15mm was shaved off one end! That's where I'm currently at - repairing the damage caused during the move (despite crating it up) and then finishing the small areas that were not quite completed. One other aspect is that the new home had to be renovated, so the layout was stored in a (dry) shed for a year - and then I discovered one board had a bad dip in it, requiring strong supports to be screwed in to make it level once more. Thankfully the framing in the other boards seem to be sufficient. I may yet have a challenge for the height of scenery at each end, due to sloping ceilings, but we shall see what happens as life progresses.

Indeed ! As a youth in about 1979 my mate and I stayed at his gran's in Hanwell for a couple of days and we spent a great few hours at Ealing Broadway watching the main line and the tube, Interesting piece of historical development!

It’s quite common for modellers to come up with a layout based on a ‘might have been’ railway. The East Beds club layout ‘Sutton’ is based on the Lancashire, Derbyshire and East Coast Railway’s proposal to build a deep sea port on the east coast, and their aborted model of Finchley Road was to be an adaptation of both what was really there together with the genuine proposal for a link line from there to Bushey. But other proposals for north London railways never came to fruition… The 1860s was a mad period of railway development and there were a number of schemes put forwards. 1862 The Tottenham & Hampstead Junction Railway (THJR) wanted junctions at Kentish Town to go via Camden Town, Eversholt Street (by Euston), Lincoln’s Inn Fields, Covent Garden Market to Charing Cross. 1864 A proposal to link Hendon (Midland Railway) with Chelsea, effectively duplicated the West London Line, then onwards to Bricklayers Arms via a tortuous route with very sharp curves. There were other proposals to link Chelsea with Victoria and Victoria with Westminster. The Mid-London Railway was created to link Kensington with Victoria via Farringdon Street, linking with Paddington and Fenchurch Street. 1871 The London Central wanted to run from Euston and St Pancras to Charing Cross. 1888 The Metropolitan Outer Railway Circle actually started work on a route but had to delay and eventually get Parliamentary powers to stop, presumably due to lack of finance. It started at Ealing and would have travelled via Hendon (MR), Southgate (GN) to Tottenham (GE) These are interesting enough, but any of the following 11 (yes, eleven!!) proposals could have had a significant impact on the railways of Hackney. 1864 proposal made to link the Great Eastern (GER) with the London, Chatham & Dover (LCDR) and London & Blackwall (L&BR )railways, from Old Ford via Mile End Road, Aldgate and Fenchurch Street. Old Ford is very close to Hackney. 1864 A suggestion to link Coppermill Bridge (Tottenham) GE with Farringdon Street (Metropolitan) so giving access to the cross-London Snow Hill line. This would have been via Springfield Park, Stoke Newington, Abney Park, connecting with the North London Line (NLL) by a spur near Canonbury, then Angel Islington. Canonbury is less than 2 miles from Canonbury. A scheme named The London & Blackwall, Great Northern and Midland Junction aimed to join the L&BR near Shadwell with the GN at Finsbury Park and the MR at Kentish Town. Shadwell is about 2 miles south of Hackney There were two proposals to build a line from Walthamstow via Clapton to run into Broad Street, plus a further one to run from Walthamstow to Tottenham This would have been very close to Dalston Junction. 1882 The Regents Canal City & Docks Railway was to run from Paddington to Royal Albert Dock via the City, joining with both the MR and GN on the way. This could have influenced links to the NLL. 1901 The North East London Railway proposed a line from Cannon Street to Tottenham via Kingsland Road, with a later projection to Southgate on the GN. Kingsland Road is extremely close to Hackney. 1903 A scheme to run from Monument to Tottenham, all under ground, plus a branch to Victoria Park (Hackney) on the NLL. 1905 Hammersmith, City & North East London Railway – Knightsbridge, Hyde Park Corner, Piccadilly Circus, Charing Cross, Ludgate Circus, Cannon Street, Hackney Road, Tottenham to Palmers Green 1906 The London Outer Railway Circle aimed to build a line from Feltham to Barking 1910 The Greater London Railway was planned for a full 57 miles from Feltham to Tilbury and Victoria Dock, connecting to all the main lines north of the Thames. Its ambition was scaled back 3 years later to a more conservative 18 miles for a version from Brentford (London & South Western) to Wood Green. 1930 The Feltham to Tilbury scheme was back before the parliament select committee. Costed at nearly £10m it was soon accepted it could not make a profit. Date unknown – a plan to link Cambridge Heath on the GE with the East London Line at Shoreditch, to give access to the Southern railway companies at New Cross. That’s a whole heap of railway proposals, showing (in part) just how much importance was placed on the existing system’s perceived inability to move the stuff quickly around the regions. You may have noted the apparent obsession with railways having to join up with Tottenham or reach the docks, as both would open up useful routes for new traffic – or so they had hoped. In most cases the parliament select committee rejected the proposals, or there was no appetite to invest in the projects. Even without all these there was a fair amount of development and variety, easily visible on the rail map of London. Whichever way you look, there’s plenty of opportunity to model a ‘what might have been’. Here I’ve marked the North London Line, Finchley Road and Hackney Graham Road in red as a reference.