Brassey

The way to gain experience is to do it. So go for it and be grateful that the brake shoes aren't 3 layers of etches as is the case in some kits!

These are already available as kits

Good to see you having a go at a challenge. I doubt you will need a spacer where the pivot is unless something is attached to that location. I might have soldered the beam to the other side of the pivot.

Very nice but too late for my period. I have a C 0-8-0 to build in 4mm. I think they look good with the smaller boiler anyway

Returning to operations, such documents are useful in planning: My question now is, how long did it take to change loco at a main station. For example, one express is timed only 2 minutes at Hereford and is listed as to set down passengers only, so no time to change a loco. Others have longer such as 15 minutes. Is that enough to change a loco? Received wisdom is that the Bristol GWR engines ran expresses through to Shrewsbury but was that always the case? Did some locos get changed at Hereford?

Yes apologies for the depth of focus on the picture but I did build it as a single slip though with much more extreme curvature than the original as has the whole layout. Talking of compromise, the prototype picture shows that the railway boundary was marked throughout by a hedge. I was reluctant to make about 6 metres of model hedge, so my layout has fencing. Stations further along the line did have fences so it's no out of keeping.

Thanks Mikkel. I meant to have said that I have now resolved to build the tender first! One of the three tenders is for a small Jumbo/Whitworth yet to be started. The other tender is for a Coal Engine. I also have 3 uncomplete Coal Tanks one of which is lined and is now just missing its plates! For me there is a challenge in maintaining the discipline in this "hobby". A couple of years back my new year's resolution was not to build things on a whim but to stick to a plan to stop having unfinished projects. I am STILL trying to complete the stalled projects in my cabinet of shame! It was always tempting to build the latest kit or respond to something that was in vogue on a forum. A lot of what I have half completed was to test techniques such as springing. Others have stalled whilst I get to grips with the art of lining. I only finished the Dean Goods when I realised goods engines were no longer lined at my period. I built an outside cylinder County to test clearances. The PLAN is to build the trains in the order as they appear in the timetable. My hope is to eventually replicate a day's timetable from 1912. This might sound over ambitious but there were 90 train movements through the station of which most went and came back. So that's 45 trains. Some shuttled up and down all day and some formations were identical so the actual number will be fewer. I think I can get by with 30 locos. That is a lot less than some peoples RTR collections! But being pre-grouping and LNWR/GWR all mine have to be built. The starting point is a branch line train which was the first through the station in the morning and is quite simple. The loco and carriages for this are all built and almost ready. The next train was a GWR fast goods for which I have a choice of 3 Dean Goods but only one break van. The problem with his approach is that managing it does become more like a job. There is always the temptation for me to start something new and I have erred now and then with a few more new projects but otherwise the mojo might completely disappear. I am hopelessly behind in carriage building. The truth is I need the stock to test the locos. However, the Special DX was the first LNWR loco I attempted. I thought an 0-6-0 goods engine would be quite simple; how wrong I was. When the instructions have a sheet of "special instrucions for P4" you are in for a challenge. I won't bore readers with all the details but last night it ran superbly with a tender attached. I had to raise the body slightly to match the tender which Im think has helped with the clearances which are TIGHT in P4 on such a slight loco. The cab sides were quite a feature of Webb and pre-Webb locos. Unlike a GWR engine like a Dean Goods, there are no internal springs in the cab. The internal cab box shaped splashers form seats for both the driver and fireman. On the left hand side of these was installed the screw reverser of which quite a lot of the associated workings were the other side of the spectacle plate which is why that was boxed in. On the fireman's side there was other pipe work. Anyway that's what it looks like on the GA drawings. I have modelled the screw reverser (which casting comes with the kit) and you can see the reversing lever in the picture coming out of the box in front of the spectacle plate. Pic of cab interior to follow showing reverser. I have also since put on the cab roof and the buffer housings.

Thanks for the input guys. As can be seen from my entries of March 2018, the trackwork has been down for years. I am not sure I appreciate the difference between a Barry slip and a single slip in this application but I built it as a single slip. At the time I used the 1909 LNWR track specs as provided in the diagrams on sale via the LNWR Society. Richard Foster supplied the signal box workings courtesy of the SRS and, despite there being 6 sets of "points" on the layout, there are only 3 levers (switches) as all work in tandem. All are operated by Tortoise motors which also change the polarity. I can't say the slip wasn't a challenge in wiring as I got one wire mixed up which took an age to resolve. The electrics work happly on both swiched DC and DCC throughout. The main challenge has been getting the TOU's sorted which I think is the main cause of derailments as can be seen from my previous observation: My main concern when planning the layout was the cant on the curve throughout the lines and how I would get pointwork across from one line to another without creating a kink. The outer rails at their extreme are 2mm higher than the inner (scale 6"). I built the yard, which is flat, 1 mm below the main lines. I think the ply wood road bed I used bent to conform to a shape that avoided any kinks and avoided any problem that way. The other issue is that the point work on the main lines are all on curves, I am no engineer, but centrifugal force means that there is a tendency for vehicles to be forced to the outer road and not take the diverging road. I have rebuilt some of the point blades which has improved things but it still persists. So my conclusion is that it is the fairly basic TOU system that I used that is the cause. I have bought some Exactoscale Tortoise TOU to replace the crude system I have. But to install these easily and avoid crawling under means dismantling the layout to turn it over. This I am currently loathed to do as the layout is wedged into my railway box room at the moment and only just fits whilst a better location is planned and it is moved again. And for the reason stated below acknowledged 3 years ago, this is not a priority: So my focus is on building the 98% of the trains that did not use the point work and the only work is to reattach the point blades that often come desoldered.

Thanks John. Peter

I can't help much but seem to recall that DC1 could not be vacuumed.

Progress on the layout has continued at what seems like a snails pace despite lockdown. The platform now has a fence along its length and a waiting hut. In the distance can be seen a signal box (without windows) and a signal (still unpainted). The builders have started to tile the roof on the still mocked-up station building but they seem to have evaporated. This is the traditional view of the station from the overbridge that has now also been built. That now needs a road covering of Chinchilla dust but building of stock for the layout needs attention.

I've found that once I've built the loco, the enthusiasm for the tender wains. Having built three 3500 gall GWR tenders for the DEan Goods projects in a batch, attention has turned to tenders for stalled LNWR projects. Herewith 3 1800 gall tenders all from the George Norton stable now sold via LRM: Today the number plates arrived for the Special DX from Narrow Planet (along with a set for another GWR 517). LNWR 3188 was at 31 Abergavenny in 1912. So I now have even more incentive to get on and get this finished. Probably been about 6 years so far:

Layout on RMWeb: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/71033-berrington-and-eye-1912/

There were trains that were described in the Working Time table as vacuum goods. Whether these express goods trains were completely fitted I do not know. However, as they ran at night, nobody is going to come up with a photograph to prove one way or another.

Google failed me so how do I find this e-group please

I copied the original GWR document which is well out of copyright by now. I don’t have the Beckett book which is outside of my period which is 1912. You have made a great start on the formation. I too have a couple of earlier Haye 70 footers in my pile that would have come down from Birkenhead. I model from Shrewsbury down towards Hereford so have some info on the area. Some of it is at Kew on the through services. Information on the local services formations is a lot harder to come by though! There are some Working Time Tables on the Clemens web site if you have not found them yet

Rest assured that no one has a photo of that train because it ran at night in the dark...

GWR Winter 1935-36 - even more vans PS: + means non-gangwayed. The return balance workings are on the right. SX Saturdays excepted SO Saturdays only MO Mondays only

Unfortunately I can't find that train in my references. It is slightly odd that it was en route so long. The late departure of the 21:50 from Shrewsbury and the fact that it only has 2 passenger carriages suggests it is a parcel train or similar and would have arrived in Paddington very late. I have found other earlier ex-Birkenhead trains with vehicles that could have been remarshalled and held at Chester but again these are only described as "van" so no help I am afraid. The 1946 GWR Working Time Table has a 22:15 from Shrewsbury listed as a Passenger and Parcels train. It only ran as far as Paddington on a Sunday where it arrived at 5:20. All other days it ran to Birmingham

If it were intended to be a corridor vehicle it would have an X next to it in the Marshalling Diagram. It is unlikely to be a goods vehicle. I have seen break thirds described as van thirds though that could refer to vehicles with luggage compartments but no brake. Some are described as "wingless vans" which meant without lookouts because of the loading gauge. Some GWR vans were banned on the LNWR because a lookout struck the spider bridge at Crewe once. If i were up to me, I would assume it was any van type vehicle that was available and not to be intended to be used by the guard as a brake van. What train is it (ie time) and where did it come from prior to Shrewsbury? The previous train may give a clue.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/109619289726001/permalink/308201896534405/

Nice to see some unfinished WIP. I've taken to building the tenders first as, once the loco is done and running, I've found the mojo flagging to get the tender done. That's why I'm now having to batch build 3 LNWR tenders to catch up. From now on it's tender first

I am sure Mallard/Blacksmith did D15 which is a similar break third. I might even have one in the kit mountain.

I have an LRM Radial tank as well as a large Jumbo/Precedent in the kit mountain. Currently building an LRM small jumbo/whitworth starting with the 1800 gal tender.

Yes the existing Stevenson’s Carriages and Worsley Works kits for example and David Geen had a few too before he retired