t-b-g

It is famous because lots of people have heard of it. Does it have to be any more complicated than that? On the basis that the world has to have a "most famous" loco, Flying Scotsman has all the credentials to take that honour. Sure the LNER publicity machine had a lot to do with it but that just proves that they did a good job. It probably all dates back to a quirk of fate of the loco being built right at the start of the LNER period and being chosen for the great exhibitions. Right from the start, the LNER publicity machine was producing books and literature and ensuring that their great looking new loco was all over the press. Since then, the loco has appeared in films, on the telly and in the USA and Australia as well as having some impressive railway acheivements under its belt.. If there is any loco with more great acheivements and a more interesting history, I can't think of it. Tony

And how many photos do you see looking down onto the decking of a MR signal gantry? Superb stuff again. Tony

You are not alone! I have switched the date of my modelling a few times, from the late 50s, back to the 30s and then to pregrouping times. But if ever a massive attack of inspiration hit me between the eyeballs, then this collection of photos is it! The idea of the last remnants of LNER liveries, with a few GNR 4-4-0s on their last legs, coupled with smart new "British Railways" on the tender and perhaps even a BR Blue express loco are setting the creative juices flowing. Locos with E or M prefixes and carriages in Teak, painted brown, LMS maroon, Blood & Custard and even Plum & Spilt Milk. Perhaps once the current several projects are done....................

I am beginning to have a slight concern over this thread! When you eventually run out of photos I am going to suffer severe withdrawal symptoms. Perhaps you could start putting the first batches on again, in an effort to fool us into thinking the supply goes on for ever! I think I may have a slight correction for you on Vol3177, the "J1" at Victoria. I am not sure what it is (Could be a J3,4 or 5) but I am pretty sure it isn't a "1" which had a raised running plate like the J2 and the J6. Many thanks once again. I know how long it takes scanning and fiddling about with photos and I (and many others, I am sure) really appreciate you making the effort to share this treasure with us. Tony

If you two boys could play nicely together instead of all this fighting, just imagine what a train set you could build together! Superb work all round and some cracking good photography to show it off at its best. Tony

A bit earlier than your timescale but I recall an arranged shed/works visit with my dad in the 1970s (probably around 1977/8) It was a fascinating place and well worth trying to recreate in model form. Any room for Inverness station? Now that would make a model and a half!!

Nowt like a little friendly banter! Very nice!!!! 15 love.

No tin hat needed for that one! I recall talking to somebody (who is on RMWeb) a few years ago about a model of Nottingham Victoria, built "down under". I have thought about it once or twice but space and practicality keep putting me off. Not that long in 4mm scale but very, very wide, enough to make the middle unreachable. I can't remember the dimensions but I think it works out at something like 26' long and 8' wide. Pure magic this thread! Wonderful photos, full of the character and atmosphere that remind me why I like building models of such things, as I can never see them for real. Tony

Don't go too OTT!! I am sure I saw a bit of litter in one of the photos! You make a very good point there. How many modellers have the discipline to model "neat and tidy"? The other thing that stands out for me is the variation in the tones of the ballast, where sections have been attended to by the P. Way people. Many model layouts seem to have the track all the same colour and it just wasn't very often like that. There just isn't one "track colour".

I can't help thinking that the press release could have been worded better. The two conflicting dates of July for restoring services and September for repairing the railway just don't make any sense without some explanation of what those two phrases mean. The BBC News Website is now quoting September as the revised target date, with the railway people giving poor weather and difficult and potentially dangerous working conditions (which I can totally believe!) as the reasons. So it seems that a July re-opening is probably off the agenda as far as Stainforth & Hatfield is concerned, unless the BBC have read the press release and decided that is what it means but have got it wrong.

I might be being a bit dim here (not the first time) but that report says that they are hoping to restore services in July but that the railway won't be repaired until September. Might be a bit bumpy! I wonder if words haven't been chosen too carefully or if there is a cunning plan. Maybe September will be the completion of the repair but trains will be running before then.

I did hear that a short while ago the old rails were succesfully cut at both ends of the problem area, allowing a start on removing the damaged track. There was some concern as to what might happen when this was done as a rail twisted like that might whip around and do damage. Other than that, I can report a large amount of road activity involving very big lorries! Tony

I don't have the inclination to do the maths but for a slip carriage to stop from, say 50 or 60 mph in a platform it is going to have to be released some way before the platform, unless the passengers are going to be flung about by severe braking. Peter Denny had a slip carriage on Buckingham, but with inside bearings and low speeds the uncoupler was only just at the end of the platforms and the slow down and stop was a bit fierce. That used three link couplings with an "on board" uncoupling hook worked via a treadle under the carriage, activated by a tiny ramp between the tracks. Unless anybody has a huge layout, the actual uncoupling would very likely be off scene and perhaps a motorised carriage following behind the train is an easy option and does away with any coupling worries. It is very tricky to get a carriage to move realistically without it being powered, as you would struggle to replicate the brake being applied. Tony

If there has ever been a better stonework effect on a layout, I haven't seen it! I hope that the layout finds a good home and that wherever it ends up, we get a chance to see it from time to time to remind us just how good Tom was. Tony

Lovely stuff! I have always thought that the period immediately after nationalisation would be a good one to model but apparently there are very few folk interested in it. One of the big manufacturers once told me that anything with BRITISH RAILWAYS in full on the tender/tank side was a poor seller compared to other liveries. I suppose it was short lived but to be able to have LMS and LNER liveries, plus BRITISH RAILWAYS and the early crest and even some express locos in blue would make for a very unusual and interesting layout. Tony

Fair do Ian! He is certainly inspirational to a lot of people. I just took the swing in the thread to be to inspirational layout builders but I am happy to see the net cast wider than that! Tim has had a few articles in the recent press, about weathering. I can't recall which mag it was and as it isn't one I get, I can't look it up. Maybe Model Rail or Hornby magazine. He has also just had a second weathering DVD released via Activity Media and has filmed another DVD for release later this year. He lives a long way from me so we don't meet often but he has been here a few times doing a bit of very subtle restoration work on some parts of Buckingham. Hopefully he will be up this way again before long. Cheers, Tony

I am very pleased to call Tim Shackleton a friend and I have a huge respect for his modelling and his writing but an inspirational layout builder? I doubt that anybody could name a Shackleton layout and I am not even sure that I have ever seen or heard of him finishing one! I am not entirely sure that he would enjoy being named as "older" either! The bloke is only a few years older than me. No witty riposts please! Cheers, Tony

The extra work on the coal rails looks to be worthwhile, especially in 7mm. It has crossed my mind that the coupling rods may be better in the 7mm kit as the artwork may have been checked for scale before it was turned into metal and the error in the 4mm kit may have been corrected. Cheers, Tony

I really looked forward to seeing Borchester Market for the second time at Nottingham. I think that the design of the layout and the railway itself really stand up as a superb example of a proper operational model railway. It was let down for me by the stock and some of the operation. I recall reading that Frank Dyer was a bit of a stickler for his operators being highly skilled on the layout before they were allowed to operate in front of others. I saw rather too many locos come to a halt because points weren't set or sections weren't switched correctly and a lot of studying lists of what to do next. The other thing with the originbal stock was that nothing was unusual or "one offs". I recall reading how Frank Dyer got his atmosphere by modelling the day in, day out railway scene. On something like Borchester, that meant B1s, K3s, J39s, J6 & 11, J50 and all sorts of motive power appropriate to a secondary line. At Nottingham, when I looked, there was an A4, a 9F and Falcon on shed! It rather went against the spirit of what Frank Dyer was aiming to achieve. I appreciate that the current owners don't have the original stock but enough suitable RTR locos have been available to allow a more suitable loco stud and it rather spoiled the overall effect for me. The layout was still worth a good coat of looking at though. Allowing a train to be seen running along the back and round into the station, with off scene fiddle yards like those is something that more of us should think about. Brilliant design!

Dad's photo shows the loco standing in the sidings at the back of Nottingham Victoria and I have seen at least one other shot of her apparently standing light engine in a platform there. That plus the odd lamp code (looks like Class K - pick up freight) made me wonder if she was pottering about the station and doing a bit of local trip working. Maybe filling in between Grantham locals. Cheers, Tony

Your dad and my dad (or my uncle they both took photos and I am not sure whose is whose) must have been knocking about at Nottingham Victoria at pretty much the same time! I have his rather poor shot of 62000 there in that livery at around the same time. I wonder if it spent some time there as a station pilot? It is my favourite part of the world for railways so many thanks for posting. Tony

Model railways are strange things when it comes to prices and values. If you wanted to have something like Bramblewick built to commission, it would cost a fortune. Yet if you look at the number of P4 modellers, who model the NER and who have space for a 40' layout, you may be looking at the fingers on one finger, so the market is tiny. There is always the chance that somebody will but it and rip up the track to change it to 16.5mm gauge but I think that would be a shame. I recall that one very well known and highly respected large layout sold for as little as around £200, simply because the market place for a large and highly specialised layout was so small. I hope that the layout is saved, hopefully in a way which will allow it to be seen by others again. It is indeed a masterpiece of modelling and artistry and deserves to be retained in a sympathetic and appropriate way. Ideally it needs somebody with the sort of skills that Tom had but there ain't many around who come even close! Tony

Looking good! I like the mod for the cylinders and motion bracket. I tried to pursuade Malcolm to do something like that when he was designing it. Sometimes he would listen to me but more often he was not one for changing his mind once it was made up! You seem to have worked your way around the discrepancy in the coupling rod centres too. The rods were not drawn new for the K2 but were lifted from the J6 artwork. This is long before CAD drawing and all those kits were hand drawn. The rods in the K2 kit seem to have had their scaling slightly adrift in the etching process as the K2 rods are not the same length as rods produced from exactly the same artwork for the J6 kits. If they had been on the same sheet of artwork as the K2 frames, it wouldn't have caused a problem as the rods and frames would have both been out by the same few "thou" but as they weren't, they ended up slightly different. Nobody made the problem known until Tony Wright's review/build article as the test build was done with sprung hornblocks assembled using the rods to set the centres. Tony

Whoever thought of that livery? Must have been a "glass half full" type. You can imagine the meeting...... "If we have to have then black at least we can give them a silver lining". I like it! They get worse...... sorry.

Very nice! I think with that one, I would have done exactly the same, especially as coupling rods are not an issue and those etched slidebars look a bit more delicate than the K2 ones. Just goes to show that there is always more than one way to tackle a modelling job! Cheers, Tony