number6

Short Mk1s? What about the Triang ones? I had one as a child and was always drawn to the carriage ends on these - I felt they had captured something the that the later full length versions failed to. The later one’s gangway was a bit anaemic and it had a round hole in the door that bothered me. I think the paint had rubbed off a bit and picked out the steps and gangway surround much like drybrushing these days picks up details. Almost everything was wrong about these models but I think they had charm.

I’m prepared to accept that early depictions of the railway might have been subject to some unfamiliarity by the artist! Like being aware of handed running? So in an image like that it may not have seemed important to have flipped it. See early images of giraffes or rhinos - until you’ve seen one for real hard to argue it’s incorrect!

Lovely job! I assume that because the original inspiring image is an engraving that would explain the wrong line running? The plate is reversed in the print process.

In the early days [pre Brexit] this would have been just fare evasion rather than 'sneaking into the UK'!

The yard at the end of the clip is Mottram on the Woodhead line. Are instanter couplings supposed to stay in the long or short position? I remember watching one on a 16T mineral in Lewes station move from short to long with a really loud bang...

Nice! Love a rough RTR bash. Agree that an old Triang Pullman would work well and would fit right in - much more so than a modern Hornby 5BEL car. "Somewhere'[!] I have a scratch built wooden 6PUL Pullman trailer you are welcome to.. It came from a kit built ebay purchase and I didn't have the heart to get rid of it. Let me know if you'd like it and I can go hunting. My feeling is some cheap Kirk Manusell sides would also build into some trailers and would also match better than the more recent Manusells. It has been 12 years since I started trying to improve that 6PUL. Lockdown got it moving again but it looks like this now.

A Man Pram. Learnt that the other day.

Looked in Mike King's Southern Coaches book and the Thanets were 56' 11" over headstocks and the later Maunsells and these first Bulleids 57' 11". I had better get the razor saw out and take a foot out the middle. I notice that there is a paragraph that says: "Most of the 59ft brakes were built several months before the companion Composites and had to be stored to await completion of the latter." Another prototype for everything!

Can't find any images from when i did them but it was only a mm or two I feel took the same amount off each end. After that they work really well with the SP parts and builds into a nice robust coach. The thin metal sides suit the Bulleid look - I tend to think these Hornby shorties are let down by the glazing which make the sides look very thick. Those more recent Bachmanns are similarly chunky in my eyes but very nice all the same.

If someone has one of these Hornby Bulleid 57ft brakes to hand would it be possible to measure the length of the body in mms and let me know what it is? This price is too good to pass up an opportunity for chopping them up and making into something else. I found that the Worsley Works etched sides I have for some Thanet stock were a bit shorter than the Hornby Maunsells I was planning to use as donors. I'm also wondering how common the underframe is with the Manusells: I can see correct Bulleid battery boxes and vac cylinders, so perhaps its a new moulding. Had to chop a few mms off the Comet sides to fit the 64ft versions to Southern pride parts. Isn't it always the case?!

Superb time capsule here and some footage of 45 110 sounding more like a sander than anything else... lots of 47s to compare to as well.

I never believed a word of it but my Uncle (fireman and driver at Newhaven) told a story of another driver at the shed who claimed a U Boat surfaced alongside the west breakwater while he was working the harbour line. The hatch opened and a commander asked him the way to Germany. The unofficial pet crematorium they offered on the footplate story was also a bit ‘tall’. It was all okay with cats and guinea pigs etc. which could be easily dispatched. But a particularly leggy old dog got it’s paws either side of the firebox doors one day and wouldn’t go in. I guess it might have been a no win no fee situation?

I can’t be the only one following this thread to get the emails from: http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/ The last list of accident reports had a couple more from the Farringdon-Ludgate Hill section. This one is a collision between two Midland goods from 1878 http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=6119 To quote: “I have inquired into a large number of collisions altogether, but I do not recollect one where the greater portion of the servants of the railway companies concerned, have displayed so much indifference and so much inattention to the proper performance of their duties as in this particular case.” Feels like confusion in this instance came from the fact that the bank engine only assisted Midland trains and any GNR service would be left to their own devices (often much lighter loaded anyway). Mistake an MR for a GNR train in the dark and things could go wrong. I am amazed how long trains waited in the murk and dark for the banker from the spur. This particular night ‘the banker’ ended up being a following Midland train and the loss of a couple of brake vans and some injuries. In these reports I am always interested in the crew descriptions detail their working conditions and responsibilities. And then the atmosphere of Victorian London that seeps in despite the technical nature of the writing.

🤔hmmm!

Superb issue. And a wonderful model of the Lewes station building. Definitely a missing link in the town and not well known locally what was on the site. It was long gone before I can remember but the patch of land it stood on was empty for years and years and one could see behind one wall of the curving viaduct of the first line to Uckfield climbing to cross Cliffe High Street. This viaduct was built over the site of the original terminus platforms when the second station (see models in earlier issues!) was built. Even in the early 20thC clues as to the original use of the building were hard to spot. Cheers.

Yes, but I wunt be druv to reveal.

The sound of that turntable going around was like nails on a blackboard to me. So I took out the motor and turned the water column by hand instead.

Those couplings...

Lovely. Is it just me (?) but I almost always prefer a tank engine running bunker first. (Apologies to all crews and their cricked necks and grit filled eyes.)

Goosestepped? - by the peaceful organisation that grew out of the ruins of the war with goosestepping fascists? Please take this talk elsewhere.

Lots of innovative stuff in the Revolution railcar including an adaption of a standard freight bogie into an efficient self contained power bogie. It uses aluminium and carbon fibre to keep weight down has quality interiors. Also to be put together in local pop-up factories. It is not intended for mainline use because the crashworthiness required would mean you'd end up with a heavy vehicle perhaps already available from another manufacturer. Think self-contained branchlines or reopenings. Caveat - I'm designing a book for the designer responsible - they have good pedigree including back in the 80s the LT prototype tube trains, Jubilee and Piccadilly trains, IC225, trams, light rail and lots of interesting international stuff including in Australia and China. Their recent work includes a tram for Coventry and proposal for similar in Cambridge.

That is a terrible job. It hurts my eyes and at smaller scales just going to be a mess. It’s like a bad print job where one colour has shifted. Maybe just a metaphor for the whole process…

I’ve a pet hate of long sections of hidden track leading to storage yards. Trains can spend so long traversing these sections only to pop out for a short scenic dash! Like the idea of the drawer so you can pull the trains out from under. I’d have thought that would work nicely for short trains not so good for long. Gradients. As it’s a storage yard and off scene you could drag trains up a short incline by hand to save space - why not?! Alternative idea. Can you run storage loops around the entire room behind the back scene? Same level as the rest of the layout. Trains can stack in long loops or weave in and out of a sequence of loops. This also gives you more opportunities for junctions and other routes off the layout. US modellers are good at this type of staging. Easy to access, don’t take up much space, flexible. Good luck

I recommend Clive Groome's DVDs on driving and firing. [Driving And Firing the Big Four With Clive Groome]. In one he gives examples of riding with crews to Penzance, Glasgow and Edinburgh. On the GWR they work back to London next day on a Castle after running west with a King. On the WCML the Coronation comes off at Crewe and a Princess and new crew takes the train to Glasgow. Total time on footplate 9 hours. He explains the disposal of engines and the time that takes the fireman. I find it hard to believe there were any quick turnarounds on those routes if engines had worked through. Changing locos enroute was a more 'efficient' use of motive power than rushing the job after arrival. Ranelagh Bridge at Paddington would turn and service engines that didn't then need to go to Old Oak but I believe they were often for the slightly shorter routes - Worcester? Another pointer to how quickly you could prepare arriving engines... Groome also describes preparing a loco at Nine Elms, running light to Waterloo, working to Basingstoke and return, ECS to Clapham then back to Nine Elms as a days work for both engine and crew. The use that the modern railway gets out of its stock is extraordinary compared to the steam railway.

Room for a nap - or a cup of tea... Scroll down here: https://thesussexmotivepowerdepots.yolasite.com/horsham-Hornby-link.php