WFPettigrew

1 hour ago, CKPR said:

making a linking section that incorporates the colliery branch

That looks a really good idea and with the added benefit of taking the model out of the back lanes to incorporate the A595 bridge site which many more people will be familiar with. 

Would you be thinking of having the "main line" between M and HB out of view, or in a cutting at the rear?

I am presuming that Charley Pit was pretty short lived - the NLS old maps show it was still in the future in 1863 but had gone by 1899?

All the best

Neil 

1 hour ago, 5&9Models said:

Unfortunately, due to work and family commitments I have had to close down my kits and castings.

So sorry to hear this Chris - I very much enjoyed building one of your lime wagon kits recently - but fully understand your reasons.

Hope you can continue with your stunning modelling.

Best wishes

Neil

45 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

"Robert Heath & Son Iron Open"

Stephen,

It is not dissimilar (but not identical either!) to the "wrought iron" bodied but dumb buffered NSR loco coal wagon supplied by "the ironmaster Robert Heath" - pictured on p69 of "North Staffordshire Wagons" (Chadwick/Wild Swan). 

Confusingly the PO wagon index at the back of said book (which in itself is also confusingly not laid out in alphabetical order) does not appear to make any mention of Robert Heath, at either Kidsgrove nor Biddulph.   

Best wishes

Neil 

13 hours ago, sir douglas said:

mishap at Maltby

Aside from the lovely wagonry, that would have been more than a squeaky bottom moment for the crew, with the firebox crown and indeed inner firebox back well and truly exposed. Get the injectors on and start praying... 

All the best

Neil  

17 minutes ago, drduncan said:

catechism

Not sure which bit of this I enjoyed the most!   The omission of Collett and Hawksworth? 

And yes, waiting for the broad gauge epiphany! 

All the best

Neil 

9 hours ago, Schooner said:

.(+1 +1), if we remember that there's also room for a wagon to stand beyond each turntable

Though possibly not if you are putting rail-built buffer stops to prevent wagons-with-heft meeting floor-with-possibly-devastating-consequence?

And I have not seen 795 before, what a lovely little loco! 

On 13/04/2024 at 10:41, Wickham Green too said:

this is my current understanding of the Rapido offer - personalised for the sources I've found and my desire for possible 1948 survivors

One bit of info to add to your list, from Turton's 8th volume: the Glass Houghton wagon is captioned as being photographed at Goole in the "early 20th century" and is indeed lettered as needing returning to the Methley Branch of the L&Y.  So it is an authentic pre-grouping one, though when exactly is not clear.  Whether it was still around in 1948 is another question - possibly yes given the two wars extending the life of railway stock?

I have received my Glass Houghton wagon and was pleased to find it was a relatively easy conversion to P4 - a straight swap of the 00 wheelsets for Gibson P4 ones with no major axle length problems, and only needing a bit filing off the brake shoes to allow the wheels to rotate freely.  (Actually I filed a bit more off than I needed to so there is now daylight visible.  Hmm, might try a shim of styrene to pack the shoes back out a bit.)

As has been commented, the plastic brake gear is commendably fine, with twin push rods etc.   There are a few relatively minor dfferences with the prototype: the most noticeable is that the hinge for the end door was above the wagon not inside, and the washer plate ("strapping") on the end door end of the sides should be curved at the bottom not straight.   Plus there were commode handles on the fixed end, horse loops across the left crown plates, and this wagon had bottom doors, so there were monkey tails and extra bolts on the solebars, plus obviously, doors in the floor if you really want to go to town with an upgrade!

The livery is spot on, and it's a lovely wagon.  I hope Rapido will be bringing out more Yorkshire colliery wagons in the future!  

All the best

Neil 

18 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

For information,  the Spring 2024 edition of the Signalling Record (issued to SRS members) has a 12 page article by Mike Norris on Carlisle No 5 (Crown Street) Signal box at the southern end of the station, apparently the first part of a series of articles covering the period 1951 to 1973.

I haven't seen the SRS article, but Mike has done a series on the changes to semaphore signals that were then lost when Carlisle power box opened in the journal of the Cumbrian Railways Association.  So this may well be a reprint. 

16 minutes ago, Citadel said:

Anyway, here's where I've got to so far - had better sleep on it.

Mike, I do think you have a good point about the views down the station being important.  The photos of your model that already really shout that this is Citadel and only Citadel are those final two that look along the tracks, featuring that iconic footbridge.  

And for what it's worth I think your decision to reduce the degree of forced perspsective looks better, even before you work out how to best achieve the views along the tracks. 

Your rolling stock is already superb, and the thought and skill you're deploying strongly suggests the layout will be just as good.

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

Oh, I had assumed there would be, but..

I agree James, there was a lot of resignalling after the Armagh crash and the various better safety requirements that followed, and these resignalling projects seem to have at least ensured all regular moves on the main line were signalled, with only movements within yards and unusual ones on the main line being hand signalled. 

Or you could decide the WNR followed the NER where every conceivable movement right down to the driver popping to the toilet had a signal...

2 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

the Up line can change to the Down line and vice versa

Up Vs Down is perhaps overrated. The Furness Railway branches to Windermere Lake Side and to Coniston changed several times as to which way was Up! The main line was always Up towards Carnforth and by extension towards London. The Lake Side line had a triangular junction but the main access onto it was in the Up Direction, while the Coniston was from the Down, yet both were labelled the same Up or Down, changing depending on which Working Time Table you look at!

From a WNR point of view I don't think it matters regarding the signalling: the levers will be numbered from one at the left hand end of the box facing towards the track, with levers numbered from one for signalling movements left to right, then points and locks and the odd signal and spare, then at the right hand end the signals for moving right to left.

On 08/04/2024 at 20:00, Edwardian said:

Caption: "Give over, Luv. Am sure there's enough room fur us both ont door, if only thee'd leave off fidgeting

Thankfully there was room, they both survived.

And stayed together for the rest of that lives. 

But she still fidgeted. And fidgeted. 

"It's been 84 years" he muttered.

11 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

How would you suggest doing those in 4 mm scale?

I have just tried using 5A fuse wire wound round a 0.7mm drill then split off using a scalpel held at a diagonal across the line of the drill.  They were then flattened and the gap closed up and glued onto the solebar. Please excuse the somewhat out of focus shot and the cruel enlargement - this one looks circular when seen on the actual wagon.   The latter is a first scratchbuild of a FR D15 two plank that was urgently needed to serve as a test bed for the trial prints and etches of some new products being developed by a friend, more on which hopefully in the future.  The brass here is from the Mainly Trains etch and the W irons are Bill Bedford ones. 

I would certainly go smaller next time as these are rather overscale for the FR examples, and I will try and follow @Dave John's example and add the securing staples and hopefully generally do a much neater job.... Here's hoping anyway!

All the best 

Neil

1 hour ago, magmouse said:

My only thought is that it centres the horse compartment in the wheelbase, which should give the horses the smoothest ride.

Of course!  Though it will still behave somewhat more oddly as a rolling vehicle especially when being propelled I would imagine.  Whatever the thinking, I  think @CKPR has done a lovely job on it, and Mike @Citadel now seems to have accepted the challenge to produce one so they can be compared and contrasted?!

(Though I am guessing that the "local" branding might suggest it was not allowed off M&C metals, so would not be allowed any further than Citadel station and those environs to which the M&C had running rights?  That said, this may not have been the case in Mike's earlier era?)

All the best

Neil 

2 hours ago, CKPR said:

Taken together, we concluded it was either a copy or a substantial rebuild.

Given that the likes of Metro' would happily tweak dimensions of their advertised products to suit the customer (almost a bit like modern day modellers playing around with CAD to shrink or expand dimensions?!) then there is maybe a case that the M&C also bought from Metro, but requested slightly different dimensions, perhaps because they had a slightly different market in mind.  Quite why they wanted an asymmetric wheelbase though is beyond me... 

There is evidence of the tweaking around the various drawings for 1870s gunpowder vans produced by the likes of Metro, and the types that ran on the LNWR and FR - there isn't hard evidence where the 6 on the FR came from but they were similar but not identical to the LNWR ones, and similar but not identical to drawings in the Metro collection... 

All the best

Neil 

3 hours ago, 5BarVT said:

GWR locking frame built at Reading signal works.

5 bar vertical tappet?

3 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Beadman built wagons

Indeed, of course! 

2 hours ago, magmouse said:

I think you are right about 7 planks

Thanks Nick.  Given the date it would also be perhaps the most likely size as well. 

2 hours ago, magmouse said:

And the fourth one

Good spot!  Shame we don't have the number of that one... (Always wanting more, eh?!)

2 hours ago, magmouse said:

And who would dare model this prototype practice?

It's tempting!  As previously alluded, I am thinking about getting some POWsides decals made up for Old Silkstone pregrouping wagons, and it would be pretty easy to miss out an "i" when rubbing them down...  If only to wind up any folks who come over all know-it-all and point out my error.. 😈

43 minutes ago, 5BarVT said:

Shut in ground frames with an intermediate instrument were about earlier I think, but my assumption is that there would have been a signalman at each end.

The closure of the Bourne End - High Wycombe line in 1970 led to the line from Maidenhead to Bourne end being worked by some sort of tablet/token in the 70s, which was placed by the crew into a cabinet at Bourne End to allow the points to be changed to reverse round to Marlow.  That also changed the point at the throat of Bourne End to allow two trains on the branch, one locked into the Bourne-End Marlow section, the other then able to run up from Maidenhead into the other platform at Bourne End.   The driver would take a tablet/token at Maidenhead released from Slough panel box.   

I cannot remember when Bourne End lost its signal box and put this procedure in place, but I am sure it was run like this in the 70s.  Nor can I remember what sort of token authority was given to the driver to run between Bourne End and Marlow sorry - not that this is of any relevance in your model.

Clearly WR not SR, but...  Prior to such a thing being introduced, the light railway origins of your line could allow just an open air lever frame or one in the station building, operated by the chargehand porter as a semi-block post before such things were swept away?

All the best

Neil 

3 hours ago, billbedford said:

gauntletted pointwork?

As Stephen said, they are tandems but with both roads diverging off a straight due to the geometry. I also suspect that this arrangement maximised the length of each siding.

45 minutes ago, billbedford said:

Can you explain how the sidings to the goods shed worked?

Well Bill, Jamie is half way there:

18 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

I think that all the three doors have two roads leading I to the,.  The  shed is wide enough for 6 platforms for road vehicles. Each  bay is fed from two interlaced points that split after leaving g the main entrance road.

The rest of the picture can be seen on the 25" map reproduced with the permission of the National Library of Scotland (Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) licence).

This shows that there were 3 pairs of rail lines going into the south east end of the building.  That is the view that we have here.   The rail lines terminated inside the shed, and there was road access into the north west end through two more large arched doorways in the outer two bays, with offices occupying the centre. .

So this was used for the transfer between road and rail.   Off the map to the SE were two transit sheds which did not have road access, and the "goods depot and bonded warehouse", which also did not have road access but did border Devonshire Dock, and this latter was used for transhipment with shipping and the storage of incoming bonded goods.

The goods warehouse building still survives - and can be seen on Google Streetview from the nearby road into what is now the Tesco superstore:

https://www.google.com/maps/@54.1123154,-3.2365406,3a,75y,152.33h,103.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s55y5_eRYz75HnQwvxR9vwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Hope that makes sense?

Best wishes

Neil 

https://maps.app.goo.gl/EUoa7D4m998FygHX6

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Yes, that's a Midland cattle wagon. With 8A axleboxes, wooden brake blocks and long brake lever, it looks like one of the large ones to Drg. 101, built either by Gloucester in 1875 or lots 30, 45, and possibly 63.

Thank you Stephen. 

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

I don't think it is a D379 meat van; agreeing with you about the ends, also the doors look as if they might be plain panelled, though with louvres in the sides either side of the doors. Other Midland passenger-style vans with end louvres have them arranged per the meat van. also, the width and position of the louvres suggests six end panels rather than five. 

Thanks again.  So would I be right in thinking the conclusion here is that this does not appear to be a MR vehicle?

If so can we start the bidding as to whose it might be?

Morning all, 

I have a couple of possibly Midland Railway wagons that I could do with a learned mind to help identify please. 

The first photo (copyright the Furness Railway Trust collection, used with permission) shows Furness Railway Number 4, one of the locos purchased for the opening of the line in 1846 and latterly used for shunting before withdrawal in 1898.  Sister No 3 had hauled the very first train on the FR so was preserved (now at the NRM York).   The location is believed to be near Ramsden Dock station in Barrow. 

It is the first cattle wagon that I believe could well be MR.   The next two are definitely FR wagons with the X bracing on the sides.  The nearer one of the two FR ones is almost definitely an FR medium cattle wagon (what was classed as D46 in the diagram book prepared by the FR in c 1922 for the incoming LMS administration).   Can anyone provide any more identification of the first cattle wagon please?

Secondly a crop of a one of the Sankey Collection images which are copyright Cumbria Archives - they are happy for such images to be shared with suitable attribution.  See https://www.sankeyphotoarchive.uk/collection/search/?searchText=59 for the new scan of this plate. 

My question relates to the van seen in front of the three road FR Barrow goods warehouse.  It has twin louvres running most of the height of the ends.  I had wondered about a MR D379 meat van, but the drawings and photos in Essery Vol 1 show these had twin louvres on the ends that were both split with a plain panel two thirds of the way up the ends, rather than being continuous as appears to be the case here.  This van does have appear to have a vacuum brake swan neck visible above the headstock, in case that helps at all?    Any thoughts?

All the best

Neil 

40 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

As in these Rhymney Iron Ore & Rail wagons: low sides for the iron ore and wooden stanchions for the rails.

Those are interesting Jonathan.  So were they used (some of the time) for carrying iron ore from the mines/quarries between Tredegar and Treorchy?  (This is where Google is telling me is there were iron ore deposits in the valleys would therefore include the upper reaches of the RR?)

I am curious that ore could be economically carried in such low side wagons, but I don't know what sort of ore it was, and how dense.  The haematite ore found in Furness was typically carried in 4 or more plank hopper wagons rated to 10 tons - so relatively high sided wagons for before the Great War (ignoring the FR's unusual side tip wagons dating back to the 1850s) - but it was a fairly soft crumbling ore hereabouts, and the FR used low side wagons like this in numbers not for ore but to move the newly cast iron pigs to the steelworks/foundries/export to other parts of the rail network.   Such low side wagons were also used to bring the limestone to the ironworks for use as a flux, as its density meant you didn't need a heavier wagon - which is what made me wonder if the Welsh ore was more dense.

All the best

Neil