Nick Holliday

Just for the record the LTSR did have tender locos. They acquired two chunky and slightly unusual looking 0-6-0 locos from Sharp Stewart in 1899. They were originally intended for the Ottoman Railway in Turkey, hence their rather odd cab. They also had the magnificent Baltic tanks.The 'model' has a certain whiff of some of the singles that ran on their rival's, the GER, tracks and might have looked better in blue.

Model Wagon Company A fantastically diverse range of 4mm wagon kits, from the seventies, I think, featuring the then ground breaking inclusion of etched brass w-irons, which meant that they could easily be built to actually run well. They provided Scottish wagons and those from obscure Welsh lines that have not been duplicated, with a smattering of Midlands lines, a few of which have appeared from other makers. Some did resurface from a short lived Milton Keynes based source (Knight Models??) but sadly everything has disappeared, although they do,, like others on this list, come up on certain web based auction sites, often for silly prices, reflecting the unusual prototypes.

As far as locomotives go, if your period goes to the end of 1889, you could include Adams' O2, which arrived in July of that year. The ones that stayed on the mainland remained relatively unchanged, apart from boiler fittings. I don't know what varieties Kernow have produced, but I suspect they haven't done one with the rather austere stovepipe chimney they started with, although there may be one with an Adams' style dome onto which a new stovepipe could be grafted.

Marsh had just arrived at Brighton from Doncaster and he brought with him an abhorrence of front coupled locos. Despite the LBSC having a large fleet of this type, one of is first actions was to convert a number of the new E5 0-6-2 tanks, and a handful of E4's, to 2-4-2 by simply removing the front section of the coupling rods. By 1909 they had been quietly replaced, and the locos were back to full power. In contrast, his new 4-4-2 suburban tanks, based loosely on GNR designs, were an abject failure. As regards the Terriers, he seems to have given them a thorough make-over to make sure they were set-up to provide the most economic service possible. As they were only expected to deal with two coaches maximum, he reduced the cylinder diameter considerably and lowered the boiler pressure, measures which would also reduce maintenance as well as running costs, as would the reinstatement of the condensing arrangements. Perhaps the removal of the front driving wheel was part of this economy drive, with four wheels deemed to give sufficient traction for the anticipated tasks, whilst the overall weight of the loco wold have been reduced slightly. However, these changes were quickly found to be detrimental to good running and no others were dealt with and the sleeves in the cylinders removed and the boiler pressure returned to normal. It just took a little longer for the front wheels to be reinstated, presumably because they were being given shunting duties as the larger D1 tanks took over the autocoach duties.

There is currently a photo of Beulah as a 2-4-0T on ebay at http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Railway-Photo-LBSCR-A1-81-Beulah-LB-SCR-Stroudley-2-4-0T-Loco-SR-/142130122943?hash=item21179d90bf:g:OPAAAOSw8gVX6XLp but it is ending within 22 hours! It isn't the clearest view I have seen of this combination, but it is not one I have seen before.

Whilst Boxhill retained some form of Stroudley livery - some sources have claimed it was in Goods Green with passenger lining, but recent debate has dismissed that idea, but the lining was non-standard, with the distinctive re-entrant corners simplified, the other loco, No 81, came out of the works in an early umber livery without name.

There's an interesting article on the history of the cattle market at http://deptfordmisc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/city-of-london-sale-of-foreign-cattle.html It appears to suggest that the War Office only rented the site until it purchased it in 1924, so whether the loco came with it I cannot say. Incidentally, I note that the maker's name was actually Maudslay - I had always thought it had an "e"! Refrigeration had already brought the yard into decline. "Trade fell off. Whereas in 1907, 184,971 cattle and 4,950 sheep were imported through the market, the figures in 1912, dropped to 21,547 cattle and 1,193 sheep." During WW1, however, "Deptford became under Major Millman, a great supply base, sending hundreds of thousands of rations to the troops in France and other theatres of war. The railways were improved and the site was adapted to the requirements of the several Expeditionary forces"

I cannot really speak for other members of the Brighton Circle, as, to be honest, I haven't the faintest idea how they earn(ed) their crust, although I am aware of a diplomat, Methodist minster, college lecturers and a tile maker. I suppose I could be classed as a hairy a****d builder, and have spent most of my life in Sarf London. Any commuting these days is on the Northern Line or between home and Leatherhead on the Southern, when they run trains.

Further to Andy's points, I would suggest adding two long scale lines, vertically and horizontally, which are a simple length to measure once printed. Add a note, as a reminder, say "200mm when printed on A4 for HO" or whatever. When you do a test print you can check whether it is correct in both directions, and suitable adjustment made if required. That way you are not reliant on dimensions in the actual drawing itself, which will usually be some random obscure figure, requiring a calculator to convert, as 1:87 isn't the easiest ratio to deal with!

During various strikes, such as in 1911, troops were allocated to guard critical signal boxes and other locations. Photo from TUC History on Line website

Getting back to the UK, just to add to the mix, a couple of tramways that were really railways, and one railway that was really a tramway. The Rye and Camber Tramway, and the Hundred of Manhood and Selsey Tramway, both part of Colonel Stephens' south coast empire, had no roadside trackage and no skirts on their steam locos. Conversely, the Bideford, Westward Ho! and Appledore Railway ran along the road and had skirted locos and Wild West coaches!

Entering pedantic mode, and adopting the spirit of I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue: Illusive is a word derived from "Illusion" and hence means something imaginary. Elusive is a strainer fitted in your toilet. No wonder you can't get hold of it if it is illusive, but, if it did exist, maybe you have a chance, eventually, of tracking down an elusive copy

That photo of a goods yard full of mainly LNWR wagons was probably taken on the Windsor Street branch of the LNWR, near Saltley. This is an extract from the NLS maps site, which has been rotated through about 45 degrees to get both the main yard and Windsor Street Wharf in. There is also an aerial photo taken on 10/6/1938 on the Britain from Above website, ref EPW05740.

What about the David Geen kits? They have an outside framed van, various types of three plank opens and an early fruit van. I think they were originally produced by the Great Western Society before they passed to David. Not to mention the Ratio and ABS Iron minks, the Shires Scenes cattle van, ABS short cattle wagon and the Ian Kirk outside framed van.

Looking at the old-maps website it is possible to compare the original shed, shown on the 1879 map, with what was left from around 1898 until it was demolished - as shown on a 1961 map. I have superimposed the two maps, with the older one overlaid in green, and it would seem that the length was unchanged, but the new shed was less than half the width of the old. If the figure of 35' given for the later shed's width is correct, it scales out at around 135' long.

Just to whet your appetite, here are some out of copyright drawings of the various options available to you: Stroudley's Jumbo C1 class Billinton C2 (with an E5 boiler) Billinton C2X (single dome option) Marsh's C3 The Billinton locos have 8' 0" + 8' 0" wheelbase, the others are 7' 9" + 7' 6"

Do you actually mean a C2? They were the original Victorian design, with a much smaller boiler, although as you will be replacing the firebox perhaps you can fit a smaller boiler at the same time. I think you'll have more luck with a C3 or the reboilered C2X classes, depending on which has a better match on the wheelbase. I can send you drawings of all three classes if you are interested, not to a particular scale but you can enlarge them as necessary to fit the chassis, whilst keeping the proportions..

I'm afraid I can't help regarding modern buildings, but I would say that the current edifices beings built alongside the tracks in south London are not exactly redolent of the area - most modern architecture is national. To get the south London effect I would have older style buildings in the background with a modern building or two in front. Street Level Models from CDCdesign might be a source of London-style buildings, both as low relief or back scene flats. modelrailwayscenery can provide downloads of slightly more modern buildings as does Scalescene.

I'm afraid your recollection may not be correct. The LBSC LV board usually was rectangular, and I think red with white letters, as per attached. Apropos the coach discussion, I am not sure if I am going away from the current discussions, but 5&9 Models have done (do?) white metal kits for LBSC early coaches, including open ones, with many, although based upon Brighton prototypes, very similar to other lines' stock. Two sets of etchings, including cast parts, were prepared for, I think, the South West Circle, each containing 4 coaches which seem identical to typical Wright products, (and LBSC types) and these turn up occasionally on eBay or on second-hand stalls. More recently, at ExpoEM, I saw Prickly Pear's latest products, some exquisite etched four-wheelers, based upon Great North of Scotland prototypes, but again redolent of other lines of that early period.

Michael Clarke of Masokits already does these edging bricks in 4mm Staffordshire Nosing Paviors: These etches reproduce the 18" x 6 “x 6"' platform nosing bricks widely used on country stations. They are etched in 0.005· brass and therefore retain the diamond pattern grooving well. The fret has nine 78mm straight lengths with a fold-down edge for platform face giving a total length of 700mm (2" 3""). Curves are possible by laying the edgings in short lengths.

As Kevin says, back on pages 6 and 7 the photos showed standard gauge examples, perhaps DonB is thinking of Light Railways? Although the Garstang and Knott End, Weston, Clevedon and Portishead, Lambourn Valley, Hundred of Manhood and Selsey, and Burry Port and Gwendraeth all were Light Railways, they were all standard gauge. However balconied vehicles also ran on the Midland, London Brighton and South Coast, London and South Western and Great Eastern which were in the premier division, and there were the ex Barnum coaches on the Alexandra Docks and Harbour line, and there are probably others that I have forgotten!

I certainly don’t want to prolong this discussion and I am very keen to see such quality pointwork appear on the market and be successful, but I also don’t want to be painted as the villain of the piece – a trackwork pretender following in Adrian Swain’s shoes, perhaps. The argument is more with the magazine for pre-empting DCC’s formal announcement, and the photo used (I think calling it a holiday snap is rather a cheap personal shot). I can only apologise that my train of logic was faulty in linking the name Slaters with this situation. I recall their name being behind a series of 7mm Midland Railway point drawings, which I believed contained errors, when I saw an example somewhere. I didn’t purchase any of them as they are not my personal interest, so I cannot provide chapter and verse. I then see this item in a magazine where a similar error has been perpetrated, and a note saying that the point was based on MR drawings. I put two and two together and obviously made five, but there remained the possibility that Slaters had based their templates on MR drawings which may have been in error. There is also the string of coincidences – my observations here regarding the current practice on the Watercress Line – the identical error in the recent MRJ article on the 2mm Society kit, as well as this sample, which seemed to be developing an unhappy trend, although I have seen the answer regarding the last two, which was a relief. Whilst Richard seems to think I am stirring things up, would he prefer me to keep quiet and let him go into production with a flawed product? I wasn’t exactly nit-picking or questioning his selection of one company’s design over another, and I am certainly not knocking the product which is a tremendous advance on any current RTR offerings, but I wasn’t to know that it was all in hand: a simple acknowledgement of the situation would have sufficed, although I have no idea what a T1 tooling is!

Sorry, I have just searched my loft and found my stash of MRJ but unfortunately I must have removed the relevant issues t on time for reference and I have no idea where they may be now. The articles and follow ups covered a number of issues, up to 25, so the drawing might be there. I apologise if I have got it wrong, it was twenty years ago and there have been several similar articles before and since, so the drawing may have accompanied one of those instead. Nonetheless the HM article describes them as being built to Midland drawings, so perhaps I didn't imagine them.

Looking at the BRM article the mistake is entirely down to the builder as the etched chairs are correct but he has extended the check rail well past the last one. However, that has nothing to do with the Hornby Magazine announcement. It is very definitely trumpeted as RTR and with moulded chairs clearly visible in the accompanying photo it has little to do with the kits produced so far, which hare of soldered construction.

I was very interested to see, in the latest Hornby Magazine, that DCC Concepts were introducing a range of RTR bullhead rail points in OO gauge. However, my excitement was rather dulled when I looked closer at the photograph of the completed turnout, and spotted what I believe is a fundamental error. The check rails extend one sleeper beyond the ends of the wing rails of the crossing. In every photo of the real thing, except where circumstances such as other turnouts close by, interlaced sleepers or extreme curvature, the check rails end on the same timber as the wing rails. I note that the piece mentions that it is based upon MR drawings which were published by Slaters – these self-same drawings featured in Bob Essery’s series on track in MRJ from Issue 22 onwards, and, at the time, over twenty years ago, I pointed out this error, in a subsequent feedback article, and no-one made any comment either way. However, at least Bob Essery seems to have taken the fact on board, as his superb ScaleSeven trackwork for Dewsbury is correct in this regard. I fear that DCC Concepts, wanting to keep this under wraps, didn’t want to reveal their CAD design to the public, and didn’t receive the necessary feedback. They also ignored the old adage of about not working to drawings without reference to photographs! The oldpway.info website has lots of examples of pre-grouping pointwork, although not Midland, which confirm my observations. Clear photos of Midland turnouts are a bit harder to find, but there are several in the Foxline book, Midland Railway Portrait, that show what I mean, dating from 1879 to 1922. It is interesting that the same mistake has occurred in the 2mm scale turnout that featured in the recent MRJ. In that case, as my letter in the current issue notes, it is impossible to say, without seeing the unmade kit in the flesh, whether the error is as a result of the design, instructions or a slip by the builder. Whatever the cause, the 2MM Society have chosen to use this example for their initial advertising, so they obviously don’t consider anything is awry. On RMweb I have also raised a similar topic regarding the Watercress Line’s current permanent way, which also seems to be based upon the same MR/Slaters drawings, and I received a lot of support from members.