CKPR

Off the top of my head, Ponteland might be worth looking at.

On 30/01/2024 at 17:32, montyburns56 said:

Heysham Harbour which despite its very compact nature was fully signalled and run as per the prototype.

 

 

 

 

I was very impressed with this layout when I first saw it in RM and recently sought out a back copy of the relevant issue to read about it again. It seemed to me to be very much in the spirit of the old O gauge layouts from the 1940s -1950s such as the Millport & Selfield that used current RTR items in a very railway like manner to portray current practice.

4 hours ago, ian@stenochs said:

Is that. Annan G&SWR or Annan (Shawhill) CR?

Good question and given the M&C's link with the Caley at Brayton, I would presume it was Annan (Shawhill).

Juat arrived in the post, an un-used M&CR luggage label for Annan. These seem to be relatively common and I wonder if this is because of the dwindling traffic over the Solway Junction line back in the day.

Re. the location of the turntable on a loop -  is this typical of the LBSC and is there an 'escape route' out of the engine shed in the event of the turntable being out of action ?

25 minutes ago, sir douglas said:

Could you not scan the 3mm drawing and print to 4

 Strictly old school round here, marra !

5 hours ago, BachelorBoy said:

 

What would a model railway by Tracey Emin look like?

It would probably have the same relationship to our hobby as Jake & Dino Chapman's 'N*zis in hell' tableaux had to military modelling...

22 hours ago, maico said:

 

When I was a small boy in the early 70s we used to see lunatics like this walking up and down Oxford street with placards helpfully informing us we had no future...

...in Englands dreaming !

On 20/01/2024 at 12:42, Ravenser said:

 

 

My one concern would be that if that cut-out square is where the door swings, the lift out section would block opening of the door. 

 

If anything happened to you while playing trains, nobody could get in to help you..

Apparently, the final iteration of Buckingham had the same issue - it must be a 4mm GCR thing !

Those wooden panels still look nice though !

To remove enamel paint from plastic, the best way used to be use Modelstrip but I've not seen it on sale for a while. The other methods are overnight immersion in variously brake fluid (!), Mr Muscle type oven cleaner or, somewhat surprisingly, neat full strength Dettol and then a good scrub with an old toothbrush. Needless to say, most of these approaches need some care as they use caustic materials so rubber gloves and sealable plastic bags are definitely required [brake fluid probably needs a large glass jar].Modelstrip was a work first time approach but I've found that both oven cleaner and Dettol usually need two attempts.

The FR horsebox looks very good indeed. I think I'll be following suit and embellishing mine with wooden panelling as it does bring the rather stark blue livery to life. You're certainly acting as the pacesetter and making us all up our game ! 

7 hours ago, Annie said:

 the things I've learned about through railway modelling are downright amazing.

 

 

Most of my historical knowledge comes from reading "Military Modelling" magazine between 1973-1981.

56 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

 In the background there is someone hitting two halfs of a coconut together.  

Well, you know me and my love of analogue railway sound synthesis...

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

I was there...

 

 

What remains of the 'stone outer dock':

 

 

 

Thank you James and the track plan, which I had not previously seen in its entirety, certainly opens up some very interesting modelling possibilities.

Getting rather distracted by the other lines in north Cumberland, especially after a trip to Hay-on-Wye that yielded two more 'missing' volumes for my reference library (the Port Carlisle book came from The Bookcase in Keswick). That London Road Models have the NBR class R / J82 in their range was welcome and tempting news to me ! Obviously even I'm not daft enough to attempt an animatronic horse in 4mm,but I was wondering if anyone has attempted this for Trainz, etc [ @Annie ?] Oh, and I discovered from the Essery & Jenkinson book that Caledonian 4-4-0T No.7 retained her pre-group livery until 1928 !

Just a thought but was it actually a rear bogie on the prototype ? Looking at the photograph, I would be thinking that the coach might have supported on an a 4w sub-chassis, possibly using some of radial axle arrangements. Whatever the prototype arrangement, there's no need to use Jidenco / Falcons bogie arrangement if you can come up with a simpler and more effective method of mounting the rear wheels. My suggestion for the latter would be a variant of the 'free bogie' arrangement usually used for tenders. In the case of the bug, I would fix the rear wheels and use a pony truck arrangement for the inner set with with the fixing point for the pivot for the latter being towards the fixed rear wheels. I don't know if this would work in practice but I've found from practical experience that 'free bogie' systems whilst appearing to be alarmingly sloppy work very well in practice.

On 12/01/2024 at 17:06, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

And put the models being photographed on superior sceniced track, rather than your own tawdry product

Many of us will remember the first Airfix model railway catalogue in 1975--76 that had photographs resembling those in RM or MRC, whilst Hornby and Palitoy still used 'toy train' layouts that certainly didn't do the latter's products justice.

Exactly and given that part of the Mealsgate line was retained as a long siding into the mid-1970s (complete with its own TOPS code !), it's possible that a Cl.25 might have at least ventured on the line at the Aspatria end.

Power restored to all sections of 'Mealsgate', including the relaid Bolton Loop and the carriage & goods shed sidings and all of the point motors are wired up and operational. The layout hack, a Bachmann Cl.25/3 (!), has traversed all lines and only derailed itself a couple of times on the relaid sidings due to now corrected track faults. Next step is to paint / touch up the track and ballast and then start on the basic scenics. That said, I haven't got round to narrowing the baseboards and moving the controls to the otherside - I think I need to run some trains first ! Rumour has it that M&CR No.29 (or is it No. 30 ? ), one of the big 'Yorkshiremen', will soon be seen on the line, an event that escaped the notice of photographers in the early 1920s...

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

I suspect the chaldrons are a wee bit easier with EM wheelsets!

 

 

 

Definitely easier in EM and they are suprisingly free running given that the axles are held in resin lugs but I will need to add some blackened brass washers behind each wheel to stop too much lateral movement from occurring.

I was primarily thinking of the reconstituted GCR and the building of the 'London Extension' and the impact of the latter.

Another factor to consider are the commercial rivalries  and outright antagonisms that existed alongside more friendly relationships and formal partnerships (L&Y/LNWR, MR/GSWR, MR/LBSC, LNWR/Caledonian, etc) in the pre-grouping era. These had an impact in terms of the routing of traffic with companies prioritising their own or 'friendly' lines over shorter and possibily cheaper rivals. This also  explains some of the seemingly superfluous or duplicate lines that were often early causalties in the grouping era. The Settle & Carlisle is probably the best example of this albeit that it is still open. Regarding the original question, the GCR was of course the johnny-come-lately of the English lines and was a direct competitor to the MR, LNWR, L&Y and the GNR. In addition, there was a management link with the SECR and an operational partnership with the GWR. Therefore, even without access to WTTs, etc, some general traffic flows can be presumed. For example, through traffic from the SECR might be more likely to be worked to the midlands and the north via the GCR. Conversely, the MR, GNR and LNWR would not be consigning through traffic to one of their rivals and traffic from L&Y would go south on the LNWR. The need for the RCH was very obvious back then !