Wheatley

I can't do multiple replies within links: I thought that at the point of sale from the owner at the time of designation the item had to be offered for preservation? Yes, more or less. The owner has to advise the RHDAB who can direct that it be offered for preservation and on what terms. That's my reading of the Railway Heritage Act anyway, ymmv. Who has to pay to re-import a designated loco? Is the owner liable given they are aware they are purchasing or transfering a designated item? i.e. if the loco is sold to EuroPhoenix are they liable to reimport when it reaches the end of its life? If the ROSCO has sold it to Europheonix then it has been 'disposed of' so it should have gone through the RHDAB process and they are presumably satisfied that Europhoenix will honour its designated status. If they have only leased it then it has not been disposed of yet so it remains the ROSCO's asset and their responsibility. Railway Heritage Act 1996, - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/42/contents . There are some amendments as the RHDAB took over the responsibilities of the Railway Heritage Committee after Dave's 'bonfire of the quangos'. There is a link to the RHC's Final Report on the first link I gave you, which makes interesting reading. Be aware that members of the RHDAB are (as far as I can establish) either volunteers or full time railway/museum staff doing it as part of or in addition to their day job. They have a secretary but that role is unlikely to be full time so there may be limited scope for detailed discussion with individual enthusiasts. Nothing to stop you trying though.

They should be 3 cars displaced off other routes by 195s but aren't (weren't) always.

The change in door/window design was indeed a result of the GTR, but the earlier coaches were not retro-fitted with the new designs (I think). They did get improved comms and radios fitted though, look for the large roof pods. On the ScR trio the toilet windows were plated over to give one less potential point of entry. Blue/grey from the mid 60s, at least one of the ScR trio was still red in April 68.

Interior surfaces were a sort of mushroomy grey which looked dirty even when ex-works. Red/black/blue seat moquette with black seat frames. Red doors, can't remember what colour the floors were (grey ?) That's all from memory - if no-one else posts a colour pic before September there are a few colour prints in my desk at work but I'm not allowed in there at the moment !

So I've been to the Heljan 45 thread and had a look. The effect of the cantrail curve starting too high is that the cab front window shape is a bit off and the door doesn't curve in enough at the top. To be honest, if I was in the market for a 45 that wouldn't be show stopping for me, it would most likely come down to price between that and Bachmann, whoever was doing the particular variant I was looking for and whether I could get it locally (I don't buy new locos by mail order unless they're giving them away - too many returns). It is still annoying though for all the reasons Ian has already mentioned - it's a basic shape error, not some obscure detail lost in the shadows somewhere. It's not that I don't care, but it's an error I can live with, like Bachmann's "a foot too long but otherwise gorgeous" BR cattle wagon. I suspect a lot of the uber-critical potential customers are already putting Penbits chassis under Bachmann bodies anyway.

Carriage and Wagon. They and the P.way (Permanent Way Engineers) had a habit of commandeering any accommodation not actually in use by anyone else, either for messing or as a tools/materials/junk store. They were still doing it in the 1990s. Most 'extra' hutting (as opposed to that provided from the start) would be timber because it was cheaper, and grounded van/coach bodies were free. They can be a good way of including some pensioned off anachronism on a layout. Edit - non-signalmen should not be expected to be allowed anywhere near a signalbox toilet. The goods yard and the station staff might even be using the public one, none of the stations I worked at in the 1990s had a staff loo.

I think Alex's point was that the majority of OO buyers, being unconcerned about the obvious gauge error, are less likely to be concerned about minor shape errors either. According to its designer there is nothing wrong with the Dapol Western, it's a really great model, beautiful model, perfectly accuate, no errors, and all the naysayers (and there were some) were merely spreading fake news. He even had a go at MR for not giving it 100% in their review. So not so much a case of "sod you" as "ner ner ner I'm not listening". As for Oxford, they are definitely designed down to a price, see the LNER cattle wagon with one of the sides back to front. They keep selling so clearly most people don't care. It is annoying though.

As far as I know there are no plans to deploy 195s on the route but I don't think there is any practical reason why they couldn't be. You would need to train Harrogate crews on them first and there isn't the capacity in the training system to do that at the moment (it was enough of a challenge getting them all passed on 170s without all the covid complications). Leeds and York sign 195s but not everyone at Leeds and York yet. The 170s were designed for sustained 100mph running, not to trundle around the Nidd valley in first gear, the 158s are better suited to that. Hence the poor reliabilty - you can have all the engines working, or all the gearboxes, or all the aircon, but rarely all 9 together. They've been better since they went onto the Leeds/Selby and Sheff/Brid services - fewer stops and less opportunity to overheat. The actual deployment of units seems to change with each timetable change though - the through services to/from Hull were 155s (traction knowledge again) then stopped, then reinstated. The extra unit which forms the 17.45ish from York was a 150 before covid19 as it was dropped off from a 4 car set earlier in the day, and a four car of anything longer than 150s is too long for half the platforms. I've no idea whats on there at the moment !

This is Marple - wrong style of canopy but I would expect the layout of the supporting structure to be similar: https://i2-prod.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/incoming/article9563611.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200/JS67154253.jpg

It was oxalic acid and it is still available. It was the only stuff which got brake dust off.

For carriages and wagons home made cardboard trays, usually made from old packaging, lined with that really thin polystyrene sheet also from packaging (the sort flat pack furniture comes wrapped in) and stacked in Really Useful Boxes. The 9 litre/A4 size holds three 'OO' trays stacked 3 high, the 18 litre ones will hold four layers, both assuming that you lay the stock on its side rather than on wheels. For short term storage they are just laid in and the next tray placed on top, if I was moving house or taking them to an exhibition etc I would have to wrap each item within the tray separately or they get scuffed. Locos and anything really delicate get a bespoke foam lined box, but with the lower part made to fold out flat (i.e not glued at the corners) to avoid damage getting it in and out. The Bachmann and Hornby boxes go in the bin.

Changing fully automatic BSIs for semi-automatics with jumpers (or vice versa) shouldnt be an issue, especially if you've already got the unit in bits to fit bike racks. It's already been done on 150s, some were converted to 3 cars around 1990 by splitting sets and sticking the extra vehicles on 2 car sets. It was intended to be done again for Northern but they went for 153s attached to PRM-compliant 150/2s instead, with some moderate platform extensions.

Thanks LMS, I was working on "bigger wheels weigh more = greater unsprung mass" but I hadn't even thought about RPM. Told you I was was asleep for that bit !

Because in many cases the weight concentrated on a single point (axle load) is of more concern than the total weight evenly(ish) distributed over a longer distance. Although bridges are fairly obviously long structures supported only by the piers, so is the track - the bit in between each sleeper is unsupported and is in effect a mini bridge. So the extra 2 tons axle weight on the Clan will break rails which the 9F will not. The Clan will also produce a greater hammer blow per wheel as there are fewer of them and they are heavier, I think, that is getting into dynamic loads and I was mostly asleep for that bit of Applied Maths.

We've done this before several times. The issue is not the aerosol or the liquid on their own, you can send aerosol deodorant up to 500ml and bottles of wine up to 1l by post, but not paint in any form because it gums up the sorting machinery if it leaks.

It was flagged at the time but shouted down.

Thanks 26 :-) Only two so far ...

I did look for Cowlairs, honest, but the best I could could find was "ceased after Grouping" with no detail. Still looking for Kilmarnock (G&SWR), there must be others which went much earlier. Wigtown - rebuild of Wigtownshire Railway No.1 from 0-6-0T to 0-4-2WT in the goods shed in 1883. WR No.4 had similarly been rebuilt twice before that so not a one-off but hardly a major works. Does that count ?

St Rollox - LMS 4F 4476 (at least that was the highest numbered of the batch), 1928. Inverurie - GNSR Class F No.45 "George Davidson", 1921.

Have a look here for liveries: http://www.lightstraw.co.uk/gpo/tpo/nightmail3.html In short, the one in your first link is in 1950s/60s livery, and the second one is in post-1990 livery. In BR steam days only the BR Mk1s were bright red, most other TPO vehicles were maroon. After 1970 they went blue/grey and then from 1986 back to red. A TPO could be a single sorting carriage (POS - Post Office Sorting) at the head of a passenger or parcels train, or a whole train of 12 or more Post Office vehicles, or anything in between. As well as the sorting carriages there were stowage vans (POT - Post Office Tender) and some brake stowage vans (BPOT), mixed and matched to suit operating requirements. The only absolute requirement was that there must be at least one brake vehicle to accommodate the guard (which could be in the passenger coaches if there were any). Beyond that the variations were legion, there was much shunting, combining and splitting of portions en route. I'm sure there are old threads on here going into much detail. A typical 'short' formation was the Scottish bit of the Up Special TPO which in the 60s was two sorting vans, a stowage van and a brake stowage van, all LMS vehicles. It combined with other portions at Carlisle. The Highland TPO was a single POS at the head of a passenger train, an ex-HR carriage until about 1960 then a BR Mk1. If you want to do it with all Mk1 vehicles then the Huddersfield - Whitehaven TPO was a POS and 3 BGs by the 1970s. With a GUV you would have no through gangway communication but you could always tag it on as a 'bag tender' i.e. not sorted en route.

This is the mock up of the scenic upper part of the layout, the station is bottom left, trains leave clockwise for Dumfries and anti-clockwise for Stranraer and Whithorn. The Whithorn branch rejoins the Stranraer line behind the backscene, there is no separate fiddle yard for the branch. The lifting section across the door is bottom right. Downstairs the lines from the surfsce drop 170mm at about 1 in 60, the gradient being set by a 600mm spirit level with a 10mm block under one end. The clockwise spiral is mostly hidden behind cutting sides until it drops below baseboard level, there is just enough headroom as it ducks below the goods yard (bottom left) where it crosses the other spiral. The anti-clockwise spiral is slightly complicated by the Dumfries end of the station not only being on an embankment but also crossing Station Road on a girder bridge - no cuttings to hide behind ! The spiral actually crossed the road almost on the level immediately behind the bridge so some sleight of hand is going to be needed to manage sight lines. The Crab is heading towards Dumfries on the scenic bit, the coaches are spiralling down towards Stranraer. Between them is the clockwise spiral, well out of sight at this point. The 'country' board will be scenic but exactly what to put on there is yet to be decided. At the moment the mock up has a representation of Goathland on it (don't ask) but other options include Carty siding or one of the smaller viaducts.

I don't think you'll have to work too hard, Dan built most of Stranraer while I was thinking about how to do the bit across the door ! Yes it's a bit of a stretch but it's unavoidable; trials of automatic couplings have been going on almost as long as the layout planning ! I've settled on the Lincs having tried most of the others. There's no delayed action but they are more robust and less fiddly than the alternatives. I need an awful lot though !

The Port Road from Dumfries to Stranraer has long been my personal obsession but not that long ago the mention of Newton Stewart would, I suspect, have had most modellers asking “Where?”. Now, in a large part thanks to Andrew Swan’s excellent book “The Port Road” (Lightmoor Press, 2017), a lot more people have noticed this rather attractive (in a suitably dour Presbyterian way) Scottish junction and the long, largely single track secondary route which served it. Bochi has already started a thread on here about his ongoing project to build Newton Stewart in the 1930s My version of Newton Stewart is set firmly in the 1955-65 period. I’ve been dithering about doodling layout plans for this for years, then faffed about for 10 years getting the shed fit to build in, have so far spent a further 4 years building the occasional board without a single train running yet and only now am I actually laying track. Even then it’s mostly held down with drawing pins while I work out whether my Absolutely Last Final Track Plan actually fits. So 14 years into a ten year plan I’m still sawing up wood for baseboards. Part of the problem is that, to model the whole station, junction with the Whithorn branch and loco shed requires a space at least 28 feet long and my shed is 13’ x 8’ internally. A bigger shed was not an option for several reasons, most of them involving our garden not being 28 feet in any direction, so it was either squeeze Newton Stewart into the space available or build something else. “Something else” would have to be somewhere else on the Port Road of course but few other locations were operationally interesting enough to hold attention for long. The fallback would probably have been Dunragit. The ‘rules’ such as they were, were that the branch platform had to hold five Mk1 coaches otherwise the Easter Tours wouldn’t fit, the Whithorn branch and loco shed had to be included, there should be no curves tighter than 3rd radius (19” or thereabouts) visible, and even then only where they were largely hidden or not obvious. Stock has to negotiate a Peco Streamline small crossover as that is what the fiddle yard uses. In practice the only visible bit of 3rd radius is tucked away in one corner although the Whithorn branch uses a short length of 4th radius (~21”) rather than the planned 30”. This is what it looked like drawn out at ¼ scale: The fiddle yard isn’t shown, largely because at that stage I had absolutely no idea what it was going to look like. The first idea was for a grand double tracked multi-level vertical fiddle yard sliding majestically up and down the back wall, but to accommodate the Stranraer boat trains this was going to need to be about 8 feet long and my carpentry isn’t up to that level of finesse. Some experimenting with a Hornby Clan, some Bachmann Mk1s and a set of DCC Concepts Powerbase magnets and bases showed that 1 in 60 gradients were feasible so a double spiral looping around to a lower fiddle yard was designed. It’s even harder to describe than it is to draw and needed a model of the model to check that it actually fits ! The fiddle yard is effectively the whole lower level, a mixture of long sidings (the longest accommodates two full length boat trains) and a traverser. One of the spirals was mocked up full size in foam board, some track pinned down and it all actually worked ! The scenic boards sit on top of this and much head scratching and trial and error has been involved in trying to ensure that access is available to them if needed. So at the moment the station looks like this. Some of the supports are very temporary, and yes I know the distant signal arm is upside down: More later.

Generally the structure belongs to Network Rail but responsibility for maintaining the public right of way over it is the local authority's. There are a lot of potential complicating factors though, exceptions, agreements otherwise and historical oddities, pretty much every one is different in one way or another !

The new derogation letters are correctly addressed to Northern Trains Ltd. The others are all the December 2019 originals.