coline33

Yes, quite understandable to have the traverser within to keep the layout in a manageable space. The only reason I looked to having it outside the back wall was to increase storage space within. Also if I did not want to have a working traverser, a dummy one would not stand-out so much!!! When I suggested Brixton Hill as a prototype for John Howe to do a tram depot kit for a smaller depot to Camberwell, I had also in mind a freelance single road entrance depot for OLE and/or conduit. It was the architecture that was so impressive and John worked from a very colourful official drawing I had of the frontage. The interior walls came from many photos I had from within in tram days plus his taken as a bus garage at the time of the kit production. So hence I was happy to develop a layout with a single conduit track entry/exit from a middle of the road single track on R N Road with the only paved point being laid to permit the terminating service 90 car not to block the depot entrance track. The other end of my R N Road is a two road fiddle yard of non paved track hidden by the railway over-bridge. At least you seem to have straighten out the "Brixton Hill" site so you have the traverser space immediately inside the entrance unless you wanted to locate towards the rear as with that built into the extension of Finchley depot to provide Feltham car maintenance bays at the rear wall. If you do, do not forget that the Feltham end overhangs are greater than any other London car if you are putting in roof stantions.

As requested I attach views of the table-top line and its fiddle yard as set up to run-in the J70s and investigate the operational side but really I consider the concept is OT to this thread which is purely on the J70s themselves. There was one addition to the layout made to extend the short siding in the fiddle yard before it was all put away. Boyces Bridge is in the bottom left hand corner but in relation to Outwell Basin (right hand side) it is a reverse image to suit the table. I did reach the point of preparing four recycled cardboard sections from cereal packets upon which to develop fixed scenery up to rail level and positioning points to plug-in items higher than track level. I have deliberately avoided having an overhang round the table for the road/canal to avoid accidental damage. Each of the four scenic sections can now be worked on independently and away from the table. Note that trains can only pass at Boyces Bridge by use of the outer tracks - the middle one will only take two vans without clashing with a passing train on the outer line!!!

For chain, do not forget the model boat suppliers like Cornwall Model Boats or even Langley. Good for bollards as well.

Thanks, Philip, for mentioning the USA firm whose products are reviewed from time to time in the T&LRS magazine "Tramfare". Yes they are expensive and that is why for both cost and ease of construction I went for Recreation21 for my simple uncomplicated junction layout designs!!! East Lancs Modelling Supplies (see their website) do import various model tramway items from time to time but I cannot recall them selling Proto87 track. Nice to hear from Dave - I still have my 2-WIM pieces in their early stages of construction which ceased when "WC" had to move to another house and be stowed away. Ray, the LCC/LPTB/LTE Deptford Wharf was situated in Greenwich High Road on the other side of the Creek to Convoys Wharf which I knew very well in the 1960s/70s as one of my close PLA colleagues left to become its Managing Director and redevelop it into a then modern cargo handling facility. When I use the DLR over that section of Deptford Creek, I look down on its redeveloped former LTE site. The Grove Street line as you say was always 'mainline property'! Just for the record there was a rail connection into Surrey Commercial Docks but only as a siding which in my days there was never used and certainly not part of the PLA's railway operations.

I too was extremely pleased with 68222. So pleased that I immediately ordered 68225 on a Saturday which Kernow had delivered for me on the following Tuesday. I operate a table-top circular layout from a Wisbech/Upwell fiddle yard serving Boyces Bridge and Outwell Basin depots. I use a Gaugemaster Model D DC controller using a single supply feed in the fiddle yard. Both locos have performed faultlessly straight from the box. The maximum train length that allows passing at Boyces Bridge is loco+5 vans+brake. I have also restored a passenger service using one of my two Heljan AC railbuses. Two freights and a passenger are the maximum the layout can take at any one time. Yes, it has created a superb operating/shunting module as well as the prefect running-in track! The grandchildren have Toby and Mavis so the layout is designed as much for them as me. Learning electrical circuitry, control, craft and organisational skills are the educational factors for them. The track is Hornby sectional so can be modified further if ever really necessary. I am now at the point of developing the scenery with help from the young ones! Being so placed with both J70s, I am wanting a third to complete my stud. 68217 is the ideal one but it looks as though I will have to be content in ordering 68223 and consider a renumber!!! Hope my concept will help other readers of this who have grandchildren with their Tobys and Mavis's and looking for a compromise!!!

Tony, on RNR the single entrance track is conduit only and runs through the building to go out at the rear where the traverser will be in the open. The rear wall therefore looks like the fronts of the original Hammersmith and Balham (Marius Road) depots. The open yard area is a separate section to that of the depot building to suit the space available at any one time. The building as a stand alone permits operation of service 90 with the parallel tracks just being storage/display. The electrics are dead simple!!! Your "O gauge hostile wisbech inspired siding layout" intrigues me - don't say you are running armoured trains on the W&U??? Kind regards, Colin.

Back to business! Rye Lane depot was one of the earliest LCC electric depots in fact it was the first 'works' as the car bodies were assembled there from makers. CRD at Charlton was not built then. Although conduit track was laid in, the ploughs were of the long-lead type as this was before overhead was used. Within the depot the ploughs were lift out within the lower saloon and a lead from overhead wires was connnected from a troller. Trollers have the wheel/s running on top of the wire whereas trolleys have the wheel underneath the wire. Trollers remain on the wire by gravity and trolleys are sprung to keep the wheel under the wire. With the opening of the LCC's largest tram depot at New Cross Gate it took over Rye Lane just as it did with Evelyn Street depot. Rye Lane then became the permanent way yard until the very end. Although Deptford Wharf was also a permanent way yard is was primarily built for material storage and deliveries by ship/barge especially sand for which there were driers. Rye Lane housed the LCC road service vehicles as well until with the rationalisation of premises under LPTB, Bowles Road became available for the maintenance of the much expanded road service fleet. "West Croydon" had attended the Beckenham club's shows when they were held at Langley Park School. I loved the shows they put on there and went every year. When my granddaughter was a toddler it was to their show she first went to and to go into the reception seeing me behind the first layout in sight virtually caused her eyes to pop out! That was the first occasion she associated me with trams now she is older and comes to visit there is "can we go to the park on the tram, grandad?" I took my grandchildren on a pouring wet day to their show at the church they use. Never again, the place was like a morgue and a row with a resident over parking at the nearest point in that deluge I could reach the place decided I would never go there again. So I love watching the club's main layout "Beckwith" when it is elsewhere!!! By the way, I also model in OO9 being a supporter of the L&BR and currently completing "East Quay" based on the construction of a ship berth at the mouth of the River Rother on the Camber side using an extension off the old Rye & Camber to reach a manufacturing factory on the site of the old Rye Tram Station. Once the ballasting and the sand dunes are completed then exhibiting will be considered probably at a future Croydon MRS show. Kind regards to all, Colin.

Ray, the paved track looks superb. I now use Simon Dawson's 'Recreation21' track sections both for conduit and overhead as they provide the most realistic setts for the tramway margin or what is called the 'swept path' today. But, apart from three Felthams in 7mm. all my rail models (2-car DMUs + DEMUs + EMUs, SR + WR auto trains, China Clay, military, and Wisbech & Upwell) and trams (LT and 'four-footers') are 4mm. The PC Models grooved rail, which you referred to as Tramalan, proved to be ideal for display but not operation!!! I am just sending my stock of these parts to the TLRS Model Tram Museum in Birmingham for display. Been called urgently away so will return to this, Colin.

Tony, pleased to find you are still with us!!! I know what life is like. The reason why my "Rotherhithe New Road" (RNR) layout has not progressed far enough is being months away from home running my daughter's household whilst she was laid up. I am now returning to normal after a funeral last week where my daughter's in-laws who born three months apart passed away five days apart. As you are so far advanced with your layout compared with mine, would you like to take over the concept and have a "what-if" scenario for which I can provide the historical basis. It would be very local to you, avoid having to have overhead wires and working trolleys, able to operate the conduit only cars that operated in London and make a very attractive local layout for yours and the Southwark club. As an annex to New Cross depot and CRD you would have all the classes/types used in London after 1938 plus those conduit fitted types that came from north London to CRD before WW2. All the works cars could be accommodated too! Having started my long term career working in Surrey Commercial Docks in 1957, I have the feel of the area and people who resided in the area in those austere post-war years. If you ever wanted to go back in time to the LCC era then from 1920 RNR would have covered all the LCC classes and you could tow the Bexley and Erith cars in for store! In fact you could accommodate all the redundant cars in Brixton Hill from 1933 to 1936 and let the builders rebuild Telford earlier to handle the Felthams. Honestly, Brixton Hill in reality is very limiting in car classes/types to what you can faithfully achieve with RNR. My depot building has an exit through the rear wall into an open area for works cars and road vehicles to replace Bowles Road!!! How about operating a modern day service 90 from a working museum depot to Surrey Quays station with heritage cars? To me RNR is more exciting operationally than Brixton Hill. What's more you do not have to change anything you have already constructed. There's a thought for you, Tony. Discuss it with RB and I will give you all the background support you need (my cars are all 2-rail and RNR is all conduit apart from one internal storage line equipped with overhead for testing non-conduit cars). In fact, you could take over and improve on "West Croydon" now that it is off the exhibition circuit (a loss to the Croydon MRS). Please let me know what more I can do for you, please? All the best, Colin.

Many thanks, Alex, for confirming my hopes! I know what you mean by the thickness. In turning my 68222 into its W&U final condition, I have to repaint the window frames seemingly white. I will now hold off till 68225 arrives later this week and prepare the two together. Colin.

Alex, your weathering makes 68222 look just right for its penultimate W&U condition. Mine has just had its mandatory run-in and performs beautifully at slow speed. Did you use the factory fitted end window frames in the open position or do as recommended in the booklet, please? I am thinking of altering the side skirts to give it the final W&U condition to run with the diesels. So pleased with the performance of 68222 that I immediately ordered 68225. Kind regards, Colin.

Thanks, RB, for alerting me to your post. In the website refurbishment, this blog unfortunately got lost as I rebuilt my past saved forums. Firstly, although Fairfield Halls will return in a new guise, there will no longer be any TLRS Festival of Model Tramways that annually used to alternate between London and Manchester. The reason is that today there are far more local shows that include trams compared with a decade ago plus the age of the organisers has also increased!!! But probably more off putting is the cost of the venues even if younger people came to the fore. Both the Croydon and Manchester venues were ideal sites for their location to today's UK tramways. As you mention the Queens Road site exists and LPTB did combine their use of Leo Street and another premise into their Bowles Road 'works' facility. As to "Rotherhithe New Road" depot the boards are in store with little more than basic track work plus some shops, the tram fleet also safely stowed in a warm place! Other of my interests have developed requiring attention since last summer together with the other problems that life brings. Now my location in the New Road was just before Canal Bridge was reached but there was no connection to Old Kent Road. It was in the V of that road junction just before reaching OKR. Service 90 was to be the timetable of the museum route to Surrey Quays station where in the days of Surrey Docks station there was a crossover for any short working 68/70. My depot would have been the direct replacement by the LCC of their Evelyn Street trailer tram depot with conduit tracks provided so it could be an annex both to CRD and New Cross depot. At present there is little prospect of progress on the boards. Please do not let this lack of my activity put you off. If you want to take over the title of "Rotherhithe New Road" or plain "Rotherhithe New" in the manner we used to call Streatham depot "Telford Avenue" or just plain "Telford", please do so and keep me informed. All the best, Colin.

Yes, John, you would have expected regulations to have been amended by the time the Drewrys were introduced but basically they were not and rules became interpreted locally and dare I say 'risk assessment' became the order of the day! Amendment to tramway legislation, including the Highway Code, etc., did not come about until the 1980's in connection with the still required independent Acts of Parliament for light rail/ tram development. Even the Transport & Works Act of the 1990s continues to incorporate features of the 1870 Tramways Act. In discussion in 1998 with the original instructors of Croydon Tramlink there was the reminder that "no carriage on a tramway must move before a bell is rung"!!! Fortunately, our drivers do use their discretion and are very safety conscience. Kind regards, Colin Withey.

Thanks, Chris, for the full explanation. Now to learn of their arrival in the UK! Kind regards, Colin.

Simon, we in the PLA were very staff safety aware and Mowlems infilled the tracks with concrete so all surfaces were smooth. Also the smooth surfaces reduced the chance of damage to wheeled cargo passing across. I see many model quaysides with cobbled setts which look very attractive to a model but in reality they are a danger in an intensively worked cargo handling area. Model Rail 257 just received illustrating small very attractive layouts by Chris Nevard and Peter Marriott using J70s. Colin.

Simon, I was thinking only in terms of open track that was readily available RTR. You have raised an opportunity for those requiring paved track so I would appeal for this forum to be used to gauge the market for it. Personally, my J70 will be for W&U style operation only. For those interested in quayside operation of docks remember that Hornby's Peckett W4 as PLA 74 is due to be released this April and that too should be ideal on 1st radius track. Kind regards, Colin.

Thanks, Simon, I will see what interest I can find for you. Colin.

Simon, please tell us more about these tram stop components and from where can they be obtained. Colin.

Simon, the tram stop looks Tramlink-like, well done with those awful H-girders! Why not do as John Clarke did for his "West Croydon" layout and build a CR4000 based on the Alphagraphix card kit with the motor bogie in the 'C' section. Far cheaper than the LTM RTR release of some years ago which was based on the Halling H0 scale K4000 for Koln with its differences. John has since 'graduated' to the Stadler by scratch-building - now that does take a real effort!!! All the best, Colin.

Nice thought, Lee, for a 1960's trial but at that time diesels would have been in mind. Maybe a postwar loan by LNER/BR would suffice if you are into that era. However, you could take yourself back to the 1930's and let your clay company loan an LNER J70 for trials after the GWR Sentinel trials in Cornwall/Devon failed to impress. For my china clay workings I do use a Model Rail Sentinel. I very much hope the J70 will take 1st radius curves for dock operations. Regards, Colin.

From the further work that Steve has done leading Chris and I to look far more deeply into available photos of the engine in use on the 7.6.1950 rail tour, I believe the engine to be NE 8222 with body work needing a great deal of attention. Whilst grime covers the number, the 'No.' and '822' can be seen but it is the 'NE' that comes through to show that it was still in its LNER condition and awaiting a repaint to get its BR number. With the right hand (from the front at the chimney end) glazed window frame missing it was in sore need of attention. A tell tale point is the small oval makers plate on a plank higher than that on others. On the 1952 tour a photo was taken of 11102 with 68222 at Upwell. The engine had clearly been attended to as the skirting was now removed from around the four end steps as shown in that superb view taken by Awdry of it in emaculate condition where one can see the position where that makers plate is or was, on the higher plank and the window frames had been attended to! So in June, 1950 the engine was 8222 and in June, 1952 it was 68222.

My PLA 201 has been in store since delivered from the batch arrival in UK. Yesterday for use in testing Osborn Models foam inset for paved dockside track, it ran perfectly out of the box. Although the foam was not glued down it passed over the foam inset beautifully and on the curves too. The foam is cobbled on one side but being smooth on the other its is perfect for PLA quayside tracks. This Janus will shortly change its number to PLA 200.

Jason, thank you very much for drawing attention to this kit. I had responded yesterday PM and the post went through but alas it seems to be missing this AM. Yes, you are quite right. The ducket needs to be the size of that for the LNER Toads and the handrail along the van section and beneath it. So can anyone please find a photo and fleet numbers of these ex-ROD, ex-MET (when altered), ex-LPTB brake vans in LNER/BR condition from 1937? So far we have drawn a blank from the internet and the books we have - admitting we do not have all the latest books. Kind regards, Colin.

Further to my above post, I am coming to the conclusion that 1952 CURC brake van was an ex-MET one taken over by LNER in 1937 from LPTB. The handrail is continuous along the side indicating that there was no van section. If this vehicle had been one of the WD road vans, then maybe the MET removed the doors as they had no need for the van section. All comments very welcome, please. Colin.

It looks as though Steve and I have found the numbers of the loco used and the special brake van provided for the CURC's 1950 tour. Because fare paying passengers were being conveyed a fully fitted brake van had to be provided for them in lieu of a passenger coach. So ex-GCR six wheel van 531725 was drafted in from somewhere else for that occasion. A photo of sister brake 531727 shows that was fitted. The guard thus travelled in the line's ex-GER van. The loco was 68217 and was lettered BRITISH RAILWAYS, skirted and with cowcatchers. So if the sales of Model Rail's J70 go to plan then here is one for the next round. Based on the 1950 tour train consist, BR repeated it for the CURC in 1952. We know the loco was 11102 and that the guard travelled in either an ex-LNER Toad D or a BR standard brake van brake van with a central ducket. Again a separate fitted brake van was drafted in for the passengers. I attach a view showing a right handed positioned ducket on the CURC's van on the left of the two. Certainly not an ex-SR Pill-box van but could it be one of the WD road vans purchased by LNER in 1924 and converted into a brake van that survived into BR days? Can anyone please confirm this and provide the number series? Regards, Colin.