Edwardian

I don't see that they need to. A prototype point, but as the purpose of carriage sheds is to keep carriages nice, I imagine the last thing one would want is to send a dirty steam engine in there to pollute with trapped smoke. With goods sheds I imagine it's as much the fire risk as the risk of spoiling the goods. So, what about that coach at the far end of the shed? Did men/horses wheel these out to within reach of an engine? I surmise that Brother Schooner's plan shows cassettes stored beyond the carriage shed, however, there only need to be two cassette roads, one for each route north out of the station: One that will need to accommodate engine and train cassettes up to 4 1/2 ' (54") for the mainline to Birchoverham Next the Sea, and that would also be used for much shorter Birchoverham Staith branch trains. This is is the one along the shed wall; and, One for the Fakeney branch, which would be at the front of the baseboard. The carriage shed acts as a view blocker, not cassette access, so the sidings terminate at the end of the shed.

Of course, I know this. But the question was posed regarding a suitable 'go-with' and that was my suggestion. If the W&U 4-wheelers are not reckoned viable - and I quite see that would be the case - all similar proposals are likely to be similarly doomed, until one isn't, that is. When you consider the number of J67-9 variants proposed and the existence of the Oxford loco, the suggestion is not as far-fetched as some. Could it reach the viability threshhold for injection moulded tooling? That has to remain doubtful, but if Accurascale used a set of, say, four or five of these short coaches in train packs including each of the loco classes/sub-classes proposed, much as Hornby has done with it's Liverpool & Manchester stuff ....

I remain fond of those PC kits. I idly wondered whether EFE would have a crack at the corridor set. PC also did the splendid clerestory diner, which is a nice extra to add to the corridor set.

I would offer the GER six a side 4-wheel suburban stock built 1898-1903. They were 27' long, which I think is about what the Hattons 4-wheel generics scale out at, but were 9' wide. They also had those distinctively 'Metropolitan' round-topped doors. As they used steel sheeting on the lower body, I would guess that they were painted coach brown rather than finished in varnished teak from the outset, going into crimson from 1919. With the round-top door, and width, with recessed doors, I think they are distinctive enough to appeal. You would need to produce just 3 bodies, assuming I am correct in supposing no physical exterior difference between the thirds and seconds, making up a long suburban train with more than one of each: - 4-compartment 1st (Dia. 113) - 5-compartment 2nd (Dia. 308) - 5-compartment 3rd (Dia. 408) - 2-compartment Brake 3rd (Dia 520 or 522) There were two 2-compartment variants and these were seemingly more prevelant than the 3-compartment version (Dia. 521)

Not the only one. Toby, in my view, was always ambiguous, and IIRC the good Reverend suggested at one point he was a Y6, though I think the final answer is that he was a J70. If so, there's a J70 on passenger duties right there! Headcode disc. In the position for an ordinary passenger service, IIRC, notionally in the above the smokebox position. These tended to be white, green or red. Single lines. IIRC, tended to be red, but could be green. Some lines had special rules. I cannot recall if the W&U did off hand. Would need to look up the point.

Quite.

This is a GER G15. It is clearly still in GER livery, as one can see the initials. I would guess the picture dates in the period 1903 to the Great War. G15 No. 129 was of the second batch, to order number N17, of 1885. It was withdrawn in 1933. The confusion no doubt arises from the fact that this loco was placed on the duplicate list, as 0129, in 1921, and the number 129 was thereupon transferred to one of the newly built C53s/J70s.

No, that's Prince Albert. Hat ... coat

Yes, but he also claimed to be a doughnut, so ...

Trying to match an exact shade of colour on a prototype, even if known, is a fool's errand for a whole bunch of reasons. To me, the ultramarine looks like a shade mid-way between the colour ranges one sees on the preserved J15, which can range from bright blue to near black in pictures. I think that is a sensible choice. Even my own pictures of the train pack show a real contrast in the blue on pictures taken at the same time and place but from slightly different angles. Similarly, grey is grey for these purposes. If it was anything like the SE&CR wartime grey, it changed shade quite rapidly out in the atmos. French grey is reputedly a slightly warm grey, but how light or dark it appears at any given point is, again, subject to a thousand variables. Thus, I should think you could take 50 shades and few if any would be objectively or demonstrably wrong! I am very impressed with the 1919 livery set and the crimson really does suit the carriages, but it is out of period for me, and I think the GER coach brown is very well done, so is the ultramarine.

Quite agree! 😉

I might be smiling, but I'm clearly still jaundiced

I like Vlad, but have mainly seen his stuff on Russia. I'll have a watch.

Listening to a DUP MP on LBC a couple of weeks back. He kept saying "we did not get the BREXIT we wanted". What does that even mean? Is he an idiot? Perhaps that is axiomatically so in the case of the DUP, but how can he think this? I have never understood why the DUP wanted BREXIT (and still do). What did they think would happen? I can see an emotional appeal as they the flag harder than a Home Secretary at Conference, and, perhaps, they thought it was a Baldrickesque Cunning Plan (and we know how they turn out) that would drive a wedge between NI (soon to be majority Catholic) and the Republic. But how did they think it would work? Did they think that a single market and a free-movement zone would not require a hard, physical border? Did they foresee that and want that? If we admit that, this is close to them wanting to prejudice the Good Friday agreement, to threaten peace. That would be insane even by their Creationalist standards of intellect. If they did not want that, how did they think the EU was going to maintain the integrity of its zone? A border between one system and another of some type has to go somewhere. In many ways the current fudge is the best solution possible to a problem the DUP wanted to create, despite the majority in NI being, quite sensibly, opposed to BREXIT. Then there was Stella Creasy giving voice to the other incomprehensible fudge; why Labour 's policy is not to rejoin. That made no fecking sense either. Honestly, I need to stop listening to this nonsense!

A professional job by CR Phillips. Pictured on this page is the Jubilee and a T1 he also did for me.

I think it is time to retire the PC Models version of these 1906-1910 cross country sets. I've just taken delivery of the EFE set and given them the once over. I am impressed.

A box arrived at Edwardian Towers .... One might think from the packaging that one had received something from the age of blue and silver, of yellow-nosed diseasals and motor-rail and Corporate Image. But, no ... These are lovely. They are not bad value for today's prices (at £59.25 per coach) and one has a complete train or, if one prefers, a portion thereof. Unlike the GWR, the Southern constituents were really into sets. This one is labelled as the ill-omened No. 63. More annon. As the tooling favours the later periods, it looks to me as if the roof vents are the conventionally proportioned ones fitted by the Southern; LSWR torpedio vents were noticably taller. The other detail I noticed are the plain disc wheels, not Mansells. These are pretty minor points, however, and easily remedied if desired. The finish and lining is excellent and seems a very fair rendering of LSWR salmon and brown, and the modelled detail is crisp, The prominent transverse springs of the LSWR Fox bogies are well captured. Unlike Hornby's square-wheeled rebuilt LSWR SR coaches, these EFE coaches seem very free running. So, the set number. Weddell notes that remarkably few of the set numbers for these vehicles are known. No.63 is known, but only because it was involved in an accident at Vauxhall on 29 August 1912, when it formed a train as one of two sets. "In this case while the 13.37 am. train from Aldershot to Waterloo was standing at the up through platform at Vauxhall Station, it was run into from the rear by a light engine proceeding from Nine Elms to Waterloo. One passenger was killed and forty-four were injured, as were also the driver and fireman of the light engine." Interestingly, only the running numbers of the brake thirds in the EFE set correspond with those in the accident report, 1520 (preserved) and 1519. One of the composites is another preserved example. So, it's not really set 63, though the brake ends are where the set number is displayed, giving that impression. BoT Report I could replace the wheels with Allan Gibson Mansells, but the bearings will be a little different and could compromise their free running. I'm minded to use these, which I have used before and which do look the part when painted up as varnished wood: Wheel Inserts

This helpful summary comes with a language warning (they're Australian):

Yes, I think I knew that, but had forgotten, so thanks. I think Hoole mentioned it in his tome on ECJS

For me part of the allure of Carlisle is the physical appearance of the station, and the other, which one can only appreciate in the pre-Grouping age, are the sheer number of companies using the station. On the ECML I suspect we split this between Newcastle, to which I expect the Scottish companies ran, and York, which saw the overlap of the two English ECML companies in terms of motive power, but also saw other English companies, perhaps most unexpectedly, the GER! This I suspect is a function of the fact that the border is much further south on the west!

Indeed. People like to criticise lawyers, of course, yet I have found that my career in commercial litigation has been built on the need for some way to regulate people who choose to be the worst version of themselves. In other words, they blame the lancet for the boil of their Original Sin. It has long been my observation that business ethics, or ethics in business, barely exist for many entrepreneurs. Unless it is illegal, it is acceptable. Sometimes, if it is illegal, but the risks and consequences are seen as manageable, it's seen as acceptable. There is no sense of any moral or ethical standard beyond the minimal requirements of legality. Politicians these days seem to live in that same amoral world.

See further: BBC Interview Grauniad Report And, go Sangita!

A member of our House of Lords considers that it was OK to lie (over her connection with a company making millions out of PPE contracts - her husband owned it) because lying is not a criminal offence. Glad you've cleared that one up, Baroness Mone.