Herbert Nigel

Oi! Who knicked that signal arm?

QUAKERS? Has he gone religious on us now( as well as changing from Jenny into an A4)?

I preferred you when you were Jenny Agutter!

If you mean Miss Roe (papers got the spelling wrong - she was a bit fishy) then she wasn't so big - just bits of her. She certainly livened up that England/ Australia match in '82.

I may be wrong, (often am) but I suspect "Rockershovel" is referring to the presence of a large tension lock coupling on the van behind the V2 in post no.8949. Honestly, 't'ain't a problem for most of us.

Only place up that way I can think of would be Seaton Delaval, though I can't imagine why ECS to Holloway would originate there. Most likely the sidings were actually at Heaton in the area where the line to Seaton Delaval turned away from the ECML. I'm sure one of the NE contributors can offer an exact location.

I thank yow (to quote Mr.A.Askey).

Awwww. I thought you'd found some real evidence of lots of NER Atlantics turning up "darn sarf" in 1938.

A bit of bedding in of the structures to plant them in the landscape?

You can't leave it there! Why please?

Has an earthquake slightly lifted selective ground levels in Peterborough?

There do seem to be a lot of telegraph poles! One row down the middle of the depot(?) and another round the back? That's going to be fun when track cleaning! Very nice gas lamps too.

That's the theory, though it's usually only applied in S&C, not plain line.

Ballast. It's a dirty word. Only ever clean when new laid as, I'm afraid, from experience with the 12 inch to the foot stuff, the rust from rail and fastenings takes no time whatsoever to begin to cause discolouration. Then you have all the dirt from those engines (diesels NOT excepted) dropping from passing trains and the rather less frequently mentioned human detritus, that even today is still far too often still deposited upon the convenient "empty" space under a train. You soon have a dirty, brown tinted ballast formation no matter which quarry the ballast originally came from.

Litter is such a feature of the everyday British scene we tend not to notice it but it's always there! It certainly makes the forecourt shot look realistic. Perhaps a light "waft" of hairspray to fix it in place would be advantageous?

Sorry. Obviously haven't got the hang of this "snipping" protocol right.

It is, at the end of the day, a model railway and one to be proud of! You have already stated where the limits are set on the "observable" area so pictures that include the "off" scene area are perfectly acceptable. You don't worry about showing us the fiddle yard, which never existed in the real world! The bit that matters is clearly recognisable as Peterborough North ( you yourself accepted from the start that the Midland lines simply couldn't be fitted in, so why torture yourself worrying about the other bits that can't be fitted in)? Those of us following this thread don't necessarily need to see the kind of pictures that appear in the magazines( sorry BRM, we stil {probably} l expect you to use photoshopping) but want to see the reality of your model, which most of us can only dream of. It inspires us to try harder!

Wish I'd seen this photo' earlier. That'll teach me to read the whole thread before venturing my opinions! Sorry Mr Wales for doubting your assessment. It IS interesting though. How many other locations might have featured such an unusual (if that's the right word in this circumstance) signalling feature?

Sorry GN. My earlier comment was made on the presumption that this object is for movements NORTH out of the Up Main platform, over one of the routes made possible by the three way mentioned by LNER4479. Top indicator would show which route, lower to show clear for movement. There may be examples where a ladder is on the "facing" side of a signal but I've never seen one and the safety hoop for an S&T man working in the "gubbins" would hardly be on the side facing traffic. The concrete post signal seems to be clearly positioned for anything leaving the bay. Wasn't the standard method for Northbound loco' changes to drop the replacement 'loco into the up platform and, when the arrived Northbound train engine drew clear, draw the replacement forward across the left hand leg of the three way onto the Down Main before setting back onto the train? This would seem the likely purpose of this strange post as how, otherwise, was such a movement signalled?

Might this be a case where both are right? Whilst I agree with ianwales that the lower segment shows a repeater signal in the "on" position the upper segment is indistinguishable. Could this actually have been a route indicator, showing which "route" the aspect applies to? My (admittedly, limited) experience with BR signal engineer's has at least persuaded me that, in the period modelled, many experiments were trialled to find the best way to impart understandable signal information to the poor driver who had to try and retain encyclopaediac knowledge of many miles of railway!

And in triplicate!

Forgive me, but I'm sure earlier in the thread reference was made to a painted back scene? This would permit more adjustment to the perspective than using photographs which are usually taken from ground level (especially in 1938!).... Since the majority of model railways are viewed from an approximate scale height about 100 to 200M ABOVE natural ground level, photography only really seems to work in a very general way as background to completely country scenes where the railway sits in a valley bottom. I'm not suggesting you can achieve a painted scene in time for the Grantham show of course, but it would seem to be the only way to achieve a satisfactory, long term solution? It would be tragic after the effort that has been put into this model for it to be spoilt for sake of the background. I have to ask - how does the Faller road system work with the photographed area as shown?