DK123GWR

I can't say that I've any experience of painting rolling stock yet, but if you like the NWR you may be interested in this model of the Ffarquar branch as it appears in the books or in this blog, which takes Awdry's Sodor as a starting point, but is what the owner describes as a 'gritty' interpretation. Both are very good indeed, and may provide some inspiration for you.

Yet the rebuilt Royal Scots were only given a 7P classification, compared to 8P for a King. Wasn't the development of road haulage facilitated by WW2 surplus though? Eariler nationalisation would not (directly) affect that.

I will accept any criticism that this isn't strictly modelling related, but some of you may be interested to know that the base game of Train Sim World 2 by Dovetail Games is free on the Epic Games Store this week. This includes the Bakerloo Line, an ICE line from Koln to Aachen, and Sand Patch Grade, a US freight route. Be aware that, outside of sales, you may not consider the add-ons to be bargains unless you are a fanatic. https://www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/p/train-sim-world-2 Please also note that if you are at all familiar with the layout of stations on the Bakerloo Line, the way that they have been simplified will drive you crazy. I know from experience, and I only commuted on it for a week.

For nationalisation in 1923, it seems reasonable that it would have been one of the people who became a big 4 CME then Collett, Maunsell, Gresley, and Hughes would have been considered. Here is a very short overview of each: Collett had never been a CME before taking over the GWR at around this time. Maunsell had been CME of the SE&CR since 1913. From what little I know of him it seems that he was more of a manager than a designer. Would this have been seen as desireable given the vast scope of the job? Gresley had been CME of the GNR since 1911. It is worth noting that he was not the first choice for the LNER job, but was reccomended by Robinson who turned it down. The ROD had chosen a Robinson design as their standard loco. Hughes had been CME of the L&YR since 1904. Of course, this ignores the quality of their previous work (which is subjective) and the inevitable political struggle, which might have led to any or none of these candidates getting the job.

It's OK. I had a better idea after posting that. Target practice!

Parking on the White Cliffs of Dover to scare away the Nazis?

Alternatively, heritage railways could show railways as they were in the good old days, before these horrible things we have nowadays called locomotives came along and ruined them. Image from wikimedia commons.

Which is really just an over-complicated version of this:

https://www.famoustrains.org.uk/index.php The rolling stock mixture may be at the less serious end of the spectrum, but if that doesn't bother you its certainly good fun. The operators really seemed to have a passion for what they were doing and interactive animations always add a little bit of magic to a layout.

So messages may experie too?

It would be if it were running as a set. At any rate, requiring a barrier vehicle 'in front' of the power car when running alone would make sighting signals (or anything else) very interesting indeed.

Would the load on the front axle be too high without the leading wheels?

You could try the M42. You can't get very far from Birmingham on that.

You'd find it hard to couple them to your 08 though!

This post is not about the SSR (though if one were needed, there is no doubt that Lundy would have played a crucial role in providing it). For context, the island of Lundy is much larger in my reality than in this one (the name is by far the greatest similarity). It has developed its own rail network slightly larger than Sodor's (though the places it serves are often larger or of greater importance than those on Sodor). Its legal status is similar to a Crown Dependency, and as a result it was exempt from nationalisation under BR (though the railways have been owned by the island's government since 1923). Its initial plan for modernisation looked something like Riddles' but unlike on BR it was kept to (electrification was considered cost effective due to the very heavy freight traffic from the west of the island to the east and to Britain, which uses a route similar to the South Devon Banks). The use of diesels on Lundy is minimised, as the skills to repair them in the event of a failure do not exist. This creates some interesting posibilities for trains to London and cross-country services to the North. One of my suggestions is the development of an HST B unit (above). This would connect to a flat fronted driving coach (to control the electric loco on the eastbound journey), then the rest of the coaches, then a pointy driving coach on the end (to control the diesels when heading west). There may be an additional flat-fronted driving coach inserted at some point along the train, allowing it to divide if necessary. The trains would work pointy driving coach first from their start point towards Lundy. At the first stop on the island, a Bournemouth-style operation would occur, with the diesels uncoupled and an electric attatched, the diesels waiting to take the next eastbound train. Of course, this would probably require significant modification the the HST's multiple working system and a new variation of Mk3 coaching stock. It would also have been developed before Polmont, and the associated nervousness around high-speed push-pull trains. One thing I'm unsure of is how to put it into TOPS. Firstly, is it one locomotive or two? Given the trouble that occurred when HSTs were considered MUs, I would suggest two separate locomotives would be better. The second is whether the B unit (or the whole lot, if it were classed as a single loco) should be a sub-class of class 43 or a new class entirely (42 had fallen out of use by this point, and all the other warship TOPS classifications were re-used for HST vehicles (41 for the prototype, 43 for the production series). I can't think of a time and place on the real network when these would have been useful. Perhaps the most plausible situation that would create a need for them (certainly more plausible than the situation for which they were imagined) is that London-Bristol had been electrified in the 1980s, where they might have been useful for trains continuing beyond Bristol.

Hate to be a pedant, but 0-6-2s aren't pacifics...

Very much a work-in-progress, but this is also bordering on the ridiculously small for a tender engine: This locomotive was not 101, but was a 'sibling' constructed in an attempt to resolve a number of problems with the original design. However, after suffering damage to the coal bunker, it was decided that it would be simpler to modify the locomotive to use a wagon as a tender than to repair it (the backstory applies to both model and imaginary prototype).

The Bishop's Fleming Branch was built opened in 1874 as an extension of the Norton and Letchmouth railway. It was intended to connect to the West Lundy Railway, which planned to extend its line from Chapelford. However, this became financially and legally impossible due to the efforts of rival companies and the Norton and Letchmouth, having invested large amounts of capital into its extension, collapsed into administration in 1876, being purchased by the Fishport, Oakhampstead, and Astleigh Railway. In later years, the line between Norton and Letchmouth became part of a branch line which diverged from the West Country Railway's mainline at Chepdene. Norton in particular remained well-served, though the frequency of trains was lower between Norton and Letchmouth. Meanwhile, the western end of the former N&LR became very infrequently served. Being an incomplete railway, it did not naturally have enough traffic to justify the sort of modernisation seen across the rest of the island. This inspired a change of direction. Most of the stations on the route served very picutresque areas or tourist attractions, while the eastern end of the line at Norton remained easily accessible by rail. Following the ban on steam locomotives operating on BR, Lundy had already become an attraction for steam entusiasts from across the UK, with many of the larger preserved locomotives finding work pulling specials across the island (they would later be used in Britain as well). However, a number of small locomotives were not able to run on the main line without causing disruption to other services. In an attempt to turn around the fortunes of the failing branch, it was relaunched as a heritage railway using locomotives from the WCR which could not be used elsewhere, alongside period coaches. On a day-to-day basis, maintenance is carried out at Norton Works, although stock is usually sent to Oakhampstead or Crovan's Gate, Sodor, for major overhauls. The works are close to Norton station, which provides connections to the main network. The western terminus, at Bishop's Fleming, is set into a cutting as the line would have then passed through a tunnel in order to connect with the WLR. As this never happened, a retaining wall has been built around the station and its goods yard on two sides, while the ground on the other two has been lowered in order to better integrate the station into the town. Most of the rolling stock carries a livery which has been used during its time on Lundy - usually de-branded BR, WCR, or one of its predecessors. A notable exception is number 101, an 0-4-0 tank engine purchased from the GWR, which in 1985 was repainted into a special livery to mark the 150th anniversary of the Great Western Railway.

It would restrict capacity as you would need a heavy freight path to be available in each direction simultaneously, and of course delays to trains in one direction would prevent the train travelling in the other from using the incline. I imagine that bankers are much more useful. Also, how dare you suggest we use fewer locomotives on this thread? Go away and imagine a new locomotive for banking duties on the Lickey Incline while you think about what you've done!

The banner has been replaced by a new format which remains prominent without negatively affecting functionality. Thanks for taking into account the comments by users and working to address them.

Not as far as I'm aware. And I always get adverts down the side.

My equivalent:

Yes, that's the banner. I hadn't noticed the gap but that if that could be removed it might allow us to see the content more easily without altering the advert too much.