David C

Brilliant! Thank you all for your responses. I may well invest in a set of Worsley Works E157 sides, even though the differences appear to be marginal and most people wont notice the differences. I've still got one half of an E147 B set to complete first, though. Interesting that the E157 that Miss Prism posted a link to has "Return to Princetown" printed on the side. Almost all of the photos of trains on that branch I've come across consist of a single Collet corridor brake compo, not a compartment coach. Maybe the E157 was allocated there because there were a lot of first class passengers visiting the jail ..... David C

Thanks for responding. I'm sure you're right brake compos with corridors, but the E157s were compartmented and built as late as 1937. David C

Any GWR coach experts out there know what the difference is between the non corridor brake compos of dia E147 and dia E157? I photocopied the complete list of coaches produced by the GWR at the back of Harris's book (borrowed from a library - I don't have a copy alas) from which I ascertained that the E147s were a whole inch wider? Were they otherwise identical or did they differ significantly? I ought to add to my stock on Woodstowe and noticed that Worsley Works produce a scratch aid for the E157. Presumably the E157s were intended for branches needing only a single coach. Thanks in advance. David C

I think it was Maurice Deane. David C

Peco bullhead track would be pretty incongruous on a German layout, as flat bottomed rail was the norm. Peco produce FB track using both code 75 and code 83 rail. I used the former on my DB branch terminus (with scratchbuilt points), but one of my two Fleischmann locos (a BR70) bashes the "chairs" on the track. It still runs perfectly, but the noise is distracting. Strangely, the other Fleischmann, (a BR98.8) doesn't - I think. This particular model is notorious for the noise it makes, so the coffee grinding sound of its motor and gears may mask any "clicking" as it goes over the chairs ..... If you do decide to use Peco track, check if the same thing doesn't happen on code 83 with your Fleischmann locos. German points are very different to British ones (including the Peco ones) as they used double width sleepers at rail joints, with sleepers along part of the point at half the angle of the frog (if that makes sense!) The standard size of the point was B8 (i.e. the tracks diverged at an angle of 1:8, so the sleepers were at an angle of 1:4. Weinert make accurate versions of the points and this link will show you what I mean: http://www.mein-gleis.de/images/html5/mg-2018/index.html#issue/4. I haven't used either Weinert or Tillig points, but if you decide to use the former, they are true to scale and are therefore very long - too long for my layout. Tillig points seem to be shorter and therefore more "space friendly" for modellers. They do have correctly angled sleepers, but not the double sleepers at rail joints. If you're not bothered about the un-Germanic nature of the points (and a lot of German modellers aren't), I'd be inclined to use Peco. BR50s were certainly used on at least one branch lines in the Eifel, that to Adenau, as were the 86s. I've seen photos of them on trains of donnerbuchsen, landerbahn type 4 wheelers and ex Prussian 6 wheelers. I travelled on a number of branch lines in the area in the early 1980s with trains of silberfisch coaches pulled and pushed by 212 diesels. They also hauled bogie convert coaches. Some of the photos I took are here: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/germanrailfr/nebenbahn-in-the-eifel-and-one-in-the-hunsruck-t9119.html. This website contains a lot of info about modelling German railways. Hope this is of interest. David C

Needs a lot of weathering, but it really captures the atmosphere of the old Liverpool Street that I remember from my youth. I spent a few summers temping nearby during school/college hols and often wandered around the station during my lunch breaks. All diesel by then, alas, but your modelling brings back happy memories of my teenage years, so thanks for posting your work on here. David C

Re: locos entering goods sheds. My understanding is that this was prohibited by most railways, which is great for us modellers as it adds to the complexities of shunting. To access the shed and what lies beyond it, engine drivers will have to use "reach" wagons. There was however one exception: Wells Next The Sea on the old Great Eastern Railway (not the one on the miniature Wells & Walsingham). Here, locos could only be stabled in the loco shed by going through the goods shed. There may well have been other examples, but certainly not on the Great Western! David C

Looks like an interesting project with some innovative ideas you have developed. I'd be interested in seeing how your baseboard folds and unfolds, particularly as I want to extend both of my layouts (1 x British and 1 x Bavarian) along a narrow corridor. The baseboards will need to be narrow, highly portable and compact to store. From the glimpses in the photos above, your Dutch prototype layout seems fascinating as well! David C

Racingpete: Apologies for for not responding to your post, but although I still check out RMWeb, I haven't looked into my thread for almost a year. Woodstowe has been boxed up while I have been concentrating on getting Weidenstein finished. Until the weather improves and I can erect Woodstowe in the garden, I can't really take any photos, although I suspect you will have solved your transition from platform to rail height issue by now! The only thing I can add is that the road to the goods yard on Woodstowe sloped down fairly gradually - the drop was only about 10 - 12mm anyway. Regards David C

Isn't this the stuff that was used on Grenfell Tower? David C

Fleischmann and Roco brands belong to the same company. The former brand now only produces N gauge, but their H0 products can be obtained on eBay or secondhand. I've got two of their models, a class 98 0-8-0T and a class 70 2-4-0T, and both run very well and reliably. The only Roco I have is a class 64 2-6-2T: its very nicely detailed and runs smoothly, but is a little "sticky". It may improve over time, but my main problem with it is that it is very complicated to dismantle. In order to oil and clean the gears, the body obviously needs to be removed. The cab and tanks are separate, but there are about a dozen or pipes running between the cab and the domes, all of which are separate. Disconnecting and reconnecting them is a nightmare and needs great care. I wasn't able to connect the wiring for all the LED lights at the rear, so mine runs with only two. I was thinking about buying Roco's new (ish) class 86 (the 2-8-2T version of the 64), but if its constructed like the 64, I'm wont waste my dosh! However, I prefer Roco coaches and wagons to Fleischmann's. I also have a Brawa loco, a Bavarian type 0-8-2T. This company's products have the reputation for producing extremely well detailed and high quality stuff and my model is certainly very well detailed and a sweet runner. It was expensive, but Brawa stuff usually is - you pay for what you get, though. I only have two of their wagons, but they are also very high quality. Hope this is useful. David C

Caradoc: in the same way that supermarkets and bus operators restrict the number of their customers at any given time. In fact, its probably easier for the TOCs because most passengers will book in advance and they will therefore know when numbers are reaching a dangerous level. If they stopped accepting bookings for a specific service at that point, but reserved a certain number of seats for key workers, (who would have to show ID), then that should answer Michael Hodgson's point. Perhaps an allowance for season ticket holders could be included as well, but It may be necessary to introduce a system for them to pre-book too. In pre-pandemic days, GA seemed to have no problem labelling seats with reserved notices for passengers starting from a station en route - and also finishing it before the terminus. If the public are warned in advance that they wont be able to travel without a pre booked reservation, then no blame can be aimed at the TOCs - and scenes such as those at St Pancras last Saturday could conceivably be avoided. Mike James: yes, last Saturday's announcement gave hardly any notice of the abolition of Christmas, but the Xmas relaxation of restrictions between 23 and 27 December had been know for some time. It should have been obvious that there would be a large increase in the number of travellers at the beginning and end of those 5 days and TOCs could have sorted out some sort of system to ensure passengers travelled safely beforehand. Keefer: I completely agree with your comments. The point I was trying to make was that the behaviour of the irresponsible should not be allowed to endanger those who were responsible - or at least, that some of the TOCs were not even attempting to curtail their irresponsibility. Phil Parker: I'm glad you think the call handlers (there were in fact 2) I spoke to will be regaling their mates with the details of my conversations with them. I'm sorry you think I was being unreasonable and/or stupid, but I maintain it was a perfectly legitimate point to make. So do my immediate family, two of whom were faced with travelling on trains on which no social distancing seemed to be in place. All three of them mentioned their concerns to me, which is why I posted on here. Incidentally, all three are graduates, two have MAs and are both solicitors, whilst the third works for Network Rail. That does not of course mean that they aren't capable of making daft or ill informed comments - but then so are you! I usually find your contributions on this forum and elsewhere interesting and often informative, but on this occasion .... David C

Try https://eisenbahnstiftung.de/bildergalerie and enter 23 in the BR search box. You will find 100s of photos of 23s and what they're pulling. Its a very useful website. David C

The sight of crowds of people trying to board trains last night to avoid the Government's latest restrictions due to Covid 19 raises the question of how irresponsible the train companies are behaving in selling tickets. Before yesterday's news, my wife had noticed that tickets were still being sold on the Trainline and the price had dropped appreciably. How many tickets were on offer? Was the need for social distancing being accounted for? Indeed, was there any limit on the number of tickets for any trains being imposed? This was of concern to us as both our daughters planned on travelling to see us on 23rd and 24th December by Greater Anglia. Both dates were potentially very busy and therefore potentially dangerous ones on which to travel if social distancing was not considered. I rang the Trainline enquiry office and was told that some rail companies were only accepting passengers with reservations onto trains, but Greater Anglia was not one of them. I then contacted the company directly and asked the following: If, say, GA's coaches have 60 seats each, but social distancing can be maintained only if (say) 30 of them are occupied, then was the company restricting their sales to 30 per coach? All the call handler (who clearly could not be held responsible for policy), could tell me was that GA estimate train capacity from advance sales, but they could not account for the number of people turning up on the day. Extra coaches would be added but only if possible. He also added that it was the passengers' responsibility to socially distance. It is appreciated that estimating passenger numbers cannot be precise. How many will join or leave trains at stations en route, how many or what size of "bubbles" will be travelling must be complicated to calculate. Nor can GA be wholly responsible for how passengers distribute themselves over the whole length of trains. But GA clearly believe that turkeys are responsible for Christmas! How can passengers with tickets be expected to socially distance on trains that are overcrowded? They wont find out what the situation is until they get to their stations. The call handler suggested that they could wait for the next one - which may also be over full. Suppose the last train is also "standing room only"? What does GA expect passengers to do if they are on a train which stops at a station en route to find the platform full of people wanting to board? As for extra "coaches", just how many FLIRTS do GA have spare? Where are they stabled ready for use? Is there the staff to run them? Surely, all railway companies should only be accepting a safe number of passengers in advance and then only allowing a safe number of those who turn up on the day to travel? Failure to do so is disingenuous on the part of GA and all the other companies who are not controlling the numbers of passengers on services. Even if they wont accept any duty of care for their passengers, they surely do have one for both their platform and their on board staff. Obviously, after yesterday's announcement, the situation is now academic, but last night's scenes of crowds attempting to pre-empt the midnight deadline should not be repeated in future. (And yes, the government should accept some responsibility as well!) David C

If you do fancy a heritage line and if the BR50 is a bit big, there are plenty of smaller tank locos which have been preserved. Off the top of my head, there are several Bavarian designs available: BR70 2-4-0T, BR98.8 0-8-0T (on the Fladungen heritage line, which also has a Prussian BR89 0-6-0T ) plus the former sugar factory 0-4-4-0T Mallet. There are also a number of enheitsloks, notably BR64s (2-6-2T) and 86s (2-8-2T) as well as former industrial locos. All of the above are or have been available RTR and Tillig have announced one of the standard ELNA locos designed for industrial use. This is an 0-8-0T. Of course, you could run almost any small tank loco on a freelance layout ... David C

Thanks for the response. I hope the flirts come out of lockdown feeling refreshed and raring to carry me to and from from Liverpool Street at some time in the near future ..... On the other hand, they may be a bit tired by 23.30. Its probably past their bedtime. Regards David C

As we seem to be coming out of lockdown, there is the possibility of train travel again, which raises the question of the reliability of the Flirts. Are they any better than when 5630 asked the question nearly a month ago? The reason I ask is purely selfish. I'm a member of the MRC and I hope that sometime in the not too distant future Keen House will re-open. Normally, I catch the 23.30 home to Ipswich from Liverpool Street. What happens if its cancelled due to a faulty Flirt? I know the train companies prioritise the last service of the day for obvious reasons, but if there is a sudden failure .... I could go for an earlier train just in case, but that would mean less time in the bar! David C

Thanks for your responses. Just had a look at the Railtec site - looks very interesting and very reasonable and will certainly try them. Now I'm no longer restricted to Stokeford or Stokehampton or variations thereof, I'll have to think of a decent name for the junction...... David C

Were all toads allocated to specific locations or were any common user? Having replaced the brake vans on the Woodstowe branch (which is set in BR days) with the Hornby versions, I ought to "brand" them with the name of the junction station. As the layout is freelance, I will need to invent a name for this imaginary junction and then make up the name by cutting and pasting transfers. The favourite is "Stokeford" - its the easiest one to do by using a decal sheet which includes Stoke Gifford and cutting out the "Gif". An alternative would be Stoke Hampton by cutting out "Wolver" from Wolverhampton. Most prototype toads that I've seen are branded with the name of the junction rather than the terminus, presumably because goods trains start and end there. On the other hand, it occurred to me that not all toads may have been branded with the name of any station to allow their use anywhere on the system. If so, that would save me the bother .... Any GWR or WR experts out there know? Thanks in advance David C

Spraying involved a Halfords rattle can of Ford Rosso red, the only one of several on the RAF Kinloss list of BR carmine equivalents available at my local branch. I can’t recall what I used on the E147 brake compo – I think it was VW tornado red, but wouldn’t swear to it as I no longer have the can. There is a difference between the Hornby and the brake compo paint jobs, the former being less orange-y and slightly darker, but this I will have to live with. Ford Rosso red certainly looks a lot better than the sludge, not quite maroon and definitely not carmine livery that the E98 came with. David C

Woodstowe is operated using timetables from real branches, one of which is Cardigan. Passenger traffic on this line was pretty minimal, almost all services post WW2 needing only a single coach. Nevertheless, to maintain the services (3 trains plus a mixed), 3 coaches were required. In the mid to late 1950s, these seem to have been non corridor vehicles, either brake compos (dia. E147) and brake thirds, the diagram of which chrisf of this forum identified as a dia D109. Now I built an E147 some time ago using Comet sides, Bachmann bogies and Hornby roof and chassis, the rest being scratchbuilt from styrene. I had plans to build some more suitable vehicles, but never got round to it. Then Hornby produced the Collet non corridors to their currently very high standards. There was some discussion on here about whether or not the 4 coach sets these particular coaches were marshalled in were ever broken up and used as singletons. Seeing a way of avoiding having another go at a dia. E147, which was hard going and pretty tedious, I assumed that some of the 4 coach sets were separated and that a couple of the D98 brake thirds were allocated to the Woodstowe branch. All the threads on here about these latest coaches from Hornby have almost entirely been positive – and quite rightly so. But coupled next to my dia E147 brake compo, which had been finished in BR carmine, the difference was striking. Hornby’s idea of BR carmine is much too dark, in my view, so I set about rectifying this. Dismantling the coaches was relatively simple as the things are held together largely by clips. The bits which were glued together (mainly the glazing) didn’t have much adhesive applied and could easily be prised off. Only one window, the odd one to the guards compartment, proved impossible to shift, so it got covered with a carefully cut out piece of masking tape.

Yes, definitely of interest. Please upload as many as you can be bothered to. Thanks in advance David C

That's the way I keep my car looking presentable ...... David C

As DavidCBroad suggested above, have a look at real timetables for NER branchlines. Great Western Journal was very useful in this respect for my own layout (Woodstowe) and gave very detailed timetables (including goods train timings) for several GW branch lines. Where you would go for similar information for Richmond, I don't know - isn't there an NER Society who might have such info? Usually, histories of branches include some copies of timetables, which would give you a starting point at least. I remember reading somewhere (can't recall where) was that Richmond as the railhead for Catterick army camp. Nowadays, we forget how much military traffic there was on the railways right up to the end of the 1950s and possibly into the 60s as well. I believe that the track to Richmond was strengthened to enable big locos (B1s and even V2s) to use it to haul quite lengthy troop trains, but this would also involve equipment. Imagine how heavy a train carrying, say, tanks would be and how powerful the motive power to haul it would be. (That said, I don't know that the line did ever carry tanks!) This apart, there was also other traffic which many branch lines handled. Not only were there the usual pick up goods once or perhaps twice a day, but there may also have been mixed passenger and goods trains. This adds to the potential for interesting operation on a layout. Tail traffic carrying meat, milk, fish, parcels etc would often be added to passenger trains, allowing for yet more shuffling at your terminus. I suggest a bit of research would come in handy. Someone somewhere must have written a history of the Richmond branch surely? Hope this helps. David C

Midland Red: 11 82xxx locos allocated to Newton Abbott on various dates from January 1955. All had moved away by October 1956. See Pannier Tank's post on page 1 of this thread and http://www.brdatabase.info/locoqry.php?action=class&id=726202&type=S&page=alloc for full details of the locos' allocations before withdrawal. Warning: you waste hours on this site - I have! David C