Flying Pig

Designed at Derby in the late 1940s, so probably very close to the twins.

I was going to agree with you, but I had a think about it and actually, if you are building for the very small spaces that are available to many British modellers, then "offstage" really does increase operational potential considerably. Otherwise you are really limited to shunting. If you have more space, as here, then you have more options.

That sounds like an excellent idea.

Is there going to be more at the far end? As it is, the sand siding (in which I guess much of the play value resides) is disappointingly short and the long kickback has so litle headshunt it doesn't seem usable.

This post a couple of pages back links photos showing examples condemned in 1965 after departmental use. So, possibly?

Although those are of the suspended type and shouldn't Period 1 stock have the scissors type? And aren't the moulded gangways on the original Mainline bodies the fixed part of a scissors gangway?

What a fantastic garden visitor.

About in the middle of this 1938 6-inch survey. The scrapyard doesn't appear on any of the large scale maps available at NLS and seems to occupy the site of the brick and tile works. The line is the branch to Eston, which appears from the relevant 1-inch sheets on the NLS site to have been closed beyond this point by the time of the photo. It looks like a classic rationalised situation with the former down branch still in existence beyond the level crossing, the up branch forming the middle road in the photo and the rightmost line part of the entry to the extensive sidings shown on the 1947 map which would be behind the photographer if they still existed. Points from the down branch under the full wagons converted to hand operation at some time (possibly quite early as passenger services ceased in 1929).

Have you seen the following post and subsequent ones (apologies if you have but there seems to be a cats cradle of threads and links on this topic)? https://community.hornbyhobbies.com/topic/35136-bogie-modification/?do=findComment&comment=373875 Before cutting bits off your precious loco, make sure the bogie pivot is moving freely in the slot in the bracket.

Not from Accurascale (they have done the 24.5t hoppers). Hornby released a new tool model of the original unfitted LNER design, but haven't reissued it recently afaik. BR fitted and unfitted wagons with welded bodies have never been available rtr and neither have the rebodies from the 1970s. Plenty of variation to have a go at.

Thanks - that's probably the one I saw on the layout. Unfortunately, I can't really remember anything of what Geoff said.

Yes, it would fit more neatly into the rectangular space, but is that what is wanted? Perhaps implying that the layout fans out beyond what we can see is better? As I've already said, one of the strong points about this layout is the way it implies its context beyond the rather small box in which it is built.

It isn't quite, as platform 2 is departure only. The layout of the station is a bit quirky with the main arrival platform (with loco release) 'wrong side' and we would probably have torn it to bits if it had been posted on here. But Geoff had created a lot of lore concerning the history and operation of the station that made sense of it - he explained it to me at an exhibition and only I wish that I could remember the details of what he said. @Pacific231G do you have a picture of the diagram of routes connecting to Tower Pier that you could post here, please?

On the small number of occasions I saw Tower Pier, I was as impressed by Geoff's interactions with the public as by the excellence of his layout. The personal qualities recalled in his obituary were certainly on display. It's very pleasing to hear the layout is in safe hands, since it is in my view one of the greats.

Please do. I agree it is a very fine layout and I do hope it won't be lost. It's a layout that benefits from being well integrated into its railway surroundings, which gives even almost vestigial trackwork like the goods roads much more presence and interest. A great use of limited space and always well presented when I saw it.

I googled "Geoff Ashdown tower pier" and got a lot of images linked to various RMweb threads, so it hasn't been reposted elsewhere afaik.

A perhaps useful repost, originally posted by @Pacific231G on this thread, now lost from the forum but still for some reason cached by Google. The signal diagram for Tower Pier:

You might like this ;)

You don't have to. For one person operation and a less intense operating regime, separating the arrival and departure platforms and having to shunt before departure may be seen as increasing the play value. That requires just a single trailing crossover with the conventional double track approach, but the OP has complicated things by imagining two separate single lines. You could start with the layout as posted, remove one of the crossovers (duplication achieves nothing here) and run the approach as double track with the junction imagined off scene (perhaps some splitting distants on the starters to suggest it).

I was more concerned by the South Western coos at the start.

Yeah, 14 year olds get funny ideas. Good thing I was 12 when my Mamod arrived.

Planet Industrials in 00 (and Minerva in 0).

info about the preserved 01 here and it is notable how dreary GW livery is compared to the TVR and Hetton schemes. Alternatively an 02 is also preserved and operational on the Worth Valley. It too worked for the NCB in County Durham as Lambton No. 52. I don't think we've had an rtr Lambton engine yet - a major omission in my opinion. Lambton Hetton & Joicey Colliery Railway 52 by Nick Baxter, on Flickr

Maybe try Wizard Models who have the MSE signal parts. It might be possible to reduce the etchings to 1:120 if there was enough interest.