Poggy1165

Love this layout so much that I am now seriously tempted to make a model of the Clogher Valley myself! If I do get round to it, it will only be a very small as (with an existing 7mm layout in place) I shall not have much room for it. But the prototype is irresistible. When I was a kid, one of my teachers was J.M. "Jim" Lloyd, who often produced drawings for railway books. I distinctly remember him borrowing a Clogher Valley timetable from York Museum - he was the kind of guy who could do such things. I often wonder what he wanted with it.

I have a copy of a letter from a gentleman who was a locomotive inspector at Leicester. He clearly remembered lots of GC green engines on shed (I suspect they were mostly green at Leicester) and no two were exactly the same shade. So perhaps some were dull.

I would argue that the total model railway market is quite small, and there are several magazines. In addition, that market is highly fragmented, not only between periods, but between scales - not to mention the divides within scales! It is unfortunate that so many modellers seem to be intolerant of any interest but their own, because really we can't afford the luxury of special magazines for each and every sector. Frankly, I find diesel and electric prototypes generally less interesting but I would rather read about a first-class modern layout than a p. poor steam one. I also find that there is usually something of interest in practically every well-written article, as long as it isn't purely about how the author opened boxes. It would be interesting to know - and only a editor could tell us - what is the ratio of submitted articles is per subject area. And also, perhaps, the percentage of articles that meet the house requirements in terms of style, or whatever guidelines they have for their authors.

I have to say that the LNWR coach livery is lovely, and I'm rather pleased that unlike many companies they never simplified it. One of the great advantages of pre-group modelling, especially in 7mm scale, is that you can legitimately choose short coaches. My layout for example has a platform that can take 4 six wheelers and an engine. That looks, or rather will look, as the coaches are not complete yet, and in some cases not even started, more impressive than two sixty four footers, which would barely get in the platform at all. As for Mk 3s, well, they would look simply ludicrous, even if they got around the curves. Of course, to take my argument to its logical conclusion, many of us would be better off modelling the 1850s, when coaches were really short.

NRM York has most, if not all, of the LDEC wagon drawings. Some were certainly based on, if not identical to, GE designs. I would hesitate to say in every case, not knowing enough about the GE. Also the LDEC hired in a lot of coal wagons from the usual suspects. (It was like the GC in that policy.) One of the most interesting wagons - and it would make a great kit - was the LDEC cattle van. Reason being that some were converted, very simply, to covered wagons for general traffic, and so you'd get two types for the price of one set of moulds. Sadly, photos of LDEC wagons are quite rare, especially good ones.

The LDEC had strong GE connections; indeed both the GE and the GN had, and exercised, extensive running powers over it. Someone showed me a photo of one of the collieries it served, and very prominent in the photo were a couple of GE steel loco coal wagons. The GC nipped in and bought it by giving the Directors a better deal than the GN had offered. The LDEC, circa 1907, would be a cracking prototype. You could have locos in LDEC, GC, GN, GE, and MR liveries. Indeed, you could even have some GC engines in LDEC livery, because as I have mentioned before, Tuxford continued to paint every loco it received (including standard GC types) in LDEC style, with just the company markings changed and numberplates added.

I have to say that the JLTRT diesel kits looked very tempting, even to me as a dyed in the wool steam bod. Had I been rich enough to regard their price as petty cash, I should certainly have bought and built one, just for the crack. Mr Waterman had an exceedingly attractive L&Y loco at Doncaster in resin/plastic/whatever, that looked good and would doubtless have been a cinch to build. I would really have been tempted to buy one of those; but if they can't be produced at a price that people like me can afford, and at the same time gives a fair return to the producer, it's just a dead end, isn't it?

I am slowly but surely emerging from the depression which has gripped me (on and off and to a greater or less extent) for more than a decade. I am now contemplating coming off ADs altogether, having already reduced to the minimum dose. There have been no ill effects, if anything the contrary. It is a slow process but I find my focus - for want of a better word - is returning, and I even have patience for such tedious tasks as ballasting. Is there a more tedious task? The point of the post is to say that tunnels do eventually end, no matter how long and dark they are. Although I shall be on guard for the rest of my life, at least I know now what the enemy looks like and how best to react.

I believe some of the 4 wheel type passed to the LDEC for miners' trains, and would have passed to the GC in 1907. How long they lasted I don't know; I wish I did!

One of my M&GN related books mentions a record of cattle wagons kept at Melton Constable. (Apparently the said record book is still extant, though it is not clear from the source who has possession of it.) The record includes entries from almost every British company, and I suspect the exceptions would be minor and light railways. As for English usage, we have a living language which happily plunders words it finds useful from all over the globe. And as for Americanisms, not only do we plunder those that take our fancy, we often merely revive good, honest medieval words that the Americans have preserved but we have abandoned. "Trash" is a good example. So is "fall" in the sense of autumn. A medieval Englishman would not have known what you were talking about if you had referred to "autumn". There are lots more, and it's great fun making use of them in medieval fiction as it's really amusing to wind up people who don't know this stuff. If you want to communicate in a dead language, try Latin. That won't change much over time as all the changes have already been made. (Though a medieval monk's Latin would probably have baffled Julius Caesar,)

Consists in accident reports can be very interesting. For example, I discovered an LBSC wagon in a CLC Liverpool-Manchester train long before wagon pooling. It was also the source for my previous comment about the GCR running complete trains of 4 wheel coaches as late as 1909.

I know we've sort of ruled it out for this railway, but as far as meat imported via Liverpool is concerned, CLC refrigerator vans would actually be as likely, if not more likely, than those of the GC/MR/GN. The CLC had some very pretty refrigerator vans, and for about 2 weeks before Woodhead Transfers (very) sadly died as a business, you could actually buy the correct 4mm transfers. I remember kicking myself for not buying them while I had a chance, though having since gone 7mm it's a bit academic (for me) now. Woodhead Transfers are rarely mentioned, but I think they were one of the saddest losses of all. Went down with all hands, without leaving so much as a cork on the surface.

I suspect the answer may be that when wagons were repainted, they didn't always bother with the finer points of the livery. Also, where wagons were built by contractors, there might be subtle differences. Ultimately, it's unlikely a pre-group G.M. was much bothered if wagons were not perfectly painted as long as they were fit for purpose and did their job of carting stuff about in return for revenue. As I mentioned in another thread, I suspect that the pre-group companies were not as rigid over "image" as many modern companies are, and therefore livery variations often existed.

Surely sheep spend their time forming the equivalent of Colditz escape committees. It seems to me they can't bear to be on the right side of the fence, that straying onto a road or railway is considered much more fun.

Nothing very exciting today, just a couple of photos of the footbridge which is (at last) near completion. A rare sight of the sun enabled me to go outside and spray it. The basic colour is just red primer which I think is fine for "indian red". What upsets me (not that much!) is the amount of retouching these photos prove is necessary. It ain't that obvious in real life, Honest, Guv! A certain family has arrived in Wathboro. Sadly I have not been able to get a really satisfactory photo of them as yet, and it may have to wait until I can buy a better camera. You can just make them out on the bridge. Father, having resolved his difficulties with the Government, has left the Civil Service to become Manager of Wathboro Main Colliery. He has no knowledge or experience of the industry, but being the "right sort of chap" that makes him an ideal candidate for the position. He is so happy he has left his hat at home in his excitement. Note that the open risers have been blocked in. Hoorah! Much more GC-like.

The Midland were a bit of a special case. Charles Sacre, of the Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire, thought that 6 wheels was going it a bit, and that four wheelers were quite adequate, even for through trains to London. Perhaps explains why the GCR was still running complete trains of 4 wheelers in the Manchester area as late as 1909; albeit, at the same time Mr Robinson was introducing bogie stock of unparalleled luxury for expresses and London commuters. I have the impression that the great transition to heavier bogie stock was generally around the turn of the century - about the time when the LNWR found itself double-heading expresses because its principal express engines had not been designed with such heavy stock in mind. Passengers were demanding more comfort, and in those days, when the market actually worked, suppliers had to respond. (Similarly, they couldn't get away with not introducing new services due to "lack of capacity". If they didn't provide the "capacity" someone else would.)

If I buy a kit, I nearly always buy all the bits and pieces to go with it, even if I have no intention of building it for ages. Because I have learned that stuff can suddenly and inexplicably go off the market. Be prepared! is the motto.

You are quite right and the temporary obsession is already beginning to fade. Give me 7 days and I shall be over it, like a dose of flu. Meanwhile some more bushes have arrived and I am about to busy myself by sticking some of these to various parts of Wathboro, I have also got some new and interesting citizens on the way, who will need installing. Next jobs: To finish the footbridge. (Plastic strip already on its way to block in the risers.) To paint the footbridge. To finish the Dog Lane entrance stairway. (A lot of brickwork painting already done, but still a fair bit of work.) To build the station buildings - that will be a big job! Then, with that part of the background complete, I can finish laying the track in the station area. Then it will just be a matter of deciding what goes at the front, and the whole section will be complete(ish). Bar signalling (best left until last) and the possible MR bridge.

This is a good example of an engine not build under the eye of Mr S. W Johnson or Mr. J. G. Robinson, which might even be called a tad on the plain side, and yet, somehow, still has an appeal all of its own.

Friends, I have made a dreadful, dreadful error. I made the mistake of finding this article about the Waterside branch. I knew it, (vaguely) Horatio, albeit in its dying days. I don't know what I love more, the level crossings, the cool viaduct or that cute footbridge. And all genuine MS&LR/GC. Such a simple prototype, all one would need would be (strictly) one loco - although a couple of reserves would be no bad thing - and loads of lovely wagons. In the space I've got, I could manage a reasonable model, albeit with compromises, even in S7. And I am fighting the temptation like hell, as it would mean ripping up everything I have done so far and my wife would either kill me or have me certified. So, pray for me. Hopefully in a week or so the obsession will pass and I will be back to Wathboro, 7mm FS and sanity!

I must admit, I tend to paint (plastic) wagons before assembly and touch up as required when complete. This is partly because I always do detailed interiors nowadays, and painting the interior of a completed wagon is a pain. But there is no sacred method of working, it's finding the method that suits the individual best. As for RTR coaches - there is no chance whatever of suitable ones being available for my needs, so I shall have to continue to be grateful for such kits as appear, given that my only alternative would be to scratch-build.

I think a lot of places, back in the day, had platforms well below the approved height, especially out in the sticks. It would be tedious to relate all the examples I remember, but Birch Vale (closed 1970) was so low that getting on a train was a bit of a scramble even for a moderately fit young lad like I was back then. Portable steps were very much the thing, and something I don't think I have ever seen modelled. I suppose the subsequent de-staffing of almost all stations makes such provision unthinkable now, but back in the 60s no one thought anything of it.

A simple kit like a Parkside or Slater's open is about as easy a kit as you will find. However, the instructions tend to be a tad on the terse side, and the method of assembly suggested is not always the most practical. For example, I always fit couplings and buffers to the end first as it is much easier than struggling with tiny tools to assemble them properly post-construction. The thinness of the instructions mean that, unless you have good knowledge of the prototype, you may make boo-boos. I know I did! But don't let that put you off. Ask for advice, for example on here. There is no such thing as a silly question. Studying a prototype photo, where available, may also help you.

That's fine if you've got an excellent set of photos for the exact loco you are modelling at the date you are modelling. To give you a working example, I have plans for a GC 9A (LNER N4) in late GC condition. Photos of such locos are surprisingly rare, because, I suppose, in the 1910s relatively few photographers carted their expensive equipment to the backwoods of South Yorkshire to photograph the things. (It was much easier, and more exciting perhaps, to go to Leicester or Calvert or wherever to photograph Directors and Atlantics and the like.) That's without going into the world of wagons. Manvers Main had literally thousands of wagons, but good photos, the sort you need to make an 100% accurate model, of these things in pre-group days are few and far between. Who can say, for sure, what axleboxes wagon such-and-such was carrying in June 1912? Who can say, for sure, that they know all the livery variations and when they were introduced? I am all for trying to achieve accuracy, my point is that some of the data doesn't exist. And it's hazardous to assume, for example, that all the locos of an old, small class were identical.