Poggy1165

People have a nostalgia for the High Street but rarely use it. I am reminded of the people who whined bout the Beeching cuts but never used the train from one year to the next. It was as if they thought their local station should be kept simply because it had always been there, and they caught a train there in 1956. Raising taxes to subsidise a dying business model is like putting a tax on trains to keep the stage coaches running. If you want a High Street (or a local market) give it your patronage. Good luck finding a shop with 7mm scale models though.

One option for a NSR loco is the Gladiator kit for the LNWR SDX. The NSR bought two or three of these babies and so it is quite correct to finish one in North Stafford livery. (It is a (very) long term project for me.) I did have a photo of one of these engines in NSR livery, but I am not sure where it was published or where it has gone. However, I'm absolutely sure it was published somewhere. Whether the NSR made any detailed changes to their SDXs or just repainted them I'm afraid I have no idea.

I am ridiculously tempted by City of Leicester and the Bulleid MN, given that I don't have a 4mm layout. I don't know whether it's fondness for the prototype or nostalgia for the Hornby-Dublo boxes that is doing this to me.

If Bellerophon was wheeled out in 7mm scale I would not be able to resist. Most of the others are too modern for me!

The Group is brand new and "feeling its way." It therefore needs funding. Not everything can be free. How it develops is up to the members. That in itself is a novelty worth paying for. I am in so many societies I lose count, none has so small a fee as £5. Some are more like the £30 quid mark.

The corners of plastic wagon kits are a problem. They almost invariably need fettling to look right and it's very easy not to get it 100% right. For opens, it would be a big improvement if the kit makers would make the corners plain and provide an etched corner plate that could be folded. This would cover many sins. Although it would not resolve the end door end, obviously. These can be just as awkward as the others.

I suppose a lot would depend on individual decisions: 1. You could have the coal delivered in your own wagon. (Whether owned or hired matters little to a modeller.) 2. You could have the coal delivered in a wagon owned by your coal factor/wholesaler. 3. You could have the coal delivered in a colliery wagon. 4. You could have the coal delivered in a railway wagon - although in that case the choice might not be yours but the suppliers. 5. You could have the coal delivered in a wagon on short-term hire from a wagon owner. (As 4.) Cost would be one factor and wagon availability another. I dare say even coal factors and collieries had to hire in wagons when short of their own. You wouldn't want to turn a customer away because you were short of your own wagons, surely?

I agree, most coal came in PO wagons. Some railway companies had few coal wagons, and in some cases these were mainly for loco coal. The GW is a good example. The GC is an example of a company with a good stock of coal wagons (including some on hire) so this is not quite an absolute rule. Even so their total was dwarfed by the number of PO wagons on its lines. The NER was. of course, exceptional in conveying most coal traffic in its own wagons, but the NER was very rich and could afford the capital costs involved in providing wagons for a vast traffic.

The Haydock Coal wagon is the best model I have ever seen of one of their vehicles - by some way - and the only one I have ever seen in the correct pre-group livery. Haydock Colliery (Richard Evans and Co) is particularly interesting to me, as they had an extensive railway system of their own (linked to the LNWR and GC) and a whole fleet of fairly intriguing locos. Some of which they built themselves. From memory - I would need to check to be 100% - this is the company that had running powers over parts of the GC St Helens branch, not least because the said branch "took over" parts of the colliery railway. Amazingly, at one time they worked a daily coal train from Ashton-in-Makerfield to St Helens over the GC. Presumably with a GC brake at the back

The other traffic that occurred to me was hops. Breweries need hops and Kent and Sussex are/were principal sources. Any town with a brewery (and they used to be legion) would need hops - I think they grow in Hereford/Worcestershire but most came from the south.

Just a bit of completely random data. I looking at a photo of Barnby Dun, near Doncaster,dated 1912. There is a line of wagons shown, the only definitely identifiable one is a LBSC round ended open. A few wagons down is another round ended open, which is not identifiable, but which I suspect to be SECR. It is certainly from one of the southern companies. Now, if I was modellling Barnby Dun in 1912 I don't think a LBSC or SECR wagon would be my first priority. But there you are. It would be interesting to know what traffic they carried to this area (the LBSC wagon is empty and may be going home) but I don't suppose we shall ever know.

There seem to have been cases where passenger receipts were pooled. For example, if you had a ticket from Manchester to Stalybridge issued by the LNWR, L&Y or GC, you could return by either route. This strongly implies to me that the receipts for this traffic must have been pooled in some agreed ratio. The same was true of the GC and L&Y routes to Oldham. Similarly, if you had a ticket from Manchester to Stockport (Tiviot Dale) you could return by a GC train to London Road or a Midland train to Central. (Source 1903 GCR timetable note.) OTOH right up until Grouping the GN would quote freight rates to Bury and Bolton using the canals for the final stretch. (There was a canal wharf right under their big warehouse in Manchester.) Grouping seems to have done away with a lot of competition, but there were certainly steps in that direction prior to 1923.

I am looking forward to the book on GCR carriages which John Quick has in preparation. I suspect it will answer many questions on the subject. All? Never.

It strikes me that the M.K&W would have been much more useful to the NSR than anyone else. I have always wondered what prospects the MS&L saw in it. Macclesfield was right at the end of its (joint) branch from Marple - it would be crazy to route Knutsford or Warrington traffic that way. Or at a minimum, very circuitous. The MS&L/GC got behind some fairly ambitious schemes, most of which came to nothing, but I have never seen the logic behind this one at all. At least not from their POV.

I can give you a specific example. The GCR lost a case against the L&Y. It wanted to exchange Yorkshire coal traffic at Philips Park (Manchester) but the court ruled the traffic had to be exchanged at either Penistone or Barnsley. The GCR got its thinking cap on. It put in a western spur from the O&AGBJ at Ashton Moss making a connection to the L&Y, and a set of exchange sidings were provided. Henceforward (this was 1911) the traffic was exchanged at Ashton Moss and this continued certainly up to the electrified era, as the OA&GB was electrified that far. The traffic concerned was pretty considerable, Yorkshire coal to an array of L&Y and LNWR stations to the west and north of Manchester. So yes, a company would try to keep traffic on its own line for as long as possible, and legal disputes on where traffic could be exchanged were not unknown. As an aside, I do not understand why Philips Park was a problem as the GCR exchanged other traffic there and indeed operated pilot engines (as they were called) to that point. But there must have been a reason sufficient to persuade a learned judge.

The GN certainly had a one third share in the CLC, but, unlike the Midland and GC, did not operate its own trains over it. (With the pedantic exception below.) It had, of course, a one third interest in CLC goods profits, and I think it's reasonable to assume a fair bit of traffic was exchanged with CLC. It did shed some shunters at Trafford Park for its huge Goods Warehouse which was adjacent to Central and naturally stood on a twig of its own metals. It reached Manchester (for goods purposes) over both GC and Midland routes, a practice which continued into the Grouping era - perhaps surprisingly. Again, it had engines lodged at Trafford Park for these trains, and indeed for the passenger trains which it continued to work (via the GC route) for some time. (These passenger trains eventually faded away.) The use of the Midland may have been prompted by traffic congestion over Woodhead. To be pedantic, I think the only GNR trains to run over the CLC were between Manchester and Chorlton Junction, and the light engines between Trafford Park and Manchester. So you could argue that the GN came into Manchester on its own (joint) metals, but only for the last few miles after quite a way over foreign rails.

I would suggest the LNWR demurrage train to Carlisle is reasonable evidence. This was cited in an article by a LNWR driver who actually worked the trains in question. But in addition, Manchester was served by the LNWR, L&Y, Midland, GCR, GNR, CLC, and Great Western. That is, all these companies ran trains into it. The GN and GW did not enjoy their own metals in the area. GN trains came in by both MR and GC routes. GW trains came in mainly by the LNWR, but some GW wagons will certainly have come via the GC as I will explain in a minute. So that's at least seven lots of wagons coming into the area in train loads, even if we make the unlikely assumption that no foreign wagons were conveyed. There were not only a number of joint lines in the area, but also significant running by one company over another's metals. The best example might be the Midland's use of the L&Y, which included a very significant traffic (several trains per day) from Ancoats to Carlisle. It's scarcely fanciful to suggest these will have brought Scottish wagons to the area. They will certainly have provided the extensive sight of MR wagons at LY locations, albeit primarily on the main lines. There were also transfer workings. The GC and LNWR operated such an exchange between Ashburys and Ordsall Lane, but this also involved GW wagons. This was because Ashburys was one of only three locations (Banbury and Aylesbury being the others) where the GC exchanged wagons with the GW. The GC operated at least one daily through goods train to Whitemoor. It would be astonishing if this did not result in GE wagons appearing as there was a very extensive fruit and flower traffic from East Anglia to Manchester, and it would be surprising if most of it was not carried in GE wagons. Knowing the MR as I do, I am about 99% confident that they would also have taken this traffic into Ancoats - but I lack factual data, not being involved in studying MR goods traffic. From local history I do know that traffic of this sort was carted from Ancoats to the nearby Shudehill market. Did it all come in MR wagons? Would there be none from the GE or M&GN? The Cambrian (of all people) had a Goods Agent in Manchester, situated in Chorlton, where the local station was CLC. Cambrian traffic certainly implies at least some Cambrian wagons in the area. Photographs? Well I could show you quite a few of Guide Bridge with any number of different company wagons on display. If anything, GC wagons are in a minority! The snag is, how representative are they? Firstly, most were taken post Great War, so pooling may be in play. The second thing is that most show the area around the tranship shed, which was located within camera range of the east end of the platforms, the natural locus for people to go to take photos of engines. Given the total mileage of sidings at the place, this is like taking one person's political opinion to represent a town of 25,000.

I think a lot would depend on where you were. Somewhere around a Manchester hub (for example) loads. At the end of the Boggington-on-the-Marsh branch, very few, except for the odd through load. (Perhaps a giant log intended to replace the roof beams of the local manor house or something like that. I am thinking of a photo of a GW wagon I once saw bearing such a load to Bakewell for Haddon Hall. You wouldn't tranship a great big log, would you?) I remember reading that the LNWR sent a "demurrage" train from Manchester up to Carlisle each day and it was vital it was in Carlisle for a certain time. I expect these would be mainly Scottish wagons - with perhaps the odd M&C one?

Was the British Rail double arrow thing an illiteracy mark? Thinking about it, why did BR put ownership markings on its loco and coaches, when for all practical purposes the entire fleet was owned by BR? Could have saved an awful lot of paint/transfers.

I just think of these things as logos. You see logos every day - literally - it doesn't mean we're all illiterate. The GCR did not just paint its five pointed star on wagons. It was part of the house flag on its ships, for example, and it was used on certain posters, which implies it meant something to Joe Public. The McDonald arches are better known, as a result of modern communication techniques, but they do a very similar job.

This is very sad news indeed. My sincere condolences to Chris's family in particular and to his friends. A great loss to the hobby. A wonderful bloke has gone from us, and we shall all miss his contributions.

The answer to the question is demand at a given price. There is only one Mona Lisa, and any number of rich people who would want to buy it so it is beyond price. Let's imagine a notional model loco. Superbly made, of an obscure prototype that maybe three people in the UK would want to buy. Two of them model in 4mm scale and this happens to be 7mm. Then let's imagine a very rare version of a Hornby Flying Scotsman. There were only a few ever made, This one happens to be mint and boxed. There are thousands and thousands of serious collectors who would want it, plus quite a few modellers who happen to fancy Flying Scotsman in that particular condition. Which is "more valuable"?

The vans in question were built from 1912 onwards, and both versions had a RH brake lever on both sides, as required by the regulations for new construction from - I think - 1911.

I like the open wagon very much. You cannot have too many "native" open wagons, and Ashby kits were such a lovely build - though I remember, back in the day, being utterly bemused by the brakes. (There were no appropriate reference books in the day and very few photos were available to me.) I gradually realised that all pre-group companies had their own ideas as to wagon brakes, and that the GC was far from being the most eccentric.

I have got the diagram 17 van as far as primer, but I am not really satisfied with it. I think the fall twisted the model slightly and I don't have the skill to "untwist" it, despite sweating blood over it for some time yesterday. I am minded to put it on the shelf for now and look at it again when I can be more objective. (This is the equivalent of writing a chapter then reading it again in six months, when you see it more like a critic and less like an author.) If it runs well, despite all, I might just keep it, though it doesn't really meet my (modest but stubborn) standards. If not, I'll break it up, keep the useful parts for use in other models, and buy another kit. Which I will try not to drop the best part of five feet. As an aside, it is interesting (to me) that there were three batches of this van. 1. The type with drop-link brake gear that the kit represents. 2. An AVB version for fast goods trains and 3. Another unfitted version, but with Morton brakes. I am really a bit puzzled as to why the didn't standardise the unfitted vans as either drop lever OR Morton, but the fact is they built quite large batches of both. What was achieved by this eludes me.