Forward!

My understanding was station refreshment rooms were originally designed for tea/light refreshment back in the days before buffet carriages became more popularised. They were the period equivalent of the ubiquitous modern Costa Coffee, I guess. I don't know Selby station, but off the top of my head there's a lovely preserved example of one at Loughborough GCR which gives a flavour of the Edwardian set up in a medium-sized intermediate station. Will

The MS&LR/ GCR had the motto first!

I'd go to visit the GWR mainline in the 1860s to see a broad gauge loco running at full chat up to 60mph. I still can't quite imagine how it must have looked and felt, despite witnessing modern broad gauge locomotive replicas running (crawling along at Didcot's track) in modern times. (By the way, I don't need to travel back in time because I'm currently sitting at my office desk in the former GWR drawing office in Swindon. The window latches, door furniture, staircases and even the toilet pull-handles all have GWR stamped on them!)

The first edition OS at 1:500, 1:1056 and 1:2500 are usually fairly accurate for track configuration, but be careful you note the distinction between the survey date vs. the publication date (which can vary by as much as 5 years in some parts of the country). The later you go, the tricker it becomes, because you have to be able to identify the distinction between a new Edition and a revision of an existing edition. Hence, by the late pre-WWII period you start to get maps that are (to use an extreme, hypothetical example) a "2nd revision of the 1st edition"- i.e originally surveyed in the 1870s but revised in ,say, 1893 and again in 1919. These need to be treated with much caution as I have seen a good deal of evidence that relatively minor changes to railway track configuration are sometimes neglected in revisions. Will

The 1:1056 Town Plan series 1868 (survey date 1866) shows the dual gauge lines ending just beyond the platform ends south of Clapham Junction Station. It does not carry on to New Wandsworth. https://maps.nls.uk/view/229950446 As to the layout of the dual Gauge at Victoria, here's the sheet you need. https://maps.nls.uk/view/103313042 (OS 1st edition 25'' 1876 (survey date 1869) Will

90% of my train travel is for work. I suspect I'm fairly average modern 'office worker' in that I simply cannot do my job offline- my main means of making voice calls and messaging colleagues/editing documents is Microsoft Teams, and the various professional systems I use are all web-based. Absence of wifi is not really a problem for me as I tether my laptop to my work phone, and if you don't have one, most business laptops have a SIM card slot. As for personal travellers, you can get high-data, SIM-only deals for peanuts now. I expect you'll find that free public wifi will slowly start disappearing from all businesses and public spaces over the coming years, not just the railways. One the trains, knowing there is a basic, slow, but more-or-less reliable wifi connection that I can use as a back up in emergencies is a "good to have", but frankly, I wouldn't think of it as essential.

They were very small even by contemporary US standards, so pretty much anything in US N and HO be made to represent them (albeit generically). I did one in N gauge using a 1:160 scale Athearn 2-6-0, which was by coincidence almost bang on for the dimensions of these locos in UK 1:148 scale. It just needed a new cab, shortened smoke box with a new door (from N Brass I think) and some simple changes to the tender to make it a really quite convincing representation of the real thing. I imagine something fairly similar can be done with a HO gauge model, perhaps with the ancient Roundhouse 2-6-0, the only US-outline mogul I know of available RTR that represents a parallel- boilered loco of similar vintage and size. And don't forget the MS&LR/ GCR had some too!

Great documentation of an iconic, and listed piece of railway architecture. Capture it on the right day and it looks like a sculpture installation.

Speed vs predictability. I once had the chance to travel on QE2 when she was a trans-Atlantic liner rather than a cruise ship. There was a very old hand I got talking to who had begun his career in the golden age if ocean liners in the 1930s. I remember him telling me that he was being rushed off his feet because "unfortunately" it looks like we will be arriving early. He told me there would be a number of very disgruntled passengers on his section traveling without their household staff (no longer the done thing by then) who will now need someone to change their onward journeys or book them a hotel room at the last minute to account for altered plans. For him, I got the sense that arriving early was as bad as arriving late!

Well, if we're talking about implausible bridge/crossing combinations, there's always this...

Indeed. Here's Old Oak Common in 1949. I challenge you to find a single motor vehicle anywhere on railway owned land! https://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/en/image/EAW022468

If you're into historic modelling, the Bristol Harbour Railway, where at Bathurst Basin you can have a tunnel portal, a level crossing and a bascule bridge all within 100 metres of each other!

Indeed, but that's not quite how public perception of safety works. After Harrow the inquiry suggested that the superior crash performance of the new BR MK.1 standard carriages limited fatalities in those carriages, and by equal measure it implied that all the wooden stock involved was a liability- noting that the oldest carriage involved in the accident dated to 1916- being 36 years old. There was much made at the time about the general state of Britain's railway stock, and calls to accelerate its replacement were made by the media and politicians. Indeed, the official inquiry recommended that the general replacement of wooden framed and panelled stock should be expedited. I suspect the ER's decision not to re-adopt a scumbled teak livery, or choose some other regional livery for it's carriage stock was for mundane reasons- probably contemporary fashion (scumbled wood effects would be perceived as very old fashioned by 1956), and the fact that Mk1 carriages were introduced at a time that spray painting was being adopted. But I think it's probably also fair to say that by the mid 1950s nobody in BR would want the travelling public to associate new steel-framed carriages with their wooden predecessors.

It would have been very unwise of BR(ER) to re-adopt a 'teak' livery that would suggest a connection between modern MK1 stock and the previous wooden-bodied stock. As recently as 1952 the Harrow rail disaster had shown the latter up to be downright dangerous compared to their all-steel replacements.

Perfect, thanks to everyone who has responded. Looks just what I need. Will

Hi all, Quick question- does any company do an (etched?) GWR smokebox-mounted train identification number frame in 4mm scale? I've seen a few photos of the real thing and they're surprisingly complicated structures. If not, does anyone know of a source of dimensioned drawings that could inform a scratchbuild? Thanks, Will

Lovely result. Amazing how far 3d printing has developed in such a short space of time. I've always thought the late GCR matchboard carriages were very elegant in a simple, robust way- a hallmark of GCR's approach to design under Robinson. Back in the day I dreamt of representing the GCR/GWR joint, but opted for just the GWR because of the (non) availability of any rtr GCR stock. To think, since then we've had several mainstream rtr GCR locos, and now plastic carriage kits too! I wonder whether a venture into modelling the joint line is in my future! Will

Excellent news. I've always regretted not getting hold of a few Blacksmith GWR carriages I wanted back when they were readily available. The idea of re-releasing the etches with perhaps 3d printed detail parts is very exciting. I understand it may take a while to get up and running, but I do think a holding website would be a good idea, listing what could be made available and perhaps adding an 'expression of interest' function so you can get a sense of where specifically the demand within the range lies. Best of luck with it. I'll be a future customer! Will

Difficult to get a sense of scale from the photo, but it looks a little light for GWR bridge rail, which is fairly hefty stuff. I think it is certainly a section of bridge rail, but suspect it's more likely to be of industrial/mining origin.

It bloody well ought to be- it's a Grade II* listed building!

The USATC was formed on 31st July 1942. Prior to that it was the US Army Transport Service, and part of the Engineers. I wonder whether the change in organization structure is pertinent to the difference in lettering styles? Is it something as simple as the plain "USA" applied first and "USATC" applied to later deliveries? Considering the locos had to be built, taken to port of embarkation, and then endure the 17 day average of an Atlantic Convoy, the first delivery must have pre-dated the formation of the USATC. Someone with insomnia might have the inclination to go through the photographs and see if there's any correlation between loco delivery date and lettering style. Will

As others have said, to model a specific part of the country situated on the LNER system in the 1930s requires the ability to represent the relevant pre-grouping company's motive power and rolling stock, much of which persisted throughout the LNER's existence. And in N gauge there are no suitable ready-to-run locomotives or carriages available for either ex-NER or ex-GNR. In 4mm scale, there are a number of suitable locomotives now available ready to run (who'd have thought that, even 20 years ago?!), but still no matching (accurate) ready-to-run NER or GNR carriage stock. The reason the LNER was like this is twofold- firstly it is a product of how its pre-grouping consitutents were brought together and how that process dictated that the company was organized into a complicated set of areas and divisions that reflected its pre-grouping inheritance. https://www.lner.info/article/history/bigfour.php And secondly, its a product of the LNER's very troubled early financial situation. It was principally a freight railway- so the General Strike of 1926 and the Great Depression of 1929-33 massively dented the company's finances for much of its existence. It didn't help that it could never get over the fact it was a conglomeration of pre-grouping companies- the anticipated cost savings anticipated by bringing them all together never really materialised- it only closed around 18 percent of its unprofitable or duplicated branchlines during its entire existence. The LNER, in my view, was constantly fixated on trying to maximise profit by cutting spending rather than trying to grow new traffic. What money it did attract for big capital projects usually came from government backed loan schemes. Initially, rolling stock renewal investment was actually quite high- the 1923 Rolling Stock Renewal Programme put out 700 new carriages in 1924. But as the economic difficulty went on the renewal of rolling stock ended up a long way down the pecking order because the LNER only very rarely drew money from their capital account to fund rolling stock renewal- it was taken from the Revenue account. It would not be an investment priority in a part of their business where revenue was declining. All of this meant there simply wasn't the cash for widespread stock renewal with new 'standard' designs in quite the same way other 'Big Four' companies managed to achieve it. A good example is that in 1935 the LNER still had 600 carriages lit by gas, and was getting it in the neck from the government to get up to scratch by converting these ancient carriages to electric. The LNER calaculated they'd convert all carriages that they thought had useful life left ahead of them- and then set the bar at up to 35 YEARS old! That gives you some indication of the backlog the LNER had by this point. And even when there were attempts at renewals, it still didn't necessarily result in a complete standardisation of design. Gresley was often forced to introduce several different diagrams to meet the specific needs of each Section- who all ran their traffic differently to each other. A good example being the "short" 52'6'' carriages designed for the Great Eastern Section and being required, I think I remember correctly, because of the specific positioning of a set of train protection equipment in Liverpool Street Station. To give you an idea of how slowly modernisation of LNER carriage stock took place, there's plenty of photographic evidence of trains running in the 1940s and 50s comprised of pre-grouping stock (and being pulled by a pre-grouping locomotive). The plus side for the modeller of course is it allows great variety for those of us who enjoy making kits! Will

I'm 38, married with two kids (8 and 6). I use the trains extensively for work. A process I'm comfortable with because it involves fairly minimal advance-planning of routes: it's always a case of simply flexing the company credit card with no consequence if I need to pay a premium to be at a certain place at a certain time. I am lucky enough to live a couple of miles from an Oxfordshire 'Cotswold Line' station that can get my family and I up to London directly- and it's an absolute no-brainer for any day-trip up to town or out to Kent to see the folks. I'm a big outdoorist, and have done fairly extensive solo leisure travel in the past where I find my better-than-average knowledge of the network has always worked in my favour for route planning, but it's required a fair bit of improvisation over the years. Unless a line is seriously set up to cater to rambling tourists (e.g. West Highland Line), I've very often regretted not having taken the car instead. But the idea of using the rail network to take my wife and 2 young kids on an extended holiday trip into provincial England? The very thought simply fills me with terror. The sheer amount of planning required, the total inflexibility of modern tickets allowing zero margin for error, even the basic logistics of carting the "stuff" you seem to inevitably accumulate in a modern family around stations and into often inadequate luggage spaces on trains... I get genuinely nervous just thinking about it! Intercity leisure travel? I get it. Good idea and often better than taking a flight. Cross country or provincial leisure travel? You couldn't pay me to plan a week's holiday around that! Will

I wonder how long it will be until the 'budget' open access operators cotton-on to charging customers extra for 'hold' luggage?

One thing's for sure. If the trend continues then train interiors are going to have to change significantly. The provision for large items of luggage is woeful, even on long-distance trains such as IETs. Anyone travelling on an LNER train for London on a Saturday Morning has to complete a small SAS assault course just to reach their seat! If only we had a high speed long-distance train with dedicated luggage van space....😁 Will