Jump to content
 

Mikkel

RMweb Gold
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,518

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    3

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by Mikkel

  1. Mikkel

    Undecided sky (1867)

    By Mikkel,

    More "out of period" operation here. This time going back in time quite a bit. In fact, it seems they didn't even have flush-glazing back then .
     
     

    The year is 1867, and it is early days at Farthing station. Mr Crummles gently guides his wife towards the first class carriage, while Mr Doyce looks on in anticipation of the journey ahead.
     
     
     

    Mrs Crummles is somewhat apprehensive. It is only a few months since that dreadful accident at Warrington, and who knows what could happen?
     
     
     

    Meanwhile Mr Doyce, ever the optimist, studies the magnificent engine that will be whisking them to Salisbury. For him there was never any doubt: These fine machines have forever changed the world!
     
     
     

    Plucking up her courage, Mrs Crummles asks her husband one last time if he is quite sure that it is safe to get on?
     
     
     

    While the last passengers finally board the afternoon departure, an undecided sky develops over Farthing. For worriers and optimists alike, the future seems uncertain but exciting.
  2. Mikkel

    Sprat & Winkle couplings

    By Mikkel,


    Misc.
    Shunter George "Bulldog" Mullins critically eyes stock fitted with Sprat & Winkle couplings.
    His shunter's pole is legendary among shunters for being rather crude!
     
    The following notes on Sprat & Winkle couplings seemed to generate some interest when first posted over on gwr.org.uk, so perhaps they are of of use to someone here also. I have taken the opportunity to take some new and better photos for illustration.
     
     
    Hooked
     
    Although the latest RTR offerings have helped enhance the looks of the RTR tension-lock coupling considerably, I still find them a bit too bulky and not quite reliable. They also do not offer the opportunity of "delayed action" uncoupling, which allows you to propel stock forward after uncoupling.
     
    Looking for an alternative, I have taken to the fairly well-known Sprat & Winkle coupling, which - although a compromise in some respects - has proved quite reliable and fairly easy to fit. I find the delayed-action feature of these couplings simple and effective, and a plus for me is that they allow cosmetic 3-links to be retained.
     
     

    Hook and bar. It could be argued that it is no less obtrusive than the modern tension-lock coupling.
    But I find it less bulky and with more functionality.
     
     
    One-hook operation
     
    The Sprat & Winkle couplings are available in 2,3,4 and 7mm scale versions. As I model in 4mm my choice was between either the standard 4mm version or the "finescale" version. The latter is in fact intended for 3mm modellers but works fine for 4mm (including OO), as long as your curves are not too severe ( ie less than 4' radius according to MSE). This is fortunate because the standard version is a bit on the large side for my liking, and so I have opted for the finescale/3mm version.
     
    In fact, even the finescale version is a bit more prominent than I would personally have wished for, especially when uncoupled. To minimize the visual impact I therefore fit a coupling hook to one end only, adding just the loop at the other end. This obviously requires stock to be facing in a particular direction when placed on the track, but on my layouts (and I think many others) this isn't really a problem. The absence of a coupling at one end also facilitates the fitting process (since you only have to fit one hook per wagon) and means I can add a prototypical (but cosmetic) coupling hook here instead, enhancing appearances a bit.
     
     

    Coupled up using the "one-hook" approach
     
     
    Mounting the couplings
     
    The coupling hook features a square "paddle" at one end, which works as a counterweight beneath the wagon or coach body. The MSE website has an instruction sheet for fitting the couplings, and details on various extra parts not described here (including custom-made mounting plates). The instructions suggest two possible ways of mounting the hook: An "Upper" method in which the coupling hook is inserted through the headstocks (ie the "buffer beam" of the wagon), and a "Lower" method in which the hook rests immediately below the headstocks, hinged to the wagon floor with wire bent to the shape of a paper staple.
     
    It is necessary to standardize on one of these two methods, and in principle I prefer the latter, which also comes recommended in the instructions: This requires only minor modification to the wagon or coach body, and is also - in my opinion - rather less fiddly. That said, I have made two minor modifications to this approach:
     
    * Firstly, I replace the curled-up wire included in the pack with straight brass wire from Alan Gibson. I find that this makes it far easier to craft the wire-staple needed for fitting the paddle. The staple is then fitted to a section of square plastic rod mounted on the wagon floor. The plastic rod is not always necessary - it depends on the distance between the floor and the lower edge of the headstocks.
     
    * Secondly, I find that the "Lower" method of mounting the coupling can sometimes give problems in ensuring that the coupling hook is fully horisontal: Exactly because it is underhung, the hook may come to rest at a slight upward angle against the bar of the loop on some wagons, which is neither aesthetically pleasing nor good for operation. I don't think it's just me, as I have heard others mention this issue also. My solution is rather crude I suppose, but effective: I simply open out a slight slot in the wagon just above the coupling hook, thereby allowing it to move freely to a full horisontal position against the loop. This may not be to everyone's taste, but the slot is really quite unnoticeable and can always be padded over with a filler if the coupling is removed.
     
     

    The "Paddle", anchored with a wire "staple" to a supporting section of plastic rod
     
     
     
    Un-coupling
     
    Uncoupling is by means of magnets located beneath the track, nested into the track base. The magnets attract the 3-links, thus tilting the hook downwards. When moving back up, the hook comes to rest in a position which allows the wagon to be propelled forward and left where you want it in the siding. Hence the "delayed-action" concept. The following photos illustrate the four main steps of this process:
     

    1. Wagons are propelled in fully coupled condition
     

    2. Coupling hook drops down as it is attracted by a magnet beneath the tracks
     

    3. As wagons are propelled forward the coupling hook moves back up, but does not fully engage the bar
     

    4. The uncoupled wagon is left where desired, and the rest of train is drawn backwards
     
    For me this works well, with one important modification: Because I use only one coupling hook, the very powerful magnets occasionally uncouple the stock even when they are not supposed to - ie when the stock is passing slowly by. This happens even with a good layer of ballast above the magnets, and attempts with a sliver of Plastikard above the magnet doesn't help much either.
     
    Again, I resort to cave-man technology for the solution: I simply break the magnets in half, thereby reducing the overall magnetic field. I say "break" because cutting will get you nowhere with these magnets - they need to be broken in two by holding the magnet with one pair of pliers and breaking downwards with another pair. Crude stuff, but it works.
     
    Finally, I should perhaps emphasize that I have no affiliation with the manufacturers, and that these are the experiments of a novice: I do not have experience with the other non-RTR types of couplings available (see jim s-w's blog for an interesting entry on the Dingham coupling).
     
    Edit 1: For a discussion of fitting the couplings to locos, see the comments to this entry.
    Edit 2: The video in the link below shows the Sprat & Winkles in operation on the goods depot layout:
     
  3. Mikkel
    Here's a little scratch-building project that I'm working on in-between the coach painting. The prototypes were used extensively at Paddington Goods in the 1900s. A similar but more austere type was used at Hockley. I couldn't find any drawings, so the dimensions are guesstimates based on photos. The build was a real pleasure, especially sourcing the parts. I'll let the pictures explain the rest - gradually!
     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
     

     
    In other words, a shed crane. I still need to model the operating lever which was situated next to the crane, and which (as far as I understand) connected to a mechanism beneath the deck. I plan to build at least one more of these - although possibly a more heavy duty type.
     
    There are a couple of things I might do differently on the next one. I think the counter-weight is a little underscale. I will also do the pulley wheels different next time. We live and learn!
     
    PS: Thanks to Missy for the tip about the watchmaker's parts, available on ebay.
  4. Mikkel

    Comparing track

    By Mikkel,

    A follow-up here to the track experiments in the previous entry.
     

    A batch of Peco Code 75 has arrived, enabling a comparison of the four types of track seen above. Everything is OO, ie 16.5 mm gauge. The Timber Tracks panel is the GWR 44' 6" version for P4/EM, and it's interesting to note theslight narrow gauge look this track has when viewed directly above. This isn't C+L's fault of course, but a result of the slightly incorrect gauge.
     
     

    But we don't often view layouts directly from above. As soon as even a slight sideways angle is introduced, the wider sleepers and spacing really starts coming into it's own, I think. The Timber Tracks panel has the later 8' 6" sleepers used after WW1, whereas the 1900s saw use of 9' sleepers on the GWR. But since the gauge is OO, I am hoping that the visual result is right. I have not actually cut the timbers from the panel yet, so the side supports have been edited out in these photos.
     
     

    C+L Flexitrack vs Peco Streamline. In both cases the rail is Code 75, but the different sleeper height makes quite a difference. Nevertheless, I've heard from other modellers that the two can be combined with no major problems. Unless anyone knows differently? The plan is for "The depot" to have C+L Timbertracks track on-scene, and Peco track off-scene. The height difference will in this case be accommodated by building the fiddle yard a tad lower than the scenic section.
     
     

    Just for good measure, here is Peco Code 100 vs Peco Code 75. I have happily used Code 100 on "The bay" as I had large quantities of it. With attention to weathering and blending in, I think it can be made to look reasonable from a distance (see eg this post), but it doesn't do well on closer scrutiny (see eg fourth picture in this post).
     
     

    I hadn't previously noticed that the chairs are different on Peco Code 100 and Code 75. Not sure what prototype the Code 75 chairs represent. Of the two, the generic Code 100 chairs look a bit more GWR'ish. For close-ups of the C+L chairs, see this post.
     
    Edit: The photos below compare the different sleeper lenghts (and sleeper spacing) of C+L and Peco track. See the dicussion on this issue in the comments below.
     


     
     


     
     

  5. Mikkel
    No, this is a not a post about my financial situation - though it could have been! This is about building and painting wagons for my goods depot layout , which is set in the period ca 1900-1908. For wagons this was a real transition period, with a diversity of styles, technical developments and liveries. So I’ve started a wagon building programme which tries to capture some of that variety. Here are some photos of developments so far.
     

     
    First off was this 3 planker, which I built some time ago from a David Geen kit. It has those nice “old world” round ends. Many were later rebuilt to straight ends, but photos suggest that a few still had those enticing curves in the 1900s. The livery is the pre-1894 version, ie with the small 5inch “GWR” on the left side. It seems this livery could still be seen here and there into the 1900s.
     

    In 1894 the “GWR” was moved to the right hand side of wagons. I wonder why – did someone at Swindon wake up one morning and exclaim “I’ve had a vision! Bring out the paint brushes!”. The non-standard tare numbers seen here are copied from a photo of the real no. 64493. Others had the numbers in the normal italics. The 4-plankers were the dominant type among GWR Opens in 1900. This model is a Coopercraft kit but with the oil axleboxes substituted for (David Geen) grease boxes, which still featured on the majority of wagons at the turn of the century. Nick, I forgot to add the vertical hanger, will see to it shortly!
     

     
    It's been fun experimenting with the shade of red. Contemporary sources indicate a fairly bright (some say light) red. In my opinion, pristine bright red doesn’t work well on layouts, so I’ve gone for a toned down look but with a bit of variety from wagon to wagon. The photo above shows an Iron Mink in the the base coat, which is a mix of bright red and orange. This was then later toned down with dry-brushing, mostly more orange and pale sand.
     

     
    Here is the finished Iron Mink in the post-1894 red livery. I couldn’t fit “To carry 9 tons” in the panel on the left. The GWR painters had the same problem and some photos show use of smaller letters to fit it all in. So I'll order some 2mm transfers and do the same. The iron minks were numerous in the 1900s. This old ABS kit was in fact a Barry Railway version that I had lying about, which I modified to GWR style. I only now see that the doors have issues in one corner. Mutter, groan, grumble!
     

     
    Then it was crunch time. There comes a time in every man’s life when he has to decide exactly when he thinks GWR wagon grey was introduced! For my part, I've been torn between 1898 and 1904.Until recently I was leaning towards 1898, which was the year when the GWR introduced cast number plates as standard on new wagon builds. If that was the case, then new wagons built between 1898 and 1904 would have looked something like the 4-planker above, which I built and painted quite some time ago.
     
     
     

     
    The cast number plates seem only to have been applied to new builds (see notes below). If GWR grey was introduced in 1898, then older wagons that were repainted between 1898 and 1904 would presumably have looked something like this 3-planker, which I initially painted in the grey livery.
     

     
    Then I changed my mind! I went through the sources and debates one more time (summarized here), and began to see the logic of 1904 as the year when the grey livery was introduced. So I decided to adopt this as the assumption on “The depot”. The implications are interesting. For one thing, it means that wagons with cast plates would generally have been red. This 4-planker is the same as the one shown in grey above, but now in red. Quite a different animal to look at! (but where's the V-hanger, must have broken off while taking the photo - back to the workbench!).
     

     
    Another implication of the 1904 cutting-off point is that older wagons repainted during 1898-1904 would have carried the 5inch right hand side red livery right up to 1904. This 3-planker is another David Geen kit, but built to represent a 1900s version with straight ends and retro-fitted with oil axleboxes. The tare numbers are again a deliberate deviation from the norm, reflecting that these numbers were often painted on after the main lettering job. Whether or not the underframes on these wagons were in fact also red is a separate discussion!
     

     
    And then, at last, came the good old "GW" livery, which was applied from 1904. Together with the Iron Minks, these pre-diagram outside-framed wooden wagons were the standard vans at the turn of the century, until the "new generation" of wooden V5 vans began appearing in 1902.
     
     
     

     
    Finally a few of my own notes on cast plates, based on the info and photos I could find in my books.
    Plates experimented with from 1894, standardized from around 1898 (sometimes 1897 is mentioned), and in principle applied until 1904 Photos suggest that number plates were only applied to new builds during this period, not retro-fitted to older wagons Photos also indicate that cast no. plates were always seen in combination with oil axle-boxes, which makes sense as wagons built during this time would have been fitted with oil axleboxes A small number of wagons seem to have carried a transition livery after 1904 which had the cast no. plate and the large “GW” letters (but not the cast “GWR”). There are examples of an Iron Mink and (oddly) a 7-plank 02 in this livery. Photos suggest that wagons with cast plates were greatly outnumbered by wagons with painted numbers. Regarding the latter point, see eg the very interesting photos from Reading Kings Meadow yard around 1905-06, in GWR Goods Services Part 2A, pages 16 and 18-19. These show many wagons with pre-1904 small GWR lettering, together with wagons carrying “GW”. Only 1 or 2 wagons with cast no. plates can be seen.
  6. Mikkel

    Slater's GWR dia. C10 clerestory coach

    By Mikkel,


    Coaches & Browns
    I’m building a Slaters kit for a  GWR bogie clerestory third to diagram C10. The coach is intended for a motley Edwardian stopping train consisting of a variety of carriage styles, as was common on the GWR in the 1900s. But first it will be used in a re-enactment of the 1911 railway strike, and is therefore in the 1908-1912 all brown livery (as yet un-lined). 
     
     

     
    This post summarizes the build.  It's a long post but I'm told the kits are due back on the market so perhaps this can help give others an impression of what's involved and avoid my mistakes!
     
     

     
    What you get. Lots of bits. Wheels weren’t included.
     
     


    The plastic components are crisp and detailed. I did spend some time cleaning away flash. The larger bits of flash are minimal and not a problem, but there are thin strips of flash along the upper edges of the windows which require care.
     
     


    I used Limonene (two coats) to bond the sides, which worked well enough. The Magnetic Clamps are from Smart Models.
     
     

     
    The partitions were then fitted, followed by the roof. I opened out the notches in the roof for the partitions, so that the roof could be taken on and off during the build.
     
     

     
    The seats are quickly made and fit nicely in the compartments - not always the case with kit seats!
     
     

     
    The clerestory structure was quickly built up. The ends and clerestory parts are “handed” with different details at each end.
     
     

     
    The underframe, solebars and headstocks were then fitted. Etched brass snuck in via the "racking plate" , which was glued in place.
     
     

     
    I then turned to the bogies. 
     
     

     
    They fold up nicely.
     
     

     
    One mistake was to put off strengthening the  stepboard supports with solder. They are very fragile and will soon break off otherwise. The photo shows the ones I managed to rescue, the rest were replaced with wire  later on.
     
     

     
    The inside frame and rocking mechanism was then made.
     
     

     
    The principle of the kits - at least those produced until now - is that the wheels run in the inside frame using "inside bearings". Brass wire hold the wheels in place and allow sprung movement. This design has drawn critical comments from people who struggled to get good running. I understand that it will be changed when the kits are re-released.
     
     

     
    In any case, I lacked the correct axles so decided to go for an alternative approach, using Alan Gibson pinpoint axles in ordinary bearings. Thanks to @Darwinian for the idea.
     
     

     
    For this approach to work, the pinpoint bearings must fit perfectly into the recessed aperture around the hole in the bogie sides - seen here - and must be of the right depth. Otherwise the sides will splay. 
     
     

     
    Using the right bearings was therefore critical. I tried various types including 2mm Top Hat bearings but these would not accommodate the axles within the bogie frames. Eventually I used these waisted bearings plundered from old Coopercraft kits, as seen above. 
     
     

     
    The ends of the bearings did need some filing so that the axleboxes would fit over them. Filing the inside of the axleboxes also helped.
     
     

     
    With this simplified approach the inner frame was not strictly required, but I decided to fit it anyway to add strength and hold the rocking mechanism.
     
     

     
     Are you still awake? Captions welcome.
     
     

     
    The bogie interiors were gradually becoming inaccessible so I primed them and painted the Mansell wheels. The latter are brownish red as a loose indication of varnished redwood (see good discussion on Western Thunder).
     
     

     
    A silly mistake cost me dearly. I forgot to fit brake shoes until the wheels were firmly in place. Retrofitting the 16 shoes was a hellish task. As a result the various brake pull yokes didn’t fit properly, so much of that is just indicated with brass wire.
     
     

     
    Once back on track, the cross stays and scroll irons were fitted. There are useful close-ups and drawings of Dean bogies in Russell's GWR Coaches Part 1 p. 93-95.
     
     
     

     
    The scroll irons were then cut to allow the bogie to rotate. Not exactly neat cuts, they were filed later. I do need a proper flush cutter.
     
     

     
    In order for the bogies to rotate, the frames have to be modified at each end.
     
     

     
    I hope I got the position of the gas cylinders right. I peered into the murky darkness of prototype photos and Didcot's C10, which suggests it's more or less OK.
     
     

     
    Next the underframe details were fitted.
     
     

     
    I shortened the queen posts, as I felt the truss rods ended up too low if fitted as intended. Prototype photos like this one (and the C10 at Didcot) shows them higher up and fairly discrete. Unless truss rods changed over the years?
     
     

     
    I didn't fancy "trapping" the bogies with the brake pull rods, so just fitted this single rod held by (unprototypical) vertical mounts. The bogie can be slid out underneath it. Bit of a bodge but at least something is there for those rare glimpses.
     
     

     
    The main buffer components. There’s an option of springing them, though I didn’t use it. The instructions state that the buffers "consisted of a curved oval steel plate bolted onto a round buffer head". 
     
     

     
    The outer plate needs to be lightly curved and then fitted to the buffer heads. I didn't make a good job of this, it looks a bit odd. If I do another one I'll see if ready-made buffers can be obtained instead.
     
     

     
    Next the stepboard hangers went on. This required patience as the hangers, solebars and stepboards all need modification for the parts to fit, as also indicated in the instructions.
     
     

     
    The material used for the stepboards somehow managed to be both bendy and brittle at the time, though note that this is a secondhand kit of some age. My adjustable multi-purpose jig a.k.a. “The Piano” saved the day.
     
     

     
    The lower stepboards were then fitted. I later found that the bogie stepboards had to be shortened approx. 1,5 mm to clear the central stepboard. The hangers for the latter also need modification or they will stick out oddly.
     

     
    It’s striking what a difference stepboards make to the appearance of a coach.
     
     

     
    From there on it was plain sailing. The roof was detailed using the as lamp tops in the kit, and 0.3mm (0.010") brass wire.
     
     

     
    Steps fitted at one end, and putty to fill out the corner joins. In 1911 the GWR experimented with Bluetack on buffers in response to complaints about rough riding. The idea was abandoned when a Slip coach destined for Weymouth was found still attached at Penzance.
     
     

     
    After priming, the interior was painted. I decided to leave the 48 picture frames untouched. Chris: I did try painting them as you suggested but soon realized that it should have been done while the partitions were still on the sprue.
     
     

     
    The coach sides were brush-painted with my normal method of multiple coats (5 in this case) of much thinned Vallejo acrylics, using a broad flat brush. In the photo a fresh coat is being applied.
     
     

     
    The coach was painted all-brown as per the 1908-1912 livery. The photos I have show light to dark grey rooves (probably the usual darkening) with no brown beneath the rainstrips.
     
     

     
    Commode- and door handles were then added, followed by lettering and insignia. The 1908 livery had the garter in the center, and crests either side with "GWR" above. The position of the crests at the outer ends makes for an unbalanced look and takes some getting used to.
     
     

     
    But that's how it appears in this crop of a 1911 photo of a scene I'll be modelling.  Perhaps this extreme position of the crests was in fact a particular feature of the little explored 1908-1912 livery - brakes excepted? Photos of bogie coaches in the all brown livery are rare, but there is a Toplight in Russell 's GWR coaches which also has the crests just before the last passenger door at each end. The photo in Slinn's Great Western Way has the crests further in, but on inspection that coach has guard doors at each end, and so there would not have been room to put the crests further out on that particular coach (crests were kept clear of doors). Of course in 1912 the GWR did move the crests further in, with just a single "GWR" placed above the garter.
     
     

     
    The 1908 livery saw the introduction of black ends. The hand rails are 0.3 mm wire from Wizard Models, which I found easier to shape than the wire in the kit. Vaccuum pipes and couplings to follow.
     

     
    So far I have never lined my Edwardian coaches, a pragmatic decision  in order to get things built and running. In this case it does add to the austere appearance though. Perhaps it's time to try out an Easi-Liner pen.
     
    Anyway, that's the current state of play. My original plan was to use this livery for a photo shoot of selected 1911 scenes and then repaint it in pre-1906 livery with cream panels. However I must admit that the sombre look is growing on me. Something to ponder.
     
     
  7. Mikkel

    GWR stables (2): Internet archaeology

    By Mikkel,


    Structures
    I have a thing for GWR stable blocks.  The subject isn't systematically covered in the literature, so in a previous post I tried to obtain a tentative overview of the major types and styles. Since then I’ve been searching Britain from Above, Google street view and old online  maps looking for past and present traces of stable blocks. It's all a bit esoteric, but for what it's worth here is a selection of my favourite 'finds'.
     
     
    Westbury
     

     
    It's 1929 and a plane soars over Westbury, capturing the photo above. The small stable block with the distinctive roof vents can be seen at the entry to the goods yard, a common and logical location for them (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     
     

     
     
    The stable block at Westbury can be seen in this 1901 map.  The station and goods area was later extensively rebuilt, as can be seen in the photos below and in this map. The stables here were built in 1899, with capacity for three horses. Many of the standard stable blocks on the GWR were built around the turn of the century, when the GWR decided to rely less on agents and do more of its own cartage (National Library of Scotland, Creative Commons).
     
     
     

     
    A grainy close-up, showing also the cattle dock. There must have been a lovely whiff in this part of the yard! (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     

     
    Toboldlygo of this parish has modelled Westbury stables, using the 4mm Timbertracks kit.
     
     

     
    Note the manure pit, a standard feature. Thanks to Toboldlygo for allowing use of the photos, there's more about the build in his thread.
     
     

     
    So, does anything remain of the Westbury stable block today? A look on Google maps suggests that there is in fact a building more or less in the location where the stables were situated!  (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    But alas, it is only the signal box that was built later. Nothing seems to remain of the stable block (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     
    Basingstoke
     

     
    The stable block at Basingstsoke has had a happier fate. Well, sort of. Lost in a sea of cars, it is seen here on Google Maps in the guise of - appropriately - a car wash. Thanks to Western Star for the tip (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    This 1949-68 series map shows how  the stables at Basingstoke were originally located at the perimeter of the goods yard, near the road. The structure does not appear in pre-1914 maps (National Library of Scotland, Creative Commons).
     
     

     
    The Basingstoke stable block in Google street view. Looks like the car park has been covered since the first photo was taken (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    Details of the roof vents on the Basingstoke block, which appear to be in original condition (though not the colour!). The vents are often a useful distinguishing feature when looking for stable blocks in aerial photos etc (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
    Chipping Norton

     
    The stable block at Chipping Norton was built in in 1904. In 1929 it was converted - like a number of other stables - to a garage for GWR motor buses  (National Library of Scotland, Creative Commons).
     
     

     
    Alan Lewis' excellent photo of the Chipping Norton stable block in 1983 (Copyright and courtesy Alan Lewis).
     
     

     
    The stable block at Chipping Norton lives on today, the only remaining building of that station (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    There's a Royal Mail facility next to it, so the delivery theme hasn't entirely gone (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    The stable block itself seems to be on private property now. It isn't much to look at from the road, but think of all the stories it could tell ! (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     
    Slough
     

     
    Moving on to the larger types, this is the stable block at Slough in 1928, again conveniently situated between road and yard (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).

     
     

     
    The Slough stable block was a fairly large example of what I call the "Archetype" design. The large variants of this design were simply "stretched" versions of the smaller versions. Note the horse drawn vehicles outside. I wonder if they were parked there overnight  (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     
     

     
    Like most stable blocks of the standard designs, the one at Slough had no windows at the back, presumably to keep things quiet for the horses. Prairies on the line!  (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     

     
    Today’s, er, view. The stable block was approx. where blue container/lorry is (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
    Park Royal
     

     
    An aircraft passes over modern day London NW. The red line below shows the extent of what used to be the main GWR goods yard at Park Royal (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    Back in the heyday of the GWR, Park Royal had a 12-stall stable block  (National Library of Scotland, Creative Commons).
     
     


    The stable block at Park Royal was almost identical to the one at Slough, but had an extra door and room for fodder. It is seen here in 1930, illustrating how substantial these buildings were (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     

     
    Here is the Park Royal stable block again in the 1950s, now a good deal shorter! Part of the building has been torn down and has been turned into a garage or similar (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     

     
    My 4mm model of the Park Royal stable block. Details here.
     
     
    Handsworth & Smethwick
     

     
    Multi-storey stable blocks were only found in the major urban areas, where space was in high demand. So far the smallest multi-storey block I have come across is the one at Handsworth & Smethwick, as seen on the Warwickshire Railways site. 
     
     

     
    The two storey stable block is seen at the bottom of this map, showing one of the yards at Handsworth & Smethwick. A single storey stable block was located next to it, and can be seen to the right in the photo above  (National Library of Scotland, Creative Commons).
     
     

     
    I was intrigued to find that the lower sidings of the yard can still be seen on Google maps at the time of writing, now apparently a scrap yard (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     
     

     
    It's hard to be certain, but I wonder if the yellow structure top center in this view is in fact the cut-down and shortened remains of the old two-storey stable block? The location and door/window relationship fits - though one window on the left side is missing (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     
    Paddington Mint

     
    Lastly, a look at the big one - Paddington Mint stables. (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted.)
     
     

     
    The original stables here were built in 1878, but expanded and rebuilt several time since then.  I've often thought that the interior yard and ramps would make an interesting diorama. There's good info and drawings in Janet Russel's "Great Western Horsepower" (Getty Images, embedding perimitted).
     
     

     
    A modern day view of the Mint stables (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     

     
    The stables now house St Mary's Hospital (Google Maps, Map data ©2019 Google, Google Fair Use principles).
     
     
     

     
    I found a 1922 view of Paddington Mint on  Britian from Above, and zoomed in. Two horses can be seen on the upper level, bringing life to the scene (Britain from Above. Embedding permitted).
     
     

     
    I tried to zoom in further to see the horses better. But it's a funny thing, the past: When you try to pin it down...
     
     

     
    ....it slips through your fingers.
     
    Edit: If the images re-appear following the Dediserve failure, see the following in the discussion below:
    * Tim V's excellent photos of the stable blocks at Witney, Shrewsbury, Westbury, Shipston and Abingdon
    * Methusaleh's find of the remaining stable block at Birmingham Hockley
    * Ian Major's views of the stable block at Littleton & Badsey
     
     
  8. Mikkel
    Here's a brief illustrated write-up on my recent experiences with modified and detailed HO figures for Farthing.
     

    My normal source of figures is to backdate OO whitemetal figures from Monty's and other ranges (see this separate blog entry). But this can be time consuming, and for pre-grouping modellers the options are limited. Like others before me I have therefore been attracted to the large German HO ranges, and especially Preiser who have a small series of figures from the Victorian and Edwardian period. Some of these can be seen on the Preiser website. The big issue is size. The photo above shows medium-sized figures from Preiser and two UK ranges. In this case, the height difference is not particularly noticeable. As an aside, the different OO ranges also seem to differ in average size, with Monty's often being slightly larger (and I suspect thereby more correct) than eg Langley.
     
     

    In other cases, however, the size difference is quite noticeable. As this photo illustrates, it's not just the height difference, but just as often the difference in "bulk" that gives the game away.
     
     

    So in my view, HO figures often cannot be mixed indiscriminately with OO figures, and often need to be used on their own or in carefully selected places on the layout. One place where I find them particularly suitable is in cramped loco cabs, where their small size is a distinct advantage. There are other examples of that in this earlier blog entry.
     
     

    The large number of figures and poses in the German ranges means that there is good scope for light modification. Even if a particular type of figure isn't available, there is usually always one that has a similar stance and which can be modified with a little tweaking. This driver was originally a portly civilian frozen in mid-stride.
     
     

    The Preiser figures are fairly well detailed compared to some of the UK whitemetal ranges, although it does differ from figure to figure. Further detailing doesn't hurt though, and beards are great period markers. Here I've added a beard using plastic putty from Model Color, applied with a wet needle to ensure it goes on without clumping.
     
     

    Funky Victorians! Victorian beards are a whole study in themselves, it seems. These gentlemen sport different styles of plastic putty beards, based on the illustrations that I found on the internet.
     
     

    The Preiser figures are rather brightly coloured as they come, so I tone down or repaint them. There are, of course, lots of figure painting techniques available on the internet, but some are a bit out of my league, and some just don't seem to work for 4mm scale. So I usually go for something simple and indicative.
     
     

    In my view, faces are a particularly criticial area, and a model with a well-sculpted face (such as this one) makes a big difference in terms of realism.Painting eyes etc is particularly tricky in this scale, so if a face is well-moulded, I often simply give it a blackened wash and let it settle in the right places, touching up lightly with skin colour afterwards.
     
     

    The difference when toned down/repainted is usually very significant!
  9. Mikkel

    Painting coach panels

    By Mikkel,

    My coaches are brush-painted, and I have sometimes been asked how I paint the panels. This video shows it. Be warned though that this is one of those bodged (hopefully not botched!) techniques I seem to often end up using - there are definitely more "correct" ways of doing it!
     
     
     
    Edit: A bit more info as a supplement to the video:
     
    In my experience, there are four key factors that effect results of this technique:
     
    (1) Using the right paint. The Vallejo paint is very richly pigmented and dries quickly and evenly. It can therefore take the dilution while still needing only one application. Having said that, it is possible to repeat the process with a second layer if necessary, though I rarely do it. But everything must be completely dry first!
     
    2) Getting the mix right. It has to be just "runny" enough to flow easily to the edges, but not so much that it dries up thinly. As mentioned in the video, something close to a milky substance - although perhaps a little thicker than that.
     
    3) Good sharp edges on the moulds of the coach, which will hold and "guide" the flow of the paint. Etched brass is particularly good, but plastic like the Ratio sides has also worked well for me.
     
    4) Good brushes - as always. The two black ones below (3/0 and 1) are the type I use in applying the paint in the video. The yellow one in the middle is a cheapo thing used for mixing the paint and water thoroughly. The blue ones are quality broad brushes (8 and 12), used for brushpainting the brown sides in several thin layers, to get smooth sides with no visible brush strokes.
     

  10. Mikkel

    Signs, posters and adverts

    By Mikkel,


    Misc.
    Here's a selection of the signs, posters and adverts that I've used on "The bay" to help enhance the ambience.
     
     

     
    The station sign for Farthing, summarizing the fictional geography of the old N&SR line. The sign is printed, a temporary measure that may become permanent now that the RMweb competition is tempting me to move on quickly to the next layout in the series. I intended to use Smiths 4mm and 2mm etched letters for the job, although testing suggested that it would be very time consuming as there is so much text here. The sign was printed using fonts stored in the files section of the always excellent GWR e-list.
     
     
     

     
    The Smiths etched letters are good though, and for a simpler station sign the job would quickly have been done. These are 4mm and 2mm scale respectively. This type of letters appears to have been introduced on the GWR around 1906, replacing an earlier more elaborate style.
     
     
     

     
    The screen for the Gentlemen's lavatory. The posterboard is a modified card item from Tiny Signs. I built up a frame from thin strips of Plastikard to bring out the relief. The posters are reduced and printed from examples found on the web. I've since noticed that many GWR posterboards from the period had a darkish frame. I assume it is the brown colour discussed in this thread? In that case I'll need to send in the painters.
     
     
     
     

     
    The posterboards from Tiny Signs as they come. An alternative set is available from Smiths.
     
     
     

     
    Enamel adverts, mostly from Tiny Signs. I tone them down slightly with satin varnish and weather them with eg a little rust at the edges. I've also made a few adverts myself, based on real prototypes that I've reproduced on the PC. Unfortunately my printer can't match the sharply printed commercial offerings. New insights from David Bigcheeseplant here on RMweb indicates that when the painters are done with the posterboards, they can move on to the window frames and apply the same brown colour.
     
     
     

     
    A sheet of adverts from Tiny Signs. It can be quite hard to tell what period the different adverts are from, as appearances can be deceitful and a check of old photos doesn't always help. I seem to remember there was a series of articles about enamel ads in Model Rail some years ago. Does anyone remember what issues they were?
     
     
     

     
    Etched station signs from Scalelink. These were painted all-over black while still on the etch, after which the paint was wiped off the raised letters. The letters were then painted white by carefully dragging a broad flat brush across them.
     
  11. Mikkel

    Shunting Puzzle

    By Mikkel,


    Layout design
    I've been working on the trackplan for the next Farthing layout, which will show part of a large GWR goods depot.
     
     

     
    In order to improve the operating interest, I've decided to incorporate a shunting puzzle in the track plan. For anyone interested in shunting puzzles, I can recommend the excellent Model Railway Shunting Puzzles site, plus of course Carl Arendt's site. The simple plan above (not to scale) is an initial design, and may be revised. Any ideas for improvement would be very much appreciated. I'll explain the visual side of things in a separate blog entry.
     
    The trackplan is similar to the famous "Inglenook" design, but the objective of operation is different: In the Inglenook concept, the aim is to assemble a goods train for departure. Here the aim is to distribute wagons from a reception siding by moving them into the goods depot in a particular order, while at the same time removing empty stock from within the depot.
     
    This was inspired by the practice at larger goods depots on the GWR (and I expect elsewhere), where incoming vans and wagons were met by a superintendent in the reception roads outside the depot, who then assigned them to particular sections of platforms (or "decks" as they were called) inside the depot.
     
     

     
     
    The diagram above shows an example of the challenge. This is the basic procedure:
     
    Prepare the puzzle by arranging the wagons as illustrated, ie with five inbound wagons in the reception road, and five outbound (ie empty) wagons in random locations inside the depot. Allocate each of the inbound wagons to a particular location on the two tracks within the goods depot. This is done by eg drawing the wagon numbers out of a hat. Shunt the incoming wagons to their respective destinations within the depot, while also removing empty wagons from the shed. The reception siding may be used to set down wagons temporarily during the shunting. The challenge is completed when all the incoming wagons are in their predefined location, and the outgoing/empty wagons are in the headshunt (any order). The puzzle has two difficulty levels: In Simple mode, any maneuver is allowed. In Advanced mode, two rules apply:
    The loco is not allowed to enter the depot (as was often the case in reality due to the fire hazard). A wagon that is destined for the far end of a platform inside the depot must therefore be propelled using other intermediate wagons. Wagons must not be left temporarily inside the depot during shunting operations, only outside.  

     
     
  12. Mikkel

    GWR stables (1): Towards an overview

    By Mikkel,


    Structures
    The following are my notes on GWR stable blocks – a subject that does not seem to have received much attention. I am about to build one for Farthing, and have noticed various style differences that may be of interest to others.
     

    Chipping Norton stables in 1983. Built 1904. Rebuilt with end doors to serve as a garage, but otherwise it features the main elements of the "archetype" standard design, ie "hit and miss" vents in windows and above doors, and those characteristic boxy roof vents. Image copyright and courtesy Alan Lewis.
     
    I first became interested in GWR stables some years ago, and received some very helpful advice and material from several RMwebbers on here. Many thanks gents! However, I wanted to obtain an overview of the designs of stables built by the GWR, and this proved tricky. While there are a number of drawings and photos in various books and line histories, I couldn’t find an actual overview anywhere (or have I missed it?). Janet Russell's wonderful "Great Western Horse Power" comes closest with a handful of selected GWR plans and descriptions, but no attempt to provide an overview of the different styles. Vaughan’s "Great Western Architecture" and Stephen Williams’ "GWR Branchline Modelling vol 2" have a few pictures and drawings each.
     
     

    The stable block at Uxbridge Vine Street, illustrating how stables were sometimes located well away from the center of stations, although usually they would be found near the yard entry/exit. Source: Britain from above. Embedding permitted.
     
    So I have tried to make my own overview. Please note that this isn't based on extensive archival research or a systematic review of the various line histories. I have used a few key books and what others have shared.
     
    I first divided the stable blocks into three overall types:
    * The standard design, with 3 major permutations
    * The small "ad hoc" designs, sometimes inherited
    * The very large designs for major goods depots
     
    In the following I focus especially on the standard designs.
     
    The standard designs
     
    Various books refer to the emergence of a "standard" design of stable blocks around the turn of the century. However, looking at drawings and photos I realized that there were detail differences in this design, which could be divided into 3 main “styles”. Two immediate caveats:
    Most of what I have found seems to have been built from approximately the 1890s to grouping. I have not found evidence of standard designs before this time, but that may just be my lack of information. Little seems to have been built after grouping as horses were disappearing, but many stables remained in use for other purposes long after that. Although I identify 3 main styles, there also seem to have been hybrids and possibly also “retro-fitting”. So rather than seeing the three styles as entirely different designs, it is probably better to see them as different expressions of a standard design that evolved over time.
    The standard designs were single-story and followed classic GWR style features, i.e. red brick structures with blue engineering bricks around doors and at corners. The main style differences were in the ventilation, windows and doors.
     
    Sizes differed widely across the same style, from a few stalls to 20+. The footprint was simply stretched in length to accommodate the necessary no. of stalls (thanks for pointing that out, Ian). They were mostly rectangular, although there are one or two examples with a V or U shaped footprint to fit in the surroundings. In the following I have used sketches of quite large stable blocks to illustrate the styles, as they are of particular interest to me at the moment - but the same styles could be found across different sizes.
     
    STYLE A “Simple”
    Plain stable doors and sash windows with 3x4 panes. Limited ventilation. No roof-mounted louvred vents, no vents in doors and windows. Examples: Uxbridge Vine Street, Castle Cary. I’m having trouble dating this style, but my theory is that it is the earliest expression of the standard designs, because it pays so little attention to ventilation.
     
     

    My reproduction of the GWR drawing of Uxbridge Vine Street, illustrating Style A. An attractive option for the modeller who doesn't want to model the complicated ventilation seen on other types. Based on the original GWR drawing in Russel's "GWR Horse Power", which also has a drawing of the smaller stable block at Castle Cary to the same design.
     
    STYLE B “Archetype”
    Classic boxy louvred roof vents. Stable doors have “hit and miss” vents above, while windows have the same vents below a 3x3 glazing pattern. Examples: Abingdon, Chipping Norton (see header photo), Westbury, Hayes (original), Hayle, Park Royal, Thame, Little Somerford. Again there are dating difficulties. Chipping Norton’s stable was built in 1904. Westbury was totally rebuilt in 1901, so maybe the stable is from that date? Park Royal doesn’t seem to have been developed until the late 1900s.
     
     

    Park Royal, illustrating the archetypical features of Type B.
     
    STYLE C “Later”
    Stable doors have 2 rows of small windows/lights above doors, main windows are 4x5 panes. No vents in doors and windows, but large roof vents that are flatter and longer than the classic style. Examples: Weston-Super-Mare, extension block at Hayes, and the unidentified large new stable block in Russel's Great Western Horsepower p. 209-210. I’m calling this the “later” style because (i) the roof vent design seems more modern and functional and (ii) the original block at Hayes was style B design, but when it was extended (no date) the new blocks were to style C.
     
     

    Weston-Super-Mare, illustrating what I call Type C. Twenty stalls is a lot, there weren't many stables this big.
     
     

    A much smaller version of Type C. This 5-stall block was erected to extend the existing Type B block at Hayes & Harlington. A comparison with Weston-Super-Mare shows that the style is the same, and was simply shortened or stretched according to need.
     
    HYBRIDS/REBUILDS
    One or two stables I have seen could be hybrids between the main permutations. However, this is confused by the fact that (i) stables may have been retrofitted with new ventilation by the GWR, and (ii) stables were often rebuilt when no longer used for horses, and so latter day photos may confuse. For example, the latter day photos of Witney (built 1905) show windows like a Style A, but with the boxy roof vents of a Style B. However, the stable block was rebuilt to house motor lorries, and a closer look at the photos suggests to me that the windows and doors did originally have vents, but were replaced/modified (ie it is a rebuilt style B). The stable block at Minehead is more tricky, as described in the caption below.
     

     
    The preserved stable block at Minehead. As seen here it would seem like a Style A, but an earlier hand-drawing (not GWR) shows it with hit-and-miss vents in the windows, suggesting a Style B - except that the drawing does not show vents above the door or on the roof. Were they removed before the drawing was made (when the end doors were installed, for example), or was Minehead a hybrid? Shared under Creative Commons license. Attribution: Chris Osment/West Somerset Railway.
     
    Non-standard designs
     
    This included "all the rest", worthy of a whole study in themselves, but broadly speaking:
     
    Ad Hoc small designs
    A number of usually small, non-standard ad hoc stables, typically built during the early years, and often by independent companies. In some locations, the GWR simply hired space in a building for the local shunting horse with private individuals. Examples: Henley-in Arden, Princetown (built ca 1910), or how about Camborne!
     
    Very large and unique designs
    Very large stables for the major goods depots, including (i) single-story designs such as Hockley, (ii) two-story designs, rare but see Handsworth & Smethwick (and Paddington originally) and (iii) in a league of its own, Paddington Mint.
     

    The stables at Paddington Mint. Copyright Getty Images, embedding permitted.
     
    So those are my notes for now. Many thanks to all who have provided info and allowed use of photos so far. I am hoping that this will also bring new insights to light from others, as I have probably only scratched the surface.
     
    Edit: For further notes, see this blog entry.
     
     
  13. Mikkel

    4mm slate roofing

    By Mikkel,

    I've been looking at options for modelling the slate roof on the goods depot at Farthing. For what it's worth, here's a quick overview of the options considered. Above is one way of doing it: Lengths of thin card strips scribed vertically, and overlaid. I think this can give good results - in 4mm at least.
     
     
     

     
    But thin card also has its drawbacks! I recently noticed that the roof on the parcels office at Farthing has buckled. Either the glue has simply let go, or it was caused by a repaint I did a while back. Using the same method but with plasticard might have been better, as convincingly demonstrated in this blog entry by 45584 (albeit in Gauge 1!).
     
     
     

     
    An alternative to scribing things yourself are these "ready-scribed" slate sheets from Slaters (ref no. 0427). The idea (I think!) is that you cut out each length and overlay them.
     
     
     

     
    I may have failed to grasp the concept here, but my experiments with the Slater's sheets suggest a significant overscale thickness of the slates (according to the Slaters catalogue, the plasticard thickness is 0.015'). Or have I misunderstood something? Until someone tells me differently, I've decided not to continue down this road.
     
     
     

     
    A third main option is of course the ready-to-fit embossed sheets, available in various guises. There seems to be two main types here: Those that are printed "flat", and those where the slates actually appear to "overlap". The flat-printed ones can sometimes work well: This roof on a (rather careworn) Coopercraft platelayer's hut gives a reasonable representation, I think.
     
     
     

     
    However, the Wills slate sheets seem to me the best of the ready-embossed solutions I've seen yet. The shingles actually give the impression of overlapping....
     
     
     

     
     ...and they have an ever so slight irregularity that can be further accentuated during painting and weathering, as on the right.
     
     
     

     
    But of course, nothing is perfect. One well-known issue with the Wills sheets is their limited size, which means several have to be joined for larger rooves...
     
     
     

     
    ....and another issue is their thickness. I don't think the individual shingles look overly thick, but at the edges it becomes more of a problem, as seen on this canopy on the goods depot. Nevertheless, so far I think I'll go ahead with the Wills sheets as the preferred choice. 
     
    Update Feb. 2019: 
    Since this post was written I have experimented with:
    Pre-cut slate sheets from York Modelmaking (more on that here) Slate strips cut from vinyl (more on that here).  
  14. Mikkel
    Time to get some track in place for The depot. For a pragmatic modeller like myself, it's easy to dismiss finescale track as something for the purists only. A little too easy, perhaps! With this in mind, I'm currently taking a closer look at some of the C+L track components. The idea is to see whether this sort of thing works for me, and how much it adds to the overall impression of the GWR in the 1900s. It's still OO, and so far only straight track, as that is all I need for the scenic part of The depot.
     
     

    After some helpful advice from Brian Lewis at C+L, I decided to experiment with the Timber Tracks system of laser-cut track panels, onto which you build the rail, chairs etc. The photos above show the GWR 44' 6" straight panels. These have the 8' 6" sleepers used after WW1, whereas the 1900s saw use of 9' sleepers. But since the gauge is OO, the visual result will hopefully look about right. Nothing is actually fixed in place on the Timbertracks panel, so some chairs etc are a little out of alignment.
     
     

    Apart from the Timbertracks system I am also trying out the C+L ready-built flexitrack. This is strictly speaking not suitable for the GWR as it has a different sleeper spacing and uses 3-bolt chairs rather than the keyed 2-bolt chairs used by the GWR. On the plus side, it is quicker to lay and the big question is of course just how much of this detail is really noticeable once it's all weathered and in place.
     
    The following photos show various detail differences between Peco, C+L flexitrack and C+L hand-build track in close-up.
     

     

     

     

     
    In fairness it should be said that the Peco track seen here is the Code 100, which I have been stubbornly using until now (bought a large quantity very cheaply some years ago). I currently have some Peco Code 75 track on order for use in the fiddle yard. Once it arrives I'll post some birds eye-view photos of the various track types for overall comparison. So far, though, I'm rather liking the Timbertracks system and the unexpected pleasures of track building...
  15. Mikkel
    I've been exploring some of the smaller and lesser known 4mm whitemetal figure ranges recently. Here's a handful of photos showing a selection of some of them. These are cruel close-ups, but if we're concerned about the details of our stock, shouldn't we be equally concerned about whether the figures look right?
     
     

    Above: This group of horse shunters are from the Geoff Stevens range, which features sets of railway staff that can be used together in little cameos. As evident from the header photo, some of the figures in this range have well sculpted faces. Very often, I think, it is the face that makes or breaks a 4mm figure.
     
     

    Above: No, not a fight but a sheeting gang, also from Geoff Stevens. I am not normally attracted to figures that are frozen in mid-motion, and cameos like these can very easily become a cliché. However I couldn't resist the two sets pictured here, which fit well with a concept I have in mind for a future third layout in the Farthing series.
     
     

    Above: These figures are from Model Railway Developments (MRD). I've been wanting to have a closer look at these for some time, as the range is focussed on my own Edwardian period.
     
     

    Above: Two further MRD figures. This range demonstrates how whitemetal figures can vary considerably in quality and detail within the same range. The little girl seen here is very good, but I don't think she takes after her mother :-)
     
     

    Above: The same figure seen from two different sides. Quite often, I find, a figure can look unrealistic from one side but quite good from another. I wonder if this has something to do with the original sculpting process? In any case, careful positioning can sometimes bring out the good side in a figure.
     
     

    Above: This loco crew is from the small Alan Gibson range. Figures in the range seem to have a 1900s-1920s look and feel. The loco crew is made for L/H drive, which is a pity for GWR modellers. But I suppose non-GWR modellers deserve decent figures too ;-)
     
     

    Above: Two porters, also from Alan Gibson. I might change the pose of these, but the faces have a certain character! Captions, anyone?
     
     

    Above: A line-up of station staff from the above ranges, plus a figure from the better known Monty's range from Dart Castings.
     
     

    Above: Clearly there's a dinner party nearby! Another comparison here, with a couple from the large Langley range thrown in.
     
     

    Above: A group of Monty's figures. While there are individual useful figures in all of the above ranges, they don't trump the Monty's range, which in my view wins hands down every time. They have the right bulk, relaxed poses and the faces are usually good.
     
  16. Mikkel

    Motley crew

    By Mikkel,


    Coaches & Browns
    After a tough spell at work it's been great to just run some stock back and forth today - no rules, no schedules, anything goes. Fortunately, GWR trains at the turn of the century lend themselves pretty well to that state of mind. A variety of stock, styles and liveries could be seen mixed together in the same train. Who said Great Western trains were all the same! Here are some examples as seen on Farthing.
     


     
    Above we see the Westbury stopping train with a motley assembly of stock, as seen on many secondary trains of the period. Four-wheelers, six-wheelers and bogie stock all in the same train.
     

     
    Three different roof-profiles on view here: Clerestory roof on the non-corridor C10 Third (RTR-bashed Triang), single-arc roof on the six-wheel R2 First (Blacksmith kit) and 3-arc roof on the Siphon (K's kit).
     


     
    Two siphons of very different height and appearance. On the right is the open-slatted 6-wheeler built from the K's kit. Due to an error in Russell's GWR Coaches Vol. 1 the K's kit is sometimes referred to as an O2.  It is in fact a Dia O1. The GWR used the O1 designation twice, initially for the earliest 4-wheel Siphons, later for this six-wheel design. On the left is a Siphon C (Shirescenes kit) with the later more modern look and higher sides.
     
     
     


     
    The eaves panels just below the roof also varied in height and added further to the variety of Edwardian GWR trains. The R2 on the right has the early deep panels, while the All Third S9 on the left sports the later more shallow style.
     

     
    During the 1900s some of the graceful Dean mainline classes began to be allocated to lesser secondary services. Here is 2-4-0 No. 3245 of the 3232 class. This loco (a Finney kit) has recently been brought back to life after a long period of motor failure.
     
     
     

     
    The Edwardian period saw a number of livery changes on the GWR within a short span of time. The coach on the left carries my simplified version of the 1880-1908 chocolate and cream livery, while on the right is a six-wheel PBV in the lake livery of 1912. A closer look at the latter coach reveals that this a rather unfinished restoration job. I did say 'anything goes' !
     
     
     

     
    A last shot of a couple of coaches in the bay. It's a funny old hobby we have: Watching some bits of metal and plastic moving back and forth, and getting a kick out of it! But it is so very relaxing.

    PS:
    According to Wikipedia... "A motley crew is a cliché for a roughly-organized assembly of characters. Motley crews are, by definition, non-uniform and undisciplined as a group. They are characterised by containing characters of conflicting personality [and] varying backgrounds...". Sounds just like my trains. Or is that RMweb I've just described? 
     
     
  17. Mikkel
    There was a time when men were men and horses weren't lasagna. I’m currently building some horse-drawn vehicles for the little yard behind my goods depot. I began with Langley’s whitemetal kit for a GWR 5 ton wagon. This represents one of the standard designs often seen in photos from pre-grouping days, especially in the London division.
     
    It should be said at once that it isn't a finescale kit - indeed it's a bit rough in places. But with a little work I thought it would be OK for a position in the middle-ground of this little layout.
     
     

     
    The kit as supplied. At 20£ this is no cheap kit, though I imagine the three horses and carter are part of the reason. There is little flash, but most parts do need a bit of filing and tweaking to make a good fit. The instructions are reasonable, although some details of the assembly are left to the imagination.
     
     
     

     
    To improve appearances, I filed thick bits down to a leaner shape. I added rails between the side boards, and used wire in drilled holes to secure items (as per photo above). I compromised on the stanchions that support the "raves": These are moulded as solid triangles, but replacing them is not really practical, I think.
     
     
     

     
    In primer. The seating arrangement follows the elevated “Paddington” pattern (as opposed to the much more basic “Birmingham” style). The parts provided for this looked overscale to me, so I basically rebuilt the whole seating arrangement. The fore carriage was fitted in a way that allowed it to actually pivot.
     
     
     

     
    There are shire horses and then there are shire horses! The one on the left came with the kit along with two others. The one on the right is from Dart castings. I opted for two of the latter.
     
     
     

     
    I replaced the supplied chain with something finer. To fit the chains to the horses, I sunk bits of wire into the beasts, fitted the chain and then bent the wire to form a small loop.
     
     
     

     
    For the lettering, I needed yellow letters. There are no ready-made transfers available for these vehicles, so I plundered the HMRS GWR goods wagons sheet, building up the wording letter by letter. The spacing to accommodate the framing was also seen on the prototypes, although it is accentuated here due to the thicker castings. The HMRS sheet does have yellow letters, but not enough for my purposes, so as an experiment I used white letters and coloured them afterwards with a yellow marker. I wouldn’t really recommend this – it works OK at first but you have to be very careful with the subsequent varnishing or it will take the colour right off. I’m not entirely happy with the lettering, but life is short.
     
     

     
    Done. The chain in the middle is a rough indication of the chains and skids used for locking and braking the wheels when parked.
     
     
     

     
    I do like the ‘osses. I was going to call them "the Finching Sisters" in honour of the two lovely ladies on Robin's Brent layout. Then I realized they were male.
     
     

     
    In position in one of the cartage bays. Although one or two details don't stand close inspection on this vehicle, I am reasonably satisfied with the overall outline and feel of it.
     
     
     

     
    The wagon seen from inside the depot. Not sure what to add in terms of load. It is tempting to do one of the sky-high loads seen in some photos (eg here), but I think it might become visually over-powering on this vehicle. Maybe on the next one.
     
     

     
    Off-topic: Looks like a leftover from the new year decorations has found it’s way into the goods depot. Happy New Year everyone!
     
    Notes on the prototype
    For what it’s worth, I’ve added here some of my own notes on these vehicles. Note that they are mainly based on my own observations from photos and drawings. I do have "Great Western Road Vehicles" by P. Kelley, but despite some useful illustrations, this book does not really go into much written detail on the horse-drawn wagons. Perhaps "Great Western Horse Power" by Janet Russell is better, and worth a purchase?
     
    Design
    These wagons were used for standard and heavy goods cartage. There were different types built to this style, some with six “bays”, some with five. Some were built for a single horse, some for two or more. The tare and tonnage varied considerably across the different designs. They had the “Paddington pattern” of seat arrangement, where the seat was elevated above the wagon. Hoops could be fitted to accommodate sheeting. A light version of the same design was used for parcels delivery vans, with hard tops.
     
    Distribution
    The wagons were especially prominent at Paddington, where photos suggest they were the all-dominant type in the 1900s. However they were also used elsewhere on the system (even as far as Cardiff, according to one drawing). In some areas they seem to have been rare though, eg at Birmingham Hockley the dominant goods delivery wagon was of a quite different design. A photo from Slough in the 1920s shows the type I have modelled alongside one of the Birmingham style vehicles, so the different types did appear together at some locations.
     
    Livery
    In Great Western Way (original edition), Slinn states that by the 1900s, station names were applied to larger horse-drawn vehicles whenever there was room for it (as seen on my model above). I have a theory, though, that this practice ended sometime after 1905 or thereabouts: Looking at photos after that date, station names are no longer present, and the “Great Western Railway” and numbering is all on one plank.
     
    Slinn also states that numbering was in random positions, but as far as I can see the numbers on these vehicles were always at the front end of the wagon. Perhaps Slinn missed the fact that the relative position of the lettering and numbers was necessarily “handed”, because we read from left to right (ie on the left hand side, it would be written “667 Great Western Railway” and on the right hand side, it would be “Great Western Railway 667”).
     
    According to Slinn, the lettering for horse-drawn vehicles in the 1900s was yellow or gold, shaded or not. I doubt gold would have been used for wagons like these, and there is no apparent shading in the photos I have seen. So presumably plain yellow (but the shade of yellow not clear?). I have sometimes wondered whether the lettering was in fact white on some wagons, because it stands out with very high contrast in some photos. However, looking at photos of parcels vans (which are known to have had white letters on their hard tops) it seems that the letters on wagons were darker than white, so presumably yellow. Later in the 1930s, horse-drawn vehicles adopted a different chocolate and cream livery and a different lettering style.
     
  18. Mikkel
    The whitemetal wagon kits from David Geen have tempted me for many years, so I thought it was time I gave them a go.
     

     
    I began with this round-ended 3-planker of 1881 vintage, for use in my “out of period” running sessions.
     
     

     
    The good stuff! Nothing like a bit of research to start off a new kit. The round ends were not long-lived on the 3-plankers. From 1883 the GWR introduced square ends, and many of the existing round-ended wagons appear to have been cut down to square ends within a short period. Perhaps to allow for extended loads? Or possibly an early EU regulation .
     
     

     
    The parts are nice and reasonably crisp. Some had flash but it was easily removed.
     
     

     
    The kit was built using Araldite. All very old school but I find it less stressful than soldering when it comes to whitemetal. Which says more about my soldering skills than anything else! I added wheels from Alan Gibson, running in Romford pinpoint bearings.
     
     

     
    I rarely regret being an OO modeller, but this is one of those occasions when the gauge issue raises it’s ugly head. That's no fault of the kit, though, but of the gauge! No doubt I will soon have forgotten all about it and go back into the usual state of denial .
     
     

     
    I went for a slightly worn look. We tend to imagine Victorian liveries as completely spotless, but I can't bring myself to believe that it was really like that at all times and in every case. The 3-plankers were originally 9-ton wagons, although those that retained grease axleboxes were downgraded to 8 tons by the 1900s.
     
     

     
    The wagon on "The bay". There is still some debate over the exact period of the red wagon livery. 
     
     

     
    This was a straightforward and enjoyable build. A square-ended version has also been purchased, for future use on "The depot" within my more normal 1900s timeframe.
  19. Mikkel

    Footplate crew

    By Mikkel,


    Figures
    I've been on the lookout for 4mm pre-grouping drivers and firemen recently, but so far with limited success. Meanwhile, here's a couple of modified ones from IKB. For me, tiny projects like these are as much fun as the more substantial work.
     
     

     
    The IKB fireman seen above is unusual in that, unlike 90% of 4mm firemen, he is not furiously shovelling! Unfortunately the mould lacks a bit of bulk, so I extended his girth using plastic putty. The nose was re-sculpted and the original whiskers were replaced in order to enhance relief and character. The camera has interpreted the trousers as black, while in reality I've given them a blueish tone. (Edit: See discussion on colour of jackets below).
     
     
     

     
    The driver uses the IKB body and the re-sculpted head of a Langley cartage man. The IKB crew actually includes a couple of extra heads, which is a great idea but I had already used these on other figures. The arms have been repositioned to reduce the stick-like appearance.
     
     
     

     
    Here's the crew temporarily mounted in a River Class loco. The loco was built to near-finished condition by the late Dave Perkins from a Peter K kit, and is now allocated to Farthing. There are various issues with the paintjob and boiler fittings that I need to look into (my doing, not Dave's), but she is a very sweet runner.
     
     
     

     
    The IKB crew is nominally "Victorian" by design. However the characteristic buttoning of jackets at the top is also evident on footplate men in some Edwardian photos. Having said that, the pre-grouping uniforms of GWR footplate crew don't seem to be very well described in the literature, and I'm unsure exactly what is correct for Edwardian times.
     
    In fact, a casual scan of photos from that period reveals a bewildering variation in the styles of jackets and caps worn by footplate crew. One pitfall here seems to be that many of the people on the footplate in such photos aren't actually crew, but inspectors etc. I also have a theory that drivers and firemen sometimes put on their private clothes and/or headwear in order to look decent in photos. Finally, given their working conditions I'm guessing that footplate crew resorted to a variety of protective clothing at different times of the day and year. Perhaps not all of this was standard?
     
    While on the subject of figures, I hear that Falcon offer some good 4mm footplate crew, but I am unsure what period they are for, and whether they are obtainable on-line? Oh, and wouldn't it be great if we had something like the 7mm Heroes of the Footplate range in 4mm scale! [Edit April 2022: We do now! See the Andrew Stadden and Model U ranges].
     
     
  20. Mikkel
    I’m building a GWR 1854 class saddle tank in 1900s condition, using a modified and detailed South Eastern Finecast body kit on a Bachmann 8750 chassis. The build is also in my workbench thread, but that tends to be a rather meandering discussion, so this is a summary of the main steps without the diversions.
     


     
    I bought the kit part-assembled, but a bath in hot water dissolved the glue and allowed me to break it down into its main components.
     
     
     

     
    The Bachmann chassis I'm using is the version for the 8750 model, seen here on the right (my loco ref was 32-200, I think the recent 57xx model also uses this chassis). Note that older versions of this chassis (seen on the left, my loco ref was 31-900) are higher and the chassis block is longer, so is less ideal for conversions.
     
     
     

     
    I wanted to avoid modifying the chassis more than strictly necessary, so that it could be replaced easily in case of a failure. The only chassis modification was therefore to remove a section off the front to allow the kit to fit over it.
     
     
     

     
    The body castings require more work. The locating lugs on the side frames and buffer beams were removed, and about 1 mm was filed off the central section of the footplate and splashers each side to clear the motor. Plastikard was used front and rear to get the correct ride height.
     
     
     

     
    The body and chassis assembled. The two front splashers are 0.5 mm too far out. However with careful positioning of the body it is barely discernable, so after mulling it over I decided to accept it.
     
     
     

     
    The tank sides fit neatly over the motor.
     
     
     

     
    The two tank halves were the most work intensive parts of the kit. The “skirts” need to be cut away…
     
     
     

     
    ...allowing daylight under the boiler…
     
     
     

     
    …followed by much filing and filling to get the two halves to fit together.
     
     
     

     
    The motor intrudes slightly into the cab, so the backhead was moved 1 mm forward and a center section of the floor raised slightly.
     
     
     

     
    I replaced the main SEF white metal boiler fittings with parts from Alan Gibson.
     
     
     

     
    Other details were scratchbuilt from bits and bobs. The tank steps were later redone enitrely in brass with tabs to secure them. The footplate steps need filing to the correct straight shape as seen here.
     
     
     

     
    Liftings rings, made from soft wire wrapped around a brush handle and squeezed to shape with pliers.
     
     
     

     
    Coal rails made from wire, and fire iron hooks bent to shape from flat brass strip. The early lamp brackets are from the Broad Gauge Society, and the buffers are Alan Gibson.
     
     
     

     
    While the main build was fairly quick, the detailing has been time consuming.
     
     
     

     
    So here she is, almost ready for a good scrub and then some primer.
  21. Mikkel

    Pre-grouping livery clippings

    By Mikkel,


    Misc.
    Here are a couple of PDF files that may be of interest to pre-grouping modellers.
     
    The first document is an 1896 article from Moore's Monthly Magazine (later renamed "The Locomotive") on British pre-grouping liveries. It includes brief livery descriptions for a number of the railways (but not all).
     
    MooresMonthlyLiveries.pdf
     
     
    The second document is my personal selection of quotes and news items on GWR liveries and selected other liveries from the archives of the Railway Magazine during the period 1898-1924.
     
    RailwayMagazineLiveries_OK.pdf
     
     
    A few notes:
     
    Apart from the general observations on British and GWR liveries, the documents contain two key sources for the theory that GWR wagons were red until 1904. I'm a follower of this theory, but thought I'd have a look at the contemporary sources to see for myself. I have to say though that the references to wagon liveries are very brief, and to me emphasize the very scant attention given to wagons by railway observers of the time.
     
    More generally speaking, this material also suggests to me that contemporary magazine articles are a somewhat problematic source of livery details. I can't help feeling that the livery descriptions herein seem rather subjective and not necessarily well researched. That said, the material does provide some snippets of information on various details of GWR loco and carriage liveries that I had not previously encountered.
     
    I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions. If nothing else, it all gives a sense of the ethos of the time! Many thanks to the RMwebbers who have helped with this.
     
     
  22. Mikkel

    Blue skies and horse traffic

    By Mikkel,


    Stories
    It is afternoon in the Overbourne bay at Farthing station. The all third "strengthener" rests in one of the sidings, while a worker from a local cartage company is lost in thought. The coach reveals that I'm still in the process of fitting couplings to some of the stock.
     
     


     
    The regular branch engine No. 1961 of the "850" Class shunts a horsebox to diagram N5 into the horse dock. The horse seems nervous at the prospect of travelling inside a box on wheels. Perhaps in reality horses were not brought to the loading dock before the stock was in place?
     
     
     

     
    Horse and groom wait for the staff to open the doors. The horsebox is from the old Colin Waite kit. The busy horse traffic around Farthing was inspired by the Newbury area and the DN&SR and Lambourn lines. I had no end of trouble finding a suitable racing horse as most available OO horses are either in full harness or just too poorly moulded to work with. So I ended up with this Noch example, to which I added just a bit of filler in strategic places, and a horse rug (is that the word?) made from toilet tissue. The horse is HO, but I think it works OK if we assume it's a two-year old!
     
     
     

     
    Meanwhile No. 1961 continues its work. The C10 "strengthener" is drawn out of its slumber for use on the busy late afternoon service to Overbourne, which always draws a good number of passengers arriving on the ex-London services or having spent the day in Farthing. The coach is a Triang RTR conversion job (construction notes here) and this photo is rather revealing of the various compromises involved. While I do like RTR bashing, in this case I've got an almost finished kit-built coach waiting in the wings as a replacement.
     
     
     

     
    The "strengthener" is coupled up to the standard branch set waiting in the platform, while a couple of well-to-do passengers watch with detached interest. The wicker baskets are from Hornby and are the only items on the layout that were used straight out of the packet. The baskets are very good in texture and colour, although a couple in my packet seemed to have slipped unduly past quality control.
     
     
     

     
    Next up in the formation is the horsebox, now containing horse and groom, and seen here being coupled up to the rest of the train. Horseboxes tended to travel next to the loco at the front of the train, although I've forgotten why. Was it easier on the horses that way?
     
     
     

     
    Every afternoon of every day, Miss Agnes Wilkinson sits on the bench at the end of the platform, hoping to catch a glimpse of driver T. F. Oberon, the lost love of her lost youth. He ignores her today as he has done for the past 45 years, but Miss Wilkinson does not give up. Tomorrow she will be back on the bench, for she knows that some fine day Mr Oberon will yield.
     
     
     

     
    The Overbourne train is now made up and ready for boarding. It really is a very clear day today - so clear in fact, that the entire town above the embankment walls has disappeared into thin air. Still, it beats having our cluttered basement as a background!
     
     
  23. Mikkel

    GWR provender wagons

    By Mikkel,


    Wagons
    In 1884 the GWR centralized the provision of provender, so that every stable block on the system received a regular supply by rail from the provender store at Didcot, typically every 1-2 weeks. The supplies consisted of hay, chaff, straw bedding and sacks of feed. The feed included oats, beans and maize, either pre-mixed or separate.
     
    The sizeable stable block at Farthing obviously needs a regular supply of feed and bedding, so two provender wagons have been made. I began with a diagram Q1, using the Coopercraft kit.
     

     
     
     
    The GWR only made a total of 12 dedicated provender wagons, in two slightly different lots of six. The Q1 kit represents the later batch, built in 1903 with diagonal bracing. They were very camera shy, the (cropped) image below is the only one I have seen so far.
     

     
     
     
    As usual, the build involved modifications. The Vee hanger on these wagons was significantly off-center, towards the right. The instructions don’t mention this. So both vees were cut off. The solebars need shortening, and the end brackets must therefore also come off. Here is the original solebar (top), and a modified one (below).
     

     
     
     
    Then, sides and ends. The locating pips for the floor were removed. They make the floor sit too low, and the solebars in turn end up beneath the headstocks.
     



     
    As provided, the brake gear does not take the off-center Vee into account, as this trial fit shows.
     

     
     
     
    So the brake gear was modified to suit. Looks a bit odd, but that's what the drawing and text in Atkins et al shows.
     

     
     
     
     The DC1 brake gear was made using parts from the  Bill Bedford etch (recently withdrawn). The buffers are from Lanarkshire Models.
     

     
     
     
    The built-up wagon in GWR wagon red, as it would have been painted when built in 1903.
     

     
     
     
    Apart from 12 purpose-built provender wagons, most of the GWR's provender was carried in numerous standard open wagons of all sorts. Several photos show them loaded improbably high. I decided to have a go at replicating this. This close crop, from a much larger shot from Vastern Rd yard at Reading, illustrates what I was aiming for.
     

     
     

    I set to work on some plumber’s hemp, cut fine and built up in layers on a foamboard box, using diluted PVA. Not the 9 o’clock news!
     

     
     

    Then sheets (a.k.a. tarps) were made, using my usual method. Ian’s superb sheets were re-numbered and printed on regular paper, then laminated with thin foil and varnished multiple times, before weathering. The result is a shell that can be easily shaped and supports it’s own weight (see this post).
     


     

    I designed the load to fit my 4-plankers. My initial plan was to have the entire load and sheeting detachable, in line with my normal approach. In this shot, the tarp and load are separate, but magnets hold them together and allow easy removal.
     

     
     

    However, with a high load like this I felt that the lack of roping looked odd. So I decided to see how it would feel to have permanent loads and sheets. I  recruited one of my 4-plankers and added roping and side-cords, using painted sewing thread.
     

     
     

    Indents were made in the sheeting by pressing the edge of a ruler into the paper/foil shell, in order to emulate the ropes pulling down the sheet.
     

     

    This is what I ended up with. Don’t look to closely at how the cords are tied at the ends. Photos of provender trains don’t show clearly whether and how they were used in a situation like this.
     
     
     

    Sometimes, the GWR used two sheets laid sideways instead, as illustrated in this cropped detail of a train of hay bales.
     

     
     

    I decided to do the same on my high-sided Q1 wagon. Here is the usual foil shell, this time composed of two sheets.
     

     
     

    For the roping and cords, I loosely followed the cropped image above.  I also tried to fold the sheets at the ends as per that photo, but gave up:  Try as I might, it just looked weird in 4mm scale. Another time maybe.
     

     
     
     
    The wagons together. The charm of everyday solutions versus boxy functional design.
     

     
     
     
    Here are a few photos of the wagons in action on the (unfinished) new layout. A Buffalo class arrives with the weekly delivery of provender. Conveniently, the stable block at Farthing happens to have a siding alongside.
     

     

    Meanwhile, Betty is having a drink in preparation for the morning round. Proper care of railway horses was a serious matter, though hardly for ethical reasons. Horses were a company asset and an important part of operations, so obviously needed good maintenance. 
     

     
     

    The loco has left, and the wagons are sat in the sidings. The camera has exaggerated the sheen.
     

     
     
     
    A close-up, warts and all. The mind struggles to accept that the hay wasn't completely covered over. There is room for improvement with the roping and cords, several lessons learnt there.
     

     

    I'd like to experiment more with the shaping of the sheets. Here I have made slight rounded indents along the bottom to avoid a straight line. Period photos show that, although sheets were pulled as taut as possible, there were still lots of wrinkles etc. 
     

     
     
    Despite these experiments, I’m still undecided about permanent loads and sheeting. To illustrate my doubt: It's the next day and the Buffalo class is back to pick up the provender wagons. But wait, what’s this? They are still full and sheeted! More thinking needed. It never ends.
     

     
     
     
  24. Mikkel
    Line dance, 4mm style. I’ve been painting some figures from Andrew Stadden’s excellent new 4mm range of Edwardian figures.
     
     

     
    A group in primer, showing the detail of the figures.
     
     

     
    Being pewter, the Stadden figures are a little harder to modify than whitemetal ones. It’s not impossible though. This gent had his bag removed…
     
     

     
    … making him look more like a railway employee. I sometimes file the caps to represent the GWR kepi, although photos from the 1900s suggest that in practice, several different types of cap could be seen at the same time during this period.
     
     

     
    I still struggle with figure painting. In particular I can't seem to master that illusive shadow-work - but it helps a lot that the figures are so well modelled.
     
     

     
    On most of the figures, the close-fitting headwear conveniently hides the upper face, which I find particularly hard to get right. This is driver J. Chuzzlewit, a seasoned man of the footplate and known for his rough driving, poor jokes, and fanatical interest in leeks.
     
     

     
    Here we have GWR Policeman W. Walmsley of the GWR Goods Department at Farthing. This figure was modified from a guard/inspector. It required a bit of research since little has been written about GWR police uniforms. My theory is that in the 1900s the GWR police force had lost much of its former status, and the main distinguishing marks on their uniforms were a gold patch on one sleeve, and brass numerals on the collar. Later (possibly in 1918), they started wearing helmets. See this thread for details.
     
     

     
    Detective F. Benton of the GWR Detective Department at Paddington. The GWR seem to have had a separate Detective department from quite early on. Considering the total value of goods being handled by the railway, that’s not really surprising. I’m sure there was a scam or two going on!
     
     

     
    Stages of undress. What’s the weather like today? And what task is at hand? Miraculously, the temperature at Farthing always seems to be moderate, which is why some staff wear a coat, others wear vests, and the hard-working men only a shirt.
     
     

     
    I’ve decided that this trio will serve as "slipper boys" in the GWR goods department at Farthing. Slipper boys, as I understand it, would assist horse shunters with tasks such as “scotching” wheels and handling the horse’s chains. Clothes mattered a lot in Edwardian days, and photos suggest that even non-uniformed, lower staff grades could be smartly dressed. Even so, a couple of these lads look very smart indeed. Is there something fishy going on? Watch this space...
  25. Mikkel

    One morning long ago

    By Mikkel,


    Stories
    One morning long ago, an 1854 class shunted the Old Yard at Farthing.  
     
     
     


    The crew were slightly bored. Nothing much ever happened in the Old Yard. Just a handful of sidings.

     
     


    A carman (sic) watched them roll by, perched on his trolley (Birmingham pattern). The carmen at Farthing were famous for not using reins. 
     
     
     

     
    William Simmons was particularly skilled. Known as The Horse Whisperer, he worked without reins for 46 years and never had an accident. People did wonder why his rounds took so long. It turned out his whispers worked on women too.
     
     
     
     
     
    On the other side of the tracks, lad porter Herbert Pocket was busy cleaning the lamps.  
     
     
     

     
    Herbert had two goals in life: He wanted to drive locomotives, and he wanted to die like a hero.
     
     
     
     
     
    He was last seen in the Congo in 1924, hanging off the tender of a runaway loco. They say he was smiling.
     
     


     
    Meanwhile, porter Alfred Jingle watched the train draw closer.  The morning fog was thick as pea soup. He liked a good pea soup.
     
     
     
     
     
    As the wagons rolled past, Alfred tried to avoid eye contact with Thomas Grig up in the lamp. They hadn’t spoken since the lardy cake argument. They’d been friends for years, but you have to draw a line somewhere.
     
     
     

     
    Thomas, for his part, had other matters on his mind. A lamplighter for 26 years, he had so far scaled the lamps at Farthing 81.121 times.  He knew, because he counted. He counted, because secretly… 
      
     
     

     
    …Thomas had an intense fear of heights.
     
     
     

     
    When he finally retired, Thomas bought a one-storey cottage in Holme Fen, sawed the legs of all his furniture, and heaved a long sigh of relief.
     
     
     

     
    The train rumbled on through the pointwork. The unsheeted Open carried a shipment of Empty Promises. A local MP would pick it up later.
     
     
     

     
    Shunter John Redlaw changed the points to No. 3 siding.
     
     
     

     
    Known as "The Phantom" he had a manner of appearing from nowhere exactly when needed, only to disappear again as soon as the job was done.
     
     
     

     
    The loco propelled the wagons into the siding...
     
     
     

     
    ... towards the covered goods dock. 
     
     
     

     
    Goods porter Samuel Slumkey watched the wagons approach. 
     

     

     
    As a veteran of the Red River Rebellion, the Urabi Revolt and the Sikkim Expedition, Samuel had travelled to the ends of the earth.
     
     
     

     
    It turned out, however, that the real edge of the world was right here in Farthing.
     
     
     

     
    As the train came to a halt, the porters prepared to put in some heavy work.
     
     
     

     
    Not Tom Roker though. Comfortably seated on his favourite barrow, he always found an excuse for not working. In fairness, whilst sat there thinking he invented a universal vaccine, a waterless crop, and an unlimited supply of clean energy. He never wrote it down though. He couldn’t be bothered. 
     
     

     
     
    As the crew prepared to pull back, George Rouncewell said good morning. Not to the crew, but to the loco. He often spoke to the locos.
     
     
     

     
    They all thought he was potty, but George had his reasons. He had worked ten years in the A shop in Swindon, before an errant bar of hot iron put a stop to it.
     
     
     

     
    So these weren’t just locomotives, they were old friends.  He would even order pints for them at the pub. And drink it all. On their behalf, you understand.
     
     
     

     
    Uncoupled, the loco backed away, leaving the wagons behind.
     
     
     

     
    As they drove off, bunker first, the driver said: “Staff here seem quiet today”.
     
     
     

     
    “Yep”, said the fireman, “Bit of a dull lot”.
     
     
    ***
     
    PS: Most of the figures have been modified, some extensively. The captions are all true, only the facts have been changed.
     
     
×
×
  • Create New...