Stoke Courtenay

[checkrail]

Having never done it before I didn't realise what fun it was taking pics of model railways.  Here are a few more of Stoke Courtenay.

 

 

A King heads west with the CRE, but looks like the crew jumped ship!

 

Here are some of Stoke Courtenay's population:

 

 

Early evening, and a young man picks his new lady friend up from the London train.  His 10 year old Austin 7 could do with a wash. 

 

 

Man having quick pint on way home from work.  My wife knows little about the GWR but does have an eye for detail.  She asked me if a pint in 1930s Devon would have such a nice creamy head on it.  I had to admit, probably not (and probably not in 2016 either.)

 

 

Finally, local garage and mechanic. (I can see he needs another touch of matt varnish on his overalls.) I remember my dad's first car, bought second hand in the 1950s, was a 1938 Standard 12 like this.

 

John C.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[81C]

With big open cabs like Kings the pipe work and controls look good when picked out with brass and red and a blob of white on the dials. 

[Andy R]

Having never done it before I didn't realise what fun it was taking pics of model railways.  Here are a few more of Stoke Courtenay.

 

Layout 24 July 2016 001-min.JPG

 

A King heads west with the CRE, but looks like the crew jumped ship!

 

Here are some of Stoke Courtenay's population:

 

Couple & car 002-min.JPG

 

Early evening, and a young man picks his new lady friend up from the London train.  His 10 year old Austin 7 could do with a wash. 

 

Layout 24 July 2016 008-min.JPG

 

Man having quick pint on way home from work.  My wife knows little about the GWR but does have an eye for detail.  She asked me if a pint in 1930s Devon would have such a nice creamy head on it.  I had to admit, probably not (and probably not in 2016 either.)

 

Layout 24 July 2016 010-min.JPG

 

Finally, local garage and mechanic. (I can see he needs another touch of matt varnish on his overalls.) I remember my dad's first car, bought second hand in the 1950s, was a 1938 Standard 12 like this.

 

John C.

 

Hi John - these recent photos lead me to ask what the make of your figures are. They are beautifully painted and natural poses. Also, while I'm on the site, what is your techniques for making your trees?

 

Many thanks and regards, Andy R

[class"66"]

More nice detailing here John..

 

 

 

 

cheers neil.

[Ramblin Rich]

I have enjoyed reading through this, the title caught my eye. 

 

I've been rather vague about where Stoke Courtenay is actually supposed to be but the sign in the pic below might provide a clue!  The name itself is from the Courtenay family, who were earls of Devon in the middle ages (and, I believe, still are), hence 'Earlsbridge').

 

Slightly off topic, you are right about the Courtneys; the current (19th) Earl of Devon is Charles Courtney, who became Earl when his father (Hugh Rupert, 18th Earl) died last year. We live in Kenton within earshot* of their home, Powderham Castle. The current Earl seems a lot more modern & approachable than the previous, being known to all around as 'Charlie'; his children attend the village primary school alongside ours and incidentally his wife is the actress Alison Joy (AJ) Langer, formally of Baywatch!

Rather confusingly, there is also the Earl of Devonshire (who is also Duke of Devonshire) and lives at Chatsworth in Derbyshire...

 

* as shown by the Radio 1 Big Weekend concerts!

Edited July 25, 2016 by Ramblin Rich

[Captain Kernow]

Top quality work there, John. Thanks for sharing and I look forward to more postings.

[checkrail]

Hi John - these recent photos lead me to ask what the make of your figures are. They are beautifully painted and natural poses. Also, while I'm on the site, what is your techniques for making your trees?

 

Many thanks and regards, Andy R

 

Thanks Andy.  The majority of the figures are Monty's Models, from Dart Castings.  As you say, they have nice natural poses, usually in repose. (Nowt worse than a guard waving a flag at a train that isn't there!).  One can't help but noticing the number of working types in the range with hands in their pockets, or otherwise idle.

 

Here's a couple more, with stationmaster anxiously looking at his pocket watch:

 

 

But another, newer, good source is Modelu, whose 3-D printed models are also great.  My only acquisition so far is the shunter shewn below:

 

 

I thought all these figures would be tedious and fiddly to paint.  Well, they were a bit fiddly, but it was actually very enjoyable and relaxing, even to an impatient git like me.

 

You also asked about trees.  On my return to modelling in 2012 I vaguely remembered that back in the 60s and 70s we all used lichen and flock, so I got some.  However, my wife said my first tree looked like a floret of broccoli so it was back to the drawing board.  Then I discovered Woodland Scenics tree armatures, Hob-e-Tack adhesive and their wonderful (if expensive) 'fine leaf foliage'.  Dead easy.

 

John C.

[Oldddudders]

Just another thumbs up for a fine layout, photographed to advantage, too.

 

Having over the years seen magazine spreads and now online threads about a zillion GWR layouts, fatigue ought to have set in. It has not, and this adds another to the quality end of that spectrum.

 

I certainly prefer to first see layouts at an advanced stage, when they serve to inspire. This does so in spades.

[checkrail]

A bit of small prairie action this morning.  They've long been my favourite locos (since a 1960 holiday family holiday in Totnes, during which my 13 year old self sneaked off to the station every night with 5 Senior Service and my ABC).  So first thoughts in 2012 were to build a BLT to practise on ..... but then again, my second favourite locos are the castles......

 

Here's 4555 (at the moment) coming into Stoke Courtenay off the Earlsbridge branch:

 

 

 

And here are a couple of 5555 (at the moment) setting back a pick-up goods into the yard from the down main line:

 

 

 

 

John C.

 

 

 

 

 

[checkrail]

Thanks for all your kind words about Stoke Courtenay.  This being my first layout for 50 years – except for a brief early 1990s dabble with diesels (Hornby & Lima) on code 100 track for my then pre-teenage son – I feel a bit overwhelmed  -  but also a bit of a fraud.

 

I’m not an ace scratchbuilder or highly skilled modeller.  I am ham fisted, impatient and a bit of a bodger.  For example, I’m rubbish at soldering (and as for superglue – what’s super about it? It’s great for sticking components to your fingers, and to your tweezers.  It’s even better at sticking your fingers to your tweezers). And why are my fingers far too big for what I need them to do?  Over four years I’ve left a trail of mangled models and broken bits, while the number of small parts that have fallen from the workbench only to disappear for ever, or catapulted themselves across the loft to vanish without trace, are beyond number - and the bad language beyond all reason or reckoning.  In fact I’m probably temperamentally unsuited to a hobby like this, but I love it so!

 

I have no technical or mechanical nous (I see railways through an aesthetic prism rather than an engineering one), and my knowledge of the prototype is pretty superficial.  My modelling is therefore necessarily impressionistic rather than scrupulously accurate.  In any case, I knew that if I was to complete Stoke Courtenay to the standard to which I aspired in any reasonable time scale my approach would have to be broad brush, using everything the trade could offer.  Fortunately followers of the GWR in 4mm scale are very well catered for in this respect.  Had I been modelling – say – the Glasgow & South Western Railway I’d have had no chance.  

 

What I wanted to prove – to myself, that is - was that one could achieve a ‘finescale’ look (overworked word I know) and a recognisably GW atmosphere -  albeit in a rather generic way – in a shortish timeframe, using commercial items and every short cut possible.  Your comments suggest that I’ve been more successful than I hoped or expected, and if that encouraged other modellers who are as daunted as I was by the things achieved by the experts I’d be very pleased.  My bibles throughout have been Iain Rice’s ‘Railway modelling the realistic way’ (2007) and any albums of pre-war photos of the GWR I could get my hands on (plus the wealth of knowledge and expertise shared here on RMweb of course!).

 

The only exception to this lazy ‘off the peg’ approach has been the track, and I’ll leave that to another post. You’ve read enough quasi-philosophical ramblings for one day.  In the meantime here are a couple of shots of a rather too clean 28xx on returning coal empties.

 

 

 

 

 

John C.

[wigancg]

Hi John,

 

Just read your most recent posting on here and enjoyed reading it. For many of us, you have summed up our feelings nicely. Some of us may be young yet in terms of expert modellers or our skill levels are still developing (come to think of it, nobody ever stops developing their skill levels - all part of being a human and not a machine) but it is the enjoyment and relaxation of the hobby that keeps us fired up (pun intended there!)

 

You have clearly taken a great deal of time, care and attention in your modelling and you can reap your rewards gladly.  

Some modellers do prefer the designing and building aspect compared with having running sessions which isn't a problem at all - to each his own. Whatever aspect it is, it's the enjoyment and relaxation that are the greatest rewards I feel, especially after a long day at work. Nothing better than to disappear back to the good days for a few hours and escape.

 

Anyway, keep the photos coming. Oh, and thank you for your advise on the running in board - it has proven to be most useful!

 

Chris

[Ramblin Rich]

Hello John, what you've termed 'broad brush' is rather good in my mind! There's a real feeling of space, atmosphere & cohesion here, the models are all to similar standards and so all contribute to the whole picture instead of some standing out due to being better than others. Seeing the current pictures gives it an overall feeling of completeness (even if it's not) but I'm sure we would all love to see & read how you achieved it!

Edited July 27, 2016 by Ramblin Rich

[number6]

There are loads of positive things to say about your layout and work and lots of things many of us can learn from it. I really like the clean and uncluttered look. I also agree that its great to see a near complete layout - it can be a bit demoralising gazing over bare plywood and unpainted track all time.

 

Also those of us modelling in 00-SF have their bashers but I have to say its really refreshing to see a layout that effortlessly champions the gauge. Why wouldn't you want 00 track work to look like this?! Of course I dread a later update which you tell of what a nightmare its been?

 

I have a feeling one of its attractions is that many us would love to find something like this on climbing through our own loft hatches?

 

Splendid stuff.

[checkrail]

 

Also those of us modelling in 00-SF have their bashers but I have to say its really refreshing to see a layout that effortlessly champions the gauge. Why wouldn't you want 00 track work to look like this?! Of course I dread a later update which you tell of what a nightmare its been?

 

Many thanks number6.  I put a more detailed post on the 'Handbuilt track & Templot' section yesterday (under 'Why would you choose 00-sf ...'), setting out my reasons for choosing these standards. Experience tells me I made a good choice, so rest assured there'll be no updates saying what a nightmare it was.  Closer to a dream.  I think 00-SF modellers try not to be too evangelistic about it; it's one possible choice among many in the broad church that is railway modelling.  But as you suggest there are some who consider us heretics!

 

But enough of gauge wars.  I'll say a bit more about the track itself in due course.  Meanwhile here are a few more pics.

 

 

The guys chatting on the path seem oblivious to the approaching Hall on a westbound train ....and to the Castle heading an eastbound express.

 

 

Meanwhile 5555 fills up at the water tower (another Bachmann special edition for Kernow Models based on the St Ives tower).

 

 

 

John C.

[The Great Bear]

Great photos. What a lovely layout you have created! The flowing trackwork is superb; targeting your effort on that has paid dividends.

 

Look forward to seeing more

 

All the best

 

Jon

[john flann]

John C, I've just come across your thread, all very nicely and refreshingly done (with good humour too,)  I shall keep looking and wish you well. John.

[Richard Mawer]

After 4 years I've just (almost) finished my layout, a loft-based affair in 4mm scale using 00-SF standards.  So time to take a breather and post a few pics.

 

 

Railway 29 June 1.JPGRailway 29 June 2.JPGRailway 29 June 3.JPGRailway 29 June 4.JPGRailway 29 June 5.JPGRailway 29 June 6.JPG. 

 

Stoke Courtenay represents a small GW junction station in the 1930s, the track layout being based on Brent, south Devon, with a few variations.  If there's any interest, once I return from holiday in a couple of weeks I'll post a bit more info and some more pics.

 

Unlike many retired returnee modellers I have no lifetime's collection of stock, just a rag bag of new and second-hand items, and unbuilt kits, gathered together over the last four years.  I've been exercising a self-denying ordinance on these pending completion of a layout to run them on, so at present they're all more or less as I bought them.  So I look forward to spending the next four years detailing, weathering, kit-building, repainting and general tarting up.

 

I can see I'll also have to investigate some better lighting for layout photography.  A lot to learn there, and indeed in all other areas, having been out of this game for 40+ years until 2012.

 

John C.

John,

 

I've just found your thread. As one 1930s GWR fan to another, I'm impressed with what you've done.

 

Unlike you, I did amass much stock over the years. I am now trying to sort it all out. I had locos that were past their sell by as it were and I have had to upgrade. I also have far too many wagons: hundreds! I obviously forgot what I had, and kept buying. Its only now I have a layout that I find certain items don't run well. So I reckon you've done it the right way.

 

Cheers

 

Rich

[checkrail]

I indicated in a previous post that my usual ‘shortcuts for the unskilled’ approach to modelling had one exception – the track. We all have different interests and priorities.  Most of us have to make some compromises in pursuit of our optimum layout and we all have our sticking points.  Mine was the track. To me trains are just trains but the track is the railway.*

 

I am happy to live with all sorts of anomalies and inaccuracies: top feeds on pre-war pannier tanks, B-set coaches with one guard’s window too many, the odd PO wagon on an unlikely 10ft steel underframe and even – for now – a Centenary rake comprised of only two types of vehicle, but I absolutely had to have fully chaired bullhead pointwork or I wasn’t going to build a model railway.

 

So it was C & L flexi-track for me, along with pointwork from C & L rail and chairs welded to ply sleepers with Butanone.  It was far less difficult than I’d feared, and very rewarding.

 

But even here Mr Shortcut had his way, in that the adoption of 00-SF standards enabled me to use C & L’s pre-fabricated crossing assemblies, saving much time and trouble (and ensuring that there was one less thing to go wrong).

 

Like most of my modellling it’s the impression, the flavour that I’m after, rather than a totally accurate scale replica.  No doubt close examination will reveal my sketchy knowledge of the prototype (I never got round to reading that book about GWR switch and crossing practice!), but on the whole I’m pleased with the results.  

 

* But here are some trains anyway!

[gwrrob]

Absolutely fantastic modelling young man.I like the flavour approach too.

[Andrew P]

This just has to about the best I've seen on here along with ANTB, and a couple more maybe, but one question or comment if I may please, why is no body Driving your Locos?

[dhjgreen]

Just found this thread (hence all the likes) what an inspirational piece of work

[LNER4479]

Just had a look through myself and, notwithstanding regional preferences / bias that my RMWeb name might imply, have to say have thoroughly enjoyed looking at the pictures and reading a little about your splendid creation.

 

If I can say that, as others have intimated, what does it for me is not just the trackwork per se (mighty fine though it is) but the overall atmosphere of a railway in its environment. It all looks so effortless and natural. By that I mean, as well as the trackwork, the ballast, the cess, the embankments / cuttings, the boundary fence and the bridges / tunnels. SO many layouts fail to convince due to lack of attention to these other aspects.

 

You're a lot cleverer than you make out, sir (even if you don't realise it!).

[checkrail]

one question or comment if I may please, why is no body Driving your Locos?

 

Thanks for kind words Andy.  Yes, I realise that at present the footplates of my locos look like the deck of the Mary Celeste!  But while working hard on Phase 1 (building the layout) I've been steadfastly resisting getting sidetracked into messing round with the stock, tempting though it was. 

 

Now it's time to start Phase 2, in which stock will be detailed, repainting done, coach & wagon kits assembled and locos fitted with crews, coal, engraved plates etc. etc.  I hope that means I'm in for an enjoyable couple of years, during which I'll keep posting pics as things progress.

 

(At least in the shots below you can't tell the footplate is deserted!)

 

John C.

 

 

[checkrail]

Continuing with the track theme:

 

 

 

 

One of the aims I set myself with the track was to replicate as faithfully as is possible in 00 gauge the look and proportions of typically British double track with bullhead rail as seen throughout the country, and which has fascinated me since childhood.  There’s something in its appearance and the way it has blended into the landscape that speaks of history and heritage, and while it’s in sight there’s always the implicit promise of a train. 

 

So I needed to establish the largest ruling radius I could for the main line (it’s about 4 feet) then carry out a few experiments to see how close together I could get away with placing the tracks.  (I determined the clearances for the curved platforms at the same time, as I wanted to avoid my passengers having to leap a scale 2 foot gap to get on or off the train!).

 

It turned out that a ‘six foot’ of 27mm, just 3mm over scale, would fit the bill. This had the fortuitous benefit that the 3mm nicely absorbed most of the total by which two adjacent 16.5 gauge tracks are underscale, meaning that the distance from the outer rail of one track to the outer rail of the other was very close to scale. Together with the deliberately underscale 8 foot sleepers of the C & L track I feel they’ve provided the illusion I was after.

 

(Of course, 4 foot radius is way tighter in scale terms than anything on a prototype main line, and 60 foot coaches pass by a hair's breadth.  The Board of Trade would have a fit. But it looks great from above when trains pass so closely!)

 

There is however, a downside!  I guess I’ve ruled out 70 foot coaches, which of course dominated on the main Paddington to west country expresses.  If I ever find the time or develop the skills to build metal coach kits I may live to regret that.  But in the meantime I’m happy with the look of the track.

 

​John C.

 

My layout: STOKE COURTENAY, 1930s GWR junction station.  See layout topic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[dhjgreen]

This is craftsmanship of the first order. No ratings suffice. I have seen very few projects on here that come close. Your track spacing approach is is one of many examples of this.