Annie's Virtual Pre-Grouping, Grouping and BR Layouts & Workbench

[Edwardian]

Locus in quo...

 

[Annie]

56 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

Locus in quo...

 

Ely Cathedral, - the Ship of the Fens.  Magnificent.

[Annie]

Digging down into the stacks of junk in my bedroom and I've just found a huge quantity of Triang series 3 track.  I think I had plans to do something with On16.5  at one time and the track was for sale for cheap and it suited my coarse scale brain.  I still have a much treasured early Triang 'Jinty' with the old style couplings and solid marzac wheels as well as various later Triang goods wagons of varying vintages, - so I think I'll carefully box them up together and a small shunting plank might happen.

There seems to be a lot of random plastic kitbash fodder hoarded away as well, - so I think I'll just give that the toss.  I don't really like working with plastic all that much since glue and solvent fumes make me feel ill.

 

[Annie]

Don't judge me.  I've just purchased an 00 Metcalfe Signal box kit and interior kit.  The idea of a small shunting plank/minor BLT appeals to me and I prefer to work in cardboard and/or wood so a die cut cardboard kit seems like the kind of thing I could safely put together and make a nice job of without accidentally cutting myself.

 

[Annie]

Could be fun.  The late Ian Rice seems to have got it to fit into eight feet of length.  I wouldn't be wanting to make an exact model of Bishop's Castle, - it's more about the track plan ticking all the right boxes.

 

[Edwardian]

5 hours ago, Annie said:

Ely Cathedral, - the Ship of the Fens.  Magnificent.

 

The view chosen not merely because the angle of view is fairly similar and because it shows the relationship of the railway to the cathedral, but because one may also glimpse, to the right in the mid-ground,  the white-painted inn seen in your illustration. This is the Cutter Inn, which is still there!

 

 

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, Annie said:

Could be fun.  The late Ian Rice seems to have got it to fit into eight feet of length.  I wouldn't be wanting to make an exact model of Bishop's Castle, - it's more about the track plan ticking all the right boxes.

 

 

Given your kit is of a NER 'box, perhaps Barnard's Castle or Bishop's Auckland!

 

The latter not inappropriate for a NZ layout!

 

Auckland Castle?

 

 

 

 

[Annie]

4 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

The view chosen not merely because the angle of view is fairly similar and because it shows the relationship of the railway to the cathedral, but because one may also glimpse, to the right in the mid-ground,  the white-painted inn seen in your illustration. This is the Cutter Inn, which is still there!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Given your kit is of a NER 'box, perhaps Barnard's Castle or Bishop's Auckland!

 

The latter not inappropriate for a NZ layout!

 

Auckland Castle?

 

 

 

 

Thanks for the additional information about the view shown in the painting James and also for the photos of the fine old inn.

 

Gosh I never saw a nice old building like that around the Auckland we've got here in NZ.  In actual fact Auckland here is more like Venice since a heavy rainstorm this weekend flooded the place again.

 

It's the trackplan for Bishop's Castle that I'm interested in and want to adapt rather than making an actual model of Bishop's Castle.  The brick signal box appealed both as a nice sized project for me to start off model-making again with and also because it would suit a minor sort of ex-NER branch line terminus.  Metcalfe have a brick goods shed and a brick country station that seem to be of an NER kind of matching style so I'll most probably pick those up as I go along as well.

 

It's just as well that I've got plenty of old model railway stuff hoarded away as I've just had a look at some of the prices that are being asked for 00 RTR locos and rolling stock these days.

Edited May 10, 2023 by Annie
can't spell for toffee

[Schooner]

11 hours ago, Annie said:

Don't judge me.

How else can we award you dix points?!

 

Sounds like a capital idea, much enthused on your behalf!

[Northroader]

Does the “upper Thames” go as far as Ely? Just asking.

[Compound2632]

22 minutes ago, Northroader said:

Does the “upper Thames” go as far as Ely? Just asking.

 

The primordial Thames did, several ice ages ago, before it breached the Goring Gap. 

[Annie]

I can purchase a 1980mm x 660mm x 35mm (78in x 26in x 1.4in) MDF primed surface panel door for $NZ61.00.

For some reason they are also available at 34 inches wide, 28 inches wide and 18 inches wide for the same money.   I've already got a 36in wide one I built a Lego railway on some time ago, but it would be too wide to handle for a 00 layout.  18 inches could be a bit too narrow so I might go for the 26 inch wide one.  Looks to me like I might have found my baseboard.  😁

[Annie]

8 hours ago, Schooner said:

How else can we award you dix points?!

 

Sounds like a capital idea, much enthused on your behalf!

Thanks Schooner.  Building 40 mile long virtual slices of imaginary Norfolk is all very well, but even after all this time I still miss the joy of prodding about a small and sulky loco and a bunch of wagons on metal trackwork attached to a wooden baseboard.  I'm still tending to look at old Triang stuff since that's wot I started out with when I was about 14 or so. 

I can't believe the prices they are asking for RTR stuff these days $NZ 534.00 for a J72 with DCC magic stuff fitted.  I've purchased cars and motorbikes that cost less than that; - Ok it might have been a while ago, but all the same it seems a bit much to me.  It's a pity I'm not allowed to use a soldering iron or a mini gas torch anymore or I'd just make my blinking own.

 

 

[Schooner]

3 hours ago, Annie said:

1980mm x 660mm x 35mm

 

Bigger by some margin than my 'finescale' O baseboard...just saying...

 

:)

Edited May 11, 2023 by Schooner

[Annie]

2 hours ago, Schooner said:

Bigger by some margin than my 'finescale' O layout...just saying...

 

:)

Could be a wee bit long, but it will fit where I want it to go Ok.  Should give me enough space for a fiddle yard or cassettes if I really want to get clever.

 

The first Triang trainset I ever had was a second hand lot of Triang 'Transcontinental' stuff and a pile of that old grey based track.  Once I started reading old back copies of RM I got for cheap from the local stationery shop I decided that I wanted a proper layout.  Dad got me the side of a plywood packing case from his work and I set to and stripped all the steel rails out of that old grey based Triang track.  I cut dozens of card sleepers and laid them down on my new layout board and glued the liberated Triang rail down in place.  Armed with a Junior hacksaw, a small vice and a file along with an electric soldering iron I purchased from the local second hand emporium I set to and started to build my own points.

 

Considering everything was measured with an ordinary ruler including the track gauge the amazing thing was it all worked, - including the single slip I made!  I think the old coarse Triang wheel standards had a lot to do with that though. 

Utterly fearless I went on to make a lever frame using Triang rail to make the levers and an offcut of thick aluminium sheet that Dad said I could have.  Under the layout board it all worked via stout string running over brass pulleys salvaged from old venetian blinds with longish lengths of straight spring steel wire with one end screwed down to the baseboard acting as return springs.

 

A turntable made of plywood and bits of copper for the engine shed came next, but I got the pivot a bit wonky so care was needed using it to avoid derailments.  If that wasn't enough I was busy churning out cardboard buildings made from drawings in Railway Modeller as well.  Considering that I had far more enthusiasm than actual real skill it didn't turn out all that bad really.  If I could go back and collect up my 15 year old self and bring her here she'd have my entire new layout built, done and dusted inside a week.

 

Not having much money and exposure to 1950s railway magazines full of post-war scratchbuilding how-tos had a lot to do with me learning how to make things for my model railways from basic materials.  The cheap availability of old Triang stuff helped things along too.  Looking at the price of stuff in the shops now makes me wonder how any young person makes a start in the hobby these days.

Edited May 11, 2023 by Annie
Um.........

[Northroader]

Annie, just looking at your latest venture, in actual tactile modelling, have you picked up on this thread, which gives ideas on very similar practices:

 

 

[Edwardian]

Something like the famed Berrow Branch, I wonder?

 

I always liked this layout, from my father's '50s RMs.

 

Berrow itself was a masterpiece in planning, while East Brent even simpler.

 

 

Returning to your wonderful picture at Ely, which has the glowing warmth of a Railway Series illustration, Clauds had a horribly complicated history, and one is almost driven by necessity to learn LNER classifications to deal with them.

 

GER classes became known by the order number of the first batch to the design. Thus the original round-top firebox Clauds are known as S46 Class as S46 was the original order number, though S46 order related to the first Claud, No.1900, and the subsequent 'class' S46s were built to several successive orders, L47, M51, F53 and L55.

 

I am going to guess that this a D56 (LNER D15), that is one of the Clauds out-shopped with belpaire boxes from 1903, rather than a conversion of a round-topped S46 (LNER D14), which did not begin to be retro-fitted with belpaire boilers until 1915 (LNER D15/1), though the RCTS volume from which I am deriving this information has the Clauds out-shopped in blue until the end of the Great War, in which case it could be one of the 1890 or 1880s numbered S46 Class in rebuilt form.   

 

Of the D56s, Nos. 1850-59, i.e. those actually built to order D56, were built 1903-1904, however, if one of these, I believe they were oil-fired, with the last of them converted to coal by 1911.   The picture does not show an oil-fired loco.

 

Next came Nos. 1840-49 (order G61) in 1906-7, but the third number on the buffer beam does not look like a 4 to me.

 

It does not look much like a 0, 1, 2 or a 3, either, Nos. 1830-39 (A64), 1820-29 (B66), 1810-1819 (D67) and 1800-1809 (P67) built across 1908-1910, after which the loco numbers start with 17.

 

All of which proves merely that Clauds are complicated and I struggle with them!

 

 

 

[Annie]

2 hours ago, Northroader said:

Annie, just looking at your latest venture, in actual tactile modelling, have you picked up on this thread, which gives ideas on very similar practices:

 

 

Thanks very much, - I shall take a look at that.

I haven't given up on digital modelling it's simply that I've realised that I've been missing the tactile feeling of handling and making models.

 

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

Something like the famed Berrow Branch, I wonder?

 

I always liked this layout, from my father's '50s RMs.

 

Berrow itself was a masterpiece in planning, while East Brent even simpler.

 

Thanks very much James.  One of the advantages of having a digital subscription to RM is having access to the RM archives.  I've found the  September 1958 issue and I'm going to take a copy of the Berrow Branch's three pages.  It's very much the kind of RM article that was an influence when I was a teenager.

 

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

Returning to your wonderful picture at Ely, which has the glowing warmth of a Railway Series illustration, Clauds had a horribly complicated history, and one is almost driven by necessity to learn LNER classifications to deal with them.

Yes it really is a wonderful painting and when i saw it I knew I had to take a copy an post it here.

Thanks for your notes on the Clauds.  They were a little too late for my original Norfolk layout, but would find a place on the version of the layout I have in TRS22 which is meant to be from the immediate pre-war years.  I have the reskinned 'Claud' Ed Heaps did some time ago and recently refreshed so perhaps it's time for me to take it out of my digital trainset box and give it a run about.

 

I hear what you are saying about using the LNER classifications for GER engines.  It always annoys me when people do it and when they are members of the GER Society it annoys me even more.  However when faced with the Clauds and trying to identify them I can understand the need to resort to it.

 

 

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Annie said:

Thanks very much, - I shall take a look at that.

I haven't given up on digital modelling it's simply that I've realised that I've been missing the tactile feeling of handling and making models.

 

Thanks very much James.  One of the advantages of having a digital subscription to RM is having access to the RM archives.  I've found the  September 1958 issue and I'm going to take a copy of the Berrow Branch's three pages.  It's very much the kind of RM article that was an influence when I was a teenager.

 

 

In terms of footprint and trackage, plus a good scenic setting, the Berrow Branch packs a lot of bang for the buck. Sort of the opposite of CA, but a truly successful example of the essence of a model railway layout. 

 

Images stolen from the interweb:

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Annie said:

 

Yes it really is a wonderful painting and when i saw it I knew I had to take a copy an post it here.

Thanks for your notes on the Clauds.  They were a little too late for my original Norfolk layout, but would find a place on the version of the layout I have in TRS22 which is meant to be from the immediate pre-war years.  I have the reskinned 'Claud' Ed Heaps did some time ago and recently refreshed so perhaps it's time for me to take it out of my digital trainset box and give it a run about.

 

I hear what you are saying about using the LNER classifications for GER engines.  It always annoys me when people do it and when they are members of the GER Society it annoys me even more.  However when faced with the Clauds and trying to identify them I can understand the need to resort to it.

 

 

 

It's only really the LNER classifications that distinguish the rebuilds in the case of the Clauds. 

 

But, yes, the assumption that one speaks LNER and the insistence on using these terms is irksome. I know, for instance, what a NER C1 is, versus a P or a P1, or a Class 59, but remembering which one is which of the damned 'J' is something I constantly struggle with! On the GER, the inability of some people to articulate the terms Y14 or T26 annoys me greatly!

 

Returning the Clauds, for CA (1905) there would be a nice choice between an unrebuilt round-top S46 and a belpaire oil-burning D56. 

 

[Annie]

43 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

In terms of footprint and trackage, plus a good scenic setting, the Berrow Branch packs a lot of bang for the buck. Sort of the opposite of CA, but a truly successful example of the essence of a model railway layout. 

Berrow is a real classic in every sense of the word.  RM visited Berrow three times in all and I've made copies of the articles from the RM digital archive for further study.  Some extreme cleaning up and moving things around will have to happen before I can start work, but I can do that while I'm saving my pocket money to buy the baseboards.

 

51 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

It's only really the LNER classifications that distinguish the rebuilds in the case of the Clauds. 

True enough in this circumstance.

 

52 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

But, yes, the assumption that one speaks LNER and the insistence on using these terms is irksome. I know, for instance, what a NER C1 is, versus a P or a P1, or a Class 59, but remembering which one is which of the damned 'J' is something I constantly struggle with! On the GER, the inability of some people to articulate the terms Y14 or T26 annoys me greatly!

Yes!  I have a lovely collection of NER 0-6-0 engines from Paulz Trainz, but with the LNER clustering them all under the letter 'J' it's just plain downright annoying trying to figure out what they're on about.  And I completely agree about folk calling a Y14 a 'J' whatever and bundling them in with everything else from the NBR, NER and GCR.

 

1 hour ago, Edwardian said:

Returning the Clauds, for CA (1905) there would be a nice choice between an unrebuilt round-top S46 and a belpaire oil-burning D56. 

Now that would be very nice indeed James.  With my own little Norfolk empire I assumed that the brand new Clauds would not have gone anywhere near my odd collection of railways.  Though by the time of my later period TRS22 layout GER engines have been moving in and replacing many of the Affiliated (Imaginary) Railway Companies engines so it's a little more likely to see a 'Claud' racing by on the joint line, or even running into Moxbury.

[Edwardian]

6 hours ago, Annie said:

Now that would be very nice indeed James.  With my own little Norfolk empire I assumed that the brand new Clauds would not have gone anywhere near my odd collection of railways.  Though by the time of my later period TRS22 layout GER engines have been moving in and replacing many of the Affiliated (Imaginary) Railway Companies engines so it's a little more likely to see a 'Claud' racing by on the joint line, or even running into Moxbury.

 

There is no real need for a Claud on CA; there are other locos that I would choose first for an ex-Liverpool Street express to Birchoverham-Next-the-Sea. These would be the T19 (or, even, a Humpty Dumpty), and singles P43 and D27. Frankly, though, I suspect a T26 would be more than adequate for the run along WNR metals with 6 or 7 6-wheelers. 

 

Only if I featured the GER Royal Train would a Claud be essential, one of the Royal Clauds, because by 1905 they would have superseded the T19s on that duty. 

 

I can have a Claud on an London express, however, and that is a comforting thought! 

 

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Edwardian
Spelling!

[Annie]

3 hours ago, Edwardian said:

I can have a Claud on an London express, however, and that is a comforting thought! 

It is indeed james.  I have sometimes played the 'diversion-over-the-joint-line-due-to-track-maintenance' card before now when I want to run something a bit more posh than usual.

[Annie]

I have found a box marked 'Gn15' in felt tipped pen and when I opened it I was surprised to find the chassis for two small H0 0-4-0s, a 'Smoky Joe' chassis and a old type 'Jinty' chassis.  There seems to be a couple of dismantled mechs for small H0 diesels as well.  I even found a wooden 4 wheeled flat wagon with small 'G' scale link and pin couplings built over an old diecast Triang wagon underframe which was very typical of the wooden models I was making a few years ago now.  There were more wagon underframes in the box along with a collection of wagon wheels.

 

In the months before I developed narcolepsy and had to give up scratchbuilding I had been starting to explore very small 'G' scale modelling on 15 inch gauge track and this lot was plainly the raw materials for me to use to make my models.  The nice thing is that most of it will be perfectly fine for me to bash a few 00 gauge models from.  To my great amusement I found that I even had the mech for a small Triang-Hornby clockwork engine in the box, - I have no idea what I was going to do with that!

 

My immune system not liking solvent and plastic glues very much was one of the reasons why I started working in card and wood and I'm sure it would work out just fine for my present project.

I used plywood and stripwood to build the greater part of this much treasured old 'S' scale open wagon of mine I've shown to you before so I'm sure that the same methods would be fine for 00.

 

 

I'm very much reminded of Jim Read and his work with building cardboard engines and rolling stock.

https://ogaugemicro.blogspot.com/p/pdfs.html

All of Jim Read's photos were done away with in the Great Photo Mess Up, but I did find this video on Youtube.

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Annie
Um.........

[Tom Burnham]

On 09/05/2023 at 21:38, Annie said:

 

And now!  A Morning Cheer Up Painting:  It's been too long since I showed the blue around here.

 

Do you know who painted it, please?  It has something of a C Hamilton Ellis look, but I wonder if the background isn't a bit too accurate for him.  And it lacks a couple of young rustics by a wicket gate in the left foreground...

[Annie]

My Metcalfe signal box kit has arrived, - only I can't believe how small it is.  I guess the reason for that is because I was working in 'O' and 1/16th scale when I last did any tactile railway modelling.  I suppose I'll get used to it, - at least I didn't choose 'N' to get back into railway modelling.

The signal box is based on the one at Goathland apparently.  And yes I did go and have a look at it on a OS map and Googled some pictures.

 

7 minutes ago, Tom Burnham said:

Do you know who painted it, please?  It has something of a C Hamilton Ellis look, but I wonder if the background isn't a bit too accurate for him.  And it lacks a couple of young rustics by a wicket gate in the left foreground...

I did try to do a search to find out who the artist was Tom, but I didn't have any luck unfortunately.

[Schooner]

15 hours ago, Annie said:

only I can't believe how small it is.

It's not what you've got, dear Annie, it's what you do with it that counts...

 

...and

of course!

 

On no more serious a note, this is the true reason I walked away from Ally Pally with a lump of O in my bag: I spent the first half hour of the show amazed by how many 3mm layouts were present before the penny dropped. Being so used to seeing 00 in front of my face or in photographs I couldn't believe how small it was at only a few feet distant, and resolved there and then to have a go at 7mm. Then the little red menace ambushed me and the rest, as they say, was surprisingly expensive...