Popular Post gr.king Posted November 25, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted November 25, 2021 Just a thought... For those who wish to undertake it, the quest for ultimate fidelity / accuracy / authenticity is a good thing, so long as it doesn't lead to all-consuming obsession, neurosis, arrogance, pomposity, or blunt (maybe even frankly offensive) dismissals of the work of others, especially if those others have for instance made their best effort or have openly admitted that they do not themselves seek ultimate fidelity but instead endeavour only to produce an overall impression of reality. I'm sure that even the layouts and rolling stock produced by those modellers who claim that they will not settle for anything that is not "correct" can actually be faulted in one way or another, whether it be dimensional compromise, scenic imperfections, running quality, viewers' ability (or not) to see the all-important trains properly, lack of correct track chairs, details missing from pointwork, colour of the buttons on the scale signalman's jacket, in fact almost anything 7 16 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Sanderson Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 Afternoon everyone, Some may know that I'm about to start a 15x2ft, 4mm Model Railway based on the NER (1958 BR), but I've been struggling to find a real life example that I could be influenced by. But today, I came across Deerness Valley Junction, an ECML diversion near Newcastle. Apart from a Station (which I will superimpose), it's perfect! It should fit just nicely on my 15x2ft Boards (arriving on Saturday). Does anyone have any good reference photos or film from the area? There isn't that much online that I've found, which is surprising for how interesting the area looks. And if anyone could recommend some reference books, I'd much appreciate it Also, can anyone identify the type of signal box? Many thanks everyone Dylan 12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john new Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) On 23/11/2021 at 17:00, cctransuk said: To you and me - and there is no greater wagon addict than I - blasphemy indeed !! Nonetheless, we must accept that there are less enlightened people on the planet - and we would want to be labelled the 'Wagon Taliban' would we?!? John Isherwood. The problem we get is knowledge/lack of same with the subsequent realisation of our errors as knowledge increases. For example I have the SLS named Class 66 [bought for the obvious reason if you see my sig'] and bought some modern wagons for it to haul as at the time I bought them they were on offer and looked right (i.e like pictures and actuals that I remembered). I subsequently found out they are almost the bogie wagons I remember, i.e. a close look a like, but that specific type were all withdrawn a couple of years before 66 957 was named! I am happy to ignore the anomaly, the combo is unlikely to ever be exhibited but even if it is how many will recognise the specific wagon type, and even if yes, when they were withdrawn or the year (2009) the loco was named? I am a long way beyond the diesels on PO wagons howler seen from time to time in exhibition videos but probably wouldn't notice the Flying Talisabethan error as mentioned up thread. Edited November 25, 2021 by john new Typo 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Tony Wright Posted November 25, 2021 Author RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted November 25, 2021 Some interesting thoughts of late. Many thanks for all those posting. I'm not sure quite where I might be on the spectrum of 'obsession'. I try to get things as 'right' as I can, but, as has been highlighted by my engineers' train, its make-up is probably completely wrong. Do I particularly care? No, but I'm 'obsessive' about good running. As visitors to LB will testify, I demand nothing less than 'perfect' running. To accept less, would mean my apologising to my visitors for poor running, which would never do (though I do have to apologise for my operating incompetence). Much of Little Bytham is 'right' because of the team which built it. That said, does it worry me that the fast lines should probably be flat-bottom rail, that the main line depiction is 14" short and that it's 'narrow gauge'? No, but I couldn't tolerate it being much shorter, and have to suffer the resultant, visible right-angle curves at the end to go on/off stage. I have to say that, in my experience, some layout owners/builders seem to live in a 'fool's paradise' when it comes to good running. What they seem to turn a blind eye to, is entirely unacceptable to me. Jerky-operation (that tight spot will go with running-in - no it won't!), trains dividing because of a hopeless mish-mash of couplings and frequent derailments caused by indifferent stock and dodgy trackwork, not to mention poor wiring, are anathema to me. Does that make me 'obsessed'? Perhaps. One thing I try to do is encourage the less-experienced in their model-making. Not by some 'virtual' methodology, but by hands-on tuition, face-to-face. This month, I've had three chaps for tuition/help (sorry I cocked-up yours, Tom) on a one-to-one basis and next weekend I'm the tutor at a loco-building seminar in Leamington (anyone interested, please PM me). Instead of 'looking down noses' (which makes those who do, cross-eyed) perhaps more modellers who 'strive for accuracy' should look at how to help others in a practical way. After all, none of those I've helped, now and in the past, believe that what they'll make will be superior to what they can buy 'off-the-shelf' or have made for them. They just want to be able to say 'I made that', even if they're 'obsessed' about it. 21 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold john new Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 46 minutes ago, Dylan Sanderson said: Afternoon everyone, Some may know that I'm about to start a 15x2ft, 4mm Model Railway based on the NER (1958 BR), but I've been struggling to find a real life example that I could be influenced by. But today, I came across Deerness Valley Junction, an ECML diversion near Newcastle. Apart from a Station (which I will superimpose), it's perfect! It should fit just nicely on my 15x2ft Boards (arriving on Saturday). Does anyone have any good reference photos or film from the area? There isn't that much online that I've found, which is surprising for how interesting the area looks. And if anyone could recommend some reference books, I'd much appreciate it Also, can anyone identify the type of signal box? Many thanks everyone Dylan The sig box in the bottom picture looks like one of the standard NER types but they varied by area. There are plenty of books around with drawings and photos. If you are modelling the N E (ex-NER area) I suggest the publications of the NER Association and joining as a member. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) It's evident from recent posts that, many (most?) of us, know more about some aspects of our chosen prototype railway, than others. It naturally follows that the more we know, the more any errors will grate. Conversely, errors in things we know less about, or which don't "stick out" are unlikely to bother us, unless and until, we learn better. John Edited November 25, 2021 by Dunsignalling 6 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium TrevorP1 Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 25, 2021 13 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: Some interesting thoughts of late. Many thanks for all those posting. I'm not sure quite where I might be on the spectrum of 'obsession'. I try to get things as 'right' as I can, but, as has been highlighted by my engineers' train, its make-up is probably completely wrong. Do I particularly care? No, but I'm 'obsessive' about good running. As visitors to LB will testify, I demand nothing less than 'perfect' running. To accept less, would mean my apologising to my visitors for poor running, which would never do (though I do have to apologise for my operating incompetence). Much of Little Bytham is 'right' because of the team which built it. That said, does it worry me that the fast lines should probably be flat-bottom rail, that the main line depiction is 14" short and that it's 'narrow gauge'? No, but I couldn't tolerate it being much shorter, and have to suffer the resultant, visible right-angle curves at the end to go on/off stage. I have to say that, in my experience, some layout owners/builders seem to live in a 'fool's paradise' when it comes to good running. What they seem to turn a blind eye to, is entirely unacceptable to me. Jerky-operation (that tight spot will go with running-in - no it won't!), trains dividing because of a hopeless mish-mash of couplings and frequent derailments caused by indifferent stock and dodgy trackwork, not to mention poor wiring, are anathema to me. Does that make me 'obsessed'? Perhaps. One thing I try to do is encourage the less-experienced in their model-making. Not by some 'virtual' methodology, but by hands-on tuition, face-to-face. This month, I've had three chaps for tuition/help (sorry I cocked-up yours, Tom) on a one-to-one basis and next weekend I'm the tutor at a loco-building seminar in Leamington (anyone interested, please PM me). Instead of 'looking down noses' (which makes those who do, cross-eyed) perhaps more modellers who 'strive for accuracy' should look at how to help others in a practical way. After all, none of those I've helped, now and in the past, believe that what they'll make will be superior to what they can buy 'off-the-shelf' or have made for them. They just want to be able to say 'I made that', even if they're 'obsessed' about it. It's not for me to say how good or bad my modelling is. Nor how much 'I know' - because I will know more tomorrow I hope. However, the most unrealistic characteristics a model railway can exhibit are trains derailing, erratic running and stock dividing. Those things annoy me intensely even if it's just me playing with my own train set. 5 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post grahame Posted November 25, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: One thing I try to do is encourage the less-experienced in their model-making. Not by some 'virtual' methodology, but by hands-on tuition, face-to-face. This month, I've had three chaps for tuition/help (sorry I cocked-up yours, Tom) on a one-to-one basis and next weekend I'm the tutor at a loco-building seminar in Leamington (anyone interested, please PM me). Instead of 'looking down noses' (which makes those who do, cross-eyed) perhaps more modellers who 'strive for accuracy' should look at how to help others in a practical way. After all, none of those I've helped, now and in the past, believe that what they'll make will be superior to what they can buy 'off-the-shelf' or have made for them. They just want to be able to say 'I made that', even if they're 'obsessed' about it. I'm not in a position, due to not being a consistently good or prolific modeller, of offering tuition, but I'm happy to explain how I've made things, usually through the medium of published articles. I certainly believe that making things, especially those that can't be purchased RTR, offers incentive and the potential for satisfaction. As I summed up in an article of mine just published in DEMU's UPDate magazine (issue #98) about bashing a couple of bogie tank wagons . . . hopefully, the models capture the look and character of the prototype that they are based on. And, probably more importantly, it demonstrates that creative self-reliant modelling can provide acceptable models that are not available either as RTR or as a kit. Plus, it provides fun and enjoyment in undertaking making them and immense pride in being able to say “I built them”. Especially when people ask “where did you get those?” I doubt many on this thread will know what they are but here are the models concerned (they're N/2mm scale): Edited November 25, 2021 by grahame 10 11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Headstock Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: Some interesting thoughts of late. Many thanks for all those posting. I'm not sure quite where I might be on the spectrum of 'obsession'. I try to get things as 'right' as I can, but, as has been highlighted by my engineers' train, its make-up is probably completely wrong. Do I particularly care? No, but I'm 'obsessive' about good running. As visitors to LB will testify, I demand nothing less than 'perfect' running. To accept less, would mean my apologising to my visitors for poor running, which would never do (though I do have to apologise for my operating incompetence). Much of Little Bytham is 'right' because of the team which built it. That said, does it worry me that the fast lines should probably be flat-bottom rail, that the main line depiction is 14" short and that it's 'narrow gauge'? No, but I couldn't tolerate it being much shorter, and have to suffer the resultant, visible right-angle curves at the end to go on/off stage. I have to say that, in my experience, some layout owners/builders seem to live in a 'fool's paradise' when it comes to good running. What they seem to turn a blind eye to, is entirely unacceptable to me. Jerky-operation (that tight spot will go with running-in - no it won't!), trains dividing because of a hopeless mish-mash of couplings and frequent derailments caused by indifferent stock and dodgy trackwork, not to mention poor wiring, are anathema to me. Does that make me 'obsessed'? Perhaps. One thing I try to do is encourage the less-experienced in their model-making. Not by some 'virtual' methodology, but by hands-on tuition, face-to-face. This month, I've had three chaps for tuition/help (sorry I cocked-up yours, Tom) on a one-to-one basis and next weekend I'm the tutor at a loco-building seminar in Leamington (anyone interested, please PM me). Instead of 'looking down noses' (which makes those who do, cross-eyed) perhaps more modellers who 'strive for accuracy' should look at how to help others in a practical way. After all, none of those I've helped, now and in the past, believe that what they'll make will be superior to what they can buy 'off-the-shelf' or have made for them. They just want to be able to say 'I made that', even if they're 'obsessed' about it. Good evening Tony, as has been highlighted by my engineers' train, its make-up is probably completely wrong a slight dumbing down of the message there. What was suggested was that on the iteration of the train in one photograph, there were so many gadgets on the metaphorical swiss army knife, it was impossible to ascertain the job of work the train was supposed to be doing. I will always call you out on the likes of the GWR bogie brake because 1. you are a professional modeler and 2. You are a mega influencer. I don't think I'm being unfair, all in all my criticisms of LB wouldn't fill the fingers of one hand. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drmditch Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) 2 hours ago, Dylan Sanderson said: Afternoon everyone, Some may know that I'm about to start a 15x2ft, 4mm Model Railway based on the NER (1958 BR), but I've been struggling to find a real life example that I could be influenced by. But today, I came across Deerness Valley Junction, an ECML diversion near Newcastle. Apart from a Station (which I will superimpose), it's perfect! It should fit just nicely on my 15x2ft Boards (arriving on Saturday). Does anyone have any good reference photos or film from the area? There isn't that much online that I've found, which is surprising for how interesting the area looks. And if anyone could recommend some reference books, I'd much appreciate it Also, can anyone identify the type of signal box? I live near here, and use the old railway routes now comfortably converted to Paths by Durham County council quite frequently. If you perform a search on Relly Mill Junction, you will find more material. By the way there are variant spellings - Relly/Relley/Deerness/Dearness - just to confuse search engines! It is not 'an ECML Diversion'! It was and is, since 1872, on the ECML itself. There was a post on RMWeb - ...here... There was an article in British Railways Illustrated for March 1996 (Vol.5 No.6) by 'MB'. Pictures are from 1955 to 1963. If you are unable to locate a copy let me know. Several of the pictures are listed as from the Neville Stead collection. I can't place my copy just at present; I was using it in my Railway Room a few months ago and it may have got buried under other projects. Your Diagram, at the bottom left, appears to miss the junction (Bridge House) between the ECML and the Bishop Auckland line. (The latter was the original line here by the way) As others have said, do join NERA. The Signal Box is probably a Northern Division type, although the border between the divisions did change several times. Edited November 25, 2021 by drmditch 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) Guessing can sometimes be productive, even when you get things wrong. Twenty-odd years ago, I was involved with Taunton MRG's Bath Green Park in its early stages, and there were a number of small structures that created confusion as to their exact position or were actually replaced at some date that we hadn't been able to tie down precisely. Solution was make what we knew and put it in one of the known positions, then take the layout to the S&DJR staff reunion on the real station, along with a several note books to record the corrections offered by those who'd been there. There was one hut in the S&D shed yard that seemed prone to frequent alteration and movement. It turned out to have been replaced more than once after catching fire with the new ones relocated to hopefully avoid history repeating itself. Among other things, I also learned that a West Country was only put into No1 road of the Midland shed once; it derailed and it was never done again.... John Edited November 25, 2021 by Dunsignalling 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold zr2498 Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 10 minutes ago, drmditch said: I live near here, and use the old railway routes now comfortably converted to Paths by Durham County council quite frequently. If you perform a search on Relly Mill Junction, you will find more material. By the way there are variant spellings - Relly/Relley/Deerness/Dearness - just to confuse search engines! It is not 'an ECML Diversion'! It was and is, since 1872, on the ECML itself. There was a post on RMWeb - ...here... There was an article in British Railways Illustrated for March 1996 (Vol.5 No.6) by 'MB'. Pictures are from 1955 to 1963. If you are unable to locate a copy let me know. Several of the pictures are listed as from the Neville Stead collection. I can't place my copy just at present; I was using it in my Railway Room a few months ago and it may have got buried under other projects. Your Diagram, at the bottom left, appears to miss the junction (Bridge House) between the ECML and the Bishop Auckland line. (The latter was the original line here by the way) As others have said, do join NERA. The Signal Box is probably a Northern Division type, although the border between the divisions did change several times. This response is exactly why I enjoy railway modelling so much. A request for help and a substantial reply in short time. In my relatively short time in the hobby, I have witnessed thus far more help and support rather than unhelpful criticism. And, thankyou 'grahame' for using the words 'fun and enjoyment' which is what the hobby is about, otherwise what is the point. drmditch - used the link to your NE railway under resconstruction. Excellent stuff and love the bridges. Dave 8 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted November 25, 2021 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 (edited) 15 hours ago, Headstock said: Good evening Tony, as has been highlighted by my engineers' train, its make-up is probably completely wrong a slight dumbing down of the message there. What was suggested was that on the iteration of the train in one photograph, there were so many gadgets on the metaphorical swiss army knife, it was impossible to ascertain the job of work the train was supposed to be doing. I will always call you out on the likes of the GWR bogie brake because 1. you are a professional modeler and 2. You are a mega influencer. I don't think I'm being unfair, all in all my criticisms of LB wouldn't fill the fingers of one hand. Good evening Andrew, I never thought for a minute you were being unfair. Far from it. Unless published images/writings (in any form) are placed under scrutiny, and any mistakes/errors/misleading elements pointed out, then those same mistakes/errors/misleading elements will be perpetuated. As a professional modeller, I assure you that that epithet doesn't mean that I make things accurately. Sometimes? Maybe? A 'mega influencer'? I've never thought of myself as that. In fact, having come across some 'influencers' in the hobby of late via Youtube or TV programmes, I'm glad they weren't around in my formative years and I were at the risk of their influencing me! I'm sure they have their place among the 'youf', but thank God that I had 'influencers' such as Peter Denny, Frank Dyer, David Jenkinson and the recently-deceased Bob Essery, among others. They've left legacies, not pap. All I try and do is help modellers where I can, in the same way I've been helped in the past - by passing on (and I hope this is not too pompous) sound, practical advice. Criticisms should be sought, and acted upon. It's almost as if some criticisms are tantamount to 'swearing in church', and the perpetrators 'cancelled', to use a modern parlance. The likes of Little Bytham, in all its elements, should always be open to critical appraisal. I'd not want it any other way. Regards, Tony. Edited November 26, 2021 by Tony Wright typo error 11 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium MarkC Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 25, 2021 5 hours ago, Dylan Sanderson said: Afternoon everyone, Some may know that I'm about to start a 15x2ft, 4mm Model Railway based on the NER (1958 BR), but I've been struggling to find a real life example that I could be influenced by. But today, I came across Deerness Valley Junction, an ECML diversion near Newcastle. Apart from a Station (which I will superimpose), it's perfect! It should fit just nicely on my 15x2ft Boards (arriving on Saturday). Does anyone have any good reference photos or film from the area? There isn't that much online that I've found, which is surprising for how interesting the area looks. And if anyone could recommend some reference books, I'd much appreciate it Also, can anyone identify the type of signal box? Many thanks everyone Dylan Good luck with this, Dylan. As others have said, join NERA. I see that you've been pointed in the direction of Bob Bage's thread too Mark 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold johndon Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 5 hours ago, Tony Wright said: it does it worry me that the fast lines should probably be flat-bottom rail, Hope you don't mind the question but, given that the track on your scenic section was, as I understand it, hand built, why didn't you go for flat bottom? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 Tongue firmly in cheek, I'd say that it betrays a desire to move the portrayed period back, at least as far as the true LNER pre-WW2 period... 5 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
great central Posted November 25, 2021 Share Posted November 25, 2021 20 minutes ago, johndon said: Hope you don't mind the question but, given that the track on your scenic section was, as I understand it, hand built, why didn't you go for flat bottom? Would it have all been flat bottom in the 1950s? There were some sections of jointed bullhead on the slow lines between Grantham and Peterborough until 4 or 5 years ago, still quite a bit between Grantham and Sleaford on the Skegness branch some of which has been spot resleepered in the last year or two. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold johndon Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 3 minutes ago, great central said: Would it have all been flat bottom in the 1950s? There were some sections of jointed bullhead on the slow lines between Grantham and Peterborough until 4 or 5 years ago, still quite a bit between Grantham and Sleaford on the Skegness branch some of which has been spot resleepered in the last year or two. I don't know, I inferred from Tony's post that it should be... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted November 25, 2021 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 2 hours ago, johndon said: Hope you don't mind the question but, given that the track on your scenic section was, as I understand it, hand built, why didn't you go for flat bottom? Good evening John, The pointwork/crossings on the scenic section of LB was hand-built from C&L components (by Norman Solomon, brilliantly), but the plain track is SMP. At the time (maybe even now), 'scale' flat-bottom rail in OO was not available ready-made. To have made it (as was done on Stoke Summit's fast lines and on parts of Charwelton would have been too time-consuming and/or prohibitively-expensive. I live with the anomaly. Regards, Tony. 3 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted November 25, 2021 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 25, 2021 1 hour ago, great central said: Would it have all been flat bottom in the 1950s? There were some sections of jointed bullhead on the slow lines between Grantham and Peterborough until 4 or 5 years ago, still quite a bit between Grantham and Sleaford on the Skegness branch some of which has been spot resleepered in the last year or two. From photographic evidence (though not conclusive), it would appear that most of the fast lines at LB would have been flat-bottom by the summer of 1958. The slows and sidings, definitely bullhead. Regards, Tony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium CF MRC Posted November 25, 2021 RMweb Premium Share Posted November 25, 2021 Some interesting recent posts about making. Passing on skills to others is something that is really important for the continuation of the hobby. It is certainly something that I enjoy doing - it’s also the day job in a slightly different context. If someone is keen and intelligent then they will learn how to use their hands for fine work; practical courses such as at Missenden Abbey are invaluable for this. But are we all experts on everything? - of course not. The beauty of the hobby is that you can pick up on the bits that appeal to you: the history, artistry and the engineering are what get me out of bed. As for the other bits, we all have blind spots, or perhaps have jolly good friends who can help. Tim 9 7 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted November 26, 2021 RMweb Gold Share Posted November 26, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tony Wright said: From photographic evidence (though not conclusive), it would appear that most of the fast lines at LB would have been flat-bottom by the summer of 1958. The slows and sidings, definitely bullhead. Regards, Tony. There were substantial amounts of flat bottom rail being installed in various parts of the country in the late 1950s. There was quite a bit, with some miles of it in long-welded form, on the SR West-of-England main line west of Sherborne (later Wilton) that was transferred to WR control at the end of 1962. When much of that line was singled a few years later, it was replaced with jointed track from lifted sections, and the welded FB re-used in the upgrading of the "Berks and Hants" route between Reading and Taunton. John Edited November 26, 2021 by Dunsignalling 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Wright Posted November 26, 2021 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted November 26, 2021 9 hours ago, CF MRC said: Some interesting recent posts about making. Passing on skills to others is something that is really important for the continuation of the hobby. It is certainly something that I enjoy doing - it’s also the day job in a slightly different context. If someone is keen and intelligent then they will learn how to use their hands for fine work; practical courses such as at Missenden Abbey are invaluable for this. But are we all experts on everything? - of course not. The beauty of the hobby is that you can pick up on the bits that appeal to you: the history, artistry and the engineering are what get me out of bed. As for the other bits, we all have blind spots, or perhaps have jolly good friends who can help. Tim Good morning Tim, A wise post, as always. Your point about having jolly good friends who can help is the reason why any model-making I've been involved with which has 'merit' is because I've worked with a group. For instance, when the Stoke Summit team sat down to discuss its building, the discussion went along the lines of 'Wrighty, you'll build most of the locos and a lot of the passenger rolling stock, along with helping with the wiring, track-laying, ballasting and scenery'. Baseboards, track-making, signals, civil engineering, architecture (not that there was much of that), the production of freight stock, making the control panels and making trees were left to others. It was a similar situation when Charwelton was built. Regards, Tony. 4 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Popular Post Tony Wright Posted November 26, 2021 Author RMweb Gold Popular Post Share Posted November 26, 2021 12 hours ago, gr.king said: Tongue firmly in cheek, I'd say that it betrays a desire to move the portrayed period back, at least as far as the true LNER pre-WW2 period... As we did over three years ago now, Graeme? Even down to Graham making those somersault signals. What a great weekend that was! What these images also show is how much more work has been completed on LB since 2018. Regards, Tony. 45 1 2 3 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Sanderson Posted November 26, 2021 Share Posted November 26, 2021 17 hours ago, drmditch said: I live near here, and use the old railway routes now comfortably converted to Paths by Durham County council quite frequently. If you perform a search on Relly Mill Junction, you will find more material. By the way there are variant spellings - Relly/Relley/Deerness/Dearness - just to confuse search engines! It is not 'an ECML Diversion'! It was and is, since 1872, on the ECML itself. There was a post on RMWeb - ...here... There was an article in British Railways Illustrated for March 1996 (Vol.5 No.6) by 'MB'. Pictures are from 1955 to 1963. If you are unable to locate a copy let me know. Several of the pictures are listed as from the Neville Stead collection. I can't place my copy just at present; I was using it in my Railway Room a few months ago and it may have got buried under other projects. Your Diagram, at the bottom left, appears to miss the junction (Bridge House) between the ECML and the Bishop Auckland line. (The latter was the original line here by the way) As others have said, do join NERA. The Signal Box is probably a Northern Division type, although the border between the divisions did change several times. Many thanks for the info, @drmditch! I presumed Deerness was a diversion because a few photos I've found of 'top links' working the area say they're diverting due to line blockage at Ferryhill. Everyday's a school day! I've found a copy of the March 1996 issue of BR Illustrated on eBay for the pricey sum of £3 on eBay, so if you think it's worth it, I'll invest! The track diagram is dated 10th June 1901, which might be why the Bridge House junction is missing? Thanks for the info on the Signal Box, is it the same type as Haydon Bridge? They look fairly similar to my untrained eye! Many thanks for your help, Dylan 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now