Adam

Non-stop on the through lines (as it was from Salisbury to Exeter). NB, taking an HST round those curves at 90 would be around double the speed limit, good though it might look (not that they were strangers to the area on diversion). Adam

That isn't accurate - or at least, not completely so - the relevant legislation is noted here: https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/legislation/other-archival-legislation/local-government-acts/ Local Authorities have a statutory responsibility to archive certain types of documentation relating to their own activities and archival arrangements are part of the process of establishment of all new local authorities (including the various unitary authorities established this week, it's a major citation headache for a book we have ready for typesetting). Collections not created by local authorities have slightly different status, particularly with regard to access and the nature of custodianship (they may be given, or placed in safe keeping under various arrangements - there's massive variation in the nature of those arrangements, some more logical than others). And there are, now, very, very clear standards for deaccessioning collections. So what I would say is that any body with materials vested in a local authority archive makes the paperwork on the status of that material securely stored and keeps their contact details up to date. The difficulty, in London boroughs in particular (as one of my PhD students is finding), and this is very pronounced, is accessibility, particularly opening times, and this comes around again and again with each review of local government spending (there are various approaches to getting around this - mostly by founding a trust that can provide local archival services on a commercial basis). I've written about this problem before, as part of - successful as it goes - opposition to cuts in Northants, and my view has not changed: https://blog.history.ac.uk/2017/07/access-to-archives/. Adam

Coming to this as someone lucky enough to be salaried in historical research, I can only empathise with all parties. It's not impossible, but is is a big challenge. This is a problem across the archive sector - there's simply no money for the business of archiving and the skills needed are massively under-rewarded: training requirements are substantial, wages are appalling - the Science Museum Group is well-known for being a poor payer, too even by these standards. The Head of Research at York is someone I know (along with others in his team) and he (and they) are well aware of the issues. The NRM has a large scale problem, borne of erratic acquisitions policies (or just saying 'yes' to everything for a long period if you like). As an accredited archive, with the requirement to do things a certain way to retain that accreditation, especially as that comes with statuary elements, coupled with extremely limited resources, complex collections at locations across the country, and big buildings full of stuff about which people feel very strongly. Funders to facilitate a proper volunteer liaison cataloguing programme are very, very few (The British Records Association, the Business Archives Council, some grants via the National Archives, a scattering of charitable trusts) and generally only attracted to limited scope, specific collection material (Ruston & Hornsby at the Lincolnshire Record Office, Dowty and GRC&W Co. at Gloucestershire Archives, Thomas Cook at Leicestershire and Rutland, and so on). As someone who works in the wider field, it has to be said that the general reputation of railway researchers for citing their sources in a way that's useful to researchers is poor, though it is improving and that - while unfair, perhaps - does not help (it isn't for want of enthusiasts in the archival sector, either!). Show the NRM the money - and we're talking six figures for project-based, multi-year work - and then it would be a different conversation. That they have no process for accepting the work of others is something that could be done, and probably should, but again, that costs staff time and with that, money. I might, but it's not my budget or my collections. Adam

I didn't know that was the answer, but it turns out that you're right (well, wood or iron, which accounts for the gasholder): https://maps.nls.uk/os/25inch-england-and-wales/info2.html#colouring. Something to add next time I do a thing on using OS maps in historical research. Adam

I have several of these chassis, so know what you mean. I found that the holes were a good fit on the wire so there was no need to open them out. There could be examples which were a touch under-etched (it happens, etching can be variable), but again, that's where the tip of a broach has served me well, just enough to press out or remove the cusp. In any event, though I have broken fine tapered broaches over the years, they break less readily than the drills. Adam

There really is little need for a 0.35mm drill for that purpose - they go ping far too readily - and I never use them to open out etched holes. What I do instead is (where material thickness allows) to drill holes out to 0.5mm, which allows space for solder in the joint, or where that isn't possible, to open the hole out with the tip of a cutting broach. By the way, the cheapest source of perfectly reasonable 0.5 mm drills is in the packs of 10 HSS drills that Draper Tools sell (about 3 quid a go from multiple online sources). I think I've had one blunt drill out of about 10 packs, and they last well. Adam

Hi Mike - yes, it's off a BD type container from above the end doors: https://zenfolio.page.link/ntCNN I reckon it's from a dia. 3/052 (going on the number, probably Lot 2213 built at Eastleigh in 1952) as BD 5531B shown in this Paul Bartlett picture: https://zenfolio.page.link/eY9K6 Adam

Essery says Melton renumbered it (and now the three-year-old is having lunch), a more detailed look at Essery states that 058 was brown - there's a nice picture of a shiny 058 in 1936 on p. 120 of his book and that seems convincing). Adam PS - I have a copy of Clark's book, too and, in an indicative error, on p. 89, has two Derby-built J41s as 'DA' (the Doncaster J3 or J4s)... It's a very pretty book though, and has some useful images and there are *dozens* available for pennies.

I've been thinking about producing a J41 for a bit (because I happen to have an affection for the M&GN - mum was brought up on the route), I have Essery's book on M&GNJR locos and that shows the following: 1. Two locos (62 and 69 in 1906 and 1909 respectively) had H boilers for a spell, before receiving Midland G7 boilers (along with nos 68 and 71) in the early '20s. In the latter condition they also had new cabs which made them look much like a 3F with an extended smokebox - which is basically what they were. 2. Post the 1936 takeover, thorough repairs and repaints seem to have been at Stratford (there's lots of images of M&GN locos of various kinds on both sides of that process and this image (linked from: https://transportsofdelight.smugmug.com/RAILWAYS/MIDLAND-GREAT-NORTHERN-JOINT-RAILWAY/MIDLAND-GREAT-NORTHERN-JOINT-RAILWAY/i-HTkgS5z/A) shows that 071 at least was lined. The 4-4-0s certainly all were as was 058 which was well-photographed - the 0 prefix was an LNER thing, but yes, the last M&GN loco livery was brown, lined yellow, but 058 seems to have had the earlier branding applied to the tender. It wasn't alone. Adam

I have a snap of the article somewhere but obviously, it wouldn't be within copyright to share it here. The wagon I built is here, and was copied directly from that picture, including the Dowty buffers. HTH Adam PS - I've reinstated the photos for those posts and a few around them (everyone else in the house is ill today).

Magnificent (not as magnificent as the reworked wheels for the Rectank which are mind blowing), but the Catfish was basically a welded version of a Leeds Forge design built by Met Camm for the LMS and branded Herring by BR, as the Dogfish was. The SECR commissioned the originals in two batches and the LNER had a few (branded Trout); they were, basically, a catalogue product so BR didn't have to think too hard. These things are fiddly in 4mm, never mind the smaller scale. Chapeau! Adam

Which they also do in 4mm! Adam

I've done one of those! Not, admittedly, a BR one - I wanted something that wasn't the usual Ruston and this fitted the bill. Adam PS - it's one of my better efforts, most of it took me a couple of weeks and it's a truly excellent runner. There's a thread, but no pictures - might have to do something about that:

A truly local factor - Bradfords had (have) their head office in Yeovil, but had offices/depots across the area including Lyme, I think. There was certainly a depot at Seaton, for example. Certainly some freight went to Lyme in mixed trains. See these two from the amazing collection of Roger Joanes on Flickr:

Thanks, Stephen - LMS wagon numbering is the bane of modellers' lives: none of this blocks and sequences nonsense from Derby! There's a Midland van for this train as well. Adam

Following consultation with photos a few more minor details. The usual door chains (twisted wire), spring stops (I used an etch from Rumney Models, but there are dozens of ways of doing these) and some extra strapping on the doors. Now it's ready for paint. Adam

Yes, I'm quite impressed. I'll be finishing this one in LMS condition (rather than BR, a small train of pre-Nationalisation wagons is the aim), but the LMS rang a few changes to the LNWR original: So we have LMS (RCH pattern) owner's plates, 'modern' label clips and a horse hook. I've run out of primer so I'll have to wait to complete it, but you really could do one of these in 24 hours. Adam

And now, something completely different (well, for me), part of a programme of unfitted open construction. This, from Bill Bedford's Mousa Models is an LNWR dia. 84, quite a common form of open high that lasted into the '50s in reasonable numbers. Below is what turns up in the box. A big bit: A complete body and underframe (there's a separate floor), all square and nicely defined. The resin is extremely robust so I've no concerns about the brakegear or levers lasting in traffic. Among the innovative features are 3D printed springing units which work very well, on trials (the principle is exactly that used in Bill's etched W irons: a bearing carrier slides inside the W-iron on a guitar wire spring. The only difference is that the spring (an 'L' shape) is mounted into a hole and a bracket rather than fixed the the bearing carrier). There are also printed sprung buffers, and couplings. I did trial assemble a buffer, and the concept works, but since I had some metal heads and springs in stock and the printed heads are a little chunky, I have substituted these. The couplings are workable - I've seen versions on Bill's stand over the years, but they are scale and my standard is a bit bigger to make them workable for my hands and eyes so I used these instead (no slight is intended, I'm fairly sure that they'd survive well in use). Note the buffer assembly jig - very clever, and it works. Anyway, here it is after a bit of cleaning up and a waft of primer (note that I had to replace the door spring plate on one side so that it lined up with the spring - I suspect a copying error here - a scrape with the scalpel and scrap of 5 thou' tacked on with cyano'. I was surprised how the striations visible before hand are not too apparent. All quite promising, I think. Adam

Adrian was an exceptionally good pattern-maker and caster (and very, very well-versed in the real railway). Declaring an interest dad knew him from the early '70s until Adrian's death and I knew him for probably 30 years, too. Did I think the way he expressed himself was always proportionate? No, and I did tell him so - but that was the nature of the man: a productive perfectionist. I'm not sure web forums were really his ideal form of communication; he was gentler in person but always of the view it took the same amount of effort to get things right as wrong (not that the 1666 in question makes that point well). Perhaps his manner, and a drift away from cast metal as a medium speak against the kits in some minds. Not for me to say. Turning to the products. His kits were/are really very well engineered, within the limitations of the medium, and the opens detailed inside and out and the brakegear is generally an excellent representation which, were it still readily available, I would use in preference to almost anything else (levers apart). They go together well and require minimal additional detail. Unlike some other whitemetal kit manufacturers the metal is always of good quality, too. Now, Slater's kits (not a lot of interior detail where applicable, though beautifully engineered and moulded) or Cambrian, which tend to have raised plank lines on the inside which I can't live with (though the interior detail is present and correct, the underframes can be a bit off) are different beasts, as are the more modern Parkside kits. That said, we're dealing with apples and oranges in production terms; the Cambrian kits are miracles of low-tech moulding by people without hard core engineering backgrounds. I've built lots of each. Adam

Yes, I had noticed the height discrepancy and, while it's very easy to check, since the drawings are readily available, I haven't, yet. They do come out at the same length as the Cambrian, however. It's a rather quicker build though (if you solder). Quicker still if you use the whitemetal levers and guides. I must take a picture of the completed vehicle in paint. Adam

The spring buckles are there as moulded by Parkside (though I did reshape the axleboxes). Ah, EM, I'm afraid. The lever guides are certainly from the Scalefour Society, I think, but I'm not sure about the levers (Masokits, perhaps? The vee hanger almost certainly is). Other changes are a bit more obvious in the picture below, but not the brakes, which, safety loops apart, are Parkside. Adam

I must admit, I always bin that sprue and replace the components completely (including replacing the buffers). The door hinge is pretty simple to do from wire, the door springs, from strip and I invariably use AMBIS coupling hooks. There are other things I do, but that's because I want to. Here's a cameo for my layout. The weathering was good fun, I admit... Adam

A nice collection, Stuart. The Vauxhall colliery wagon is probably a bit of an anachronism (the pit closed in 1928), but I wouldn't worry: http://www.welshcoalmines.co.uk/North/vauxhall.htm, it's such a frequent application of modellers' licence it's not worth worrying about, especially for a bargain. I agree that the LMS open is closest to an 1898 - my rendition of a 1895 is below (right). A modest variation to the vastly more common 1666 (left). I scratchbuilt mine - I could/should have just put a Cambrian body on a longer wheelbase! Adam

As Pete notes, pretty much all the variants were included (but no parts list was included - mine had various minor bits missing which I only discovered through reading the text). As I remember the instructions weren't great though (the drawing of the cab interior turned out to be from a J15 with the screw reverse tippexed out on the original, for example - there's no reversing lever in the box or the instructions), but it's a reasonable basis for an O2. Adam

That's really coming on nicely, Jack. Pipework is essential to the character of steam loco models, but it is a right fiddle to do (I like that motor mount, too - very neat). Adam