This may be of interest...
http://www.dself.dsl.pipex.com/MUSEUM/LOCOLOCO/loadgauge/loadgauge.htm
Hi Midland Pacific
Dave is correct they where a series of marks painted on the wagon to identify it or give information to people who could not read they where put on in the railway workshops for the benefit of yard operations.
You will not need graffiti it will not look right I am not saying it wasn't around but just it will not look right.
You could do a period figure with a sandwich board with "I hate trains on it"
The UK did not to my knowledge have hobo's in the US way, getting a free ride on a train earned you a stretch in prison no if but's or maybes about it.
regards John
....and bigger wheels means significantly less of a need for counterweighting, too.
Dave, I saw your email - will reply when I get more time - still waiting on the LSWR book with maps and track diagrams in the mail.
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
I don't know if this is correct...
As I understand it they went for inside cylinders because the cylinders were mounted directly beneath the boiler/smokebox... this made for very short steam pipes and maximised the heat of the arriving steam in the cylinder. This was before superheating. Hot steam means less evaporation which is important as water doesn't compress. This means that any build up will, like priming, smash either the piston or the end of the cylinder. It can also bend the piston rod. This is not good.
Once you have gone down this road you automatically get inside valve gear.
I have the pleasure of never having had to service or maintain it!
The size of the counterweight will be in direct proportion to what's on the other side of the circle. So the answer to your queston will partly be in the pictures. I say partly because there may be parts between the frames that aren't visible.
With inside stuff there is a cranked axle with all sorts of bits built in.
Dave-the-Train wrote: MidlandPacific wrote: The GWR locos are very interesting - they have so many unusual variations in practice: outside frames, then the Collet and Churchward engines which look so much more like American engines to me than most of the other British equipment of the period - the outside cylinders, and outside motion valve gear. Still not as pretty to me as the Drummond and Adams 4-4-0s on the LSWR - there's something very attractive about the clean lines and the speedy look those engines have. Most Rly cos started out with inside frames, moved to outside - some had split frames - and then back to inside... It depended on the metalurgy and technology of the day.American style "bar frames" were extremely rare in the UK and not thought safe as a rule.All the Churchward / GWR locos right to the last of the Kings had outside cylinders, inside frames and INside valve gear. This was because of a ****-up* by Churchward who designed a Scissors gear for the original designs (the Star Class IIRC)... but you had to take the boiler off to adjust it... So Swindon works got him out of a jam with the first presentation to the shareholders by sticking in Walschaerts gear between the frames... and there it stayed on the GWR.Only when Stanier went to the LMS and produced the Black 5s (and others) did the Walschearts gear go back out where it belonged on the outside.IIRC the GWR loco chiefs were... Armstrong, Dean, Churchward and Collett.The GWR had the Dean Vacuum Brake which had more force than the other UK vac brakes and has very specific appearance under the stock.Dean also invented a non-centre pin bogie for stock because he thought that the standard centre pin arrangement used almost everywhere else was deficient. History has proved him right... look at modern high speed stock...Webb on the LNWR adopted the Cleminson flexible wheelbase in preferance to using bogies at all.The LSWR was vac braked. To its east the LBSC used Westinghouse air. East again and the SECR used both... SER had adopted vac while LCDR used Westinghouse air. I suspect that there was an element of deliberate incompatibility. Across the river (headed north now) The GER used Westinghouse Air... I think that the GNR did as well.The 4-4-0s are pretty but lack presence in my view. If you want express trains their relative lack of power/obsolescence by 1913 meant that they had to double head.Double heading was expensive... but came from the operating not the loco department budget. the GWR/Swindon had a huge tradition of putting old underpowered locos in for a service and sending back out a huge new monster... with the same number and maybe a few bolts from the previous loco. "Creative Accounting" is not new.[* a "male bird"-up is an expression from English archery using long bows. To get accurate flight the arrows have one of the four sets of feathers in the flight made of **** feather. this flight should be at the bottom when the arrow is notched. If it is on top the shot will go astray... hence a "****-up"... which expression is printed in Hansard as it is one of the accepted parliamentary terms. You'd be astounded the sort of dastardly things that are not allowed to be said... epsecially by one member about another].
MidlandPacific wrote: The GWR locos are very interesting - they have so many unusual variations in practice: outside frames, then the Collet and Churchward engines which look so much more like American engines to me than most of the other British equipment of the period - the outside cylinders, and outside motion valve gear. Still not as pretty to me as the Drummond and Adams 4-4-0s on the LSWR - there's something very attractive about the clean lines and the speedy look those engines have.
The GWR locos are very interesting - they have so many unusual variations in practice: outside frames, then the Collet and Churchward engines which look so much more like American engines to me than most of the other British equipment of the period - the outside cylinders, and outside motion valve gear. Still not as pretty to me as the Drummond and Adams 4-4-0s on the LSWR - there's something very attractive about the clean lines and the speedy look those engines have.
Most Rly cos started out with inside frames, moved to outside - some had split frames - and then back to inside... It depended on the metalurgy and technology of the day.
American style "bar frames" were extremely rare in the UK and not thought safe as a rule.
All the Churchward / GWR locos right to the last of the Kings had outside cylinders, inside frames and INside valve gear. This was because of a ****-up* by Churchward who designed a Scissors gear for the original designs (the Star Class IIRC)... but you had to take the boiler off to adjust it... So Swindon works got him out of a jam with the first presentation to the shareholders by sticking in Walschaerts gear between the frames... and there it stayed on the GWR.
Only when Stanier went to the LMS and produced the Black 5s (and others) did the Walschearts gear go back out where it belonged on the outside.
IIRC the GWR loco chiefs were... Armstrong, Dean, Churchward and Collett.
The GWR had the Dean Vacuum Brake which had more force than the other UK vac brakes and has very specific appearance under the stock.
Dean also invented a non-centre pin bogie for stock because he thought that the standard centre pin arrangement used almost everywhere else was deficient. History has proved him right... look at modern high speed stock...
Webb on the LNWR adopted the Cleminson flexible wheelbase in preferance to using bogies at all.
The LSWR was vac braked. To its east the LBSC used Westinghouse air. East again and the SECR used both... SER had adopted vac while LCDR used Westinghouse air. I suspect that there was an element of deliberate incompatibility. Across the river (headed north now) The GER used Westinghouse Air... I think that the GNR did as well.
The 4-4-0s are pretty but lack presence in my view. If you want express trains their relative lack of power/obsolescence by 1913 meant that they had to double head.
Double heading was expensive... but came from the operating not the loco department budget. the GWR/Swindon had a huge tradition of putting old underpowered locos in for a service and sending back out a huge new monster... with the same number and maybe a few bolts from the previous loco. "Creative Accounting" is not new.
[* a "male bird"-up is an expression from English archery using long bows. To get accurate flight the arrows have one of the four sets of feathers in the flight made of **** feather. this flight should be at the bottom when the arrow is notched. If it is on top the shot will go astray... hence a "****-up"... which expression is printed in Hansard as it is one of the accepted parliamentary terms. You'd be astounded the sort of dastardly things that are not allowed to be said... epsecially by one member about another].
One question about the placement of pistons, rods and valve motion inside the frame - was that done to reduce vibration? It seems like having that motion inside the wheels would generate less dynamic augment, and less pounding on the frames and the rails. The counterweights on British locomotives seem very small - I know the wheels are generally bigger, but I haven't yet seen any designs that have massive, protruding counterweights like you see on some 2-10-2s and 2-10-4s - the counterweights on the T&P 2-10-4s actually protrude out from the face of the driving wheels.
It's interesting to see how companies adapt their engineering practices to different conditions. I suspect a lot of the differences between British and American practice are a result of the relatively different costs of labor and capital, and the very different economic situation of the railroads. It always seems as if the British companies had significantly more money to invest in the fixed plant, and they built to the highest standards, since a densely populated country with a developed economy could offer a railroad traffic from the very beginning.
It occurs to me that you do not want hoboes to be able to readily identify a car or its load...
Something to bear in mind about UK railways is that they are normally required to be completely fenced of (including Level crossing arrangements) from all other property for their entire length. This meant a huge mileage of fencing and - for 1913 - well maintained walls and hedges. Wire fencing only came to be accepted as really adequate between the wars. Its use had started earlier.
The non-recognition of dyslexia, schooling systems and social stigma meant that poor spelling would not appear anywhere in public. It was simply better to get a job not requiring spelling. You should bear in mind that when I started school in 1959 icking up a pencil to write with the left hand was still not just unaccpetable but likely to be disciplined "out of" a child. I should have been laft handed in fact. My right handed script is awful. This probably still applied in the US at that date.
////
Meanwhile, back at "Joint Stock"...
This was not "Joint Stock" in an investment/stock exchange sense. It was rolling stock, paid for, owned and used by several comapies working together. I think that there was some west coast Joint Stock as well but it is much less heard of... and I don't think that it lasted long. the difference is that the West coast was largely covered by the LNWR from London (Euston)right up and into Scotland. The East coast route was divided into chunks. No one Rly covered the bulk of the distance.
The Midland and great Northern Joint Rly was a railway company in its own right own by the Midland and the great Northern.
The Cheshire Lines Committee was a weird entity in its own right but the result of a committee of several companies in the area.
The South Eastern Rly and the London Chatham and Dover formed a committee of some sort which resulted in somethiong like a merger and the South Eastern and Chatham Railway... which IIRC was at one stage known as the "Joint Committee".
I think that John means the painted symbols that were used briefly in the C19. The only one I can recall was the white diamond painted on the sides of LNWR cars mid way between the door and the ends. (Therefore four diamonds per wagon/van).
IIRC the idea comes from two issues... (1) The fact that stock was identified by cast iron number plates that showed the owner and other details. There were also cast iron Builders plates. These remained in use on all stock until very recently... I'll have to take a look at some of the really modern stuff to see what they do now in place of them... I just haven't looked. the thing is that in most train fires the iron plates would survive so that it could be worked out what stock (and loads) had been destroyed from practical evidence. (2) These plates could not be spotted and read easily - they were placed on the stocks' solebars... not in consistent positions until later. I don't actually know whether they were painted with the lettering being highlighted by white paint in the ealry days. Given the cost of paint, problems of developing consistent pigmentation and more I doubt that they were... at least originally. The result is not so much a solution to illiteracy as to being able to switch out a specific companies cars more quickly without someone having to get up-close-and -personal to read the plates.
I don't recall the usual name given these marks... I had actually forgotten all about them. To be honest I've heard of the marks as a theory but in all my research (including masses of original source material) have never found a single reference to them. This doesn't mean that they weren't intended to get round illiteracy.
The thing is that train guards had to be literate to learn the rules and do the paperwork. The same went for Station Masters and warehouse supervisors.
Also... I have worked with non-reading rail staff and you can be sure that they can identify what they want by the number of symbols and, in the worst case, by the sequence of their shapes. The reason I know this? The inability to read does not stop them identifying the names of the horses they are interested in...
Whatever the case most Rlys moved to a period of putting either the full name or the initials in big painted letters on the sides of stock. To save on cost this later became simplified. At the extreme this resulted in stock marking very similar to US car data with the company initials and stock number at the left end of the lower side.
For 1913 you want LSWR emblazoned along the sides of goods stock. Locos tended to have LSWR with the coat of arms in the middle. Passenger stock tended to have the full name in elaborate script and the coat of arms. All this is why it got simplified!
We don't/didn't have "hoboes" in the UK in the same way that you had in the US. I think that the closest we would come would not be tramps but itinerant agricultural workers. "Riding the rails" was a swift ticket to a beating and/or a prison sentence. Even with Charlie chaplain and Laurel and Hardie romanticised "tramps" did not evoke popular sympathy here in the way that the Great depression built up a folk hero status in the US.
I would disagree (in a technical/historical way) with john about the class issue. Most "philanthropy" came from the Upper Classes - who had the means and time to learn of the need for it and then actually do something about it. The real sharp end was your own class. There was (and arguably still is) immense pressure on people to not act in any way "above their station in life". (Try to find Stanley holloway's monologue "Brown Boots"). Also the BBC series "Upstairs Downstairs".
There is primary source evidence that people were "put down" (as in slighted/not spoken to) for eating meat more than once a week. this was seen as being "uppity". The Upper Classes had some concern about this as it would suggest possible poaching but the people that really put the boot in came from the same social grouping/strata.
John Busby wrote: Hi Midland PacificDon't forget illiterate marking on early wagons I am not sure when these where phased out but they where prominent in the early days when most working class people could not read.Society in those days was very class conscious and the upper classes stayed well away form the great unwashed masses, "Not one of us you see" it was not the enlightened society some historians would have us believe. So this will have to be reflected in any model you build no matter how romantic the image.regards John
Don't forget illiterate marking on early wagons
I am not sure when these where phased out but they where prominent in the early days when most working class people could not read.
Society in those days was very class conscious and the upper classes stayed well away form the great unwashed masses, "Not one of us you see" it was not the enlightened society some historians would have us believe.
So this will have to be reflected in any model you build no matter how romantic the image.
John, when you say "illiterate markings," do you mean markings that were meant to be comprehensible to the illiterate, like hobo pictograms, or misspelled or poorly written markings?
As I mentioned in one of the innumerable locked graffiti threads, I think graffiti is a great way for setting an historical scene - NG&SLG ran a great article back in '03 on a freelanced mining layout of apparently indeterminate era built by a guy in Australia - I can't recall his name. Anyway, in one of the pictures of a beautiful mining complex, a railing bore the painted slogan "DRAFT BILLY HUGHES INSTEAD." I know just enough about Australian history that that little bit of graffiti placed the layout perfectly to the era of the First World War. It was a brilliant little detail.
Very quickly...
Yes "Pool" stock is stock that can be used by anyone for whatever traffic is on hand... anyone in the pool that is... This was NOT joint service but like interchange Rules part of a way of reducing dead haul of stock back to home roads.
Churchwood visted the US and brought back a mass of ideas which went into GW practice via Swindon works and indirectly through Wolverhampton works (for the northern area of GW). Collet tends to be seen as a ale shadow or stop gap. the man that gets credited with carrying on development is Stanier who left Swindon for the LMS... from there things moved to the BR Standard classes.
Deisgn was also about coal and water types available/in use. The GW used S Wales coal while the Midlans for one used Midlands coal.
All the Joint Stock schemes that I can think of were through trains on express passenger routes where the Stock travelled the lines of the owning and building companies.
CLC and M&GN were different
Dave-the-Train wrote: By 1913 the 4-6-0 was fast becoming the express engine wheel configuartion of choice... Churchward on the GWR, ?on the a Highland, Can't recall the nickname of Drummonds or Adams big locos on the LSWR... Paddlesteamers??? Webb on the LNWR (The seriously ugly Claughtons). NER engines had large side window cabs virtually unlike any other English Company - with a few GER exceptions (maybe it's the East coast?). The next favourite (possibly equal 1st) was the "Atlantic" 4-4-2 configuration. These were mostly fast but lacked the clout of the 4-6-0s with the extra powered axle. [P.S. Webb was also a signal engineer].The Counties and Kings of the GWR and Standard Classes of BR were direct derivatives of Churchwards designs of the early 1900s. (The Saints, ladies and Stars... the best locos for looks ever built apart from the De glehnn Compounds).[That is FACT not opinion]. -["La France" and "Lady Disdain" remain my all time favourite locos]-[PS Against the big locos regularly running at over 60mph and readily up to 100mph - only kept down by orders not to "race" because of media press hostility - you have to recall the wages of the day, child birth was dangerous for mother and child, smallpox, polio and tuberculosis were incurable and common... read "All Quiet on the Western Front" rather than Connan Doyle. ...in 1905 people were still trekking west behind the rumps of oxen, asses, mules and a small number of expensive horses. They trekked because the "fast" trains didn't go many places and were expensive]. On the LMS Stanier shifted the Walshearts valve gear back outside where it belonged. I think that it's an open question which looks better... the hidden gear of the GWR or the outside gear of the LMS/BR. I'll never forget a a Western Region 4-6-0 coming through Bristol Temple Meads (I think) screaming for the road when I was a kid of six or seven. I was too busy hugging a roof column but I expect that it had sixteen on. I may not have the railfan's notebook but I will always have the sense of shear thundering power.Somehow the Southern King Arthurs of home turf never had the same impact... as for the spam cans Then again the Q1s were superb for their shear unadulterated ugliness.That should give you some research to do! As far as freight stock goes you should be aware that continuous automatic brakes did not become universal until about 1976. Even then there was a mix of vacuum brake and Westinghouse (air) [few people realise that Westinghouse also had a vacuum system at an early stage].Most 10 to 20 ton wagons were NOT fully fitted. Those that were, were frequently labelled "Non Common User" because of their higher cost to the owning company. Conversely "Pool" stock was usually unfitted. Pool stock usually didn't have extra fittings like tarpaulin bars.In 1913 fitted freight stock would have been the exception not the norm. Non "passenger rated" freight stock would also have all been plain 3 link couplings. Passenger rated stock (Special cattle wagons, Horse boxes, Carriage Trucks and Covered carriage trucks - CCTs- Milk and Fish wagons or vans and parcels stock (to cover most of them) would have passenger grade wheels and suspension and screw link coulings. Most would have been Fully fitted and some (particularly horse boxes and CTs/CCTs) would have been dual fitted for Air and vac... because they were prone to stray to other lines.BUT so long as they were not run as one of the last 3 vehicles in a train anything could run in a passenger rated train if it had (A) passenger running gear and screw link coulings and (B) at least through pipes for the appropriate brakes.To explain... a vehicle could have the brake pipes only for one or both types of brake OR it could have pipes only for one type and the full work for the other type OR it could have the full brake gear for both air and vac.Got that?Right... later than 1913 two things spread into freight stock... Instanta Link Couplings and more automatic brakes (either air or vac... very rarely both on freight stock... but could be piped ).If it's any help US practice was no less complex if you look beyond interchange practice. It's amusing that with the spread of model variants of couplings since Kaddee ceased to be the only "Buckeye" type MRR are go the reverse way to the way the real RR went from c1890 on. there were many, possibly hundreds of attempts at the most effective automatic coupler and drawgear. Although they increasingly looked much the same they were not necessarily compatible. In fact The UK looked hard at auto coupling and the issue of cut hooks from 1890 to 1910 but drew the conclusion that for our weight of cars and frame design/buffing gear we were better to stick with the arrangement we had and still largetly have. This was in no small part because of the complexity of not entirely compatible choice we saw in the US.Okay...Incidentally a piped only wagon or van is known as a "blow through" which was also a term used for weapons cleaning and other purposes.Latterly blow throughs got specific distinctive markings so that they could be spotted more easily and marshalled correctly.There is a complexity about marshalling ba=ecause of the different brakes.Passenger trains are only allowed to be Fully Fitted from loco to last 3 vehicles... but... subject to rules they could have a percentage of blow through stock. The thing is that a blow though adds weight in a train but makes no contribution to the brake force availabe. (No dynamic braking in regular UK railways - the London tube has regenerative braking which is similar).A passenger rated train (e.g. milk, parcels or fish) would increasingly run fully fitted to allow a higher linespeed... but again they could have blow throughs...AND they could run "Part Fitted".A part ftted train was made up of stock that was Automatic Brake fitted and neither Automatic brake fit http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply Dave-the-Train Member sinceJuly 2006 2,299 posts Posted by Dave-the-Train on Sunday, June 3, 2007 6:18 PM The good news is...In the UK a Loop is NOT a balloon track. A Loop strictly is a parrallel track connected to the same track at both ends controlled by one signal box. A Run Round track on a single line is the simplest example.Simple isn't it? Then there's platform loops. Same thing... but, because of the length of the platform frquently controlled by two and occasionally three Boxes (bearing in mind we are dealing with 1913).And a loop line (like the Catford Loop in South London) is anything but a loop, balloon, semi circle... . It wiggles all over the place between other routes.Looping from London Bridge (central London) to Waterloo (central London) is known as "Going Round the World". Ride it and you may understand why...Goods loops are usually controlled by one Box and are simply laces to tuck goods trains away to let other traffic pass. They are often known as Refuges or Laybys. But Refuges/laybys may be dead end tracks. Sometimes a goods loop/refuge will have one end controlled by the Box and the other end controlled by a ground frame. A groundframe is a subsiduary lever frame which is interlocked to the controlling signalbox. Some are in huts some in the open.OKAY...ANOTHER HUGE THING TO RECALL AT ALL TIMES...Under the BoT Facing Points were avoided except where working was impossible without them.THESE TWO THINGS MAKE UK TRACK LAYOUTS DISTINCT FROM ALL OTHER COUNTRIES INCLUDING MOST COLONIES (whenever you departed from us).In a Double track station trackplan you will find that the two crossovers required to allow runround movements are both Trailing crossovers. Yard connections will also be trailing connections in the vast majority opf cases. facing connections into yards are almost always treated and signalled as junctions.ALL facing connections in assenger carrying lines are REQUIRED to be fitted with FACING POINT LOCKS. There are no exceptions to this.For 1913 the maximum distance of an FPL from the controlling lever was 200yds (IIRC) BUT most layouts would still be on the previous standards and therefore at 180 or 150 yards (IRRC)This meant that a lot of station layouts had TWO Signalboxes. Both Boxes were Block Posts. On Double track these would be Absolute block Boxes with short Block Sections between them and Slotted Distants. On Single Lines Absolute block would apply between the Boxes (with the station loop providing the Double track between them) and ETB or another Single line system working on either side of the station.That said... usually one box would have all or most of the yard connections and be a larger frame and structure while the other would be smaller.To keep segregation easier on both single lines and double most stations concentrate all yard tracks to join the running lines at one location... usually through one connection with one trap facility.Sooner or later you will come across something called a "Catch Point".A Catch Point "catches" unauthorised movements (and sometimes authorised ones)[oops!] in the wrong direction.In practice this means that a loop may have a Trap point at the exit end to prevent unauthorised egress in the right direction at the exit end in the normal direction of travel AND a catch point at the entry end to stop anything escaping in the wrong direction. This means that a refuge will usually be a parralel loop track (like a runround track) entered by a crossover that is facing from the Running line...AND exited by a crossover that is trailing for the Running Line but facing from the refuge... so if a train in the refuge moves either way when it shouldn't it will drop off and not get out onto the Running Line.You won't model this but catch points are also provided on steep and/or long up grades. these are sprung so that right direction moves can run through automatically but anything running (wrong direction) back down the grade will be tipped off and not run back into any following traffic.Hope this all helps. Reply Dave-the-Train Member sinceJuly 2006 2,299 posts Posted by Dave-the-Train on Sunday, June 3, 2007 5:35 PM Right... layout design.Assuming that you won't go for multiple track...You have Double Track or Single Track. 1913 LSWR (or NBR) Will be Absolute Block for Double.1913 LSWR Single track you have a choice but Electric token Block is the easiest. NBR would also have ETB or might be Staff and Ticket... which could also be used on the LSWR... but I wouldn't.Remember the pile of stuff on Station Limits and Block Sections? All you do to get ETB from Absolute Block is overlap the two directions from their seperate lines onto one line... then occupation of the single line is ONLY permitted by whoever is in possession of the Token or Staff out of the Electric Block Machine. The ETB machine uses exactly the same three stages of "Line Blocked", "Normal" and "Line Clear" as AB for Double lines. The difference is that "Line Clear" received by a Block Box allows the Signalman to withdraw a SINGLE token or staff. Once the token or staff has been withdrawn the system is TOTALLY locked up until it is replaced. Neither Signalman nor anyone else can get a second token or staff out of any machine in the system until the first one has been out back into any (one) other machine in the system.If you are working ETB real life DO NOT lose the token or staff. I've seen a fireman thrown into a river to retrieve one that had bounced and gone awol because he got it wrong. He came back with the token... drowning was the better option to not coming back with it.Right... trackplans.THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO ALWAYS KEEP IN MIND...ALL RUNNING LINES ARE SEGREGATED FROM ALL NON-RUNNING LINES AND ALL PASSENGER CARRYING LINES ARE SEGREGATED FROM ABSOLUTELY ALL NON PASSENEGER CARRYING LINES.THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS UNDER BoT REQUIREMENTS.All this means is that the lines that trains make journeys on are identified as Running Lines. Most Running Lines are Passenger carrying lines. there are a (relatively) few non-passeneger carrying Running Lines. These are freight lines. Running Lines are worked under Absolute Block reguloations of the appropriate kind.Non Running Lines will be worked under Local arrangements. These may be Station Yard Working (Rules).Physically this means that ALL lines that carry passeneger carrying traffic are physically seperated from BOTH all non passeneger carrying lines AND all passeneger carrying lines that are not Running Lines.Non Passeneger carrying lines are all freight/goods lines, yards and everything that isn't designated as Passenger Carrying Running lines. The segregation is acheved by all the lines having a Trap Point on the approach side of the Fouling Point of ALL connections to the Passeneger Carrying Running Lines. Put simply you cannot get from any yard or siding to a passenger carrying running Line without going through a Trap Point.A trap point is the equivalent of a derail. It is a point which may be only one blade, may be two blades and no common crossing, a full set of points and crossings and even a route into a siding or sidings/yard. The thing is that an unauthorised movement not only cannot physically get out onto the ruynning lines but will be deflected away from them. Some trap points (traps) lead to sand traps. Where (as in a centre road) there is no safe side to deflect to the blades may move in opposite directions to achieve a straight-on drop off. going through and open trap results in landing in the dirt. NB an Open trap derails.For 1913 movements within a yard not attempting/wanting to go out onto the Running Lines could be made as unsignalled movements in all cases except where signals were provided.Exit from Non-Running lines to Running Lines and the reverse movement would almost always be signalled by a Fixed Signal. A Fixed signal in this case would be Stop arm, a Secondary Stop arm or a shunting signal. Shunting signals are frequently known as "Dummies" or "Dollies". In 1913 there were only Red Dummies that were Absolute Stops for the move they controlled. later "Yellow Dummies" appeared... I'm not going there. Nor will I deal with the later "Running Dummies".Some lines (not LSWR and I don't think NBR) prefered to use very short arms on a conventional post rather than the more usual shunt signals... which i should have pointed out are usually very short "ground signals" not much more than 24" to 30" tall.Right... Some Passeneger Carrying Lines... such as dead end bays and loops... are specifically designated as Non Running Lines. these don't usually have trap points to prevent unauthorised egress. When they do have Traps they usually have to be set closed for the train to run through and on to further Running Lines when any Passeneger carrying move is being made.If one of these roads is trapped it may be used to stable trains. if it isn't trapped it either will not be permmitted to stable trains or special rules will apply. Got that? Good. Reply Dave-the-Train Member sinceJuly 2006 2,299 posts Posted by Dave-the-Train on Sunday, June 3, 2007 4:25 PM Try a new post...Okay...For 1913 the passenger classes would be 1st and 3rd. So? modern is "Standard" and 1st. Try what the airlines do... ...and "Primary schools" have become "First Schools"... DUH?!? Then again... I can understand Secondary Schools becoming "High Schools"... all those smelly trainers....Anyway...Fish and Milk were perishables (so were bananas... special stock)... so they ran passenger rated (class 1 or 2). Milk was daily. Fish tended to load toward late Thursday. Milk churns had to be returned empty. So did fish boxes. I have several "fish empty" waybills for S E London (Catford loop) to Grimsby. I also have "Egg empties" going to Braintree in Essex. The pile includes notes on chocoate vending machines.A huge amount of "smalls" were carried by passenger trains. If you bought a hat by mail order or in the next part of town it could be delivered via the local train station... in this particular case the route to cover a few hundred yards went via Central London and several miles... but it got there. You quite possibly got a hand delivered note to tell you that the parcel was waiting at the station for you to collect. Now that is service! ... Before anyone takes the mickey... I recently received a parcel (2 CNW U25Bs) from Slough (about 100 miles away) and had to go 12 miles without public transport to sign for and collect the package because I wasn't in and they don't deliver on Saturdays. Progress? A myth to dispell...Under the administration of the BoT there is almost no such thing as a "Mixed Train".In the few examples that a "Mixed Train" was permitted (that's "permitted" not "allowed") the train would be a fully fitted passenger head end (quite possibly with a passenger brake and guard) AND a freight tail end with a goods brake van and guard."Mixed Goods" trains didn't exist on the railway and you will see THOUSANDS of pics and reports of them in the media."Mixed Goods" trains would be about the equivalent to your local "peddlar" goods. They basically carried bits and pieces that needed delivering and weren't carried by any other train.As for stock to start out with...LSWR ran a relatively limited range of Private Owner coal wagons (compared to most other roads except the NER - and maybe Scottish practice). BUT you could check out who their POs were and get some of them... English PO wagons are pretty readily available RTR. Incidentally by 1913 all coal wagon (all wagons) would have full sets of sprung buffers all round and neither all dumb buffers or dumb buffers one end. (A dumb buffer is the extension of the wagon (structural) side frame out beyond the end(s) - this was normal construction practice up to 1885-90 and being phased out through to 1914. In theory dumb buffers were banned from c1905 with a phase-out to 1910 but they hung on into and "because of" WW1. They were probably all gone by 1922 at the latest. Scotland (being a seperate legislature) may have run earlier or later.I know LSWR opens and vans are available at least as kits... can't recall by whom. get Railway Modeller magazine.Same goes for passenger stock... and some locos.NBR... much more difficult.You want to look for (for LSWR) an M7 4-4-0T tank. An Adams Radial tank (4-4-2T) - looks nice in pea green. If there is a model a 4-4-0 "Steamroller" would be good as a "mixed traffic" loco. The M7 is MT while the Radial would be passenger. IIRC there was an 0-6-0 known as a Black Goods which would be good for freight.You must have at least one 10 ton (goods) brake van.They had some nice 6 wheel passenger brake vans with baggae at each end and the brake in the middle. There was a matching all van of tis and at least all vans in 4 wheel and 8 wheel. These were in "Salmon pink" and Brown (chocolate?) pre Southern era.Coaches you'll get by the yard. The LSWR ran some very nice sets of 8 wheelers with brakes at each end... you can tag full vans and/or brakes onto these... or run them in their own right... so long as there is always a brake in the consist.Goods stock you will see on LSWR OBVIOUSLY MAINLY LSWR... BUT... LBSCR, SECR, GWR, GER, MR, in good numbers. maybe a bit less LNWR, GNR, Met, M&GN. "Visitors"... CLC, NSR, Cam Rys...(and South Wales local lines.. ... probably via Reading)... some NER and a tiny amount of Scottish lines...if any.Run through passenger rated stock... more likely other Southern constituent Rlys... SER, LCDR -> SECR. GWR, Midland and GER, GNR would probably be more likely than other "exotics".Of course it depends heavly on where on LSWR you are... I'm thinking edge of London. As you go further West you'd get more of the GWR and less of the other Southern Cos. and Much less GER, GNR. Midland would probably increase... from Bristol and Gloucester. Get really west and you'll get more of the Welsh stuff filtering through plus LNWR. The GWR dominated the West somewhat like UP does in the US today. You either love it or hate it. You'll always get GW models by the ton. MR probably runs second followed by LNWR... LSWR is down the pile somewhere but not bad. Sadly you'll probably get modern "Sprinters" and Class 37s in millions of liveries much more readily. Reply Dave-the-Train Member sinceJuly 2006 2,299 posts Posted by Dave-the-Train on Sunday, June 3, 2007 3:01 PM By 1913 the 4-6-0 was fast becoming the express engine wheel configuartion of choice... Churchward on the GWR, ?on the a Highland, Can't recall the nickname of Drummonds or Adams big locos on the LSWR... Paddlesteamers??? Webb on the LNWR (The seriously ugly Claughtons). NER engines had large side window cabs virtually unlike any other English Company - with a few GER exceptions (maybe it's the East coast?). The next favourite (possibly equal 1st) was the "Atlantic" 4-4-2 configuration. These were mostly fast but lacked the clout of the 4-6-0s with the extra powered axle. [P.S. Webb was also a signal engineer].The Counties and Kings of the GWR and Standard Classes of BR were direct derivatives of Churchwards designs of the early 1900s. (The Saints, ladies and Stars... the best locos for looks ever built apart from the De glehnn Compounds).[That is FACT not opinion]. -["La France" and "Lady Disdain" remain my all time favourite locos]-[PS Against the big locos regularly running at over 60mph and readily up to 100mph - only kept down by orders not to "race" because of media press hostility - you have to recall the wages of the day, child birth was dangerous for mother and child, smallpox, polio and tuberculosis were incurable and common... read "All Quiet on the Western Front" rather than Connan Doyle. ...in 1905 people were still trekking west behind the rumps of oxen, asses, mules and a small number of expensive horses. They trekked because the "fast" trains didn't go many places and were expensive]. On the LMS Stanier shifted the Walshearts valve gear back outside where it belonged. I think that it's an open question which looks better... the hidden gear of the GWR or the outside gear of the LMS/BR. I'll never forget a a Western Region 4-6-0 coming through Bristol Temple Meads (I think) screaming for the road when I was a kid of six or seven. I was too busy hugging a roof column but I expect that it had sixteen on. I may not have the railfan's notebook but I will always have the sense of shear thundering power.Somehow the Southern King Arthurs of home turf never had the same impact... as for the spam cans Then again the Q1s were superb for their shear unadulterated ugliness.That should give you some research to do! As far as freight stock goes you should be aware that continuous automatic brakes did not become universal until about 1976. Even then there was a mix of vacuum brake and Westinghouse (air) [few people realise that Westinghouse also had a vacuum system at an early stage].Most 10 to 20 ton wagons were NOT fully fitted. Those that were, were frequently labelled "Non Common User" because of their higher cost to the owning company. Conversely "Pool" stock was usually unfitted. Pool stock usually didn't have extra fittings like tarpaulin bars.In 1913 fitted freight stock would have been the exception not the norm. Non "passenger rated" freight stock would also have all been plain 3 link couplings. Passenger rated stock (Special cattle wagons, Horse boxes, Carriage Trucks and Covered carriage trucks - CCTs- Milk and Fish wagons or vans and parcels stock (to cover most of them) would have passenger grade wheels and suspension and screw link coulings. Most would have been Fully fitted and some (particularly horse boxes and CTs/CCTs) would have been dual fitted for Air and vac... because they were prone to stray to other lines.BUT so long as they were not run as one of the last 3 vehicles in a train anything could run in a passenger rated train if it had (A) passenger running gear and screw link coulings and (B) at least through pipes for the appropriate brakes.To explain... a vehicle could have the brake pipes only for one or both types of brake OR it could have pipes only for one type and the full work for the other type OR it could have the full brake gear for both air and vac.Got that?Right... later than 1913 two things spread into freight stock... Instanta Link Couplings and more automatic brakes (either air or vac... very rarely both on freight stock... but could be piped ).If it's any help US practice was no less complex if you look beyond interchange practice. It's amusing that with the spread of model variants of couplings since Kaddee ceased to be the only "Buckeye" type MRR are go the reverse way to the way the real RR went from c1890 on. there were many, possibly hundreds of attempts at the most effective automatic coupler and drawgear. Although they increasingly looked much the same they were not necessarily compatible. In fact The UK looked hard at auto coupling and the issue of cut hooks from 1890 to 1910 but drew the conclusion that for our weight of cars and frame design/buffing gear we were better to stick with the arrangement we had and still largetly have. This was in no small part because of the complexity of not entirely compatible choice we saw in the US.Okay...Incidentally a piped only wagon or van is known as a "blow through" which was also a term used for weapons cleaning and other purposes.Latterly blow throughs got specific distinctive markings so that they could be spotted more easily and marshalled correctly.There is a complexity about marshalling ba=ecause of the different brakes.Passenger trains are only allowed to be Fully Fitted from loco to last 3 vehicles... but... subject to rules they could have a percentage of blow through stock. The thing is that a blow though adds weight in a train but makes no contribution to the brake force availabe. (No dynamic braking in regular UK railways - the London tube has regenerative braking which is similar).A passenger rated train (e.g. milk, parcels or fish) would increasingly run fully fitted to allow a higher linespeed... but again they could have blow throughs...AND they could run "Part Fitted".A part ftted train was made up of stock that was Automatic Brake fitted and neither Automatic brake fitted nor piped. The Fitted and piped stock would be grouped as far as possible/appropriate at the head end with all the brakes piped up and working. Everything behind the fitted head was "unfitted" even if the Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Sunday, June 3, 2007 10:40 AM Incidentally, Dave, the Dugald Drummond you mentioned was at different times loco superintendent for both the NBR and the LSWR. Built some beautiful 4-4-0s for both of them. I have also just finished C. Hamilton Ellis's "The Trains We Loved," a nostalgic little book about the pre-Grouping era - so I'm leaning toward modeling 1913 (that's the era I like in the States, too). It's amazing to see the trains of that era and to realize that the 4-4-0 was the standard express passenger engine - tells you something about how well the railroads were engineered - no "Crooked and Slow" in the UK! http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Sunday, June 3, 2007 10:34 AM John Busby wrote: Hi Midland PacificDefinitely don't try the forth bridge.I did the calculations once and if memory serves you will need approximately 36 feet and that does not include the 1/4 mile approaches to the bridgeI dont think the Tay bridge would be a model able prospect eitherregards JohnOh, I knew they were big - I just liked the look of them, that's all. There's a lot of interesting variety in British civil engineering - you seldom see masonry in American prototypes on the scale that British builders used it (the Pennsy and parts of the B&O excepted), and the enormous bridges are also fairly rare. I think for now I want to concentrate on building a British train - that's kinda more feasible in the short term. So I'm trying to get information on model building. I want to work my way up to building some of those beautiful kits Martin Finney sells - does anyone know of anyone who sells coach kits in brass? I thought perhaps I might build three or four carriages and then a locomotive for the LSWR. I have worked brass before, but mostly small stuff - repairing and improving locos, some small etched parts, soldering repairs, that kind of thing. I'm interested in taking on something a bit more challenging. http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply John Busby Member sinceApril 2005 From: West Australia 2,217 posts Posted by John Busby on Sunday, June 3, 2007 8:55 AM Hi Midland PacificDefinitely don't try the forth bridge.I did the calculations once and if memory serves you will need approximately 36 feet and that does not include the 1/4 mile approaches to the bridgeI dont think the Tay bridge would be a model able prospect eitherregards John Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Saturday, June 2, 2007 9:24 PM Thanks, guys! More to follow. http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply Dave-the-Train Member sinceJuly 2006 2,299 posts Posted by Dave-the-Train on Saturday, June 2, 2007 8:20 AM Models for Scottish companies are much easier to come by now but still thin on the ground compared to English companies.Parkside Dundas is one maker to look at and they could put you in touch with other Scottish specialists. They could also advise on paint and lining out... and custom painters.You will of course be working in 00 - 4mm=1ft - 1/72. You will NOT get what you are looking for in H0.Painting is exactly the same whatever country/prototype you choose. Lining out on UK or Colonial Rlys is more complex... Rlys schemes simplified throughout the 20s and on. Complex coats of arms tended to be dropped as well. (Except on special stock).LSWR is good. Like many English Rlys they had at least one Scottish Loco Engineer - D Drummond (D = Dougald/Dougal ??? ).More stuff available for LSWR and then South Western Division of Southern. Model 1923+ and you get both sides of the grouping... means you have more excuse for including other Southern and constituent companies' locos. Locos in the UK tended to stay on home rails - with exceptions of course.You should look for the "South Western Circle" on the net.Signals for LSWR are probably easier to get... I'm sure that there is a maker but can't recall the name.Try looking at the Hampton Court Branch as a nice example of (then) just-out-of-London traffic. You might even get in some very early 3rd rail electrification.IIRC Hapmton Court had a level crossing less than a mile from the (terminal) station. This may well have meant that the last signal (Section Signal) toward london (UP direction) had a slotted Distant below it. This would be a nice addition/add interest if you have enough track length to do it. It would not affect the interlocking for the station Box.IIRC The LSWR was one of the companies that used Coligney Welch adaptors on its Distant signals. This was an additional white light, > in shape to the right of the red Caution aspect used on Distant Signals before makers managed to achieve a stable yellow coloured glass for Distant signal aspects. I don't recall the date of the change. I think that it started about 1905 and would probably have been completed... UM? Not sure... try the Signal Record[s] Society. Distant arms were also red until the aspect colour changed... Distants have always had the end notch and chevron. Chevron was white on the face of a red arm.Purple was proposed as an alternate colour to red for Distant aspects before Red was sorted out. I think that it was tried but it didn't find favour. I think that it was used as one of the colours in some 3 aspect semaphore signals (NER used 3 aspects more than and longer than anyone else IIRC). In that case red=stop, purple =caution and white =clear.The LSWR was one of the first lines to experiment with electric light signalling... can't recall the date... I have a photocopy somewhere. 1880s or 90s around Vauxhall IIRC with a sort of "position light" indication... IIRC it was a white light which had a horizontal bar indication for Stop and a 45 degree (high at the left end) for "Off". As far as I know there was only ever the one.I wouldn't try to model the Forth Bridge. Reply John Busby Member sinceApril 2005 From: West Australia 2,217 posts Posted by John Busby on Saturday, June 2, 2007 7:45 AM Hi MidlandPacificThe answer is quite simple paint the loco the correct colour then buy the decal sheet it will have all the lining & crests for the loco you build but do go to the expense of getting the brass etched name, builder and number plates for the locomotive.There is a good book on loco building and painting unfortunately I don't have the title or author I have only seen it once.I would suggest starting with NBR mixed traffic loco, coach, brake end coach and a couple of wagon kits say a couple of open fish trucks just to make really sure its what you want to do.The fish trucks would be attached to the back of the trainSome you can bash some you will have no choice but to get the right stuff from the off.Look at doing a small branch line to get the feel of things make sure foreign railway wagonslike the Caledonian and Highland railway or the G&SWR are in fact those not a swifty the early wagons where quite distinctive from the modern ones for instance mostly no brakes other than hand which had to run with a fitted head and a lot of wooden frames as wellregards John Reply John Busby Member sinceApril 2005 From: West Australia 2,217 posts Posted by John Busby on Saturday, June 2, 2007 7:00 AM Hi Midland PacificYou mention Cuneo paintings If you can get your hands on some of the prints or older Triang- Hornby catalogues for a few hours find the mouse, and I mean this literaly study the picture and find the mouse it will be there somewhere..No mouse and it isn't a print of a Cuneojust a bit of useless informationregards John Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Friday, June 1, 2007 8:41 AM So........no suggestions? At all? http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Thursday, May 31, 2007 10:26 PM BUMP! Since I know the sun's just coming up on the other side of the Atlantic...... http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Thursday, May 31, 2007 2:01 PM BUMP! Well, thought I should let you guys know how I was doing. Have just had a baby, so not much time to work on the existing layout, let along start a new one - but have been doing plenty of research and reading on British modelbuilding. I am really developing an interest in the old London and Southwestern - in part because of Martin Finney's beautiful Adams and Drummond express loco kits. The other line that appeals to me is the North British - both of them had some really remarkable bridges - the Meldon Viaduct and the Forth Bridge are just spectacular. I have also been favorably impressed by the emphasis on scratchbuilding technique in the British books that I have got my hands on - I picked up a couple of books on signalling from MSE, and they were full of interesting stuff. One question: those wonderful pre-WWI paint schemes: can anyone recommend a good book on painting techniques for British loco models? I love the striping and fine detail work, but it's not something I have ever tried, and I figure there must be a good book on the subject somewhere. http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Saturday, March 31, 2007 1:06 PM I read somewhere once, a long time ago, that Stephenson gave the actress Frances Kemble a right on the footplate of "Rocket" on one of its first trips. http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply Dave-the-Train Member sinceJuly 2006 2,299 posts Posted by Dave-the-Train on Saturday, March 31, 2007 6:45 AM MidlandPacific wrote: jon grant wrote: andrechapelon wrote: Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow? Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail BlueJonDidn't the original come with the actress on the footplate? HUH! Typical! Hollywood trying to steal our history again! Reply MidlandPacific Member sinceFebruary 2003 1,138 posts Posted by MidlandPacific on Friday, March 30, 2007 8:26 AM jon grant wrote: andrechapelon wrote: Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow? Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail Blue JonDidn't the original come with the actress on the footplate? http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply 1234 Subscriber & Member Login Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more! Login Register Users Online There are no community member online Search the Community ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Model Railroader Newsletter See all Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox! Sign up
By 1913 the 4-6-0 was fast becoming the express engine wheel configuartion of choice... Churchward on the GWR, ?on the a Highland, Can't recall the nickname of Drummonds or Adams big locos on the LSWR... Paddlesteamers??? Webb on the LNWR (The seriously ugly Claughtons). NER engines had large side window cabs virtually unlike any other English Company - with a few GER exceptions (maybe it's the East coast?). The next favourite (possibly equal 1st) was the "Atlantic" 4-4-2 configuration. These were mostly fast but lacked the clout of the 4-6-0s with the extra powered axle. [P.S. Webb was also a signal engineer].
The Counties and Kings of the GWR and Standard Classes of BR were direct derivatives of Churchwards designs of the early 1900s. (The Saints, ladies and Stars... the best locos for looks ever built apart from the De glehnn Compounds).[That is FACT not opinion]. -["La France" and "Lady Disdain" remain my all time favourite locos]-
[PS Against the big locos regularly running at over 60mph and readily up to 100mph - only kept down by orders not to "race" because of media press hostility - you have to recall the wages of the day, child birth was dangerous for mother and child, smallpox, polio and tuberculosis were incurable and common... read "All Quiet on the Western Front" rather than Connan Doyle. ...in 1905 people were still trekking west behind the rumps of oxen, asses, mules and a small number of expensive horses. They trekked because the "fast" trains didn't go many places and were expensive].
On the LMS Stanier shifted the Walshearts valve gear back outside where it belonged. I think that it's an open question which looks better... the hidden gear of the GWR or the outside gear of the LMS/BR. I'll never forget a a Western Region 4-6-0 coming through Bristol Temple Meads (I think) screaming for the road when I was a kid of six or seven. I was too busy hugging a roof column but I expect that it had sixteen on. I may not have the railfan's notebook but I will always have the sense of shear thundering power.
Somehow the Southern King Arthurs of home turf never had the same impact... as for the spam cans
Then again the Q1s were superb for their shear unadulterated ugliness.
That should give you some research to do!
As far as freight stock goes you should be aware that continuous automatic brakes did not become universal until about 1976. Even then there was a mix of vacuum brake and Westinghouse (air) [few people realise that Westinghouse also had a vacuum system at an early stage].
Most 10 to 20 ton wagons were NOT fully fitted. Those that were, were frequently labelled "Non Common User" because of their higher cost to the owning company. Conversely "Pool" stock was usually unfitted. Pool stock usually didn't have extra fittings like tarpaulin bars.
In 1913 fitted freight stock would have been the exception not the norm. Non "passenger rated" freight stock would also have all been plain 3 link couplings. Passenger rated stock (Special cattle wagons, Horse boxes, Carriage Trucks and Covered carriage trucks - CCTs- Milk and Fish wagons or vans and parcels stock (to cover most of them) would have passenger grade wheels and suspension and screw link coulings. Most would have been Fully fitted and some (particularly horse boxes and CTs/CCTs) would have been dual fitted for Air and vac... because they were prone to stray to other lines.
BUT so long as they were not run as one of the last 3 vehicles in a train anything could run in a passenger rated train if it had (A) passenger running gear and screw link coulings and (B) at least through pipes for the appropriate brakes.
To explain... a vehicle could have the brake pipes only for one or both types of brake OR it could have pipes only for one type and the full work for the other type OR it could have the full brake gear for both air and vac.
Got that?
Right... later than 1913 two things spread into freight stock... Instanta Link Couplings and more automatic brakes (either air or vac... very rarely both on freight stock... but could be piped ).
If it's any help US practice was no less complex if you look beyond interchange practice. It's amusing that with the spread of model variants of couplings since Kaddee ceased to be the only "Buckeye" type MRR are go the reverse way to the way the real RR went from c1890 on. there were many, possibly hundreds of attempts at the most effective automatic coupler and drawgear. Although they increasingly looked much the same they were not necessarily compatible. In fact The UK looked hard at auto coupling and the issue of cut hooks from 1890 to 1910 but drew the conclusion that for our weight of cars and frame design/buffing gear we were better to stick with the arrangement we had and still largetly have. This was in no small part because of the complexity of not entirely compatible choice we saw in the US.
Okay...
Incidentally a piped only wagon or van is known as a "blow through" which was also a term used for weapons cleaning and other purposes.
Latterly blow throughs got specific distinctive markings so that they could be spotted more easily and marshalled correctly.
There is a complexity about marshalling ba=ecause of the different brakes.
Passenger trains are only allowed to be Fully Fitted from loco to last 3 vehicles... but... subject to rules they could have a percentage of blow through stock. The thing is that a blow though adds weight in a train but makes no contribution to the brake force availabe. (No dynamic braking in regular UK railways - the London tube has regenerative braking which is similar).
A passenger rated train (e.g. milk, parcels or fish) would increasingly run fully fitted to allow a higher linespeed... but again they could have blow throughs...AND they could run "Part Fitted".
A part ftted train was made up of stock that was Automatic Brake fitted and neither Automatic brake fit http://mprailway.blogspot.com "The first transition era - wood to steel!" Reply
The good news is...
In the UK a Loop is NOT a balloon track. A Loop strictly is a parrallel track connected to the same track at both ends controlled by one signal box. A Run Round track on a single line is the simplest example.
Simple isn't it?
Then there's platform loops. Same thing... but, because of the length of the platform frquently controlled by two and occasionally three Boxes (bearing in mind we are dealing with 1913).
And a loop line (like the Catford Loop in South London) is anything but a loop, balloon, semi circle... . It wiggles all over the place between other routes.
Looping from London Bridge (central London) to Waterloo (central London) is known as "Going Round the World". Ride it and you may understand why...
Goods loops are usually controlled by one Box and are simply laces to tuck goods trains away to let other traffic pass. They are often known as Refuges or Laybys. But Refuges/laybys may be dead end tracks. Sometimes a goods loop/refuge will have one end controlled by the Box and the other end controlled by a ground frame. A groundframe is a subsiduary lever frame which is interlocked to the controlling signalbox. Some are in huts some in the open.
OKAY...ANOTHER HUGE THING TO RECALL AT ALL TIMES...
Under the BoT Facing Points were avoided except where working was impossible without them.
THESE TWO THINGS MAKE UK TRACK LAYOUTS DISTINCT FROM ALL OTHER COUNTRIES INCLUDING MOST COLONIES (whenever you departed from us).
In a Double track station trackplan you will find that the two crossovers required to allow runround movements are both Trailing crossovers. Yard connections will also be trailing connections in the vast majority opf cases. facing connections into yards are almost always treated and signalled as junctions.
ALL facing connections in assenger carrying lines are REQUIRED to be fitted with FACING POINT LOCKS. There are no exceptions to this.
For 1913 the maximum distance of an FPL from the controlling lever was 200yds (IIRC) BUT most layouts would still be on the previous standards and therefore at 180 or 150 yards (IRRC)
This meant that a lot of station layouts had TWO Signalboxes. Both Boxes were Block Posts. On Double track these would be Absolute block Boxes with short Block Sections between them and Slotted Distants. On Single Lines Absolute block would apply between the Boxes (with the station loop providing the Double track between them) and ETB or another Single line system working on either side of the station.
That said... usually one box would have all or most of the yard connections and be a larger frame and structure while the other would be smaller.
To keep segregation easier on both single lines and double most stations concentrate all yard tracks to join the running lines at one location... usually through one connection with one trap facility.
Sooner or later you will come across something called a "Catch Point".
A Catch Point "catches" unauthorised movements (and sometimes authorised ones)[oops!] in the wrong direction.
In practice this means that a loop may have a Trap point at the exit end to prevent unauthorised egress in the right direction at the exit end in the normal direction of travel AND a catch point at the entry end to stop anything escaping in the wrong direction. This means that a refuge will usually be a parralel loop track (like a runround track) entered by a crossover that is facing from the Running line...AND exited by a crossover that is trailing for the Running Line but facing from the refuge... so if a train in the refuge moves either way when it shouldn't it will drop off and not get out onto the Running Line.
You won't model this but catch points are also provided on steep and/or long up grades. these are sprung so that right direction moves can run through automatically but anything running (wrong direction) back down the grade will be tipped off and not run back into any following traffic.
Hope this all helps.
Right... layout design.
Assuming that you won't go for multiple track...
You have Double Track or Single Track. 1913 LSWR (or NBR) Will be Absolute Block for Double.
1913 LSWR Single track you have a choice but Electric token Block is the easiest. NBR would also have ETB or might be Staff and Ticket... which could also be used on the LSWR... but I wouldn't.
Remember the pile of stuff on Station Limits and Block Sections?
All you do to get ETB from Absolute Block is overlap the two directions from their seperate lines onto one line... then occupation of the single line is ONLY permitted by whoever is in possession of the Token or Staff out of the Electric Block Machine.
The ETB machine uses exactly the same three stages of "Line Blocked", "Normal" and "Line Clear" as AB for Double lines. The difference is that "Line Clear" received by a Block Box allows the Signalman to withdraw a SINGLE token or staff. Once the token or staff has been withdrawn the system is TOTALLY locked up until it is replaced. Neither Signalman nor anyone else can get a second token or staff out of any machine in the system until the first one has been out back into any (one) other machine in the system.
If you are working ETB real life DO NOT lose the token or staff. I've seen a fireman thrown into a river to retrieve one that had bounced and gone awol because he got it wrong. He came back with the token... drowning was the better option to not coming back with it.
Right... trackplans.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING TO ALWAYS KEEP IN MIND...
ALL RUNNING LINES ARE SEGREGATED FROM ALL NON-RUNNING LINES AND ALL PASSENGER CARRYING LINES ARE SEGREGATED FROM ABSOLUTELY ALL NON PASSENEGER CARRYING LINES.
THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS UNDER BoT REQUIREMENTS.
All this means is that the lines that trains make journeys on are identified as Running Lines. Most Running Lines are Passenger carrying lines. there are a (relatively) few non-passeneger carrying Running Lines. These are freight lines. Running Lines are worked under Absolute Block reguloations of the appropriate kind.
Non Running Lines will be worked under Local arrangements. These may be Station Yard Working (Rules).
Physically this means that ALL lines that carry passeneger carrying traffic are physically seperated from BOTH all non passeneger carrying lines AND all passeneger carrying lines that are not Running Lines.
Non Passeneger carrying lines are all freight/goods lines, yards and everything that isn't designated as Passenger Carrying Running lines. The segregation is acheved by all the lines having a Trap Point on the approach side of the Fouling Point of ALL connections to the Passeneger Carrying Running Lines. Put simply you cannot get from any yard or siding to a passenger carrying running Line without going through a Trap Point.
A trap point is the equivalent of a derail. It is a point which may be only one blade, may be two blades and no common crossing, a full set of points and crossings and even a route into a siding or sidings/yard. The thing is that an unauthorised movement not only cannot physically get out onto the ruynning lines but will be deflected away from them. Some trap points (traps) lead to sand traps. Where (as in a centre road) there is no safe side to deflect to the blades may move in opposite directions to achieve a straight-on drop off. going through and open trap results in landing in the dirt. NB an Open trap derails.
For 1913 movements within a yard not attempting/wanting to go out onto the Running Lines could be made as unsignalled movements in all cases except where signals were provided.
Exit from Non-Running lines to Running Lines and the reverse movement would almost always be signalled by a Fixed Signal. A Fixed signal in this case would be Stop arm, a Secondary Stop arm or a shunting signal. Shunting signals are frequently known as "Dummies" or "Dollies". In 1913 there were only Red Dummies that were Absolute Stops for the move they controlled. later "Yellow Dummies" appeared... I'm not going there. Nor will I deal with the later "Running Dummies".
Some lines (not LSWR and I don't think NBR) prefered to use very short arms on a conventional post rather than the more usual shunt signals... which i should have pointed out are usually very short "ground signals" not much more than 24" to 30" tall.
Right... Some Passeneger Carrying Lines... such as dead end bays and loops... are specifically designated as Non Running Lines. these don't usually have trap points to prevent unauthorised egress. When they do have Traps they usually have to be set closed for the train to run through and on to further Running Lines when any Passeneger carrying move is being made.
If one of these roads is trapped it may be used to stable trains. if it isn't trapped it either will not be permmitted to stable trains or special rules will apply.
Got that? Good.
Try a new post...
For 1913 the passenger classes would be 1st and 3rd. So? modern is "Standard" and 1st. Try what the airlines do... ...and "Primary schools" have become "First Schools"... DUH?!? Then again... I can understand Secondary Schools becoming "High Schools"... all those smelly trainers....
Anyway...
Fish and Milk were perishables (so were bananas... special stock)... so they ran passenger rated (class 1 or 2). Milk was daily. Fish tended to load toward late Thursday. Milk churns had to be returned empty. So did fish boxes. I have several "fish empty" waybills for S E London (Catford loop) to Grimsby. I also have "Egg empties" going to Braintree in Essex. The pile includes notes on chocoate vending machines.
A huge amount of "smalls" were carried by passenger trains. If you bought a hat by mail order or in the next part of town it could be delivered via the local train station... in this particular case the route to cover a few hundred yards went via Central London and several miles... but it got there. You quite possibly got a hand delivered note to tell you that the parcel was waiting at the station for you to collect. Now that is service! ... Before anyone takes the mickey... I recently received a parcel (2 CNW U25Bs) from Slough (about 100 miles away) and had to go 12 miles without public transport to sign for and collect the package because I wasn't in and they don't deliver on Saturdays. Progress?
A myth to dispell...
Under the administration of the BoT there is almost no such thing as a "Mixed Train".
In the few examples that a "Mixed Train" was permitted (that's "permitted" not "allowed") the train would be a fully fitted passenger head end (quite possibly with a passenger brake and guard) AND a freight tail end with a goods brake van and guard.
"Mixed Goods" trains didn't exist on the railway and you will see THOUSANDS of pics and reports of them in the media.
"Mixed Goods" trains would be about the equivalent to your local "peddlar" goods. They basically carried bits and pieces that needed delivering and weren't carried by any other train.
As for stock to start out with...
LSWR ran a relatively limited range of Private Owner coal wagons (compared to most other roads except the NER - and maybe Scottish practice). BUT you could check out who their POs were and get some of them... English PO wagons are pretty readily available RTR. Incidentally by 1913 all coal wagon (all wagons) would have full sets of sprung buffers all round and neither all dumb buffers or dumb buffers one end. (A dumb buffer is the extension of the wagon (structural) side frame out beyond the end(s) - this was normal construction practice up to 1885-90 and being phased out through to 1914. In theory dumb buffers were banned from c1905 with a phase-out to 1910 but they hung on into and "because of" WW1. They were probably all gone by 1922 at the latest. Scotland (being a seperate legislature) may have run earlier or later.
I know LSWR opens and vans are available at least as kits... can't recall by whom. get Railway Modeller magazine.
Same goes for passenger stock... and some locos.
NBR... much more difficult.
You want to look for (for LSWR) an M7 4-4-0T tank. An Adams Radial tank (4-4-2T) - looks nice in pea green. If there is a model a 4-4-0 "Steamroller" would be good as a "mixed traffic" loco. The M7 is MT while the Radial would be passenger. IIRC there was an 0-6-0 known as a Black Goods which would be good for freight.
You must have at least one 10 ton (goods) brake van.
They had some nice 6 wheel passenger brake vans with baggae at each end and the brake in the middle. There was a matching all van of tis and at least all vans in 4 wheel and 8 wheel. These were in "Salmon pink" and Brown (chocolate?) pre Southern era.
Coaches you'll get by the yard. The LSWR ran some very nice sets of 8 wheelers with brakes at each end... you can tag full vans and/or brakes onto these... or run them in their own right... so long as there is always a brake in the consist.
... probably via Reading)... some NER and a tiny amount of Scottish lines...if any.
Run through passenger rated stock... more likely other Southern constituent Rlys... SER, LCDR -> SECR. GWR, Midland and GER, GNR would probably be more likely than other "exotics".
Of course it depends heavly on where on LSWR you are... I'm thinking edge of London. As you go further West you'd get more of the GWR and less of the other Southern Cos. and Much less GER, GNR. Midland would probably increase... from Bristol and Gloucester. Get really west and you'll get more of the Welsh stuff filtering through plus LNWR. The GWR dominated the West somewhat like UP does in the US today. You either love it or hate it. You'll always get GW models by the ton. MR probably runs second followed by LNWR... LSWR is down the pile somewhere but not bad. Sadly you'll probably get modern "Sprinters" and Class 37s in millions of liveries much more readily.
A part ftted train was made up of stock that was Automatic Brake fitted and neither Automatic brake fitted nor piped. The Fitted and piped stock would be grouped as far as possible/appropriate at the head end with all the brakes piped up and working. Everything behind the fitted head was "unfitted" even if the
Incidentally, Dave, the Dugald Drummond you mentioned was at different times loco superintendent for both the NBR and the LSWR. Built some beautiful 4-4-0s for both of them.
I have also just finished C. Hamilton Ellis's "The Trains We Loved," a nostalgic little book about the pre-Grouping era - so I'm leaning toward modeling 1913 (that's the era I like in the States, too). It's amazing to see the trains of that era and to realize that the 4-4-0 was the standard express passenger engine - tells you something about how well the railroads were engineered - no "Crooked and Slow" in the UK!
John Busby wrote: Hi Midland PacificDefinitely don't try the forth bridge.I did the calculations once and if memory serves you will need approximately 36 feet and that does not include the 1/4 mile approaches to the bridgeI dont think the Tay bridge would be a model able prospect eitherregards John
Definitely don't try the forth bridge.
I did the calculations once and if memory serves you will need approximately 36 feet and that does not include the 1/4 mile approaches to the bridge
I dont think the Tay bridge would be a model able prospect either
Oh, I knew they were big - I just liked the look of them, that's all. There's a lot of interesting variety in British civil engineering - you seldom see masonry in American prototypes on the scale that British builders used it (the Pennsy and parts of the B&O excepted), and the enormous bridges are also fairly rare.
I think for now I want to concentrate on building a British train - that's kinda more feasible in the short term. So I'm trying to get information on model building. I want to work my way up to building some of those beautiful kits Martin Finney sells - does anyone know of anyone who sells coach kits in brass? I thought perhaps I might build three or four carriages and then a locomotive for the LSWR. I have worked brass before, but mostly small stuff - repairing and improving locos, some small etched parts, soldering repairs, that kind of thing. I'm interested in taking on something a bit more challenging.
Thanks, guys! More to follow.
Models for Scottish companies are much easier to come by now but still thin on the ground compared to English companies.
Parkside Dundas is one maker to look at and they could put you in touch with other Scottish specialists. They could also advise on paint and lining out... and custom painters.
You will of course be working in 00 - 4mm=1ft - 1/72. You will NOT get what you are looking for in H0.
Painting is exactly the same whatever country/prototype you choose. Lining out on UK or Colonial Rlys is more complex... Rlys schemes simplified throughout the 20s and on. Complex coats of arms tended to be dropped as well. (Except on special stock).
LSWR is good. Like many English Rlys they had at least one Scottish Loco Engineer - D Drummond (D = Dougald/Dougal ??? ).
More stuff available for LSWR and then South Western Division of Southern. Model 1923+ and you get both sides of the grouping... means you have more excuse for including other Southern and constituent companies' locos. Locos in the UK tended to stay on home rails - with exceptions of course.
You should look for the "South Western Circle" on the net.
Signals for LSWR are probably easier to get... I'm sure that there is a maker but can't recall the name.
Try looking at the Hampton Court Branch as a nice example of (then) just-out-of-London traffic. You might even get in some very early 3rd rail electrification.
IIRC Hapmton Court had a level crossing less than a mile from the (terminal) station. This may well have meant that the last signal (Section Signal) toward london (UP direction) had a slotted Distant below it. This would be a nice addition/add interest if you have enough track length to do it. It would not affect the interlocking for the station Box.
IIRC The LSWR was one of the companies that used Coligney Welch adaptors on its Distant signals. This was an additional white light, > in shape to the right of the red Caution aspect used on Distant Signals before makers managed to achieve a stable yellow coloured glass for Distant signal aspects. I don't recall the date of the change. I think that it started about 1905 and would probably have been completed... UM? Not sure... try the Signal Record[s] Society. Distant arms were also red until the aspect colour changed... Distants have always had the end notch and chevron. Chevron was white on the face of a red arm.
Purple was proposed as an alternate colour to red for Distant aspects before Red was sorted out. I think that it was tried but it didn't find favour. I think that it was used as one of the colours in some 3 aspect semaphore signals (NER used 3 aspects more than and longer than anyone else IIRC). In that case red=stop, purple =caution and white =clear.
The LSWR was one of the first lines to experiment with electric light signalling... can't recall the date... I have a photocopy somewhere. 1880s or 90s around Vauxhall IIRC with a sort of "position light" indication... IIRC it was a white light which had a horizontal bar indication for Stop and a 45 degree (high at the left end) for "Off". As far as I know there was only ever the one.
I wouldn't try to model the Forth Bridge.
Hi MidlandPacific
The answer is quite simple paint the loco the correct colour then buy the decal sheet it will have all the lining & crests for the loco you build but do go to the expense of getting the brass etched name, builder and number plates for the locomotive.
There is a good book on loco building and painting unfortunately I don't have the title or author I have only seen it once.
I would suggest starting with NBR mixed traffic loco, coach, brake end coach and a couple of wagon kits say a couple of open fish trucks just to make really sure its what you want to do.
The fish trucks would be attached to the back of the train
Some you can bash some you will have no choice but to get the right stuff from the off.
Look at doing a small branch line to get the feel of things make sure foreign railway wagons
like the Caledonian and Highland railway or the G&SWR are in fact those not a swifty the early wagons where quite distinctive from the modern ones for instance mostly no brakes other than hand which had to run with a fitted head and a lot of wooden frames as well
You mention Cuneo paintings
If you can get your hands on some of the prints or older Triang- Hornby catalogues for a few hours find the mouse, and I mean this literaly study the picture and find the mouse it will be there somewhere..
No mouse and it isn't a print of a Cuneo
just a bit of useless information
BUMP!
Well, thought I should let you guys know how I was doing. Have just had a baby, so not much time to work on the existing layout, let along start a new one - but have been doing plenty of research and reading on British modelbuilding.
I am really developing an interest in the old London and Southwestern - in part because of Martin Finney's beautiful Adams and Drummond express loco kits. The other line that appeals to me is the North British - both of them had some really remarkable bridges - the Meldon Viaduct and the Forth Bridge are just spectacular.
I have also been favorably impressed by the emphasis on scratchbuilding technique in the British books that I have got my hands on - I picked up a couple of books on signalling from MSE, and they were full of interesting stuff. One question: those wonderful pre-WWI paint schemes: can anyone recommend a good book on painting techniques for British loco models? I love the striping and fine detail work, but it's not something I have ever tried, and I figure there must be a good book on the subject somewhere.
MidlandPacific wrote: jon grant wrote: andrechapelon wrote: Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow? Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail BlueJonDidn't the original come with the actress on the footplate?
jon grant wrote: andrechapelon wrote: Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow? Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail BlueJon
andrechapelon wrote: Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow?
Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow?
Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail Blue
Jon
Didn't the original come with the actress on the footplate?
HUH! Typical! Hollywood trying to steal our history again!
jon grant wrote: andrechapelon wrote: Hmm. Wonder what a class 37 would look in in SP Black Widow? Howzabout Stephenson's Rocket in Conrail Blue Jon