Modern freight info.
Andrew
freight stock in the '70's &'80's ? What was used when and where? Would
anyone be available to answer questions on the subject? It seems most
enthusiasts think that time ended in 1966! Thanks, Andrew
Anthony New
steam to the start of privatisation? We used to call it "modern image"
but blue diesels aren't modern anymore. Is there a new term, or will we
end up using the term "modern image" like "modernism" in architecture,
as a historical movement?
How about the "Blue Period" (a la Picasso)?
And are we now in "Post-modern image"?
Mick Bryan
Anthony New wrote in message <372583...@wsi.co.uk>...
I have heard suggestions of
"The Corporate Era" - BR blue
"Sectorisation Era" - railfreight grey and Intercity liveried locos, later
triple grey with sector markings.
"Pre-privatisation Era" - Loadhaul/Transrail/Mainline - although
Sectorisation and Pre-privatisation do merge together a little.
and finally
"Privatisation Era" EWS/Virgin/First Group etc. and the miriad of
"ice-cream" van liveries.
What do we call preserved steam engines running out on the mainline? As far
as I'm concerned they are part of the contemporary scene. I'm lucky as I
portray the current scene, so have no problems about calling my layout
"modern image" although I do have plans to model 1970-1973 green/blue era.
Would I call that "Immediate Post Steam" or "Pre-TOPS" or what?
Mark Veneman
1991-1995. It far more precise and less vulnerable to interpretation.
Mark Veneman
Tim Hammond
situation which is miles apart from the Corporate Blue times of the 70s.
Tim
In article <372583...@wsi.co.uk>, Anthony New <a...@wsi.co.uk> writes
>Another question is, what do we call the railway period from the end of
>steam to the start of privatisation? We used to call it "modern image"
>but blue diesels aren't modern anymore. Is there a new term, or will we
>end up using the term "modern image" like "modernism" in architecture,
>as a historical movement?
>How about the "Blue Period" (a la Picasso)?
>And are we now in "Post-modern image"?
--
Hammond Publishing - Editors of Model Railway Enthusiast
Tel/Fax: 01723 506326
PO Box 199, Scarborough, YO11 3GT.
http://www.mremag.demon.co.uk/
Tony Polson
In Germany modellers and manufacturers talk about Epochs I, II, II etc
which have relevance to ownership (pre-war DR, postwar DR, DB etc) and
liveries.
I feel sure we could devise something similar for Britain.
--
Tony Polson, North Yorkshire, UK
Chris Brown
>Another question is, what do we call the railway period from the end of
>steam to the start of privatisation? We used to call it "modern image"
>but blue diesels aren't modern anymore. Is there a new term, or will we
>end up using the term "modern image" like "modernism" in architecture,
>as a historical movement?
>How about the "Blue Period" (a la Picasso)?
>And are we now in "Post-modern image"?
Follow up, please:
When exactly did it become wrong to refer to "British Rail"
(a) in certain circumstances?
(b) in any circumstance?
--
CB
Tim Hammond
period of Railway activity, from 1948 to 1993-7. That is over 45 years.
The post grouping companies such as LNER and LMS were only established
around 1924 and only had a period of 24 years in existance. Despite
that people model specific periods within those ranges and it is easier
if there is a general term to apply to their particular time slot.
More and more modellers today are now stating that their model is based
on a specific year and each and every item of stock is in the specific
livery/condition that applied at that time.
It is more helpful, to commentators, however, to have general statements
that identify a little more broadly a general era. The problem is
defining when specific eras start. You couldn't use the decade itself,
but people could get away with saying early or late in such a decade,
but that would mean a vast number of catagories.
The reality is that there are no specific time periods, to which name
catagories could comfortably apply. The worst term currently used, and
as this thread has identified, is the use of modern image to determine
anything after the end of the use of steam by BR. Unless we are
modelling the current scene, and continually making alterations to match
the real railways development, we should define the model otherwise as
late 80s, early 90s, pre-tops (early 70s), etc., or any other general
term that applies. I think I'm going round in circles.
Tim
In article <eT5jIFAr...@x-track.demon.co.uk>, Chris Brown <chris@x-
track.demon.co.uk> writes
--
Chris Brown
<T...@mremag.demon.co.uk> writes
>The problem with the term British Rail is that it applies to such a long
>period of Railway activity, from 1948 to 1993-7.
It was that latter part that I was thinking about, rather than the
"zoning" question. Talking to friends across the atlantic, I still have
a tendency to say "British Rail" when I suppose "British railways" is
more appropriate, especially when I don't have good individual operator
information, merely that a route exists. Except that some of them
aren't British any more, even though they are in Britain.
We used to sell our railways to world, now we sell our railways to the
world.
(Sorry, I have just been reading "The Great British Railway Disaster)
To which I could add a few of my own tales.
>
>Tim
>
>In article <eT5jIFAr...@x-track.demon.co.uk>, Chris Brown <chris@x-
>track.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>Follow up, please:
>>When exactly did it become wrong to refer to "British Rail"
>>
>>(a) in certain circumstances?
>>(b) in any circumstance?
>
--
CB
Brian L Dominic
<T...@mremag.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>The problem with the term British Rail is that it applies to such a long
>period of Railway activity, from 1948 to 1993-7.
I would tend to disagree. "British Rail" only appeared as a brand name
when the dreaded (at the time) "corporate blue" came in, together with
the "I don't know which way I'm going" double arrow symbol and the
associated black and white notice style.
Prior to this time, it was "British Railways", as it had been from
1948.
Brian
NB "Rumpus"
Web Sites:
"Rumpus": http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/rumpus.htm
Golden Valley Light Railway: http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/
Canals: http://www.proweb.co.uk/~dominicfam/canal.htm
Tony Polson
domin...@proweb.co.uk (Brian L Dominic) wrote:
>On Wed, 28 Apr 1999 10:09:02 +0100, Tim Hammond
><T...@mremag.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>The problem with the term British Rail is that it applies to such a long
>>period of Railway activity, from 1948 to 1993-7.
>
>I would tend to disagree. "British Rail" only appeared as a brand name
>when the dreaded (at the time) "corporate blue" came in, together with
>the "I don't know which way I'm going" double arrow symbol and the
>associated black and white notice style.
>
>Prior to this time, it was "British Railways", as it had been from
>1948.
For the whole of the period from 1948 to privatisation, the correct term
was "British Railways". I understand that the term "British Rail" was
only a trading name of the British Railways Board and that it never had
any legal status.
Brian's quite right, "British Rail" only arrived in the 1960s along with
mini-skirts, the Beatles and the XP64 trainset. It was an attempt,
together with the double arrow, corporate blue livery and black
Helvetica notices on a white background, to make a complete break with
the past. Did they manage to make the break? I think it was, at best,
only a partial success. The decrepit stations and many green locos and
maroon coaches let it down IMHO.
The BR double arrow is one of the most highly respected logos in
advertising. It's often been copied, but never bettered. It's classic,
minimalist clarity and near-perfect description of the nature of the
business it advertises are the reasons for its retention as the symbol
of National Railways.
Clive Wood
This site belongs to Robert Volland and has many modern wagon photos. He may
be able to assist.
Clive
Andrew wrote in message <01be8fc2$21cd90a0$21e637cb@badger>...
Andrew
sent me freight site URL's.
Regards, Andrew
Clive Wood <Clive...@tesco.net> wrote in article
<7gbobb$pfk$1...@barcode.tesco.net>...
Tim Hammond
point remains the same the business 'British Railways - British Rail'
was in existance for a very long period and that it is necessary or
helpful to have a range of terms to define specific periods within that
timespan.
Tim
In article <372d8081...@news.freeserve.co.uk>, Tony Polson
<ne...@scalby.freeserve.co.uk> writes
--