Jump to content
 

A tale of two Blandfords

Barry Ten

Entry posted by Barry Ten in S&D

923 views

 Share

 

 

stour6.jpg.df70a0c9162763f159b84ef84150e41b.jpg

 

It must be about twenty years since Hornby released their improved West Country/Battle of Britain pacifics, supplanting the old triang-era model. I've got four of these nice models, mostly acquired with little thought to region/period suitability. It was only when I started work on Stourpayne Marshall that I started taking a closer look at what I had, and how they might fit in with the S&D theme.

 

Back in October, with the help of some friendly commenters, I came up with this non-exhaustive list of original condition Bulleid light pacifics as seen on the S&D prior to closure:

 

4109 Trafford Leigh Mallory

34040  Crewkerne

34041 Wilton

34042 Dorchester

34043 Combe Martin

34093 Saunton

34037 Clovelly

34044 Woolacomb

34095 Brentor

34107 Blandford Forum

34110 66 Squadron

34108 Wincanton

34102 Lapford

34103 Calstock

34067 Tangmere

34079 141 Squadron

34051 Winston Churchill

34105 Swanage

 

and just before closure:

 

34006 Bude

34057 Biggin Hill

 

My models in BR condition were Tangmere, and two Blandford Forums. Tangmere can stay as it is - it wasn't a "regular" on the S&D but it did traverse those hallowed metals at least once, so it gets a pass. Blandford of course suits the line even more so by dint of its name, but what to do with the two models? Ending up with two was an oversight. I'd bought and weathered my own example, then several years later, for some reason, I forgot that I had it and bought one of Lord & Butler's very fine pre-weathered models.

 

Unfortunately the optons for renumbering Blandford were a bit limited, requiring it to be wide-cab loco with a cut-down tender. Calstock and Lapford were identified as suitable candidates, but there's a bit of a snag with the body. Those Hornby models. like Blandford or Tangmere, that have a town crest or RAF plaque, have it attached via a plastic moulding which plugs into a hole in the bodyside. Lapford and Calstock have just the name, so one is left with the problem of dealing with that hole in the side. I believe Hornby did take care of this with some of their other releases, which had a modified tooling, but I had to work with the models in my possession.

 

One of the Blandfords would need its nameplate and plaque removed, and the safest best seemed to work with the one I'd worked on, as the weathering was much lighter than on the Lord & Butler example. The plastic mouldings were easily prised-away with the edge of a knife, leaving two holes where the nameplate clipped in, and another for the plaque. I'd ordered some Fox plates (having opted for Calstock) and the etched plate easily fitted over the two holes, meaning they could be left untreated.

 

The small hole for the plaque posed a more serious problem. I couldn't see any plausible way to use conventional filling and sanding methods without losing both the rivet detail and having to repaint some or all of the body. I didn't fancy that at all! So I opted for a pragmatic approach, aiming to minimise the visual effect of the hole without concealing it completely. The first job was to drip glue-n-glaze into the hole until it filled the cavity, leaving a clear plug. This already looked better. Once I'd added two layers of glue-n-glaze, I then retouched the hole with Railmatch BR green. I felt that this reduced the visual impact of the hole from normal viewing:

 

stour5.jpg.3da7a6f238a98f19e709985bf9189d79.jpg

 

I felt that this worked well enough that I was happy to continue with the work on transforming Blandford Forum into Calstock. The cab numbers were removed with T-cut, a cotton bud, followed by gentle abrasion with a cocktail stick. I added replacement numbers from the Fox range. The etched plates came with a smokebox number. No other changes were necessary. I must say that these Fox plates are splendid, and the red really pops. It lifts the somewhat drab BR green quite nicely, I feel. 

 

As for the other Blandford, I've still to add the detailing parts, as well as a decoder, but the excellent L&B weathering should be apparent below:

 

stour7.jpg.9a74b18134c787189f7e1a5a20d7c045.jpg

 

Look at the subtle work around the rivets, and the pale staining between the nameplate and firebox. I find a lot of commercial weathering to be a bit meh, but Adrian seems to get a lot of tonal variety into his models, without obliterating the underlying colours. It's an effect I struggle to achieve when I do my own weathering, so I'm all the more impressed and willing to spend a little more for the quality of the work. I still think this model will benefit from some etched plates, though.

 

Next in the renumbering queue will be a pair of rebuilt pacifics - but that's another story.

 

Thanks for reading!

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 16
 Share

41 Comments

Recommended Comments



45568

Hi Barry,

                34102 would definitely  be a better fit for your loco./tender combination. This useful table: 

 https://www.bulleidsociety.org/OVS_Bulleid/OVSB_Light_Pacifics.html

 gives a mass of detail on the Bulleid pacifics. From this 103 received it's cut-down tender in 10/58 whereas 102 received cut-down in 7/61.

 One other point to be aware of is the position of the W/C class scroll. On those locos not intended for a shield it is placed higher up the casing. See this pic. from Colour-Rail:

https://colourrail.co.uk/api/image/medium/e375d001-003b-429e-8358-702a9e26ecfa

 

Hope this helps,

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment
Combe Martin
1 hour ago, 45568 said:

 

 One other point to be aware of is the position of the W/C class scroll. On those locos not intended for a shield it is placed higher up the casing. See this pic. from Colour-Rail:

 

 

This may have been the intention, but wasn't implemented  completely in practice.

 

For example, S&D regulars 34041 Wilton had the scrolls in the lower position, whereas 34043 Combe Martin had them in the higher position.

 

Both Lapford and Calstock had them higher but these 2 were less frequent on the S&D.

 

Looking back at earlier S&D photos of Bullieds before rebuilding, those that had higher scrolls had them at various height positions.  At least one was just below the name plate !

 

I havnt checked non S&D photos for this as I'm between house moves and most of my non S&D books are in storage.   

 

As is usual when doing detailing, a photo or photos of your loco in your modelling period are essential if you want to get it right.   

 

 

  

 

 

Edited by Combe Martin
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment
Combe Martin
10 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

My only option for swapping a tender body would be from my existing three rebuilts, of which I think 34036 Westward Ho might be suitable, if I'm understanding my tender types, but then I'd need to find a new identity for  34036. 

 

 

 

Out of the list of Bullieds 'common' on the S&D in the early 60s that I listed earlier that were rebuilt, I would say you have a choice of 3.

 

You cant do 39 Boscastle or 46 Braunton because they had a rebodied tender top.

I wouldnt do 40 Crewkerne because it wasnt rebuilt until the end of 1960 and I havnt yet found a photo that shows what tender it had from then.  

 

That leaves 28 Eddystone, 42 Dorchester and 45 Ottery St Mary.

As you have 3 rebuilds you may have 45 Ottery St. Mary already as it was done by Hornby.  (Ive got one)

 

So your choice is 28 Eddystone or 42 Dorchester.    From the number of photos I've seen I would say that 42 Dorchester was the more common. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Combe Martin
2 hours ago, 45568 said:

 34102 would definitely  be a better fit for your loco./tender combination. This useful table: 

 https://www.bulleidsociety.org/OVS_Bulleid/OVSB_Light_Pacifics.html

 gives a mass of detail on the Bulleid pacifics. From this 103 received it's cut-down tender in 10/58 whereas 102 received cut-down in 7/61.

 

 

Whilst the above is correct for 34102, so you could correctly rename/renumber your Blandford as 34102 Lapford,  as it says, 34102 didnt get its cut-down tender until mid 1961, but as far as I've found, photos only show it on the S&D in 1959 & 1960 when it still had its high sided tender. 

 

I still think 34103 Calstock is your better option if you have got a narrow bodied cut-down tender top to swop over.

 

I accept that the lack of a photo dosn't mean 'something didn't happen'  but I have got a lot of S&D picture books.   Also, the period (years) you are modelling is a consideration. 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Barry Ten
  • RMweb Gold
59 minutes ago, Combe Martin said:

 

Out of the list of Bullieds 'common' on the S&D in the early 60s that I listed earlier that were rebuilt, I would say you have a choice of 3.

 

You cant do 39 Boscastle or 46 Braunton because they had a rebodied tender top.

I wouldnt do 40 Crewkerne because it wasnt rebuilt until the end of 1960 and I havnt yet found a photo that shows what tender it had from then.  

 

That leaves 28 Eddystone, 42 Dorchester and 45 Ottery St Mary.

As you have 3 rebuilds you may have 45 Ottery St. Mary already as it was done by Hornby.  (Ive got one)

 

So your choice is 28 Eddystone or 42 Dorchester.    From the number of photos I've seen I would say that 42 Dorchester was the more common. 

 

I do have plates for both Eddystone and Dorchester. So If I've got this right, I could put Westward Ho's tender top onto Calstock, then Calstock's tender onto Westward and rename it either 28 or 42?

 

(my three rebuilts are Westard Ho, 17 squadron and Yes Tor, by the way). 

Link to comment
Combe Martin
35 minutes ago, Combe Martin said:

You cant do 39 Boscastle or 46 Braunton because they had a re-bodied tender top.

 

 

If you did fancy a bit more work, you can produce one of these two because you can get a re-bodied tender top from somewhere.

 

The old Hornby-Dublo rebuilt Bullied had the re-bodied tender (incorrectly fitted to lots of models), and later produced by Wrenn.  There is someone somewhere that was still making and selling these re-bodied tender tops, and I know some modellers have used them to produce a rarer model (there were 4 re-bodied tenders used by 5 locos ?) by fitting them to a current Hornby tender chassis.  They are unpainted and may need a few extra details added (the ex Albert Goodall range of Bullied bits ?, RT Models ??), and probably need a bit of fettling to fit the new Hornby chassis, but I'm sure I've seen a picture on here somewhere of one that's been done (by one of the modellers on here that's done lots of Bullied rename/renumber/detailing/resprays etc) .

 

Just a thought.  If I can find who makes them and who's used them I'll add the details.    

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment
Combe Martin
3 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

I do have plates for both Eddystone and Dorchester. So If I've got this right, I could put Westward Ho's tender top onto Calstock, then Calstock's tender onto Westward and rename it either 28 or 42?

 

(my three rebuilts are Westard Ho, 17 squadron and Yes Tor, by the way). 

 

Yes, provided Westward Ho's tender top is the narrow bodied cut down tender top, it would be correct for Calstock.  I havn't seen Westward Ho, but if you compare its tender top to that currently fitted to your Calstock and it's different and it's not a high sided one then its correct.   Hornby have only made two of the Bullied light pacific cut down tender tops.   Do you have a 41 Wilton or 43 Combe Martin, it needs to be like them.

 

One other consideration.  As I said earlier,  over the years (changing Chinese factories, putting a DCC socket in the tender etc) Hornby have modified the fitting details (tender top to chassis) of these, so if your two models are of a different manufacturing generation, you may need to make some modifications to make them fit.  But if you take the two tender tops off, (and before doing any modifications) compare the insides/clips etc you'll be able to see the difference (if any).

 

I havn't done this myself, this is what I've been told on here and it does make sense.  I'm still waiting for exhibitions to restart so I can try finding a suitable spare tender or donor loco to do the same.

Edited by Combe Martin
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Barry Ten
  • RMweb Gold

I'm not in the mood for spraying at the moment so I'll be looking to avoid any repainting.

Link to comment
mattingleycustom

34107 would have lost the casing ahead of the cylinders by the time the tender was cut down, a sharp knife will sort that out.

As already mentioned, Fox etched plates/plaques/scrolls would improve the look of the loco considerably.

 

Much as I like Fox nameplates those for 34043 are noticeably too long, I used Modelmaster for Combe Martin as they are closer to the correct length.

 

Glenn

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Barry Ten
  • RMweb Gold
49 minutes ago, mattingleycustom said:

34107 would have lost the casing ahead of the cylinders by the time the tender was cut down, a sharp knife will sort that out.

As already mentioned, Fox etched plates/plaques/scrolls would improve the look of the loco considerably.

 

Much as I like Fox nameplates those for 34043 are noticeably too long, I used Modelmaster for Combe Martin as they are closer to the correct length.

 

Glenn

 

I don't know why that casing is present on the later model of Blandford, and not my earlier one. Presumably a production boo-boo by Hornby.

Link to comment
Combe Martin
5 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

I do have plates for both Eddystone and Dorchester. So If I've got this right, I could put Westward Ho's tender top onto Calstock, then Calstock's tender onto Westward and rename it either 28 or 42?

 

(my three rebuilts are Westard Ho, 17 squadron and Yes Tor, by the way). 

 

I've just seen your photo of your Westward Ho and its definitely the correct tender, a narrow body 4500 galllon cut down type, so suitable for Calstock.  The easy way to spot the difference is that the wide body versions have that great big water tank extention block on top of the rear half of the tender top, which is not there on the narrow tenders.   

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Combe Martin
4 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

I'm not in the mood for spraying at the moment so I'll be looking to avoid any repainting.

 

Yes, I'm not sure I'd attempt this (unless I'd got nothing else to do) as in order to get a paint match I'd probably have to re-spray the whole loco as well as the tender which would also mean re-doing the lining.  Something I've not attempted before.

 

I have been hoping that Hornby would eventually 'tool up' the re-bodied tender top, so that they could do both Boscastle and Braunton.  I've always got the impression that a model of any loco numbered correctly for the S&D has always sold well !   

Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Barry Ten
  • RMweb Gold

Happy to report that the tender swap was very easy, with the body fixings being unchanged. I couldn't just swap the tenders as the polarity was indeed different between the two models (why, Hornby?).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Combe Martin
8 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

Happy to report that the tender swap was very easy, with the body fixings being unchanged. I couldn't just swap the tenders as the polarity was indeed different between the two models (why, Hornby?).

 

I suspect we have to blame the chinese for that one, possibly a consequence of changing the chinese suppliers and and their factories.  Anyway, I'm very glad to be of help, and it confirms for me what I have to do to make my Calstock.  In particular, I now know which rebuild to look out for as its always been a bit vague before.   

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
mattingleycustom
17 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

Happy to report that the tender swap was very easy, with the body fixings being unchanged. I couldn't just swap the tenders as the polarity was indeed different between the two models (why, Hornby?).

 

Could you just swap the tender bodies over?, I think it is only the brake handle that causes any grief.

 

The polarity of the tender changes between each batch with Hornby. With my cynical head on I thought it was to prevent tender swaps but I suspect it's not that devious just the way the factory turned them out at the time.

Link to comment
  • RMweb Gold
Barry Ten
  • RMweb Gold

Yes, that's just what I did - two screws undone, and bodies swapped. They needed a bit of persuasion to unclip from the base  but nothing major.

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...