Umber is the New Black

[Northroader]

Looking at my copy of Bradley's book for the RCTS, which is my bible for all LBSC matters, the two petrol railcars were built by Dick Kerr with frames, wheels, and body, but Daimlers supplied the power equipment, being two 35hp engines, each driving a gearbox through a clutch. It seems they weren't liked, due to vibration, fumes, and low power. Daimlers supplied skilled mechanics, who had to give frequent attention, pushing operating costs up. They had new engines with more power fitted, but were transferred to service stock around WW1. Surprisingly, they didn't go up in flames, which always seems to happen when you put a petrol engine in a rail vehicle.

[Nearholmer]

Thanks, Northroader.

 

[Edited to remove doubts]

 

Tallies with Kidner in "the Railcar 1847-1939" (which I couldn't be bothered to look for earlier). I have the author's copy of the first, 1939' edition, with all his references marked-up in preparation for creating the second edition, and he points to an article in Locomotive Magazine, 1905 p150.

 

[edited again! to add confusion......]

 

Reading on, Kidner says that, once they passed to the electrification department, they were fitted with accumulators, and electric motors. It isn't clear to me whether they retained the petrol engines, perhaps driving a dynamo to make them "Mixte", or whether they became straight battery-electrics. He does cite a reference in LM 1911, so maybe that says.

 

It's no wonder various sources describe them in various ways!

 

K

Edited January 24, 2016 by Nearholmer

[corneliuslundie]

Would they not have needed some way of controlling the speed of the petrol engine even if they were petrol electric, as well as controlling the voltage to the motors? So perhaps a gearbox. The proofs I have in front of me definitely refer to them as petrol electric, and there are many references in the proofs to Bradley though not as it happens in this particular section.

 

Jonathan

[Oldddudders]

Do I not recall Hamilton Ellis noting one froze up in Kemp Town tunnel full of patrons for the City Limited or the like? You don't need many failures like that before the 'new-fangled' is regarded with utter contempt.

[Nearholmer]

Cornelius/Jonathon

 

In a PE rail vehicle [at the date under discussion], the engine almost always drove direct to the dynamo, no gearbox.

 

Control is then exercised by varying the engine speed (using the throttle and advance/retard), and varying the current in the field windings of the dynamo, which in turn varies the voltage supplied to the motors. At the date in question, these controls were separate, and it took a very clever chap, with three arms, to drive one optimally. The engine was often set to run at its most economic speed, and vehicle speed was controlled was by controlling the dynamo field current alone. Control of engine speed and dynamo field current was integrated, to give optimised "one handle" control, at about the time of WW1, most famously, but not only, by Hermann Lemp in the USA.

 

Kidner specifically describes the mechanical drive train of these cars, in very convincing detail, so I conclude that they were definitely PM as built. He mentions differentials to cater for minor differences in wheel size, which wouldn't be present on a PE.

 

If, later, they became dual-powered, that might have been done by one of several means, but the most sensible would have been to rip out all of the mechanical drive train, use the engine to drive a dynamo, and have that dynamo feed the motors, and a set of accumulators in parallel, allowing either "battery only", or blended propulsion. This sort of drive was first used by Patton in the USA c1889, on a railcar, was used by Ferdinand Porsche for his first road car design and for other vehicles, and was popularised for rail traction in Belgium and France by Pieper. [ edit: pieper's system, certainly as applied to road vehicles, was subtly different from what went before, but I'm not totally sure about his rail vehicle drives]. The general idea got reinvented a century later by the likes of Toyota! [see "The Electric Vehicle: Technology and Expectations in the Automobile Age" by Gijs Mom, for loads of fascinating detail of early electric cars] [a later, post-Patton US car is shown here http://smg.photobucket.com/user/PeterS/media/americanengineer80newy_0119_zpsda797cc9.jpg.html with lots of detail. These Strang-Brill cars were built in various sizes c1906-09]

 

 

So, I think your sources have been led up the same garden path that I was up until I re-read Kidner this afternoon.

 

There are some really clear photos of them c1928 in Mike Morant's collection. They still seem to be in LBSCR livery (whatever that was; umber?), and have had big battery-boxes added below the frames, in such a way that I doubt that the mechanical drive-train can have remained in place.

 

If I discover more, I will let you know.

 

Kevin

Edited January 25, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Nick Holliday]

This is the first time that I have heard any suggestion that the Brighton petrol railmotors had electric motors, whether as originally built, or later for service duties. I cannot find my copy of Bradley's RCTS volume, but I seem to recall suggestions that they occasionally were bump started with a steam loco, something not possible with electric transmission. I find it strange that Kidner did not bother to mention his battery electric idea in his later Oakwood book, Service Stock of the Southern Railway, 1993, as he was an author who liked to drop such snippets into his writings. However I can imagine that they were fitted with larger batteries than previously needed just for interior lighting, as their work was done mainly at night, and the roof platform would have been well equipped with floodlights.

Groves, in the RCTS GNR Loco series, details the transmission on their one railmotor as:

Two standard 4-cylinder Daimler engines each capable of developing 36 h.p. were supplied by the Daimler Motor Co. of Coventry who also made the greater part of the transmission. The engines did not drive directly on to the axles but to a common longitudinal shaft connected to the axles by bevelled gearing. A special form of differential gear which incorporated the reversing mechanism was provided. The engines were connected through independent clutches to a common change gearbox from which power was transmitted via the shaft into gearboxes suspended from each axle. These gearboxes governed speed by means of single reduction gearing similar to that used in electric tram motors.

I am not quite sure if I understand all these details, as he seems to repeat himself with subtle variations.

OS Bulleid was responsible for the running trials and reported that its dual engines gave little trouble, but the gearboxes were a constant anxiety and the pawls broke with monotonous regularity. Another difficulty was that the engines had to be started by hand - needing a strong one to do the job.

Groves raises doubts as to whether the car was ever actually used in public service, and it could hardly have been considered a success, and by April 1905 the GNR effectively gave up on the idea and turned to steam railmotors instead, having only tried the petrol motor on the Hertford branch in February of that year.

I don't think the Brighton were swayed by the GNR reports, rather Douglas Earle Marsh had only just joined the LBSCR from the GNR where his position would have involved him in the scheme, so he would have been familiar with the arguments for the motor, and the order to Dick, Kerr would have been in train if not actually placed before the failings became apparent. After all, after delivery to Doncaster Works in September 1904, the car made a successful run of 156 miles to take it to London.

[ChrisN]

Cornelius/Jonathon

 

In a PE, the engine almost always drives direct to the dynamo, no gearbox.

 

Control is then exercised by varying the engine speed (using the throttle and advance/retard), and varying the current in the field windings of the dynamo, which in turn varies the voltage supplied to the motors. At the date in question, these controls were separate, and it took a very clever chap, with three arms, to drive one optimally. The engine was often set to run at its most economic speed, and vehicle speed was controlled was by controlling the dynamo field current alone. Control of engine speed and dynamo field current was integrated, to give optimised "one handle" control, at about the time of WW1, most famously, but not only, by Hermann Lemp in the USA.

 

Kidner specifically describes the mechanical drive train of these cars, in very convincing detail, so I conclude that they were definitely PM as built. He mentions differentials to cater for minor differences in wheel size, which wouldn't be present on a PE.

 

If, later, they became dual-powered, that might have been done by one of several means, but the most sensible would have been to rip out all of the mechanical drive train, use the engine to drive a dynamo, and have that dynamo feed the motors, and a set of accumulators in parallel, allowing either "battery only", or blended propulsion. This sort of drive was first used by Patton in the USA c1889, on a railcar, was used by Ferdinand Porsche for his first road car design and for other vehicles, and was popularised for rail traction in France by Pieper. It got reinvented a century later by the likes of Toyota!

 

So, I think your sources have been led up the same garden path that I was up until I re-read Kidner this afternoon.

 

There are some really clear photos of them c1928 in Mike Morant's collection. They still seem to be in LBSCR livery (whatever that was; umber?), and have had big battery-boxes added below the frames, in such a way that I doubt that the mechanical drive-train can have remained in place.

 

If I discover more, I will let you know.

 

Kevin

 

Kevin,

I wanted to hit the 'That is really interesting' button but there isn't one.

 

I must admit that I would like a steam railcar but they are at least ten years after my period.

[Nearholmer]

Nick

 

That description of the drive train of the GNR cars by Groves is almost word-for-word what Kidner says about the LBSCR ones as originally built.

 

But, Kidner goes on to say that, after they went to the electrification department: "Accumulators and motors for electric drive were also fitted, and in this form they survived until 1930".

 

It's the "also fitted" that bugs me ...... It implies that the mechanical drive may have been left in-situ, rather than ripped out, but the position of the battery boxes goes against that.

 

And, there are other, clearly erroneous, sources that cite them as being PE from the outset, and that, together with the fact that Dick Kerr were wizard electricians, is what led me up the garden path.

 

Kevin

 

PS: photos of the GNR ones are a bit elusive, so here is a very dodgy iPad snap of a print that Kidner tacked into the back of his book, presumably for use in the next edition. It is pretty much identical with the first LBSCR one.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Edwardian]

I have just enjoyed catching up.  I was off the air today because I took the day off to do modellin'.  First time for months, since July in fact, and it felt GOOD! 

 

Nothing Brighton connected, I am bound to say, but firmly pre-grouping period.  I mentioned, many pages back, that my first attempt at building a layout would be a little light railway style venture, but that it was in abeyance.  It's now out of beyance.

 

Something Brighton will follow, but I want to get this apprentice piece underway first.  

[corneliuslundie]

Oh dear. I think I am going to have to ask the author of the book I am dealing with whether he wants to revise his text which definitely says petrol electric from new.

 

There are certainly no large underslung battery boxes on either of them in the photos.

 

"Out of beyance" - wonderful.

 

Jonathan

[Edwardian]

Certainly nowhere the Brighton ran, but, I have managed to start a second range of buildings for my little freelance BLT.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Edwardian

[Nearholmer]

Quality work, Sir!

 

Where are they from? I ask, because they do look awfully like the sort of knapped flint construction that is used on the South Downs (in Brighton territory) and along the Chilterns.

 

The Brighton might even have built the odd station from knapped flint; I thought Glynde, but having checked, perhaps not.

 

Kevin

Edited January 25, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Edwardian]

Thanks, Kevin, and, yes, I realise that there is flint-knapped construction in the South East, though I am not familiar with the vernacular architectural styles associated with it in that region.

 

Cyril Freezer once said, or so I read, that one should be able to identify the railway company, or, perhaps, the geographical setting, of a layout without any locomotives or stock present.  Well, in my case, as the locomotives and rolling stock will be odd, old, small and Victorian, in the ownership of a freelance company, their presence wouldn't be of much help.

 

I must rely on my attempts to capture the vernacular of a particular area.  If successful, there is a fair chance that some viewers will be able to identify the area in which my fictional village is set.  If I fail, I will have to tell you where it is supposed to be!

 

I suspect that the scene will need to be far nearer to completion for you to have a fair shot at guessing/working it out.  Let's put it this way, the Great Mr Downes of this parish used to produce whole hand-scribed Cotswold villages at places like Pecorama.  The point is, you always and instantly knew you were in the Cotswolds.  Well, the Cotswolds is a very recognisable region, but you get what I am driving at?   

 

So, to recap., the long row of cottage backs was my second model building (the first being a test run with a Scalescenes kit), and first scratch build/kit bash.  It was constructed between April and June last year.  In July, or so, I started on the group of buildings to the right.  Personal circumstances then placed it into abeyance.  Yesterday, a fresh start was made and I advanced the rearmost, 'L'-shaped structure from a basic shell.

 

This structure is approximately to HO or 1/87 scale; there is a bit of forced perspective going on.  Nothing too ambitious, as these are my first attempts and the composition still has time to go badly wrong. 

 

Anyway, please don't let this inter-regional working derail the fascinating discussion of Brighton railcars and stations, and Edwardiana in general ... I am learning a lot and enjoying it hugely.

[Nick Holliday]

Nick

But, Kidner goes on to say that, after they went to the electrification department: "Accumulators and motors for electric drive were also fitted, and in this form they survived until 1930".

It's the "also fitted" that bugs me ...... It implies that the mechanical drive may have been left in-situ, rather than ripped out, but the position of the battery boxes goes against that.

And, there are other, clearly erroneous, sources that cite them as being PE from the outset, and that, together with the fact that Dick Kerr were wizard electricians, is what led me up the garden path.

 

Kevin

 

PS: photos of the GNR ones are a bit elusive, so here is a very dodgy iPad snap of a print that Kidner tacked into the back of his book, presumably for use in the next edition. It is pretty much identical with the first LBSCR one.

Kevin

Thanks for the GNR photo, one I haven't seen before.  However, it isn't identical with the first LBSCR one.  That was No. 3 and it looked very different.

The next to be delivered, No. 4, was a bit closer in appearance, but there is a fundamental difference between the central passenger entrance and the GNR's end entrances, not to mention that originally both the LBSC cars had half open ends and gangways, quickly closed in.

Just for comparison here is the GNR vehicle in stationary mode.

The Brighton car that resembled the GNR one was actually the Electrical Engineering Department No 1, supplied in May1908, and I have a theory that this vehicle is actually the GNR one, which slipped off their radar in the second half of 1908. 

The most familiar photo of the Electrical Department cars is this, which shows No 1 and the converted No 4 (although it has a closer resemblance at first glance to No 3 there are a number of key identifiers that confirm its number, which actually clearly visible on the print I have.)

At the angle of this view it is clear that the accumulator boxes are hanging outside the solebars, and thus would not interfere with the existing transmission arrangements if they were retained, and, to my mind they are not large enough to provide sufficient power to move the car for a long period, but more than enough to power the lighting required for working at night. In addition, the radiators, which were hung under the front of the cars, are clearly visible, and surely these would have been removed if they had been converted to battery only power.

[Nearholmer]

Brilliant stuff, Nick!

 

I see what you mean about the battery boxes, but, following Kidner's ambiguity, they could still have had traction motors fitted, even if battery range was limited.

 

While you've been looking at the siblings, I've been hunting for the parents, knowing that various Daimler-related companies had been building railcars since the 1880s.

 

I think I've found the mother or father of our GNR/LBSCR ones, in the form of this, which (subject to further confirmation) I think was built by Austro-Daimler in 1902 for KkStB (Royal Austrian Stare Railways). Pretty similar, eh?

 

Shortly after this, when Porsche joined them, Austro-Daimler got heavily into petrol-electric drives, notably convertible road/rail tractors for the military, paralleling what Dick Kerr did during WW1.

 

Kevin

 

PS: for completeness, and so that I can refer back to it, this general type seems to have begun with car BW1 of the Wurtemmbergische StB in 1896 (sources conflict on this date) which was followed by four others for the same customer up to 1900. The first one at least had a more "locomotive" cab at each end of the tramcar-type body. The structures were by Esslingen, and the engine and drive Daimler (Canstatt Werke). At least one car of the same type went to KSStEB in 1904.

 

The second photo and drawing show the car owned by the Swiss North. Eastern Railway from 1900, which I think might have come secondhand from WStB, it was built in 1894/5.

Edited January 25, 2016 by Nearholmer

[Nearholmer]

And, just for completeness, here is the granddaddy of 'em all, as preserved in the Mercedes Benz museum.

 

The LBSCR had some Daimler draisines, I think, and there is a well known photo of a road-car type draisine festooned with route indicator discs, although I'm too 'flu inflicted to go hunting round the house to find the book with it in (Bennett Collection?), so I can't check whether that was a Daimler or not.

 

K

[Nearholmer]

Village location?

 

Remembering stuff from O Level geography: somewhere where the pale green Cretaceous bits on this map (chalk, therefore flint), meet the east coast (tile-making techniques, and even tiles, imported from the lowlands).

 

Sussex looks very similar, but more often uses peg tiles, Kent is a bit of a mixture, I think.

 

So, shall I try Blakeney, Norfolk, if only because it is such a fascinating place in general, and really ought to have had a light railway.

 

K

Edited January 25, 2016 by Nearholmer

[justin1985]

Such fascinating stuff on this thread! 

 

The range of buildings look excellent - really convincing, especially as a proper range of buildings that look like they've grown up together over the years rather than been jumbled together by someone designing a model railway Is the stone texture from a Scalescenes (or equivalent?) printed sheet, or actually a scaled image of a real building? The variation and weathering is excellent. The combination of flints and rich terracotta pantiles makes me think Norfolk - and with the superb medieval gateway nestled amongst the houses, I'm thinking of Castle Acre. Am I warm? 

 

The petrol railcars are fascinating - really elegant little cars - reminiscent of contemporary tramcars, and very model-able! More ammunition for my Wealden branch line thoughts ... (must focus!)

 

Justin

[Edwardian]

Well done, Kevin.  The 'flu has clearly not impaired your faculties.

 

It is a fictitious place, so no precise location is possible, but it is supposedly west Norfolk, near as damn it to Blakeney.

[Edwardian]

Justin,

 

Our posts crossed.  Are you warm?  You are white hot.

 

You are as near as any fictional place can be to a real place.  Many of the structures, including the gateway, are based on Castle Acre.  The name chosen for the layout is Castle Aching (Castle Acre and Castle Rising names combined, for the benefit of those not up on Norfolk place names).

 

And, yes, there will be a castle in due course.  The ultimate inspiration, though it will look nothing like, is the castle corner-piece on Madder Valley (I love MVR).

 

To answer the question, I started with the row of cottage backs.  For the 4 little flint cottages, I took wall textures from the Scalescenes Row of Cottages, the flint and brick option, obviously. The pan-tiles are all from that kit too.

 

When I was looking at a photo of the arch, which is the rear of the towered gateway at the start of Bailey Street, Castle Acre, I thought to myself 'why not just size and print the photo'.  That has lead me to use resized textures from photographs on other structures and, where suitable, whole elevations.  

 

So, the building I tackled yesterday has a gable end using Model Railway Scenery flint, with over washings of white paint, because it's too dark for the Norfolk buildings.  The wing uses a photograph of cottages in Castle Acre.  So this structure is a combination of photographs and proprietary texture sheets, and I suspect that I will continue to use both.

 

Rather than adapt kit-windows, for the first time I used pictures of the real windows.  Windows use the now fairly common technique of printing onto self-adhesive labels, sticking to clear plastic with the panes cut out.  

[justin1985]

Excellent! Its a fascinating village and your model captures the atmosphere perfectly. How will the railway relate to this scene?

 

My "one day" model will be Clare, Suffolk, where the Marks Tey-Cambridge line threaded between the motte of a Norman castle and an Augustinian friary. The station itself was built within the outer bailey of the castle, and lane led from the river and the end of the goods yard, past a row of brick cottages and a granary, up to a vast half-timbered sixteenth century coaching inn, and the medieval high street. A very different East Anglian vernacular, but perhaps a similar atmosphere

 

Justin

[Edwardian]

Thanks, Justin.

 

An outstanding location, Clare.  You realise people will point at a goods shed next to a Norman Motte and tell you how unrealistic that is!  You must do this.

 

"How will the railway relate to this scene?"

 

Err, umm.  Not sure.

 

Somewhere in front, on a curve.

[corneliuslundie]

I have been in touch with my Brighton author. He has responded very quickly: "Definitely petrol mechanical, the plan of No 3 states Automobile Carriage."

 

Time to move on. Not sure about umber locos at Castle Acre but the M&GN had yellow ones. Yes, Blakeney is delightful, as are several of the villages along the coast such as Kelling, though not all have castles I am afraid. And those buildings are very promising. Do they actually need a railway?

 

And Clare, too. There has been a layout from down the line at Glemsford though that does not have nearly so much character (but on the other hand my daughter lived there for a while).

 

Jonathan

 

Not my layout, by the way. Photographed at a show.

Edited January 25, 2016 by corneliuslundie

[Edwardian]

Jonathan, that's beautiful and outshines my meagre efforts, but great models inspire poor ones to become reasonable, and, hopefully, ever better!

 

In line with a completely fictional, rather than 'might have been' setting, I am trying not to tie myself down with too elaborate a backstory (though I do enjoy detailed alternative histories and have contrived a few myself).  I imagine, though, that this little line has survived independent to the turn of the Century because it is backed and part-owned by the Great Eastern, but now finds itself surrounded by the M&GN post the last spate of amalgamations and the joint line breaking cover in, I think, about 1893.

 

This might, in due course, allow the odd M&GN service, as the West Norfolk Railway (for so it will be known) connects to the national network via the M&GN, but allows Great Eastern services to trespass on the M&GN in order to reach the WNR.

 

That, however, is pie in the sky future talk; I have first to build the village, the station, and bodge-up some suitably eccentric stock for the WNR.  

 

As for umber, I might yet work round to the OP, given time; once upon a time I think locomotives of both the Great Eastern and its rival (Eastern Counties?) wore green, but whereas the GER famously adopted Prussian Blue, I seem to recall that the Eastern & Midland, as the competition became, adopted brown or umber. 

[justin1985]

If you haven't already, take a look at the Oakwood press history of the West Norfolk Junction Railway (book is called "The Lynn & Hunstanton Railway and the West Norfolk Branch"). The line ran from Heacham (Hunstanton) to Wells. I always find it fascinating to read about the financial chicanery and desperate deal making of these independent companies. I don't think the GER were ever that thrilled about absorbing the line. 

 

I think Iain Rice had some great very early GER ochre and green locos on one of his EM layouts back in early issues of MRJ? (see, nearly back at umber!). Of course, if the Mid Suffolk remained independent right until grouping, and the KESR until nationalisation, a reimagined West Norfolk could easily have done so! 

 

I saw that Glemsford layout at a show perhaps five or ten years ago, and got talking to the owner, who sent me a photocopy of a set of measured plans of the station building (which is the same "1865" waiting shelter as the station at Cockfield and the second platform shelter on all other stations on the line). I can't remember his name now though - David Hawkins, or Hoskins? I seem to remember he was based on the south coast somewhere.

 

Justin