The Oak Hill Branch - LBSCR / SECR 1905ish - New layout starts on page 129

[BlueLightning]

I agree the terriers do look quite amusing at the head of a rake of carriages, that this image of Fenchurch pulling the Santa special a few years ago. It almost looks like they have got a terrier in the wrong scale.

 

Gary

[richard i]

The misses says you lot are a bad influence on me, if I were you I'd take that as a compliment.

 

 

That is the same terrier as was in the above shot with the lamp posts. until the 2-4-0T configuration was suggested to me it was Bodiam in K&ESR Blue livery. I think it looks much better in Umber. I have moved the sandboxes that Hornby put on the front backwards and I had put sand pipes on but the one on this side has already fallen off. With it coming off that quick I may not bother to replace it but I am quite happy with how this has come out. Just some transfers and number plates to order now.

 

and evidently I found a nice shot of number 81 on Edwardian's "Umber is the New Black" thread here: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/104321-umber-is-the-new-black/page-11&do=findComment&comment=2187006

 

Thanks for looking,

 

Gary

Sorry for the idea. Personally I think you have done a great job. It make it a special engine because it is different.

Richard

[BlueLightning]

Thanks Richard,

 

I am finding a new problem now though. All the pictures I can find of them appear to show them pulling a Balloon push pull carriage. I believe these didn't exist in 1905 when they were first converted. Does anyone know what they would of pulled in 1905? or at least know of a good candidate for what it would have been?

 

Gary

Edited October 8, 2016 by BlueLightning

[Edwardian]

Thanks Richard,

 

I am finding a new problem now though. All the pictures I can find of them appear to show them pulling a Balloon push pull carriage. These didn't exist in 1905 when they were first converted. Does anyone know what they would of pulled in 1905? or at least know of a good candidate for what it would have been?

 

Gary

 

Around 1905 several companies were experimenting with both Railmotors and Motor Trains (i.e. Auto-Trains) in order to achieve economnies.  The latter outlasted the former.

 

In the case of the Brighton, Railmotors started with the Dick Kerr internal combustion units from February 1905, whilst the first Motor Train, Terrier plus Balloon Trailer, was the Brighton-Worthing service in September 1905.

 

So the short answer is that this sort of train simply did not exist before 1905. 

 

EDIT:  Thus, if you are seeking employment for the 2-4-0T configuration, you will be looking at a Motor Train, because the conversion to 2-4-0 occurred at this time and the locomotives thus altered were destined for Motor Train services, thus:

 

• No. 82, Boxhill, is converted and trialled March-June 1905 (with a Trailer Car).  Handed over to the running department on 18 July and commences on the Brighton-Worthing service on 3 September, 1905.  Note, No. 82 is said to have worn Stroudley Goods Green and to have retained her name.

 

• No. 81 is converted and fitted with Motor Train gear in September 1905.  It is No. 81 which is in Marsh Umber.  No. 81 commences service on 27 September 1905 on the Brighton-Worthing service.

 

• More Terriers are converted to replace Railmotors on the Eastbourne-St Leonards route, and further Motor Train services are introduced in 1906-7.

 

So, the answer to your question is: Third class Balloon Trailers to diagram 105/179 - the first diagram produced.  This is the type pictured behind No.81 at Kemp Town.

 

So my comments below apply, of course, to 0-6-0 Terriers.  It is interesting that the Terriers were struggling with their loads by the turn of the Century, which is why the LBSC starts to sell them off.  Then, when they realise the possible use of the class for Motor Trains, and especially when the petrol and steam Rail-motors are a disappointment, the class gets something of a new lease of life.

 

The 'go to' book for non-Motor Train services is probably White, Turner & Foulkes, LB&SCR Carriages, Volume 1, which is in print and well worth the money.

 

I would suggest, therefore, that 4-wheelers, such as the K's Stroudley or the very Stroudleyesque Bachmann coaches, would be perfectly suitable. 

 

At plate 5.17 of the book, we have a Stroudley-Era scene at Victoria, with a D1 and a mix of Stroudley and Craven coaches. 

 

Plate 5.23 shows Craven coaches are pictured behind Terrier Martello at Eastbourne c.1880.

 

More your line are probably the following examples:

 

• Plate 6.2, undated, but showing Terrier Gipsyhill, with a set of 7 Stroudley 4-wheelers, and you can see the whole rake: Brake, x2 5 compt. Thirds, x 2 4-compt. coaches, so Second or First/Second Composites, 5 compt Third, Brake.

 

• Plate 6.8: Terrier Brighton with an 8-coach Stroudley suburban close-coupled block train.

 

• Plate 6.9: D1 with a 10-coach Stroudley suburban close-coupled block train.

 

• Plate 6.11: Terrier Poplar with a Stroudley Brake Third, Composite, Brake Third service (also reproduced in the Ian Allen Stroudley Locomotives volume

 

So far as I am aware, the Stroudley 4-wheelers were never repainted in umber and cream.

Edited October 8, 2016 by Edwardian

[BlueLightning]

Thanks James,

 

I have held out on buying that book due to its cost. However searching now it seems to have dropped to £20.00 which I think is more manageable for a book.

 

(WARNING SHAMELESS PLUG AHEAD) I shall have a look at the Uckfield MRC Exhibition on the 15th & 16th October at the Uckfield Civic Center 10am - 5pm both days as we have a very good bookseller coming along. (End shameless plug of club show)

 

Gary

Edited October 10, 2016 by BlueLightning

[Edwardian]

Thanks James,

 

I have held out on buying that book due to its cost. However searching now it seems to have dropped to £20.00 which I think is more manageable for a book.

 

(WARNING SHAMELESS PLUG AHEAD) I shall have a look at the Uckfield MRC Exhibition on the 15th 16th October at the Uckfield Civic Center as we have a very good bookseller coming along. (End shameless plug of club show)

 

Gary

 

 

Gary, apologies.  In my groggy state this morning, I completely missed the point of your post, which was to find something for the 2-4-0 Terrier to pull in 1905.  So, I have edited the post and you will see that the answer is "a Balloon Trailer"

[BlueLightning]

Not a problem James, your post was, as usual a very informative and interesting read.

 

EDIT: would I be wanting the same as what is pictured here for 1905? http://www.lbscrmodels.co.uk/boxhill.html

 

Gary

Edited October 8, 2016 by BlueLightning

[BlueLightning]

• No. 82, Boxhill, is converted and trialled March-June 1905 (with a Trailer Car).  Handed over to the running department on 18 July and commences on the Brighton-Worthing service on 3 September, 1905.  Note, No. 82 is said to have worn Stroudley Goods Green and to have retained her name.

 

I had heard this about Boxhill's livery as well, however if you look at the photos here: http://www.lbscrmodels.co.uk/boxhill.html of when Boxhill was a 2-4-0T is looks to me like it is wearing I.E.G not Goods Green.

 

Gary

[Edwardian]

I had heard this about Boxhill's livery as well, however if you look at the photos here: http://www.lbscrmodels.co.uk/boxhill.html of when Boxhill was a 2-4-0T is looks to me like it is wearing I.E.G not Goods Green.

 

Gary

 

Yes, I was struck by the oddness of the reference to Goods Green - it is from the RCTS volume 1, page 160 - IEG seems far more likely and I agree that the photograph appears (to me) to show Boxhill in IEG.  EDIT: The site you linked to points out the difference in lining- the 2-4-0 version has appears to have a plain incurve.  It is not Stroudley Goods Green, but perhaps there was a repaint and that it was to a two-tone experimental goods green!

 

Yes, that is the trailer.  It is readily identifiable because, of the 3 Trailer diagrams built 1905-1907, only the first, diagram 179 of 1905, had a gangway connection on the non-driving end.  This is exactly the type for both Boxhill and No.81 (ex-Beulah) on the Brighton-Worthing service from September 1905.  There were 2 of these vehicles, Nos. 1326 and 1327.

 

For details of the Trailers see Newbury's Carriage Stock of the LB&SCR and, especially, Gould, Bogie Carriages of the London Brighton & South Coast Railway.

Edited October 8, 2016 by Edwardian

[BlueLightning]

Thanks again James,

 

I can't find a copy of Newbury's book online however I have found a couple of copies of Gould's book for a reasonable price so will get one ordered.

 

Gary

[Edwardian]

Thanks again James,

 

I can't find a copy of Newbury's book online however I have found a couple of copies of Gould's book for a reasonable price so will get one ordered.

 

Gary

 

These books make sense if you understand that Gould is essentially an updated/expanded version of Newbury, but restricted to the bogie coaches, whereas Newbury covers everything.  Gould reproduces the drawings in Newbury, but, alas, not to 4mm Scale.  They are in 4mm scale in Newbury.

 

The fact that Gould here is able to use older drawings from a previous work explains why his SE&CR bogie coaches volume is not similarly blessed with drawings (and is the poorer for it). 

 

What Gould will give you is a plan view with dimensions and the side of the vehicle, neither to 4mm.  Newbury gives you the side drawing in 4mm and no plan.

 

I have found life easier since owning both!

Edited October 8, 2016 by Edwardian

[BlueLightning]

I will try my hardest to get both then.

 

Gary

[Roger.s]

Afternoon Gary,

 

Leading Terrier wheel set was 2ft 9ins in old money according to the Brian Haresnape Stroudley Loco Book. It sez here that numbers 81/82 were converted and subsequentl;y in 1913 returned to 0-6-0 configuration. Coupled wheels were 4ft diameter.

 

Hope that helps!

 

Cheers 

 

Craig.

 

Does anyone know why Brighton changed the locos from 0-6-0T to 2-4-0T? It seems like a lot of expense but for what gain; then more cost to convert them back.

 

Roger

[BG John]

Does anyone know why Brighton changed the locos from 0-6-0T to 2-4-0T? It seems like a lot of expense but for what gain; then more cost to convert them back.

 

Roger

Four coupled locos were thought to be better for passenger work than 6 coupled, although I can't remember the exact reason. Some companies removed the coupling rods from the rear drivers on 0-6-0Ts for passenger work.

[Mad Carew Too]

Does anyone know why Brighton changed the locos from 0-6-0T to 2-4-0T? It seems like a lot of expense but for what gain; then more cost to convert them back.

 

Roger

 

Especially as  the GE simply disconnected the front drivers instead!

[Edwardian]

Especially as  the GE simply disconnected the front drivers instead!

 

You're not wrong there!  We'll have you in Prussian blue, rather than North Western black, before we're done!

[Edwardian]

 

In the early days, when precision engineering was as much about luck as anything, cumulative errors in quartering were thought to cause more problems with more wheels and coupling rods.

The GER had the idea that removing the front coupling rods reduced wear on the flanges and rails.

The LNEr though otherwise, and put the rods back on for the most part - 100% adhesive weight was deemed more important.

  <cough> <splutter>

Unless the GER ran in Somerset and Dorset, I think you'll find it was ultramarine!

(VW "marine blue" paint is a perfect match, by the way... Who needs an airbrush?)

 

Yes, but "Prussian Blue" sounds so much more impressive!

[Edwardian]

Impressive, yes. But still wrong...

 

But I forget myself: you are a lawyer, and if we can equate impressive with persuasive, then I can see why you would be prefer to be persuasive over accurate...

 

According to the GERS website "The actual blue colour used was a pure ultramarine blue - a tin of which is in the GERS Collection. When painted over the French grey undercoat and varnished this gave a very deep, rich blue". 

 

The implication being that, although "pure ultramarine blue" was the basis of the livery colour, the resultant shade was distinct, being a product of the effect of undercoat and varnish.  Necessarily, therefore, the livery would not have appeared as "pure ultramarine blue".

 

But, I am bound to concede that Prussian Blue and Ultramarine Blue are terms that refer to distinct pigments.  Illustrations suggest that a variety of shades are possible from each.  Perhaps the colloquial use of the term Prussian Blue was thought to reflect the rich dark blue appearance of GE locomotives better than ultramarine, though, as both pigments can yield rich dark blue, the technically correct name is no doubt preferable.  

 

I have always considered the perfect colour-match as a creature of fiction.  Variations in mix and application and varnish, dirt, weathering, cleaning, bleaching on the prototype, the effect of scale upon the model and the effect of light upon both conspire to give me a Casual and Cavalier attitude to livery shade.  But, assuming, despite this, I manage to happen upon a reasonable approximation of GE blue - and thanks to your rattle-can tip, I just might -  whether or not it looks the part will remain unaffected by my romantic notions of nomenclature! 

 

In deference to Gary, should we discuss umber now, or, perhaps, William Stroudley's colour blindness?!?

Edited October 11, 2016 by Edwardian

[Edwardian]

GER blue is darker than Prussian blue, and without the black border lined red, looks horrible. Polished brass also helps.

(Don't forget that cab fronts and rears were plain black, too.)

 

Incidentally, after using the VW marine blue, I put spots of Gloy and Precision Paints GER blue on the underside of the boiler. They all but disappeared.

 

Given that the difference between S, which is presumably the scale in which you were working, and 4mm is not so very great, I dare hope that your Volkswagen shade will be as effective in 4mm.  A very valuable tip!  We should certainly plan for at least one GE loco on CA, but, wait, we are not in Norfolk, but the Sunny South.

 

Apologies Gary.  Blame Mad Carew and call him an elephant!

[BG John]

Given that the difference between S, which is presumably the scale in which you were working, and 4mm is not so very great, I dare hope that your Volkswagen shade will be as effective in 4mm.  A very valuable tip!  We should certainly plan for at least one GE loco on CA, but, wait, we are not in Norfolk, but the Sunny South.

 

Apologies Gary.  Blame Mad Carew and call him an elephant!

The K&ESR was in the south, and used GER blue. With all the extensions originally proposed, it would have met, or come close to, the Brighton and South Eastern at various places. Does Volkswagen blue match Dapol's O gauge Terriers?

[Edwardian]

The K&ESR was in the south, and used GER blue. With all the extensions originally proposed, it would have met, or come close to, the Brighton and South Eastern at various places. Does Volkswagen blue match Dapol's O gauge Terriers?

 

A world of possibilities opens up for both you and for Gary.

 

Except hasn't he just painted his blue Terrier brown?

[Nick Holliday]

Four coupled locos were thought to be better for passenger work than 6 coupled, although I can't remember the exact reason. Some companies removed the coupling rods from the rear drivers on 0-6-0Ts for passenger work.

Marsh had just arrived at Brighton from Doncaster and he brought with him an abhorrence of front coupled locos.  Despite the LBSC having a large fleet of this type, one of is first actions was to convert a number of the new E5 0-6-2 tanks, and a handful of E4's, to 2-4-2 by simply removing the front section of the coupling rods.  By 1909 they had been quietly replaced, and the locos were back to full power. In contrast, his new 4-4-2 suburban tanks, based loosely on GNR designs, were an abject failure. 

As regards the Terriers, he seems to have given them a thorough make-over to make sure they were set-up to provide the most economic service possible.  As they were only expected to deal with two coaches maximum, he reduced the cylinder diameter considerably and lowered the boiler pressure, measures which would also reduce maintenance as well as running costs, as would the reinstatement of the condensing arrangements.  Perhaps the removal of the front driving wheel was part of this economy drive, with four wheels deemed to give sufficient traction for the anticipated tasks, whilst the overall weight of the loco wold have been reduced slightly.  However, these changes were quickly found to be detrimental to good running and no others were dealt with and the sleeves in the cylinders removed and the boiler pressure returned to normal.  It just took a little longer for the front wheels to be reinstated, presumably because they were being given shunting duties as the larger D1 tanks took over the autocoach duties.

[BlueLightning]

Apologies Gary.  Blame Mad Carew and call him an elephant!

 

No need for apologies. I am quite enjoying reading the discussion about GER colours. it is a very attractive livery after all.

 

I do also have another blue terrier although that is closer to LMR blue than K&ESR

 

Gary

[BlueLightning]

Marsh had just arrived at Brighton from Doncaster and he brought with him an abhorrence of front coupled locos.  Despite the LBSC having a large fleet of this type, one of is first actions was to convert a number of the new E5 0-6-2 tanks, and a handful of E4's, to 2-4-2 by simply removing the front section of the coupling rods.  By 1909 they had been quietly replaced, and the locos were back to full power. In contrast, his new 4-4-2 suburban tanks, based loosely on GNR designs, were an abject failure. 

As regards the Terriers, he seems to have given them a thorough make-over to make sure they were set-up to provide the most economic service possible.  As they were only expected to deal with two coaches maximum, he reduced the cylinder diameter considerably and lowered the boiler pressure, measures which would also reduce maintenance as well as running costs, as would the reinstatement of the condensing arrangements.  Perhaps the removal of the front driving wheel was part of this economy drive, with four wheels deemed to give sufficient traction for the anticipated tasks, whilst the overall weight of the loco wold have been reduced slightly.  However, these changes were quickly found to be detrimental to good running and no others were dealt with and the sleeves in the cylinders removed and the boiler pressure returned to normal.  It just took a little longer for the front wheels to be reinstated, presumably because they were being given shunting duties as the larger D1 tanks took over the autocoach duties.

 

 

Thanks for the very informative post Nick. Your knowledge is very much appreciated.

 

Gary

[BlueLightning]

Well since the talk on GER livery seems to have ended I suppose I should post that update I used to do every Tuesday.

 

My mojo really has returned following the work on the terrier and I have spent time working on the buildings for Oak Hill firstly I have done some more to the station building and will be putting bricks on it as the next step, it has had paint applied to some areas since the pictures were taken:

 

Although the building looks bowed in the photo it is actually the wood it is on that has bowed. The building sits on the platform quite nicely

 

Realising that I had no brick sheet to clad the building in and wanting to carry on I have also started work on the stable which can be seen next to the paper mock=up that has sat on the layout for many months:

 

I originally made it to big and had to remove a section from it. Much like the mock-up but I am very happy with how it is looking and I have got more brick sheet today which I'm sure my misses will spend a good portion of the evening painting then the buildings can progress further. I also have some more bits ordered that should arrive this week so plenty to be getting on with.

 

Thanks for looking,

 

Gary

Edited April 11, 2017 by BlueLightning