Jump to content

Skinnylinny

Great Southern Railway (Fictitious) - LSWR Stock Updates

Recommended Posts

On 24/04/2020 at 19:52, Skinnylinny said:

Not much of a modelling update today, but rather a preparation. When I was down south for the Uckfield show (which feels like many, many moons ago already, but only six months ago (!)), Gary @BlueLightning and I did a trade - me offering some LBSC wagons, in exchange for some "resin wagon kits, I think they're LSWR".

I was presented with many resin parts, carefully wrapped in tissue, which unfortunately had gone very brittle and "tacky" and removing them from the tissue turned out to be difficult - I broke three wagon ends just trying to get them out of the tissue. They turned out to be Maple Models kits.
20200424_191930.jpg


Well, today I was feeling brave... or foolhardy. Could go either way. I've decided to have a go at the Panter brake van. As lovely and crisp and detailed as the castings are, the brittleness means I can't drill holes for handrails, so this will decidedly end up as a layout wagon. There are a few bits that need some filling (notably the corner nearest the camera) and some very cautious sanding. 
 

20200526_230456.jpg

The eagle-eyed will spot two compromises immediately:
1) I've used some plastruct strip instead of wire for the handrails, as mentioned above.
2) I haven't built up the chassis from etched axleguards, cast springs etc as expected in the kit instructions. I've bodged a Hornby wagon chassis (which is not quite right in wheelbase, and is way out in terms of brake gear, but I'm slowly carving that away) as a temporary underframe, as I intend to split it and correct the wheelbase.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, good news.

A few weeks back, a friend from the model railway club shared a job advert with me, for an opening in his company (some new upstart company called Network Rail, I've never heard of them. Are they some sort of managing committee like the SE&CR?). Well, with nothing to lose during furlough, I tidied up my CV and sent in an application. 

Today's the interview. Well, except that in These Trying Times it's a sort of virtual interview. I receive pre-recorded questions, and have to give an answer on video from home, but with no visual feedback from the listener. I know I've complained in the past that it feels like job-hunting is becoming more and more depersonalised, but an interview without an interviewer actually being there? 

Anyway, speaking of Network Rail, I was reminded of the book Railtrack and other Letters, which is available online for free at https://www.brokenmind.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/railtrack.pdf

The introduction is as follows:

Until reaching financial difficulty in 2002, much of Britainʼs railway infrastructure was operated by Railtrack plc. The company was sold to Network Rail. The removal of ʻRailtrackʼ from the Companies House register allowed John Hein to register Railtrack Ltd as a company in Scotland, and so Railtrack Ltd was born in May 2003.

 

Those looking up the company would note that the Registered Office is that of an Edinburgh tenement and that the company has remained dormant since incorporation. The rebirth of Railtrack has caused confused solicitors, debt collectors and private individuals to address correspondence to Railtrack Ltd, and in turn, to receive entertaining replies. Only replies to correspondence are shown. The original letters are not reproduced, but the nature of the original letter is inferred.


I certainly found it good for a laugh, although there is some rather coarse language involved. 

  • Like 6
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck!

 

I'm surprised they can't do some kind of VC interview (skype/zoom/etc) so that you can get the interaction and feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skinnylinny said:

an interview without an interviewer actually being there? 

Bit like a railway company without a customer-servicing train...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Regularity said:

Bit like a railway company without a customer-servicing train...?

Or the episode in 'Yes Prime Minister' where he visited a new hospital which was running extremely smoothly and efficiently - but had no patients!

 

Good luck, Linny!

 

Jim

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the kind wishes. The interview is over. Four very generic questions, and a message that "We'll be in touch shortly". I don't expect to hear back until after the deadline for the video interview submission next week, but until then, all appropriate appendages are crossed. 

In other news, several keys on my laptop keyboard have died suddenly (meaning my top row of keys now gives QETYOP and nothing more) so posts will be somewhat less frequent until I can repair it.

  • Friendly/supportive 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best wishes with the interview! But how did you spell "frequent" without the R key?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jamespetts said:

Best wishes with the interview! But how did you spell "frequent" without the R key?

On my mobile phone! Although typing on here is rather a pain, hence why I won't be updating too much. 

  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Skinnylinny said:

In other news, several keys on my laptop keyboard have died suddenly (meaning my top row of keys now gives QETYOP and nothing more) so posts will be somewhat less frequent until I can repair it.

 

Best cure for this is a dirt-cheap USB keyboard, a lot less hassle then having to open them up.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having now finally found instructions on how to dismantle the laptop in order to get to the keyboard, I have to agree with you! I work with repairing electronics so I'm happy enough undoing ribbon cables and working with PCBs, but the point at which I had to get the heat pipe off the processor was the point at which I said "enough's enough". 

Anyway, the weather here in Edinburgh is gorgeous (19 degrees just before 9am!), so I'm going to try to go out for my walk before the huge crowds begin. Then I might do something less nerve-racking, like having a go at some brake gear for the LSWR brake van.

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the sun has been out, and I have managed to gain access to the Hacklab laser cutter (having had to make sure nobody else was going to be around, and taking many precautions). Technically it was classed as "going to work" as I was cutting some bits for sale for an order placed months ago. However, a few other kits may have accidentally fallen into the "to be lasered" pile. 

The two Stroudley 6-wheel full brakes for my fixed rake have now had corrected bodies cut, and one is already
looking decidedly carriage-shaped:

20200607_211858.jpg

Lurking in the background can also be seen an LSWR 1st/2nd composite which gives some much-needed non-third-class accommodation to my LSWR carriage stock:

Composite.jpg.c4ab5e04a7553aee6fb0b77abf4d5250.jpg

And finally, something which popped up on my Twitter feed, and which I feel would be appreciated by you 'orrible reprobates! 
 

 

  • Like 6
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Not much to report this week. More painting (first coat of mahogany on the Stroudley 6-wheel brake, being left to harden before the next coat tomorrow, and the chocolate on the LSWR composite), plus some lettering. I think I'm starting to get the hang of making running numbers up out of these pressfix transfers - it's the few seconds of mobility you have when the transfer's wet but the paper hasn't come off yet that's the real clincher. So, the LSWR 42' third has a running number (343), and lettering. This one will be lettered "L&SWR" as compared to "LSWR" for the 42' brake third (which was a later rebuild of the 42' third type, so wouldn't have seen L&SWR lettering). Until I can get around to proper underframe detailing, the Triang clerestory underframe moulding actually doesn't look too bad. Sure, the queenposts are about a foot too close together, and the gas tanks are on the wrong diagonal, but they fill up the gap between the bogies nicely.

A parcel arrived today from H&A Models with some Markits buffers (which look close enough to LSWR carriage buffers for me!) and some 40 pairs of 14mm Mansell wheels - eagle-eyed viewers will note that I've borrowed some Bachmann 14mm wheels for one of the bogies on this third, so they'll be getting changed out in the morning!

790607021_LSWRThirdLettered.jpg.926ec34907c8aa4bbcd1f5f15b73bc0a.jpg

Still to do on this carriage: Pick out the droplights on the other side, then letter up and glaze. Add door handles and grab rails (yay!), vac pipes, end handrails and try to find some suitable footsteps for the ends. I'd rather do these in etched metal than card for strength - does anyone know where I could get an etch of just footsteps, or should I get some strip and bend up my own?

Edited by Skinnylinny
  • Like 10
  • Craftsmanship/clever 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Goodness me that looks brilliant!

  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you! Strictly speaking, of course, the panelling should all be lined out in red and black, but I've yet to figure out a way of doing that that's within my abilities!

64492807_1573319586135727_14150284980948

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn damn damn. I just discovered that the 42' brake third I've been working on to go with this... was in fact not converted to a brake until 1909, which means it simply can't be the main representation of a LSWR brake carriage for Linton. Linton was always intended to be a secondary or branch line when it comes to LSWR stock, so it looks like while the 42' Third (of 1889) would have been around, but it looks like Linton would most likely have seen 6-wheeled carriage stock.   

Guess who has another chapter of LSWR Carriages to read. I can't seem to find any reference to 6-wheel and bogie stock being used together, with the exception of 6-wheel luggage vans, so I suspect my 42' Third might in fact be useless, unless anyone else knows better?

  • Friendly/supportive 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As to the lining, I wouldn't bother - the highlights and shadows of the beading edges do the job. I would paint the bolections the same colour as the droplights, per your photo. 

 

I think you'd have a hard time proving that bogie and 6-wheeled stock was never mixed, though I gather the LSWR went in for fixed sets. One train of bogies (plus 6-wheel brake) and one of 6-wheelers? The bogie set might be on a mid-day filling-in turn from main-line duty.

 

Accident Reports may be worth exploring, e.g. Virginia Water, 1900, up Chertsey train: brake 134, bogie third 49, bogie composite 344, bogie third 1160.

 

 

 

Edited by Compound2632
  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some lovely modelling on this topic Linny, I can't imagine why I haven't come across it before!

All the best,

Dave.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

As to the lining, I wouldn't bother - the highlights and shadows of the beading edges do the job. I would paint the bolections the same colour as the droplights, per your photo. 

That was the conclusion I was coming to, although there was a temptation to try working a very thin dark wash into the corners of the panelling to suggest the dark lining a little better.  As for the bolections, they're already rather a cheat (not raised, but recessed, due to the difficulties of lasering something so tiny to represent a moulding) but picking them out in brown to match the droplights ought to disguise this further. Good shout!

 

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

I think you'd have a hard time proving that bogie and 6-wheeled stock was never mixed, though I gather the LSWR went in for fixed sets. One train of bogies (plus 6-wheel brake) and one of 6-wheelers? The bogie set might be on a mid-day filling-in turn from main-line duty.

For me it's not so much a case of "prove it never happened" as "was this common?" - looking through Weddell LSWR Carriages Volume One 1838-1900 I can't see a single photo shewing a combination of 6-wheel and bogie stock (with the exception of 6-wheel vans running with bogie carriages). I suppose I could get around the lack of a brake-end carriage by using a full brake at each end.

I like the idea of the bogie set being on a filling-in turn, it would allow me to use more modern stock than might be expected on a secondary line. 

In October 1889 a notice came down from On High (the Traffic Superintendent) stating that "Passenger trains should be formed with a Brake van next the engine wherever possible. It may be that in some of the country districts where one van only is used this is not always practicable, but when this is the case the carriage next the engine should be a Third class, the front compartments of which next the engine should not be used for passengers unless absolutely necessary...".

The idea of checking accident reports is a good one - thank you! What's curious is I can find a record of bogie guards van no. 134 being built to replace 134 (in line with the LSWR using the next lowest available running number for new-build stock) but can't seem to find the previous 134!

Edited by Skinnylinny
  • Informative/Useful 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

That was the conclusion I was coming to, although there was a temptation to try working a very thin dark wash into the corners of the panelling to suggest the dark lining a little better.  

 

Worth tying - perhaps on a test piece? (You must have some failures that you can experiment on.)

 

16 minutes ago, Skinnylinny said:

As for the bolections, they're already rather a cheat (not raised, but recessed, due to the difficulties of lasering something so tiny to represent a moulding) but picking them out in brown to match the droplights ought to disguise this further.

 

The Triang clerestories are the same but once the "inverse Bolection" is picked out, it's hardly noticeable - certainly the clerestory set on the EM gauge layout Westcliff, which uses Triang bodies, passes muster. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Superb coach modelling, Linny

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
You'd think I could spell a sentence that short correctly the first time, wouldn't you?
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Worth tying - perhaps on a test piece? (You must have some failures that you can experiment on.)

 

The Triang clerestories are the same but once the "inverse Bolection" is picked out, it's hardly noticeable - certainly the clerestory set on the EM gauge layout Westcliff, which uses Triang bodies, passes muster. 

I have some bits I can try that out on, although the joys of enamel paint mean it'll take a few days until they're suitably painted.

You're quite right about the inverse bolection not being noticeable on the Triang clerestories - I've just had to have a closer look myself! Well now I feel much happier about it. Besides which, the bolection only seems to protrude by maybe 3/8" - 1/2", far too small to be represented to scale with card! 

Oh, and @Edwardian, Carriages, dear boy, carriages!  But thank you!

Edited by Skinnylinny
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

re: the LSWR going for block trains, a lot of these seem to be rather longer than what I require for Linton, but I've also just spotted a photograph of a rather gorgeous and modellable little block train at Yeovil Junction c. 1899 (perfect timing). The train is described as:

O2 0-4-4t (got one already!)
30' 6-wheel brake of 1887
30' 6-wheel third of 1886
24' 4-wheel composite of 1872 (early panelling style and lower roofline so something interesting and distinctive!)
30' 6-wheel brake third of 1890

The post-1878 stock all uses the same panelling style and end shape as the 42' carriages so I can re-use a fair amount of the CAD work, The 1872 composites only lasted until December 1904 at the latest though, and the brake thirds to 1906, which is not ideal. Perhaps the bogie stock would be useful for representing a later time period.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skinnylinny said:

In October 1889 a notice came down from On High (the Traffic Superintendent) stating that "Passenger trains should be formed with a Brake van next the engine wherever possible. It may be that in some of the country districts where one van only is used this is not always practicable, but when this is the case the carriage next the engine should be a Third class, the front compartments of which next the engine should not be used for passengers unless absolutely necessary...".

This was standard practice to form a 'leader', effectively a 'crumple zone' in modern day parlance.  where trains were being divided to run forward in separate sections it was sometimes necessary for spare brake vehicles to be available to form a leader if one portion was not going to have a brake compartment next to the loco.  Often trains which were to be divided would have two brake vehicles 'back to back' inthe centre of the train where the division would take place.

 

Jim

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't get the job at Network Rail, but I did get a nice parcel today from the postie!

I bought one of the Hornby new-tooling Stepney models when it came out, and mentioned to my partner that I was planning on repainting/naming/numbering it into something more suitable for the layout (I'm trying to avoid having any preserved locos where possible), possibly 77 Wonersh after one of the stations on the Cranleigh line.

A look of horror and a stern instruction that I was to do no such thing were the result, and I was given domestic blessing to acquire another terrier which we hadn't seen at the Bluebell to desecrate! (And yes, I'm well aware Stepney as preserved is an A1x, thank you!) As such, when TTC listed the IEG 48 Leadenhall for £63, and with the partner offering money towards the purchase, very little self-justifying took place before I placed the order. 

unknown.png

There are already a few detail differences between the two, most notably the condensing pipes on Leadenhall and the distinctive cranked pipe from cab to smokebox on Stepney (what is that again?).

Anyway... I'm going to see if I can find any suitable terrier to repaint Leadenhall into, ideally one which kept condensing pipes until relatively late on. I still want a Marsh Umber one too, but that can wait for now!

  • Like 6
  • Friendly/supportive 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's much to be said for a spot of IEG - but does your partner not approve of renumbering,...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.