Coulsdon Works

[jrg1]

On 23/12/2020 at 21:32, thegreenhowards said:

John,

 

What makes you say that they should have round bases? I don't have an end on picture of this twin, but the pictures of Gresley non corridor stock all have square bases.

 

By the way this model is in 0 gauge - I hope that was clear. NMRS don't do '00' if that's what you were looking for.

 

Andy

 

This is the clearest photograph that I have

[thegreenhowards]

26 minutes ago, jrg1 said:

This is the clearest photograph that I have

John,

 

That looks like Pickering and the LNERCA GNR invalid Saloon. In any event it has GNR buffers rather than LNER standard ones. 
 

The LNER standard ones for non corridor stock were like the ones I have on my twin. Corridor stock was similar to mine but ‘clipped’. I.e. with the top clipped off to form a straight edge.
 

Andy

[Headstock]

On 28/12/2020 at 08:51, jrg1 said:

This is the clearest photograph that I have

 

Good afternoon John,

 

Andy is correct in that the buffer in your photo is a different type to that fitted to non gangway carriages. That is the Buffer arrangement used on gangway stock. However, the same arrangement was used by the GNR, ECJS and the LNER. The first designs of LNER carriages used the identical buffer head shown in the photo, only later types used the clipped buffers from new. The housing also looks more like the type adopted by the LNER, the GN type looked slightly different but they both worked the same way.  It is possible this is a preservation replacement, or done while the carriage was still in BR/LNER service but retaining its original buffer heads. It is also possible that the design predates the creation of the LNER, being a late development of the GN type. This is certainly true of the buffer heads. I would have to check late designs for the GN and ECJS to be sure. Early LNER carriages propagated a lot of detail design features of the GN and ECJS carriages, that were modified later.

 

The buffer in your photo is in the extended position, to allow the carriage to be coupled up via the screw link coupling. This allows it to function like the buffer on a non gangway carriage and could be mistaken as such. The chain, reaching from the headstock is attached to a chock that keeps the extended buffer from being pushed back into the housing. When the buffer is retracted, the chock is stored on the hook close to the outside edge of the headstock, the chain prevents it from being lost. When it is retracted, the buckeye coupling will be in use and also the Pullman gangway, with its inbuilt buffing gear.

 

The LNER used two basic types of buffers on non gangway stock. The earliest type had a straight shank, similar to NER designs. The later style had a bell shape, that made them similar looking to the extended buffer in your photo. The bell shaped buffer (is this what you mean by round?) was used from the late twenties onwards, right up to the version used on Thompson stock. Whether Andy's twin has the correct buffers or not, is very much dependent on build date and if any retrofitting occurred during its service life.

Edited December 29, 2020 by Headstock
add info

[thegreenhowards]

First Loco of 2021 is ready to show.

 

I found this in a box while doing some tidying up.

I bought it like this from eBay 3 or 4 years ago and it got put in the too difficult box because it didn’t have any coupling rods. However, when I found it I remembered that I had an old K’s J3 chassis with some coupling rods which should fit so decided to see if I could make it work. 
 

Well, despite being the same wheel spacing in theory, the coupling rods were about  0.75mm too short, so I had to broach them out quite a bit and then plug the holes with solder. This seems to have worked and I have a smooth running chassis. I then dug around in my spares box and found some better wheels - four of them even have the correct 14 spokes. The other two have 16 spokes and I will have to keep an eye out for replacements. 
 

I then added a Portescap which I had stripped from another loco and some pick ups and I had a working loco. I considered leaving it there but realised that there was a vast empty space between the wheels so I dug out a Mainly Trains brake shoe etch and added some brakes. They’re supposed to be for a B12 but I don’t see how you would know if I hadn’t told you. So this is the state of play as I draw stumps for today.

 

Tomorrow I will replace the safety valves with some Ross Pops and paint the chassis and buffer beams. Then I need to decide on an identity. I’m thinking a Hornsey example but I’ll need one with the bigger front footstep which were the minority, so my choice will be limited.
 

Andy

Edited January 1, 2021 by thegreenhowards
Typos

[jrg1]

7 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

First Loco of 2021 is ready to show.

 

I found this in a box while doing some tidying up.

I bought it like this from eBay 3 or 4 years ago and it got put in the too difficult box because it didn’t have any coupling rods. However, when I found it I remembered that I had an old K’s J3 chassis with some coupling rods which should fit so decided to see if I could make it work. 
 

Well, despite being the same wheel spacing in theory, the coupling rods were about  0.75mm too short, so I had to broach them out quite a bit and then plug the holes with solder. This seems to have worked and I have a smooth running chassis. I then dug around in my spares box and found some better wheels - four of them even have the correct 14 spokes. The other two have 16 spokes and I will have to keep an eye out for replacements. 
 

I then added a Portescap which I had stripped from another loco and some pick ups and I had a working loco. I considered leaving it there but realised that there was a vast empty space between the wheels so I dug out a Mainly Trains brake shoe etch and added some brakes. They’re supposed to be for a B12 but I don’t see how you would know if I hadn’t told you. So this is the state of play as I draw stumps for today.

 

Tomorrow I will replace the safety valves with some Ross Pops and paint the chassis and buffer beams. Then I need to decide on an identity. I’m thinking a Hornsey example but I’ll need one with the bigger front footstep which were the minority, so my choice will be limited.
 

Andy

Lovely locomotive class, and such a variety for modellers.  I have a Mainly trains etch and a Hornby body that is currently being hacked and modified to suit.  If I can source another body, I will produce a condensing version with earlier cab.

[thegreenhowards]

The J52 is now finished bar weathering and is ready to enter service. The weathering will have to wait for warmer weather.
 

 

 

A quick win for the New Year!

 

Andy

[thegreenhowards]

Another quick win for 2021 - looks rather similar to the first!

 

 

 

It’s another j52. The body has been sitting on top of a Hornby J52 chassis on my shelf for a couple of years. It’s another Becs white metal body bought on eBay as body only. I couldn’t make the Hornby chassis fit without creating short circuits. But the body was a perfect fit for the new chassis I built for 68815 above. So I have two bodies sharing one chassis. Not ideal, but as J52s won’t feature very frequently and they represent different time periods anyway I think I can live with it.

 

Unfortunately it’s a case of one step forward and two steps backward. In doing the research for 68815 above I bought the Yeadon J52 book. This enabled me to get 68815 right. But I’ve realised that both this one and my Hornby one are not correct for the number they carry. This is the Hornby one (which runs on a Bachmann Pannier chassis).

 

I specially made the front footsteps for the Hornby one however this type of footstep was fitted to the earlier members of the class (like 68761). 68862 should have front footsteps like on my other two and should also have a large ventilator on the cab roof. 68761 needs the earlier metal bar type front footsteps. 

 

So I either need to renumber them both, or swap the footsteps over and add a cab ventilator on 68862. I’m tempted to do the latter. Has anyone made a cab ventilator or have suggestions on what it should look like from above - the photos in Yeadon are all side on.

 

These well lit photos have also shown up some flaws in my painting of the chassis - this will be sorted when I do the weathering.

 

Andy

 

 

[thegreenhowards]

I’ve finally just about finished the Gresley twin art.

 

 

 

The only thing remaining is couplings and I’m waiting for some Dinghams to be delivered to try them out. I went for 100% Smoking in the end as the diagrams and photos show. John at Precision labels did me a sheet of just the blue oblongs to allow me to finish the twin without too much wastage.

 

 

[thegreenhowards]

I’ve finished backdating my Ivatt Atlantic today. This was Bachmann/ Locomotion 62822 in weathered condition. This wasn’t really right for Gresley Jn as it was allocated to Grantham and I doubt it made the London area in BR days except for the farewell railtour.
 

So I needed a Hitchin or KX allocated example. I spent quite a while hunting around for one without the handrails wrapped round the front end as the real 62822 didn’t have this feature and I wanted to make the conversion easier. However I should have looked at my model as Bachmann have modelled the wrap round handrails despite it being incorrect for 62822! Once this fact was established the choice was easy. There is a lovely picture of 2881 in 1948 on a rake of twins in East Coast from KX by Eric Neve (p83). It’s in well weathered LNER livery, so I needed to backdate that. Here is my attempt.

 

Blending the weathering back in to match the factory applied weathering (which was quite good) was quite tricky but I’m happy with the final result.

 

Look out for her debut on Gresley Jn soon.

 

 

 

[thegreenhowards]

On Saturday I dug my Queen of Scots Pullman rake out of the box where it has been sitting since just before lockdown 1 as its turn is coming up on the Gresley sequence. I was disappinted to find that it was not up to a good enough standard to show. I had a mix of Pullman emblems (pre and post ‘61). I think they had largely been transferred to the SR before the late emblem made it onto any ECML Pullmans (apart from the Met Cams and the brakes which survived to work with them). They had some white roofs, some weathered and some grey Hornby plastic. Several roof boards were missing. And Car 61 was still in the rake which I don’t think ever worked on the Eastern Region (although I could be wrong).

 

 So I did some quick upgrading work. 

1. All the roofs were painted Railmatch roof grey.

2. The late emblems were removed and replaced with early emblems. I took the opportunity to gloss up these cars at the same time.

3. My newly built/ cut ‘n’ shut Car 105 replaced Car 61.

4. Borrowing enough roof boards from the far side, so that all the coaches have the correct roof board on the near side.

5. All tension locks replaced with Hunt couplings or Rocos.

 

I’m pleased with the train now. It represents the 1959 formation although it didn’t alter much over the years. All the cars are listed in the excellent Ford Pullman books as having worked on the Queen of Scots in the ‘50s (although not at the same time). Zena is a bit doubtful as she went on loan to the WR for quite a long period but is listed as working the QofS in 1954. I may have to renumber her. There is a 50/50 mix of all steel and wooden bodied cars which is typical of the train in the ‘50s - perhaps should be one more all steel?

 

Here is the resulting rake in pairs.

Fingall and Car 105.

 

Car 161 and car 70.

 

Car 83 and Joan.

 

Onyx and Zena.

 

And finally Car 107 and Car 77.

 

The last three cars are Hornby Railroad Pullmans (the ones with the horrid silver roofs). I’ve treated them to Precision labels to rename them which cover the whole umber strip. Car 107 was cut ‘n’ shut to represent one of the trio of wooden bodied cars (105/6/7) which were different to all the Hornby models and were regulars on the ECML in the ‘50s. I wrote it up on here a year or so ago. I think they stand comparison now with the super detail cars. The obvious weaknesses are the bogies and the lack of interior lighting (I don’t normally bother with interior lights but when the rest of the rake has them it looks a bit strange). I intend to do something about both soon(ish). I have a lighting pack from DCC concepts to try and I may take the bogies off surplus Hornby super detail Pullmans.

 

Comments welcome - Pullmans are a minefield and I’m bound to have got something wrong!

 

Andy

 

[great northern]

22 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

On Saturday I dug my Queen of Scots Pullman rake out of the box where it has been sitting since just before lockdown 1 as its turn is coming up on the Gresley sequence. I was disappinted to find that it was not up to a good enough standard to show. I had a mix of Pullman emblems (pre and post ‘61). I think they had largely been transferred to the SR before the late emblem made it onto any ECML Pullmans (apart from the Met Cams and the brakes which survived to work with them). They had some white roofs, some weathered and some grey Hornby plastic. Several roof boards were missing. And Car 61 was still in the rake which I don’t think ever worked on the Eastern Region (although I could be wrong).

 

 So I did some quick upgrading work. 

1. All the roofs were painted Railmatch roof grey.

2. The late emblems were removed and replaced with early emblems. I took the opportunity to gloss up these cars at the same time.

3. My newly built/ cut ‘n’ shut Car 105 replaced Car 61.

4. Borrowing enough roof boards from the far side, so that all the coaches have the correct roof board on the near side.

5. All tension locks replaced with Hunt couplings or Rocos.

 

I’m pleased with the train now. It represents the 1959 formation although it didn’t alter much over the years. All the cars are listed in the excellent Ford Pullman books as having worked on the Queen of Scots in the ‘50s (although not at the same time). Zena is a bit doubtful as she went on loan to the WR for quite a long period but is listed as working the QofS in 1954. I may have to renumber her. There is a 50/50 mix of all steel and wooden bodied cars which is typical of the train in the ‘50s - perhaps should be one more all steel?

 

Here is the resulting rake in pairs.

Fingall and Car 105.

 

Car 161 and car 70.

 

Car 83 and Joan.

 

Onyx and Zena.

 

And finally Car 107 and Car 77.

 

The last three cars are Hornby Railroad Pullmans (the ones with the horrid silver roofs). I’ve treated them to Precision labels to rename them which cover the whole umber strip. Car 107 was cut ‘n’ shut to represent one of the trio of wooden bodied cars (105/6/7) which were different to all the Hornby models and were regulars on the ECML in the ‘50s. I wrote it up on here a year or so ago. I think they stand comparison now with the super detail cars. The obvious weaknesses are the bogies and the lack of interior lighting (I don’t normally bother with interior lights but when the rest of the rake has them it looks a bit strange). I intend to do something about both soon(ish). I have a lighting pack from DCC concepts to try and I may take the bogies off surplus Hornby super detail Pullmans.

 

Comments welcome - Pullmans are a minefield and I’m bound to have got something wrong!

 

Andy

 

 Car 61 was recorded in Railway Observer as being in the Queen of Scots rake in 1955 Andy. As to proportion of steel to wooden, I worked it all out a few years back, based on the number of both types allocated to or on loan to the ER in 1958, and came to the conclusion that it would probably be a ratio of seven steel to three wooden. I ca't remember if I still have the information I worked from. I'll have a look.

[thegreenhowards]

6 hours ago, great northern said:

 Car 61 was recorded in Railway Observer as being in the Queen of Scots rake in 1955 Andy. As to proportion of steel to wooden, I worked it all out a few years back, based on the number of both types allocated to or on loan to the ER in 1958, and came to the conclusion that it would probably be a ratio of seven steel to three wooden. I ca't remember if I still have the information I worked from. I'll have a look.

I remember the exchange of posts involving you, Tony Wright and Steve (31A). I have printed it out and keep it as vital reference material. On that basis I should have 3 wooden vehicles rather than five, but the formations in the back of Ford (vol 2.) have up to 4 in the 8 coach north of Leeds formation and I know from pictures that the front two cars attached at Leeds often had one wooden vehicle as well, so I think I’m OK, if top end, with 5 overall. 
 

My Yorkshire Pullman rake has 5 wooden out of 11, so slightly more in keeping with your rule of thumb but still a bit wood heavy. I really need a couple more all steel vehicles (one for each rake) but they’re expensive so I will wait until I see a bargain.

 

As for Car 61, it’s also got the wrong window arrangement as the prototype didn’t match the standard Hornby design, so it will be going on eBay at some point soon.

 

What I’d also like to do is cut ‘n’ shut a car 209 or 248 like Tim did for you. But it’s not a priority for the moment.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[thegreenhowards]

This post could be called “A Tangle of Tenders: the Andy Sparkes Version”! For those not familiar there is an excellent series of articles of that name on the complexities of which A4 got which tender on the Sir Nigel Gresley Locomotive Trust website.

 

Anyway, back in November you may remember that I stole the streamlined non corridor tender from ‘Miles Beevor’ to place with an ex ‘Minoru’ front end and produce 60046 Diamond Jubilee. That left me with this oddity.

I had been wanting to produce No 9 for my Elizabethan rake as it hauled the train in 1957 (which is the year my rake represents) whereas 60013 which I had been using did not.  I have struggled to find a streamlined corridor tender A4 on eBay at a sensible price, so I decided to cannibalise 60013.  I took it’s tender and cleaned it up and put the late emblem on the slides. I then transferred the body to the tender chassis off Miles Beevor (as this was a later Hornby version with the decoder in the tender). As I only run the southbound Lizzie, I’ve removed the coal from the tender and left it almost empty to represent the train towards the end of its journey. Meanwhile the front of Miles Beevor was transformed into No.9. 
 

 

 

Nameplates, springbok plaques and numbers are from Modelmaster, the South Africa crest is from Fox (ordered on Monday, delivered on Tuesday, fitted Wednesday). Klear certainly brings out the green nicely and I think she looks the part on the Elizabethan.

 

 

What about Dominion of New Zealand you say? Well she now shares a tender with 60020, Guillemot. Not ideal but as they are the older Hornby type with a simple tender connection and the decoder in the loco body, it seems to work OK. This means she has a non corridor tender which was carried from 1951 to ‘55. Pictures show that she carried the NZ crest at this time, so I ordered one of these from Fox at the same time as No.9’s and fitted it yesterday. Here is the revised No.13.

 

 

That leaves me with the following bits and bobs.

 

The tender body off Minoru doesn’t seem to fit No.13’s old tender chassis. The loco chassis has lost a coupling rod screw. And 60035 is missing its chimney. So a bit of a challenge! But with a fair wind, I’m hoping 60106 Flying Fox will emerge from this mess in a couple of months. Does anyone know what thread size the Hornby coupling rod screws are?

 

Andy

Edited January 29, 2021 by thegreenhowards
Cropping photos

[Tony Teague]

You are fortunate in that loco numbers did not appear on tenders in BR days!

Modelling pre-nationalisation SR means I just couldn't do what you have done!

[thegreenhowards]

28 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

You are fortunate in that loco numbers did not appear on tenders in BR days!

Modelling pre-nationalisation SR means I just couldn't do what you have done!

I don’t make a habit of it, but it was useful in this case. Luckily 13 and 20 were both bought second hand from the same person so the weathering matches reasonably well.

[davidw]

40 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

This post could be called “A Tangle of Tenders: the Andy Sparkes Version”! For those not familiar there is an excellent series of articles of that name on the complexities of which A4 got which tender on the Sir Nigel Gresley Locomotive Trust website.

 

Anyway, back in November you may remember that I stole the streamlined non corridor tender from ‘Miles Beevor’ to place with an ex ‘Minoru’ front end and produce 60046 Diamond Jubilee. That left me with this oddity.

I had been wanting to produce No 9 for my Elizabethan rake as it hauled the train in 1957 (which is the year my rake represents) whereas 60013 which I had been using did not.  I have struggled to find a streamlined corridor tender A4 on eBay at a sensible price, so I decided to cannibalise 60013.  I took it’s tender and cleaned it up and put the late emblem on the slides. I then transferred the body to the tender chassis off Miles Beevor (as this was a later Hornby version with the decoder in the tender). As I only run the southbound Lizzie, I’ve removed the coal from the tender and left it almost empty to represent the train towards the end of its journey. Meanwhile the front of Miles Beevor was transformed into No.9. 
 

 

 

Nameplates, springbok plaques and numbers are from Modelmaster, the South Africa crest is from Fox (ordered on Monday, delivered on Tuesday, fitted Wednesday). Klear certainly brings out the green nicely and I think she looks the part on the Elizabethan.

 

 

What about Dominion of New Zealand you say? Well she now shares a tender with 60020, Guillemot. Not ideal but as they are the older Hornby type with a simple tender connection and the decoder in the loco body, it seems to work OK. This means she has a non corridor tender which was carried from 1951 to ‘55. Pictures show that she carried the NZ crest at this time, so I ordered one of these from Fox at the same time as No.9’s and fitted it yesterday. Here is the revised No.13.

 

 

That leaves me with the following bits and bobs.

 

The tender body off Minoru doesn’t seem to fit No.13’s old tender chassis. The loco chassis has lost a coupling rod screw. And 60035 is missing its chimney. So a bit of a challenge! But with a fair wind, I’m hoping 60106 Flying Fox will emerge from this mess in a couple of months. Does anyone know what thread size the Hornby coupling rod screws are?

 

Andy

I don't know the size but you can get valve gear and screws from the likes of Peters spares. I worked from the service sheets. When it came to screws try Hornby. Chimneys try Graeme King.

[thegreenhowards]

5 minutes ago, davidw said:

I don't know the size but you can get valve gear and screws from the likes of Peters spares. I worked from the service sheets. When it came to screws try Hornby. Chimneys try Graeme King.

Thanks David,

 

I’m sure Peter’s spares would do it but I’m too mean to pay postage for one silly screw! Plus I know the one I lost will turn up as soon as I order a new one.

 

Same really applies to chimneys. I’ll borrow one from a kit until I can get it a show again.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[John Tomlinson]

13 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Thanks David,

 

I’m sure Peter’s spares would do it but I’m too mean to pay postage for one silly screw! Plus I know the one I lost will turn up as soon as I order a new one.

 

Same really applies to chimneys. I’ll borrow one from a kit until I can get it a show again.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Worth remembering as well that the screws come in different sizes in the sense of depth of the unthreaded bit on them, plus the pack you get has different size washers for the different size screws. Deffo worth having some in stock for times such as this, fully sympathise however with doubling the cost with the postage. Lots of other goodies on Peters Spares site if you have a gander...

 

John.

[thegreenhowards]

I started a new project last night in front of Match of the Day. Always more fun to start a new one rather than finish anything off!

 

This is a Kirk kit for an O gauge F-T Gresley twin. It will run with the BT and BT-T I’ve already built to make a five car non corridor set for use on out new club O gauge layout. So far, I’ve cleaned up the ‘T’ and stuck most of it together and I’m still at the jigsaw stage with the ‘F’.

 

 

I do find these kits very enjoyable to build and Ian is such a nice man to do business with.

 

 

 

 

[Tony Teague]

You could at least have cut it into smaller parts!

[thegreenhowards]

This morning I finished off a couple of Parkside 0 gauge wagon kits. They went together nicely, but the transfers have been a bit of a trial. The 5 plank was bought off eBay and came with useless PC Models pressfix transfers which had completely dried out. The van was bought new and came with water slide transfers which were easy. I have a part used HMRS pressfix LNER wagon sheet bought second hand with a few already used which I’d forgotten about. When I dug that out they worked very well, so allowed me to finish off the 5 plank as well. The load is from 10 commandments - I’m not sure if I’ve got the lettering in the right place - comments welcome.

 

 

 

I’ve given them a light weathering but I’ve found that LNER wagon grey, roof dirt and the weathered black/ frame dirt combo I used on the running gear all look quite similar so there’s not much variation in the weathering.

 

I’ve got another three nearing completion which should appear shortly.

 

Andy

 

 

[jwealleans]

I believe you can revive old Pressfix transfers by treating them as Methfix, but I haven't done so myself up to now.

 

The sheet lettering looks ok, but have you got anything in the wagon to stop the load moving in a rough shunt?

[thegreenhowards]

1 hour ago, jwealleans said:

I believe you can revive old Pressfix transfers by treating them as Methfix, but I haven't done so myself up to now.

 

I didn’t try but I think these are past it. They are so brittle they have a tendency to flake into small pieces when they come off the backing sheet. The HMRS ones were much better.

1 hour ago, jwealleans said:

The sheet lettering looks ok, but have you got anything in the wagon to stop the load moving in a rough shunt?

Yes, blutac! Did you mean that there should be something there representing what the prototype would have done? If so what would it have looked like? A couple of wooden blocks or similar?

 

Andy

[jwealleans]

I suppose it depends what's under the sheet, but I'd put either wooden bracing or straw (loose or in sacks), I think.  A wooden baulk nailed across the wagon would be the minimum, unless the load would override it in a bump.

 

Or you could argue that it is secured to the floor and the sheet's covered it up.  Visible bracing/packing is more interesting, though.

[Jon4470]

5 hours ago, jwealleans said:

I believe you can revive old Pressfix transfers by treating them as Methfix, but I haven't done so myself up to now.

 

 

Jonathan

I think that you are correct about the use of meths. I know i’ve Seen something a few years ago about this,,,,seem to recall that you can also add stickiness with something......might be French polish - not sure.

i think that meths loosens French polish and therefore makes it sticky.

May have to resort to google!

Jon