Jump to content
 

Building the Hertford Quad set from Mousa Models/Bill Bedford


Recommended Posts

Here we go, once again...

 

Photographic evidence, particularly with the camera-shy Hertford Quads, is woefully hard to find. The enjoyable part of that is spending a quiet hour or so poring over Harris/Campling and Banks/Google. Very relaxing!

 

I have only seen one photograph - of set #159 - in Harris’ book (p139). Alas close inspection has revealed that the brake vehicle, built to diagram 102 was fitted with only two battery boxes, not the four supplied (but replaced by me) in the kit. I think it would have been an easy mistake to make as diag. 102 is only one compartment different to diag. 119 and the ones I found have four boxes. 

 

FCC1B4ED-84C3-47AB-9917-5347529EC06E.jpeg.c4888ad96f34bcf32c6aa2c313f8ec4c.jpeg

 

Oh, well, off they come and will be replaced with the etched single boxes from the kit.

Edited by EHertsGER
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Hi Marcus

 

On my to do list is a Hertford Quad. I aim to build them from Kirk sides. It will involve quite a bit of cutting and shutting as the compo (dia 103) and the middle third (dia 104) have non standard size compartments. I did toy with the idea of using standard size compartments but that would have resulted in both middle coaches being the wrong size and different lengths.

 

Dia 105 Thirds in twin sets appear to have two battery boxes on each side.

 

In an earlier post you mentioned the outer bogies being 8ft, the diagram shows 8 ft 6 ins. Looking at the diagram enlarged to 1/76th the outer bogies do have a lighter looking frame than the inner ones, I read that as ordinary 8ft 6 in bogies on the outer ends and heavy duty on the inner ends.

 

I am building it to compliment my early GER OLE units on a planned layout called Chenford. A loco hauled set of coaches needs to be on stand by for when the class 125 DMU blows an engine.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

The easiest way to tell heavy duty from standard duty bogies is to rivet count. Or rather count the rows of rivets, specifically above the axle boxes. One row standard, two rows heavy duty.

I am assuming, Richard, that having conjured up such an idea you are prepared to volunteer for the task using the photo in Harris’s book on p139, then...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, Paul Cram said:

Kitchenside wrote an article for one of the railway magazines on the quads and he stated thet the LNER built ones were on 8 foot Heavy duty gresley bogies.

The GNR line quads were built with 8 ft bogies, the diagrams 102, 103, 104 and 105 for the Hertford GER line quads clearly show 8ft 6ins bogies. These sets were what we today would call outer suburban but in LNER days they were ordinary coaches, unlike the GNR line quads and the GER line quints that were  high density inner suburban designs. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

The GNR line quads were built with 8 ft bogies, the diagrams 102, 103, 104 and 105 for the Hertford GER line quads clearly show 8ft 6ins bogies. These sets were what we today would call outer suburban but in LNER days they were ordinary coaches, unlike the GNR line quads and the GER line quints that were  high density inner suburban designs. 

Harris states that initially they were built with 8'6 but from 1925 8 fott bogies weer substituted

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
18 minutes ago, Paul Cram said:

Harris states that initially they were built with 8'6 but from 1925 8 fott bogies weer substituted

Hi Paul 

 

He does state that, but that is in the GNR quad art section of the chapter about articulated non-gangway sets. The Hertford sets had more in common with the twin articulated coaches than the GNR quads and GER quints. 

 

Edit, My model will have 8ft 6 ins bogies as I feel that is right. 

Edited by Clive Mortimore
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paul Cram said:

Harris states that initially they were built with 8'6 but from 1925 8 fott bogies weer substituted

Paul

 

I am going along with Clive for two reasons - for now, unless I find out more. I agree that the GER vehicles were 8’6” as opposed to the GNR 8’0” (don’t start me on 8’6” inner and 8’0” outer combinations) and (as I said, for now) this will lay the bogie issue aside while I get on with actually building the things. Fortunately they come off easily (unlike undergubbins) and I will never waste them - there is always a vehicle that can use whatever I am not going to fit as the ‘final answer’.

 

Onwards...

 

best,

Marcus

 

Edited by EHertsGER
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 17/08/2019 at 21:06, EHertsGER said:

I am assuming, Richard, that having conjured up such an idea you are prepared to volunteer for the task using the photo in Harris’s book on p139, then...

 

I'm pretty confident the outer bogie on the left is a heavy duty variant. Further info from Mike Trice says there are 4 rivets on the bottom row, and standard duty bogies have5 rivets on one row (https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3527#p28086). It looks like the inboard end has the two rows and it looks like only 4 rivets.

 

The first articulated bogie is too unclear but logic says if there was a heavy duty bogie on the outer ends then it would be the same for inboard? I can sort of understand why they may have standard duty bogies on the outer ends but to me it looks like a heavy duty one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • RMweb Premium

Hi Marcus and all

 

I hope this photo of my progress is of interest. The bodies and roofs are only plonked in place. The photo shows the set on its "running trilas" on my layout. No derailments, so far.

 

009a.jpg.cac7c384381a199d11bfd0c8407035ce.jpg

 

 

More photos and how I am bodging it can be found on my Sheffield Exchange thread.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

It’s been a while since my last update. The explanation is simple; distractions elsewhere in life. However, my return has turned out to be anything but straightforward. Firstly I have pressed on with the droplights on the remaining sides ‘in the flat’ and then gone back to finish the first side of the diag 105.

 

Hinges are MJT/Frogmore as below, door handles and vents from the kit, grab handles from MJT.

 

595A91AF-143A-4DFB-AA82-23D79D007A4F.jpeg.49e8e6396c974a493f973afffce456a1.jpeg


This stage seems to be just being patient and plugging away to the point of complete sets of finished sides. It was when I went back to the earlier attempt at the brake coach (diag 102) that things started getting complicated. Looking it over after six months away from it left me feeling I had hurried it - and it showed. 
 

Later work on the other sides (103/4/5) revealed a better solution to the hinges issue (the hinge brace - see earlier posts) clashing with the droplight led me to using the door hinge etch marketed by MJT (a Frogmore Confederacy product). The results can be seen above.

 

Worse was to follow as I tried fitting the roof. It is an MJT extrusion and fits perfectly.

98F5FC1D-58A0-4DEB-8903-F64AD3B08EDE.jpeg.3b9a755a01e188483407f5d6ec7d22cc.jpeg

 

A little settling and it will be snug. My issue was with the way I had built the body; it seems the waist was wider than the bodywork:

 

D8F521AF-B121-49AA-BA51-4B2060A7557A.jpeg.ea2ee72171ffbd67fa30339b520e14c1.jpeg


So, the logical thing to do would be to tear it down and build it up again properly. A pain, but it couldn’t stay that way. It was then that I noted some damage to the etches and began to contemplate simply replacing the sides. Bill Bedford must do replacement sides, right? This is a standard diagram, so may even be available as a single set. At that point real confusion set in; certainly the diag 66 is available as a set of sides, but hold on a minute. It’s not quite a diag 102, but, it seems, neither is the one I have...

310BAF1B-AF5E-4BB3-9E3B-01B9E930BE4C.jpeg.d93f0c38ee3b53c0757d357023b17203.jpeg

The existing brake vehicle has five toplights between the van doors, whereas the diag 66 only has four:

5E9D0F43-3B11-4D92-91E8-5EC64B673C7D.png.5e6a3c2c6941fdb32566a11b2f576b2d.png

 

From the photos of the prototype, there are only three - and it has a ducket at the end.
FCC1B4ED-84C3-47AB-9917-5347529EC06E.jpeg.c4888ad96f34bcf32c6aa2c313f8ec4c.jpeg

 

Even looking at a diag 119, that is nowhere near either, so what is it? I’ve asked Bill, so we wait and see. In the mean time I have re-done the undergubbins with, in summary, the MJT 61’6” turnbuckles cut down and the MJT vacuum/tank set. The Battery boxes are now Wizard etched boxes cut in half to make the single boxes of this vehicle (see photos, above):

 

E8A9A4E0-EAA9-486D-95B9-DE3035B2A73B.jpeg.70b044de01011888fb352f69e9041b0a.jpeg


Overall things are going well; this was never going to be an easy kit - even if it qualified as a ‘kit’ in the first place.

 

So, I suppose one might say we are making progress. While I await Bill’s reply I have three more coaches to build - and the articulation units to work out...

 

Best to all, 

Marcus

 

 

 

Edited by EHertsGER
  • Like 8
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, EHertsGER said:

It’s been a while since my last update. The explanation is simple; distractions elsewhere in life. However, my return has turned put to be anything but straightforward. Firstly I have pressed on with the droplights on the remaining sides ‘in the flat’ and then gone back to finish the first side of the diag 105.

 

Hinges are MJT/Frogmore as below, door handles and vents from the kit, grab handles from MJT.

 

595A91AF-143A-4DFB-AA82-23D79D007A4F.jpeg.49e8e6396c974a493f973afffce456a1.jpeg


This stage seems to be just being patient and plugging away to the point of complete sets of finished sides. It was when I went back to the earlier attempt at the brake coach (diag 102) that things started getting complicated. Looking it over after six months away from it left me feeling I had hurried it - and it showed. 
 

Later work on the other sides (103/4/5) revealed a better solution to the hinges issue (the hinge brace - see earlier posts) clashing with the droplight led me to using the door hinge etch marketed by MJT (a Frogmore Confederacy product). The results can be seen above.

 

Worse was to follow as I tried fitting the roof. It is an MJT extrusion and fits perfectly.

98F5FC1D-58A0-4DEB-8903-F64AD3B08EDE.jpeg.3b9a755a01e188483407f5d6ec7d22cc.jpeg

 

A little settling and it will be snug. My issue was with the way I had built the body; it seems the waist was wider than the bodywork:

 

D8F521AF-B121-49AA-BA51-4B2060A7557A.jpeg.ea2ee72171ffbd67fa30339b520e14c1.jpeg


So, the logical thing to do would be to tear it down and build it up again properly. A pain, but it couldn’t stay that way. It was then that I noted some damage to the etches and began to contemplate simply replacing the sides. Bill Bedford must do replacement sides, right? This is a standard diagram, so may even be available as a single set. At that point real confusion set in; certainly the diag 66 is available as a set of sides, but hold on a minute. It’s not quite a diag 102, but, it seems, neither is the one I have...

310BAF1B-AF5E-4BB3-9E3B-01B9E930BE4C.jpeg.d93f0c38ee3b53c0757d357023b17203.jpeg

The existing brake vehicle has five toplights between the van doors, whereas the diag 66 only has four:

5E9D0F43-3B11-4D92-91E8-5EC64B673C7D.png.5e6a3c2c6941fdb32566a11b2f576b2d.png

 

From the photos of the prototype, there are only three - and it has a ducket at the end.
FCC1B4ED-84C3-47AB-9917-5347529EC06E.jpeg.c4888ad96f34bcf32c6aa2c313f8ec4c.jpeg

 

Even looking at a diag 119, that is nowhere near either, so what is it? I’ve asked Bill, so we wait and see. In the mean time I have re-done the undergubbins with, in summary, the MJT 61’6” turnbuckles cut down and the MJT vacuum/tank set. The Battery boxes are now Wizard etched boxes cut in half to make the single boxes of this vehicle (see photos, above):

 

E8A9A4E0-EAA9-486D-95B9-DE3035B2A73B.jpeg.70b044de01011888fb352f69e9041b0a.jpeg


Overall things are going well; this was never going to be an easy kit - even if it qualified as a ‘kit’ in the first place.

 

So, I suppose one might say we are making progress. While I await Bill’s reply I have three more coaches to build - and the articulation units to work out...

 

Best to all, 

Marcus

 

 

 

Hi Marcus

 

The diagram shows the van on the second brake to start to narrow from the doors near the last compartment not the compartment as on the Mousa model.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Marcus

 

The diagram shows the van on the second brake to start to narrow from the doors near the last compartment not the compartment as on the Mousa model.

Clive

 

Yes, that too. I have even got to the point of contemplating cutting and shutting brass sides...

 

Marcus

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Does anyone know of Bill’s whereabouts? I have sent off several orders (including the ‘vital’ bits to keep this going) but, even after the ‘28 days’ still no movement. It is possible he is busy/distracted/ill (goodness, I hope not, even just with a cold. Misery in all this chaos.), so I am more worried than impatient.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Here we go again! Avid readers may recall I mentioned I would ‘ask Bill’ about the diag 102 that wasn’t. My question was added to an order for sufficient sides to ‘cut and shut’ to create a set of 102 sides. Well, I got the sides I ordered - and a new set of correct diag 102 sides:

 

21B5EB29-FBE1-45D1-8948-B1E8650473E1.jpeg.b1ef357ffc74554c25d4902a80aa455a.jpeg

 

- which in my book amounts to the definition of ‘customer service’ as is the nom de temps. Thank you, Bill! Onwards...

 

...and a whole lot of other diagrams to build now, but you know I enjoy this sort of thing

Edited by EHertsGER
  • Like 5
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please add me to the list of interested parties. I'm a long ago 1:1 Quint traveller and observer and have several of Bill's Quint kits gradually moving towards my workbench. I only have the Isinglass drawings for the Quints, so unfortunately call add anything to the knowledge on the Hertford sets.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So, finally, things on my bench have taken a leap into the recognisable in the form of four assembled bodies of diags 102-105. They do need a good clean, but each has droplights, ventilators, doorhandles and grab handles. Count them. That’s the delay explained...

 

Anyway, here they are waiting for me to pounce again and begin with solebars, trussing and undergubbins while I work out the articulation. 

73CF37CF-91FF-4755-967E-4522A2422A81.jpeg.d858ce8a7280ed9c4680f074fcf19c29.jpegD991F680-2839-4007-B415-3EE1808DF4A5.jpeg.1888b6317066c8285290a96cb00d996f.jpeg016FD243-99C1-4F97-A1C5-A819B489F4C9.jpeg.17d5fa37487d9edf012780139e71ecbb.jpeg279544BA-6B30-4DCB-BA64-CB3B3CD88A18.jpeg.dc0d3cf67d1e81c0c743d0b2845e0344.jpeg

 

one or two notes; the floors were replaced by more solid 0.018” n/s sheet (see previous notes for reasons) with the exception of diag 105 which was built around an MJT 51’ underframe kit. Roofs are MJT aluminium extrusions.
 

Best,

Marcus

Edited by EHertsGER
  • Like 7
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...