Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Hal Nail said:

I didn't think the Bulldogs were lined after 1920? Mine is though so would be good to know!

 

http://www.ianrathbonemodelpainting.co.uk/gwr-locomotive-liveries-1923-39.php

 

The austerity unlined green came in during WW1 and there are quite a few albums showing it in widespread use and I have not (so far) seen a confirmed 1920's photo of a bulldog with lining.  Anyone else?

 

Craig W

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 23/10/2019 at 15:25, A Murphy said:

After 1945, I suspect (but can't offer substantial evidence) that most engines which survived remained in pretty shabby green or even war-time black. David Maidment's loco portfolio on Small Wheeled Double Framed 4-4-0s has plenty of photo's and has been on offer from Pen & sword recently for £21. I haven't completely got to grips with the book yet.

 

Regards,

 

Alastair M

This book, along with the other Maidment books, are a great source of prototype detail shots, but please, DO NOT TRUST the captions. I have mentioned on other threads that several of the captions are just wrong.  Example, page 55, Teignmouth - try Penzance! page 135 Swindon, err no Taunton. My favourite as a Manchester born is page 217 at Bukeahead,  I think he means Birkenhead, which never received LMS colour light signals in GWR days. It is Manchester Exchange.  And there are others, these are just the ones I can remember. All the mentioned shots, along with many others have been published before with correct captions so there is no excuse. However, this book brings all the images, from several sources, together in one place. I have only brought this up for those wanting to represent trains based on photographic evidence, as some of the captions give a  false indication of which engines worked at a particular location and you end up not knowing which captions to trust. The Counties book has the same issues.

 

But he still gets a class 66 named after him!

 

IMG_2945.JPG.daeccd51f194a1f42b8f3e0d9c565a04.JPG

Mike Wiltshire

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
35 minutes ago, Coach bogie said:

This book, along with the other Maidment books, are a great source of prototype detail shots, but please, DO NOT TRUST the captions. I have mentioned on other threads that several of the captions are just wrong.  Example, page 55, Teignmouth - try Penzance! page 135 Swindon, err no Taunton. My favourite as a Manchester born is page 217 at Bukeahead,  I think he means Birkenhead, which never received LMS colour light signals in GWR days. It is Manchester Exchange.  And there are others, these are just the ones I can remember. All the mentioned shots, along with many others have been published before with correct captions so there is no excuse. However, this book brings all the images, from several sources, together in one place. I have only brought this up for those wanting to represent trains based on photographic evidence, as some of the captions give a  false indication of which engines worked at a particular location and you end up not knowing which captions to trust. The Counties book has the same issues.

 

But he still gets a class 66 named after him!

 

IMG_2945.JPG.daeccd51f194a1f42b8f3e0d9c565a04.JPG

Mike Wiltshire


The Grange book also has errors. I was about to buy a copy a couple of weeks back. The very first caption I read was wrong. In those circumstances I always think what else is wrong that I don’t know about and will take as good information. I saved my money...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 23/09/2019 at 12:00, The Great Bear said:

 

 

I just need to pin down which Bulldog I want to model. As my layout is post war the selection to pick from is more limited. To help  I've now got a good selection of photos, both from GWRJ Bulldog articles, the David Maidment book and this photo archive site

Thanks for the link, it is always interesting to see the various tender combinations in use.

 

Of particular interest is Skylark with what looks like a Collett 3000 g tender in tow.

 

Previously I thought that type of tender was only seen behind 2251 class locos.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

This book, along with the other Maidment books, are a great source of prototype detail shots, but please, DO NOT TRUST the captions. 

 

Some of the captions are a long way off. It does make me wonder why they don't check them, because the Small Wheel 4-4-0 book and the Saints book in the same series give you a fantastic source of photographic evidence. It is often incredibly easy to work out just how wrong the captions are, but I do strongly agree with Coach Bogie's (Mike Wiltshire) caution above,

 

Regards,

 

Alastair M

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, A Murphy said:

. It does make me wonder why they don't check them

 

I'm sure they do. Trust me on this, you can spend days checking and rechecking and still things slip through. Its incredibly annoying. And if you're trying to make any kind of living the clock is ticking... I have never added up the time I spent writing my book, but I greatly fear that the hourly rate on what I was paid was at best pennies... And when you're using photographic libraries in quantity what feels like the lions share ends up with the libraries. Fair dos, it costs serious money to obtain, store and maintain a photographic library, but its another big chunk off what what you might get to take home.

  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Coach bogie said:

 All the mentioned shots, along with many others have been published before with correct captions so there is no excuse.

 

I am not at all sure its as simple as that. If the photo library has the wrong data then how practical is it to go round hundreds of books in search of an alternative? For every photo in the book? If you don't even know that its wrong? If another author spotted the error did they notify the photo library? Has more than one photo library got copies of the photo? Just because one has the correct information it doesn't mean another does. Photographs were the single thing that caused me most stress (with the possible exception of arguing with the editor about commas and footnotes) and I only used about a dozen of them!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, JimC said:

 

I'm sure they do. Trust me on this, you can spend days checking and rechecking and still things slip through. Its incredibly annoying. And if you're trying to make any kind of living the clock is ticking... I have never added up the time I spent writing my book, but I greatly fear that the hourly rate on what I was paid was at best pennies... And when you're using photographic libraries in quantity what feels like the lions share ends up with the libraries. Fair dos, it costs serious money to obtain, store and maintain a photographic library, but its another big chunk off what what you might get to take home.

I am not convinced. The howler, in the Counties book is pages 70 and 76. It is the SAME PICTURE, yet the caption says it is County of Stafford or is it County of Dorset. Is it Knowle and Dorridge or the unidentified location stated five pages later? Is taken in 1923 or 1930? Same picture, two different dates/engines/locations. Not much evidence of checking here.

 

I had decided not to purchase the counties book, but changed my mind when I found it contained two images not seen before useful for my coach research. Page 51 shows the only view I have seen of the D33 Kitchen Brake as built and page 97 has the best view I have found of the little known Dreadnought tea car (totally missed in the caption stated as just a brake third) both now available from Worsley Works.

 

I understand that a member of the Great Western Study Group has drawn up a correction list across all the books

 

Mike Wiltshire

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I learnt a long time ago to not take captions as gospel and look at the photo first before reading the caption. I often wonder where it's someone other than the author writing them.

 

The usual one is "unidentified Black Five" when you can clearly see it's an 8F due to the lower running plate and longer steam pipes or a Jubilee with splashers and a nameplate. To me that's like mistaking a Castle for a Hall, I doubt many real GWR enthusiasts would make that mistake.

 

 

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I've done some proof reading. These days it's all digital so the propensity to go wrong is enormous anyway - "to err is human but if you really want to foul up then use a computer". The real killer is when someone decides to do something like insert a photo and move all the others along one. It's not like word - each bit has to be moved. Typically they do this after you've already checked it several times and sometimes just before it is signed off and you just stop seeing things after a while....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to Bulldogs: are any of you planning a visit to the NRM archives in the near future? I've spotted an interesting description in the NRM Swindon drawings list. It runs 31381, 1906/10/xx,  "Cab & Splashers, No 2 boiler in Lot 102 Frames",  "Bulldog boiler in Duke frames i.e Bulldog New cab & Screw reversing gear lot 118." Assuing the data and descriptions are all correct that seems to suggest that a month after the last Bulldog rolled out of the works they were designing screw reverse for the early ones. It would be a very interesting drawing to get a sight of. Sadly the drawing is listed as grade 4 - the worst condition.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting. Lot 118 was the first lot of Bulldogs built as Bulldogs (as opposed to being converted from Dukes), so the 'new cab' bit of that drawing's description could merely convey a cab that was wider than the narrow ones on the first Dukes. I don't think that new cab would significantly alter the lateral axis of the reverser. The real question is, for a drawing dated 1906, why isn't there any evidence for screw reversers on Bulldogs before c 1925? (Apart from the Birds of course.)

 

Edited by Miss Prism
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I'm a bit late to the party, but with regards the 3d printing, on the Issinglass stand at Scaleforum the chap was printing LNER coach kits with the sides and roof done on end and I have to say they looked great, the best 3d printing I have seen. Could you print the loco either standing on its smokebox or firebox, this obviously needs the printer to have enough vertical movement.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Siberian Snooper said:

I'm a bit late to the party, but with regards the 3d printing, on the Issinglass stand at Scaleforum the chap was printing LNER coach kits with the sides and roof done on end and I have to say they looked great, the best 3d printing I have seen. Could you print the loco either standing on its smokebox or firebox, this obviously needs the printer to have enough vertical movement.

 

 

 

I've not considered printing on end I have to say. My printer would be large enough to do it (for a loco, not a coach). I suspect that I'd run into problems with supports for overhangs. Print quality is worse at the bottom where you have to support the model lift it off the build plate. I get good results printing at about 40 degree inclination, with the cab at the build plate end (which is the top as the model is printed upside down, pulling it out of the resin vat). This then means the smokebox is at the free end with no supports to get in the way / need cutting off. Have a look at my thread on printing coaches and you'll see how models  are orientated. 

 

The latest print I have, the one I am running with is a bit better than the last one shown, there were some little deformations in that one because the film vat was marked which reflected in the print. New film has fixed that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I have been following your coach exploits and I'm very impressed with the work that you have produced.

 

I only mentioned the on end method as it was the first time I had seen it and I couldn't see any blemishes, pity he's only producing LNER kits and at £30 a pop, they're a very reasonable price.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 14/10/2019 at 16:50, brumtb said:

The excellent GWR Modelling website suggests in A Beginners Guide to Outside Framed 4-4-0s that "during the 1920s some Bulldogs, both straight and curved frame, were fitted with the smaller and shorter Number 3 boiler" .  Having just completed a reasonable (to me) representation of a GWR 36xx which also used the Standard Number 3 boiler https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/131939-representational-modelling-early-1920s-gwr-36xx/page/2/

I'm seeing possibilities for another Dukedog to Bulldog conversion.  I used a modified Mainline 2251 boiler to represent a Standard Number 3.

Can anyone point me to information sources which might have details of Bulldogs so fitted and when please?

I can't see any replies to this but the std 3 boiler was a No 2 with a shortened barrel, that is the parallel bit at the front shortened by 9" I believe,  When used on a Bulldog a 9" distance piece was used between barrel and smokebox so there may have been no visual difference what so ever between a loco with a std 3 and one with a std 2. The smokebox was certainly not 9" further back from the buffer beam than on the std 2.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 11/10/2019 at 20:51, The Great Bear said:

Can I ask a couple more questions (for my education!):

Some locos have a box on the cab front above the firebox looks like linked to the whistles - see picture of Kingfisher here - what is this?

What are the 4 "horns" on the corners of the firebox

Locos seem to have random patterns of rivets on the cab sides, these are just ad-hoc repairs?

 

Getting there with the prints, just making some final tweaks to match chosen loco.

I can't get anything with that link, just "404 Not Found"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's why I've got to with my bodged Bulldog.

 

p3686102709-5.jpg

 

p3686102712-5.jpg

 

Getting the fit on the bottom of the firebox and the cab proved a pain, even with several prints. I didn't have the model quite deep enough, shy by 0.5mm or so. Rather than do yet another print, a strips of plasticard to fill the gap, not done very well. Also I dropped the model so the frame infront of the smokebox saddle on one side has again been bodged with plasticard. Amongst other ham fisted modelling is to much glue on the handrail knobs - drilled slightly too big hole in boiler, didn't have the right size bit - and too heavy application of the aerosol primer I think.

 

So it could be done better and at some point in the future I may try another print but for now (to make me feel like I am making some progress!) I am running with this one, painting it. Oh and I need to find the bogie. I'm sure I put that somewhere for safe keeping...

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 31/10/2019 at 19:49, DavidCBroad said:

I can't see any replies to this but the std 3 boiler was a No 2 with a shortened barrel, that is the parallel bit at the front shortened by 9" I believe,  When used on a Bulldog a 9" distance piece was used between barrel and smokebox so there may have been no visual difference what so ever between a loco with a std 3 and one with a std 2. The smokebox was certainly not 9" further back from the buffer beam than on the std 2.

Thank you for this useful info.  So it should be possible to produce a Standard No 2 by extending a Standard No 3 by 3mm (in 4mm scale)?

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically yes. There is the caveat though that what we look at is of course the boiler cladding, not the boiler, and the one doesn't always follow the other. The Std 10, for example, with the same barrel as the Std 3, was usually clothed with a taper extending all the way to the smokebox, whereas the barrel underneath had a short parallel section.

  • Thanks 1
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...