East Barnet Joint Stock - a workbench

[Asterix2012]

11 hours ago, Chas Levin said:

 

Indeed; I was just reading a section on these questions in Steve Barnfield's 1994 book on Painting and Lining and after referencing the long-running Lake/Crimson Lake/Maroon debate as an example of how difficult a subject this can be, he quotes Bob Forster as telling him that "the shade of Crimson Lake ordered from the manufacturer by the LMS was always matched to a 1913 Midland Railway sample. The perceived difference of shade which resulted derived from the way in which this paint was applied, not in the actual paint itself. It is well known that the Midland were very keen on finish of the highest quality, but that the LMS, although still desiring a lasting result did cheapen the process by cutting down the number of top coats and varnishes."

 

This should be read in context though: his wider point is that the kind of certainty sought in such traditions is simply impossible to achieve and was so at the time, let alone over a century later and at small modelling scales. Ian Rathbone makes the same points in his book.

 

None of which alters for me the charming image of senior gents at the LMS carefully unwrapping a foot-square piece of painted carriage side for comparison purposes each time a new order of paint was being prepared, returning it to an enormous Crimson Lake-coloured office safe afterwards...

I have read in a reference book about when the Highland Railway Jones Goods was restored to steam in the Fifties and Jones’ surviving relative was present when it was unveiled in Highland Railway green.

 

She commented that was the wrong colour and reference was made to samples still held at the North British Loco company at that time still in business 

 

These were steel plates with colour and lining samples painted on

 

From these the locomotive was repainted in the yellow scheme it carried for some years.

 

I do not recall which book I read this in and I have checked those I have now, so apologies for the lack of corroborating evidence.

[Chas Levin]

10 hours ago, Asterix2012 said:

I have read in a reference book about when the Highland Railway Jones Goods was restored to steam in the Fifties and Jones’ surviving relative was present when it was unveiled in Highland Railway green.

 

She commented that was the wrong colour and reference was made to samples still held at the North British Loco company at that time still in business 

 

These were steel plates with colour and lining samples painted on

 

From these the locomotive was repainted in the yellow scheme it carried for some years.

 

I do not recall which book I read this in and I have checked those I have now, so apologies for the lack of corroborating evidence.

 

No need to apologise! That story's typical of the kinds of things that happen so often with the paint colour question, where peoples' memories are pitted against physical evidence; it does make it complicated...

[Chas Levin]

A very railway-themed weekend spent in York, the main purpose being to do some research at the NRM:

 

 

 

I walked back through York Station, as I never tire of looking at the curve of the roof and the platforms:

 

 

We also discovered that the hotel we stayed at started out life as the Head Office of the NER:

 

 

 

It's been done up inside of course, but very much in keeping with its age - 1906 - with woodwork in chocolate brown and walls in dark cream. One ground floor door was a massive safe - presumably for the payroll, as everyone received wages in cash in those days.

 

We stopped off for a quick trot round the York Model Railway Show too, which was at York Racecourse:

 

 

It was *very* busy, reassuringly so, in light of recent laments for the poor health of our hobby. There were not only a lot more people but also, I thought, a much better atmosphere - more genuine excitement in the air - than at Ally Pally earlier this month. I'm not sure if that's a North/South thing, or an Easter thing, or just a random difference.

Great to see 'Grantham - The Streamliner Years', especially having just learned that the layout's to be retired next year…

[Rob Pulham]

Hi Chaz,

 

Did you happen notice the diagonal line of rivets down the tender of the narrow gauge loco in your first photo? They presumably follow the line of the coal slope but they are anything but in  a straight line. It was in residence at Shildon for many years which was where I noted it. If you modelled it of course you would be derided for shoddy workmanship...

[Chas Levin]

8 minutes ago, Rob Pulham said:

Hi Chaz,

 

Did you happen notice the diagonal line of rivets down the tender of the narrow gauge loco in your first photo? They presumably follow the line of the coal slope but they are anything but in  a straight line. It was in residence at Shildon for many years which was where I noted it. If you modelled it of course you would be derided for shoddy workmanship...

 

Hello Rob, no, I didn't, but I'll take a look next time I'm there. Interesting question how far we should take prototype imperfections in modelling. Uneven steel panels are a great example: some photos of big mainline express locos with the light reflecting off the sides show some of the body panels look incredibly uneven, bumpy and dented but as you say, anyone modelling that would be thought quite hamfisted!

 

I was there to visit the Search Engine and library and I didn't actually spend much time at all in the main museum - those photos were taken from the Sarch Engine balcony. I also meant to have a closer look at that Pullman, named 'Topaz', as it looked so much shorter than I'd expected...

[Chas Levin]

A little short of modelling time currently, but things are moving, slowly and I'm finally ready to tackle the main body:

 

 

Amongst my weaponry are such thoughts as:

 

1. Roof can’t be cut to length or ends worked on before basic body construction (sides + ends joined), because it has to match the upper body shape, including closely matching the shape of the ends. 
2. Unmodified roof piece can be used to define upper body width and upper spacer sizes though.
3. Floors can’t be done before body either - same reason - plus the seat heights need to be correct for windows, also steps in doorways etc.
4. Lower body width minimum is defined by floor-pan; widening strips could be added, though, & hidden underneath.
5. Upper and lower widths to be fixed by stretchers.
6. Positions of upper body stretcher which also include roof fixing points must be fixed with roof bolts already installed inside roof, but stretchers to fix the upper body width can be fixed in place between the roof-securing ones before the roof is done (though care needed to ensure spacers don't clash).
7. Roof bolts will be secured by loose nuts, tightened up beneath upper body stretchers, so the nuts will only be accessible with body detached from chassis+floor assembly, therefore chassis-to-body fixings need to be accessible from the chassis underside.
8. First stage of body construction - turnunder/tumblehome - already done, but ends' curvature still to do. These, plus vertical angle of sides' tumblehomes, will determine body widths at top and bottom.

I'm in slight danger of going round in circles here, telling myself that each section depends on its neighbours for dimensions: I need to decide on a part of the body to take as a datum and work from that.

Both roof and floorpan can be widened if necessary by adding strips, but perhaps a good starting place would be to do a mock-up using both of them, with the sides held in place, to see if the resulting angles of the sides look right, then create the ends' curvature to match... 🤔

[Bucoops]

I think my preference on this would be to have the roof, ends and sides as a 5 sided box, then have the floor removable, so perhaps start with the nice rigid roof as ground zero? Also probably easier to alter the floorpan width than the roof?

 

That would be my approach I think, but having the roof removable is also totally valid - especially as there's a nice closed in area for the boiler gubbins to have mounting screws, and perhaps hooked into the far end to hold it in place?

[Jon4470]

Hi Chas

 

 

I think that there are also a few internal partitions to include. I’d be inclined to start with these, as they can define the width at top and bottom of the sides. Once tacked in, you could then trial fit the roof section and floor to make sure the widths are correct. Then move on to the spacers. If anything is incorrect it is easy to unsolder and start again.

 

Of course, then you have to make sure you form the ends correctly to match the widths.

[Chas Levin]

11 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

I think my preference on this would be to have the roof, ends and sides as a 5 sided box, then have the floor removable, so perhaps start with the nice rigid roof as ground zero? Also probably easier to alter the floorpan width than the roof?

 

That would be my approach I think, but having the roof removable is also totally valid - especially as there's a nice closed in area for the boiler gubbins to have mounting screws, and perhaps hooked into the far end to hold it in place?

 

2 minutes ago, Jon4470 said:

Hi Chas

 

 

I think that there are also a few internal partitions to include. I’d be inclined to start with these, as they can define the width at top and bottom of the sides. Once tacked in, you could then trial fit the roof section and floor to make sure the widths are correct. Then move on to the spacers. If anything is incorrect it is easy to unsolder and start again.

 

Of course, then you have to make sure you form the ends correctly to match the widths.

 

Thanks gents, food for thought - well, something to sleep on, more accurately!

Definitely easier to alter the floorpan width that the roof, Rich; and I'd forgotten about the internal partitions Jon - bet I'd have remembered them at some really awkward point too!