Jump to content
 

Who is correct - Gresley corridor stock end designs?


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, John Tomlinson said:

Whilst there is this discussion, I've always wondered if the Thompson stock has the same cross sectional profile as the Gresley (obviously other than at the domed ends). The diagrams I've seen in books suggest as well this is very close to that used by Bulleid when he introduced his stock on the Southern. However I don't have the large scale detailed drawings to check.

 

Both Thompson and Bulleid stock seem to have a similar bulbous profile of roofs, in contrast to that of the BR Mk1 that followed and is noticeably different.

 

Apologies for going a bit off thread.

 

John.

 

The Thompson roof profile was identical to that used by Gresley, sans the domed ends. They had nothing to do with the Bulleid end or roof profile, the roof of the latter was closer to the MK1. The tumblehome on Thompson stock was more bulbous than that on Gresley stock. The recessed van compartment was dispensed with on brake vehicles and unlike the Gresley BG's, the full brakes (with the exception of the deal vans) were the same width and end profile as the passenger carriages. Hope that helps.

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

5 hours ago, MikeTrice said:

As far as I know Colin had the original Kirk moulds. It was Colin's intention to retool both the roof and ends but never got around to it before the moulds were passed on to Coopercraft. Isinglass used to supply an alternative plastic moulded roof but I don't think they actually produced them. I don't recall matching ends though.

 

Most of the Ian Kirk kits that Colin had went to C&L before they went to Coopercraft.

 

The only ones that didn't was the SR carriages and the wagons. I bought some wagons from him about eight years ago on eBay. He seemed to be having a clear out.

 

Obviously Phoenix has now got the SR stuff but I have no idea what happened to the wagons. These aren't the ones which ended up in the Parkside range. Things like the LNER wooden loco coal wagon.

 

 

As for the thread itself. Extremely useful as I have a few LNER coaches waiting to be built from a few different sources and they are quite complicated. LMS and BR ones are so much simpler.

 

 

Jason

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

The Thompson roof profile was identical to that used by Gresley, sans the domed ends. They had nothing to do with the Bulleid end or roof profile, the roof of the latter was closer to the MK1. The tumblehome on Thompson stock was more bulbous than that on Gresley stock. The recessed van compartment was dispensed with on brake vehicles and unlike the Gresley BG's, the full brakes (with the exception of the deal vans) were the same width and end profile as the passenger carriages. Hope that helps.

Many thanks for your very informative response. I did take the picture below at Swanage last year, which does show a comparison between Bulleid and Mk1 stock, the greater curvature on the sides at least of the former is clear as is the curved glass. So are the roof sections on the Mk1's, another source of discussion on the forum!

 

Thanks again,

 

John.

IMG_0766_copyweb.jpg

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

42 minutes ago, John Tomlinson said:

Many thanks for your very informative response. I did take the picture below at Swanage last year, which does show a comparison between Bulleid and Mk1 stock, the greater curvature on the sides at least of the former is clear as is the curved glass. So are the roof sections on the Mk1's, another source of discussion on the forum!

 

Thanks again,

 

John.

 

 

Evening John,

 

The MK1's copied a lot of features from the Bulleid carriages, they were a more modern and safer design but not as aesthetically pleasing. As you probably know, the curved sides matched that of the tenders and cabs on the original Pacific's. The Bournemouth stock, were some of the most handsome carriages ever built in my opinion.

 

The roof extrusion used by Comet is I believe a MK1 profile, not so good for anything else in their range. A common problem with carriage kits is that the shape of the end profile is compromised by whatever roof is available. We are very lucky to have the MJT extrusion for LNER carriages.

Edited by Headstock
lucky not looky, drrrrrrrrrrr
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 05/05/2020 at 10:32, Bucoops said:

 

image.png.209b3a047341dafdf8ed036fc1b37294.png

 

And these ones are ok:

 

image.png.87d0c46e507e5eca5463862531d42749.png

 

I don't know either way on any of the others.

 

The Worsley coach etch I have is:

 

image.png.856ec994eea35a02d89caf4634ebd9f9.png

 

 

On 06/05/2020 at 11:01, MikeTrice said:

Isinglass used to supply an alternative plastic moulded roof but I don't think they actually produced them. I don't recall matching ends though.

 

A new alternative source, Isinglass are now producing 3D resin-print kits. I first came across them at the Peterborough show, and purchased one to try out.

They're basic kits for the body shell, also available with floor / underframe  and bogies. Underframe fittings, wheels, and interiors need to be sourced separately. Quality and fit good, and easy assembly using superglue.

The sides have a recess on the inside around the windows to get the glazing near flush. Basic shape looks good to me.

Two more in the post as I type.

 

Bucoops, all the types you list are in the range, apart from the D141. I believe he can also supply roofs.

The ex GN Buffet conversion also previously mentioned's also covered.

 

Dia.27 Third Open

IMG-20200418-WA0000.jpeg.ab28548650ee3074a8b6cb02f1077ead.jpeg

 

IMG-20200418-WA0003.jpeg.173924dded34b79e5dedacf6731ce72b.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

Hi Ken,

 

I've been following the Isinglass kits for a while - one day I may try one but I'm not totally convinced the material is strong enough having seen several people manage to break components. But yes there is the scope for many useful diagrams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 14/05/2020 at 18:16, Ken.W said:

 

 

A new alternative source, Isinglass are now producing 3D resin-print kits. I first came across them at the Peterborough show, and purchased one to try out.

They're basic kits for the body shell, also available with floor / underframe  and bogies. Underframe fittings, wheels, and interiors need to be sourced separately. Quality and fit good, and easy assembly using superglue.

The sides have a recess on the inside around the windows to get the glazing near flush. Basic shape looks good to me.

Two more in the post as I type.

 

Bucoops, all the types you list are in the range, apart from the D141. I believe he can also supply roofs.

The ex GN Buffet conversion also previously mentioned's also covered.

 

Dia.27 Third Open

IMG-20200418-WA0000.jpeg.ab28548650ee3074a8b6cb02f1077ead.jpeg

 

IMG-20200418-WA0003.jpeg.173924dded34b79e5dedacf6731ce72b.jpeg

I did wonder with these how "rough" the 3D printed surface was. On a Steel panelled vehicle it doesn't matter so much, as it's relatively easy to sand smooth, but panelled stock would be another matter.

 

Did you need to do much to this - the end result looks quite smooth?

 

John.

 

John.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have his GN BTL building at the moment.  As you say it's not easy to sand a panelled vehicle, so I'm taking the approach of a couple of coats of filler primer before the paint proper and we'll see what happens.   It'll almost certainly finish up with a coat of Klear on the teak which is also self-levelling, so there is a chance it'll look OK.

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

2 hours ago, John Tomlinson said:

I did wonder with these how "rough" the 3D printed surface was. On a Steel panelled vehicle it doesn't matter so much, as it's relatively easy to sand smooth, but panelled stock would be another matter.

 

Did you need to do much to this - the end result looks quite smooth?

 

John.

 

Hi John, and thanks.

 

No, none at all.

The only surface treatment was arosol sprays of Halfords Burgandy Red and a Railmatch varnish, no rubbing down at all, or primer, needed.

 

Ken

Edited by Ken.W
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 14/05/2020 at 19:21, Bucoops said:

Hi Ken,

 

I've been following the Isinglass kits for a while - one day I may try one but I'm not totally convinced the material is strong enough having seen several people manage to break components. But yes there is the scope for many useful diagrams.

Hi,

As it's 3D printed resin, not plastic, the material is a bit on the brittle side.

The instructions do caution on this and advise on handling, particularly drill or file, do not use a knife blade on them.

Once built up into a bodyshell structure however, they seem to be sturdy enough.

 

In my model, posted above;

Sides, ends, roof, vents, and gangways are the basic kit,

plus floor, which incorporates the solebars and underframe trusses, and bogies, purchased with the kit.

 

Other underframe parts, buffers, and door handles from Comet

 

Seats and tables from Southern Pride, partitions plasticard.

 

As an experiment, which seems to look ok, the toilet window was glazed with clear plasticard, then a piece of white plasticard  glued inside of it.

 

Provision is also made for fitting Hornby / MJT bogies, and alternative floor / underframes can be used.

 

If I could add another question here, what colours do people use for LNER coach interiors?

(BR period if relevant)

Edited by Ken.W
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

what colours do people use for LNER coach interiors

 

Humbrol 62 for the inside of 3rd class compartments, 186 for the first (they had more expensive wood).  Depending when the coach was built, a dark matt red for third class seats or later (say after 1934-ish) 'moquette' which is basically beige with coloured patterns drybrushed on.  First class seats dark blue except in restaurant cars where it's green; corridor handrails brass (I use .7 wire) except in catering vehicles where they're chrome.

 

Your TO would most likely have had the moquette seats.  Dark grey for the floor (you can't see it anyway).

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

  • 1 month later...
On 18/05/2020 at 17:00, John Tomlinson said:

I did wonder with these how "rough" the 3D printed surface was. On a Steel panelled vehicle it doesn't matter so much, as it's relatively easy to sand smooth, but panelled stock would be another matter.

 

Did you need to do much to this - the end result looks quite smooth?

 

Hi John,

 

A pair of Isinglass printed sides, the 61'6" 5-bay RU, as supplied straight out the box

 

20200708_010324.jpg.1c562a1dd04f15733a06443f139eff71.jpg

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

Ken, many thanks for posting the picture. These look very good quality indeed, with little or no sanding smooth required.

 

Coincidentally, I've just come back from a couple of days away and prior to switching on my computer a few minutes ago, opened a parcel from Isinglass with a Dia.109 Sleeper 3rd kit inside. The quality on that is excellent too. So it does look as if 3D has much to offer us modellers, as long as it's done by someone capable!

 

John.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 08/07/2020 at 01:56, Ken.W said:

 

Hi John,

 

A pair of Isinglass printed sides, the 61'6" 5-bay RU, as supplied straight out the box

 

20200708_010324.jpg.1c562a1dd04f15733a06443f139eff71.jpg

 

Good evening Ken,

 

could I ask you a favour. Could you measure the length of the sides and the width of the windows.

 

I assume the sides are  dia 187? If so, I don't think it has the right type of ventilators in the saloon windows.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Ken,

 

could I ask you a favour. Could you measure the length of the sides and the width of the windows.

 

I assume the sides are  dia 187? If so, I don't think it has the right type of ventilators in the saloon windows.

 

Good evening Andrew, sorry not actually been on here today.

 

No problem with the sizes, sides are 242mm and passenger windows 16 mm.

It looks as though the PC's done something funny with the perspective, note also the squares on the cutting mat appear rectangular. In original photo on phone they appear ok.

 

It's dia.11, RF / RU

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ken.W said:

 

Good evening Andrew, sorry not actually been on here today.

 

No problem with the sizes, sides are 242mm and passenger windows 16 mm.

It looks as though the PC's done something funny with the perspective, note also the squares on the cutting mat appear rectangular. In original photo on phone they appear ok.

 

It's dia.11, RF / RU

 

Morning Ken,

 

thanks for the information, that is very helpful. I've found the sides of the non gangway stock to be compressed through their length. thus too short. Your gangway carriage seems to not suffer from this problem.

 

Five bays not four and one kitchen window not two, of course it's dia. 11, a bit of wishful thinking on my part, perhaps they will do a dia 187? 

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

9 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Morning Ken,

 

thanks for the information, that is very helpful. I've found the sides of the non gangway stock to be compressed through their length. thus too short. Your gangway carriage seems to not suffer from this problem.

 

Five bays not four and one kitchen window not two, of course it's dia. 11, a bit of wishful thinking on my part, perhaps they will do a dia 187? 

 

Thanks Andrew, hmm that's interesting. I'd though your query on the length of this one was due to the apparent compression of the photo. Besides this D.11 RF/RU and the D.27 RTO above, I also have the D.45 BG kit, and all of these are the correct length.

 

I've not tried any of his non-corridors, can i ask how much short they are? I mostly have the Hornbys for non corridor stock as I find these tolerable, unlike their corridor stock, as well as finely detailed. The D.62 BT got built as it's 'something different' - 5 compartment and the unusual van arrangement.

 

Worth asking him about your D.187 RC. He did say when I enquired about converting a D.186 TTO from a D.27 (basically a toilet window both sides), that he could easily alter it to produce one.

I see from my Harris the D187's also 5 bay like the D.11 but being a Composite has different window spacings, so hopefully the difference isn't too great for one to be produced that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ken.W said:

 

Thanks Andrew, hmm that's interesting. I'd though your query on the length of this one was due to the apparent compression of the photo. Besides this D.11 RF/RU and the D.27 RTO above, I also have the D.45 BG kit, and all of these are the correct length.

 

I've not tried any of his non-corridors, can i ask how much short they are? I mostly have the Hornbys for non corridor stock as I find these tolerable, unlike their corridor stock, as well as finely detailed. The D.62 BT got built as it's 'something different' - 5 compartment and the unusual van arrangement.

 

Worth asking him about your D.187 RC. He did say when I enquired about converting a D.186 TTO from a D.27 (basically a toilet window both sides), that he could easily alter it to produce one.

I see from my Harris the D187's also 5 bay like the D.11 but being a Composite has different window spacings, so hopefully the difference isn't too great for one to be produced that way.

 

Good morning Ken,

 

the shortness in the non gangway stock is because of the the way that they have produced the ends. Instead of the ends being set between the sides as on your Kirk, they are literally like a cork in a bottle, thus the ends stick out beyond the natural length of the real carriage. This adds at least a 1mm of extra material to each end that doesn't even exist on the real thing. To compensate for what would now be an overlong carriage, the whole of the sides have been compressed in length, thus the doors windows etc are all now slightly too small All done to accommodate and end design that isn't anything like the real carriage. Despite this, the body still seems to overhang the bufferbeam, despite the ends being flush with the bufferbeam on all Gresley non gangway stock. If they had been the right length, it would have been a reasonably easy job to cut and paste them into the excellent Hornby non gangway stock and produce a myriad of diagrams quite quickly. Perhaps a bit expensive compared to brass siding.

 

Re dia 187, I seem to having a bit of a moment on this. It's actually dia. 268 and 267 that I'm interested in. Both being anthracite electric cars, one RU and the others RT but externally pretty much identical. The gangway stock looks to be worth experimenting with, your example looks pretty good, as the cost of building complete brass trains of Gresley stock has skyrocketed in recent years.

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

As we've drifted onto the subject of the Isinglass 3D printed kits, I thought I'd mention that I made a start on my Dia.109 Sleeper 3rd this weekend.

 

Taking the bits out outside into bright sunlight on Friday, I could see some faint layer marks, so after separating the parts with Xuron cutters and using a metal backed nail file to clean the pips, I ran a bowl of lukewarm water to give the whole thing a good wash in kitchen cleaner, Cif or Jif whatever it's called now. This took off the residual stickiness and at the same time I carefully sanded the main parts with fine wet and dry used wet, using little blocks to get inside the beaded panelling. The effect was very positive and the whole thing looked and felt a lot better.

 

I test fitted the sides and ends, and immediately it was clear that the mounting ledge inside the ends was too big for the lower part of the sides to fit properly - easily remedied with a file.

 

I bought floor and bogies with the kit, and I suspect like many of us usually make coaches with a bodyshell of roof, sides and ends, a floor unit with partitions and seats, and an underframe/ chassis, which makes painting a lot easier especially if you spray. These kits are designed with a retaining ledge on each side of the floor to hold the sides and if you use this you have to make the chassis and sides (plus ends) as one unit. I hope this is visible in the attached picture. It has the advantage that the sides hold the floor dead straight.

 

I elected for glueing with Araldite Rapid, which gave me enough time to make sure everything was square and true as I fitted the sides and ends to the floor. I glued a side and two ends to start, checking before the glue went off that the second side would fit, and then glued the second side. Thankfully the fit of the roof is perfect, just needing a little sanding on the lugs at each end to fit snugly between the coach ends. I hope I'm not pushing my luck in saying I'm confident of making a neat joint beteen sides and roof on final assembly after painting.

 

I've added roof vents now, and the second photo shows where I've reached, next job is to make an interior, and then using MJT trussing etc. do the underbits. I'll fit axle bearings and test one axle for free -running, and then fit wheels after painting, as I don't fancy keep taking the wheels in and out of the brittle resin bogies.

 

Worth mentioning that the pre-made holes for the grab rails by the doors are too big for the MJT product, so I filled and re-did these plus drilled pilot holes for the hinges, which I still need to source. In overview I'm delighted with the product, and I'm sure I'll order some more!

 

John.

IMG_1172 copyweb.jpg

IMG_1168 copyweb.jpg

  • Like 6
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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...