Jump to content

Towards pre-Grouping carriages in 4mm – the D508 appreciation thread


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

I am looking at making some MR 48ft LTSR coaches with elliptical roofs, along with some LMS 54ft LTSR coaches. The Ratio Suburbans will form the basis of the models with Dapol roofs.

 

Snap

 

TilburyBT.jpg.e3a0204e7c6aab2ae6d6c14d05d3bfdd.jpg

 

Might fudge the tumblehome issue...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I ought to have acknowledged earlier that my current bout of thinking about Slaters sides has been encouraged by @Penrhos1920' topic on Great Western carriages from Ratio sides:

... and also a demonstration of similar cut-n-shuttery at ExpoEM a couple years ago. (Did I already mention that?)

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/09/2020 at 00:09, Compound2632 said:

Most wine bottles are around 3” in diameter. This bottle is a uniform 2½” diameter over 7⅛”, making it ideal for forming 8 ft radius Plastikard carriage roofs for carriages up to 45 ft long, such as were worn by Midland Railway arc-roof bogie carriages built in the period 1878 – 1889.

Interesting. I'm taking note of that for future. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/09/2020 at 22:16, Compound2632 said:

Just for fun, I’ve also drawn out some of the elegant 54 ft 12-wheelers. Here’s the most numerous of them, the 25 composites built as Lot 110 in 1886 – the last Midland main line carriages to be built without lavatories and with oil lighting. They had three first class compartments flanked on either side by a pair of thirds, and a spacious 7’0” luggage compartment at one end. They were given diagram D507:

2107518445_MRD50754ftcompositeLot110.png.382e3a4cf7abced3b881f8a8325c8c0a.png

One could probably assemble this from one pair of sides for D504 third brakes and one and a half pairs of sides for D516 composites.

 

In 1892, twenty of them had one compartment converted to a pair of lavatories serving the adjacent first and third class compartments. They were converted to gas lighting at the same time. According to Lacy & Dow, the diagram, D507A, shows the first class compartment nearest the luggage compartment end converted:

1301934671_MRD507A54ftlavatorycomposite.png.3e582bfee600b89a0bb35e97f16f4af5.png

Lacy & Dow reproduce a photo of No. 279 that has the first class compartment nearest the non-luggage end converted:

137130572_MRD507B54ftlavatorycomposite.png.e7287f76cabd667dd5e07fe81eda6240.png

To complicate matters further, a c. 1900 photo (possibly a few years earlier) that @Lecorbusier sent me of an express near Didsbury, hauled by a 2183 Class 4-4-0, shows a third variant, with the third class compartment next but one to the luggage compartment converted:

902301710_MRD507C54ftlavatorycomposite.png.cca6466e9ce0c8a8b8c8897dd9a689ad.png

It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that which compartment got converted depended on the day of the week the carriage came into the works – so this is the Monday version, the diagram shows the Tuesday version, and No. 279 is the Thursday version! (The end compartments wouldn’t get converted as they’re Sunday and Saturday.)

 

In that photo, the following carriage is the variant with the Tuesday lavatories, so there are at least photos of these three variants. All this 12-wheel grandeur is let down by the next carriage, a 29 ft 4-compartment first of 1875 vintage, whilst a D490 bogie third completes the passenger accommodation, the whole being flanked by a pair of D529 4-wheel brakes.

 

The second most numerous type of 54 ft 12-wheeler were the last arc-roofed carriages to be built, composite brakes to D522, twenty of which were turned out in 1896. They had lavatories and gas lighting from new:

821315058_MRD52254ftcompositebrake.png.4b747a13f575a9c74d57a8f409e4d7f5.png

Note the fixed window next to the double doors of the brake/luggage compartments, as mentioned re. the 40 ft composite brake conversion. These carriages can be seen mixed in with the new clerestory carriages in many photos of express trains of the 1898-1905 period, only being displaced from main-line use as corridor carriages took over. They were very long-lived compared to other Midland arc-roofed carriages, being withdrawn in the 1930s. One was used on the Walsall Wood branch in the dying days of its passenger service.

 

This could be cobbled together from Slaters’ sides but would need two pairs of lavatory third sides:

992306832_MRD52254ftcompositebrakecutnshut.png.8f8e7997dc417f9fa7f5955a94cdd21d.png

There’s a subtle difference in the panelling of lavatory compartments converted from passenger compartments, compared to ones built as such. The latter have a continuous long waist panel and, if the blank side between the lavatory window and the adjacent compartment window is divided into two panels, they are of equal width. The converted compartments keep the short waist panel and the dimensions of the compartment windows are preserved in the upper panelling.

 

These are gorgeous, I'd love to know what services they ran on? Highly doubtful they'd run south of London, of course, but one hopes. The artwork implies quite a generous compartment size?

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, AVS1998 said:

 

These are gorgeous, I'd love to know what services they ran on? Highly doubtful they'd run south of London, of course, but one hopes. The artwork implies quite a generous compartment size?

 

Compartment sizes on the arc-roofed carriages were standardised in the late 1870s at 7'3" between partitions for first and 6'0" for third (with the exception of those 40 ft thirds with 6'6" compartments). There was some variation of up to about ½" to fit - for example, the D490 and D502 43 ft thirds and third brakes had 5'11¾" compartments - with 1¼" thick partitions and 3⅛" ends it all adds up. But for many carriages there was a luggage compartment to take up the odd fractions of an inch! On those D552 12-wheelers, the lavatories were 3'6" between partitions; rather more cramped than the lavatories converted from passenger compartments. When Clayton went over to clerestory carriages, not only did the width go up from 8'0" to 8'6", giving a bit more elbow room, but the firsts went up to 7'9" and the thirds to 6'6". When David Bain took over in 1903, sizes shrank a little to 7'4" for first and 6'4" for third, at least for side corridor carriages.

 

Both those designs of 12-wheeler, D507 and D522, were in the front rank expresses mixed in with the new clerestory carriages until the general adoption of corridor carriages from c. 1905 onwards. They're often seen in London-Manchester expresses. I don't know whether they would have worked south of the river but certainly arc-roof carriages did until the Metropolitan gauge clerestories were built in 1907-1911. 

 

There were certainly 45 ft composites worked through between Kentish Town and Herne Hill, exactly where they came from and went to beyond those stations I'm not sure; it may just have been a connecting shuttle service:

 

Edited by Compound2632
sp.
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Idling away, I came upon the I think moribund LMS Review website where a photo of a D516 31 ft 6-wheel centre-luggage composite in departmental use at Dumfries in 1966 is posted as a "mystery photograph". The photographer, D.A. McNaught, noted that it was built in 1885. Peter Tatlow identified it, posting a photograph of an MSJS example, together with the diagram, bout taken, I think, from Lacy & Dow. 

 

While it's tempting to draw the inference that this carriage is one of the 25 Kilmarnock-built MSJS carriages, 9 of which went to the G&SWR when they were replaced on Anglo-Scottish expresses by the clerestory corridor carriages of 1899/1900, the build date of 1885 clearly implies that it is a Derby-built Midland carriage, one of the 100 built to Lot 111, ordered in March 1884. The second batch of 100, Lot 141, was ordered towards the end of November 1884, so it seems unlikely that any were complete before the end of that year. The Kilmarnock-built MSJS carriages were ordered in April 1882 so were almost certainly all in traffic by 1883. (At the same time, Cowlairs built 10 of the 31 ft 5-compartment thirds, Midland diagram D493, for the MSJS.)

 

This raises a little mystery: why, having built nothing but bogie carriages for main-line use from the late 1870s, was there this sudden reversion to 6-wheelers, and for the prestige Anglo-Scottish expresses at that? The Kilmarnock composites were the first of their type; the Cowlairs thirds only the second batch of that type, the first being built at Derby for use in close-coupled local sets. 

 

These 6-wheel luggage composites are very well known and perhaps many people's idea of a pre-clerestory Midland carriage, thanks in no small part to the superbly-restored example at the NRM:

 

image.png.35297b5c441ee31643980f90f36e47fb.png

 

Wikimedia Commons / James E. Petts / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0).

 

There's another being restored by the Vintage Carriages Trust at Ingrow, after many years spent sporting GN&SR livery.

 

But in my view, splendid as they are, they're not as typical or as representative of the Midland's carriage stock of the 1880s and 1890s as the arc-roofed bogie carriages. Alas, not one survives - though at Foxfield there is the body of a D490 43 ft 7-compartment third and exactly the right underframe for it, complete with original bogies, under the "Bass" carriage...

 

 

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

Why the reversion to six-wheel carriages is indeed a puzzle. Prejudice and partisanship leads me to blame the parsimonious North British.  I should know this, but when did the M&SJS split into M&NB and M&GSW? 

 

Do you have notes of the distribution of actual carriages when they where displaced from the Anglo-Scottish workings, all I know is that they were shared out according to the proportions of ownership and I'd assumed that where they were built mattered little when they were re-allocated.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Buhar said:

Why the reversion to six-wheel carriages is indeed a puzzle. Prejudice and partisanship leads me to blame the parsimonious North British.  

 

I wonder if money was at the root of it. The GSWR and NBR were having to pay their one-third share of the cost of the joint stock; it may have been felt unsatisfactory that they were having to pay cash whereas the Midland was to a large extent paying in kind by building stock in its own works. In which case, I wonder if Kilmarnock and Cowlairs were not equipped to build bogie carriages? One would have thought that if that was the issue, Deby could have supplied the bogies.

 

42 minutes ago, Buhar said:

Why the reversion to six-wheel carriages is indeed a puzzle. Prejudice and partisanship leads me to blame the parsimonious North British.  I should know this, but when did the M&SJS split into M&NB and M&GSW? 

 

Do you have notes of the distribution of actual carriages when they where displaced from the Anglo-Scottish workings, all I know is that they were shared out according to the proportions of ownership and I'd assumed that where they were built mattered little when they were re-allocated.

 

The M&GSW and M&NB stock was the new clerestory corridor carriages, firstly on the afternoon trains in August 1899, then the morning and other trains, done by some time in 1900. The division of shares was a bit more equitable: two-thirds to the Midland and one-third to the other partner in each case. The M&NB stock included some sleeping carriages but the sleeper services to Glasgow and Stranraer always used Midland vehicles. As far as I can work out, there was no transfer of MSJS vehicles to the new joint stocks; presumably they remained separately accounted for. There was also the MSWJS, created for the dining carriages of 1896, which only ran in the Glasgow trains; those carriages were transferred to the M&GSW joint stock.

 

Lacy & Dow give the distribution of the MSJS carriages, which was as nearly as possible one-third of each type to each company, without sawing any up! The GSWR got 29 carriages, renumbered as follows:

  • 3 x 54 ft composite 107-109
  • 6 x 40 ft composite 110-115
  • 9 x 31 ft composite 116-124
  • 4 x 31 ft third 619-622
  • 7 x 25 ft brake nos. not known

The NBR got four of the 54 ft 12-wheelers but only eleven 6-wheelers. The Midland's share of the 12-wheelers seems to have been the three converted to dining carriages; these remained in the Scotch services for some years. The Midland also snaffled eight of the 40 ft bogie composites, against six to the other two companies. I haven't done the sums but the division may have been arranged to give each partner the same number of first and third class compartments.

Edited by Compound2632
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 01/09/2020 at 00:09, Compound2632 said:

Turning to composites, two designs were produced in August 1877, both described in the Drawing Register as “Composite Carriage (40ft Bogie Carriage) 1st, 2nd, 3rd + Luggage Compt” – two and a half years after the Midland had abolished second class!

 

The first design, to drawing 331, had three first class compartments flanked by a pair of thirds, with a 5’2½”-long luggage compartment at one end. Three batches were built, 30 to Lot 17 and 10 each to Lots 50 and 58. In 1895, 40 of them had one first class compartment downgraded to third; it’s not stated which but my guess would be the one furthest from the luggage end, as being over the bogie so giving the least smooth ride. Ralph Lacy couldn’t find an official photo to illustrate them but this is my interpretation:

501185511_MRD-40ftcompositeLot17.png.0ce4b7dba3a0820f8fe12eca16b9b482.png

 

 

I think I've found one of these elusive vehicles in a train photo at Elstree c. 1899, Midland Railway Study Centre Item No. 60594. Although the web image is only a thumbnail, looking at the second carriage, the third compartment is widely-spaced from the compartments either side, suggesting three firsts in a row. I also think those are Pullman bogies. 

 

EDIT: I had a hunch I'd seen this photo before - I've tracked it down to R.J. Essery and D. Jenkinson, An Illustrated Review of Midland Locomotives Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1988) Plate 49, where it's dated c. 1904. It can't be c. 1899 as the leading D530 brake has the small guard's lookouts introduced in 1902 and the locomotive wears its lamp irons in the post-1 February 1903 positions. This clearer reproduction of the photo confirms my identification, I believe. The carriage is seen from the same side as my sketch. An oddity is that the ventilator is on the RH door of the luggage compartment, which is anomalous.

Edited by Compound2632
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

I have been asking for advice on the best way to get a good square cut for cut'n'shutting:

Advice upon which I will be acting. Meanwhile, my carriage-building has taken an interesting twist in a different direction, thanks to Dave @chris p bacon's very kind offer to prepare some carriage side "kits" using his Silhouette. Having extolled the importance of Midland bogie carriages, I've actually gone for a 6-wheeler, largely because it's a particularly challenging one to cut'n'shut from Slaters sides, being a 30 ft 4-compartment all first to D262, 91 of which were built in 1883-4 for use in short-buffer (close coupled) suburban sets, along with short buffer thirds and third brakes. The latter were short-buffer versions of the D493 and D504 31 ft carriages represented by the Slaters kits. The first is wanted to make up one of the five-coach Birmingham, Walsall and Wolverhampton sets, formed BT/T/F/T/BT.  The Midland Railway Study Centre has both a copy of the drawing, Drg. 547, and the official photo, MRSC Item 64340 - see also R.E. Lacy & G. Dow, Midland Railway Carriages Vol. 2 (Wild Swan, 1986) Figs. 340 and 341.

 

For the Silhouette, I prepared drawings in CorelDraw, output as PDF for the cutter. I've followed the classic David Jenkinson method, with a main body side layer in 0.020" plasticard, a droplight layer in 0.010", and a beading layer, which Dave cut in both 0.010" and 0.005", along with bolection pieces in the same thicknesses. The aim is to produce sides that are a good match for the Slaters sides, rather than reproducing scale thicknesses exactly. The Silhouette wasn't set to cut right through any of these thicknesses, making the sheets of plasticard more robust for sending through the post.

 

Here's the main side piece, with a start being made on opening out the windows, using the Jenkinson method of cutting a cross and folding back each triangle so that the plasticard snaps off on the score line. If I'd thought ahead, I would have got the Silhouette to mark out the cross lines!

 

99145809_MidlandD262firstmainlayer.JPG.ec4a822ff99ee9f0303a3bcb1f0694c8.JPG

 

I'm not too fussed at this stage about the rough edges on the quarter-lights but the door window openings need to be neat.

 

Next the beading layer. I started with the 0.005" thick sheet, concerned that it would break up, but in fact it is fairly straightforward to push the pieces out. I've left the quarter-lights blank, which gives greater rigidity to the resulting doily:

 

1557528064_MidlandD262firstbeadinglayer.JPG.a9f43234f1a858ec9deff436fcba049d.JPG

 

Both pieces are marked out within a bounding rectangle. For the beading layer, this gives extra strength, but the main aim is to use this to align the beading and main side layers. The only thing to remember is that the scored side of the main layer is the inside, so that once the beading is stuck on, it's still visible when I come to cut the completed side to size. (It's an advantage here to have chosen a symmetrical design of carriage!)

 

1310342693_MidlandD262firstmainandbeadinglayers.JPG.93ac140b7b3b5d197921879a79f784ed.JPG

 

Here are these two layers welded together with d-limonene, with a start made on cutting through the quarter-light openings from the rear side:

 

1472653024_MidlandD262firstbeadinglayerfixed.JPG.455f28a7d154434f5ebb3326632cd8f9.JPG

 

The next installment should see @richbrummitt's dessert wine bottle pressed into service.

 

 

Edited by Compound2632
Typo corrected
  • Like 7
  • Craftsmanship/clever 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen,
Would there be any advantage in shaping the curve on the sides first and them adhereing the beading section to help hold the shape?
Or there is not enough strength in the beading section to actually do that?
I am thinking along the lines of how you laminate, say pieces of ply to form a curve that will hold, if that makes sense!
 

Khris

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, kandc_au said:

Would there be any advantage in shaping the curve on the sides first and them adhereing the beading section to help hold the shape?
Or there is not enough strength in the beading section to actually do that?
I am thinking along the lines of how you laminate, say pieces of ply to form a curve that will hold, if that makes sense!

 

Well, it's all experimental at this stage. The only beading on the curved section is at the ends. I'll be using the hot water method to set the curve. Thinking about it, it might be an advantage to trim the ends to shape before doing this, so that the double layer doesn't offer additional resistance. Apart from the beading at the ends, at the moment, I'm thinking that the 0.020" side will be the only layer below the waist - the droplight layer only extends from the bottom of the waist panel to the top of the eves panel. But if that seems to flimsy, I could laminate a thicker layer of pre-curved plasticard behind the tumblehome. 

 

It seemed easiest to fix the beading on to the main side while in the flat, to get the alignment right. Even so, I'm not happy with the alignment - this first side may well turn out to be a sacrificial test piece.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been hitting the bottle:

 

1887421956_MidlandD262firsttumblehomeformingtaped.JPG.589a4d248ab1b2ed98e408afa99e7f74.JPG

 

Into the hot bath, or pie dish:

 

178095150_MidlandD262firsttumblehomeformingimmersion.JPG.b5c8d637f8a35c50671c103eece1bbbc.JPG

 

Dried out, and on with the bolection panels - 0.005" plasticard again:

 

917778027_MidlandD262firstbolectionsfixed.JPG.ef5566eafb1d54eaddf78d60b66a64fe.JPG

 

With a start made on cutting through from behind. The tidying up won't start until the droplight layer is fitted. This photo shows why I'm thinking this first attempt won't make the final cut - the door window openings go right up to the beading - i.e. the beading is fixed a whisker too low down on the side. Nevertheless I think I'll take it all the way to test all the finishing-off - door ventilators, hinges, etc.

  • Like 7
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bolections cut through from the rear and the 0.010"-thick droplight layer added:

 

313247118_MidlandD262firstdroplightlayerfixed.JPG.c6419fb6ab98069f7081f56b22adffb3.JPG

 

On the two RH compartments, the bolection has been trimmed back at 45° by careful skrawking, with the round needle-file for tidying up the corners. The slight downwards mis-alignment of the beading layer is evident again, with the bolections being too wide at the bottom and disintegratingly thin at the top. Living and learning, in the hope that practice will make, if not perfect, at least better.

 

An advantage of starting out with an all-first is that there are fewer sets of windows than for an all-third!

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's great, it's a prototype, a real world 3d design sketch, proving the theory and improving the practice. Basically, the man who never made a mistake, never made anything. If we had the means to cut plastic card that well and more importantly that quickly on a DIY basis thirty years ago, I would have one hell of a fleet of pre grouping coaches by now.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MrWolf said:

If we had the means to cut plastic card that well and more importantly that quickly on a DIY basis thirty years ago, I would have one hell of a fleet of pre grouping coaches by now.

 

I couldn't agree more. Although the Silhouette turns out to have its limitations in actually cutting through plasticard, its real value lies in the accuracy of marking-out and scoring lines. I hope you've noticed the little blip in the beading on the right-hand side of the door, for the door lock.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have, it would be one thing filing that to shape for one door, but reproducing it accurately and consistently on many doors would be near impossible.

There would be a distinct possibility of filling the swear jar though

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Although the Silhouette turns out to have its limitations

It does, but there are others on here who have got so much more than me out of it.

 

I think I paid about £130 which isn't a small amount of money but I reckon it's money well spent. One thing I use it for is test building, I've found it invaluable for checking whether an etch sheet will go together easily or not.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To me , limitations or not, the cutter does the hard work in actually marking out the plasticard/styrenne, which when done by hand is very hard work to get and keep it all square!

Khris

  • Agree 4
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.