Wright writes.....

[Paul Cram]

Here is one I made from an ABS kit

[cctransuk]

41 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks John,

 

Good value at £3.00 each, then?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I'd buy them all day at that price, Tony.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[jwealleans]

I'd have said you got a bargain there, Tony - I'd have snapped them up at that price.

 

The Ratio bogie bolster tends towards the fictional but they do look nice.  

 

The Quad (correctly identified above as WD and then NER) has been available for more than 50 years as a kit.

 

 

I think this image has been in this thread before.  I was given two and they don't look out of place alongside the Parkside or ABS versions.

 

 

[t-b-g]

48 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

There are many who don't 'get' lots of things and, of course, preference is a personal choice thing. But it is often helpful to look and try and understand rather that react and condemn.

 

Also I very much doubt that 'functional' is the best descriptive word. And 'modern architecture' is a rather bland catch-all for a whole host of modern styles such as post modern, deconstructionist, brutalist, neo-futurism, international style, contemporary and even revivalism. Even Bauhaus is considered modern and that dates from the 1920s - a century ago. It's rather like lumping all pre-Mk1 coach designs together as being from the 'fussy' era. Even I can see that there are some from that period that have redeeming and interesting features as well as the grossly over-worked styles.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You carry on modelling what you like (edit to add that you are doing it superbly!) and I will carry on modelling what I like. Everybody wins! 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 28, 2020 by t-b-g

[MJI]

4 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Grahame,

 

the thing about the devotees to the simplicity and functionality equals good argument, is that as soon as you visit their houses, the first thing that you notice is that simplicity and function is right out the window in favour of cosy comfort.

 

The MK1's were indeed successful, or were they? The MK2s came in within a decade and reversed almost all the design philosophy of the MK1's. Cuddly carriages with better proportioned windows were back.

 

 

Don't get me started!

 

The Mark 1 was a quick fix, a decent modern old style vehicle easy to produce a lot of, the carriage version of the BR standards.

 

Swindon developed both the B4 bogie and unitary construction so the prototype Mark 2, a very different vehicle but not that advanced.

 

2DEF were the first proper advances for the passenger.

 

As to riding on a Mark 1 or Mark 2 _ABC depends entirely what is under the Mark 1. a 1 FO declassified as a SO on B4 is preferable to a 2B TSO, my rake of 2Bs has 2 1 FOs declassified one Commonwealth one B4, I rode in real life in the B4 one, was one of my favourite 47s as well.

[MJI]

3 hours ago, bbishop said:

 

Maunsell never designed a coach in his life!  He just had an official sit and said "well done, Lionel".  The C&W chief was Lionel Lynes from the SECR, with Surrey Warner from the LSWR concentrating on electric stock.  What I find fascinating was the Lynes coach design was SECR externally but LSWR internally (logical really as the LSWR was the only main line constituent of the SR).  Twenty five years later, the Mk1 was externally an LMS design, but the "internal philosophy" was taken from Bulleid's post war 64' stock.  Of course the bogie design came from somewhere unmentionable.

 

Bill

 

 

You mean the Swindon B4?

 

 

4 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Which is more than can be said for the ride of the bogies.

 

The ride is fine with decent bogies such as Commonwealth or B4

[MJI]

1 hour ago, Clive Mortimore said:

When the country end Driving Trailer Composites of the class 309s first class was derated to standard class I would always try and get a seat in the Clacton (buffet) sets because if you were lucky you would get a single seat in the single non-smoking bay. Sitting in an armchair traveling at 100mph through Essex in a commuter train on commonwealth bogies. Luxury to a mere peasant like me.

 

My mate would go for a Walton set with compartments in the old first class end, you could end up with an unknown person either side of you. Even some of us peasants have standards.

 

The Western Region had quite a few Mark 1 FOs with decent bogies (AFAIR by 1980 no BR1 FOs left) and air brakes declassified to second class running with 2ABC stock, more AB with odd C.

 

Nice and comfy.

[t-b-g]

3 hours ago, Bucoops said:

Coaches can be very good looking - to be honest a large part of it is livery.

 

 

Give me this over a visit to the Tate any day

 

I wonder how they got that very realistic teak effect......

[Clive Mortimore]

8 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I wonder how they got that very realistic teak effect......

Does B&Q do some nice teak veneer finished chipboard?

[t-b-g]

1 minute ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Does B&Q do some nice teak veneer finished chipboard?

 

Maybe. A genuine question here and I don't know the answer. In that livery, with no lining, should the end be teak or black?

[Mark C]

Tony

 

Thanks for the Ivatt 4MT information - I'm relieved...I thought I had missed something on mine!!  There were a fair number with the token exchange apparatus on the tender for M&GN operation, but 43106 certainly appears to have been quite camera shy.

 

John is correct regarding the ex-GWR TUBE - I believe it is made up from the long-since discontinued Ratio kit of the Open C and as such is quite a rare item (especially if unmade).

 

Regards

Mark

[micklner]

23 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

Maybe. A genuine question here and I don't know the answer. In that livery, with no lining, should the end be teak or black?

I would say Black , however it does look lovely !!

[Daniel W]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

And now for some 'interesting' freight stock models on LB. Taken looking up as well!

 

 

I bought this ex-LMS 'Flatcase' and ex-GWR 'Tube' wagon from a second-hand stand at a show last year. They were in EM Gauge. The proprietor told me that many potential punters had picked them up, but, on finding they were not OO, put them back, disappointed. He simply couldn't sell them. 

 

'How much each, please?', I asked. 'They're no good, I can't sell them', replied the proprietor. 'No problem' I'll buy a load'. 'You can have them for £3.00 each'. They were re-gauged to OO within minutes of my returning to my demonstration stand! I didn't even have to change the wheels.

 

Are these models correct? I have no idea, such is my ignorance of freight stock, but they do look rather good (at least to me). 

 

*Snip*

 

 

That GWR Tube was an absolute bargain for sure. The Ratio kit has been out of production for years and goes for over £20 on ebay.

[Darryl Tooley]

Just now, t-b-g said:

Maybe. A genuine question here and I don't know the answer. In that livery, with no lining, should the end be teak or black?

The varnished teak ends and the company initials amidships with the number repeated at either end mark this out as early LNER livery.  According to Harris, in 'LNER Standard Gresley Carriages' the ends of non-vestibuled carriages were black from October 1925, and the quad-arts entered service unlined.

 

D

[Bucoops]

34 minutes ago, Darryl Tooley said:

 and the quad-arts entered service unlined.

 

D

 

Much to the relief of the NNR painting team

[t-b-g]

47 minutes ago, micklner said:

I would say Black , however it does look lovely !!

 

I recall reading that the sets were modified and I wasn't sure if the preserved set is in original or modified condition.

 

As you say, the work the NNR folk have put in on that is really first rate and the set looks gorgeous, whether it be technically correct or not. 

[t-b-g]

43 minutes ago, Darryl Tooley said:

The varnished teak ends and the company initials amidships with the number repeated at either end mark this out as early LNER livery.  According to Harris, in 'LNER Standard Gresley Carriages' the ends of non-vestibuled carriages were black from October 1925, and the quad-arts entered service unlined.

 

D

 

Thanks. I don't have "Harris". I used to borrow a copy if I needed one! I didn't know they were unlined. I had though that even secondary stock was lined up to the livery change.

[Darryl Tooley]

Just now, t-b-g said:

I had though that even secondary stock was lined up to the livery change.

It was.  The GN quads were apparently an exception.  The GE section quin-arts, by contrast, were lined when new.

 

D

[Steven B]

On 28/05/2020 at 10:03, bbishop said:

 

Maunsell never designed a coach in his life!  He just had an official sit and said "well done, Lionel".  The C&W chief was Lionel Lynes from the SECR, with Surrey Warner from the LSWR concentrating on electric stock. 

 

Don't disagree. I doubt Gresley, Thompson, Collett, Hawksworth, Stanier et.al. had that much involvement in the coaches that carry their names either.

 

Steven B.

Edited May 29, 2020 by Steven B
Correcting spelling of Hawksworth

[jwealleans]

Since Gresley joined the GNR as their Carriage and Wagon Superintendent and immediately started building carriages to the profile which lasted on the LNER until his death, you might want to reconsider that.

 

 

[Compound2632]

6 hours ago, bbishop said:

 

Maunsell never designed a coach in his life!  He just had an official sit and said "well done, Lionel".  The C&W chief was Lionel Lynes from the SECR, with Surrey Warner from the LSWR concentrating on electric stock.  What I find fascinating was the Lynes coach design was SECR externally but LSWR internally (logical really as the LSWR was the only main line constituent of the SR).  Twenty five years later, the Mk1 was externally an LMS design, but the "internal philosophy" was taken from Bulleid's post war 64' stock.  Of course the bogie design came from somewhere unmentionable.

 

Bill

 

Not unlike the situation on the LMS, where Reid, from the Midland, was responsible for carriages that were in exterior and interior appearance thoroughly Midland but in dimensions and interior layout were pure LNWR. The latter was by far the dominant constituent of the LMS in terms of long-distance passenger traffic.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Compound2632

[3rd Rail Exile]

1 hour ago, Steven B said:

 

Don't disagree. I doubt Gresley, Thompson, Collett, Hawkswroth, Stanier et.al. had that much involvement in the coaches that carry their names either.

 

Steven B.

I trust Hawkswroth was suitably angry if he didn't like a design that carried his name...

[Northmoor]

7 hours ago, Geep7 said:

I think they weren't too bad with a decent B4 or Commonwealth under them, but they definitely gave more bounce than newer stock. That was part of the charm of them, at least in my opinion. I certainly miss a lovely deep cushioned Mk1 EMU bouncing along the South Western Mainline. You could tell where you were just by the odd lurch and sound coming from the track, unlike today's more modern stock.

Until my commute was suspended in March, I could pretty much tell where I was between Waterloo and Woking with my eyes shut - which they often were - on a Class 450.  You could always feel the curve and slight lurch on the down slow at Weybridge.

[MarkC]

4 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

I wonder how they got that very realistic teak effect......

Well, they could tell you...then they'd probably have to kill you

[Denbridge]

9 hours ago, bbishop said:

 

Maunsell never designed a coach in his life!  He just had an official sit and said "well done, Lionel".  The C&W chief was Lionel Lynes from the SECR, with Surrey Warner from the LSWR concentrating on electric stock.  What I find fascinating was the Lynes coach design was SECR externally but LSWR internally (logical really as the LSWR was the only main line constituent of the SR).  Twenty five years later, the Mk1 was externally an LMS design, but the "internal philosophy" was taken from Bulleid's post war 64' stock.  Of course the bogie design came from somewhere unmentionable.

 

Bill

You can say the same for every CME. They guided the design teams and set the specifications. Always amuses me that for instance, Gresley designed his pacifics solely on his own drawing board as some people seem to think.

Edited May 28, 2020 by Denbridge