Clean locos and rolling stock

[Etched Pixels]

For goods wagons the "check the photographs" rule applies when possible, Some wagons had the white lettering painted in self cleaning paint (a paint whose surface continually slowly flakes off in very very thin layers) so dirty with cleanish lettering is rather more likely that expected.

[Poggy1165]

Very true. I also have very severe doubts when someone tells me wagons were painted in a particular shade. Even to the extent that they were originally, exposure to grime thrown up from the track, weathering and - far from least - industrial pollution would all have an impact. In theory, GCR wagons were a lead colour - whatever that was - but in photos you can see two standing together, one looking almost black, one almost white. But the point made above is very valid - the lettering on both can be remarkably clear.

[MikeOxon]

For those who worry about gtting colours "exactly right", look at this optical illusion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Optical_grey_squares_orange_brown.svg

 

Both circles are the exact same color( HEX#D18600 ), and both squares containing them are also the exact same color ( HEX#707070 ).

 

It shows that the colours we see depend very much on the context in which they are placed.

 

Mike

[Etched Pixels]

Lead paint starts whiteish and goes dark with time as it reacts with chemicals in the air. Its big value was that it protected the material beneath from harm and was very good at that. Even by 1887 however they knew it was probably toxic and dangerous although a tobacco corporation type lobbying exercise actually stopped it getting banned completely in much of the world until the 1970s - or in the Australian case 1997.

 

So if the GCR paint was simply a lead paint then it would presuambly have darkened as you describe and would have been chosen because it was cheap and a good protector of the materials below not because they liked the shade.

 

(the amount of lead in paint btw actually rose from the 1930s until banning despite it being know dangerous - so old 1950s paint is the most dangerous of all.. what fun. The paint companies are now finally getting their comeuppance in the USA at least, with asbestos style lawsuits heading their way.)

 

Alan

[James]

My grandfather told me that in pre group days locos were as clean as the ones in York museum

 

No they weren't.

 

When labour was cheap the railways cleaned stock very frequently - we do it mechanically now of course. But one thing applies throughout railway history - railways are horribly dirty places. Even in the 21st century spend a day on track and you certainly won't be clean, especially if you actually working, with p-way or S&T for example. In pre-group days I don't ever doubt that care was taken to keep things clean, but there's no getting away from the fact that the steam railway produced a lot of dirt itself and industrial areas added to this.

 

For models, each to their own but I think there's one overwhelming piece of evidence to support weathering (and weathering isn't just dirt - an ex-works loco is harder to convincingly portray than a filthy one) stock of this era is Bramblewick.

[MikeOxon]

Every self-respecting engine crew would have a wad of cotton waste to hand, to wipe off any grime each time they stopped!

 

They took real pride in their locos in Victorian times.

 

Mike

[James]

Every self-respecting engine crew would have a wad of cotton waste to hand, to wipe off any grime each time they stopped!

 

They took real pride in their locos in Victorian times.

Some of us still take a pride in what we do!

 

Polished Levers by JamesWells, on Flickr

 

But even then you must remember that it was simply a way of paying for food and a roof over their family's heads. This isn't, however, the cosy image that most enthusiasts choose to believe was the case. Railway work at that time was hard and in many cases dangerous. Early on conditions weren't great and it was only the rise of unions within industry which helped improve certain things.

 

What the railway could do was provide a safe job which often came with a house at a good price. Some jobs, such as train crew and signalmen, gave some quite ordinary people a chance of a very responsible job which they may not otherwise have had - often these jobs resulted in railwaymen taking a pride in what they were doing. And some traditions continue even now - in most traditional signal boxes Sunday is the day when the box is cleaned, just as it has been for years...

[ian@stenochs]

Every self-respecting engine crew would have a wad of cotton waste to hand, to wipe off any grime each time they stopped!

 

They took real pride in their locos in Victorian times.

 

Mike

Hi,

 

I know that the crew on the empty coal wagons to Dalmellington set their engine to the task and got out, one either side, and cleaned the engine until they got to Holehouse Junction.  However that would not clean the under frames.  Frequently smoke boxes were burned with hard steaming and the G&SWR only did patch painting when locos were in shops.  I'm sure other railways did the same.  Crews certainly took pride, witness the personalisation with polished brass stars etc on the smokebox front, but dirt & dust always accumulates between cleaning no matter how often its done.

 

My locos get weathering to simulate a clean engine in service.  Under frames show accumulation of grease and dust from motion, brake blocks and road dirt.  

 

I would like to find a way to simulate the patterned polishing used by some cleaners.

 

Happy modelling,

 

Ian.

[Dunsignalling]

Immaculate cleanliness was not universal, even in the idealised pre-group era, declined during the Great War and never fully recovered afterwards.

 

There was a hierarchy with newish passenger locos and stock receiving thorough attention but older stock, whilst still well-looked-after, being less "bulled up". Wagons would be another matter; a coal wagon that was one of two belonging to a coal merchant might have got scrubbed up occasionally whereas one operated by a large colliery probably wouldn't be touched until it went in for a heavy repair.

 

Also, I suspect that, because photography was a very expensive hobby back then, there would have been a bias towards the most "photogenic" subjects. This attitude wasn't confined to the pre-grouping era, I encountered a guy at Fairwood Junction in the 1990s who wouldn't sully his Kodachrome with anything that wasn't clean, however interesting the subject. I'd guess most of his films were out-dated before he got to the end!

 

No ex-works loco stays that way for long; soot, brake dust, road dirt etc start to build up as soon as the wheels begin turning and even thorough cleaning doesn't get rid of it all.

 

John

[Dunsignalling]

Very true. I also have very severe doubts when someone tells me wagons were painted in a particular shade. Even to the extent that they were originally, exposure to grime thrown up from the track, weathering and - far from least - industrial pollution would all have an impact. In theory, GCR wagons were a lead colour - whatever that was - but in photos you can see two standing together, one looking almost black, one almost white. But the point made above is very valid - the lettering on both can be remarkably clear.

Very true. "Lead" is a nightmare - as it is based on the colour of the oxidised surface of the metal which can and does vary. 

 

It is also been documented that paint ingredients were not always accurately measured before being mixed, the foreman often judging the proportions through experience. 

 

John

[BG John]

I know that the crew on the empty coal wagons to Dalmellington set their engine to the task and got out, one either side, and cleaned the engine until they got to Holehouse Junction.  However that would not clean the under frames.

That would be interesting to model!

[Etched Pixels]

Also, I suspect that, because photography was a very expensive hobby back then, there would have been a bias towards the most "photogenic" subjects. This attitude wasn't confined to the pre-grouping era, I encountered a guy at Fairwood Junction in the 1990s who wouldn't sully his Kodachrome with anything that wasn't clean, however interesting the subject. I'd guess most of his films were out-dated before he got to the end!

 

One way historians deal with this is to research photographs where the subject of interest to them is not the one of the photographer. So they for example use railway photos to look at architecture. I don't know how much if any of the reverse direction has been done. The idea is that while train photographs may well be very biased on the train parts, the rows of houses in the shots probably were not selected or dolled up for the picture.

 

Alan

[James]

One way historians deal with this is to research photographs where the subject of interest to them is not the one of the photographer. So they for example use railway photos to look at architecture. I don't know how much if any of the reverse direction has been done. The idea is that while train photographs may well be very biased on the train parts, the rows of houses in the shots probably were not selected or dolled up for the picture.

Well in the case of this book many photographs came from archives which were not anything to do with the trams themselves, they just happened to be in the photos. The nice thing is it shows them in a context which wouldn't be so obvious had the tram been the subject of the photo.

[mikeandnel]

Well, I have to admit that I did expect some comment when I posted this subject, but

it has certainly generated a mixture of opinions.

James post makes sense in some ways, but I personally don't model the unions

and my railway is a non-union operation anyway, so I can make my cleaners do their

'b****y' job properly!

For PD&SWJR, I think that your locos look beautiful and I would not change them, except

that 'modern image' Beattie Well Tank.

Below, Hopefully is a picture of my Beattie Well Tank, as yet un-numbered.

 

 

For Etched Pixels and Dunsignalling, Your comments about lead paint are very appropriate.

I can remember, as an apprentice, having to mix lead paint from the ingredients, and being told

very forcefully when I got the balance wrong

 

Michael

[justin1985]

I'm in complete agreement with the "clean is not ex-works" argument on this one. Even the most thorough manual cleaning, with natural products, cannot restore anything painted to an immaculate, as-new condition, especially when we are talking about something exposed to the elements. Even the most thorough hand cleaning, even if staff were (I imagine punitively) required to clean the inside of wheels on occasion, results in a different visual result to a complete repaint. Dust and oil would accumulate in even the most diligently cleaned nooks, crannies, creases and joints. Paint would have not only faded, but faded differentially, and as others have commented, been blistered or subject to chemical reaction as a result of the heat of the locomotive, and the chemicals in the Victorian\Edwardian environment. 

 

Moreover, I thinking about the pre-grouping models I am used to seeing, which are much more likely to be 7mm or bigger than models of more recent periods, the thing which destroys the illusion more than anything is a large uniform expanse of an (often bright) colour. Even in 7mm or Gauge 1 etc., we don't have have the shadows and light effects we're used to seeing on a full size locomotive - the eye just sees a 7mm boiler as a tube of colour - and the model screams "I'm a presentation case model", rather than looking like part of a real railway, no matter how beautiful. The brighter the colour, to my eye, the more noticeable this is, hence it often seems "worse" on pre-grouping models. On darker coloured liveries, the dark greens and overwhelmingly common blacks, the eye is more easily fooled. 

 

Colour modulation is the technique military modellers seem to use exaggerate depth and bulk, and avoid this effect. While some of the military stuff can look overbaked, as has already been said about much late steam era weathering etc., a recent thread shows it to good effect on a 7mm modern Cargonwaggon. Even subtle weathering to the top and the bottom of a boiler - representing the accumulation of oil and dirt from below, and fading and smoke\soot weathering to the top, can easily fool the eye into thinking its seeing an object with life-size optical properties. 

 

And thats without even mentioning "scale colour" ...

 

So, I'd say, its fine not to weather, or use other painting effects on, your pride and joy hand built pre-grouping model if its going in a display case, but, if its going on a layout, which you want to look like a railway rather than a train set, there is no excuse not to use some degree of weathering or visual effects to make it feel more real.

[phil-b259]

 

There need be no question of "destroying beautiful liveries". In pre-group days, when labour was cheap, the standard of cleanliness was very high. However it has to be accepted that a coal-fired steam loco must inevitably have got dirty whilst working - this was unavoidable. it is quite likely that when it had finished it's duties a gang of cleaners would have toiled to get it back to an impressively clean condition. BUT while it was working there would have been no escaping the effects of smoke, soot, ash, oil, grease and water.

 

Here's a snap of number 9. Without a doubt a clean, well looked-after machine, but look at the state of the top of the streamlined casing. It had just pulled a train from Alton (in Hampshire) to Worcester. Admittedly that's quite a long run but maybe equivalent to an average day's work for a loco?

 

 

 

Personally I think the kind of weathering needed to suggest a working machine that is subject to a thorough cleaning regime is the most difficult, but it can be done. I don't think a quick mist coat with an airbrush will answer, it's going to take some careful, detailed work.

 

However the last thing to say on the subject - on this as on so many other things RULE ONE APPLIES.

 

Chaz

 

I would suggest that the state of the top of the boiler has far more to do with todays heath and safety rules (more restrictive - but safer practices for using ladders, etc), finding a suitable location to do it (remember if done on NR metals things like PTS etc. will come into play) not to mention the problems caused by overhead wires (for mainline locos). Thats not to say the LNER or BR would necessarily have bothered either in steam days either but if they did modern life makes it that bit harder to do the same.

[James]

James post makes sense in some ways, but I personally don't model the unions

and my railway is a non-union operation anyway, so I can make my cleaners do their

'b****y' job properly!

I won't bring politics into it (which is the danger with talk of unions) but that is offensive as you suggest those railwaymen in a union don't do their "b****y" job properly.

[asmay2002]

I would suggest that the state of the top of the boiler has far more to do with todays heath and safety rules

No, look at pictures of big pacifics in the 50's and 60's and you will see the same steak of dirt along the top that the cleaners couldn't reach.

 

On the other hand pre-group engines were much smaller and there was a lot less to clean.

[mikeandnel]

James

It was not my intention to be offensive, and if you read my posting I did say 'on my railway'

Because I do not believe personally in spoiling a beautiful livery by making it dirty, so my cleaners 'clean'

underneath as well as on top!.

Michael

[James]

Michael, I read your post very carefully before I replied. It was offensive, even if that was not your intention.

[Guest 2750]

James

It was not my intention to be offensive, and if you read my posting I did say 'on my railway'

Because I do not believe personally in spoiling a beautiful livery by making it dirty, so my cleaners 'clean'

underneath as well as on top!.

Michael

In my opinion weathering done properly only enhances a model.

Each to their own on this. I can't run a loco on my layout without being weathered, but that is because for me I'm trying to recreate the real thing, rather than look at a model.

 

Just my opinion mind.

[billbedford]

Because I do not believe personally in spoiling a beautiful livery by making it dirty, so my cleaners 'clean'

underneath as well as on top!.

I always knew railway modelling was about recreating a fantasy world………..

[James]

its not offensive James, and thats my with my ex-RMT rep hat on

It was the inference that union workers wouldn't do the job properly.

[James]

Oh I know that but I have heard far worse said about such things

I've hear much worse too! But on a forum which is all about railways and people modelling it I think it's a shame for comments like Michael's.

[burgundy]

First of all, while we are on Unions, can I recommend this site, which is an absolutely brilliant resource - irrespective of politics.

The two photos below have been posted previously in this thread - but they are worth another look. Both feature the Stroudley livery and therefore must date from before WW1 when the Brighton had a reputation for smartly turned out locomotives. Those on mainline expresses probably were, but evidently you did not need to go very far to see locos showing obvious signs of use. 

Wapping is captured in the 1870s (see the balancing pipe across the top of the tanks, which was removed early on). Note the scorched paintwork around the smokebox, boot damage (?) along the bottom of the sidetanks, water stains below the tank fillers and oil stains around the wheels and motion.

Bonchurch is long overdue for a wipedown with an oily rag, with scorching on the chimney, water stains below the condensing pipes, bare metal around the boiler feed and the lining almost invisible. The driver also appears to have been selected from a packet of HO scale figures.

Best wishes

Eric