Dapol 00 Gauge LSWR B4

[46444]

1 hour ago, Graham_Muz said:

Spot the difference... 

 

Drummond (ex K14) 30084 has now changed her identity to No. 82 and back dated to Post War livery. 
The tool boxes have also been relocated to the more forward position as they were on 82. 

 

Weathering to follow.

 

Very nice Graham. 

 

Out of interest were any of these Drummond boiler versions sheded at Plymouth Friary? 

 

I've renumbered a previous version into number 94. I'm quite tempted  to have another variant being influenced by your version of 82.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark 

[Graham_Muz]

7 minutes ago, 46444 said:

 

Very nice Graham. 

 

Out of interest were any of these Drummond boiler versions sheded at Plymouth Friary? 

 

I've renumbered a previous version into number 94. I'm quite tempted  to have another variant being influenced by your version of 82.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark 

Hi Mark 

 

I don’t off hand know what period you model? 

84 was the only ex K14 allocated at all to Plymouth Friary where she was from new up until 1953 however she carried an Adams boiler between 11/36 and 8/56 

[46444]

Hi Graham, 

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

I'm modelling the 1947 period so it looks like 84 had an Adams boiler. 

 

Bit of modellers licence may be in order.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark 

[JeremyKarl]

Once open, a 6-pin direct plug DCC chip is easy to fit in Guernsey but it does need to be very small as shown below. (Apologies in advance if the insides of these locos have been shown in a previous post on this thread, but I like to see the inside of locos.) Personally, I was surprised by the size of the Dapol electronics board in these locos. I appreciate it requires some electronics for the firebox flicker orange and yellow LEDs (as shown lit on the far left of the photo) but Dapol's board does seem large compared to the size of a DCC chip. As mentioned in a previous post on these locos, the cylinders are only a press fit, so avoid picking up the chassis by the cylinder blocks or you may end up having to slot the coupling rods back in again - a somewhat fiddly job requiring fine tweezers (I speak from experience of having made this error).

Jeremy

 

[mikesndbs]

Couple of questions, thinking about number 176.

Do we know when she was named (or the class) as my books indicate this was shortly after arrival at the docks?

The water filters were fitted from 1925, so I am thinking she is in 1910 condition?

 

Many thanks 

[nnich]

I don't think this has been mentioned before but I just noticed that the rather odd yellow version of  "Sussex" represents a unique tooling combination of an Adams loco with a Drummond boiler.  Sussex was originally LSWR no 100 and was sold out of service to Stewart and Lloyds in 1949 carrying a Drummond boiler which it presumably kept the rest of its days.   For those looking to do some renumbering it could be painted black and re numbered SR 100 and be correct from 6/1945 up to when it was sold in 1949.  Another possibility is to give it the identity of 30088 which carried a Drummond boiler from 5/1947 to 8/1956 when that boiler was (re) fitted to 30084.   My information comes from the excellent booklet "The B4 Dock Tanks" by Peter Cooper

Norm

 

 

 

[Edwardian]

Well, first impressions, out of the box, are very favourable.

 

The first thing that struck me is how small Terriers are!  Bodiam looks small and delicate and the B4 looks slab-like and huge! 

 

 

Actually, that was the second thing that struck me.  The first was the detached sand box, but it was in the box and looks like an easy fix.  Other than that, in QC terms, on the other side the cab steps and tool box are slightly wonk, and resist correction, but aside from these minor points it looks stunning.

 

 

I think the pale lining should be white, not pale green, as this should be a non-standard livery, which Dapol has interpreted as goods livery.  I knew that before purchase, however, and had decided to live with it. 

 

The corrected shade of green for this loco is much better and works for me as LSWR "Holly" green, which I suspect is the dark green shade in which they were painted, 

 

When a get a round tuit, I'll remove the vac pipe stands and fit safety chains.

 

Almost needless to say, with this model, it ran like a dream.

 

The firebox glow is a lot less evident (in DC) than is the case with the Terrier, but still a very pleasing touch. 

 

 

[Roy Langridge]

4 hours ago, Edwardian said:

The firebox glow is a lot less evident (in DC) than is the case with the Terrier, but still a very pleasing touch. 

 

 

 

In my opinion the firebox glow of the B4 is more realistic, that of the Terrier being a bit ‘in your face’. 
 

Roy

[Pre Grouping fan]

7 minutes ago, Roy Langridge said:

In my opinion the firebox glow of the B4 is more realistic, that of the Terrier being a bit ‘in your face’. 
 

Roy

Agree with that. When I took the body off mine, I found the circuit board is actually under the cab floor with the LED's close to the front, rather than the LED's pointing out the firehole as per the terrier. Which I think helps give a much softer glow. 

 

Also I think the Yellow/Orange colour is better than the mostly red of the Terrier. You could probably put some coloured film or something over the firehole doorto make it softer. 

[Edwardian]

Hmm, my firebox glow has disappeared!  A loose connection, perhaps?  Should I fiddle with it?

 

Has anyone else had their fire dampened?

 

Recently I've found I'm returning 2 out of every three models I'm buying, across different manufacturers, and I do start with a certain determination to live with minor defects.  My Rocket (didn't run) and my Peckett B2 (missing whistle) both needed second attempts. 

[coeurdelyon]

Hi Edwardian,

Our model of GUERNSEY is decorated in the standard goods livery with light green lining as mentioned by Bradley and the HMRS LIVERY REGISTER No. 3 LSWR & Southern, however you are saying this is incorrect and the lining should be white. When NORMANDY was restored the livery was Holly green with light green lining, so I feel white lining is the odd ball out and our model is correct.

Regards, Richard

[mikesndbs]

9 minutes ago, coeurdelyon said:

Hi Edwardian,

Our model of GUERNSEY is decorated in the standard goods livery with light green lining as mentioned by Bradley and the HMRS LIVERY REGISTER No. 3 LSWR & Southern, however you are saying this is incorrect and the lining should be white. When NORMANDY was restored the livery was Holly green with light green lining, so I feel white lining is the odd ball out and our model is correct.

Regards, Richard

 

Am I right in saying she is in 1910 to 1924 condition?

 

Thanks

[coeurdelyon]

Hi, No this is in 1893 livery when originally sent to Southampton docks

Regards, Richard

[mikesndbs]

20 minutes ago, coeurdelyon said:

Hi, No this is in 1893 livery when originally sent to Southampton docks

Regards, Richard

 

Ah right, I thought it was a shade later as they got their names after they arrived?

Could I say this is how she was in 1910? 

[coeurdelyon]

Hi, Probably by 1910 she would have been repainted in the Drummond livery of black with green lining,

Regards,

Richard

[Graham_Muz]

42 minutes ago, mikesndbs said:

 

Ah right, I thought it was a shade later as they got their names after they arrived?

Could I say this is how she was in 1910? 

 

Both Jersey and Guernsey were delivered to the docks in November 1893 with only the names for identification. They were constructed as first two of the second batch of 10 B4s built to order D6 with there construction costs charged to the Docks account. 

[Graham_Muz]

30 minutes ago, coeurdelyon said:

Hi, Probably by 1910 she would have been repainted in the Drummond livery of black with green lining,

Regards,

Richard

The B4s allocated to the Docks went from the original lined green (Also I believe to be pale green line)!to unlined dark green during the 1920s 

Eastleigh started out shopping the docks B4s post 1933 in the dark chocolate brown with red lining that managed to keep until the war. 

[Edwardian]

3 hours ago, coeurdelyon said:

Hi Edwardian,

Our model of GUERNSEY is decorated in the standard goods livery with light green lining as mentioned by Bradley and the HMRS LIVERY REGISTER No. 3 LSWR & Southern, however you are saying this is incorrect and the lining should be white. When NORMANDY was restored the livery was Holly green with light green lining, so I feel white lining is the odd ball out and our model is correct.

Regards, Richard

 

Hi Richard,

 

You see these were dock allocated tanks and as such not painted in goods livery, which, I agree, has light green lining.

 

Starting with 81 and 176 in 1893. on transfer to the Dock Department B4s received cab cut-outs and names (Jersey and Guernsey  for this first pair) and were painted dark green (I assume the same dark Holly green as goods locos), but with white lining. Your model must be taken to represent 176 in this condition, thus, should have white lining. 

 

The practice of painting Dock Dept. locos differently persisted, as, on Grouping, those allocated to the Southern Railway's Docks and Marine Dept. were painted brown, lined red, as per previous models.

 

Details in both little (RCTS) and big Bradley loco volumes.

 

As for what people do on preserved locos ....!

 

 

[Graham_Muz]

The published George Kerley collection photograph of Guernsey taken just after delivery, even as a black and white photograph the lining when compared both the name paint colour and bright handrails and motion etc shows as a darker colour although obviously paler than the body green colour. This image is in Peter Cooper’s book The B4 dock tanks. 
From this image even with usual B&W caveats it’s hard to deduce white rather  than pale green. 
A similar picture of Jersey appears in the Wild Swan version of Bradley. 
 

Bradley is also my usual first source.  My 1967 RCTS issue states “repainted in dark green , and had their cabs cut away” with no mention of lining, the the additional statement regarding lining, was an amendment in later issues? 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Graham_Muz

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Graham_Muz said:

The published George Kerley collection photograph of Guernsey taken just after delivery, even as a black and white photograph the lining when compared both the name paint colour and bright handrails and motion etc shows as a darker colour although obviously paler than the body green colour. This image is in Peter Cooper’s book The B4 dock tanks. 
From this image even with usual B&W caveats it’s hard to deduce white rather  than pale green. 
A similar picture of Jersey appears in the Wild Swan version of Bradley. 
 

Bradley is also my usual first source.  My 1967 RCTS issue states “repainted in dark green , and had their cabs cut away” with no mention of lining, the the additional statement regarding lining, was an amendment in later issues? 

 

Yep, it's Big Bradley (1985), rather than little RCTS Bradley (1967) than specifies white lining, so presumably he had come across more information in the meantime. 

 

I don't think there is any difficulty in accepting that the Dock Dept. had it's own livery - in this case apparently dark green like goods locos but still lined black and white in the style of the Adams passenger 'pea' green that non-Dock the B4s were seen in.  After all, they gained names painted on the tanks, not part of any standard LSWR livery, and they retained an autonomous livery on Grouping.  

 

Another example was the Engineer's department, who apparently 'got away with' painting their locos a sort of Doncaster green.  I don't doubt that the practice would have persisted had they retained their own fleet.

 

In other words, there is no reason to expect the Dock engines necessarily to follow the Goods liveries, or comfort to be gained by assuming that they do. I suppose it depends on how much you trust Bradley.  If you accept that he would not have added white lining in his text unless he'd seen a painting instruction, then I think you need to prefer him over inferring the colour from Goods lining, or the unreliability of judging colour from old black and white images, or what preservationalists take it into their head to do. 

 

Looking at the pictures of both Jersey and Guernsey in this condition, I really do not think one can sensibly determine whether the lining is white or pale green.  it could very easily be showing white. 

 

Anyway, it's not a deal-breaker for me, after all I'm putting up with the inappropriate double-scallop to one side of the rear cab sheet; if I corrected that, i'd have to reline it! 

 

EDIT: My firebox glow has returned - yay!

Edited June 2, 2020 by Edwardian

[coeurdelyon]

Hi, James,

I do disagree with your synopsis of white lining. In 1893 the standard LSWR goods livery (mentioned by Bradley on page 5) was holy green with light green lining, also as Graham says the lining on the photograph of Guernsey looks darker than white, In fact why would the LSWR mix up the white lining for passenger locomotives and pale green for goods engines. As Bradley states the first three engines were painted in passenger livery with white lining, it is possible on page 97 of his book, Jersey and Guernsey were painted with white lining which could be a typo. error (he has already mentioned light green lining for goods engines), we know the docks later had their own livery of dark brown with red lining during the 1930's. Books are the only resource and so no one can be definite but the pale green is the most logical for Jersey and Guernsey when sent to work in Southampton docks.

Regarding the rear cab sheet, we have made eight different versions of the B4 and K14 (later B4), and for the first run copied the rear cab sheet of the preserved NORMANDY in its livery. With all the changes to these locomotives over the years it is impossible to tool every version, it would be totally uneconomical.

Regards, Richard

[Graham_Muz]

I do generally and mainly trust Bradley, although I am aware of others that do not, as a few corrections have since been proved. 
for example a four page erratum to the Wild Swan Adams book was subsequently published by the South Western Circle. 
When comparing lining tone of b&w image with others of known white lining I am yet to be convinced.  
 

That aside I have no toned down the bright (correct for as built) handrails and cylinder covers for a slightly later more used look. 
 

[Edwardian]

45 minutes ago, coeurdelyon said:

Hi, James,

I do disagree with your synopsis of white lining. In 1893 the standard LSWR goods livery (mentioned by Bradley on page 5) was holy green with light green lining, also as Graham says the lining on the photograph of Guernsey looks darker than white, In fact why would the LSWR mix up the white lining for passenger locomotives and pale green for goods engines. As Bradley states the first three engines were painted in passenger livery with white lining, it is possible on page 97 of his book, Jersey and Guernsey were painted with white lining which could be a typo. error (he has already mentioned light green lining for goods engines), we know the docks later had their own livery of dark brown with red lining during the 1930's. Books are the only resource and so no one can be definite but the pale green is the most logical for Jersey and Guernsey when sent to work in Southampton docks.

Regarding the rear cab sheet, we have made eight different versions of the B4 and K14 (later B4), and for the first run copied the rear cab sheet of the preserved NORMANDY in its livery. With all the changes to these locomotives over the years it is impossible to tool every version, it would be totally uneconomical.

Regards, Richard

 

37 minutes ago, Graham_Muz said:

I do generally and mainly trust Bradley, although I am aware of others that do not, as a few corrections have since been proved. 
for example a four page erratum to the Wild Swan Adams book was subsequently published by the South Western Circle. 
When comparing lining tone of b&w image with others of known white lining I am yet to be convinced.  
 

That aside I have no toned down the bright (correct for as built) handrails and cylinder covers for a slightly later more used look. 
 

 

The problem you gentlemen have is it's surmise v. Bradley.

 

Bradley might be wrong, but I'd tend to back him over surmise, when there is no evidence on the table.  With the photographs, it's too easy to see what you want to see, which cuts both ways, of course. 

[coeurdelyon]

Hi James,

It seems we both have our own ideas regarding this livery.

As you may know doing research is very involved and costly for a business and it is a shame that this model has come in for criticism which could possibly put off customers purchasing this great model, which has been manufactured from original general arrangement drawings providing an authentic and scale model, including a compensated chassis for smooth running over uneven track. Over the long life of these locomotives the biggest change was to the dock tanks with cabs being originally with cutouts in front/rear cab sheets, then modified to partly enclosed, rear open, and finally fully sheeted in (none of which were standard), with no drawings available. As I stated earlier it would not be economical to make tooling for the many versions of the dock tank cabs, fortunately the cabs of those locomotives used on the main line were never rebuilt, so our models are correct.

It is time to put this to bed and enjoy some modelling.

Regards, Richard

[mikesndbs]

27 minutes ago, coeurdelyon said:

Hi James,

It seems we both have our own ideas regarding this livery.

As you may know doing research is very involved and costly for a business and it is a shame that this model has come in for criticism which could possibly put off customers purchasing this great model, which has been manufactured from original general arrangement drawings providing an authentic and scale model, including a compensated chassis for smooth running over uneven track. Over the long life of these locomotives the biggest change was to the dock tanks with cabs being originally with cutouts in front/rear cab sheets, then modified to partly enclosed, rear open, and finally fully sheeted in (none of which were standard), with no drawings available. As I stated earlier it would not be economical to make tooling for the many versions of the dock tank cabs, fortunately the cabs of those locomotives used on the main line were never rebuilt, so our models are correct.

It is time to put this to bed and enjoy some modelling.

Regards, Richard

 

I think they are lovely, something that would not have been possible for most of us, the running qualities for an 0-4-0 are remarkable, the detail stunning and I enjoy seeing the flickering firebox very much  tractive effort for a light loco is also a surprise. I'd like to lock down the dates on Guernsey however? I wanted her to represent the locos from delivery to pre grouping so 1893-1920 (ish)  Can I say that with any degree of confidence?