Castle Aching

[Compound2632]

19 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Having to go to Bradford 

 

(family from Leeds)

 

A misunderstanding. The through carriage (D508) starts from Bradford but at Leeds is attached to a reversing up Scotch Express - so can be joined at Leeds.

[Edwardian]

Livery transfers ...

 

The supplier I had lined up to produce lining transfers is too busy to assist.  To be fair, I made the enquiry five years ago, and I suspect he is a tad hacked off at the delay.

 

That means lining transfers for WNR locos are open to tender (no pun intended).  Happy to pay sensible rates (not claiming favours or mates rates here, it's a lot of work).

 

The locomotive roster of the WNR has been long-known, long-planned.

 

True, additions have cropped up from time to time, and I am currently in need of working a Beyer Peacock 0-6-0 or two and a Neilson 2-2-2T into the sequence.  Generally though, I've know what I want and the story is one of continuity.

 

My approach to lining transfers might be flawed, but I will outline my thoughts.

 

The lining is complex and the idea is to create it with transfers panel by panel, locomotive by locomotive. 

 

Let's assume 15 locomotive types. Drawings  exist, or can be worked up, for each of these.  Each splasher, each tank side and front, each cab sheet, each sandbox, tender, bunker etc can be drawn and defined and could have a bespoke transfer livery panel.

 

To recap:

 

0-4-2T, Neilson & Co, designed by SW Johnson based upon GER Class T7, 1877

 

0-6-0ST, Fox Walker, 1877

 

0-6-0T, Sharp Stewart, 1872

 

2-4-0, Sharp Stewart & 4-wheel tender, 1873

 

0-6-0, Sharp Stewart & 4-wheel tender, 1875

 

2-4-2T, Sharp Stewart, 1884

 

4-4-0, Neilson & Co & 4-wheel tender, 1866

 

2-4-0, Melton Constable/Sharp Stewart & 4-wheel tender, ExCMR-E&MR (Second-hand, 1895)

 

0-6-0T, Sharp Stewart & 4-wheel tender, ExCMR-E&MR (Second-hand, 1899)

 

0-6-0T, Stroudley ex-LB&SCR Class A1 (Second-hand, 1901)

 

4-4-0 Sharp Stewart 'small bogie'

 

0-6-0 Beyer Peacock (in the style of an Ilfracombe Goods)

 

0-6-0 Beyer Peacock (in the style of McDinnell Class 101/J15)

 

2-2-2T Neilson & Co, 1862 

 

2-4-2T Hunslet Engine Co (Tram) (based on Bideford, Westward Ho! & Appledore Ry locomotives)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Compound2632]

As a pendant to the discussion of the exchange of Midland 0-4-4Ts for M&GN ex-Lynn & Fakenham 4-4-0Ts, I've tracked down a photo I had at the back of my mind of No. 10 in the Golden Gorse livery with M&GN lettering removed and the pre-1907 Midland coat of arms, at Wirksworth I believe:

 

[Edwardian]

Thank you,  I said one plus Pullman worked Wirksworth, but no one seemed to believe me!

[Nearholmer]

Aha! Yes, I've also seen that somewhere before, when reading-up on the history of 'motor trains'. 

 

What I hadn't remembered was that strange extra bit on the clerestory of the coach. Was that added to accommodate control gubbins? I don't know without checking whether the initial Midland system was mechanical, but if it was, that box might contain cranks or gears to change direction of rodding. 

 

PS: Edwardian, I do like your plan to provide a lifetime of gainful employment to a bespoke transfer maker. PM if you need advice about a particular one to avoid. 

 

Edited February 15, 2019 by Nearholmer

[Compound2632]

Summerson, Op. cit. Vol. 1, has a chapter on the Midland's motor trains. The 4-4-0T plus Pullman "motor carriage" was the second step, after the trials with the two steam motor carriages Nos. 2233 and 2234, introduced in 1904. These were of the railcar type, with a steam-powered motor bogie at one end, like the well-known Great Western ones. These were initially tried out on Morecambe-Heysham services, but after re-building with a conventional locomotive rather than vertical boiler, they were used on the Hemel Hempstead branch from August 1905. In common with several other lines, the Midland evidently found having the locomotive unit inside the body of the carriage unsatisfactory, so was motivated to experiment with the use of a small locomotive permanently attached to a carriage. (The linkage was indeed mechanical.) There were only four 4-4-0Ts borrowed from the M&GN, so only four "motor carriages", but the Jan 1906 list of proposed services includes sixn: Derby - Melbourne and Ashby, Derby - Wirksworth, Derby - Ripley, Wakefield branch, Mansfield - Sutton Town, and Newark, Rolleston and Farnsfield - but not Hemel Hempstead! It seems that in practice, two motor carriages were allocated to the Hemel Hempstead branch and two to Wirksworth. The other routes had to wait for the motor trains, introduced in 1908 - these were vacuum controlled.

[Martin S-C]

12 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Meanwhile, Somewhere in Yorkshire, the Waterbury family change trains, heading for what they hope will be a through service to the fashionable Norfolk resort of Birchoverham Next the Sea, where they will join Mr Waterbury who has now lost the pallor of gaol thanks to the fresh, one might say "wholesome", sea air of the North Norfolk coast.  

 

 

Hang onto your coal, that young gentleman on the left looks full of mischief.

[Martin S-C]

On 12/02/2019 at 12:40, Edwardian said:

A package arrived at Aching Towers today, courtesy of Turbosnail of this Parish.

 

The print is good and clean and looks as if it will need minimal preparation.  It is a better finish and better value than I am used to from Shapeways, so well done there, Tom.  The only damage in transit was a brake shoe with a particularly fragile attachment, but easily glued I suspect. 

 

So, looks like one from the Old Country for Castle Aching ....

I received one of these from Tom yesterday and a very nice print it is too! I grabbed one off him because its simply a lovely looking engine but I know nothing of the prototype - can anyone give me some information please?

[Edwardian]

5 hours ago, Martin S-C said:

I received one of these from Tom yesterday and a very nice print it is too! I grabbed one off him because its simply a lovely looking engine but I know nothing of the prototype - can anyone give me some information please?

 

Photo & Brief History

 

Apparently the Science Museum have the GA drawing in their catalogue: Link 

 

Steam Index  gives this information:

 

No.8,   2-2-2ST,  Neilson & Co  Works No. 855/1862, driving wheels 5ft 0in,  Cylinders 12 x 18in, withdrawn 1885-7, photograph: Howth branch

 

 

[Martin S-C]

That information is very useful James, thank you.

[TurboSnail]

With regards to the Science Museum drawings, I found a few possible candidates, but there was no single one that matched the information I had perfectly, hence why the model is 'representative' rather than being of a specific prototype. Well, that and the change from 5ft 3in gauge to OO.

[Edwardian]

19 minutes ago, TurboSnail said:

With regards to the Science Museum drawings, I found a few possible candidates, but there was no single one that matched the information I had perfectly, hence why the model is 'representative' rather than being of a specific prototype. Well, that and the change from 5ft 3in gauge to OO.

 

It seems to me that, for a freelance railway, that's absolutely fine; if the WN had ordered such a locomotive from Neilson & Co to standard gauge in the 1860s, that is what they would have got!

[Regularity]

On 11/02/2019 at 12:37, Edwardian said:

Jonathan, entirely serious, the giraffe in question was transported thus in 1912 from London to Ipswich Museum, where, I believe, it resides to this day.

 

Turning back to birds of a different feather, a Coote & Sons wagon pictured at Hilgay (date not known).  I wonder if there is sufficient here to identify a suitable Slaters or Cambrian kit as a basis? I do not know what colour it is supposed to be but am minded to assume black. 

Returning to this, I snapped an S Scale model (built by Maurice Hopper) on Trevor Nunn’s Trowland today. In fact, I put it in the train precisely for this purpose.

[monkeysarefun]

On 15/02/2019 at 23:17, Edwardian said:

Play up and play the game!

 

Schools, r/Rugby, and foul behaviour all seem to coalesce into one image .... 

 

Bares a resemblance to Captain Frontbottom from the  Australian'70's TV series "The Olden Days" except he was black and white (and revoiced by a  '90's comedy show).

 

 

Edited February 16, 2019 by monkeysarefun

[Compound2632]

9 hours ago, Regularity said:

Returning to this, I snapped an S Scale model (built by Maurice Hopper) on Trevor Nunn’s Trowland today. In fact, I put it in the train precisely for this purpose.

 

I'm fairly sure the wagon in the Hilgay photo has conventional corner plates although there is possibly some extra ironwork on the top plank at the far end. Also at the far end I don't see much sign of a headstock so it could well be dumb-buffered. There also seems to be an oval plate on the top plank above "PETERBOROUGH". It's just too dark and grainy a photo to be sure.

[Regularity]

It’s only a suggestion - after all, we should never model a model anyway, but the general approach to painting may be the same.

[uax6]

I would say that it isn't dumb buffered, in the foreground you can see bufferheads (I make it two heads, there is a shading line between them) and there is also a glint off the shaft.

 

I've now looked again and although I can see that it could be dumb buffered, the glint could be off the strapping at the end of the beam, but I don't think it can be as dumb buffers are square section, whereas the this bit is definitely circular.

 

Andy G

[Compound2632]

7 hours ago, Regularity said:

It’s only a suggestion - after all, we should never model a model anyway, but the general approach to painting may be the same.

 

But one can build a model using the research that went into building that model. Messrs Hopper and Nunn should state their sources!

 

1 hour ago, uax6 said:

I would say that it isn't dumb buffered, in the foreground you can see bufferheads (I make it two heads, there is a shading line between them) and there is also a glint off the shaft.

 

I've now looked again and although I can see that it could be dumb buffered, the glint could be off the strapping at the end of the beam, but I don't think it can be as dumb buffers are square section, whereas the this bit is definitely circular.

 

Andy G

 

It's very difficult to interpret! What James has given us is, I think, a scan of a photo reproduced in a book. A print from the original negative plate might reveal more. Is there a source given for the photo?

[Regularity]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

But one can build a model using the research that went into building that model. Messrs Hopper and Nunn should state their sources!

Why?

That’s a new one for the hobby. We should state the information source of every model we display, even if it was a gift.

Or indeed, of every model that someone else takes a photo of.

 

Trevor just runs the wagon on his layout, as for Maurice, he will have done some research I am sure as he is that kind of guy: as he is a registered RMWEB user, anyone wanting to know can always ask him. At the least, the livery will be a best bet interpretation of available sources, and as good as anyone else is likely to come up with.

[Caley Jim]

When you've built something as a 'best guess from photographs ' because you couldn't find any drawings or other details and someone tells you you're wrong, my response is ' prove it!'  I've just finished such a drawing for a footbridge and am now designing an etch for it. 

 

Jim 

Edited for typo 

Edited February 17, 2019 by Caley Jim
Typo

[Edwardian]

9 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

But one can build a model using the research that went into building that model. Messrs Hopper and Nunn should state their sources!

 

 

It's very difficult to interpret! What James has given us is, I think, a scan of a photo reproduced in a book. A print from the original negative plate might reveal more. Is there a source given for the photo?

 

Well, I was in the process of replying, but we had a power cut! 

 

The picture is featured in The GERS Journal, No.168 and is Part 2 of an article on private owner wagons seen in the Windwood photographs.

 

If I could find Part 1, I might have a better idea about these photographs.

 

The picture concerned is reproduced to quite a small size.  It is one of the Windwood photographs held by the GERS.  The GERS collection is not, so far as I know, actually held by the GERS but is deposited in a library in Essex.  Chelmsford IIRC. You cannot obtain copies online or from the Society, so far as I know.

 

I have no plans to visit Chelmsford.

 

The photograph is numbered 1269 and the caption has it as Coote & Sons No. 264.

[Compound2632]

17 hours ago, Regularity said:

Why?

That’s a new one for the hobby. We should state the information source of every model we display, even if it was a gift.

Or indeed, of every model that someone else takes a photo of.

 

Trevor just runs the wagon on his layout, as for Maurice, he will have done some research I am sure as he is that kind of guy: as he is a registered RMWEB user, anyone wanting to know can always ask him. At the least, the livery will be a best bet interpretation of available sources, and as good as anyone else is likely to come up with.

 

I was being tongue-in-cheek as I hoped the exclamation mark would indicate. I'm not really expecting modellers to conform to academic standards of rigour. But in the instance of that particular model, I am curious to know!

[corneliuslundie]

While I don't expect others to do the same, with the exception of the loco and stock for my imaginary colliery, I have sources for all the rolling stock on my layout, and will happily state what they are. In fact i usually do when i post.

But that is my approach and I do not expect it of others.

And when one has a prototype such as the WNR it gets a little difficult. Somehow all the relevant source material seems to have been lost in a fire/flood/building collapse or whatever at Castle Aching some years ago.

Yet much of the thread has been discussion of relevant sources of the rolling stock and buildings of CA, and the approach is to make everything as plausible as possible by following precedent or example.

Others invent everything and still produce convincing scenarios.

Each to his/her own.

Jonathan

[Regularity]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I was being tongue-in-cheek as I hoped the exclamation mark would indicate. I'm not really expecting modellers to conform to academic standards of rigour. But in the instance of that particular model, I am curious to know!

I realised that, but unfortunately the exclamation mark also indicates surprise and insistence, amongst other things, and I wanted to make a reducio ad absurdum argument.

Love ‘em or loathe ‘em, smileys have their uses...

[drduncan]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I was being tongue-in-cheek as I hoped the exclamation mark would indicate. I'm not really expecting modellers to conform to academic standards of rigour. But in the instance of that particular model, I am curious to know!

Why not? It’s not difficult.  It would make researching models much easier and just think of the problems it would cause those with more opinions than facts to back them up.  No more forum frothing!

D

Edited February 18, 2019 by drduncan
Typo