Strand and its trains

[Guy Rixon]

I have been considering the Metropolitan trains into and through Strand in 1909. Previously, I'd thought of short EMU formations, all of which turn back at Strand because the SECR has not electrified its system. Recent reading  suggests two alternatives.

 

First alternative: four of these ...

...which are the "bogie stock" of c.1998, but with the brake coach converted to a driving trailer similar to this...

...which is a later photo but I think at least the driving windows are as built in 1905. These coaches to be propelled into Strand for the north by one of these ...

...being one of the BTH series of electric locos. At Strand, the electric loco comes off and the train goes on to (I think) Woolwich behind an SECR engine (I have an H and I'm not afraid to use it).  Two of these push-pull sets were historical, were formed in 1905, but were converted c.1907 into N-stock EMUs; I would have to presume that this change didn't go ahead.

 

Alternative two is six of these ...

...being rebuilds of the 8-wheel rigid stock. These would again we worked in from the north by an electric loco (but not propelled, as they did not have driving trailers) and taken on by an SECR loco.

 

If I push the bounds of the story a little harder, I might presume that the Met keeps a steam loco at Strand for the onward service to Woolwich. 

 

The EMU, give-up-at-Strand-and-go-home workings will probably be Hammersmith and City trains.

 

The bogie-stock push-pull coaches are almost covered by the LRM kits, but their driving trailer is the kind converted from the N-stock motor-cars, not the 1905, unpowered version.

 

The refurbished rigid stock is available from Roxey.

Edited February 13, 2021 by Guy Rixon

[Guy Rixon]

44 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Tea and observation seem to be the key ingredients here.

Yes, and the tea was pretty orange. If I'd mixed the paint with it I might have been able to skip a wash or two. 

[Compound2632]

5 hours ago, Guy Rixon said:

First alternative: four of these ...

Alternative two is six of these ...

 

Four of one and six of the other, would be my vote!

[Edwardian]

On 13/02/2021 at 11:16, Guy Rixon said:

I have been considering the Metropolitan trains into and through Strand in 1909. Previously, I'd thought of short EMU formations, all of which turn back at Strand because the SECR has not electrified its system. Recent reading  suggests two alternatives.

 

First alternative: four of these ...

...which are the "bogie stock" of c.1998, but with the brake coach converted to a driving trailer similar to this...

...which is a later photo but I think at least the driving windows are as built in 1905. These coaches to be propelled into Strand for the north by one of these ...

...being one of the BTH series of electric locos. At Strand, the electric loco comes off and the train goes on to (I think) Woolwich behind an SECR engine (I have an H and I'm not afraid to use it).  Two of these push-pull sets were historical, were formed in 1905, but were converted c.1907 into N-stock EMUs; I would have to presume that this change didn't go ahead.

 

Alternative two is six of these ...

...being rebuilds of the 8-wheel rigid stock. These would again we worked in from the north by an electric loco (but not propelled, as they did not have driving trailers) and taken on by an SECR loco.

 

If I push the bounds of the story a little harder, I might presume that the Met keeps a steam loco at Strand for the onward service to Woolwich. 

 

The EMU, give-up-at-Strand-and-go-home workings will probably be Hammersmith and City trains.

 

The bogie-stock push-pull coaches are almost covered by the LRM kits, but their driving trailer is the kind converted from the N-stock motor-cars, not the 1905, unpowered version.

 

The refurbished rigid stock is available from Roxey.

 

Clearly one of each. With the second set not reversing, but going on with a Met steam locomotive

[Guy Rixon]

48 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

Clearly one of each. With the second set not reversing, but going on with a Met steam locomotive

OK. So we need to pick a class of locomotive. It could be A (4-4-0T), B (ditto), C (0-4-4T, like a Stirling Q), or E (better 0-4-4T). Class D 2-4-0T are extremely cute, but probably too small for this work; also busy elsewhere. Class F 0-6-2T could do it, but are goods engines and busy. Class H 4-4-4T and the 2-6-4T are out of period.

 

I have an IKB kit for a 4-4-0T, so I think I might use that. If shiny antiques are to run, it also raises the question of using unrebuilt, 8-wheel rigid stock instead of the rigid rebuilds. A couple of ex-inner-circle sets were put back into service in 1909, after the MDR dropped the mic. There were more stored coaches, so a 4-set of these could easily have been dug up for the CCEJ services. They would be fun (and easy) to scratch-build.

[Edwardian]

3 minutes ago, Guy Rixon said:

OK. So we need to pick a class of locomotive. It could be A (4-4-0T), B (ditto), C (0-4-4T, like a Stirling Q), or E (better 0-4-4T). Class D 2-4-0T are extremely cute, but probably too small for this work; also busy elsewhere. Class F 0-6-2T could do it, but are goods engines and busy. Class H 4-4-4T and the 2-6-4T are out of period.

 

I have an IKB kit for a 4-4-0T, so I think I might use that. If shiny antiques are to run, it also raises the question of using unrebuilt, 8-wheel rigid stock instead of the rigid rebuilds. A couple of ex-inner-circle sets were put back into service in 1909, after the MDR dropped the mic. There were more stored coaches, so a 4-set of these could easily have been dug up for the CCEJ services. They would be fun (and easy) to scratch-build.

 

Well, the A would be the charismatic choice

[Engineer]

Going back to the post on Metropolitan coaches, a clarification.  The driving trailer third in the photograph was a 1929 conversion of a 3rd class Bogie Stock coach, enabling the electric 'W' Stock to run in four-coach formations with a motor coach at the other end.  The Driving trailer of the 1900s era was a conversion from a steam-hauled brake, soon converted again to electric motor coach, with a style as shown here, :

https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/collections-online/photographs/item/1998-89135

This type of coach ended up on the non-driving end of the push-pull sets, so features in the LRM coach set.  The snag with the LRM sets, if turning the clock back, is that they don't include a First coach, only a Composite.  An alternative is the 3D print range of these Bogie Stock vehicles, which includes the steam-era variants necessary for a full 1900s train: 

http://www.rue-d-etropal.com/3D-printing/passenger-stock-lt/3d_printed_metropolitan_railway_ashbury-bogie_coaches.htm 

[Guy Rixon]

Underframe for the GER van. This is a nice, s-per-instructions build ... except for the obligatory design mistake and the missing parts that needed to be replaced.

 

The design mistake is that the body-fixing screws are placed where they foul any sprung buffers. The holes for the screws had to be re-drilled. Luckily, this is pointed out in the instructions.

 

The missing parts were the castings for the suspension hangers, and I've replaced them with brass parts. The white metal castings would have been liable to damage anyway. The replacements are "forged" from 0.9 mm brass wire. The eyes at their lower ends were made by annealing the wire in a candle flame, flattening with pliers, drilling out, and bending to shape using a jig to get them near enough the same size. The one on the left of the photo is possibly a little too long and I may replace it. Or not, this being a boredom-limited activity, and the variation in lengths being likely to be hidden in the other detailing.  

[Guy Rixon]

Edging towards completion. On the underframe, only the brake rigging and the buffers are left to do. The body can't be finished off until the transfers become available. I'll make the roof when the body is done, and that will discourage it from warping before it's fitted.

 

The underframe is ... unkind to the builder. Too many loose components in the handbrake linkage when one fold-up part would do the job. Also, the long, lower footboard, as etched, doesn't fit over the axleboxes, lacking the usual cut-outs. I cut it down to the shorter form as seen here and in some photos of full-sized vans.

 

The kit had whitemetal castings for the vacuum and Westinghouse connections. In modelling these parts there's always a choice between fixing them to the underframe, and leaving them vulnerable or fixing them to the body and having a visible gap where they meet the frame. For this van, I put them on the underframe and, of course, they broke off straight away. The replacements are brass castings from Branchlines and I need to order a pallet or two of these for future projects.

[Compound2632]

Louvres. I've part-built etched brass Midland and S&DJR milk vans. Looking at original drawings of Midland ones, the louvres are slats mounted at 45°, such that when viewed side-on there's no line-of-sight through. So I think some black plastikard backing will be called for.

[Guy Rixon]

Yes indeed. I plan to add the backing to the louvres after the coat of varnish that seals the transfers. Adding the backing before varnishing risks a visible build-up of glop around the slats.

[Guy Rixon]

Nearly there. Just needs transfers, glazing, blanking of louvres, blackening of ironwork and greying of the roof. But it may have to go for a lie down in the display cabinet until the transfers become available.

 

The buffers, lamps and Laycock vents are prints. I decided that the castings in the kit were too much trouble to clean up. The brake rigging around each wheel (which you can't see in this shot but you know what it looks like) is also a print. The push-rods from the Westinghouse cylinder were whittled from fret-waste, as cursory research suggested that they should be bars rather than round rods.

Edited March 22, 2021 by Guy Rixon

[Edwardian]

Stunning work, Guy

[Guy Rixon]

Last night, I lined a coach.

 

Let me rephrase that: I LINED A COACH!

 

This is a massive step forward for me, since all all previous lining attempts have been outright failures, or painfully slow and difficult. This run was not too hard and only took an hour or so.

 

In truth, it's really not very good lining, but I will get better with practice and with better paint underneath.

 

The tool is a Moore lining-pen. By itself, that is an expensive way to disappointment, as it needs near-perfect conditions to do anything useful. The enabling secrets are:

• use Precision "LNWR liining tan" enamel-paint, as it's a good, goldish colour;
• use fresh paint, unthinned;
• clean the pen with airbrush cleaner, as white spirit doesn't get it clean enough to work;
• when the pen finally does clog (it will), ignore the supplied cleaning-wire, which is too limp to do much, and poke it clean with a cutting broach; this is a brutal thing to do to a precision item, but seems to do no damage provided that the broach is pressed in and not twiddled.

[Andy Hayter]

I wish my lining attempts were as good as that.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Guy,

 

I have both the Bob Moore pen and several bowpens, which I find much better. Kern are the best in my experience, followed by Haff  , Ecobra and the cheapo types. Haff, which Ian Rathbone recommends in his book, are still available. I got mine direct from Haff but also available here;

https://www.lionpic.co.uk/r/25401/Haff-Precision-Ruling-Pens

 

[Edwardian]

Very impressive, Guy

[Penlan]

Very good lining.
Because I seem to acquire all sorts of odd's and end's, I have numerous singular coach sides in THE box, and I sort of get myself into the mood for lining by doing some practice runs first, if nothing else it helps to become familiar with the 'flow' of the paint and/or the bow pen that day.
I have an Electrical theory book from my HNC days (some 50+ years ago) that is just the right height to support my hand for 4mm coach sides,  but you can hardly see the title for all the 'practice' runs from bow pens on it   

[Guy Rixon]

Here's the same lining --- same pen, same paint --- on a more appropriate coach, and I think it's rather better.

 

The coach is more appropriate first because it's an ex-SER vehicle, for which the livery is well suited, second because the underlying paint is smoother, so the lines have gone on better, and third because this is part of a train that matters to me.

 

Thirty years I've been blocked on this lining. Thirty years. It's hard to express how liberating it is to be able to do this.

 

FWIW, there is a further nuance to using the Moore pen. Before loading it, I sprayed through airbrush cleaner, then ran the pen on paper until no more solvent came through. Then I loaded it with paint, and I think a tiny film of the cleaning solvent stayed in and made the paint flow better. This is possibly related to the "add a drop of lighter fluid" folklore associated with these pens. 

[Mikkel]

Very nice, Guy. Gold lining on brown just looks so good, especially when done this neat.

[Guy Rixon]

Shiny; also verbose.

 

The goldish colour of the lining is a good match to the goldish lettering.

 

Roof paining, interior and glazing to do and then this one's finished.

[Edwardian]

The ex-LCDR coach looks to be a more crimson lake - as SE&CR coach models used to be painted - than the darker, browner, lake of your ex-SER coaches, which is the shade modern scholarship tends to favour.

 

Is there actually a difference in the shade you have employed, or is it just a trick of the light?

[Guy Rixon]

The LCDR coach is an ancient model. I built the shell in 1988, finished it in 1990, and painted it in 1992. It's painted in some mix of humbrol colours. I may repaint this one.

 

Since then, paint samples have come to light showing the purple lake was much bluer. The Precision enamel colour for SECR coaches reflects this, but I think it's too blue and I mix it with Indian Red to get a shade I like. More recently, I've tried to recapture that shade in acrylics (details a few pages past in this thread) and that's what you're seeing here.

 

Interestingly, my acrylic mix was also a little too blue (IMHO), but the varnish has reddened the perceived shade. The lining and lettering also make it look lighter and redder.

[Edwardian]

Thanks, Guy.  I'll track down your acrylic mix.

 

Not that I want to open a debate, but how do the cognoscenti reconcile the paint sample evidence with contemporary colour or coloured views?  These in my experience tend to be consistent in showing a red, rather than brown, cast to the lake. Are they assumed to be wrong?

 

For instance:

 

 

And two views given as c.1910:

 

 

 

[Jol Wilkinson]

During a career in the motor industry I visited several OE paint suppliers in the UK and France. I learned that colour memory is never as good as we think it is, that colour fastness even on paints manufactured in the 80's and 90's was not as reliable as was wanted, although streets ahead of what it had been years before. This was at a time when research into paint production was increasingly scientific, unlike the pre-grouping era. Approved colour samples were always kept in light proof safes and production consistency for colour was always checked against these by the gentler sex, who apparently have better colour vision.

 

Add to that the difficulty of accurately reproducing colours in printed media, and you will understand why I believe that "definitions" of paint colours and reproductions of printed media cannot be really relied on to show us what a colour was really like, both when originally applied and after some time in service.