School Project - The Victorian Railway

[Edwardian]

Loco-wrapping begins!

[Skinnylinny]

Wow, that's some excellent work between the two of you. Gary, your transfers look very impressive, definitely capture that ornate early-pre-grouping look!

[Nearholmer]

Are they transfers, or have you "wallpapered" it?

 

Whichever, it looks really good, and this 'modelling against the clock' seems to work very well; I noticed it myself when I left building the stairs and canopy for Paltry Circus until the last minute before an exhibition.

 

I'd bet it feels good at a psychological level too.

 

K

[uax6]

I would say wallpapered. But interestingly it is an old fashioned technique for models, I have rattling around in the van a Hornby-dublo coach that has been transformed into an LNWR vehicle with the use of printed overlays....

 

Andy G

[Edwardian]

It's wallpaper.

 

It would have been better if I could have printed the wallpaper out to a better quality and then match the printed colours. As it is, I had to resort to over-painting the main colour, which is not ideal. I find that it is just about possible to paint over Gary's print and maintain a reasonable result; I could not have painted and lined out as well by hand.  Gary's design work was excellent, and I could not have produced such a livery in the time available, or, indeed, at all, without them.

[BlueLightning]

Looking good James!!

 

As I was sitting doing the tender sides yesterday I was worried that they were going to be too small and ruin the look, but I can happily say I am feeling rather proud of them. Stunning model you have there!

 

One thing though, the light green edges on the boiler bands are supposed to be body colour so you might want to try and over paint them if you can.

 

Gary

[Edwardian]

Looking good James!!

 

As I was sitting doing the tender sides yesterday I was worried that they were going to be too small and ruin the look, but I can happily say I am feeling rather proud of them. Stunning model you have there!

 

One thing though, the light green edges on the boiler bands are supposed to be body colour so you might want to try and over paint them if you can.

 

Gary

 

The picture isn't clear, but I have cut off the body-coloured outer edges.

[Edwardian]

The Stockton & Darlington was well known for its long boiler mineral 0-6-0s, and the tradition continued up to 1875 under the Darlington Committee. All classes of S&D long boilers were lumped together as the '1001 Class' by the NE in 1894, and many saw service elsewhere on the NE. The Blyth & Tyne and the West Hartlepool Harbour also had long-boiler 0-6-0s.

 

So, it's a type long associated with the NER prior to Grouping.

 

But, what about other users?

 

A quick search revealed this beauty from Down Under (NSW?).

 

Stunning.

[Nearholmer]

Uax

 

If you look at my thread, you will see that I run a few wallpapered wagons. I've got a couple more 'wood and wallpaper' wagon kits in stock to build, and am about to wallpaper a Hornby 4w coach, to turn it into a milk van. The main (possibly sole remaining) purveyor of vintage litho sheets is a regular attendee at the 0 gauge group that I belong to, and he comes with a sheaf of things in 00 and 0, so if you get the urge, I can put an order in for you.

 

What I haven't hacked yet is making my own, largely because I loathe and detest having anything to do with actively using software as part of my hobby; I don't find it relaxing in the same way as using actual, real, physical tools, or playing trains.

 

K

[Edwardian]

Uax

 

If you look at my thread, you will see that I run a few wallpapered wagons. I've got a couple more 'wood and wallpaper' wagon kits in stock to build, and am about to wallpaper a Hornby 4w coach, to turn it into a milk van. The main (possibly sole remaining) purveyor of vintage litho sheets is a regular attendee at the 0 gauge group that I belong to, and he comes with a sheaf of things in 00 and 0, so if you get the urge, I can put an order in for you.

 

What I haven't hacked yet is making my own, largely because I loathe and detest having anything to do with actively using software as part of my hobby; I don't find it relaxing in the same way as using actual, real, physical tools, or playing trains.

 

K

 

Interesting, and well worth looking at what he has, thanks.

 

And here is what Tabitha's long boiler should have looked like!

 

PLM Bourbonnais, 1860:

[Regularity]

It’s a shame we don’ Have a button for “stunning transformation”!

[Annie]

The Stockton & Darlington was well known for its long boiler mineral 0-6-0s, and the tradition continued up to 1875 under the Darlington Committee. All classes of S&D long boilers were lumped together as the '1001 Class' by the NE in 1894, and many saw service elsewhere on the NE. The Blyth & Tyne and the West Hartlepool Harbour also had long-boiler 0-6-0s.

 

So, it's a type long associated with the NER prior to Grouping.

 

But, what about other users?

 

A quick search revealed this beauty from Down Under (NSW?).

 

Stunning.

Quite a lot of older Australian standard gauge railway rolling stock and locomotives was very British looking.  With some wagons and locomotive you'd be hard pressed to be able to pick the difference.  I posted a picture of an Australian sheep wagon not so long ago and it was so close to being the same as a North British Rly sheep wagon it wasn't funny. 

[sem34090]

A famous example being the Aussie Terriers...

 

But how about this G6 almost-look-alike:

With a strong Beyer-Peacock influence, I would imagine...

[Edwardian]

Ah, but a locomotive may not have been rebuilt, but yet not remain in 'as built condition'.

 

What constitutes a "rebuild" anyhow? Will a new boiler do, or does it need to be more fundamental, like rebuilding a tender engine into a tank engine, for instance?

[Nearholmer]

If you wanted a modern, rather tedious, definition, 'rebuilding' as the term is often applied by railway enthusiasts would probably be anything that caused the design to materially depart from the design that was first type-approved for use on the given railway (certificated for use these days), so as to necessitate it passing through the type-approval process again.

 

The same logic applies to cars, in that if you restore an old car, it doesn't require type-approval, merely approval that it continues to comply with 'type' and approval that it continues to meet relevant regulations to allow it to pass an MOT test. But, if you took the same old car, fitted it with an engine of significantly different type from the original, jacked-up suspension etc, it would have to be type-approved. I think the 'construction and use' regulations are what governs this.

 

But ...... 'in the old days' the processes and definitions relating to railways were much less formalised. It was for the particular railway to decide whether a particular loco design was fit for use on its system, and to define what constituted 'rebuilding', and we all know that the term was as often used for accounting as for engineering reasons. And, the internal governance arrangements of railways sometimes didn't work perfectly, so that batches of locos were built before it was discovered that they weren't compatible with the infrastructure!

 

So, ask an accountant, and he'll probably ask you in return how much you would like to carry as capital on your balance sheet.

Edited April 19, 2018 by Nearholmer

[Hroth]

Ah, but a locomotive may not have been rebuilt, but yet not remain in 'as built condition'.

 

What constitutes a "rebuild" anyhow? Will a new boiler do, or does it need to be more fundamental, like rebuilding a tender engine into a tank engine, for instance?

Its a thorny topic, and can approach fisticuffs (or worse) when Greslyites and Thompsonistas get together over "Great Northern" and "Cock O' The North". Some of the Southern ilk also get rather tetchy over what the de-airsmoothed BOB/WC and MN locos should be described as!

 

A proper rebuild must be akin to speciation, you don't expect them to be able to breed.....

Edited April 19, 2018 by Hroth

[Edwardian]

If you wanted a modern, rather tedious, definition, 'rebuilding' as the term is often applied by railway enthusiasts would probably be anything that caused the design to materially depart from the design that was first type-approved for use on the given railway (certificated for use these days), so as to necessitate it passing through the type-approval process again.

 

The same logic applies to cars, in that if you restore an old car, it doesn't require type-approval, merely approval that it continues to comply with 'type' and approval that it continues to meet relevant regulations to allow it to pass an MOT test. But, if you took the same old car, fitted it with an engine of significantly different type from the original, jacked-up suspension etc, it would have to be type-approved. I think the 'construction and use' regulations are what governs this.

 

But ...... 'in the old days' the processes and definitions relating to railways were much less formalised. It was for the particular railway to decide whether a particular loco design was fit for use on its system, and to define what constituted 'rebuilding', and we all know that the term was as often used for accounting as for engineering reasons. And, the internal governance arrangements of railways sometimes didn't work perfectly, so that batches of locos were built before it was discovered that they weren't compatible with the infrastructure!

 

So, ask an accountant, and he'll probably ask you in return how much you would like to carry as capital on your balance sheet.

 

The last point opens up a further can of worms - "rebuilds" for accountancy purposes that were, in reality "new-builds"!

 

Time to continue on the pedants' topic?

Edited April 19, 2018 by Edwardian

[Compound2632]

On the Midland in S.W. Johnson's day (sorry, I'm off again...) engines seem to have got "Rebuilt" plates for changes such as enlarged cylinders, Johnson in place of Kirtley boilers, etc. This seems to have happened most to 2-4-0s - "Rebuilt" engines invariably have the classic swooping curve between the splashers:

 

 

in lieu of Kirtley's separate splashers/rectangular cab side-sheet or even the first, flatter, Johnson style:

 

 

The plate over the leading axlebox of No. 1070 reads:

 

 MIDLAND R^Y C^O

      REBUILT.

  DERBY, 1889.

 

She'd started life in 1874 as a product of Sharp, Stewart, in very late Kirtley style with his design of boiler and holes in the splashers and a square sandbox built into the leading splasher, but with Johnson-style cab and chimney. She was rebuilt with 18" cylinders and a Johnson boiler in 1889.

 

No. 1305 carries her original plate:

 

 MIDLAND RAILWAY Co

           MAKERS.

             1876

          [illegible]

 

With MAKERS. in gothic script. A bit fictitious as she was in fact built by Dubs. She was rebuilt with 18" cylinders in 1891.

 

Apologies for all that. Just felt we needed to see some properly-proportioned engines after all those fascinating long-boiler types.

Edited October 12, 2022 by Compound2632
Images re-inserted

[sem34090]

Do you wish me to add it to the list?

 

How to spot different types of train from a long way away:

 

No.1070: The Midlander:

The Midlander.

[Compound2632]

No. I cringe at "Midlander". If you must, classify this as "Classic Johnson".

[Northroader]

The LMS liked sticking works plates on these as well, much later.

[sem34090]

No. I cringe at "Midlander". If you must, classify this as "Classic Johnson".

I do apologise...

[Regularity]

I have no issue with as built/modified/rebuilt, just the word “unrebuilt”.

[sem34090]

I have no issue with as built/modified/rebuilt, just the word “unrebuilt”.

Wrong thread!!!

[Nearholmer]

It is a strange term, isn’t it.

 

Here is an unrebuilt merchant navy.