'Genesis' 4 & 6 wheel coaches in OO Gauge - New Announcement

[thunderer08]

On 16/11/2022 at 22:29, Colin_McLeod said:

 

One of these coaches was built around a diesel locomotive to assist the steam loco.

 

See underframe of third coach from the camera.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

I think you’re thinking of this;

 

[NHY 581]

On 15/11/2022 at 19:17, Compound2632 said:

 

Just how did that carriage get into such a filthy state in the pre-Great War world? Questions will be asked of the C&W Department!

 

I have to disagree there. I think that's a lovely restrained job on that coach which has embodied much character to it. 

 

 

Too many people think pre-grouping models have to be pristine. In the real world they did get dirty. Why not model them so ? 

 

You've made rather an unfair comment to be honest that undermines both TBG's excellent work and Rob's obvious pride in his coach.  

 

Rob

[Compound2632]

40 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

You've made rather an unfair comment to be honest that undermines both TBG's excellent work and Rob's obvious pride in his coach.  

 

I'm afraid I am unrepentant. I do not deny that one could have a little subtle weathering, and the roof going grey is the usual reaction of white lead paint with a sulphurous atmosphere, but I think what has been done here is unprototypical, certainly for a vehicle belonging to a major company. One does see photographs of carriages pre-Great War that look a bit shabby, lacking shine, but this is down to the top layers of varnish having worn off. I would like to understand how it is proposed that the carriage got into this condition. 

Edited November 18, 2022 by Compound2632

[NHY 581]

56 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

I'm afraid I am unrepentant. I do not deny that one could have a little subtle weathering, and the roof going grey is the usual reaction of white lead paint with a sulphurous atmosphere, but I think what has been done here is unprototypical, certainly for a vehicle belonging to a major company. One does see photographs of carriages pre-Great War that look a bit shabby, lacking shine, but this is down to the top layers of varnish having worn off. I would like to understand how it is proposed that the carriage got into this condition. 

 

It's this sort of approach to others work that annoys me. 

 

Neither you or I observed such things in person. 

Therefore, your assessment of the condition of such carriages, in fact any item of rolling stock or locomotive, is dependent upon your interpretation of monochrome images which are in excess of some 100yrs old. You cannot possibly say that the weathering on this coach is not prototypical, anymore than I can say it is. 

 

Your comments therefore are based on supposition. Nothing more. 

 

Why can't this nicely executed weathering job be accepted for what it is ? 

 

Rob. 

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

I would like to understand how it is proposed that the carriage got into this condition. 

I'm with Miss Prism. The weathering is subtle enough to pass as clean-but-used, in an era of railways generating an awful lot of smoke, and city smogs. Pristine it isn't, but dirty doesn't cover it either.

 

And in my day, a little more recent than this, carriage cleaning was the responsibility of the Traffic Department, not C&W, who generally deal with more important things like making the stock run sweetly and safely.  

[PaulRhB]

Weathering in publicity shots especially is not representative of everyday life of stock and as photos were expensive you didn’t get the wide variety of everyday shots as many who took photos wanted something pristine and glamorous. 
You only have to look at how modern stock weathers on a hot dusty or wet day with spray kicked up even after being mechanically cleaned overnight to see how fast grime can accumulate. 
Top expresses might be thoroughly cleaned each day but I’d bet even they had little deep cleaning to the underframe as that was hidden by platforms. Commuter and lower priority trains probably got a quick body wipe down but with dirt still in the crevices. 
I’ve seen a 159 come off depot with shiny black bogies after a swap and the same unit with them weathered down the next day while the body is pretty clean again. 

[Schooner]

As ever, disagreement welling up to fill a gap in understanding.

 

2 hours ago, NHY 581 said:

 

You've made rather an unfair comment to be honest that undermines both TBG's excellent work and Rob's obvious pride in his coach

 

Easy there @NHY 581 - Stephen made no comment at all on the quality of TBG's work (which is evidently superb) nor whether GWRRob should or shouldn't be happy with it (I hope he is, but that's none of our business), nor whether anyone else should or shouldn't "accept it for what it is" (a conversation cut short and now unlikely to happen).

 

@Compound2632 did enquire about how such a (real) vehicle might come to be in the state as modelled in the period modelled. We all know the effort Stephen puts into research - many pre-Grouping modellers use his findings as the cornerstones of their own work - and that his comments are not based on supposition. It's not a surprise that the coach as shown piqued his interest. In this he's not alone.

 

We all know Robs both and TBG to be outstanding modellers. This isn't in question; it needs no defense. No surprise here either, many of us have publicly lauded their work via comments and emotes here and elsewhere.

 

However, I know little about the question at hand and would have welcomed comments to aid my own understanding. I cannot welcome the reflex dismissal of any enquiry as a personal attack when it clearly wasn't one. Such discussions are almost universally good-humoured and well-sourced in their relevant corners of RMWeb. The assumptions (and accusations) have come from others, not from Stephen, and have turned what could've been an interesting and informative conversation into...well, neither of those things, which is a surprise. And I still don't know why the coach looks as it does, or what alternatives exist(-ed) and why! 

 

Turns out what really annoys me is this false equivalence between enquiry and attack. It does none of us any good and reduces the value of the community, which is why I feel strongly about it.  There was no reason not to take Stephen's comment good faith, and failure to do so wasn't to anyone's benefit. Right. Sorry. Kettle on, rant mode off. 

[Gilbert]

55 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

I'm with Miss Prism. The weathering is subtle enough to pass as clean-but-used, in an era of railways generating an awful lot of smoke, and city smogs. Pristine it isn't, but dirty doesn't cover it either.

 

 

 I think this is a really nicely done weathering job - its at the "gentle" end of the spectrum - as said above - used but not filthy...

Edited November 18, 2022 by Gilbert

[gwrrob]

Does anyone want to see my brake third too .....

[Compound2632]

Well, that was interesting. I think this photo shows the sort of weathering one should be aiming for, if one compares the grubby carriage bottom left with the rather clean one next to it - not so long out of the shops by the whiteness of its roof:

 

 

Leamington Spa, c. 1903 - looks as if it has recently rained. [Embedded link to Warwickshire Railways image gwrls850.]

 

What I particularly doubt about the weathered model is the grey on the lower panels, which I suppose is thought to have been thrown up from track level - though I may be mistaken in my interpretation. I would have thought the footboards would have screened the lower panels from any such upthrow.

 

I do have in mind that the Midland Railway carriage & wagon superintendent, T.G. Clayton, did report to his directors in 1892 that NPCS, with the exception of passenger brake vans, were being lined out in yellow rather than gold, as such vehicles were never washed:

 

 

[Embedded link to Midland Railway Study Centre item 88-P4/8, Derby official DY6516.]

 

The difference in patina compared to well-kept locomotives and carriages is obvious:

 

 

Carlisle, c. 1905/6. [Embedded link to Midland Railway Study Centre item 81609.]

 

My impression, or interpretation of photos, is that we're looking at an all-over coat of sooty grime, rather than dirt thrown up from trackbed level. (It's the mechanism by which dirt would be thrown up from a steel tire on a polished steel rail that foxes me; with the vacuum brakes of the day, I'm not convinced one would see that much in the way of dirt from the brake blocks. But this is an argument based as much on reason as on interpretation of monochrome photos.)

 

It's interesting, looking at that grubby carriage in the Leamington photo, that the cream panels appear grubbier in the middle than at the edges - perhaps the carriage cleaner ran a cloth around the beading, to give a shine to the lining, but didn't have time to do the rest!  

Edited November 18, 2022 by Compound2632

[Colin_McLeod]

13 hours ago, thunderer08 said:

I think you’re thinking of this;

 

I stand corrected.  Wrong movie!

[gwrrob]

1 hour ago, gwrrob said:

Does anyone want to see my brake third too .....

 

Again, the work of @toboldlygo and it will look great in my workman's train.

 

 

 

 

[NHY 581]

5 minutes ago, gwrrob said:

 

Again, the work of @toboldlygo and it will look great in my workman's train.

 

 

 

 

 

They really do look the part, Rob. 

 

Er.....

 

Rob

[Michael Hodgson]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Well, that was interesting. I think this photo shows the sort of weathering one should be aiming for, if one compares the grubby carriage bottom left with the rather clean one next to it - not so long out of the shops by the whiteness of its roof:

 

 

 

The most obvious aspect of the grubbiness is under the doors where mucky boots have trodden on the footboards. 

[Gilbert]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

The most obvious aspect of the grubbiness is under the doors where mucky boots have trodden on the footboards. 

I have to agree....

[SDJR7F88]

8 minutes ago, Gilbert said:

I have to agree....

What technique/paints did you use for the coach body? 

[NHY 581]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Well, that was interesting. I think this photo shows the sort of weathering one should be aiming for, if one compares the grubby carriage bottom left with the rather clean one next to it - not so long out of the shops by the whiteness of its roof:

 

 

Leamington Spa, c. 1903 - looks as if it has recently rained. [Embedded link to Warwickshire Railways image gwrls850.]

 

What I particularly doubt about the weathered model is the grey on the lower panels, which I suppose is thought to have been thrown up from track level - though I may be mistaken in my interpretation. I would have thought the footboards would have screened the lower panels from any such upthrow.

 

I do have in mind that the Midland Railway carriage & wagon superintendent, T.G. Clayton, did report to his directors in 1892 that NPCS, with the exception of passenger brake vans, were being lined out in yellow rather than gold, as such vehicles were never washed:

 

 

[Embedded link to Midland Railway Study Centre item 88-P4/8, Derby official DY6516.]

 

The difference in patina compared to well-kept locomotives and carriages is obvious:

 

 

Carlisle, c. 1905/6. [Embedded link to Midland Railway Study Centre item 81609.]

 

My impression, or interpretation of photos, is that we're looking at an all-over coat of sooty grime, rather than dirt thrown up from trackbed level. (It's the mechanism by which dirt would be thrown up from a steel tire on a polished steel rail that foxes me; with the vacuum brakes of the day, I'm not convinced one would see that much in the way of dirt from the brake blocks. But this is an argument based as much on reason as on interpretation of monochrome photos.)

 

It's interesting, looking at that grubby carriage in the Leamington photo, that the cream panels appear grubbier in the middle than at the edges - perhaps the carriage cleaner ran a cloth around the beading, to give a shine to the lining, but didn't have time to do the rest!  

 

If I may say, Stephen, a more measured response. Your point regarding the deflection offered by the footboards makes sense. 

 

I was immediately drawn to the coach at bottom left and the weathering of the upper panels which I agree is opposite to that which I'd expect and is pretty much where James went with his weathering. Panelled stock, by the very nature of their construction provides much in the way of nooks and crannies, inviting grime and dirt to lodge therein. Despite the best efforts of the coach cleaners, I'm sure these areas would darken over time. 

 

I'll definately be applying this hopefully logical approach to weathering my own pre-grouping coaches (when they eventually arrive from Hattons !). 

 

 

Rob. 

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, Gilbert said:

I have to agree....

 

Now that is, to my mind, much more the thing, appropriate to the period depicted by the livery. Grime in the corners of the panelling and round the hinges. 

[Compound2632]

Just now, NHY 581 said:

If I may say, Stephen, a more measured response.

 

Thank-you. I apologise for the tone of my first snarky comment; I had hoped I had found a humorous way of saying that it didn't look right to me but as the subsequent posts indicated, I failed. 

[NHY 581]

Just now, Compound2632 said:

 

Thank-you. I apologise for the tone of my first snarky comment; I had hoped I had found a humorous way of saying that it didn't look right to me but as the subsequent posts indicated, I failed. 

 

And in turn, Stephen, I too should apologise for the abruptness of my response. 

 

Rob  

[Compound2632]

4 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

And in my day, a little more recent than this, carriage cleaning was the responsibility of the Traffic Department, not C&W, who generally deal with more important things like making the stock run sweetly and safely.  

 

Hum. For the Midland, I don't know but could find out - the minute books of the various committees have monthly summaries of departmental wage bills; it should be easy enough to find out which department carriage cleaners were employed by. I'll add it to the list for my next visit to Kew!

 

For the Great Western, I have no idea but I'm sure there will be somebody in the GWSG who has looked at the relevant records.

[Gilbert]

26 minutes ago, SDJR7F88 said:

What technique/paints did you use for the coach body? 

That would be telling.....so here goes...I used a MIG Ammo Panel Liner on the details (including roof - any tidemarks are lost when airbrushed) and let that dry for 24 hours. I then splashed on  a Mig enamel wash which is left on for about 15 minutes - it looks terrible..here's a horse box I did:

 

 

but - then removed with a very slightly damp (white spirit) brush and cotton buds.

IIRC that one was also then buffed up with T-cut. This one was:

Chris

I've also just noticed the products have photobombed the coach in my first post!

Edited November 18, 2022 by Gilbert

[murphaph]

Perhaps more recent pics of the Irish panelled coaches would help identify where the dirt accumulated. I believe CIE did try to keep coaching stock clean even if the locos were filthy. @jhb171achil would know for sure though.

[PhilJ W]

6 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Well, that was interesting. I think this photo shows the sort of weathering one should be aiming for, if one compares the grubby carriage bottom left with the rather clean one next to it - not so long out of the shops by the whiteness of its roof:

 

 

Leamington Spa, c. 1903 - looks as if it has recently rained. [Embedded link to Warwickshire Railways image gwrls850.]

 

What I particularly doubt about the weathered model is the grey on the lower panels, which I suppose is thought to have been thrown up from track level - though I may be mistaken in my interpretation. I would have thought the footboards would have screened the lower panels from any such upthrow.

 

I do have in mind that the Midland Railway carriage & wagon superintendent, T.G. Clayton, did report to his directors in 1892 that NPCS, with the exception of passenger brake vans, were being lined out in yellow rather than gold, as such vehicles were never washed: 

Interesting weathering on the end of the coach on the right. It appears to be 'wet' for a couple of feet above the buffer beam but dry higher up.

5 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

The most obvious aspect of the grubbiness is under the doors where mucky boots have trodden on the footboards. 

Or possibly the paint worn off?

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Interesting weathering on the end of the coach on the right. It appears to be 'wet' for a couple of feet above the buffer beam but dry higher up.

Or possibly the paint worn off?

 

That may just be the effect of the turn-under - carriages of that type were not flat-ended.

 

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Interesting weathering on the end of the coach on the right. It appears to be 'wet' for a couple of feet above the buffer beam but dry higher up.

Or possibly the paint worn off?

 

Or polished by constant use?