Hornby 2021 - SR Bogie Luggage van

[Dunsignalling]

I'm half tempted to just add BR markings to mine and hope that SR malachite under several re-varnishings and some road dirt, ended up looking not too dissimilar to Maunsell olive.

 

John 

[Dunsignalling]

On 14/05/2021 at 14:25, Combe Martin said:

 

Ah yes, thanks for the reminder.  I think those 2 are the only 53 ft GBLs that have been identified so far as being repainted in malachite or BR(S) green.

 

So, £64000 question, given that the paint was fairly new, so unlikely to be re-painted again soon, do you keep it with SR numbers or number it with a BR number ? 

Malachite would have been applied no later than [x1948x] early 1949 (see next post), and re-varnishing seems to have happened every 2/3 years.

 

BR markings should have been applied along with the next coat of that; so it'll depend if you are modelling 1948-50 or 1951 onwards...

 

John 

Edited May 17, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Wickham Green too]

Well - splitting a paint-brush bristle or two - malachite wouldn't have been applied any later than spring '49 .... the decision to go for "crimson lake" ( or whatever you want to call it ) was taken by the Railway Executive on 17th Jan : the Tavern Car sets - built in April-June were finished in the new colours and there were reports of Lancing re-paints in the May Railway Observer.

[Combe Martin]

One thing that has just occurred to me regarding the colour of a particular 53 ft GBL in BR days is that of the Bluebell Railway example.  This is 2462 (I think) and when it was withdrawn from normal use it was transferred for departmental use, and I think that was when it gained the extra wide doors (now rebuilt with standard doors though) .  As far as I remember and at the Bluebell, before having the doors replaced with standard width ones and being repainted, its colour was scruffy Olive.  I wonder if it never had a repaint in BR days and this was how the Bluebell received it.  If so there's another accurate colour/number combination that can be used for BR days.  Does anyone on here know someone at the Bluebell who knows someone at the Bluebell who would know how the Bluebell received it ?    

Edited May 14, 2021 by Combe Martin

[Dunsignalling]

20 minutes ago, Combe Martin said:

One thing that has just occurred to me regarding the colour of a particular 53 ft GBL in BR days is that of the Bluebell Railway example.  This is 2462 (I think) and when it was withdrawn from normal use it was transferred for departmental use, and I think that was when it gained the extra wide doors (now rebuilt with standard doors though) .  As far as I remember and at the Bluebell, before having the doors replaced with standard width ones and being repainted, its colour was scruffy Olive.  I wonder if it never had a repaint in BR days and this was how the Bluebell received it.  If so there's an other accurate colour/number that can be used.  Does anyone on here know someone at the Bluebell who knows someone at the Bluebell who would know  ?    

Very good point.

 

The "before" pic on the Bluebell website looks like (very) neglected olive green. Heavily faded from years in departmental use and many more standing around later. I doubt any further re-varnishing would have taken place after withdrawal from revenue stock.

 

John

Edited May 14, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[hmrspaul]

27 minutes ago, Combe Martin said:

One thing that has just occurred to me regarding the colour of a particular 53 ft GBL in BR days is that of the Bluebell Railway example.  This is 2462 (I think) and when it was withdrawn from normal use it was transferred for departmental use, and I think that was when it gained the extra wide doors (now rebuilt with standard doors though) .  As far as I remember and at the Bluebell, before having the doors replaced with standard width ones and being repainted, its colour was scruffy Olive.  I wonder if it never had a repaint in BR days and this was how the Bluebell received it.  If so there's an other accurate colour/number combination that can be used.  Does anyone on here know someone at the Bluebell who knows someone at the Bluebell who would know  ?    

It is much more likely that it received the standard BR departmental colour of olive green. Unfortunately neither of my photos of DS70141 are in colour but many other conversion/transfers can be seen in olive in my collection.

https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/srdepartmentalcoach/e1b8f39b

 

SR 2462 GUV (General Utility Van-Gangwayed) built 1931 (rhrp.org.uk) 

 

ADS 70141 - PSS Staff & Tool van « Test Trains, Departmental railway stock & Internal Users - departmentals.com

 

Paul

[Combe Martin]

Ah, so bang goes that theory !

[trevor7598]

I can answer the question about the ' as received ' livery of the Bluebell Railway's GBL.

I was asked to go to South Lambeth, Battersea, to select the best GBL of the two present there, in about 1981.

Both were in ' worn ' departmental olive, and both were without gangways.

Of the two 2462 had better planking, but wider doors, which at the time were in excellent condition.

The other GBL present there went to the K&ESR, and later to Robertsbridge.

[Dunsignalling]

38 minutes ago, hmrspaul said:

It is much more likely that it received the standard BR departmental colour of olive green. Unfortunately neither of my photos of DS70141 are in colour but many other conversion/transfers can be seen in olive in my collection.

https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/srdepartmentalcoach/e1b8f39b

 

SR 2462 GUV (General Utility Van-Gangwayed) built 1931 (rhrp.org.uk) 

 

ADS 70141 - PSS Staff & Tool van « Test Trains, Departmental railway stock & Internal Users - departmentals.com

 

Paul

Curses, I'd completely forgotten BR Departmental Olive green.....

 

Malachite it is, then. 

Edited May 14, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[hmrspaul]

9 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Curses, I'd completely forgotten BR Departmental Olive green.....

 

Malachite it is, then. 

as a Stewarts Lane incumbent a BR olive green departmental version would go well with the Bachmann version of ADB975276 which is also reported as conserved. 

https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/srcctdepartmental/eb075975

 

Paul

 

 

[Robin Brasher]

It looks like British Railways departmental olive green and the Tri-ang green one with red doors are the only colours missing from my collection of gangwayed bogie luggage vans. It looks like none made it to British Rail blue but the Hornby model shows what it would have looked like if it did.

[Jack P]

Finished off the GBL over the weekend. 

 

I've only given it a light wash, further weathering will follow, but I'd like to get my other ones ready first. 

I've replicated something I saw on another PMV, broken window bars. 

 

 

Pretty pleased with it. 

[Dunsignalling]

On 14/05/2021 at 16:31, hmrspaul said:

as a Stewarts Lane incumbent a BR olive green departmental version would go well with the Bachmann version of ADB975276 which is also reported as conserved. 

https://PaulBartlett.zenfolio.com/srcctdepartmental/eb075975

 

Paul

 

 

Departmental Olive is a bit late for me, did any of these receive Gulf Red?

 

John

[Dunsignalling]

10 hours ago, Jack P said:

Finished off the GBL over the weekend. 

 

I've only given it a light wash, further weathering will follow, but I'd like to get my other ones ready first. 

I've replicated something I saw on another PMV, broken window bars. 

 

 

Pretty pleased with it. 

Very nicely done, airbrush or rattle can?

 

John

[JSpencer]

My Maroon arrived over the weekend. A few pictures below comparing with the Triang dated one and the van B.

 

 

[Jack P]

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Very nicely done, airbrush or rattle can?

 

John

 

Airbrush, Railmatch malachite green

[sandwich station]

13 hours ago, JSpencer said:

My Maroon arrived over the weekend. A few pictures below comparing with the Triang dated one and the van B.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shows that the Triang version was quite good for its time.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, sandwich station said:

 

Shows that the Triang version was quite good for its time.

 

...... apart from the raised plank 'grooves'!

 

John Isherwood.

[sandwich station]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

...... apart from the raised plank 'grooves'!

 

John Isherwood.

 

I think most people knew about that anyway and I can understand why Triang did it in the first place.

[Dunsignalling]

7 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

...... apart from the raised plank 'grooves'!

 

John Isherwood.

The raised plank joins weren't really noticeable from layout-viewing distances, though.*

 

It was the standard Tri-ang roof that I found most objectionable, because that was!

 

John

 

* I only just stopped myself from saying they didn't stick out! 

Edited May 18, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[Wickham Green too]

9 hours ago, sandwich station said:

 

I think most people knew about that anyway and I can understand why Triang did it in the first place.

Maybe the mould maker thought "we need grooves" - so cut grooves in the mould !!?!

[The Johnster]

Nice idea, but in fact the raised planking joins were used because it made production engineering sense in 1958; it was very much easier to release the completed body from the injection mould than if the joins had been correctly represented as grooves.  This was normal practice in those days, cf Hornby Dublo/Wrenn Fruit D or PMV and plastic bodied goods vehicles; nowadays with better mould technology and better plastics there is little problem in releasing the mouldings and the correct relief can be modelled, but the Triang Utility Van is a very old model.  It's failings were probably acceptable for late 50s RTR but it was long overdue for an upgrade, which it has now had.  I have one, Roxeyfied but with the original doors, and door thickness plus the raised plank joins are the only major problems; it has correct bogies, decent underframe, and has been worked up a bit in terms of gangways and handrail detail.  It is not a bad model, but I intend to replace it with the new version, and it will be retired when I do.

[steam69]

25 minutes ago, The Johnster said:

Nice idea, but in fact the raised planking joins were used because it made production engineering sense in 1958; it was very much easier to release the completed body from the injection mould than if the joins had been correctly represented as grooves.  This was normal practice in those days, cf Hornby Dublo/Wrenn Fruit D or PMV and plastic bodied goods vehicles; nowadays with better mould technology and better plastics there is little problem in releasing the mouldings and the correct relief can be modelled, but the Triang Utility Van is a very old model.  It's failings were probably acceptable for late 50s RTR but it was long overdue for an upgrade, which it has now had.  I have one, Roxeyfied but with the original doors, and door thickness plus the raised plank joins are the only major problems; it has correct bogies, decent underframe, and has been worked up a bit in terms of gangways and handrail detail.  It is not a bad model, but I intend to replace it with the new version, and it will be retired when I do.

Johnster

Hornby Dublo never produced models with raised joint lines, it was a cheaper way of producing a tool something HD never did, and their body mouldings compare with the latest produced now. Not the first time you have written something before checking your facts.

 

Richard

[cctransuk]

6 minutes ago, steam69 said:

Johnster

Hornby Dublo never produced models with raised joint lines, it was a cheaper way of producing a tool something HD never did, and their body mouldings compare with the latest produced now. Not the first time you have written something before checking your facts.

 

Richard

 

Quite correct in both respects!

 

In the case of the 'non grooves' - this was one reason that HD was more expensive than Tri-ang; they didn't 'cut corners'. Unfortunately, Hornby (Tri-ang) still have the habit - as demonstrated with their fixed, flangeless trailing axles on Pacifics.

 

I too am increasingly annoyed at the regular posting of 'fake news' by certain members - if you are not certain of your 'facts', don't post. This is exactly how the increasingly common model railway 'myths' come into circulation.

 

John Isherwood.

[melmerby]

8 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Quite correct in both respects!

 

In the case of the 'non grooves' - this was one reason that HD was more expensive than Tri-ang; they didn't 'cut corners'.

 

 

John Isherwood.

Don't many of their injection moulded bodies live on in the Dapol range but with new chassis?