What might be The Real LNER Garter Blue ? Answer: Humbrol Enamel No 221.continues as The Paint Job.

[woodenhead]

1 hour ago, Forward! said:

Here's the paint stores at Swindon.

 

https://www.steampicturelibrary.com/swindon-works/carriage-wagon-works-24-shop/24-shop-paint-stores-1938-19983666.html

 

No bathtubs in sight!

But equally, no tins of ICI branded paint

[rodent279]

8 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

That made me chuckle, but it is true. The arch exponent of “vertical integration” was the Pennsylvania Railroad, and I am fairly certain they went to the extent of owning forests and coal mines

Did any UK railways own coal mines, or was there a law passed against it?

[Nearholmer]

Plenty of coal mines owned railways, some quite big and long, but very few (none?) had powers as public railways.

 

Most public railways were built under acts of parliament which effectively constrained what they could do (build and operate a railway, including necessary associated things as stated), so would probably have exceeded their powers if they had started digging coal mines, just as they were shown to be exceeding their powers when they started building rolling stock to sell to other companies. 
 

So, no law against it, but no powers to do it.

 

The classic thing to do in that case is to create a holding company, which then has both the railway company and the coal company as subsidiaries. Whether any cases of that existed in Britain, I don’t know. The ownership structure of the East Kent Light Railway might repay study.

Edited August 1, 2023 by Nearholmer

[Wickham Green too]

Without wading through two volumes of the Oakwood Press history, I'm pretty sure the Kent Coalfield mines were separately owned though some may have come under the same umbrella ownership as the EKR at one time. 

[Nearholmer]

PS: a public railway in Britain would probably have been within its powers to mine coal on its own property for its own use, in the same way that they used in some cases to manage embankments as sources of fodder and bedding for railway horses, draw water from wells, and do a host of other things. What they didn’t have powers to do was to sell goods and services outside their remit, and even some of the things they did do were actually done through wholly-owned subsidiaries, docks and shipping for instance, I think buses too, although I’m not sure, and certainly the southern dealt with its interests in aviation in a special way ….. maybe RAS was a standalone body, with each railway owning shares in it. Have we gone OT at all?

[Forward!]

On 01/08/2023 at 07:36, Nearholmer said:

The classic thing to do in that case is to create a holding company, which then has both the railway company and the coal company as subsidiaries. Whether any cases of that existed in Britain, I don’t know. The ownership structure of the East Kent Light Railway might repay study.

 

Very common practice in the Eastern US, despite the government attempting to prevent the practice. The eastern coal-carrying railroads sought to control the supplies of the coal they carried (and therefore set the price). Directors of each railroad company sat on each others' boards- effectively creating a railroad-coal cartel.

[Bucoops]

2 hours ago, Forward! said:

 

Very common practice in the Eastern US, despite the government attempting to prevent the practice. The eastern coal-carrying railroads sought to control the supplies of the coal they carried (and therefore set the price). Directors of each railroad company sat on each others' boards- effectively creating a railroad-coal cartel.

 

Like it or lump it?

[Tom Burnham]

On 01/08/2023 at 09:58, Wickham Green too said:

Without wading through two volumes of the Oakwood Press history, I'm pretty sure the Kent Coalfield mines were separately owned though some may have come under the same umbrella ownership as the EKR at one time. 

Arthur Burr was the financier behind the Kent Coalfield, and the financial structure was of Byzantine complexity, with various holding companies, intra-group shareholdings and such like. The EKLR was created by the associated companies as part of the projected industrial development of East Kent, which - fortunately in many ways - never came up to the promoters' hopes.  After the Burr empire unravelled in the early 1920s, the EKLR became essentially independent, although the Southern Railway came to have a sizable holding. The SE&CR/Southern and the Stephens light railways attempted to use Kent coal at various times but I believe it was never very satisfactory for loco use.

[Pacific231G]

On 31/07/2023 at 09:09, rodent279 said:

At the risk of stirring up a hornets nest, Garter Blue seems almost indistinguishable from Caledonian Blue (the lighter of the two shades).

Maybe a photo of 60022 beside the Caledonian 0-4-4 tank would tell us something?

The aim is surely for the model to look the same from a normal viewing distance as the real thing seen from an equivalent difference and that can't be achieved by just using the same paint. This was always very evident in the models that shipyards supply to ship owners. They're beautifully detailed models and the owner's livery is faithfully reproduced (which is what they want) but they're unmistakedly models because the same colour seen from a few inches away looks different when it's seen from several feet away. Getting over that may just be a matter of letting the colour down with a bit of grey though I believe artists also do subtle things with complimentary colours.

We're used to colour perspective for painting backscenes but it would surely also mean that the appropriate colour to paint an 0 gauge model is different from an N gauge model and both very different from full size. Using the same colour as the prototype in all three of hue, luminance and colour saturation  will surely make it look too bright and too colourful but you'd have to ask a colourist whether you can simply keep the hue the same and alter the other two. There's also the question of how the surface scatters light. 

[ROSSPOP]

 

The Tender is still in the paint shop , but the engine has her colour scheme; not quite my best paint job and still a lot of details to fit including a fully detailed cab and sliding window frames.

 

 

 

 

 

[Nearholmer]

That looks excellent.

 

Personally, I think that shade would look really good with very light weathering, to represent “well cleaned, in-service” condition, where despite the best efforts of the polishers, the joints in the cladding showed more distinctly than when new.

 

One question, from a person who has no idea about the LNER: was there a white line along the lower edge of the valance? As ever, I refer to Hornby Dublo, who thought there was. 
 

 

Edited August 9, 2023 by Nearholmer

[Bucoops]

29 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

That looks excellent.

 

Personally, I think that shade would look really good with very light weathering, to represent “well cleaned, in-service” condition, where despite the best efforts of the polishers, the joints in the cladding showed more distinctly than when new.

 

One question, from a person who has no idea about the LNER: was there a white line along the lower edge of the valance? As ever, I refer to Hornby Dublo, who thought there was. 
 

 

 

Sounds like the stainless steel strip  on the locos designated for the Coronation(?) train - 

 

 

Although in practice all sorts of locos ended up on all sorts of trains.

 

Edited August 9, 2023 by Bucoops

[ROSSPOP]

[Ian Rathbone]

It’s a pity the backing film is visible on the LNER transfer. It is not difficult to put the letters on without the connecting strip. Cut a piece of masking tape and place it on the model along the base line of the letters, checking that it is straight and level. Then cut out the lettering transfer and place it in its correct position dry, then mark the letter positions on the tape. The transfer can now be cut into individual letters, removing as much backing as possible and then soaked and put in position.

 

 

lan R

[BachelorBoy]

7 minutes ago, Ian Rathbone said:

It’s a pity the backing film is visible on the LNER transfer. It is not difficult to put the letters on without the connecting strip. Cut a piece of masking tape and place it on the model along the base line of the letters, checking that it is straight and level. Then cut out the lettering transfer and place it in its correct position dry, then mark the letter positions on the tape. The transfer can now be cut into individual letters, removing as much backing as possible and then soaked and put in position.

 

 

lan R

 

That works for LNER. But it wouldn't work for GWR as circular letters extend below the baseline.

 

[Ian Rathbone]

1 hour ago, BachelorBoy said:

 

That works for LNER. But it wouldn't work for GWR as circular letters extend below the baseline.

 

Fox transfers have an exaggerated extension below the base line, not shown on the prototype. In this case put the masking tape above the lettering or use HMRS transfers, which have no backing.

 

Ian R

[ROSSPOP]

No real advantage faffing with that as the transfer thickness would leave it all with four separate letters with the same visual problem..... it is as it is....

 

Fox replacements would be better IMO....

 

John

[BachelorBoy]

15 hours ago, Ian Rathbone said:

Fox transfers have an exaggerated extension below the base line, not shown on the prototype. In this case put the masking tape above the lettering or use HMRS transfers, which have no backing.

 

Ian R

 

Typographers and sign-writers extend Gs, Qs, Os, Cs below the baseline, and above the capital height too. So tape along the top of the capital line wouldn't work either. The diagonal strokes of the R can also extend below the base line

 

 

 

(The rounded tops of lower case Os, Ns, Rs etc also extend beyond the x-height

 

There are a lot of optical illusions that typographers have to correct for. 

 

Even apparently geometric typefaces -- supposedly constructed out of circles, rectangles, and triangles with the same stroke width throughout -- aren't geometric.

 

Their Os aren't perfect circles, they're lightly squashed, and the strokes at the top and bottom are thinner than those on the sides. If you don't make those adjustments, a perfectly circular O doesn't actually look like it's perfectly circular.

 

 

 

My favourite is that Xs are not actually two diagonals. The bottom-left to top-right stroke is not a straight line. There's actually a dogleg where it crosses the other stroke. 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2023 by BachelorBoy
added "top of"

[Forward!]

I haven't used Fox transfers for a while. Do they react to decal-setting solution such as 'Microsol'? Perhaps an application lessen the thickness issue?