SDJR as delivered livery and marking details

[Ian M.]

Hello. I recently acquired a number of Bachmann SDJR locos. I am trying to confirm livery points with respect to the prototypes as delivered to the SDJR to determine if I want to attempt any alterations to bring them to as-delivered form.  Specifically:

1.      4F 0-6-0, #58 (Blue)

2.      3F 0-6-0T #24 (Blue)

3.      7F 2-8-0 #89 (Black)

 

On each the raised characters on the smokebox numberplate are white, not silver/polished iron. Was this SDJR practice and would this have been correct on delivery?

 

On each, the tender number (The 4F and 7F are apparently correct LMS number plates) and capacity (all 3) plates have the raised characters painted white, not brass or silver/polished iron. Same question: would this have been correct on delivery?

 

Works builder plates: on the 4F 0-6-0, the Armstrong-Whitworth plates are white painted, not brass as I assume would have been the case. Thoughts?

 

Cabside numbers appear correct with shaded, plain gold and yellow respectively. SDJR on tenders/tanks also appear correct with the close spacing of “SDJR” on the 4F and 7F before repainting to spread on subsequent shopping (wide on the Jinty).

In the event changes are suggested to the out of the box Bachmanns, does anyone have a reference for aftermarket OO scale decals of maker plates, capacity & tender number plates, etc.?

 

Cheers.

[queensquare]

The Armstrongs, 4Fs, were unlined black, never blue. Bachmanns blue 4F is pure fiction - it also has the wrong tender.

 

Jerry 

[Combe Martin]

42 minutes ago, queensquare said:

The Armstrongs, 4Fs, were unlined black, never blue. Bachmanns blue 4F is pure fiction - it also has the wrong tender.

 

Jerry 

 

Its the tender front on the Bachmann 4F Fowler tender that's wrong. The've used their 'Coal Door' front tender, whereas it should be a 'Coal Hole' front tender.  But Brassmasters do a 'Coal Hole' tender front etch for the Fowler tender which can be used on a number of Bachmann and Hornby Fowler tenders where its wrong for the loco you want, Eg Bachmann 7F, Hornby 4F, Hornby 2P.  Not all of these are wrong, it depends on which loco you'r modelling.   

[queensquare]

26 minutes ago, Combe Martin said:

 

Its the tender front on the Bachmann 4F Fowler tender that's wrong. The've used their 'Coal Door' front tender, whereas it should be a 'Coal Hole' front tender.  But Brassmasters do a 'Coal Hole' tender front etch for the Fowler tender which can be used on a number of Bachmann and Hornby Fowler tenders where its wrong for the loco you want, Eg Bachmann 7F, Hornby 4F, Hornby 2P.  Not all of these are wrong, it depends on which loco you'r modelling.   

The Armstrongs haven’t got a Fowler tender, it’s the Johnson style 3500 riveted tender. I’m not sure anyone does one of those RTR in 4mm

 

Jerry

[phil_sutters]

1 hour ago, Ian M. said:

 

 

These look black to me.

Edited September 28, 2023 by phil_sutters

[Combe Martin]

2 hours ago, queensquare said:

The Armstrongs haven’t got a Fowler tender, it’s the Johnson style 3500 riveted tender. I’m not sure anyone does one of those RTR in 4mm

 

Jerry

Yes, you'r right, Bachmann's 'Armstrong' hasn't got a Fowler tender and their Johnson tender that it's supplied with is the wrong type and no-one does the correct RTR one.   

 

What I was getting at is that all the Armstrongs eventually acquired a Fowler tender, but the Bachmann model with the Fowler tender also has the wrong type for an Armstrong but which could be converted using the Brassmasters Etch, and then re-numbering.

 

As far as I know, Bachmann havn't produced a 4F with Fowler tender and numbered as an Armstrong.    

 

One other point Bachmanns 7F is the 2nd series that were built with the large boiler, but then later in their life retro fitted with the small boiler, this is how Bachmann have modelled it, so is it wrong to have it in S&DJR condition and as no. 89.  No 89 received its new small boiler in 1930, but in 1930 it was renumbered as 9679.

 

Also, photos show Bachmanns Fowler tender is the wrong type for 53809 in BR days, though its possible it had a tender swop very late in its life just before it was withdrawn because photos I've seen of it at Woodhams scrap yard show a different tender, and I think it still has this one in preservation.

 

I cant recall what type of tender it was built with, and there is an article in one of the S&D trusts magazines, Pines Express, all about the tenders fitted to the 7Fs, but I can't find it at the moment.  But I'm sure it wasn't a Fowler tender with coal doors which is what it's modelled with. 

..

Edited September 28, 2023 by Combe Martin
Added info about tenders.

[bécasse]

The owning partners tended to be parsimonious so far as capital expenditure was concerned which would tend to support the provision of cheaper cast-iron plates. The white highlighting of characters in relief on these wouldn't have stayed white for very long - regular wiping with an oily cloth would turn the white a pale buff colour.

[Ian M.]

56 minutes ago, bécasse said:

The owning partners tended to be parsimonious so far as capital expenditure was concerned which would tend to support the provision of cheaper cast-iron plates. The white highlighting of characters in relief on these wouldn't have stayed white for very long - regular wiping with an oily cloth would turn the white a pale buff colour.

"Parsimonious" -- love it and have not had a chance to use that term in ages. I would tend to agree, so probably black painted white (smokebox numbers and tender plates) on the raised as delivered, and not polished brass or iron, with aging over time.

 

I knew the 7Fs came black and about the large to small boilers on the 1925 batch, but thought the 4Fs came from A-W in blue. Oh well, Phil your photo is a very helpful one.  Unless the Prussian Blue showed up very dark in B&W, pretty fairly conclusive I would say. 

[phil_sutters]

2 hours ago, Ian M. said:

Unless the Prussian Blue showed up very dark in B&W, pretty fairly conclusive I would say. 

Prussian Blue, on most B&W photos that I have seen, shows up as a distinctly lighter tone, than ones showing locos newly painted in black. As black becomes grubbier the difference is a bit less.

[Ian M.]

...picking up this old thread -- are we agreed that the 3F Jinties delivered from Bagnalls in late 1928/1929 were unlined Prussian Blue? Essery & Jenkinson seem to think so in LMS Loco Profiles on the inherited Midland and SDJR stock.

[Ian M.]

On 28/09/2023 at 14:16, Combe Martin said:

I cant recall what type of tender it was built with, and there is an article in one of the S&D trusts magazines, Pines Express, all about the tenders fitted to the 7Fs, but I can't find it at the moment.  But I'm sure it wasn't a Fowler tender with coal doors which is what it's modelled with. 

..

Fowler tender of the first type without coal doors would have been the type in 1925 when delivered.

 

 

Edited March 10 by Ian M.
Typo

[nick_bastable]

17 minutes ago, Ian M. said:

Fowler tender of the first type without coal doors would have been the type in 1925 when delivered.

 

 

do you know when the tablet catchers where fitted ?

[Ian M.]

Unsure but prob. upon entry into service or soon thereafter.  The photo is a pre-delivery builder grey study portrait so not surprising it lacked certain add-on details like the tablet catchers.

[phil-b259]

On 28/09/2023 at 19:16, Combe Martin said:

Yes, you'r right, Bachmann's 'Armstrong' hasn't got a Fowler tender and their Johnson tender that it's supplied with is the wrong type and no-one does the correct RTR one.   

 

What I was getting at is that all the Armstrongs eventually acquired a Fowler tender, but the Bachmann model with the Fowler tender also has the wrong type for an Armstrong but which could be converted using the Brassmasters Etch, and then re-numbering.

 

As far as I know, Bachmann havn't produced a 4F with Fowler tender and numbered as an Armstrong.    

 

One other point Bachmanns 7F is the 2nd series that were built with the large boiler, but then later in their life retro fitted with the small boiler, this is how Bachmann have modelled it, so is it wrong to have it in S&DJR condition and as no. 89.  No 89 received its new small boiler in 1930, but in 1930 it was renumbered as 9679.

 

Also, photos show Bachmanns Fowler tender is the wrong type for 53809 in BR days, though its possible it had a tender swop very late in its life just before it was withdrawn because photos I've seen of it at Woodhams scrap yard show a different tender, and I think it still has this one in preservation.

 

I cant recall what type of tender it was built with, and there is an article in one of the S&D trusts magazines, Pines Express, all about the tenders fitted to the 7Fs, but I can't find it at the moment.  But I'm sure it wasn't a Fowler tender with coal doors which is what it's modelled with. 

..

 

The Bachmann SDJR liveried 7F is a model of the actual preserved loco - which has long carried Prussian Blue and naturally still has its small boiler in preservation. It never was intended to be an accurate model of the loco as it existed during  the S&DJRs lifetime.

 

Similarly the S&DJR 4F loco was never intended to be a 100% accurate rendition of the real thing! It was a special release done for the Bachmann collectors club taking advantage of the fondness many folk have for the S&DJR and its existence is in essence no different from why Hornby put their tender drive 4F in S&DJR livery a decades or so beforehand.

[RailWest]

21 hours ago, Ian M. said:

Unsure but prob. upon entry into service or soon thereafter. ....

I would agree with that suggestion. Given that by the 1920s the use of the Whitaker apparatus must have been a key element in normal day-to-day S&DJR operations, it would seem strange IMHO if they were to delay fitting any longer than necessary.

[Compound2632]

On 10/03/2024 at 17:26, nick_bastable said:

do you know when the tablet catchers where fitted ?

 

On arrival at Highbridge, presumably? Photo was presumably taken at Stephenson & Co.'s Forth Street Works.

[phil_sutters]

On 10/03/2024 at 17:26, nick_bastable said:

do you know when the tablet catchers where fitted ?

This shows a small boilered 7F in photo grey, with a tender cab, presumably at Derby. It does have the tablet catcher fitted. I would doubt that they would have sent 7Fs up to Highbridge even if they had arrived without catchers. Wouldn't Bath shed have had fitters that could fit them. I am trying to remember if 7Fs ever made it up the Central line. Dad said the Somerset Central was the original line and therefore should never be called a branch!

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

On arrival at Highbridge, presumably? 

 

37 minutes ago, phil_sutters said:

This shows a small boilered 7F in photo grey, with a tender cab, presumably at Derby. It does have the tablet catcher fitted. I would doubt that they would have sent 7Fs up to Highbridge even if they had arrived without catchers. Wouldn't Bath shed have had fitters that could fit them. 

 

Yes, I wasn't thinking - on arrival at Bath!

 

Phil, haven't you got that photo of a string of 7Fs being delivered - or are they Armstrongs?

Edited March 11 by Compound2632

[queensquare]

35 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 

Yes, I wasn't thinking - on arrival at Bath!

 

Phil, haven't you got that photo of a string of 7Fs being delivered - or are they Armstrongs?

They’re Armstrongs Stephen,

 

Jerry

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, queensquare said:

They’re Armstrongs Stephen,

 

But do they already have the tablet exchange apparatus fitted? (And where was the photo taken?)

[phil_sutters]

44 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

But do they already have the tablet exchange apparatus fitted? (And where was the photo taken?)

The photo appears to be an official Armstrong Whitworth image, as their company has put its name on the print. I assume from that it was taken at or near one of their works and I am sure someone here can identify the location, or at least the railway company involved, from the array of signals in the background. Later Bradley and Milton record that these five were built at the Scotswood Works at Newcastle-on-Tyne.

The 4Fs do not appear to have the catchers fitted, just a small handrail at the location.

Should we award a prize for the first person to make a scale model of that glorious cabin, hut, shack in the foreground?

Edited March 11 by phil_sutters

[RobAllen]

On 11/03/2024 at 20:53, phil_sutters said:

I am trying to remember if 7Fs ever made it up the Central line. Dad said the Somerset Central was the original line and therefore should never be called a branch!

Page 283 of The Somerset & Dorset Railway Bath to Bournemouth by Derek Philips has a photo of 18805 near Highbridge on a freight train. The caption is: "More used to tackling the steep gradients of the Bath extension than the less taxing Somerset levels, 2-8-0 13805 works tender first near Highbridge with a goods train on 23 July 1937"

 

I'm using this photo to justify 7Fs on my Holcombe branch :)