Worsdell forever's Workbench - Loads of North Eastern Stuff

[Compound2632]

1 minute ago, Worsdell forever said:

Thanks for that, it's the only kit I have without a drawing on the box lid, all easily resolved. was there also a corridor on the other side of the other toilet?

 

Were these carriages semi-corridor or was access to the loo only from the adjacent compartments?

[Daddyman]

4 hours ago, Worsdell forever said:

 

Thanks for that, it's the only kit I have without a drawing on the box lid, all easily resolved. was there also a corridor on the other side of the other toilet?

You've done extremely well without a drawing - hood on centre line of clerestory vents/door vents except over toilet where hood shares centre line with a vent (unless you model after 1908 when hoods start to disappear - except over toilets). 

 

Sadler drawing (usual source of D&S box art) is I think NERA Supplement 84. But there was a drawing by one G.R, Ives in a very North Eastern issue of (?) Model Railway News in the 1970s - albeit without roof arrangement but with interior view to answer Stephen's next question: corridor on the other side, yes, but going the other way (i.e. away from the gas-tap end, towards the step end). So two "part" corridors - one on this side to give access to two compartments to the right of the toilet; one on the other side to give access to two compartments to the "other" right. 

 

Interestingly (well, not really), Ives and Sadler each show the alarm at a different end! A photo of what I think is a D.5 on Ernie's Brampton thread, and one at York in the BRJ special NER issue, seems to show it at the one you (and I) have modelled. That took me a few months of agony to work out! 

 

Are you in the NERA? Image KT02270 in the Ken Taylor collection has a superb broadside view of the other side of a D.5 in NER condition, still with hoods; the arrangement is quite complex. I can't publish it here unfortunately. 

Edited January 24 by Daddyman

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

Sadler drawing (usual source of D&S box art) is I think NERA Supplement 84. But there was a drawing by one G.R, Ives in a very North Eastern issue of (?) Model Railway News in the 1970s - albeit without roof arrangement but with interior view to answer Stephen's next question: corridor on the other side, yes, but going the other way (i.e. away from the gas-tap end, towards the step end. So two "part" corridors - one on this side to give access to two compartments to the right of the toilet; one on the other side to give access to two compartments to the "other" right. 

 

Ah, so two loos, between them taking up the full width of the carriage, not one loo with a corridor past it.

[Daddyman]

20 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Ah, so two loos, between them taking up the full width of the carriage, not one loo with a corridor past it.

Precisely! That's the reason why the hoods had to remain over the toilets once the other hoods on the vehicles disappeared and the NER switched to incandescent gas lighting - the centrally mounted incandescent light would not have reached into the toilets. Took me a few months to work that one out too! 

 

LNER arrangement (can't remember if this was before or after I removed the feeds to the hoods, plugged all the holes and moved them a smidgen inboard! EDIT: it's certainly before I realised the clerestory vents had flush rather than louvred faces in late NER and LNER days, and flipped them over): 

Edited January 24 by Daddyman

[thetalkinlens]

14 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

Ernie's Brampton thread

 

Could you link me to this thread please?

[Daddyman]

1 minute ago, thetalkinlens said:

 

Could you link me to this thread please?

There you go! 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/albums/72157687890893261/with/26333242139/

 

 

Seems to be a D.5: 

 

[Worsdell forever]

27 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

You've done extremely well without a drawing - hood on centre line of clerestory vents/door vents except over toilet where hood shares centre line with a vent (unless you model after 1908 when hoods start to disappear - except over toilets). 

Sort of referring to other box drawings, just the lavvy that's different.

 

27 minutes ago, Daddyman said:

Are you in the NERA? Image KT02270 in the Ken Taylor collection has a superb broadside view of the other side of a D.5 in NER condition, still with hoods; the arrangement is quite complex. I can't publish it here unfortunately. 

 

Yes, found the photo, (as new?) looks like there's an extra vent on the third class compartment next to the first class loo?

So these were 3rd, 3rd, lavs, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd?

[Compound2632]

23 minutes ago, Worsdell forever said:

So these were 3rd, 3rd, lavs, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd?

 

Ah yes, you couldn't possibly have one loo serving both first and third class!

 

I assume these carriages were designed under David Bain's superintedency vefore he moved to Derby at the start of 1903? If so, it's interesting that the lavatory non-gangwayed stock he had built at Derby, starting in 1905, retained the previous Midland arrangement of the loos only serving the adjacent compartments, rather than this demi-semi-corridor layout.

[Worsdell forever]

2 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Ah yes, you couldn't possibly have one loo serving both first and third class!

 

I assume these carriages were designed under David Bain's superintedency vefore he moved to Derby at the start of 1903? If so, it's interesting that the lavatory non-gangwayed stock he had built at Derby, starting in 1905, retained the previous Midland arrangement of the loos only serving the adjacent compartments, rather than this demi-semi-corridor layout.

 

Been thinking about that, it's a sort of Victorian modesty corridor, couldn't possibly be seen going directly into the loo from the compartment, just proves the North Eastern superiority over the Midland...😁

[Daddyman]

3 hours ago, Worsdell forever said:

Yes, found the photo, (as new?) looks like there's an extra vent on the third class compartment next to the first class loo?

I suppose this is allowed - a detail crop for research purposes; should count as fair use: 

 

 

Do you mean the second vent from the LH end? Yes - there seem to be two in that compartment for some reason. Note that one of the hoods (the one over the toilet) is in the open position - that confused me for a while: wondered why the NER had ray guns on their carriage roofs! 

3 hours ago, Worsdell forever said:

So these were 3rd, 3rd, lavs, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd?

In your period, yes. The last 1st before the solitary 3rd at the end was downgraded in LNER days to 3rd according to Williamson in an early NERA article; I've done the transfers on mine following Williamson.  

Edited January 24 by Daddyman

[Daddyman]

2 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I assume these carriages were designed under David Bain's superintedency vefore he moved to Derby at the start of 1903? If so, it's interesting that the lavatory non-gangwayed stock he had built at Derby, starting in 1905, retained the previous Midland arrangement of the loos only serving the adjacent compartments, rather than this demi-semi-corridor layout.

I mean... he was probably still shellshocked at the many, many ways the Midland did things wrong. One battle at a time. 

[billbedford]

5 hours ago, Daddyman said:

Interestingly (well, not really), Ives and Sadler each show the alarm at a different end! A photo of what I think is a D.5 on Ernie's Brampton thread, and one at York in the BRJ special NER issue, seems to show it at the one you (and I) have modelled. That took me a few months of agony to work out! 

 

The photo at Brampton shows the alarm gear at the end with two third compartments and a Lav. 

 

The possible alternatives to a D.5 would be D.74, which had 5 first-class compartments and D.88 which had two thirds at each end. There were 32 D.74 built and one D.88 compared to 138 D.5s. 

[Daddyman]

23 hours ago, billbedford said:

The photo at Brampton shows the alarm gear at the end with two third compartments and a Lav. 

Yes, that's what decided me on putting it at the end nearest the toilet; Ives has it at this end, Sadler at the other. 

23 hours ago, billbedford said:

The possible alternatives to a D.5 would be D.74, which had 5 first-class compartments and D.88 which had two thirds at each end. There were 32 D.74 built and one D.88 compared to 138 D.5s. 

Not a D.74 as the panelling between the two compartments furthest from the camera on the Brampton coach is single; on a D.74 it's double (see Transport Library image LSDC1150). 

 

39 x D.74s built, incidentally. 

Edited January 25 by Daddyman

[billbedford]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Ah yes, you couldn't possibly have one loo serving both first and third class!

 

I assume these carriages were designed under David Bain's superintendency before he moved to Derby at the start of 1903? If so, it's interesting that the lavatory non-gangwayed stock he had built at Derby, starting in 1905, retained the previous Midland arrangement of the loos only serving the adjacent compartments, rather than this demi-semi-corridor layout.

 

The Midland arrangement would give an extra seat in each class, and, of course, the MR coaches were longer so easier to fit every thing in. 

[Worsdell forever]

2 hours ago, Daddyman said:

I suppose this is allowed - a detail crop for research purposes; should count as fair use:  

 

 

And to promote the NERA and the comprehensive archive available to members.

 

2 hours ago, Daddyman said:

 

 

Do you mean the second vent from the LH end? Yes - there seem to be two in that compartment for some reason. Note that one of the hoods (the one over the toilet) is in the open position - that confused me for a while: wondered why the NER had ray guns on their carriage roofs! 

In your period, yes. The last 1st before the solitary 3rd at the end was downgraded in LNER days to 3rd according to Williamson in an early NERA article; I've done the transfers on mine following Williamson.  

 

Could the extra vent be because there isn't one at the other side where the corridor is? would this mean there's also an extra vent on the first First class compartment at the other side?

[Daddyman]

1 minute ago, Worsdell forever said:

 

And to promote the NERA and the comprehensive archive available to memers.

Good point! (Whitby pronunciation?) 

 

2 minutes ago, Worsdell forever said:

Could the extra vent be because there isn't one at the other side where the corridor is? would this mean there's also an extra vent on the first First class compartment at the other side?

Ah! Of course, yes! But no extra on the other side according to Sadler - just the usual vent over the right-hand window of each compartment, as per standard NER practice. 

[Worsdell forever]

Just now, Daddyman said:

Good point! (Whitby pronunciation?) 

 

It's een edited, letter   is playing up on this keyoard!

[Michael Hodgson]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Ah yes, you couldn't possibly have one loo serving both first and third class!

 

Even as recently as the late 1970s I worked for an engine manufacturing company that had works toilets in the factory, staff toilets in the offices and managers toilets that were kept locked and management (and presumably the cleaners!) were the only key-holders.

There was even more class discrimination when it came to the catering = the directors got better facilities than the managers and the MD had a secret wine cellar despite the site being officially dry.!

[30368]

41 minutes ago, Michael Hodgson said:

Even as recently as the late 1970s I worked for an engine manufacturing company that had works toilets in the factory, staff toilets in the offices and managers toilets that were kept locked and management (and presumably the cleaners!) were the only key-holders.

There was even more class discrimination when it came to the catering = the directors got better facilities than the managers and the MD had a secret wine cellar despite the site being officially dry.!

 

Yes agree, I recall much the same approach in many of the factories I visited well into the 1980s. It is, perhaps, a reflection of a wider malady that prevents the UK for moving forward instead of continually looking backwards to a "golden age" when we all knew our place. It never existed....

 

Kind regards,

 

30368

[Worsdell forever]

Rooftop reshuffle. 

 

[Worsdell forever]

It seems you can vote for me! If you enjoy what's going on here...

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfVprB4ALfO-BPO2zBXLSPI5UiSDDmfxfHLtR8rqfbj7DokOg/viewform

[Worsdell forever]

It's gone red! 

 

 

With a friend. 

 

 

[Worsdell forever]

Still slowly plodding along with carriages, more of that later but we've just been to get some eggs from a local farm and they're slowly refurbishing the building, they also sell potatoes and a barrow has appeared to put them on, a North Eastern platform barrow. 

 

 

 

 

[Compound2632]

45 minutes ago, Worsdell forever said:

they also sell potatoes and a barrow has appeared to put them on, a North Eastern platform barrow. 

 

For a moment I thought that was 4 mm scale. But I'll remind you that in 1913 the North Eastern transported 171,222 tons of potatoes - that's nearly 3½ million 1 cwt sacks and goodness knows how many bad backs - from stations on its own system, and probably a good few 10,000 tons from stations on other lines - North British stations in Fife, for seed potatoes, at a guess.

[Worsdell forever]

So, back to the carriages, there's now a respectable set of four. Two, a D18 3 compartment van third and a D14 8 compartment ordinary third that were finished a few years ago. Next is the D5 lavatory composite that is externally finished, needs glazing and seats, last is a D77 5 compartment van third, built many years ago and finished in late LNER condition with electric lights and middle lower steps removed, lamp tops have been added but the steps still need to be added but it has been repainted, lettered and lined. Please don't look too closely at the lining, I'm getting better at it!