Wright writes.....

[Compound2632]

7 hours ago, Leander said:

 

A coach style that is often overlooked is the LMS post-war types. Similar in styling to the pre-war period 3 but with additional doors, like the Porthole stock. However they had rectangular rather than round windows.

 

And, as noted above, much more numerous - certainly the thirds. The other point is that as brand new carriages, the potholes would have been straight into mainline express work, only being cascaded to secondary services and relief work in the later 50s (i.e. when they were approaching ten years old) with the proliferation of Mk 1 carriages.

 

Poor man's Thompson? I think not. The ultimate stage of LMS carriage design, with features that fed into the design of the Mk 1.

[Headstock]

 

I had one of the post war dia 2123 thirds through the paint shop last year. A simple brass sided RTR conversion, though it required a new set of roof vents.

 

[drmditch]

On ‎25‎/‎05‎/‎2019 at 09:47, grahame said:

 

Corporate branding

Social messaging (i.e. watch out thieves about, poppy appeal, etc) 

Camouflage (i.e. wartime)

 

Thank you for your reply. However, I am afraid we may not be speaking the same language. I am an older person, and am very suspicious of politically and commercially inspired 'Newspeak'.

( Re-reading 1984 recently was quite depressing.)

 

My original post suggested three purposes for rolling stock finishes.

1 - Protection and preservation of constructional materials

2 - Advertisement

3 - To demonstrate pride in craftsmanship.

 

What is now called 'Corporate Branding' was something of which 19th Century Railway Companies were well aware of. I would describe it as 'Advertisement'. In some cases features like necessary panelling of wooden structures and different paint and/or varnish finishes became part of what might now be called a 'brand'. For example LNWR and GNR/ECJS/GNNEJS coaches, both of wood panelled construction, would present a different 'corporate image' at York station in, say, 1910. The primary purpose of the panelling and the multiple coats of paint and/or varnish in both cases was to protect the constructional materials. Today the two functions are separate. Coating and paint do one job, and a vinyl overlay the other.  

 

What you call 'social messaging', I would still call 'advertisement' although its motivation and intention might be other than purely commercial. 

 

The lining-out of vehicles, whether emphasising structural features like cladding bands or coach panels, or whether entirely decorative such as cab or tender plating, is, I suggest, demonstrating pride in craftsmanship. I call it 'engineering as art'. It also of course became part of the advertisement or 'brand'.

 

'Camouflage' is interesting, although fortunately so-far little required on British railways. Is it a kind of 'anti-advertisement'?

The change of the LNER electric stock in the NE from red and cream to blue and cream is the only example I can think of; apart from the specifically military coastal defence trains.

 

So, are there any other reasons out there?

 

Do the curved or wavy vinyls we see on some current rolling stock suggest a pride in the shape and form of modern engineering?

 

Back in my world, I need at least one train with LNE and GW or LMS or SR liveries. So many lovely models are based south of York. North of Darlington I have more options!

 

 

Edited May 26, 2019 by drmditch

[grahame]

6 minutes ago, drmditch said:

What is now called 'Corporate Branding' was something which 19th Century Railway Companies were well aware of. I would describe it as 'Advertisement'.

 

No. Corporate branding and advertising is not the same, and never has been. Corporate branding would include liveries to differentiate between railway companies/owners of the vehicles and promote those companies. Advertising is where the space is sold to a third party, for income, to promote other products.

 

No need to be suspicious about social messaging. It usually cover good advise, warnings and information for the travelling public and doesn't have to be political or commercial. It is not an advertisement in that it is not designed to sell product and generate revenue.

 

HTH

 

G

[drmditch]

1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

No. Corporate branding and advertising is not the same, and never has been. Corporate branding would include liveries to differentiate between railway companies/owners of the vehicles and promote those companies. Advertising is where the space is sold to a third party, for income, to promote other products.

 

No need to be suspicious about social messaging. It usually cover good advise, warnings and information for the travelling public and doesn't have to be political or commercial. It is not an advertisement in that it is not designed to sell product and generate revenue.

 

HTH

 

G

Your reply double plus ungood. Sorry.

Reasons quoted above in relation to 'Newspeak'.

Advertisement and self-advertisement are both advertisement.

 

Back to my wiring my storage sidings. My least favourite railway job.

 

Edited May 26, 2019 by drmditch
PC language inserted.

[grahame]

20 minutes ago, drmditch said:

Disagree entirely. Sorry.

Reasons quoted above in relation to 'Newspeak'.

 

I think you're getting confused between advertising and PR (and/or self promotion). Advertising is creating paid announcements to be promoted through different types of media including online, print, TV, out-of-home and radio. Space on the side of rolling stock is sold to third parties for advisements but it is not the same as railway company branding. PR, on the other hand, is a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organisations and the public. Most companies have different budgets for advertising and PR. Both, and branding, are part of the marketing mix but they are not the same.

 

G

[Headstock]

Corporate branding is a little more specific than just advertising, the latter being a catch all term. It's basically about identity and image and the promotion of that identity. Advertising can be as simple as give us some money in exchange for our goods or services, without any reassurance to the nature of the business. The big four were all in the same business but established very different identities, The LNER as modern, the GWR as traditional, the LMS as boring etc. Anybody who makes a choice about the car that they drive or the railway company that they chose to model, is buying into corporate identity.

[Chamby]

1 hour ago, drmditch said:

*snip*

 

So, are there any other reasons out there?

 

*snip*

 

 

 

I would add distinction of purpose/status.

 

For example, why the LNER painted some of its locomotives black, and others green, blue or even grey.  Why the newly nationalised British Railways painted top-link locomotives blue, some Brunswick green, some lined black and some unlined black.  Why some DMU’s received all-over BR blue but some had grey window surrounds.  Why sectorisation livery had different logo’s for each sector.  There are many more examples of deliberate differentiation...

 

Phil.

[drmditch]

16 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

I think you're getting confused between advertising and PR (and/or self promotion). Advertising is creating paid announcements to be promoted through different types of media including online, print, TV, out-of-home and radio. Space on the side of rolling stock is sold to third parties for advisements but it is not the same as railway company branding. PR, on the other hand, is a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organisations and the public. Most companies have different budgets for advertising and PR. Both, and branding, are part of the marketing mix but they are not the same.

 

G

Please see my edit to my previous post.

We should probably cease this conversation. We are approaching this from a different perspective and, I suspect, different backgrounds!

[grahame]

9 minutes ago, drmditch said:

We are approaching this from a different perspective and, I suspect, different backgrounds!

 

My background is over 30 years in marketing management.

 

G

[mattingleycustom]

20 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Talking about Leaders, Southern locos and coaches, what a plug ugly loco this was - and what is that tatty old coach behind her it?

 

 

Brit15

 

That is the prototype Class 66 Diesel, or is it two Q1s back-to-back?

 

Glenn

[Andy Hayter]

2 hours ago, drmditch said:

Thank you for your reply. However, I am afraid we may not be speaking the same language. I am an older person, and am very suspicious of politically and commercially inspired 'Newspeak'.

( Re-reading 1984 recently was quite depressing.)

 

My original post suggested three purposes for rolling stock finishes.

1 - Protection and preservation of constructional materials

2 - Advertisement

3 - To demonstrate pride in craftsmanship.

 

 

 

So, are there any other reasons out there?

 

 

 

 

 

Any others?  Well as WW1 progressed a number of railways moved to simplified, rationalised or completely different liveries.

Locos and coaches  that had been highly decorated with complex lining had a simplified lining assigned or no lining at all.   That could be considered as the obverse of 3 - a lack of craftmanship.

Other companies changed the fundamental colours used - SECR locos went from ornate lined green to plain grey.  GER went from Prussian Blue to grey.  Many goods locos went from branded colour to black.  The reasons for this are perhaps several - lack of pigments that had previously been sourced from what was now the enemy: austerity: just showing that "we are all in this together" to use a modern idiom.  Brand image (or advertisement in your speak) was obviously less important than point 1 in your list.

I am not quite sure where you put these factors or how you would sum them up in a succinct phrase.  "Penury of conflict" perhaps - but it is not exactly clear.   

Edited May 26, 2019 by Andy Hayter

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

Any others?  Well as WW1 progressed a number of railways moved to simplified, rationalised or completely different liveries.

Locos and coaches  that had been highly decorated with complex lining had a simplified lining assigned or no lining at all.   That could be considered as the obverse of 3 - a lack of craftmanship.

Other companies changed the fundamental colours used - SECR locos went from ornate lined green to plain grey.  GER went from Prussian Blue to grey.  Many goods locos went from branded colour to black.  The reasons for this are perhaps several - lack of pigments that had previously been sourced from what was now the enemy: austerity: just showing that "we are all in this together" to use a modern idiom.  Brand image (or advertisement in your speak) was obviously less important than point 1 in your list.

I am not quite sure where you put these factors or how you would sum them up in a succinct phrase.  "Penury of conflict" perhaps - but it is not exactly clear.   

 

In many cases, these changes had started in the decade before the Great War - several companies moving to black for goods engines (Midland, NER, ...) and simplified liveries for passenger engines (Midland, Brighton, ...). Perhaps the most drastic of all was the Great Western, abandoning Indian Red frames for locomotives very early in the century, then going to all-over brown for carriages in 1908 and claret in 1912 - livery hardly different to the Western Region in BR days! The slow but steady financial decline of the railways that set in at the turn of the century was beginning to bite.

[stewartingram]

5 hours ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

Any others?  Well as WW1 progressed a number of railways moved to simplified, rationalised or completely different liveries.

Locos and coaches  that had been highly decorated with complex lining had a simplified lining assigned or no lining at all.   That could be considered as the obverse of 3 - a lack of craftmanship.

Other companies changed the fundamental colours used - SECR locos went from ornate lined green to plain grey.  GER went from Prussian Blue to grey.  Many goods locos went from branded colour to black.  The reasons for this are perhaps several - lack of pigments that had previously been sourced from what was now the enemy: austerity: just showing that "we are all in this together" to use a modern idiom.  Brand image (or advertisement in your speak) was obviously less important than point 1 in your list.

I am not quite sure where you put these factors or how you would sum them up in a succinct phrase.  "Penury of conflict" perhaps - but it is not exactly clear.   

More like an early prototype of a 70 perhaps?

[Andy Hayter]

Compound 2632, You are of course absolutely right and I used WW1 as a general marker that seems to have caused an acceleration.  The problem of course is to discern what is  normal change/re-branding and what is triggered by other factors.  Liveries have changed over time on a semi-continuous basis.  In modern parlance (sorry DRM) this is just a re-branding exercise.   On building the London extension, the MSL rebranded itself and created the GCR and with it a new passenger livery.  I have speculated elsewhere that this may have been to differentiate GCR coaches bound for London from those of the MR.  

Edited May 26, 2019 by Andy Hayter
for clarity to which post I was reffering

[Tony Wright]

On 25/05/2019 at 10:09, Michael Delamar said:

Tony what is the origin of the Devon Belle car m280m? Id love one in that livery.

It's either Hornby or Golden Age, Michael,

 

I can't remember right now.

 

There's not a huge amount of difference, other than in the respective prices!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

On 25/05/2019 at 10:56, Headstock said:

 

Morning Tony,

 

Have you actually measured up any off your collection of RTR carriages, or just guessing?

 

It's easy to fill up the holes. They ride so well that their performance on hand built track is as good as the alternatives, providing you set the back to backs correctly. Given my limited time remaining as a participant in the Hobby, they are just not worth the cost of changing. As you have enthusiastically advertised, it is a hobby that is about buying shinny new product. Awaiting a new livery from a manufacturer is a rather sad state of affairs, not for me.

 

Semi corridor lavatory composite is the full description in the diagram books but not as a telegraph code as recorded in the instructions for the formation and working of carriage sets. I have used the telegraph code. It is listed in the latter under non gangway vehicles as opposed to the sub category of non corridor. Semi corridor is not used.

I can't say I've measured up every one regarding ride-height, Andrew,

 

I'm more interested in relative ride-heights. By that I mean, if a rake is consistent (whatever it's made up from - RTR/kit/modified/RTR) in itself and consistent in height with the loco which is hauling it, then, in most regards, that's fine. Not fine, of course, if everything rides too high or too low. 

 

Assuming everything rides at the same height. There are plenty of prototype examples where this is not the case! 

 

Am I enthusiastically advertising shiny new products? Do you really think that? Once again, my powers of writing coherent English must be sadly disappearing. I'd rather hoped I'd come across over all these pages as an advocate (an enthusiastic one at that!) of folk making things for themselves, and not just being content with buying RTR stuff, however shiny. 

 

All those pictures of carriages I posted are from my picture library, taken (in the main) for magazine use. They ether show what's new (or what was new) or were part of a series for review. 

 

Actually, many of the subjects are not that shiny, but, it cannot be disputed, most are very good models indeed.

 

And, I've never thought of using Hornby (or Bachmann) wheels. One of the first jobs is to replace them with Romford/Jackson/Markits alternatives. They must certainly have improved since the last lot I had wobbled along!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Ray Flintoft]

Good day Tony ,

  As I promised some time ago , a couple of shots of my DJH Caprotti Std  class 5 .The first shows the chassis nearing completion . It is powered by a Mashima 1624 through a Markits gearbox giving a very smooth & quiet ride . The second shows the completed model in typical Patricroft condition .

                Regards , Ray .

[Tony Wright]

On 25/05/2019 at 14:40, Clive Mortimore said:

Have we lost that many of our fellow modellers as to effect sales of a product? 

We have indeed, Clive!

 

I still keep in close(ish) touch with the RTR manufacturers, and I'm currently assisting three of them with new (steam-outline) locomotive development. Very often I'm told 'We'd better get a move on with these, because the target market (because of advancing age and mortality) is diminishing all too rapidly.'

 

Not only that, have a word with the publishers of books/magazines relating to the 'steam age'. Cancellations of subscriptions now out-weigh new ones by at least two/three to one! How old must one be to have seen BR steam, and not just through the eyes of a child? I'm not talking about the 1968 fag-end of it all, but when our main lines were still mainly steam-hauled - say up to 1961-'62? Yes, I know the SR lasted a bit longer, but the Kings had all gone by the end of '62, and the first A4s were being withdrawn by then. I was 16 when the Kings finally went, so a sentient observer of such things must be late-60s/early-70s. Yes? 

 

That generation, of which I'm part, one might call the 'Grey Pound'. The one which spends the most money in the hobby right now. The one beginning to die-out! 

 

Mortality does affect sales, I'm afraid. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

26 minutes ago, Ray Flintoft said:

Good day Tony ,

  As I promised some time ago , a couple of shots of my DJH Caprotti Std  class 5 .The first shows the chassis nearing completion . It is powered by a Mashima 1624 through a Markits gearbox giving a very smooth & quiet ride . The second shows the completed model in typical Patricroft condition .

                Regards , Ray .

Lovely stuff, Ray,

 

Thanks for posting.

 

I used to see the Caprotti Standard Fives (and the LMS Caprotti Fives) every day in Chester, working the Llandudno-Manchester expresses. These used to be made up of about eight cars (a mix of ex-LMS and BR Mk.1 types), including, in some services, a Club Car. They used to run to/from Manchester Exchange.

 

The last time I saw a Manchester-Llandudno service (at the end of the last century) it was formed of a pair of Pacers! Progress indeed! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

Edited May 27, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

Just a quick word on the current 'debate' regarding liveries....................

 

Railway liveries have always been changing; for all the reasons mentioned.

 

From my point of view (simplistic, I admit), my perception is that, in the past (the recent past as well), liveries tended to complement the form to which they were applied, especially lining. I'd say (for instance), the Surtees-inspired full SE&CR livery is an engineering work of art. 

 

When the production Deltics first appeared, their livery was inspired, with complementary two-tone green and the master-stroke white cab surrounds. The subsequent all-blue with 'arrows of indecision', was awful in comparison. However, compared with some more-recent liveries with their swishes, swirls, sparkles and stars, it was positively restrained and in good taste. No thought seems to have been given as to how some modern liveries complement the forms to which they're applied. Is it an example of camouflage?

 

Though the inappropriate (in my view) 'swishy' livery still adorns the sets which fizz past my house, at least the (never had sex) 'splodge' (created using a giant icing cone?) has been replaced by a more-dignified, and entirely apposite, 'LNER' branding.  A personal point of view, of course, and I know nothing about how profitable (or not) a previous franchise might have been.

 

I have to say, I find the look of the latest units very striking and an example of good industrial design, at least in terms of the liveries. 

[Chamby]

33 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

We have indeed, Clive!

 

I still keep in close(ish) touch with the RTR manufacturers, and I'm currently assisting three of them with new (steam-outline) locomotive development. Very often I'm told 'We'd better get a move on with these, because the target market (because of advancing age and mortality) is diminishing all too rapidly.'

 

Not only that, have a word with the publishers of books/magazines relating to the 'steam age'. Cancellations of subscriptions now out-weigh new ones by at least two/three to one! How old must one be to have seen BR steam, and not just through the eyes of a child? I'm not talking about the 1968 fag-end of it all, but when our main lines were still mainly steam-hauled - say up to 1961-'62? Yes, I know the SR lasted a bit longer, but the Kings had all gone by the end of '62, and the first A4s were being withdrawn by then. I was 16 when the Kings finally went, so a sentient observer of such things must be late-60s/early-70s. Yes? 

 

That generation, of which I'm part, one might call the 'Grey Pound'. The one which spends the most money in the hobby right now. The one beginning to die-out! 

 

Mortality does affect sales, I'm afraid. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Given these anecdotes, are we passing the peak interest for BR steam modelling?  If we’re talking about 12 to 15 year-old spotters in 1961-2 being the last of their kind, then those lads would be around seventy years old by now.  I would argue that most modellers at this age will have already amassed the bulk of their collection, perhaps only acquiring the occasional new locomotive or rolling stock items to complement what they have already amassed.

 

Logic would dictate that the ‘big spenders’ in the hobby should be those with the time, space and money to realise their long-imagined dream model railway... those approaching or at retirement probably best fit the brief.  So, early-to-mid sixty-year-olds, who as lads would have been gricers during the early BR blue period.  Should we therefore be seeing a growth of interest in this period?  The models being released by the RTR manufacturers don’t seem to reflect that yet...

 

After all, at 63 years old, although I do have a modicum of BR blue, my big project requires mostly 1948-50 former LNER items.  Am I an exception, or are oddballs like me in sufficient numbers to suggest that age is NOT the major determinator of core railway interest?

 

Phil

[Compound2632]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

We have indeed, Clive!

 

I still keep in close(ish) touch with the RTR manufacturers, and I'm currently assisting three of them with new (steam-outline) locomotive development. Very often I'm told 'We'd better get a move on with these, because the target market (because of advancing age and mortality) is diminishing all too rapidly.'

 

Not only that, have a word with the publishers of books/magazines relating to the 'steam age'. Cancellations of subscriptions now out-weigh new ones by at least two/three to one! How old must one be to have seen BR steam, and not just through the eyes of a child? I'm not talking about the 1968 fag-end of it all, but when our main lines were still mainly steam-hauled - say up to 1961-'62? Yes, I know the SR lasted a bit longer, but the Kings had all gone by the end of '62, and the first A4s were being withdrawn by then. I was 16 when the Kings finally went, so a sentient observer of such things must be late-60s/early-70s. Yes? 

 

That generation, of which I'm part, one might call the 'Grey Pound'. The one which spends the most money in the hobby right now. The one beginning to die-out! 

 

Mortality does affect sales, I'm afraid. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

The managers of arts organisations and the like are often to be heard saying that they need to reach out to a younger audience as their current audience is getting on. Apart from the implicit ageism in this attitude, there is, I think, a failure to recognise that it is the late middle aged who have the time and resources to indulge in such things - and there is a steady supply of newly late middle aged people...

 

I do believe the same is true of our hobby but what we will see as the next, post-steam, late middle aged cohort comes along is much less of a focus on BR steam than there has been. I think this is starting to be seen at exhibitions, where the best layouts are set well beyond living memory and depend on meticulous research rather than personal recollection for their authenticity. 

 

Chamby's just said much the same.

Edited May 27, 2019 by Compound2632
Noting Chamby's post.

[grahame]

42 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The managers of arts organisations and the like are often to be heard saying that they need to reach out to a younger audience as their current audience is getting on. Apart from the implicit ageism in this attitude, there is, I think, a failure to recognise that it is the late middle aged who have the time and resources to indulge in such things - and there is a steady supply of newly late middle aged people...

 

I do believe the same is true of our hobby but what we will see as the next, post-steam, late middle aged cohort comes along is much less of a focus on BR steam than there has been. I think this is starting to be seen at exhibitions, where the best layouts are set well beyond living memory and depend on meticulous research rather than personal recollection for their authenticity. 

 

 

One of the other effects on model railway type modelling and popularity (apart from mortality and memory) is the spreading of history. As time progresses there is a wider range of railway genres with new trains and traction providing additional interest, attraction and modelling choice. The BR steam era is becoming a smaller segment of our railway history. With it increasingly becoming a distant memory it is only natural it will become less popular.

 

G

[t-b-g]

I can't help but think that any decline in sales of books and magazines may also be down to the fact that finding new material of high quality and covering subjects that haven't been done to death is difficult.

 

There is a finite number of photographs from steam days and much of what hasn't been published is either poor quality (like the photos my dad and uncle took) or covers things that have already appeared many times before.

 

I have bought a few books recently that cover my area of interest just for the one or two photos that I haven't already got.

 

Also, many people have full bookshelves and no room to keep adding purchases. I am in that situation and so are several people I know. So purchases are limited to "must haves" rather than "I quite fancy that".

 

Apart from MRJ I find most modelling magazines unreadable. Lots of variable quality photos of mostly RTR models but very little to read! They are too full of RTR, DCC and many pages on new product releases, with very little to do with making models, so I stopped buying them unless there is something of personal interest.

 

So there are factors other than modellers falling off their perch!