Wright writes.....

[cctransuk]

40 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Occasionally, one handle might get lost....................

 

 

 

No - it's there - hiding under the shadow, at 20-past.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[t-b-g]

17 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

Not a particular area of expertise of mine, Jesse, but this looks like the tender you've used:

 

 

These look more like what Andrew describes:

 

 

 

Pictures from Neil Dimmer's collection on SmugMug (click on images to link to the collection).

 

 

 

The curved ends to the tender side plates look so much better than the straight ones that look like a proper bodge job!

 

I have a vague recollection of reading that some J10s had waterscoop fitted tenders for the London Extension longer distance workings in the early days but I can't remember which type they were and a quick glance at photos hasn't found any, so it may have been short term until the J11s replaced them on the longer, heavier workings.

 

So maybe the waterscoop has to go but I like that loco and tender combination and wouldn't change it!

[t-b-g]

6 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

No - it's there - hiding under the shadow, at 20-past.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Well spotted. I can't imagine a crew taking a loco out on the road without the locking handle. A few lurches and the door could swing open!

[Headstock]

26 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

 

David Larkin's Freight Wagons of the Early British Railways Era shows a darker grey replaced by an almost white shade on new wagons and he reckons to cover 1948-54 in that volume.

 

Morning, Jonathan, 

 

thanks for the info. So a mix of liveries (I like livery mixes) would look quite cool. The number and weight in tons seems to be in two patches and latter a single patch, is that right? If so does he say when the change occurred?

Edited June 14, 2020 by Headstock
add of

[jwealleans]

I'll dig the book out this afternoon, Andrew.   It lives by my workbench and I'm downstairs this morning.   Very early repaints/builds had no black patch but then they started adding that (presumably to help visibility of the lettering).  I'm not sure what official guidelines there were about the black - you see separate areas, one large patch and on ex-POs sometimes whole planks painted, at other times the absolute bare minimum to accommodate the text.

[Bucoops]

Good Morning All,

 

It's been around 20 years since I've done a smokebox door but I don't remember being instructed to ensure it was directly down (or up) - and the only photo I can find of one of the kettles I had the privilege to work on seems to support that,

 

 

 

There would be a point where the catch inside was no longer effectively holding the door however.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Bucoops

[Headstock]

51 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

Not a particular area of expertise of mine, Jesse, but this looks like the tender you've used:

 

 

These look more like what Andrew describes:

Pictures from Neil Dimmer's collection on SmugMug (click on images to link to the collection).

 

 

 

Isn't that the shorter tender tank, the Bachmann tender being the taller, higher capacity type.

[jwealleans]

Hard to tell, the angles not being the same, but I thought the tender looked lower than the cab by the same amount on both Jesse's model and 5137.

 

Edit - BR wagon grey.  David Larkin says the shade seems to have been variable and... some wagons had unpainted woodwork with only the metal framework of the body actually being painted.

 

The black number boxes, according to the HMRS, should allow 1" round the number, but As the years went by these tended to become larger with running number and tare often appearing in a single large panel.  Larkin comments that there was considerable variation to be found in this feature.

 

Edited June 14, 2020 by jwealleans

[Headstock]

5 minutes ago, Bucoops said:

Good Morning All,

 

It's been around 20 years since I've done a smokebox door but I don't remember being instructed to ensure it was directly down (or up) - and the only photo I can find of one of the kettles I had the privilege to work on seems to support that,

 

 There would be a point where the catch inside was no longer effectively holding the door however.

 

Good morning Bucoops,

 

as you have eluded to, if there is wear and tear, then the locking handle has more chance of moving as you tighten it up. However, non of the images that have been posted are as extreme as Clem had his.

 

5 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

Hard to tell, the angles not being the same, but I thought the tender looked lower than the cab by the same mount on both Jesse's model and 5137.

 

The best way to tell is by looking at the height of the tank from above the extension piece for the grab handle, up to the coping plate.

[cctransuk]

20 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Morning, Jonathan, 

 

thanks for the info. So a mix of liveries (I like livery mixes) would look quite cool. The number and weight in tons seems to be in two patches and latter a single patch, is that right? If so does he say when the change occurred?

 

David can sometimes be a bit 'hard and fast' about wagon liveries in the 1950s and 60s - when the reality was by no means so cut and dried.

 

Study as many dated photos as you can - you'll find that the apparent shade of grey varies immensely and, as they're mostly monochrome photos, it is very difficult to say how much of this is due to weathering and / or the performance of the film used.

 

As to lettering on patches; there is ample evidence that this was applied largely at the whim of the painter. You can find wagons with huge black patches for minimal lettering, whilst others are almost geometrically fitted to the lettering. One or two patches at the LH end is also completely random.

 

John Isherwood.

[Barry Ten]

Most of the chassis work now finished on my Fowler 2-6-4T:

 

 

I had my usual set of aggravations with the valve gear, nothing to do with the quality of the product, just annoying stuff like soldering two pieces together and having to redrill, getting it all set up then realising I'd put a pin through the wrong hole, etc. Grrr! I realised that although I'd built a couple of locos last year, I hadn't done a set of valve gear for two years so there were some skills that were begin to perish. My soldering iron tip is on the way out, too, so it was struggling to deliver enough heat to do a quick in and out touch.

 

In the process of handling the body, the varnish and weathering layer began to lift in spots so as an experiment I carried on and was able to remove most of it from the side tanks with very little trouble, just using a cotton bud and alcohol. I think this will help in sorting out the issues with the body. The lining is quite poorly applied (HMRS pressfix) so i may just press on redo the lot, while remedying the poorly defined area around the rear cab opening.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Barry Ten
typos

[Headstock]

11 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

David can sometimes be a bit 'hard and fast' about wagon liveries in the 1950s and 60s - when the reality was by no means so cut and dried.

 

Study as many dated photos as you can - you'll find that the apparent shade of grey varies immensely and, as they're mostly monochrome photos, it is very difficult to say how much of this is due to weathering and / or the performance of the film used.

 

As to lettering on patches; there is ample evidence that this was applied largely at the whim of the painter. You can find wagons with huge black patches for minimal lettering, whilst others are almost geometrically fitted to the lettering. One or two patches at the LH end is also completely random.

 

John Isherwood.

 

Good morning John,

 

some of the wagons that I am currently modelling don't have patches at all, just white lettering on grey. Unfortunately, a lot of BR period lettering / numbers come on black patches only and are of no use. Usually, I have to make them up out of individual letters and numbers via the HMRS sheets. It is very time consuming as opposed to whacking a black patch on with lettering etc in place.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Headstock

[cctransuk]

3 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning John,

 

some of the wagons that I am currently modelling don't have patches at all, just white lettering on grey. Unfortunately, a lot of BR period lettering / numbers come on black patches only and are of no use. Usually, I have to make them up out of individual letters and numbers via the HMRS sheets. It is very time consuming as opposed to waking a black patch on with lettering etc in place.

 

That's because you buy your transfers from the wrong supplier - very, very few of my transfers have a black patch, and I can supply a sheet black transfer material for that purpose; (see Sheet BL7 at https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm ).

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited June 14, 2020 by cctransuk

[Headstock]

3 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

That's because you buy your transfers from the wrong supplier - very, very few of my transfers have a black patch, and I can supply a sheet black transfer material for tha t purpose; (see Sheet BL7 at https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm ).

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

John,

 

I know you're right. being an 'on the cusp' modeler, pure BR liveries are a tiny percentage of the whole that I require. Being tiny, your list is a bit daunting in that respect. You may recall that we discussed the lettering on an ex GWR 6 wheel siphon some time back on this thread. Despite this being a BR era model, the script was pure GWR of some kind, for that reason I never pursued it, knowing that you are very much orientated towards BR graphics.

[cctransuk]

25 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

John,

 

I know you're right. being an 'on the cusp' modeler, pure BR liveries are a tiny percentage of the whole that I require. Being tiny, your list is a bit daunting in that respect. You may recall that we discussed the lettering on an ex GWR 6 wheel siphon some time back on this thread. Despite this being a BR era model, the script was pure GWR of some kind, for that reason I never pursued it, knowing that you are very much orientated towards BR graphics.

 

Whilst my transfer range is very largely BR era, there are a few GWR sheets in the C-prefix section at the end of the list.

 

Within the BR section, there are quite a number of early examples that make use of the ex-GWR script; particularly amongst the departmental wagon sheets.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[65179]

2 hours ago, jwealleans said:

Not a particular area of expertise of mine, Jesse, but this looks like the tender you've used:

 

 

These look more like what Andrew describes:

 

 

 

Pictures from Neil Dimmer's collection on SmugMug (click on images to link to the collection).

 

 

 

I think even the 'big' tender here is still a Pollitt rather than Robinson tender. The Pollitt 4000 gallon has a tender valance with curved ends (at the buffer beam end) and step plates which are straight. Look up thread and you'll see Robinson 4000 gallon tenders with step plates which curve inwards towards the outside frames and a straight tender balance without the curve down to the buffer beam. The coalrails/coalguards aren't necessarily indicative of a Robinson tender unfortunately, those Pollitt 4000 gallon tenders with curved ended coalguards tended to be swapped from passenger locos.

 

J10 details are a nightmare!

 

Edit: to add my brother's almost finished  J10. Note discrepancy between cab cutout and Pollitt 4000 gallon tender as a result of a tender swap.

 

 

 

Simon

Edited June 14, 2020 by 65179
Added photo

[Headstock]

14 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Whilst my transfer range is very largely BR era, there are a few GWR sheets in the C-prefix section at the end of the list.

 

Within the BR section, there are quite a number of early examples that make use of the ex-GWR script; particularly amongst the departmental wagon sheets.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

Thanks John,

 

that is very useful information to know.

[Headstock]

10 minutes ago, 65179 said:

 

I think even the 'big' tender here is still a Pollitt rather than Robinson tender. The Pollitt 4000 gallon has a tender valance with curved ends (at the buffer beam end) and step plates which are straight. Look up thread and you'll see Robinson 4000 gallon tenders with step plates which curve inwards towards the outside frames and a straight tender balance without the curve down to the buffer beam. The coalrails/coalguards aren't necessarily indicative of a Robinson tender unfortunately, those Pollitt 4000 gallon tenders with curved ended coalguards tended to be swapped from passenger locos.

 

J10 details are a nightmare!

 

Simon

 

Afternoon Simon,

 

it's also riveted.

[richard i]

Pollitt had rivets on show on tenders. Robinson preferred flush rivets so the tender side was smooth. If my observations are correct.

Richard

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

I can tell you haven't shut many smokebox doors. Why would you even do that, unless you were daft. 

Why would I ever have had necessity to shut a smokebox door?

 

I've never worked on the railway, not even as a volunteer on a preserved line.

 

My comment was merely speculative.

 

I'm sure, in all the collections of prototype photographs, there will be one example where a 'daft' fireman has set the inner handle to '12 o' clock'. 

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

No - it's there - hiding under the shadow, at 20-past.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

So it is!

 

Many thanks.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Jesse Sim]

37 minutes ago, 65179 said:

 

I think even the 'big' tender here is still a Pollitt rather than Robinson tender. The Pollitt 4000 gallon has a tender valance with curved ends (at the buffer beam end) and step plates which are straight. Look up thread and you'll see Robinson 4000 gallon tenders with step plates which curve inwards towards the outside frames and a straight tender balance without the curve down to the buffer beam. The coalrails/coalguards aren't necessarily indicative of a Robinson tender unfortunately, those Pollitt 4000 gallon tenders with curved ended coalguards tended to be swapped from passenger locos.

 

J10 details are a nightmare!

 

Simon

This might be a bit naughty of me, but when it’s running along the railway, you can’t really notice it. If it isn’t right, I think I’ll just live with it, I’m happy with it, even if it is only 50-70% right. 
 

i may get chewed up and thrown out of Wright Writes for that,  totally understandable

[Tony Wright]

Some wonderful observations on J10s.

 

Many thanks.

 

The few I saw were at the end of their days on the CLC, pottering around Chester Northgate. I was too young (or not bright enough) to note which tenders they towed.

 

 

This one is underlined in my 1957 Ian Allan abc Combined Volume. Definitely a smaller tender.

 

When my elder son was 15 (almost a quarter of a century ago!) he asked me if he could build a loco kit. Thus, I handed over a Magna Models J10; very basic, and with no chassis. However, if he messed it up, not much would be lost.

 

He didn't mess it up....................

 

 

 

 

 

Granted, the chances of a Manchester-allocated J10 (or any J10) shunting on Little Bytham would be remote (though other ex-GC locos did appear from time to time), but it's such a pretty little loco that it's used occasionally. 

 

It's certainly lacking in detail (rivets, brakes, etc) but it's definitely a J10. 

 

I assisted him in scratch-building the frames, but the rest his all his work. He extended the height of the side coal plates on the tender. 

 

How he's arranged the smokebox door fastening is obviously daft! 

 

When I look back to what I was making at 15 years of age, this is light years beyond that.  

 

 

[Headstock]

18 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Why would I ever have had necessity to shut a smokebox door?

 

I've never worked on the railway, not even as a volunteer on a preserved line.

 

My comment was merely speculative.

 

I'm sure, in all the collections of prototype photographs, there will be one example where a 'daft' fireman has set the inner handle to '12 o' clock'. 

 

Thanks Tony,

 

When you find it, I look forwards to the it appearing as a model on LB, perhaps with a suitably burnt smoke box door. Although, I have seen a locomotive trundling around an exhibition layout with the smokebox door ajar, I'm not sure if a prototypical photograph would be found for that one.

[Erichill16]

Regarding the J10, I think the size of the cab side cut outs are not the same. Look at their relationship with hand rails in the pictures. This may effect the look of the tender.

regards Robert