A Nod To Brent - a friendly thread, filled with frivolity, cream teas and pasties. Longing for the happy days in the South Hams 1947.

[St Enodoc]

4 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Must be identity time because:

Is this a Hawksworth all 3rd? It is an old Comet Build that was in GWR Livery and well built but badly painted , that I found in a box of so called junk I bought on Ebay. The other stuff really was junk but I shall finish prepping this and paint it maroon with appropriate finish. I have an all 3rd built for Geoff Brewin (RIP), so I have a visual aid to work from. Roof Gutter to start with as this is flush sided at the moment.

I will gladly accept any advice on further details too. The Chassis/UF is sound and the Bogies are very tidy and run freely. The interior is basic Comet bits but I will tart that up; might even fit some passengers!

Thanks for your time all and prayers for my old City tonight. The shootings took place exactly where the old SR Viaduct used to cross over the main road (below the Close where it took place, to arrive at Ford Station, heading for St. Budeaux.

Phil

Definitely a Hawksworth all-third to diagram C82 or C84 (perhaps @Miss Prism can tell the difference?) but for some reason it's numbered as an E163 composite.

[gwrrob]

Some more this morning featuring 4012 Knight of the Thistle.

[Mallard60022]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Definitely a Hawksworth all-third to diagram C82 or C84 (perhaps @Miss Prism can tell the difference?) but for some reason it's numbered as an E163 composite.

Thanks matey, yes that's weird but the source was a bit weird too!! There were three others in the package; old wood and flat plastic side kits from the 60s I should think? Horrible things and paint jobs were crap. I was thinking I might get some Comet sides but need to assess the faff against the CBA factors! Typical sad RIP stuff being fobbed off by some dealer that knows nowt. But I did get a decent Comet build for half the price of an unbuilt kit so it turned out to be a bit of a bargain!!! I'm not that fussed about accuracy if only minute differences as it will appear only once in a blue moon, on a Diversion or Holiday, Footy or some sort of Special.

ATB

Phil

 

[Mallard60022]

11 hours ago, bgman said:

Here's something to watch for them as likes Spam ( there my be one or two ? )

 

 

The way in which this chap synchronises actual sounds to the models is something else.

 

G

Grief. Even I can have too many Spams in a short time.

[Miss Prism]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Definitely a Hawksworth all-third to diagram C82 or C84 (perhaps @Miss Prism can tell the difference?) 

 

Most books (which I haven't got with me currently) tend to treat C82 and C84 as the same thing. Maybe it's just an underframe difference? If anyone has GW coaches appendix Volume One handy, that might have the clue.

 

Edited August 14, 2021 by Miss Prism

[BMacdermott]

Final Call for Votes

 

GWR 00 Rolling Stock Mini-Poll No.9:                                   

The Case for a Select Few Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights 

 

Hello everyone

 

A reminder that the 'Polling Station' closes at 1700 today with Results expected tomorrow.

 

If you haven't already voted, please do so - we are hoping for a 'record turnout' on this one! The more voters, the more positive the case!

 

Please see page 1680 for details.

 

Brian

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

I have copied relevant coaching stock widths pages from the LMS General Appendix to the Working Time Tables, March 1937 tfn to the attached PDF for those who are interested in such matters. GWR stock is there.

 

Brian

LMS General Appendix to the Working Time Tables March 1937 tfn (Brian Macdermott).pdf

[BMacdermott]

Hello everyone

 

In GW Coaches Appendix, Vol 1, the author shows the dimensions of C84 with the note 'identical to C82'  in parentheses.

 

Brian

[Nick Gough]

27 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

 

Most books (which I haven't got with me currently) tend to treat C82 and C84 as the same thing. Maybe it's just an underframe difference? If anyone has GW coaches appendix Volume One handy, that might have the clue.

 

 

If I recall correctly (I'm away from my books) the differences were in the materials used for constructing the interiors.

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Miss Prism said:

 

Most books (which I haven't got with me currently) tend to treat C82 and C84 as the same thing. Maybe it's just an underframe difference? If anyone has GW coaches appendix Volume One handy, that might have the clue.

 

I have, and it doesn't. Nor does Russell Part 2, which simply states (with reference to C84):

 

"There was very little difference between this series and those of C82".

 

 

[Mallard60022]

5 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I have, and it doesn't. Nor does Russell Part 2, which simply states (with reference to C84):

"There was very little difference between this series and those of C82".

Been looking into this and yes, it was minor detail as with others such as the CK, BSK and BCKs. Seemed to be just the later date builds! FK seemingly there were only 3! I may have missed a bunch of course! Been fun looking. I see the RTR version are still over £30+ so I have stripped the sides off the really old things I was going to Dump: BSK, BCK and CK I think it is but maybe another SK; need to check the innards. Thinking of using Comet sides and some fettling bits to produce 3 more coaches for the price on 1 new RTR version. OK it means some work and painting but  hey, Autumn is approaching!

Thanks for all the info chaps and apologies Rob for the hijack.

Phil

[The Stationmaster]

On 13/08/2021 at 16:35, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Mike

 

Some were 69ft 11.3/4in x 8ft 11.1/4in.

 

Brian

Sorry Brian - I thought we were talking about the Option 1 '60 foot' vehicles.  Most 70 footers were quite restricted even on the GWR where they were basically limited to main line (and not necessarily all of them depending on their width over handles) however some were allowed over limited parts of former LNWR lines beyond Crewe.   Incidentally following a couple of coaches coming into contact with each other painted dimensions were altered to show the width over handles and not the body width.

 

On 13/08/2021 at 17:06, Miss Prism said:

Toplights were 9'5" over handles. I don't think such a width barred them from many lines, but the length was a factor - I can't recall seeing a pic of a 70' Toplight off GWR territory.

The restrictions which applied to the '60 foot vehicles measuring 9ft 5" over door handles were relaxed for other Companies/Regions lines several times over a 20 year period from 1936 onwards  thus the places they were allowed to work to gradually increased every time.

[BMacdermott]

Results - GWR 00 Rolling Stock Mini-Poll No.9:                                   

The Case for a Select Few Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights                                                  

 

Hello everyone

 

I am delighted to say that all 36 respondents voted ‘in favour’ of our suggestions of…

 

56ft 11¼in Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights:

• Diag.C32 Third
• Diag.D56 Brake Third
• Diag.E98 Composite
• Diag.K22 Passenger Brake Van

Caveats

• 3 voters would prefer earlier than our suggested 1927/8 liveries onwards
• 2 voters said they might not buy the K22
• 1 voter said they might buy just the K22
• 1 voter said they would like a BCK as well (but that would mean an additional underframe size)

We will send the Case Notes, Results and Comments Received to at least three manufacturers.

 

However, as I am ‘ahead of schedule’ with Results publication, I will hold off sending until Monday so that I can add any relevant comments you may have been now and early Monday.

 

Brian (on behalf of John, Chris & Ian)

(Note: These are ‘informal Polls for fun’ on Rob’s thread only and neither RMweb nor The 00 Wishlist Poll Team are specifically involved, apart from Brian, John, Chris and Ian in our ‘personal capacities’.)

 

 

GWR Mini-Poll No.9 The Case for a Select Few Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights Comments Received.pdf

[BMacdermott]

Thanks Mike

 

The subject of  'lengths and widths' is a vexed one!

 

Brian

[The Stationmaster]

Just now, BMacdermott said:

Thanks Mike

 

The subject of  'lengths and widths' is a vexed one!

 

Brian

Yes - with considerable lack of detail at times (albeit sometimes corrected in later years) as to whether the width is 'over body' or 'over handles' or (much more rarely but apparent in a few  restrictions) 'over projections'.  Length usually seems to be based on 'over buffers.  At least drawings usually show what dimensions apply to but lists of restrictions frequently didn't.

[gwrrob]

Some small prairie action as 4547 attaches a grubby SR PLV to the B set before departing for Kingsbridge.

 

[Miss Prism]

53 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

The restrictions which applied to the '60 foot vehicles measuring 9ft 5" over door handles were relaxed for other Companies/Regions lines several times over a 20 year period from 1936 onwards  thus the places they were allowed to work to gradually increased every time.

 

That's interesting, but Toplights were in decline after 1936 and the 20 year period beyond that, during which era Collett 57'-60' general stock would have been suitable and more common for use on some other lines.

[The Stationmaster]

5 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

 

That's interesting, but Toplights were in decline after 1936 and the 20 year period beyond that, during which era Collett 57'-60' general stock would have been suitable and more common for use on some other lines.

But even  as late as 1958 still with a considerable number of vehicle dimensional variants listed there were apparent ambiguities such as it being far from clear in the Supplements if what are referred to as 'Cross Country dimensions' (clearly not Toplights) and with two different vehicle lengths are actually Yellow Disc vehicles or C1 restriction - or indeed what 'Cross Country dimensions' actually meant apart from it boiling down to mean able to go to a lot of places including branches. It's all very much trying to hit a constantly moving target although it was a lot clearer back in 1920.

[St Enodoc]

9 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

I see the RTR version are still over £30+

Crimson and cream Hawksworths are £29.99 from Kernow at the moment.

 

Usual disclaimer.

[Oldddudders]

3 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Crimson and cream Hawksworths are £29.99 from Kernow at the moment.

And very nice vehicles they are, too. I bought three to run behind my Dapol 43xx and find them most attractive. 

[Neal Ball]

12 hours ago, BMacdermott said:

Results - GWR 00 Rolling Stock Mini-Poll No.9:                                   

The Case for a Select Few Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights                                                  

 

Hello everyone

 

I am delighted to say that all 36 respondents voted ‘in favour’ of our suggestions of…

 

56ft 11¼in Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights:

• Diag.C32 Third
• Diag.D56 Brake Third
• Diag.E98 Composite
• Diag.K22 Passenger Brake Van

Caveats

• 3 voters would prefer earlier than our suggested 1927/8 liveries onwards
• 2 voters said they might not buy the K22
• 1 voter said they might buy just the K22
• 1 voter said they would like a BCK as well (but that would mean an additional underframe size)

We will send the Case Notes, Results and Comments Received to at least three manufacturers.

 

However, as I am ‘ahead of schedule’ with Results publication, I will hold off sending until Monday so that I can add any relevant comments you may have been now and early Monday.

 

Brian (on behalf of John, Chris & Ian)

(Note: These are ‘informal Polls for fun’ on Rob’s thread only and neither RMweb nor The 00 Wishlist Poll Team are specifically involved, apart from Brian, John, Chris and Ian in our ‘personal capacities’.)

 

 

GWR Mini-Poll No.9 The Case for a Select Few Steel Panelled Gangwayed Toplights Comments Received.pdf 122.33 kB · 6 downloads

Excellent poll thanks very much @BMacdermott. I wonder what the manufacturers will make of it.

 

I would have thought Bachmann are already working on a replacement set of carriages for their Sunshine stock…. 
 

That still leaves a possible 4 companies who might be interested…. Unless of course Toplights are what Bachmann are working on.

 

Thanks again for the poll.

[Miss Prism]

8 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

But even  as late as 1958 still with a considerable number of vehicle dimensional variants listed there were apparent ambiguities such as it being far from clear in the Supplements if what are referred to as 'Cross Country dimensions' (clearly not Toplights) and with two different vehicle lengths are actually Yellow Disc vehicles or C1 restriction - or indeed what 'Cross Country dimensions' actually meant apart from it boiling down to mean able to go to a lot of places including branches. It's all very much trying to hit a constantly moving target although it was a lot clearer back in 1920.

 

The 'Cross Country dimensions' are specific to a particular post-1930 cross-section, characterised by recessed grabs (to keep the waist width down) and a pronounced lean-in to the narrow cantrail. I don't think there was much of this type of stock, and it was probably earmarked for routes with particularly narrow loading gauges.

 

 

[BMacdermott]

8 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

But even  as late as 1958 still with a considerable number of vehicle dimensional variants listed there were apparent ambiguities such as it being far from clear in the Supplements if what are referred to as 'Cross Country dimensions' (clearly not Toplights) and with two different vehicle lengths are actually Yellow Disc vehicles or C1 restriction - or indeed what 'Cross Country dimensions' actually meant apart from it boiling down to mean able to go to a lot of places including branches. It's all very much trying to hit a constantly moving target although it was a lot clearer back in 1920.

 

Thanks Mike & Miss Prism

 

I'm not and haven't ever been 'a railwayman', but it seems to me that Appendixes often simply 'caught up' with what was happening on the ground. 

 

The subject of 'lengths & widths' is one which doesn't seem to bother many (as far as I  can tell).

 

I wonder how many modellers here have ever considered coaching stock length and width - and, perhaps, 'correct' gangway connectors etc. 

 

A future Mini-Poll perhaps? 

 

Brian

 

 

[5BarVT]

1 hour ago, BMacdermott said:

I wonder how many modellers here have ever considered coaching stock length and width

Probably not, but then most modellers are adding the landform around the track so can adjust the loading gauge to suit.

Paul.

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Thanks Mike & Miss Prism

 

I'm not and haven't ever been 'a railwayman', but it seems to me that Appendixes often simply 'caught up' with what was happening on the ground. 

 

The subject of 'lengths & widths' is one which doesn't seem to bother many (as far as I  can tell).

 

I wonder how many modellers here have ever considered coaching stock length and width - and, perhaps, 'correct' gangway connectors etc. 

 

A future Mini-Poll perhaps? 

 

Brian.

I once did a part build LMS Kitchen Car for Pendon (very enjoyable that was as well) and they didn't want the Comet parts fitted for the Gangways as they used Masokits ones. Same with the Chap from Kingstorre that I also did several part builds for years ago. I am told the Masokits ones are very realistic. Are they?

Other clients were not so particular as am I, unless they look really horrible!