micklner Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Thanks Mike !!!, I thought you suggested Humbrol Leather in the past but I couldnt find the thread hence the request ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeTrice Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Thanks Mike !!!, I thought you suggested Humbrol Leather in the past but I couldnt find the thread hence the request ! Matt 62 is Leather Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Due to the darker beading, it is unfortunate that the Thompson's have been given a livery more akin to that applied to flush-sided steel stock before the war. As Mike shows in one of his pictures, the graining was in panels but with no borders save for natural door gaps. I cannot see any way of correcting the Hornby teak, which is a pity. I used darker beading on Gresley wood panelled stock because it sometimes goes this way with age, plus it is a useful foil when no primrose lining is present. The model below shows post-war Thompson livery skilfully applied by pro painter Dave Studely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeTrice Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 A couple of cruel enlargements: Yes, the solebar colour is slightly redder than previous shades used. The top waist panel is too short (being similar to the original incorrect Gresley Corridor coaches) resulting in the "1" looking cramped. Interesting to note the rounded corners to the graining on the droplights which is not really visible, except in magnification. Note the windows have square corners rather than the rounded corners that feature on the BR Crimson versions. To my mind the "1" in the window looks a tad wide. This must be the most expensive RTR coach I have ever bought! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nimbus Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Interesting to note the rounded corners to the graining on the droplights which is not really visible, except in magnification. Looks like the tampo pad couldn't squeeze into the corners of the droplight recesses. But that's 'pushing the envelope' for you. I've no need to get heated, as the next batch of BR liveries are what I'll buy. The Nim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
60800 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I'm rather disappointed to see what is effectively a page and a half of this coach being sl###ed off. If you want a better teak effect then go and paint one yourself - the bordering is no issue to me. I saw one in the shop at Grosmont yesterday and immediately snapped it up. The mock teak effect is lovely and provides a great contrast to that of the Gresley teaks - we wouldn't want this little beauty to merely mix in now, would we? To me, this is the best piece of carriage stock that's ever been produced on the RTR market, and the only thing that has the potential to top it is Bachmann's new gangwayed stock. I for one will do nothing beyond weathering the frames on mine and will keep a dusting brush handy whenever it's out. I'm eagerly awaiting the brake to appear Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-BOAF Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Couldn't resist seeing what 4 LNER coaches looked like together. Not brilliant focusing. Of note is that the Gresleys have significant differences in their teak, with the buffet being much more 'honey' in tone than the BCK, which has more grain. The CL stands out for its lack of beading, and yes the base colour does look different, but I concur with Blackout that it would have been odd if it had matched the real teaks exactly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I'm rather disappointed to see what is effectively a page and a half of this coach being sl###ed off. If you want a better teak effect then go and paint one yourself - the bordering is no issue to me. Funny innit, but we come on here to say how the real teak livery was applied to real Thompson coaches and we're accused of slaggging off the model. If you are happy, then fine. But remember that RMweb is not all amateurs (yet), and if it means knowledgeable members should not speak up now, then this forum has changed direction since I joined in 2007. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Barry O Posted July 21, 2013 RMweb Premium Share Posted July 21, 2013 difficult to reproduce teak when the real thing is so variable I have tried to reproduce a "teak finish" on some real coach interiors using a scumble paint and its is not easy to do. Not sure also how long the effect lasts for - and it definitely ends up being different every panel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 The Hornby version falls down due to every panel being the same colour . No two panels should be exaclty the same on any teak coach ,adding to the problem are the panel lines which are grossly exagerated on a macro lens and the prototypes lack of beading . Yet to see one in the "flesh". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
60800 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 The Hornby version falls down due to every panel being the same colour . Perhaps it could be altered with weathering paints / powders to produce variations in panels. It's understandable if Hornby simply cannot provide further panel variation and a modest (?) RRP. The problem arises with how many more separate layers would have to be printed. The problem then arises that every single coach of each batch would have an identical panel pattern that would be significantly more noticeable than what's been done Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I'm rather disappointed to see what is effectively a page and a half of this coach being sl###ed off. Given the people commenting, I'd personally listen to them! They know what they're on about! If you want a better teak effect then go and paint one yourself I reckon Larry could give it a go! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
C7/2 732 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I've only seen photographs of them, but for me it doesn't seem to stand out like the Gresley teak finish did, granted I know they aren't the same. I don't need any mind as I model pre war. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 I've only seen photographs of them, but for me it doesn't seem to stand out like the Gresley teak finish did. This is it in a nutshell. I'm afraid uploading pictures of Gresley wood panelled coaches lends nothing to the debate on how Thompson steel sided coaches were grained. I have not seen evidence of darker panelling applied to the real Thompsons, and so in effect Hornby has given the Thompsons the same treatment it gave to its Gresley wooden coaches. The trouble lies in attempting to correct Hornby's mistake....It seems an impossible task. Funnily enough, It would have been a simpler livery had it been done right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
C7/2 732 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Hello Coachman. I've been an admirer of your work for some time. What I meant was when Hornby did their teak finish on the Gresley Non Corridors, it seemed far better and closer to the prototype than it does on these Thompsons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
60800 Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Sure, sure, shoot me down when I'm backing up the manufacturer. It's stifling, so I'm leaving. Don't expect anything on here from me again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbedford Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Well that sounds like a philosopher's strike…………. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
C7/2 732 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 Sure, sure, shoot me down when I'm backing up the manufacturer. It's stifling, so I'm leaving. Don't expect anything on here from me again I'm sure you mean well, but nobody is shooting you down. If something is wrong with the product isn't it fair it's discussed, plus what happened to freedom of speech? A number of people who have posted are generally experts in their fields. Just because you think it's great, doesn't mean everyone else will. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeTrice Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 Saw full thirds in Ian Allan at Waterloo this lunch time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obadiah Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 I, as a rule, do not indulge in the posts concerning whether or not something is correctly finished, however on this occasion please permit me to make the following observations concerning the LNER teak and ersatz teak finishes. With the wooden teak bodies the colours of the panels varied to quite a degree, even when built, as the quality and colour of the timber used was not completely constant, and other influences such as seasoning of the timber all had an effect on the overall finish. Once in service the panels quickly became dirty, and the varnishes of the period aged quite quickly. On subsequent overhauls the panels where either replaced, cleaned and re-varnished, but the coaches were never completely restored exactly to an as built appearance. A visit to any preserved line that has Gresley stock running will show quite a few colour and tone variations, even on the same vehicle, and the lines concerned usually look after the stock really well. On the ersatz teak LNER coaches, the finish depended to a great extent on the painters skill, and the particular mix of paint being used. Thereafter age, dirt, and on the Thompson stock, rust, all affected the colour over a period of time, and re-varnishing compounded the changes of hue. Who can say at this remove what the true colour might have been, you have to be around eighty years old to have seen them with the personal mark one eyeball, and colour pictures of the time are subject to emulsions of the period (i.e Dufy film). Do the coaches look the business, yes, do the generally please the eye, yes, and are they better than anything that has gone before, yes. Can’t say better than that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matabiau Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 Surely the "false" teak Thompsons would have been far more homogenous than the "real" teak Gresleys? Unless the panels were repainted individually as and when required the steel Thompsons would have had a uniform paint job with the only perceptible variation being due to external weathering differences and not due to replacement panels as in the case of the wooden Gresleys? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 I, as a rule, do not indulge in the posts concerning whether or not something is correctly finished, however on this occasion please permit me to make the following observations concerning the LNER teak and ersatz teak finishes. With the wooden teak bodies the colours of the panels varied to quite a degree, even when built, as the quality and colour of the timber used was not completely constant, and other influences such as seasoning of the timber all had an effect on the overall finish. Once in service the panels quickly became dirty, and the varnishes of the period aged quite quickly. On subsequent overhauls the panels where either replaced, cleaned and re-varnished, but the coaches were never completely restored exactly to an as built appearance. A visit to any preserved line that has Gresley stock running will show quite a few colour and tone variations, even on the same vehicle, and the lines concerned usually look after the stock really well. On the ersatz teak LNER coaches, the finish depended to a great extent on the painters skill, and the particular mix of paint being used. Thereafter age, dirt, and on the Thompson stock, rust, all affected the colour over a period of time, and re-varnishing compounded the changes of hue. Who can say at this remove what the true colour might have been, you have to be around eighty years old to have seen them with the personal mark one eyeball, and colour pictures of the time are subject to emulsions of the period (i.e Dufy film). Do the coaches look the business, yes, do the generally please the eye, yes, and are they better than anything that has gone before, yes. Can’t say better than that. People are consistently missing the point. Hue, colour or whatever is not the question nor should it be the debate. It is the darker 'panelling' that Hornby has chosen to put down door frames and around windows. The Thompson coaches carried a completely different style than pre-war and did not attempt to emulate pre-war wood panelled coaches as the prewar 'all-steel' coaches had done. The post-war teak livery on Thompson coaches was laid out like marquetry with perhaps a very fine line between the mock panels. From a distance it looked plain. I have illustrated this point with a model of a corridor coach. The Thompsons do not look the business...They are simply wrong. If they are pleasing to the eye, then that is a different matter and has nothing to do with historial accuracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 Another example no idea if this is correct https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=thompson+teak+coach&client=firefox-a&hs=bPU&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=LMzyUbr_DMuS0QWmmIGYAQ&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1525&bih=689#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=XOctZrsk9m89yM%3A%3BGinGU3wJGn-7DM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.srpsmuseum.org.uk%252Fimages%252F10077%252F10077.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.srpsmuseum.org.uk%252F10077.htm%3B600%3B400 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachmann Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 Ignoring hue, colour, shade etc., hope these rough illustration explain things better than words. Hornby has put the Gresley finish on the Thompson models... Lined out teak.... Unlined gresley wooden non-corridor coaches..... Postwar teak on Thompson corridor and non-corridor coaches..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Reid Posted July 26, 2013 Share Posted July 26, 2013 Larry correctly sums it up with "they are simply wrong". No academic (for that's all they can be lest we have say coachbuilders or carriage painters with a photographic memory from the 1930s in our midst) statements about how this or that was produced will make them any less so, and neither will comparison with modern restorations. Representation of a paint finish will always be problematic however there's no escaping the fact here that the framing of the panels as represented on the model by Hornby was not present on the vehicles as built or after later refinishing. Having worked with some fine ex-LNER coachbuilders & painters I'm sure they'd have been equally disappointed whilst still recognising the quality of the models. (Obviously) not on a suburban coach but here's a fine example of how it should have looked)...... http://www.flickr.com/photos/irishswissernie/6564605867/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.