James Harrison

Some further thoughts and a few numbers on the transition from brown and cream to teak livery. Jenkinson in 'British Railway Carriages of the 20th Century, Volume 1' gives an interesting table on page 86 of numbers of passenger rated coaching stock in 1901, 1911 and 1921. Let's look at just the passenger-carrying vehicles (so we're excluding non-passenger coaching stock). In 1901 the GCR had 998 carriages. By 1911 this had increased to 1489. So 1489 - 998 = 491 carriages. I'll average this out at an increase of 49 carriages per year- considering that several large orders were put into external builders in 1903 - 05 and then everything calmed down until the Barnums and matchboard stock started in 1910 this is unlikely but for my purposes it seems a reasonable approximation. By 1921 this figure stood at 1694 carriages. 1694 - 1489 / 10 = 20 carriages per year. The decision to switch from brown and cream to teak was taken in November 1908. So 7 years increase in stock at 49 per annum since 1901 = 343 for a total of 988 + 343 = 1,331. Now, granted, some of that new stock might be replacements for existing vehicles rather than a material increase in its own right. I don't have exact figures for how much stock was scrapped between 1901 and 1908, but if we say that it was probably expected to have something like a 30-year service life (similar to the lifespans of later pre-grouping, grouping and BR standard stock) then we're saying by 1908 that anything predating 1879 had been withdrawn and scrapped. So the question then becomes how many carriages were 30 years old in 1908. If you say the turnover rate was 20% then we're saying (1331 * 0.2) = 266 vehicles were scrapped. Is this realistic? - well it sounds quite high to me (especially considering the GC were in a financial tight spot and would probably be trying to keep their older carriages in service for as long as possible). Then again I don't have stock books so I can't really comment. Scratch that. The table simply says '1901 = x and 1911 = y' so has already considered withdrawals. So with some caveats I cautiously estimate that as of 1908 the GC had 1331 passenger carriages to refinish into teak livery. Naturally all of these could not be repainted at once, also the carriage works is trying to repaint existing stock at the same time as trying to complete new vehicles. Add in, too, that around 1908 - 1910 the carriage and wagon works are being relocated from Gorton to Dukinfield, with all the upheaval that that would have entailed. However in a limited way Dukinfield went 'live' in 1908 so I will assume the paintshop opened prior to the switch. So what would the paintshop capacity be? Considering the new Dukinfield paintshop was part of one building also containing the new erecting shop and several other functions, I can't see that it would be more than a few sidings and platforms. Maybe enough space to deal with 30 vehicles in one go. Jenkinson handily says (page 83) that a turnaround of three weeks could reasonably be expected to repaint a carriage. Let's assume that Dukinfield threw out its stocks of brown and cream paint as soon as the decision was taken in November 1908 and began repainting existing stock just as quickly as it could. Let's also say that carriages were taken in in batches every three weeks, and that each batch was a mixture of new build stock and existing. At 49 carriages per year that's 49 / 52 * 3 = 2.8 new carriages in each batch. Say 3 new carriages per batch. So in December 1908, through 1909 and 1910 every three weeks, 27 old carriages are being released to service in teak. This assumes of course that none of the 1331 vehicles are in fact coming due for replacement. 52 weeks x 2 years + 4 weeks (December 1908) = 108 weeks, / 3 weeks = 36 batches at 27 vehicles a time = 972. So by my reckoning, January 1911 saw 1331 - 972 = 359 carriages still in brown and cream. Remember I mentioned above 20 new carriages per year after 1911? 20 / 52 * 3 = 1.15, say 1 new carriage in every painting batch from January 1911 onward. So that's now 29 existing carriages per batch. 359/ 29 = 12 batches, or 36 weeks. So GCR brown and cream could have been gone by September / October 1911. Now you can see there are a fair few assumptions I've taken here, and I'm sure someone will point out 'but you haven't considered x/y/z and that could affect your date' - and if they have additional data then I'd be very interested. But the interesting thing is that working it out numerically from rough estimates and assumptions seems to match tolerably closely with the photographic record (at least that bit of it that has been published and that I have seen) that broadly suggests a period around 1910 where the coaching stock quite quickly switched from being mostly brown and cream to wholly teak. Is it possible the brown and cream survived longer? Yes, absolutely so. 1. The published photographic record concentrates on the London Extension, which was given the newest and most up-to-date stock. It's entirely possible, in fact probable, that in the areas where older stock was relegated (such as Sheffield and Lincolshire), brown and cream hung around longer. 2. If there were significant stocks of paint in the shops, would these have been written off and thrown out? Maybe, maybe not. If not, then it could push back the start of the switchover by a few months. 3. One of my main assumptions is that the switchover prompted a mass repainting exercise. If what actually happened was stock was repainted as it happened to pass through the works for repairs and maintenance, or when it came due for a repaint, the old colours could have lasted until around 1913/ 1914 - perhaps longer considering the outbreak of WWI - taking a lifespan of five years for the paint and varnish. So what am I saying here? It is probably unlikely that front line post-1910 motive power (Directors, Sam Fays et al) actually hauled brown and cream stock - at least on expresses on the principal GCR mainlines. However, it is possible that the brown and cream livery overlapped with the introduction dates of those classes. Certainly I don't think the lack of a definite photograph showing a post-1910 locomotive alongside brown and cream stock is definitive proof that it didn't happen.

Well, that's the first practice piece approaching done; It's funny how despite it having absolutely no GCR provenance about it at all, it still wears the livery surprisingly well.

I could get R3 to work, but with R2 the buffers started locking.

It was seeing the Genesis carriages fitted with up the Accurascale chauldron magnetic couplings that prodded my own experiment, so if you did imagine them it would have been in the nature of a group hallucination :D If I remember rightly those couplings are also limited by the length of the buffer shanks?

Cross Post from the Hattons Genesis thread; I've fitted my rake of 7 six-wheelers with Hornby R7399 20mm magnetic couplers this evening. Analysis; it was a simple swap-over and it massively improved the appearance. However; because the buffers are unsprung I think they are now route-limited to 3rd radius curves or better. Possibly 2nd radius at dead slow but in my experience this evening I got buffer locking. When I do get around to repainting these, I think I'm also going to look into fitting sprung buffers.

I've spent a fairly angst-free half hour this evening fitting my rake of 7 up with Hornby R7399 20mm magnetic couplers. Conclusions; this really improved the look of the carriages. However, it also effectively limits them to 3rd radius curves or better. And even then the buffers on the inside are kissing. 2nd radius you might get around at dead slow, but buffer lock is almost certain. I think sprung buffers would have been a good idea for those if us who go looking for alternatives to train set couplers but don't have room for 5 or 6 foot radius curves. I think when I get around to the repaint I'm planning I'll retrofit sprung buffers too.

Sorely sorely sorely tempted, it would look nice paired with the Met Bo-Bo. Which of the Metropolitan liveries should I be looking at for the early 1920s?

So, current state of various things; - Hattons Genesis carriages - safely stored away in their shipping box, these will be guinea pigs of a sort because I'm trying to find an alternative to tension lock couplings. I'm looking at three links for freight stock and I was starting to use Kadees on the passenger side but the vacuum pipe lookalike magnetic type have also caught my eye. So I'm going to try those out on these carriages. I want to get more practice in, before I repaint them, so.... - Mainline 57' panelled stock - I was looking for cheap second hand carriages I could practice repainting and lining on, and I found a rake of three of these. So they'll be going into GCR brown and cream. I'm under no illusion that they're anything like GCR carriages (though if you scrape the panelling off and scribe matchboarding on they do look vaguely like post-1910 stock), but if they come out OK they might see use as generic layout stock. Dimensionally they're a few feet longer than the corridor stock the GC bought/ built in the early 1900s (53' versus 57') and although the panelling looks similar the windows are considerably different, and I think the roof profile differs too. - Decision has been made for bogie non-corridor stock to standardise on Triang/ Hornby short clerestories. The Ratio suburban kits I've got (new-old, second hand kits) I've decided are going to be too much work to build satisfactorily. - I've sketched out an island platform option for Red Lion Square that in layout looks rather like Birmingham Moor Street, or Kidderminster Town. I think I prefer it to my Marylebone-derived version, partly because of a particularly elegant flow to the station throat (including twin-track junction to the single track branch) and because I think visually there will be better balance between passenger and freight provision.

My understanding is that the GNR carriage livery was always teak, but I'd heavily caveat that by saying the GNR isn't my particular pre-grouping railway of interest and that I've not made any great study of GNR rolling stock. All I can say is that every photograph or painting I've seen of GNR carriages, shows them to have been teak of some description. To expand on Compound's reply about the likelihood of a 1903 livery surviving to 1923, my comment about the GCR carriage livery was written in the context of my recently having gone through my (fairly comprehensive) library of GCR books to try and pin down a date when the later brown and cream livery was phased out (Dow states that the switch to teak was formalised in November / December 1908 and that it took a few years for the new teak livery to really take hold). My findings from that exercise are that brown and cream appears in photographs as late as 1910 - but after that I haven't seen anything (even for 6 wheel stock) that could definitely be said to be anything other than teak (there are one or two I came across from 1911 which could be two-tone livery, but could equally well be light playing tricks with mouldings, and - as it usually is - the carriages in question are out of focus and at the rear of the train). So if my researches to date suggest that the pre-1908 livery had gone by 1910, I don't see how the pre-1903 livery could be hanging around 20 years later.

Your GCR full brake would be long in the tooth indeed if still sporting the 1897 - 1903 livery in LNER days.

I thought I had an issue with the springing of the bogie on mine, as it seemed very stiff and when placed on a level surface the bogie seemed to be trying to do an SMS Derfflinger impression (I'm exagerrating slightly but it was definitely trying to capsize). Turned out the lead wheelset wasn't fully inserted into the bogie and was skewiff and wedged between the bogie frames. I was able to rectify this by delicately but firmly pushing it home until it clicked, and that solved the problem.

It's been an expensive few weeks. - I've bought a pair of 3D printed matchboard carriages; - My pre-order for the Sonic Models 9N arrived; - My pre-order for 7 Hattons Genesis carriages arrived. I would love to say that the Genesis carriages are the GCR examples, but unfortunately they wouldn't be any use to me, being in the pre-1903 livery. Personally I think GCR brown and cream or teak would be a better bet, however I can also see the argument that the one livery is too similar to GWR and the other too close to GNR/ LNER/ LBSC. So I've got a nice repainting job on my hands. I also think I'm erring toward a layout that can be operated both circa 1910 and circa 1920, I've certainly got enough stock to do it.

A good idea, and I've just emailed them to make them aware of it.

My GCR green example arrived today and it is a very, very pretty thing indeed. However, because I was at work and therefore out of the house I came home to a note through my door that it was 'over the side gate' - a 6' drop onto slabs... Luckily there doesn't appear to have been any damage (I was very impressed with how well-packed it was), but maybe a 'fragile' sticker on the parcel would be a good idea? I'd have sooner had to wait another few days to pick it up from the local sorting office than have had to send it back for replacement.

Perfectly timed to coincide with the GCR Coronation Tank landing too. I go months without spending anything on chuff and then blow £400 in two days 😄

If you rub some vaseline into your eyes, and you squint, and you're on a galloping horse maybe only fifteen miles away, the one does look like the other. Or maybe I need to go to Specsavers.

I found exactly the same laying out Harestone with Peco Streamline. Also the CLC-inspired loco shed scene in the same book seems to use, shall we say, 7/8 size turnouts.

Might be worth a shot, as I do rather baulk at the money potentially wasted on these otherwise.

Well, not quite all is lost it seems. I'd got an old Triang clerestory (one of those where the bogies are rivetted into the bodywork and the wheels are more like cookie cutters), with a bit of care after breaking up the Ratio wreck I've found it's possible to transplant the Ratio bogies. The Ratio roof is a bit too wide - or the Triang body is a bit too narrow - but I think I can sort that out. Then there are of course bits like the ventilators and the vacuum pipes that can still find use. So it's only the sides, the ends and the floor of the Ratio kit that are bound for the scrapheap (in other words, about 90% of the kit). Broadly I think I'll be to get a useable arc-roofed carriage out of the best bits of the two.

I think I'm one of those headed for the basket. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Cmq6pkr_oME/XefjhK_28tI/AAAAAAADrTs/3TF7RKpDZoAkyZn8NdvXo6I_maYvuYQ8ACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/female-krampus-cards-3.jpg

In the end, that's exactly what I did. I then found that the body was so warped that it wouldn't sit on the chassis correctly... I know this is a very old example of the kit, but I doubt it could have been built successfully when new. Parts are either badly moulded, or warped, or bent. This being one of a job lot of six that I bought, I've had a look at three of the others and conclude that of those three - One looks like it could be acceptable - One looks like it 'might' be buildable - One has both warped floor and sides, rendering it unuseable. I think the conclusion I'm drawing from this is if I want to use these kits for rolling stock, I need to buy brand new rather than second hand or new-old stock. That way if it's warped to the point of being unbuildable I've at least got a route to recompense. That said though to be honest this kit has been such a dog that it's made me reconsider using them. I'm now thinking of either 1. Buying up Traing/ Hornby short clerestories and standardising on those (using the roof profile from the Ratio kits on some of them) 2. Biting the bullet and buying 3D printed GCR non-corridor stock 3. Hoping that somebody announces suitable generic early 1900s bogie stock.

Tongue very firmly in cheek... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland

There's a difference between paint applied as a protective measure and that applied for aesthetic purposes. An example of untouched pre-1920s steel that we can go and look at today is the so-called 'Big Piece' of the Titanic, which was brought up in the 1990s. And on that you can still find traces of red lead paint that was applied as a preservative prior to the final colour finish coats.

I did consider that and I think it's probably how I'll end up solving the issue, my only concern is making sure the seating and bulkheads line up with the windows and doors. The other problem I've got is that I've fitted the bufferbeams to the body ends and fitted the couplings to the bufferbeams (this is another one I've fitted up with three links). I'm sure you can see the problem, the back of the couplings stops the body fitting over the floor. I'm reluctant to remove the couplings because they were a pain in the proverbial to assemble and fit in the first place (before I realised the sides were twisted). I want to have a good think about this before I start tearing couplings and bufferbeams off because I'll then have to refit them, around and about the solebars and the bogies. Hmmm. Another month or two on the roundtoit shelf beckons.

I've pushed on a little further with the old Ratio carriage that was intended to be my first foray into the pre-1910 scene. You may recall that this stalled because the sides were a bit warped. I've found that by assembling the body and firmly gluing the roof down, this has all straightened back up. The problem now of course is having had to do that, getting an interior fitted. Also slightly complicated by my fitting strips of plastic 'L' section inside the body to try to straighten it out. It's a problem that I think I can look at another time. Other news, I've started slowly buying up the medium radius bullhead points I'll need for the Marylebone-esque version of the trackplan. At the rate of maybe one or two a month, I'm hoping that by the time I've bought what I need, Peco will have announced a bullhead three-way point. Even if then does need the better part of a decade to actually make it to production. I'm expecting that for the curved points, I'll be able to take advantage of the flexible nature of the long radius bullhead turnouts.