MikeOxon

I was intrigued by the origin of the Danish word 'jul', until I realised that it's equivalent to 'yule'. 

I note that it's the same throughout Scandinavia, even making it into that often different language Finnish as 'joulu'. 

Passing the winter solstice must always be a cause of great joy in the far North - it's pretty good news here, too 😁

44 minutes ago, railroadbill said:

Glædelig jul og godt nytår

what he said (and I hope it's not rude 😄)

Mike

41 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Wonderful work, as others have said!

So nice to get a comment almost 10 years after I wrote the post - it seems to have stood the test of time 😀

12 hours ago, Mikkel said:

The basic principle with two flat-topped towers at the sides appeared in different shapes and forms at various locations:

It seems to have been a popular style at that period.  I grew up in Southport and had a nagging feeling that the style of the towers was familiar - I found the following on Wikimedia:

Pavilion Buildings, built in the 1870s as a Luxury Hotel at the southern end of the main Lord Street thoroughfare.

Source From geograph.org.uk  Author Gerald England Attribution (required by the license) Gerald England / Pavilion Buildings, Southport / CC BY-SA 2.0

This is a real tour de force, although I felt quite exhausted just reading about it.  All that detailing of the string courses, buttresses, finials etc!

I hope you will take a very well-earned break for Christmas 🙂

Mike

12 minutes ago, David Bigcheeseplant said:

Nothing unusual about the bricks between the window they are queen closures

Thank you for the info. - my knowledge of brickwork is minimal.  Yet another skill required for railway modelling 🙂

42 minutes ago, Mikkel said:

It looks very good. Thanks for the info on the bricks.

There seem to be some unusual brick sizes being used in the pillars between the windows.  Compare with the English bond courses below the windows.

I like the result very much.  It is interesting to note that the 'DCC Concepts' platform lamps that I used at North Leigh contain filament bulbs, rather than LEDs, since the manufacturer claims that incandescent lamps provide a more authentic 'glow'.  These lamps have a variable resistor in the control unit,so I could adjust the glow to meet my aspiration. 

There is something very special about watching the trains pulling into the station with just the glow of the oil lamps on the platform.  One day I shall do the same for some of my carriages and intend to use you proposed method of an internal battery 'somewhere in the rake to provide power to all the carriages.

I think your work on the interior is really splendid.  There's no doubt that 7mm scale offers far more scope for real detailing, rather than 'suggestion', which is often the case in smaller scales. I rate this 5 stars but the system didn't seem to respond to my attempts to show these.

2 hours ago, Mikkel said:

I am in the brown ironwork camp, but I must admit that the black looks good.

I tend to agree with Magmouse that the coach-style rounded mouldings go with a black finish.

16 minutes ago, Schooner said:

Yes, Mike, that's exactly the sort of post I could've done with!

Sorry it came too late for you!  As I recall, that undergear was very tricky but I learned a lot from making it.

1 minute ago, magmouse said:

Nice work, Mike, and interesting to see this having just done my 7mm version.

It was your post, Nick, that reminded me I had made one just over 10 years ago!  I was going simply to restore the original pictures but then I found I had lots of other photos on my computer.  I don't know why I didn't use them at the time.  It seemed a pity to waste them.

According to the 'Wizard Models' instructions: "Livery details are believed to be as follows: body sides and ends coach brown, possibly crimson lake between 1912-22. The sides were almost certainly lined in gold at first with black mouldings, with droplight frames and window bolections in Indian red. An unlined livery was later adopted, probably during the Great War."

This took me right back to my own first etched kit model, which was an N6 horse box in 4mm scale.  Your comment about 'grooms end' struck a chord since I wrote back then "I decided to start with the chassis and puzzled for some time over which was the ‘groom’s end’, when looking at the chassis parts. I eventually realised that the fold-out steps on the solebars are the key to this, though not mentioned in the instructions."

Mike

Many of Armstrong's designs had double plate frames.  One difference between the Armstrong and Dean 'standard' goods engines was that Dean only used single inside frames on his version.

John Gibson in his 'Critical Appreciation' of GW engine design commented that "Swindon was always noted for astonishing reconstructions but for broad gauge 0-4-2 tanks to end up as standard gauge 4-4-0 tender engines was the most remarkable re-build ever."

Dean returned to double frames with his larger 4-4-0s and Gibson again commented that "... we mostly had double-framed Bulldogs , which were horrid to work on.  After 55 years I still remember working, with a smoky paraffin flare lamp, with head and shoulders in the space of some 14in between inner and outer frames, with an inch thick layer of filthy black grease all around and above me."

The use of inside frames for driving wheels and outside for carrying wheels was a feature of David Joy's 'Jenny Lind' design, which was highly successful and set the pattern for many engines thereafter.  Joy wrote in his diary about his design: "Inside frames, which must be made to
carry the cylinders, the frames stopped at the firebox, so that the firebox was got as wide as the wheels would allow it. ... Then I put on the Gray's outside frames for leading and trailing wheels, 4 ft. diameter, giving the bearings below, thus making a firm wheel-base, with no overhanging weight."

Mike

On 02/12/2023 at 22:14, JimC said:

I'm away from my library, but what was the situation with other broad gauge lines that early? Were any operational?

At the time Whishaw was writing even the GWR itself was not fully operational.  He wrote (p.158):

"The line was first opened to the public on the 4th June, 1838, as far as Maidenhead; … and now it is opened to the Faringdon Road, a distance of 63¼ miles from London. The opening of that portion of the line between Bath and Bristol took place on the 31st August last, so that the public have now the use of about 75 miles of this railway; and the whole line Mr. Brunel expects will be finished about August 1841."

The directors of the Bristol and Exeter Railway decided to avoid capital outlay by arranging for the GWR to operate their line for them. The first section of the B&ER line was opened between Bristol and Bridgwater on 14 June 1841, just before the GWR completed its line from London to Bristol.

Those were competitive times that broke out into real fighting in a few places.  I notice that the 1849 map, on which I based my North Leigh layout,  shows a different alignment at the Eastern end of the OW&W,  The planned route dipped further South near Cassington.

1849 Map of the Witney area

reproduced from http://www.fairfordbranch.co.uk/ , with permission from Martin Loader

47 minutes ago, Annie said:

Working in brass is like tales from another country compared with 3D modelling and printing

That's exactly how I felt when I looked back at my old posts!  The updating of my old post was triggered by Jim Champ's musings about 2-4-0s.  I remembered my old forum post and found it had been archived and lost all its images, so decided to revive it.  It led to a session of nostalgia as I read through what I was doing almost 10 years ago.  It's cold gloomy December weather here, so sitting by the fire reading old posts has been a pleasant activity.  Perhaps I'll decide on a new modelling project soon but, at the moment, I'm enjoying a quiet contemplative period.

Let's hope that images in RMWeb survive for many years to come 🙂

I agree, Annie.  I have now restored the images in my series about modelling No.184 (formerly OW&W No.23).  It reminded me of how much more difficult modelling was before 3D printing turned it into an armchair activity 🙂

On 17/11/2023 at 12:39, JimC said:

Here's a bit of fun, and probably some procrastination as well. This is the current contents of my 2-4-0 sketches directory.

I missed seeing this collection for a while.  Although I've been exploring the early broad-gauge (BG) era recently, I started my own scratch-building with the simple, well-proportioned Armstrong designs.  I was attracted back then by that 'missing link' to the BG: the 'Bicycle' class and, now that I can use 3D-printing, I may re-visit the idea.

2 hours ago, JimC said:

One could have a spot the difference here! Feel free folks, especially if you can spot something I'd otherwise miss when I come to my sketches.

I suppose that the more significant differences are the presence of compensation beams on the earlier engine and the change from round-section coupling rids to flat rods in the later version. 

There are difference in the boiler and firebox supports, as well as in the smokebox wrapper. The spring gear looks to have been beefed-up in the later engine.  The reversing lever has changed and so has the spring balance but these could be something on the drawings, rather than on the engine itself!  I'm surprised that the leather buffers do not appear to have changed!  i assume that the vertical lines above the backplate on the later version are the edges of a small spectacle plate.

1 hour ago, JimC said:

I'm beginning to find this early stuff rather fascinating, but always the way I suppose. I fear I lack the skills and perhaps more importantly the determination to follow @MikeOxon into modelling the period though.

Thank you for the reference Jim.  The good thing about the early period is that there is very little information to prove if you've got it wrong 🙂 

On the few occasions where there are photos, however, I have found frequent discrepancies from the drawings.  It's an old problem:  as long ago as 1898, Sekon wrote in his book ‘The Evolution of the Steam Locomotive’ that “Readers may wonder why such obviously inaccurate statements should be published. One can only conjecture. Many lists of early locomotives have during the past few years been published. These should, however, be accepted with the very greatest caution.” 

Always try to find primary sources whenever you can and be prepared for later information to be inaccurate.

On 15/11/2023 at 18:01, JimC said:

... Also spotting things that seem to be missing. RCTS seems very quiet about the changeover from coke to coal, and that was a very big deal indeed at the time. 

I think that trying to fill the gaps is important.  Now that the RCTS books are available again on a print to order or digital basis, there's not a lot of point in repeating what can already be found there.  Their biggest weaknesses in those books are the very small illustrations and very little about constructional developments and details, apart from boilers - adoption of the Giffard injector, as an example.  I like the way that, in an earlier time period, Edward Lane included drawings or sketches of various little details that appeared on the engines of his time (1840s)

A lot depends on your target audience.  Modellers need external dimensions and details like wheel diameters and number of spokes  A tricky one is always boiler diameter over the cladding - a figure that can be hard to come by, except by examination of photos.  It's frustrating only to have side elevations too.

Internal dimensions, like numbers of tubes, don't actually reveal a lot, except that some designers packed in more tubes than made sense and some over-long boilers were acting more like condensers at the chimney end.

'Thoughts' (also on GWR e-list):

I had a look at Alan Peck's book about Swindon Works and realised how turbulent a time the mid 1860s were for the GWR.

Gooch's retirement in 1864 caused considerable upheavals, leading to Joseph Armstrong being appointed his successor. Armstrong brought in a new team, including William Dean and Thomas Clayton from the North, to tackle the tremendous challenges brought by the inevitable impending demise of the broad gauge. Very large numbers of new standard gauge engines were required and Armstrong had to deal with this alongside major construction of new works at Swindon and the failed plans for Carriage Works at Oxford. It is hardly surprising that precise details of design changes are hard to find amongst all this activity.

Joseph Armstrong built about 600 new locomotives at Swindon at a rate of 60 - 70 per year, as soon as the extended facilities were available in 1869. It is not surprising that Armstrong placed great emphasis on simplicity, while requiring the new engines to be as powerful as the broad gauge engines they replaced. While I can't be specific about exactly when the Giffard injector was applied, I think it is clear that it fitted in with Armstrong's design priorities. The Beyer engines were 'stop gaps' but they brought the new injector with them and would have been taken up as soon as possible for the new Armstrong constructions.

I realise that this is not very specific response to your query but may be the best we can do.

I really appreciate your comment, T0ny 🙂  I write because I enjoy doing so and comments like yours make it feel even better 😁