MarkAustin

I saw the 56xx at Ally Pally on Saturday, and it's not the Langley monstrosity, which has a distinctly oval boiler. It's more likely the Beaver kits version, which was available a few years ago, and then vanished from the market. The manufacturer has since resurfaced, and I saw him at Expong 2 years ago, picked up his catalogue and ordered a few (which are still sitting in my gloat box). He doesn't yet have a web presence to the best of my knowledge.

The 2mm Assocciation description of the twin-pack Opens is highly misleading, in particular for the 4-plank Open. The brief history of these beasts is that the GWR introduced a 4-plank Open in the latter part of the 19th century, and they were built with a single sided brake, lever operated, and acting on 2 wheels only. When the GWR was experimenting with a new brake 3 of these were fitted with various  brakes, and eventually ended up with the DC1 brake. The last Lot of 4-plank wagons (of 500) was built with DC1, later mostly converted to DC1x. When the Diagram Register was set up, the wagons with DC1 brakes were allocated Diagram O5, but those with the lever brake were not allocated a diagram (the remaining 2 and 3 plank wagons didn't get a diagram either). As there were 23,000 or so (I'm doing this from memory) of the undiagrammed 4-plank wagons, they outnumbered the O5s by 460 to 1. When the GWR finally decided in c1928 to implement the BoT 1909 (?) directive on either side brake, 18,000 or so of the undiagrammed 4-plank wagons were fitted with an independant brake , lever facing right and acting only on the left-hand wheel on the hitherto unbraked side, thus conforming with the letter if not the spirit of the directive. This was supposed to be completed by 1939, but it is possible that, due to WW2, some of the single-side braked vehicles survived until after the war, but not many, and they went very quickly after that.

You can also model the three plank wagon by removing the top plank and, if desired reinstating the rivet detail. I'm indebted to David Walley for telling me this.

The situation with the 5-plank wagons is also a bit misleading as you can make several diagrams by ringing the changes on brakes and buffers, one more with a bit of work (one diagram, the first 5-plank wagon had five planks of equal height and was 6in narrower), and a whol slew of others if you are prepared to replace the diagonal strapping with a straight section (the kit has the less common variant with a "knee") or, indeed, if you are prepared to ignore a relatively small detail. Finally, you can make the GWR's first China Clay wagon by replacing one end with a tip door and fitting DC2 brakes (and a few more details). This one was pretty the only type of wagon to retain DC2s, as you couldn't have brake gear mechanism at the tipping end, as it would get clogged with slurry.

I would warn people I'm doing this from memory, so I might have got some of the details wrong, and cannot remember the Diagram numbers concerned, but this is the general thrust of it. If anyone wants the diagram numbers, reply to this and I'll repost tonight.

Mark Austin

What's th4e sleeper spacing under the buffer stop?

Hi Pete,

I think the problem may be the height of the pick-up beam. Compare to the EPB here: http://www.semgonlin...class415_5.html 3rd picture down.

Not a Southern expert, but I live in third rail country, and I'd say the beam is too high, presumably to avoid hitting lineside details.

On the Lima Horsebox, I think that there was only one, central, lamp over the drover's compartment. It's impossible to tell from the drawings, and I've not seen any photographs from above, but I can't see why two lamps would be needed there

Sad indeed- are we being a teensy bit over cautious?

No he isn't. It is not sufficient just to acknowledge copyright. You need the permission (generally written) of the copyright holder (who might or might not be the book's author, plus the payment of a fee if required to reproduce copyright material (other than limited copying for the purposes of private study or for the purpose of of a review, neither of which apply here). Both the author of the blog and rmweb.co.uk could be sued. You would lose, and damages and costs would be awarded against you.

In the case of a book there are two types of copyright: the copyright of the book layout (in this case image+caption) and the copyright of the image itself.

Can i second john's request. As I said at Ally Pally, I could use one of the cranes for Cockett Goods yard. Wonderful work on the crane, and I'm sure the City etches can be redesigned.

Two comments on the Red livery.

This was discussed on the GWR ehgroup some time ago. As a result, someone did some tests mimicing the orthochromatic film available at the time of the transition and demonstrated that it was impossible to distinguish the colours from Black and White photographs.

Secondly, in "The Locomotive" Volume 1, No. 3, March 1896 (part of a study of virtually all the major Companies liveries, and quite a few of the smaller, the author states:

"A light red colour is adopted for the wagon stock with white lettering but the goods brakes are a dark grey."

Since this is contemporary observation, it must mean that the change was later than 1896.

Thank you again folks! and thank you for the link Andy, I will watch that later.

Suberb bit of modelling Missy!Just one tiny observation. Cattle van's tended to have a lime wash (or at least they did in GWR days) as apparent by the white staining on their lower section. Would this white staining have also affected the cattle dock? You'd need to check prototype photo's to confim this, but if so would it be worth dry brushing some of the dark vertical staining with a bit of white/cream? I wouldn't add any further vertical staining to what you've already done through fear of over-doing it.Best WishesPaul

Hello Paul :)Thats another good point. From what I have figured out cattle docks didnt get the same level of attention as the wagons did so I am assuming they never really saw much lime washing (unless someone would like to say otherwise?) As you say the staining might be a little too much and in hindsight I wouldnt have made it so heavy, but I did want to make the cattle dock look VERY used.Another thing that I have realised is that it probably wasnt a good idea to fiddle with the white balance settings on my camera for the first time whilst taking the additional photos so apologies for that, its definately noticable on one of the additional photos for sure.I must leave things alone unless I totally know what I am doing!!Missy

This depends on the period. The use of limewash was banned at some point (it tended to rot the cattle's hooves). Not exactly sure of the dates, but certainly before the grouping, and probably pre WW1.