Edwardian

Derek, if you check your ratings, you will see a notification that I rated your above post as "Funny". Needless to say this was a slip of the keys, for which I must apologise. I meant to indicate my support.

Mea culpa. I have just started to build my first wagon kit, so I am in the process of finding out just how difficult it is to get such an apparently simple thing right. Once I start hacking up frames to change w/b etc, I expect it will become far harder! A very interesting and helpful link

Lovely shots - can't see myself getting bored of pictures of beautiful hand-built models of elegant prototypes on your stunning layout. It's not as though you've shaken a box, posted a snap and now want a prize! Quality viewing, your stuff. May I add that I am sorry to hear of your ongoing and seemingly intractable health issues. You have my very best wishes and hopes that you can get it sorted out before too long.

Brilliant work. I am enjoying seeing this come together. Clever use of transfers and I like what you are doing with the adverts.

This is because you have become distracted by Dean Goods, Adams Radials and horse trams! Those wagons look pretty respectable to me!

Funnily enough, apropos the horse tram topic, the thought had crossed my mind! If you look closely, you will see that it connects to the rear lady just below the neck line. It is routed thence to the engine, thus may the ladies achieve acceleration!

This, then:

More excellent photographs. With the granite, I would leave the dark colour as a base and dry brush with enamels or acrylics until an overall lighter appearance is achieved. Personally I am more comfortable with acrylics, but enamels will work just as well. I would suggest being bold; as you are dry brushing, you can afford to use a much, much lighter colour. I might end, or even start with, something like the old Citadel Bleached Bone or Vallejo Bone White. For an idea of how not-white Vallejo's Bone White is, the upper, cream, panels on the coach in post #1818 are painted Bone White; http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/107713-castle-aching/page-73. The cream content will yield a better result than a 'pure' grey, i.e. one with black and white only. I suspect that I am attempting to teach you to suck eggs, however, given the excellent weathering tones already achieved, not least on the concrete platforms. Keep up the good work!

I am very impressed with the station building. That last shot with the street leading away from the camera is what it's all about. The illusion of reality deftly achieved.

I think the point that you are all missing is that each of the ladies in the traces has a set of wheels and a small 2-stroke engine installed beneath her skirts. There are petrol filler caps leading to tanks in the bustles and oil was stored in the hats.

Fair enough, Castle Aching is the only thing that keeps me sane!

I find I am bound to agree. As I have inter-war Dean Goods, inside and outside framed, in the form of white-metal kits, I am likely to want just a single belpaire example pre-(Great)War. I had hoped that would be the Oxford model. The Mainline body captures the prototype well, particularly the cab-side cut-out and the firebox profile. I suspect the answer might be to use Oxford's chassis and tender and attempt to graft the Mainline loco body onto it.

Exciting stuff, and I am glad to see that unlike Red and Blue Box, you have posted realistic years for release next to each product. [wink]

Looks like a good plan and I look forward to developments. You mention the signal box dating from after WW1. GW signal boxes, even in the '20s, weren't exactly Bauhaus. The hipped roof examples (see Prototype kit (Ratio does a plastic one)) were built well into the '20s and there was gable roofed version too. See Astrop (1907) and Green Lane (1925) on this site, which might give you a start: http://www.signalbox.org/gallery/gw.htm

Excellent, but, then, basically I just want your whole layout

I'd settle for an accurate Dean Goods

John, Thanks. I agree, that is a copper top to the chimney, thanks for confirming. Note that the dome strikes you as painted. I think so. From the sample of photographs I have seen, the cab cut-out profile stays the same, but the distance of the top of the cut-out to the cab roof increases slightly but noticeably. Were there variations to the curvature of the cut-outs? I don't know. Were all cabs raised for belpaire boxes? I don't know. There is a suggestion that spectacle plates were smaller after belpaires were fitted, though perhaps that need not have been the case where the roof was raised? You raise some very good questions. If only we had the answers! The example of 2516 shows that there might have been a prototype that, in c.1913-14, better was a better match for Oxford's model than 2309. But, without a photograph ....

Helpful, as ever, not least because I don't have that RCTS volume. It was particularly useful to learn that the top feeds were a 1913 feature. Apply that to the Oxford model: - While it seems that a polished dome is not an improbability for 1913-14, and interpreting old B&W plates can be tricky, it looks to me that, in April 1914, 2309 had a painted dome, as per regulations. It might be that a contemporary locomotive, with top-feed, might have worn a polished dome, but it does not appear that 2309 did, and without photographic evidence for a class mate, you're no better off. This is a problem, as to correct would involve matching Oxford's green shade and finish exactly. - The chimney is interesting, because the photograph of 2309 clearly shows the capuchin (which appears black), but appears to show a polished metal top, so Oxford seem to be correct as to that, albeit the sample has it painted brass, not copper. Easily corrected, as, presumably, is swapping over the whistles. - The cab cut out appears too close to the roof line, and there may be other issues, but I will keep an open mind until I see it in the flesh.. - There is some room for interpretation on some of these points, perhaps. Certain other details appear to be clear errors: The firebox profile is wrong generally, and the position of lower wash-out plugs and plating looks wrong for this engine. The extent of riveting on the smoke box is wrong for 2309. The step is wrong for 2309. Interestingly, No. 2516, funnily enough the example preserved at STEAM in Swindon, ran at one stage in a similar condition, with top-feed. She is pictured thus, though no date is given, looking more like the Oxford model: - Top-feed - Straight-step - Smoke-box riveting - And, though the firebox lacks the plating at the base seen on 2516 in preservation and has the lower wash-out plugs closer together than seen on the Oxford model, the photograph appears to show something of a crease to the turn-under on the firebox profile!!!!! Unfortunately, there is no date given by STEAM for this picture, and it is hard to detect any trace of lining. The shot is, perhaps later, the engine dirty and war-weary, but it is possible that, if the top-feed were fitted pre-War, c.1913-14, when still lined out, 2516 might have represented a better match for Oxford's tooling. Annoying for a Museum not to offer a date for its photograph, but you can view it here: http://www.steampicturelibrary.com/dean-goods-no-2516/print/4079975.html

I would have thought so. The step can be cured. Assuming you can live with the softer, better, but not quite right, firebox profile (I suspect I can), you could even add the missing plugs without too much bother. I'd need to see the real thing, I think, to judge the cab-side. On some photographs the curve of the scoop looks better than in others, as I have found with pictures of the Mainline version.

The Oxford model is of 2309. This is one of the first batch of 20, so, as built was domeless. I find I have an image of the rebuilt 2309. She is at Birmingham Snow Hill and the photograph is said to date from April 1914. Note she is powered by the Mainline/Hornby motorised tender, crudely disguised by a giant mound of coal [smiley face]. I assume that it is this state that the Oxford model is intended to represent. Indeed, it could hardly be otherwise. So, it would be in order to compare the model with the prototype picture. - Notice the step between the front 2 splashers. Like my model of 2319, the Oxford model is incorrect in featuring a straight-sided step. So, I will have the annoyance of replacing and lining the steps! - Query whether the dome on the prototype is polished brass or painted. - Note the apparent absence of rivets around the prototype's smoke-box. - Note also the position on the Oxford model of 2309's lower pair of firebox wash-out plugs, which seem too widely placed and along a plate that seems absent on the prototype. - Also, I think there is a problem with the cab: Note how much closer the cab side cut out appears to the roof on the Oxford model. Some at least of the classes' cabs were later raised slightly, no doubt in conjunction with the installation of the higher belpaire firebox. I do not know if the Oxford cab is of the higher or lower stature, but it has the cut-out coming close to the cab roof, as was the case before cabs were raised. It does not seem to match the photograph of 2309, the cab of which has clearly been raised, resulting in a greater distance between the roof and the cut-out. It is hard to tell, but the curve of the cab cut-out does not seem right, either. Look at my model of 2319 (Post #436 above), which, after all, is the same batch as 2309. It seems to reflect accurately the original appearance of the cab-side, and you can tell, I think, that the curve of the scoop matches that on the picture of 2309. The difference is that 2309's cab has been raised slightly by the time the picture was taken in 1914. Look at the curve of the cut out on the Oxford model. It seems different. I do not know how you could correct this, if at all, without ruining the cosmetic finish. If the cab is to the greater height, but with a cut-out profile from the lower cab, stretched to go full height, it could be an inaccurate hybrid cab. It certainly does not look right for 2309. Now is the time to spot for any other inconsistencies!

Horse fly bites are things to be avoided, in my experience.

Here is one from Edwardian's 'To Do' List. This is one of the first 20 built without domes. It needs stripping down and repainting in dark green and then needs lining out. It also needs added details, such as tender rivets, and there are some later features that are incorrect for the 'as built' condition, such as the chimney, which is a later, shorter chimney, and the steps between the front 2 splashers, which should have curved sides. After this, locos were built with domes on the front boiler ring. Russell includes a good shot of 2537 in 1908 with an S4 boiler, with round-top firebox, and dome mounted on the centre boiler ring. Typically, the locomotives are paired with the old 1,800 gallon tender as in the picture of my model, but I have seen forward and centre-mounted examples paired with the later tender. My indulgent ideal would be a domeless locomotive and a forward dome example, both with Indian Red frames, and a centre dome round top and a centre dome belpaire, both black-framed. All lined, of course. If the Oxford example comes good, that's 2 of the 4! Of course, a couple of Armstrong Goods would be needed to round things off! I don't have the RCTS volume that includes the Dean Goods. As is often said, and it is particularly true of a large class built over time, pick a contemporary photograph and model from that. EDIT: Though far from conclusive, on the dated photographs I have (and, of course, I do not know how reliable the dating is), I have not seen belpaire examples earlier than April 1914, but perhaps someone can produce information to confirm or deny that as the earliest date for these fireboxes on Dean Goods?.

I fear that the Hudswell Clarke will start to feel lonely, now that it now longer has Bachmann's Birdcage coaches to keep it company in model railway Never Never Land! I am sure that it will materialise eventually, and be quite exquisite when it does. I am living in hope of news that we might get a pre-WW1 variant, otherwise I'll have to pass.

Domeless, forward mounted dome or centre mounted dome?

I think that is probably right. I think they have changed it and I think there is some improvement, though I don't think it's quite right. The Mainline one is a better shape. The overall appearance of the lined version, with the darker green and the crisp lining is really very good and I am thinking that the improved-but-not-quite-right firebox profile is something I can live with.