kitpw

From BFI - a slightly clearer version of 'Windsor Castle'.  It includes a ringed distant signal which Is why I have it bookmarked - https://player.bfi.org.uk/free/film/watch-the-brilliant-biograph-2020-online.

Might help - https://www.axminstertools.com/axminster-precision-centre-finding-rule-ax96220

Everywhere I've ever been in the world, 'the chairman' has got there first with his indestructable garden seating and coffee tables, always the same pattern. There they are, under the tree...  Nice blog by the way, the aluminium Metro-Cammel coaches are wonderful things.

Lead flashing: grey paper & pencil (and grubby finger) to give the surface a bit of shine.

Kit PW

11 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Highbridge playing Nine Elms-inspired rifs of standard Derby wagons

I visited Nine Elms when it was still a steam shed, say 1962 or, perhaps, '63.  This was a special day out organised by our slightly eccentric headmaster. I wish I'd taken more interest in the wagon sheet supporters but, sadly, I did not.

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

The venerable - or perhaps simply old - Keyser GW 6-wheeled siphon; which I understand to represent diagram O2

Diagram 0.2 was almost the same but had a single arc roof.  The 3 arc roof type is diagram 0.1 as it has the top framing finished with a heavy, full width straight as per the illustration in your post: diagram 0.3 is also 3 arc, same dimensions, but the top rail is also 3 arc following the roof line, not a straight.  There is a photo of 0.1 and 0.3 with C19th lettering style with GWR on the top plank in Slinn & Clarke's GW siphons HMRS 1986 edition.  Let me know if you need a copy of relevant pages - I think the book is now out of print. (the 7mm scratch built model I've 'unfinished' for several years is diagram 0.2).

44 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

Had other companies (other than the Cambrian which I know about) already built milk vans of this type?

The MET.  No 3, built 1896 is in the LT Museum - very handsome it is too in varnished teak. It's here: https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/collections-online/vehicles/item/1981-540

There is a summary of the history of "containerisation" here: 

http://www.conflat.co.uk/con_hist.html

"The origins of containerisation on Britain's Railways can be traced right back to their very beginning - although the idea took more than 100 years to catch on!

In the 1830s the Liverpool & Manchester Railway used "simple rectangular boxes, four to a waggon, ...to convey coal from the Lancashire collieries to Liverpool, where they were transferred to horse-drawn carts by crane" But although there were some advantages, in particular the reduced handling of the cargo, the idea does not appear to have caught on. Even so, by the early 1900s the London & North Western, Lancashire & Yorkshire, and Midland Railway companies were carrying 'box coal' on flat wagons, the coal being destined for use by steamboats.

The original Great Central Railway also played a part in the story of containerisation, being one of only three companies which provided special wagons for the conveyance of 'fish tanks'. The GCR carried considerable fish traffic and the 'fish tanks' were designed to ensure that the fish reached its destination as fresh as possible. As such, the wagons were classified as passenger stock. The other two companies were the Midland and the Great Northern; the latter referred to its containers as 'cod boxes' and some of them lasted into the 1930s.

By the late 19th Century the closed container was with us. Resembling a wooden box van body, but with end doors, these were initially known as 'lift vans' and were privately owned by several furniture removal firms. They were carried both on railway wagons and on flat road trailers drawn by horses or steam tractors.

The 'box coal' is familiar in model form - the 'cod boxes' I've been unable to find, model or prototype.  There was some discussion on RMweb a few years ago about fish traffic but I don't think it covered 'cod boxes' - as a search term on RMweb, it returns no results.

There are quite a few references on the web. This is just one.  https://www.steampicturelibrary.com/swindon-works/carriage-wagon-works-21-shop/21-shop-wagon-repairs-building-shop-c1930s-486174.html.

These articles are of interest if a little on the long side:

https://cmykhistory.com/orthochromatic-photography-part-1/
https://cmykhistory.com/orthochromatic-photography-part-2/

One passage in particular caught my attention (from part 1). "The only method for reducing the amount of blue light reaching the plate was to either modify the illuminating source, or to filter the light at the camera before it reached the negative, using a yellow or orange screen. The use of yellow screens dates back as far as 1858, when William Crookes discovered that a yellow filter placed in front of the camera lens gave a better rendering of color values in reproductions of paintings on gelatino-bromide plates. Screens became a necessary component of the orthochromatic process. Reducing blue light reaching the plate helped emphasize the effect of the sensitizing dyes. While there was no increase in the green or red light, increased sensitivity of orthochromatic plates to those colors, coupled with the reduction in blue light, created a more uniform spectral sensitivity."

8 hours ago, magmouse said:

Has a simple inversion taken place by mistake?

Very likely, although it doesn't explain why the Iron Duke buffer beam is dark.

However, by a slightly different method, the blue channel only produces this:

which is I think "corrected" in that the colours with a red component (buffer beam)

are now going towards black where the lighter blues (sky) are going towards white.

Ortho, 2nd row, third from left tells the story - it's really dark which is as it should be, it's the strongest "true red" (to my eye!).  The "pan" chart is a scale of greys which again is as it should be, so full marks on both! 

I must look again at why the buffer beam should come out properly dark using the channels approach; also the red wagon in the goods yard at Farthing is darker than the grey wagon - both are what I expected. I'll have a look at the Photoshop comment/help area and see if that turns up anything.

17 minutes ago, 57xx said:

blue sensitive bromide films

...not sure!  That's the problem of relying on algorithms. I did the colour chart to see if that would confirm what it's actually doing, one way or another.  As you pointed out, the red buffer beam has rendered very dark where the reds in the chart are light grey - both by the same method which confuses things a bit.

17 minutes ago, 57xx said:

I'll pop your colour chart into my template to see what results that gives.

That'll be interesting - I think your latest post just arrived as I was about to send this so I'll press 'submit reply' anyway.

A few further experiments in monochrome....

The grey chart is the same colour chart rendered into b & w in the same way

as the Iron Duke picture above.

Just to illustrate how greys (or is it grays?) are influenced by what's around them. 

All the larger grey squares are the same square repeated in different parts of the grid.

(There's a small light grey square crept in...don't know where that came from).

Although the're the same grey square, they look darker or lighter depending

on where they are on the grid.

Some experiments:

taking the process as a dark room process rather than a 'taking-pictures' process, akin to printing a colur picture in black & white on panchromatic or orthochromatic paper, Photoshop 'channels' rather than filters allows the removal of different colour sensitivities and relies only on the Photoshop algorithm.  The Iron Duke picture can be "printed" with only the blue channel and looks like this:

It can also go through some post production, using the RAW filter to increase 'haze':

which approximates to the polluted environment which was commonplace in the photos we are used to looking at from the late C19th. It can be increased as required.

Using the same processes in Photoshop on one of the Farthing pictures - blue channel only:

...and with added haze and a minor reduction in 'clarity' (which isn't the same as blur):

In Photoshop, the process requires the colour channels to be duplicated and the originals deleted.  The blue channel can then be selected and the other duplicated channels deleted.  The image then needs to be copied and pasted to a new file and the channels tab will show only a gray channel.  The post-production is user determined where the transition to b & w is algorithm based - I'm not certain but I think that the channel deletions produce ortho rather than panchromatic "paper" as clouds do not appear in the Iron Duke picture.  Mikkel's sky is post-production in the original (I think).  I haven't tried this out in DarkTable as I don't yet have much experience of it.  What is clear, I think, is that all the colurs are rendered only on the basis of their original tonal quantity/quality when tint is no longer a permitted parameter.

18 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

I am now a little worried about putting the final layer of paint on, as I think that to get the colour I want I will lose detail.

You could try these https://www.jacksonsart.com/faber-castell-pitt-graphite-crayon.  Available in the usual grades on the soft side of HB. Being a flat bar of graphite (no wood round it), you could try wiping it over the surface as it won't go into the cracks between slates but I'd try it on some scrap first! As an alternative,  I guess that a soft pencil might do the trick anyway particularly when rubbed in gently with a rolled paper smudger or a finger - again, I'd try it first on some scrap as graphite pencil might not take on whatever surface you've now got.

1 hour ago, airnimal said:

I wanted something different and colourful from a small local firm

This guide to Stockport of 1883 gives a few names under "Furniture Removers" some of which might still have been around on your chosen date (about 1905/1910?) - http://www.davenportstation.org.uk/archive/stockport-1883-slater.pdf.  Kelly's Directory might also be worth a look. Maybe with some names to work on, your librarians could turn up something.

52 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

Still have not got up the courage to use contact adhesive to stick the surface layer to it though.

I still use gum arabic  which is a distinctly old fashioned approach*.  (If you can't get on with it, it can always be used up in making marshmallows and [?] other culinary delights). The gum arabic I use as a laminating adhesive for card, paper and blotting paper (excellent stuff as it laps up shellac).  Cornellisen (https://www.cornelissen.com) and Jacksons (https://www.jacksonsart.com) stock it and a variety of other exotic resins, gums and varnishes.  I use white glue sometimes for shelac'd materials: neither arabic or pva seem to cause them to buckle and wobble. It might be worth a try on some scrap materials to see if either or both suit your methods and preferences.

*I was reminded about gum arabic several years ago when reading a 1950s (?) article on making coach sides in several laminated layers of Bristol board. I've tried plasticard but in my hands, it seems to warp, melt, delaminate or otherwise confound my efforts which is why I investigated card and suitable adhesives (with no volatile solvents).  The body of the little horsebox I posted about on Swan Hill recently is made from Bristol board, laminated with gum arabic.

4D Modelshop (https://modelshop.co.uk/) - much frequented by architectural modelmakers - has a wide range of sheet materials including ply and very thin MDF (they supplied some 1.5mm MDF to me just the other day).  I use quite a lot of ply in various thicknesses and also card and paper: my shellac bill is prodigious as particularly the paper needs toughening up if it is to survive my handling.

I do enjoy reading your posts about the devlopment of Traeth Mawr - I might even find out how to pronounce it one of these days (my son just moved to mid Wales and is getting to grips with his local place names) - but I sometimes (mostly, to borrow a well known title) forget to hit the' thumbs up' or 'craftsmanship/clever' buttons.  Must remember in future.

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Have a watch of this.

Marvellous clip, much to take in there.  I did notice the shape of the draw hook shown in close up with the shunter dropping the 3 link: it's not a constant thickness throughout.  The part of it that does the work is, as one would expect, pretty chunky but the top/point is slimmed down to make dropping the link easier.  A tiny detail on a model but I've found it worthwhile to do the same with the thicker hooks. Thanks for posting the film.

27 minutes ago, jim.snowdon said:

However, the shunter’s pole, as a tool, is designed for right handed operation

...the shunter's pole may be 7mm to the foot at Swan Hill but the principle is the same - with no other constraints such as different coupling types, then left hand wagon to right hand wagon it is.

My initial question seems to have raised some interesting points about coupling technology (to give it a grand title): thanks for all the responses.

13 minutes ago, magmouse said:

The SR wagon in 7th place seems to have roughly sawn lengths of wood loaded vertically

Timber for pit props generally came from Canada and, as you say, was usually left "in the round" with bark intact.  Timber for headings might be a possbility, (headings: typically 4ft square tunnels for drainage work or similar). The head tree would be 225 x 150 or thereabouts with side trees of 200 x 100 and stretchers (floors) 150 x 100.  This lot would produce the rather random selection of timber sizes seen in the photo and they would usually be cut tight to length on site since the tunnel width and height might vary for one reason or another.  Equally, they could be for trench work, supporting the sides although I would expect longer lengths than the depth of the SR wagon plus a bit. Although the timber could be for anything, the fact that they are all relatively short lenghts suggests some more particular purpose.

45 minutes ago, BR traction instructor said:

driving a train of wagons with the former would be a different beast to the latter

My interest in the couplings is very much to do with how trains start, move and stop and how far that can be represented in model form so your comment pointing out the different behaviour of 3 link and instanter is exactly the sort of difference I've been thinking about although, at the moment, I don't have any instanter couplings on the layout.

43 minutes ago, brossard said:

I think for the purpose of running our model trains, any coupling position that is convenient can/should be used.  Not always easy to get the link over the hook especially when there are danglies getting in the way.

True!  I've spent a bit of time recently getting the 3 links consistent for thickness of the wire in the bottom link (thin is best), thickness of the hook (again, thin is best) and making sure that the link which goes through the hook is free moving so that it doesn't hang up.  Operation has improved: swear box less often required!

1 hour ago, PeterStiles said:

Are you left-handed?

No but I have a weaker left eye which may account for the preference! I note that the younger generations in my family are much more adept at using the 3 links than I am and display no preferences for left to right or right to left.

1 hour ago, LMS2968 said:

I don't recall lifting the coupling off one wagon just to drop on the opposing coupling.

Thanks for that, it makes sense to me but then I'm often surprised at what was covered by one rule or another and got to wondering whether I was missing something.

42 minutes ago, Flood said:

From the 1972 General Appendix (previous years may have had slight variations)

Thanks for posting that. I was pretty sure there were some rules about instanter and screw types and the GA confirms requirements where there are different coupling types between vehicles - the rules you draw attention to (2.4 and 3.3) certainly occur in the model and also 1.4 which requires the use of the vehicle coupling when attaching an unfitted vehicle to an engine.  This last rule is probably the most commonly encountered in model form and compliance at Swan Hill is rare!