thetalkinlens

18 minutes ago, MarkC said:

Some exciting news - I'm delighted to be able to announce that Scalby has been invited to the South Shields show on Friday 9th & Saturday 10th February 2024.

 

My co-conspirators and myself are looking forward to it 😎

 

Mark

I've put it in my diary Mark. I hope I can make it over.

Looking good Karl. Further updates highly anticipated!

42 minutes ago, rapidoTom said:

Hi,

 

As you say, the extra lining around the edges of the tanks was not on the preserved example, also the vac pipes and we have modelled the vac pipe controls in the right-hand side of the cab that should be easily removable if you wish to back-convert. The smokebox door is slightly different, we believe it was fitted with the current one (with closer hinges) in NCB days, as our NCB No.6 model also had the same one from the photos we've used as reference. This part is also separately fitted so you should be able to swap it if you're happy taking a small screwdriver to it! The Ramsbottom valves were also fitted from new but the preserved example is missing the arm that sticks out above the brass cover. We spent a lot of time trawling through the photos to get the details right!

 

There's also the thorny question of the correct shade of green (there's a whole thread on this forum dedicated to that), but we're consulting with several experts/groups and should get to a conclusion on that soon.

 

Hope that helps!

This helps massively, thank you for the detailed reply. I take my hat off to you!

This feels like a naive question but will decorated samples be shown before the pre-order book is closed?

I'd like to ask a question on No.1310... the model is going to be based on the loco in preserved form. Is there a reasonably known list of differences to how it would have looked in the W. Worsdell livery in the NER period?

Vac pipes on the bufferbeams are the obvious one. I think there is also additional white lining around the edge of the tanks and cab which is not present on the preserved livery. Is there anything else?

Many thanks for those suggestions @Jon4470 and @MarkC. I've found that the brass joints I've been doing have worked out quite well. It is the joints into the whitemetal where the brass is inserted into where it's not quite as neat as I'd like. I'll try the flux in the hole trick next time. It makes sense as a logical approach.

Yes interesting they did the prototype van. Perhaps they had drawings for it to hand and not the production one. I've finished off the handrails on the ends this evening and am about to glue in the replacement floors. I've ordered some resin 3d printed torpedo air vents and after a clean up it should be ready for painting.

2 hours ago, MarkC said:

I think it might have been in the LNER Modellers FB group, tbh.

 

Mark

Found your post Mark, showing the kit in parts. I don't think I've seen any pics of yours built up yet though, so will be interested to see how it looks.

1 hour ago, MarkC said:

Very nice.

 

You've probably seen the initial photos of my own model using this kit, which I have built during my present tour of duty on my ship. (It's now packed away ready for suffering the vagaries of the luggage system during my forthcoming flight home...). The only modification I've made was to fit more modern wheels with pin point bearings, rather than the original plain axles, intended to run in the whitemetal itself. Once home I'll paint it & then put a couple of photos up. I bought mine via the Bay of E back in 2012, so it's been in the roundtuit pile for quite a while!

 

The whitemetal, I thought, was very nice to work with, compared to modern material which has more pewter in it, I think, which makes it harder, but more brittle.

 

Mark

Thanks Mark, yes I've put different wheels in and brass bearings. It rolls very nicely. I'm sure I've seen your thread with your build of it, as that rings a bell now you've mentioned it, but Rmweb's search is dire - could you link me to it please?

I've been itching to start this one since I picked it up off a well known online auction web site last year for just £6. It is a Keyser K's brake van kit. I'm not sure how old, but I'd guess at least 70's?

By my reckoning, it is a reasonably close representation of the prototype to the N.E.R. Diagram V4, which was given Diagram U16. Only the one was built: No.17827 and it was allocated to "Goods, York". I've seen a few other modellers having made this kit and it looks pretty acceptable in my opinion.

The whitemetal castings were quite severally bent on inspection. I've straightened them out as best I can, though it's still not as good as it might be.

One of the end floors was missing, which I knew about before purchase. Rather than have mismatching ends, I've made up two replacement floors from plasticard. These will go in once I've finished soldering the end hand rails on.

I'd like to improve on neatening up my visible soldering joints, such as on the handrails. Any tips here would be welcome.

8 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

I mean that's a useful exercise to a point! It shows that my 'phone camera is pretty unforgiving. The initial pictures I took with other locos in NER livery, which remain normal and a much better colour!

 

My problem remains that I cannot, in any light, get the model to look like your initial picture when viewed with the naked eye!

 

In other words, I can get it to look less radioactive by the naked eye, but I cannot perceive it as other than too much to the light and yellow side. In less than bright light, I don't see the depth of colour acheived in your picture. 

My comparisons above were intentionally restricted to two subjects : the Bachmann O (both yours and mine, but in theory they are the same colour) and the colour sample in NER Record Vol.3. And they are nothing more than that - comparisons, which can be bolted onto your opening post. Comparing to your other models is much harder not having them in front of me physically. I've said it before, but will say it again.. the 290 looks lovely and the shade of green is part of that.

Clearly it doesn't help solve the problem, as your O to your eye does not look right.

I don't own any green NER models for comparison (at the moment!), so without any models to compare to my next thoughts would be to head to Shildon or York with the Bachmann Class O to take photos with both the model and a preserved NER locomotive in the same photograph. Photos of 1621 at Shildon have been posted in the thread already, but I don't think it is a neutral enough comparison to have a picture of 1621 at Shildon alongside a picture of the Bachmann Class O taken at home.

And now a comparison which I think is quite interesting.

First the opening post photo of the O again:

And now the the same photo in my previous post, but over-exposed by 2 full stops in Photoshop:

And now another photo taken just now, with the camera over exposed by 2 full stops rather than in Photoshop:

Now we have clearly achieved a very similar radioactive vomit colour here. But also, look how much the colour now varies between the model and the colour sample in the book...

I believe the original decorated samples photographs by TMC also suffered from a degree of over exposure. As they were taken in a lightbox type environment, that doesn't surprise me.

Does this explain things? Maybe, maybe not, but it is yet another interesting comparison.

Do I see to my eye the Bachmann Class O as my camera takes it either set to normal automatic exposure, or 2 full stops over exposed? I see it as the normal exposure.

16 hours ago, Edwardian said:

In short, while I'd buy a loco the colour of the one in your picture, I've never seen the Bachmann O look anywhere close to it. You seem strangely and uniquely blessed.

I cannot explain that, but I'm doing nothing with the photos taken beyond firing the shutter. They are simply with an iPhone with everything set to automatic.

Here is an additional comparison with the same subjects in the same location, but under "full sun" light. The shadow can be seen on the model to indicate this. The time of day was 1pm, taken today, so the sun is relatively high in the sky for the time of year.

And here are the same colour samples picked out from the models tank side and the books left hand colour sample:

I've been debating whether to get involved in this thread, as I thought my posts gave some helpful objective comparisons on the TMC thread. I'm not sure whether the opening post of this thread targets any of my posts as disregarded or not.

However, I think it is worth a second comparison to the opening post, specifically with the NER Record Vol.3 swatch and the Bachmann Class O. The reason being, the photos in the opening post of the O, I agree the green looks like radioactive vomit. But I don't understand how this has been achieved. My O looks nothing like that shade of green unless I place it under very harsh light.

I think it is an important factor to include comparisons within the same photograph, as taking two photos to compare will result in different exposure etc etc.

Here is a photo of my O under natural daylight. No sunshine. Cloudy. And also outside, so no glare that may come off windows. Handily, it is photographed on top of the page in the NER Record with the colour sample.

Now comparing to the opening post photo of the O (I hope that is ok posting @Edwardian's photo direct here for the purposes of comparison) which is stated also taken under natural daylight:

Next the swatches. Here is the opening post NER Record on the left and the Bachmann O on the right:

and here are mine of the same subjects, taken from the first photo above.

So is the Bachmann NER green as far out as what is being suggested?

I am in the same situation as the opening post. I have a Bachmann Class O and I would like to know how close or far out the green is. Hopefully this post is objective and provides a useful second comparison.

The Diagram G1 kit by 51L is now complete bar weathering. A little messy soldering the brake levers onto the solebar. A bit more practice needed there, but otherwise I'm pretty happy how this has gone together.

Another 3d printed P4 hopper by the Small Loco Works has been completed. This one is in 1911 to 1922 livery.

I have three more of these to finish, but am now struggling to find any photos of original wagons to base them on.

And this is the one I previously posted, which has since been weathered:

After a lot longer than intended, I've finally invested in a soldering iron for white metal kits and today was the first crack at putting one together without using Araldite. Fortunately, I think I did my research reasonably thoroughly, taking advice from many fellow modellers, to which I'm truly grateful, and nothing melted except the solder!

This is a 51L North Eastern Railway Diagram G1 covered goods van. I paused at this stage to pick which wagon number it was going to get and the correct brake configuration. With that now decided, onwards to the brake levers, floor and roof before a scrub down and priming...

Video of my Class O shunting a few NER wagons:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CuZpe7qgB5T/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

I've fitted a metal hook to the bufferbeam on mine. Some more photos and description on my workbench page:
https://www.rmweb.co.uk/topic/174961-thetalkinlens-north-eastern-railway-workbench/?do=findComment&comment=5218228

For my North Eastern Railway period locomotives and rolling stock, I have opted for three link or screw link couplings with metal hooks on the bufferbeams. On the TMC/Bachmann Class O, there is very little space behind the hole for the hook due to a mounting for the chassis screw.

I prefer to file the shaft of hooks down rather than open up the hole on the bufferbeam. The issue with the spacing indicated below:

And this is my solution below. The hook shaft has been cut to length and a new 0.4mm hole drilled through it. There is then just enough space to fit some 0.012" (about 0.31mm) wire through the hole. The wire is tight against the body and when the chassis marries up, it holds the wire in place, so no glue is needed.

A small amount of filing is needed on the chassis: a cut shape for the hook shaft end and a bit off the top front to allow space for the wire. The guard irons mounted on the chassis have also been trimmed for space for the wire.

The rear of the model is much more straight forward with plenty of space to push the hook right through. It will then be bent through 90 degrees against the rear of the bufferbeam and glued so it does not foul the bogie.

1 hour ago, 5Dublo2 said:

So the issue is not a digital camera artifact but the light source (and probably the material under the paint) are affecting perception

Agreed on this, but I would add re the digital camera artefact. From the testing I've done so far - you notice the difference to the naked eye under artificial light. But a digital camera will pick up the difference under any light. To date I don't think I've seen any photos where the dome looks like a match.

On 02/07/2023 at 12:21, Compound2632 said:

 

I have seen the Ratio Midland suburban carriages used to represent NER non-corridor non-clerestoty bogie stock. The Ratio kits depict David Bain's first round-cornered panelled stock for the Midland, being built in 1903 for the Manchester South District services, shortly after he moved from the North Eastern, and were replicated (with the addition of the 4-compt brake third) for the Birmingham District in 1908/9. They have the great advantage of having the deep waist panel that Bain had also been using on the North Eastern. Reference to North Eastern Record Vol. 2 reveals that these carriages were built around 1899-1901 and were 49 ft long, a foot more than the 48 ft of the Midland carriages. Other than that, the main visual difference is the use of 8 ft wheelbase bogies rather than the 10 ft of the Midland carriages. There seem to have been seven diagrams, 50-55 and 63/64, consisting of 8-compartment thirds, 4-compartment brake-thirds, and three or four varieties of 7-compartment composites, with 2, 3, or 4 first class compartments. It might be a bit if a stretch to use these kits to represent non-corridor clerestories, as those were 52 ft long, though I dare say one could get a good long way by cutting and shutting the Ratio sides.

 

The Hattons Genesis 6-wheelers are pretty close to NER 6-wheelers, especially the 5-compartment third and the centre-lavatory composite; they are the right length and have the correct flat ends.

Is that one of these?

Which is representing one of these? (NER Diagram 64)

Returning to the TMC/Bachmann model, a few people have noted to me the bunker on the NER versions are solid plastic rather than open between the rails.

I believe TMC/Bachmann have got this detail right. Quoting from North Eastern Express issue 119 which features a detailed article about the Class O / G5's:

Quote

"To prevent spillage of small coal the rails were very soon filled in with steel backing plates".

There is a photo of the original No.2093 in NER livery dated August 1924, so just after grouping, but not repainted yet. The three rail bunker does look to have the backing plate as per the model.

2 hours ago, drmditch said:

As far as I am aware, the NER didn't use the Class O for push-pull workings. That was what they used the BTPs for.

Correct, 19 G5's were fitted with push/pull gear between December 1937 and February 1945. Then two more were push/pull fitted by British Railways.

There are a number of 3D print NER coaches listed here:
http://www.rue-d-etropal.com/3D-printing/passenger-stock-lner/3d_printed_ner-coaches.htm

They are available to purchase through Shapeways. This is where I become hesitant! I have heard that the quality of printing from Shapeways can be quite poor and I've not seen any of these from the links above out in the wild so to speak, so have nothing to judge on how good they a might be.