ian@stenochs

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Thanks to @ian@stenochs for the reply re. carriages which I have to apologise for not having seen until now. I now know at least seven times as much about G&SWR carriages than I did before!

 

I've changed the topic title again as I have another G&SW question...

 

I've a photo taken at St Enoch in LMS days, which I'm trying to date as well as identify the locomotives. In the background is LMS Standard 2P No. 576, which I presume must be the second of the class to carry that number, built to Lot 67 in 1929, not the engine built as part of Lot 49 in 1928 and quickly transferred to the S&DJR. D.L. Smith, Legends of the Glasgow & South Western Railway in LMS Days (David & Charles, 1980) lists the 2Ps sent new to ex-G&SW sheds in 1928, which include all of 570-579 apart from 575 and 576, which went to the S&DJR along with 580. He also lists the engines delivered in 1930, numbered in the 6xx series, but makes no mention of the second Nos. 575, 576, and 580. Were these also allocated to ex-G&SW sheds from new, i.e. in 1929?

 

The main feature of the photo in question is a Manson 4-4-0 with, I think, a large Drummond or Pickersgill boiler, and an 8-wheel tender. It has no smokebox numberplate but is in second LMS livery, with its number on the rear splasher. The leading digits are definitely 142, then almost certainly 2, the fifth digit being completely obscured. According to Wikipedia, Nos. 14220-7 were 336 Class and Nos. 14428-9 were 194 Class. Here's a crop from the full photo:

 

 

Can anyone confirm the class or even identity of this engine? The withdrawal date (or range) would also be useful to know.

 

What is the object hanging down the cab side? (The 2P seems to have something similar.)

 

The profile of the carriage behind will I think give the clue as to why I'm interested in this photo! (It is an ex-M&GSW Joint Stock 50 ft composite, D468 of 1900.)

The engine is a Manson 240 class, basically an 8 class with a bigger boiler, built 1904-6.  Some of the 8 class were also given the bigger boiler and corresponding higher cab by Manson.  None ever got Caley designed boilers.  However some did get the Whitelegg treatment, modified valve motion, new standard boiler and commodious Whitelegg cab. The object threaded through the handrail and dangling on the cab side is the slaker pipe for damping down the dust and washing the floor.  It was worked off the firemans side injector via a simple plug cock on the top of the splasher.

The Manson tablet catcher wasn't used on the Sou' West.  Where a catcher was employed it was the Bryson apparatus but most often just the firemans arm!

There were two of the 8 wheeled tenders. Manson brought the design with him from the Great North, the Sou' West versions differed in detail like standard buffers,  axleboxes and springs.  Also the handbrake was on the left, firemans side on the G&SWR.  The tenders went on locos use on the Diner which ran non stop so needed extra water capacity.  The started on the 8 class and then the 240s when they replaced the 8's.  By LMS days they were only on two engines 14246 & 14248.  The engine in the picture is 14248.  14246 was a Whitelegg version.  379class. Both were withdrawn in 1932.

Ian.

There are a lot of photos of trains on the long road principally consisting of M&GSW stock with Manson bogies top or tail.  I have always thought that these would be for the local traffic and would come off at Carlisle leaving the posh coaches to go on to St Pancras!  
 

James Manson designed the 43’ bogie stock and introduced them in 1893.  The first ones had square corners to the panelling below the waist very like the Smellie six wheeled stock but then all got the oval panels below the windows.  The bogie stock were built to the same profile as the six wheelers which continued to be built until 1900.  

The bogie stock were either 6 compartment 1st or 7 compartment 3rd with both Brake 3rd and Brake composites.  In 1899 a series of corridor stock for the Stranraer service was built to the same profile.      These were longer at 47’ 6” 

The panelling was similar to Midland but the Sou West always had square corners at the bottom of window and door panels and the commode handles were distinctly L shaped as opposed to the loop of the Midland. Another similarity was the use of Clayton bogies identical to the MR except the axlebox covers had G&SW cast on..  I don’t know if these were built in house or bought in.  Carriage work was done at Kilmarnock works until 1901 when the new C&W works opened at Barassie. 

17 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

What's that Wild (Sou') West saloon?

The director and officers saloon,  unofficially the ‘Shebeen’ Built on a standard 43’ underframe with the balconies tacked onto the ends.

10 hours ago, pH said:

 

Reduced maintenance during WW1 meant their performance suffered. Then Whitelegg's modifications, mainly the fitting of the extended smokeboxes, just added to the problems. 

 

It wasn’t just during wartime that maintenance on the Sou West was a problem.  Kilmarnock works was too small and I’ll equipped to handle routine maintenance almost from the start. By the turn of the century there are accounts of rows of engines at loco sheds waiting a place at the works.  The multiplicity of boiler types didn’t help.  Boilers took about three times as long as the mechanical work on an engine so if there wasn’t a suitable boiler to hand delay was inevitable. The major sheds did undertake quite a lot but even they struggled.

2 hours ago, PenrithBeacon said:

There is an excellent two part article on Manson's locomotives in the January/February 1964 issues of Railway Magazine. 

The  pictures attached give a good idea of why the engines were unsuccessful,  boiler not big enough,  ditto firebox, ditto grate with the latter being very cramped too. Essentially an enlarged 4-4-0  rather than a clean sheet design. Manson was typical of his era but his engines were very beautiful. 

Of the Scottish 4-6-0s they were head and shoulders above in looks!  In my opinion only the GCR Imminghams come close and much of their appeal is in the elaborate multicolour livery.

The 1919 renumbering was applied quite quickly on the Sou,West, about the only positive thing Whitelegg did! The circular handrails were only fitted on new Whitelegg doors

The extended smokeboxes did not do much to improve steaming but there were alterations done to the blastpipe and chimney liners too.  Most of the drivers resorted, unofficially,  to fitting razors on the blastpipe to sharpen the blast and improve steaming.

I have checked through the engine records in my possession and see that 497 got an extended smokebox in April 21 but kept original boiler. I have a photo of this engine with the circular handrail broken, leaving only half, with the bottom left knob missing and signs of burning!

510 got a new boiler with longer firebox and a Whitelegg cab in May 1920.

511 got the same in July 1920 but is noted in August 1921 with the Smokebox door nearly burned off!

Ian.

.

Willie Stewart’s Scottish drawings went to the relevant line societies and copies can be had from them.  

From the ones I have used I can vouch for their accuracy, Willie always tried to   work from a GA drawing but was very careful in checking other sources too.  His one foible was that he tended to draw the subject from the least cluttered side.  On most of the G&SWR locos, of which I am most familiar, that meant the left hand side. Details of the reverser and Westinghouse pumps, when fitted, were thus missing.

Ian

Happy Birthday Mike.
 

 I had mine last week and got some rather nice bottle conditioned ale so I will raise a glass to you tonight.  

Ian

I'm interested in your mention of using Rotring pens.  Are you using them with Humbrol paint and if so how do you clean them out?  I have only used mine with ink and cleaning that out is difficult enough.

Ian.

I use plain brass balls, sold for ball bearings, to make valve bodies etc in 7mm scale.  They are easily drilled or can be soldered and come in a variety of sizes. Look on eBay but here is the company I have used.  https://www.ballandrollerstore.com/brass-ball-bearings/
 

Ian.

1 hour ago, readingtype said:

 

For a newbie could you explain: what gives this guarantee? The fact that you won't slacken the chuck?

 

I'd like to see a photo of the arrangement you used when profiling the tyre -- next time perhaps?

 

Thanks a lot -- this thread is very helpful.

Ben

Ben,

The jaws are clamped onto a piece of round bar using the inside face of the jaw and noting which chuck key socket that was used to tighten them. The step in the chuck is now turned to the diameter of the object to be held.  The round bar is removed, using the noted socket, and the workpiece placed in the chuck.  As long as the chuck remains on the lathe parts held in the turned step will always run true.  Note this only works for workpieces all of the same diameter, as my 6 wheels in the example given.

The setup I use to profile the tyres is shown below.  The mandrel is held in the chuck and the wheel clamped onto the tyre with a substantial washer and screws, shown before tightening up in the picture.  There is no strain put upon the spokes.  The tyre profile is done at slow speed with a form tool which I mount on a rear tool post so that the swarf drops away from the cutting edge and cannot get jammed.  The tool is fed very slowly and I note the reading when the first tyre is correct size.  All the other wheels are turned to the same setting and are automatically all the same size and profile.

When using a form tool it is important that the saddle is locked and there is no play in the cross slide, a smear of cutting fluid and a stoned cutting edge also helps give a fine surface finish.

Ian.

It’s worth remembering that where a repeatable setup is required a chuck with soft jaws is well worth having.  Most reputable chuck makers will supply soft jaws with the chuck. I use a four jaw self centering, which has both hard and soft jaws and was quite reasonably priced.  I also find it very useful for turning square stock.
 

As an example of a typical use, here is a wheel which has been reprofiled with a form tool.  The wheel was held on a mandrel which clamped the tyre to prevent straining the delecate plastic spokes. The soft jaws have been machined to form a recess which will hold the wheel for boring the centre hole for the axle.  As six are required I can be sure that the next five will run just as true as the first one.

Ian.

On 02/04/2021 at 17:27, Gilwell Park said:

Some time ago I was watching my granddaughter driving James, very fast, round my layout. I realised that James is a very unusual locomotive, apart from his ability to speak that is. He is an inside cylinder 2-6-0. I have only found 2 such classes in the UK, One on the Caledonian & one on the Glasgow & South Western plus one in Ireland. I thought that it could be regarded as the goods equivalent of the 4-4-0. I read somewhere that James Holder of the GER considered a small wheeled Claud Hamilton for mixed traffic work, supplementing the E4 2-4-0 but never went ahead. I therefor present the LNER K10 class. An A. J. Hill development of the B12. A better loco for MT work than his heavy freight J20. It is built on a Hornby 0-6-0 chassis with a 3F footplate & original B12 cab, boiler & smokebox with front footplate attached . I have assumed that LNER rebuilt them with a round topped boiler as they did the B12/1 & the J20. 21mm Romford driving wheels are fitted. It is numbered in the unused 640xx series between the 2-8-0 & the 0-6-0. With a very old X04 motor it is a very useful engine.  Roger.

Rev Audrey was friendly with David L Smith, author of a number of books on the G&SWR, so it’s very likely that James was based on the Austrian Goods as the 2-6-0s were called on the Sou’ West.  They were a superheated development of Peter Drummonds big 0-6-0, the poney wheel added to take the weight of the superheater header and enlarged smokebox.

The twins, Donald & Douglas, were also based on a working in G&SW area though in BR days.  Most of the original stories were based on facts and railway practice.

Ian.

22 hours ago, Rick Gibson said:

Just throwing this one out there. I spent the week learning how to focus stack images to make my photographs of the layout more realistic look. I then decided to 'cross a line' and 'manipulate images to improve the modelling' specifically by cloning a face onto to an already high quality 3D laser printed figure. Some may see this as a step too far, but the human eye can identify and differentiate faces that are barely perceivable in the most difficult of circumstances. Many layouts and dioramas are beautifully realistic miniature worlds held back by lumpy and unrealistic figures with no clear credible facial features. In a previous thread I raised my disappointment that (apart from ModelU and Hardy's Hobbies) figures have remained poor for decades while locomotives, rolling stock and buildings are all amazing. Photoshop is frequently used to remove background clutter from layouts photographed in sheds and garages. Also most of us now employ photographs for backscenes. What d'ya reckon? (example image attached)

 

You raise a good point about figures but I think to have a totally convincing picture all the elements have to be of similar quality.  Your photo is a case in point.  Nothing shouts model more than the front of the bogie, the unrealistic shine on the over scale wheels and the prominent mould line on the chimney. If you mask these off you have an excellent picture right down to the signal post growing out of the dome.  A feature of so many photos taken in the steam age!

Ian.

I have seen a photo of an early Barclay, piano tank, with a Gifford injector on the left side of the footplate.  The Gifford injector was not self starting and had a control wheel on the end so had to be accessible. The view is 3/4 rear and there is no back, only a rail, on the cab. 
There were main line locos built with only one injector but most also had a pump.  I cannot say that I have seen any evidence of a pump on a Barclay loco, yet!

Ian.

I should really be doing work around the house to get it ready to put it on the market but my motivation is sadly lacking. I could do with a kick up the backside because it won't do itself. 
 

Mike,

It can be a bit counterproductive to do much in your house before putting it on the market. New paint or wallpaper can indicate to prospective buyers that you have something to hide!  Even though you’re not hiding anything  the new owner will probably paint over it!

What does help is removing clutter so just make sure you have a tidy workbench and carry on with the superb modelling.

Ian.

I always have at least 5 minutes actual modelling on Christmas Day.  This year it was easier as we were on our own with no guests so not so many potatoes to peel!  So 20 minutes making the footsteps for the loco I have been building was time well spent.

Ian.

I use plungers almost exclusively. My solution is home made , costs very little, virtually invisible, does not catch fingers like wipers, permits wheels to have sideplay without loss of contact and can be easily removed for cleaning without taking the wheels off. 

The photo below shows the construction but basically a piece of brass tube soldered into the frames behind the tyre has a plastic tube liner glued inside. The pickup is a piece of brass or copper wire, I use brass, with a scrap brass fret tag soldered near one end and the wire to the motor goes onto the tag.  Opposing plungers are pressed against the wheel by another bit of brass tube with one end closed off containing a spring and a plastic rod plunger.  Think toilet roll holder!  The pressure can be adjusted by shortening or lengthening the plunger.  You need less pressure than you think!

A couple of my smaller locos use a piece of foam rubber as the pressure source.

Ian.

If you get one of the professional painters  to paint your model it will never be your own work which is recognised, it will always be an xx paint job!   
 

At least have a go at painting, it’s not rocket science, read up on techniques and give it a go.  Even if it’s not perfect you can strip off the paint and try again. 
 

Ian.

50 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

This is the proposed LMS rebuild of the GSWR Stirling 0-4-0 mineral engines, using the standard G0.5S Belpaire boiler. Drawings were prepared, then someone from Kilmarnock works pointed out that the class had all been withdrawn by about 1900. 

Nice thought. Some of the Fower wheelers lasted until after the Great War, this one didn’t but is seen here in rude good health in 1908!

15 hours ago, airnimal said:

Marc, I also like small odd loco' but with the numbers modelling S7 I don't think it is ever going to be feasible for any manufacturers to produce wheels for any of them. 

 

A little bit of progress with this Furniture wagon but I am making it up as I go along whether it is going to be a runner is still open to debate. I have been on Grandad duties for the past 3 days which is harder than going to work full time. Plus I did 50 miles on the bike on Sunday which was hard work at my age but I have to keep going. Use it or lose it !

You are correct Mike.  There are so many different patterns and sizes of Industrial locomotive wheels that it would be impossible to cater for all.  
 

I have made wheels, it’s not that difficult if you have the equipment, but would prefer not to have to do everything. If a range of wheel tyres in different sizes could be produced that would make wheel making a lot easier.
 

I have no experience of 3D printing but would that be a suitable material for making the centres?  Industrial wheels are small and usually quite chunky, would the spokes be robust enough?  Some of my bigger locos have whitemetal wheel centres home cast from plastikard patterns and they have stood up to quite a bit of running without any problems.

Ian.

6 hours ago, Bob Lawrence said:

What year was this supposed to have happened?.

Bob

I have had this story from a number of people. They cannot all be making it up!

Snap Mike!

I followed a very similar path. Moving to 7mm scale from P4 I did build one loco in fine standard 0 but soon converted it to S7 and have never looked back. Being able to lift dimensions straight from a GA drawing makes modelling so much more satisfying.

I am thoroughly enjoying following this build of yours. It is a bit of a cliche but modellers tend to favour the less usual prototypes when in reality they were quite rare. We have seen you produce some exquisite 'ordinary' wagons and this special you are building will truly be a 'special' example!

Ian.

1 hour ago, Aberbrothock said:

A pair of Ivatt class 2's going about their duties in Arbroath yard.

 

 

They look suspiciously clean.............

and one hell of a jump for the fireman filling his shovel!

11 hours ago, Dave Hunt said:

The threads here are fascinating and informative but I just want to point out that it is an indisputable fact that notwithstanding any evidence to the contrary the Midland was the finest railway on planet earth. In stating this I am completely unbiased in any way.

 

Dave Hunt

Chairman, Midland Railway Society.

Facts are fine but don’t let them get in the way of a good story! It is worth remembering that the G&SWR had a close working relationship with the Midland and almost took them over, 3 times!  
 

Ian Middleditch,

Chairman, Glasgow and South Western Railway Association.

Getting a rigid chassis square and free of twist with all the axles in the same plane is very difficult. There is only one perfect and an infinite number of almost right!  By fitting sprung or equalised bearings you remove the need for absolute square completely. 

Even if you can built a perfectly square chassis you will only have three wheels in firm contact with the rails which compromises current collection. Of course if your track is perfectly flat!!!

Ian