buffalo

Sorry, Rich, my question was specifically in response to Edward's comment that Midmight Blue was very dark on a model. Hence what colour undercoat did he use with this (and with the Ontario Blue) as this might well affect the final colour, particularly as Kilmersden had mentioned that the SDRT had used a medium blue undercoat on their full-sized specimens. Nick

Bearing in mind what has been said above, what undercoat did you use with these paints? Nick

This site lists the Rover version of Midnight Blue as suitable. Must try it some day... Nick

Why not put the pivot above the axle centres and just above that frame cutout? If you look at the 1366 photo that is what was done there, and is often done on other models. You may even be able to shape the beams to avoid the plungers and it will be less conspicuous that way. As to fore and aft movement, as chaz says, provide you allow a bit of space in the frame axle holes it will be irrelevant. There will be some minute movement wherever you place the beam centre. Nick

None of the early ones (up to No 17) were intended to pull tail traffic*, nor were they coupled together. No 18 was fitted with buffers and regularly hauled horse boxes, etc. on the Lambourn branch. Subsequently, the ones with flat panels (19-38) were all built with buffers and did often run in pairs or with a trailing coach or van. Nick * those up to No 17 were fitted with a vestigial form of buffer, just a pin without any head. You can see these clearly on Karhedron's second photo above. They provided some protection if they came into contact with stop blocks or other vehicles, but were not intended to act as buffers in normal use.

There certainly were differences under the skin between the 1935 and 1936 batches, but the visual difference that you've pointed out is, AFAIK, only cosmetic. It is simply that the beading on 5-7 sweeps up to the centre of the front windows whereas that on 8-17 is straight. The painting reflects this and, possibly, it may reflect a difference in panel shapes. Of course, if the model has only the straight beading then you're right that it will be wrong for No 7 (or vice versa). The handrails are irrelevant as neither group had these fitted when built. The handrails and footsteps were added some time later. The earliest example of these that I've seen is in a 1939 photo of parcels car No 17. Nick

Afraid not, the first Hurricane in 1838 had 10' drivers and the second in 1895 had 7'8". The third was a renamed Castle. Mind you, an 1838 Hurricane would be an entertaining project. Nick

Welcome to RMweb! It's a large and complex site so maybe a bit difficult to find their way around, however, there are specific forum areas for all manner of subjects. Take a look at the Forum Index to see all the forum areas. Your question would best be asked by posting the Electrics (non-DCC) section. It might help when you ask the question to say what type of track you are using. Alternatively, a quick Google search on 'gaugemaster ds instructions' will find you the instructions on the Gaugemaster site. Blogs are not for asking questions. If you take a look at a few other Blog entries, you'll find they are mostly used to show what people have been modelling, etc. Nick

Except, of course, when they were black, with or without red lining, brown and cream or crimson lake as GJ Churchward intended... Nick

As Mike said, ordinary tail lamp brackets had long been fitted to coaches and NPCCS on the GWR and can be seen on vehicles in the late 19th century. They were normally mounted above or just inboard of the left hand rear buffer (viewed from behind) and have their long section in line with the end of the vehicle. What I think you are referring to are side lamp brackets. During the Dean era these were mounted on the end, or extreme end of the sides, and were oriented like the post-1905 GWR loco lamp brackets with their long section in line with the vehicle side. In a few cases, vehicles with end duckets had their side lamps mounted inside the upper part of the ducket. The Churchward era type was similarly aligned, but was usually mounted on the vehicle end and stuck out further to the rear. The use of side lamps on passenger trains ended in 1934 so thereafter they only showed one lamp (the tail lamp) to the rear. Many of these brackets survived, though unused, well after they ceased to be used for lamps. Previously, passenger trains (includeing NPCCS) showed three lamps to the rear, one tail lamp and two side lamps (except slip coaches that had extra special lamps). Nick

It's a tail lamp, not a loco lamp, and side lamps had gone long before Rob's time so no fitting problem. Nick

Try posting in the Modelling Questions forum area. More people will see it there and blogs really are not for asking questions. Nick

How about some photos for those of us who are not familiar with this kit? Nick

Was it in clean ex-works condition? The Swindon-Bristol and return stoppers were regularly used as running-in turns for engines fresh out of the works, though Castles and Kings were the more commonly seen. Nick

I should have mentioned that the mid-1927 date for the start of blue axleboxes comes from GWW. Looking at their references, it appears they used the same evidence of photos from Russell's Appendix that I mentioned above. I don't recall seeing any other source for this date. Nick

Well, if you don't believe me, try the paper read to the GWR Mechanics' Institution on January 9th 1896 by a certain G. J. Churchward, reproduced in Russell's coaches vol 1. Alternatively, look at the photos in the same book. You'll find very few grease boxes beyond the first few pages. Nick

Try Russell's Appendix Vol 1. Looking only at the E diagrams from E132 (1928) to E163 (1947), most of the 'as built' photos show the blue spring hangers. Exceptions where only the axleboxes are painted are mostly around 1928 or after 1947. Unfortunately few 'in service' photos are clear enough to detect any hint of blue paint. Nick

The above comments about white lead reacting with sulphorous compounds are quite correct, the process being well advanced within a year or so of painting. Painting the tops of axle boxes blue began in 1927 and was used to indicate that the axle boxes had been modified. I don't know the nature of the modification, but it certainly had nothing to do with grease vs oil types. Grease boxes had not been fitted to GWR coaches or other rolling stock since the late 19th century (oil boxes were introduced from the late 1880s). Contemporary photos from the late twenties and thirties regularly show both the axlebox cover and the spring hangers painted blue, though I've not seen any explanation for the latter. Nick

The photos of the 3501 tanks are quite clear and full-page copies of these and others were printed in BGS Broadsheet No 68. In only two or three cases is there even a hint of the black line close to the edge of the tanks and none of the orange. Equally, there is no hint of the black edging or red or orange lining that would be expected near the edge of the frames (this may however have appeared somewhat later). Certainly, the boiler bands on all of the photos are not lined. It is certainly possible to find examples of unlined or partially lined engines, particularly tanks and many of these do not have lined boiler bands. Perhaps a better photo of Prince in Geof Sheppard's Broad Gauge Engines taken fairly soon after almagamation of the SDR with the GWR does clearly show lining on the bunker side, but not on the cab side sheet. As to 517s, the John Copsey article in GWRJ 74-5 shows almost every combination. Most have some lining, some have difficult to see lining and maybe one or two have none. Boiler band lining is often missing. I don't remember the Guy Williams' article you mention but I doubt if it was a very early example as until the 1890s most of the class had Wolverhampton livery with very visible pale lining. I see the point about lining not being visible in photos, but red or brown wheels and frames aren't visible in most photos either My main concern with model lining is that only the very best model painters appear to be able to produce something near a scale 1/8" line (0.04mm in 4mm scale) and so much of what we see is just gross. Nick

Yes, the answer is in GWW and, in a less up-to-date form in RCTS Part 1 or the RCTS Livery Register for the GWR. It isn't simple, remember there were sixty odd years of the GWR before 1900 and there were many livery variations. The situation is made more complex because for most of these years the liveries used at Swindon and Wolverhampton differed quite widely. There was always some form of lining from at least the mid 1840s, but much variation in colour and where it was applied. At the time the 3501 tanks were built (1885) boiler bands and lining were black with a narrow orange line either side. The orange is rarely seen on photos because, as Mike said, contemporary film emulsions simply did not record it and so treated it much like red. There are some other photos of 3501 tanks that show a hint of lining, and lining is seen on many contemporary side tanks. As in later years, lining on saddle tanks is restricted to cabs or bunkers or both. Some earlier linings do show up better on photos. The black with white edging and pea-green/straw varieties are usually much more visible. See, for example the photo of a Caesar class 0-6-0 goods engine on the BGS home page. This photo probably mid-1860s or maybe a bit later. Nick

No, they were always the 2221 class. There had been a 2201 class (2201-2220), Dean 2-4-0s, but the last of those had gone by 1921. The 4-4-0 Counties were the 38XX class, although 3800 and 3831-9 had been 3473-82 before the 1912 renumbering. So, did they really mean the County tanks, or am I missing something? Nick

Hi Mike, Remember 5-6" overall is only 2.5-3.inches per side. I've just been looking through Ahrons' Development of British Locomotive Design, no GWR examples but a couple of fold-out dimensioned drawings may surprise you: An NER 4-4-4T, boiler 4'9", cladding 5' 8 1/4" A MR 4-4-0, boiler 4' 7 7/8", cladding 5'3". Maybe the GWR was rather stingy with its insulation? Nick

Oh come on, Mike, you're being really selective there. Just look at the other two drawings on that page or on any of the next few pages. In each case there's around a mm or more between the solid and dashed lines. Whilst these are far from accurate drawings most do show room for a good 2-3 inches of lagging. The 439 drawing hardly has room for the cladding to clear any rivets joining the boiler rings! Nick

Hi Mike, Looks like I missed the 1893 Wolverhampton rebuild! As it happens, I have a copy of Swindon drawing No 11130 of 1893 sitting in front of me. This relates to alterations to the trailing end of a 517, but it shows the outlines of both the boiler and the cladding. The dimensions are unfortunately unreadable, but given the usual boiler diameter of 3'6 7/8", a quick measurement and arithmetic suggest about 3' 11 1/2" for the outside of the cladding (for what it's worth, my Mitchell kit came out at fractionally over four feet). There are plenty of images online that may help to convince you - try a google image search on 'boiler cladding'. Here's one example, the length of the handrail knobs and the gap between top feed piping and boiler should give a clue. Nick

Hi Mike, Looks like you are making good progress. One question, though. Where did the 4'2" boiler diameter come from? RCTS Part 3 has 4'1" for the original boilers and 4'7/8" for the type 34a fitted when rebuilt in 1871. A trivial difference you might say, but the boiler diameter given is usually the diameter of the bare boiler. Cladding will add five or six inches to this size. Nick