Big Bertha

[Midland Mole]

Bringing the topic back to actual liveries, KR have now given us the LMS Black (sorry about the picture size, can't seem to find a bigger version)

But it at least shows the cut down tender sides and the double later style valves. Nice to see that thay have indeed got those details right.

Hopefully the engineering prototypes will answer more questions when they eventually break cover, but I'd say they are moving in the right direction.

[Michael Hodgson]

10 hours ago, GWR-fan said:

There is a market for those who demand authenticity and obviously a market for those who like something a little different to the norm.

Yes, there is the question of how many OO modellers are going to put another engine on the back of their trains to shove them up a hill.

And among those, how many are modelling one particular two mile stretch of track south of Brum.

 

I rather think most of those who have one will be "applying rule 1" or claiming it's on its way to/from Derby Works.

[96701]

13 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Since it would appear that KRM'S idea of researching Midland Railway liveries is finding an image of an old cigarette card - primary evidence, that - we now know the value that they place upon authenticity; (even for a fictitious livery).

 

Still, whilst there are id***s around to buy this rubbish .......!

 

CJI.

Nice insult, there John.

[Bernard Lamb]

13 hours ago, No Decorum said:

“L. M. & S. R. MIDLAND SECTION.” Wills obviously had the same approach as KR.

 

The thing is, apart from the Class 40*, I love KR’s choice of subject. Sadly, it looks as if KR is set on making a mess of everything. I’m beginning to think that I don’t want anything KR produces. Perhaps he’ll go bust and Accurascale will buy the moulds cheaply and set about fixing everything, Class 66 style.

 

*I have nothing against the Class 40. It just isn’t specialised enough to fit into KR’s area.

Congratulations on seeing the light.

I reached that point several years ago.

 

I do hope that KR is going to make a contribution to Wills for the use of the image.

Bernard

[GWR-fan]

14 hours ago, No Decorum said:

.............................................................................Perhaps he’ll go bust and Accurascale will buy the moulds cheaply and set about fixing everything, .....................................................

 

 

Personally,  I would be very surprised if KR Models actualy "owns" their tooling.  They may have exclusive rights to the tooling.  These days the Chinese like to keep everything inhouse,  doing all the cad work and owning the tooling.  

[Michael Hodgson]

6 minutes ago, GWR-fan said:

 

Personally,  I would be very surprised if KR Models actualy "owns" their tooling.  They may have exclusive rights to the tooling.  These days the Chinese like to keep everything inhouse,  doing all the cad work and owning the tooling.  

So if a Western "manufacturer" went bust, those exclusive rights would transfer to the liquidators under our laws. 

They would sell them for whatever they could get for them to pay creditors. 

Or are you saying Chinese possession woukd be nine tenths of Chinese law?

Eigther way, I don't see any reasons to assume they could not be the basis for production by somebody else.

[John Isherwood]

1 hour ago, 96701 said:

Nice insult, there John.

 

JMHO.

 

CJI.

[Buhar]

12 hours ago, melmerby said:

The other companies that made up the LMS arer also rendered as LMSR XXXXX Section.

Fairly quickly the LMS was constituted into divisions; Northern, Central, Western and Midland, so Wills weren't far off. Those cards must be early 1923 or very near.

Alan

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, No Decorum said:

“L. M. & S. R. MIDLAND SECTION.” Wills obviously had the same approach as KR.

 

The thing is, apart from the Class 40*, I love KR’s choice of subject. Sadly, it looks as if KR is set on making a mess of everything. I’m beginning to think that I don’t want anything KR produces. Perhaps he’ll go bust and Accurascale will buy the moulds cheaply and set about fixing everything, Class 66 style.

 

*I have nothing against the Class 40. It just isn’t specialised enough to fit into KR’s area.

What on earth is wrong with the 'LM&SR Midland Section?  As it actually existed it hardly seems to be wrong to use it on a cigarette card.  Don't forget (if you knew?) that these cards were issued in 1924 (yes, I have checked that date) and the artist would probably have been at work on them in the previous so the description is correct for the time.

 

The interesting thing about the card is the livery as generally - and there were exceptions cigarette card artists worked from contemporary information.   So maybe, as already suggested, the artist based it on what was known at the time about LMS livery.   And 'there were no doubt 'rivet counters' among the people who collected the cards who might well have written to Wills once the final livery was known (yes, that really did happen).  

 

Addendum

Reference on the Grouped Companies to the name of the Pre-Grouping owner continued in offocial documentation for many years after the Grouping,  Definitely way into the 1930s (for which I have examples)  and probably even up to nationalisation.

Edited June 24, 2023 by The Stationmaster

[Ian Hargrave]

I used to collect Turf cigarette cards I recall they were rather good. I persuaded my father to smoke the brand which was widely considered to be puffing on old rope so that I could complete the set of BR locos. Things one does for one’s kids……

[Roy Langridge]

Reading through this thread has given me a laugh this morning. Only on RMWeb would people argue about the accuracy of a fictitious livery. Priceless…

 

Roy

[No Decorum]

29 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

What on earth is wrong with the 'LM&SR Midland Section?  As it actually existed it hardly seems to be wrong to use it on a cigarette card.  Don't forget (if you knew?) that these cards were issued in 1924 (yes, I have checked that date) and the artist would probably have been at work on them in the previous so the description is correct for the time.

 

The interesting thing about the card is the livery as generally - and there were exceptions cigarette card artists worked from contemporary information.   So maybe, as already suggested, the artist based it on what was known at the time about LMS livery.   And 'there were no doubt 'rivet counters' among the people who collected the cards who might well have written to Wills once the final livery was known (yes, that really did happen).  

 

Addendum

Reference on the Grouped Companies to the name of the Pre-Grouping owner continued in offocial documentation for many years after the Grouping,  Definitely way into the 1930s (for which I have examples)  and probably even up to nationalisation.

There’s nothing wrong with “L. M. & S. R. Midland Section”. The point I was trying to make was that the caption jarred with the livery carried by the locomotive. Unless the card was produced immediately after grouping, I would have thought an effort would have been made to depict it with LMS insignia.

[melmerby]

11 minutes ago, No Decorum said:

There’s nothing wrong with “L. M. & S. R. Midland Section”. The point I was trying to make was that the caption jarred with the livery carried by the locomotive. Unless the card was produced immediately after grouping, I would have thought an effort would have been made to depict it with LMS insignia.

As I said, all the cards published in that section show locos in their pre-grouping liveries (but published post-grouping.)

It is not purporting to show LMS livery.

 

3 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Perhaps he’ll go bust and Accurascale will buy the moulds cheaply and set about fixing everything  bin them and start again.

👍

[melmerby]

8 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

But seriously folks...

 

It does seem to be a question of doubt whether in reality, in black, 2290 received the LMS cartouche in place of the Midland coat-of-arms or kept the latter until receiving the 1928 style lettering, i.e. number on the cab-side and LMS on the tender.

That is correct, equally there is no evidence to prove it didn't, either.

Photos of 2290 between 1922, when it received it's headlight and post 1928 in the new LMS livery, seem to be conspicuous by thir absence.

However, repainting an engine in 1923 that was just over 2 years old and not on "frontline" passenger service would seem a luxury the new LMS had no need to do, until major shopping or needing repainting.

[Buhar]

It would only need a cab side repaint to put on the LMS in its box in place of the MR arms and removing MR from the buffer beam.  I've only got a dozen photos but I'm inclined to think neither happened. Those few photos seem to indicate the tender was cut down at the same time it received the later LMS livery.

Alan  

[No Decorum]

5 hours ago, melmerby said:

As I said, all the cards published in that section show locos in their pre-grouping liveries (but published post-grouping.)

It is not purporting to show LMS livery.

 

Fair enough. Sorry, I missed that comment.

[Compound2632]

6 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

Reading through this thread has given me a laugh this morning. Only on RMWeb would people argue about the accuracy of a fictitious livery. Priceless…

 

Missing the point. Midland / early LMS passenger locomotive livery is not fictitious. Application of that livery to 2290 as a "what if" is fictitious; but surely fiction is at its best when it is consonant with reality?

[melmerby]

Essery & Jenkinson state that photographic evidence shows that 2290 was still carrying it's MR crest as late as 1926, so it's unlikely to ever have carried the LMS roundel.

Edited June 24, 2023 by melmerby

[PMP]

8 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

  And 'there were no doubt 'rivet counters' among the people who collected the cards who might well have written to Wills

Proper old school!

 

Dear Sir,

             It has come to my attention….

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Essery & Jenkinson state that photographic evidence shows that 2290 was still carrying it's MR crest as late as 1926, so it's unlikely to ever have carried the LMS roundel.

 

Do they say if that was after the tender sides had been cut down, for which 1925 has been suggested, IIRC.

 

To be nitpicking, being a black engine it would never have carried the LMS roundel anyway, as that was part of the red passenger engine livery. Black engines got the LMS cartouche, which seems elusive in on-line photos, so will make do with this illustration:

 

 

[Embedded link to London Midland Society webpage.]

[Buhar]

5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

Do they say if that was after the tender sides had been cut down, for which 1925 has been suggested, IIRC.

My limited photos show all those in MR livery with a high tender and all those in LMS livery with numbers on the cabside with the cut down version.  Not a lot of evidence and regrettably all are undated.  If it was 1925 that's three years to be photographed in MR/low tender or LMS with cartouche and low tender.  Jenkinson/Essery must have had access to many more images and can't sequence things with any certainty so I plead a later date for the tender work.

 

Alan

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

Do they say if that was after the tender sides had been cut down, for which 1925 has been suggested, IIRC.

No mention of the cut down tender.

The do say that the first LMS carried was the standard they call C1 which is with a cabside "cut-corner" cartouche with number still on the tender but receiving the 1928 livery soon after.

 

Can we assume that for that short period post 1926, rather than full repaint it just had the cartouche replacing the MR crest?

[TheCoffeePot]

13 hours ago, Roy Langridge said:

Reading through this thread has given me a laugh this morning. Only on RMWeb would people argue about the accuracy of a fictitious livery. Priceless…

 

Roy

It's actually put me off from reading much rmweb. I've heard of rivet counters who have something to reference whilst conducting unhealthy amounts of obsessive criticism but I've never seen people so desperate to yuk people's yum by dictating how a spurious item should be constructed with arguments over authenticity!!! I'm more aghast than amused.

 

as the kids say, step away, go outside, touch grass.

 

 

[Compound2632]

9 hours ago, TheCoffeePot said:

It's actually put me off from reading much rmweb. I've heard of rivet counters who have something to reference whilst conducting unhealthy amounts of obsessive criticism but I've never seen people so desperate to yuk people's yum by dictating how a spurious item should be constructed with arguments over authenticity!!! I'm more aghast than amused.

 

I think you misrepresent what is going on here and do a disservice to those willing to share their knowledge of the subject; an apology might be appropriate.

[leezer3]

There is a certain subset of members here who are doing nothing more, nothing less than trolling.

 

This totally derailed the Fell thread, and I'm afraid it's happened again here in spades.

Bluntly, the whole thread needs cleaning and locking, and IMHO this reflects badly upon the site as a whole.