Sonic Models OO LBSCR K class

[Wickham Green too]

3 hours ago, BlueLightning said:

Is there a need for Bradely to quote lining when there wasn't an unlined livery? Saying they were black when only one black livery existed, which had double red lining, seems perfectly reasonble to me.

In this instance a photo cannot be seen as a reliable indicator as to any lining being present, due to the posibility of the use of Orthocromatic film which would not pickup the red lining.

"Orthochromatic film is simply made with silver halide crystals, which are naturally blue-sensitive. First produced in 1873, early film photos and movies used orthochromatic film, which is the reason why skies in early photographs are almost always white: being blue, they overexposed easily. The orthochromatic film couldn’t see a red light, so anything red would turn black"

Reading the full text 339, 340/2/6 would have been in black, not umber. Nothing about the description implies umber with LBSC lettering.

Gary

Now, the words "Nos. 337/42/4 left the Paint Shop in passenger umber" rather suggest to me that Nos. 337/42/4 left the Paint Shop in passenger umber - in 1923.

 

Yes, I agree about the orthographic film business but I feel plate 93 would have shown a HINT of lining had it been present .......... Bradley makes no mention of lining in the chapter on either of L.B.Billinton goods classes nor in the liveries section of Vol.1 ............ which, of course, doesn't prove that it wasn't applied. Wisdom's plate 42 shows "E1, No. 150 in plain livery with no lining .......... some locomotive repaints were in umber rather than black" - whether this loco was umber or black, it appears to be unlined so is in a livery that didn't exist.

 

So far as Bulleid liveries are concerned,  John  Harvey confirms my earlier interpretation - specifically "None of the Ks were repainted in experimental olive."

 

"unknown at Tonbridge, Ashford, Southampton, Salisbury and Bournemouth," specifically refers to "the war years" ....... they were out of gauge for the Eastern & Western sections until tastefully reduced in height between 1929 & '39.

[Compound2632]

On 08/08/2024 at 12:29, The Stationmaster said:

But that is asking rather a lot is it not?  Firstly the designer/commissioner needs to know, or be told by someone who does know, that any relevant books exist.  Then having found out that such books have been published they have to obtain copies of them and having obtained them (if that is possible) they then has to work out which ones are correct and which ones are erroneous or contain misleading information or inaccurate dates.  And if the designer is based in China it all becomes an awful lot more difficult to do any of those things.

 

That is why some companies, or commissioners, and their designers speak to people who they are either recommended to speak to or who they know already in order to get better original source information.  However I suspect that might be a lot more difficult for a designer based in China.

 

And even companies based in Britain can create serious errors in models by sending poor information and undated photos to a designer based in China who they seem to expect to do everything for them including miracles (although the overwhelming majority are far. far, better than that).

 

It's called basic research, which should be being done by the commissioners before the designer gets involved. And it's not too hard to work out who to ask if they need help evaluating the published information - the first step being to ask the relevant line society, who will have people eager and willing to help. It's perfectly well understood that NDAs may come into play.

[GreenGiraffe22]

Gosh, from all of that I think the late 30s Olive version will be the best to go with for now, probably, maybe? 😅  Be interested to see if they make any revisions to the initial livery announcements

[Midland Mole]

14 minutes ago, GreenGiraffe22 said:

Gosh, from all of that I think the late 30s Olive version will be the best to go with for now, probably, maybe? 😅  Be interested to see if they make any revisions to the initial livery announcements

 

For your era either the late olive or malachite would be suitable, so basically whichever livery you like more 😉

[Butler Henderson]

6 hours ago, Nick C said:

I've got a partial scan of the 1954 loco route availability chart for the Western section and that seems to suggest the K's were only cleared for St Denys-Fareham, Eastleigh to Portcreek Jn and Farlington Jn, and ***stbury to Salisbury (I presume Westbury, though not sure why that'd be on an SR route chart?).

Theirs a missing link between Eastleigh and Salisbury - could the stbury be somewhere else?

Edited August 9 by Butler Henderson

[Dunsignalling]

9 hours ago, Butler Henderson said:

Theirs a missing link between Eastleigh and Salisbury - could the stbury be somewhere else?

 

The only "bury" that would make sense is Alderbury Junction, which implies via Romsey.

 

By the time one got to Westbury it would be miles past Salisbury and well off Southern metals.

 

Edited August 10 by Dunsignalling

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

It's called basic research, which should be being done by the commissioners before the designer gets involved. And it's not too hard to work out who to ask if they need help evaluating the published information - the first step being to ask the relevant line society, who will have people eager and willing to help. It's perfectly well understood that NDAs may come into play.

Quite but the plain fact is that some people don't bother with research while others (most of those I think doing British outline models) do bother but even then there can be errors.  And it is not always possible to get at all the source material and even original drawings can be inaccurate as they represent what the draughtsman decided should be built rather than what the works found could actually be built.  

 

And all of that comes before engines enter traffic  get minor changes made at running sheds or changes made when they pass through works which means accurately dated photos are needed.  And how do researchers know that a photo has been accurately dated unless it comes from a known reliable photographer?

 

I absolutely agree about research but it isn't necessarily as easy as some folk seem to think and don't forget that development might also be up against timescales

[Compound2632]

Just now, The Stationmaster said:

 

I absolutely agree about research but it isn't necessarily as easy as some folk seem to think and don't forget that development might also be up against timescales

 

I'm not suggesting research is easy, simply that it is necessary.  I was also hoping to point out that there are people one could talk to who can at least smooth the path to the primary information.

[Nick Holliday]

On 09/08/2024 at 07:55, JSpencer said:

 A very good question, I'm not sure the double domed version is even planned by Sonic. But one in LBSCR would prise my wallet open....

The trouble with the double-dome version, which I think is the best looking one, is that the boiler is , externally, completely different, with the casing  in four, rather than three, sections, and the actual steam dome is roughly 1' 6" closer to the cab.  This would require a completely new tooling, which might not be justified for a version that only applied to 7 out of seventeen locos for a period of about 14 years, although some of the variants on offer appear to be only correct for one or just a handful of locos for a couple of years.

[JeremyKarl]

1 hour ago, Nick Holliday said:

The trouble with the double-dome version, which I think is the best looking one, is that the boiler is , externally, completely different, with the casing  in four, rather than three, sections, and the actual steam dome is roughly 1' 6" closer to the cab.  This would require a completely new tooling, which might not be justified for a version that only applied to 7 out of seventeen locos for a period of about 14 years, although some of the variants on offer appear to be only correct for one or just a handful of locos for a couple of years.

I'd love a double-domed version - it would be so unique amongst my other locos 😊

[Nick Holliday]

21 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Yes, I agree about the orthographic film business but I feel plate 93 would have shown a HINT of lining had it been present .......... Bradley makes no mention of lining in the chapter on either of L. B. Billinton goods classes nor in the liveries section of Vol.1 ............ which, of course, doesn't prove that it wasn't applied. Wisdom's plate 42 shows "E1, No. 150 in plain livery with no lining .......... some locomotive repaints were in umber rather than black" - whether this loco was umber or black, it appears to be unlined so is in a livery that didn't exist.

Whilst Bradley may have the odd mistake, his work in generally seen as being very reliable, and many other writers have used his information as their primary source.  Just to bring all the disparate elements together, I have extracted his various thoughts on the subject together:-

Bradley general livery notes, in Vol 1 –

Marsh Goods Classes – A deep, glossy black with vermilion lining.  All lettering and numbering was in yellow, shaded in red and white.  Vermilion was also used for the buffer beams and to back the numberplates.  Unlike the paint employed in more recent years, this black wore well and never became an unattractive dark grey.  When numberplates were discarded, transfer numerals became standard.

L Billinton – The Marsh passenger and goods liveries were retained, apart from the use of yellow paint instead of gilt, the substitution of LBSC for the full LB&SCR, and the replacement of the company’s monogram by a specially designed coat of arms.

From early most 1921 locomotives were painted umber after passing through Brighton Works for routine attention.  This was not because black had lost favour, but because supplies of umber were cheaper than the high quality glossy black and Billinton’s refusal to purchase one of the tarry concoctions then coming on the market.  For some months after Grouping, Brighton perpetuated the full umber livery, sometimes with Southern Railway numberplates and tenderside numerals.  By the end of 1923 passenger classes were appearing in sage green.

Bradley Vol 3 – Specifically the K Class

When first completed, No. 337 was painted red oxide and it ran trials devoid of lettering and numerals, apart from those on the buffer beam. For the official photographer, it was given a coat of dove-grey and fully lined out in black and white, with the white lettering back-shaded in black.  This was carried until February 1914, when glossy black was applied. No. 338 also ran its thousand mile trial painted red oxide, but then received standard goods livery before being despatched to revenue-earning service.

In October-December 1916, Nos. 342-347 left the Erecting Shop painted black  with yellow numerals and plain tender sides. (Bradley does not explain what this means - perhaps no lettering {LBSC} or maybe no lining)

In April 1921 No 351 was fitted with a Lewis Draft Appliance, and, during trials, (to January 1922?) it was not painted in the Company's livery, but running in red oxide with white numerals and no lettering.

Black remained the standard livery for all repaints until 1923, when Nos. 337/42/4 left the Paint Shop in the passenger umber with Brighton-style lettering and numerals.  Thereafter, the new Southern Railway liveries were used; at first lined-black on Nos. 345/9 in November December 1923, and then passenger green commencing with No. 338 in June, 1924.  Inevitably there were engines be seen at this period in a mixture of Southern and Brighton liveries; Nos. 339, 340/2/6, for instance, ran for a year or so with Southern numberplates attached to the cabsides, numerals on the tenders below the lettering LBSC, and Brighton-style figures on the buffer beams.

The Bulleid livery alterations first affected the class in June, 1939; with .the painting of No. 2347's tender olive green: apparently in error, for that belonging to No. 2037 Selsey Bill; since it was immediately repainted dark green, with Maunsell lettering and large numerals.  No other changes occurred before December, 1939, when No. 2346 left Eastleigh Works painted unlined, dark green with Bulleid-style lettering and cabside numerals.  Three others, Nos. 2348, (January, 1940), 2351 (April, 1940), and 2353 (March, 1941), received similar treatment, while in November, 1940 Nos. 2337/50 were painted unlined light (malachite) green with Bulleid lettering and numerals.  After that all repaints were in plain black, although the green of No. 2337 wore so well that it not only lasted throughout hostilities, but for a year or so of the peace that followed.

At Nationalisation all were taken into British Railways stock to be renumbered in the.30000 series and given the lined-black livery.  The first to be painted was No. 32339 by Brighton Works in January, 1949, while No. 2343 ran for a time with the temporary “S” prefix.

 

The statement regarding 342-347 rather puts the cat amongst the pigeons, particularly in combination with  the later comment that, in 1923, in Southern days, 345 was given lined black, on what was probably its first repaint.

 

As for the photo of E1 No 150, I am not convinced, from the printed picture, that it is unlined; the red lining on black is very elusive, even on clear photos. 

I also found this one, 347, from 1920, which also appears to have run its trial period in some form of temporary grey.

 

 

 

Edited August 10 by Nick Holliday
Typo

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, Nick Holliday said:

Whilst Bradley may have the odd mistake, his work in generally seen as being very reliable, and many other writers have used his information as their primary source.  

 

Technically, Bradley is a secondary source. But as his work is the dominant secondary source, one has to assume that where authors agree with him, they are following him: their work cannot be seen as corroborating him. But the question is: what primary sources did Bradley have access to? My memory of his books - it is many years since I read them - is that they are no better at citing sources than most other railway histories. It's behaviour which brings railway history into disrepute with historians generally.

[Nick Holliday]

It is rather disappointing that we are now expected to pay a deposit on items that we are not in a position to see how relevant the proposed versions are to a buyer’s expectations, especially where the liveries are concerned, and that, despite receiving expert advice, there seem to be rather too many elements whose accuracy may be in question, although I appreciate that the preparation of engineering samples is at a very early stage, and we will, hopefully, be receiving more convincing images in the near future.

Taking @Wickham Green too ’s comments on board regarding the Southern liveries, a gap in my knowledge, a few hours going through Bradley has allowed the preparation of a crude spread sheet that can, at a glance, suggest the likely configuration of any loco at a particular, within a year or two. 

I have gone through the current offerings, and noted which fittings are likely to be on the model, and also noting approximately how many different locos that configuration might apply to, and for how long:

1)      K Class 2-6-0 LBSC Black (Unlined) No. 346

Original cab, Ramsbottom safety valves and top feed from new.  Running period 1917 – 1923 (9 possible numbers)

2)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern – in LBSCR Umber with black lining No. 342

Original cab, Ramsbottom safety valves and top feed.  Running period 1923 – 1925? (3 possible numbers)

3)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Maunsell Dark Olive Green No.343 : assuming this is B343 it'll be the early standard livery ; applied roughly 1925 to 1930

Original cab, Ramsbottom safety valves and top feed.  Running period 1925 – 1932? (9 possible numbers B338 from 1924)

4)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Maunsell Dark Olive Green No.2346:  AT A GUESS this is the standard 1931 scheme but it COULD be with early Bulleid lettering from 1939

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1936 – 1949? (17 possible numbers if Maunsell green)

5)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Bulleid Malachite Green No.2353: description may be WRONG - 2353 received Bulleid lettering on unlined Maunsell green in1939-41

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1931 – 1949? (4 possible numbers)

6)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Bulleid Light Olive Green No.2337 : description may be WRONG - 2337 received Bulleid lettering on unlined malachite green in 1940/1

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1940 – 1947? (2 possible numbers)

7)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Bulleid War Time Black No.2352: standard livery from1942 (2352 received BR number in Jan.'49 - retaining 'Southern' on the tender)

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1941 – 1949 (11 or more possible numbers)

8)      K Class 2-6-0 British Railways – Plain black No. 32348

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed)  Assumed livery Bulleid lettering and numbering, BRITISH RAILWAYS on tender.  Running period 1948 – 1950?  (1 possible number)

9)      K Class 2-6-0 British Railways – Lined black, Early emblem No. 32342

Southern cab, Ramsbottom Safety valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed & Weir pump removed) Running period 1951 – 1957 (1 possible number)

10)  K Class 2-6-0 British Railways – Lined black, Later emblem No. 32353

Southern cab, AWS fitted, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed and Weir pump removed) Running period 1960 – 1962 (6 possible numbers)

As can be seen, based on what we think the liveries are going to be, that there seem to be 4 options that have only been considered as “one-off” liveries of limited application and or duration. (2 / 5 / 6 / 7).  There are also two strange choices in 9 and 10.  The periods of early and late crest BR are likely to be the most popular with modellers, yet the locos chosen are out of the usual.

9 – No 32342 during the period in question (1951-1958) was uniquely fitted with a boiler which retained the original Ramsbottom safety valves, whereas the other 16 of the class carried Ross pop valves, so either the model is wrong, or anyone wanting the other numbers will not only have to change the number, but alter the safety valves as well. (Perhaps supplied as separate items)

10 – No. 32353.  This was one of six K’s that was fitted with AWS equipment, which required a large battery box on the offside running plate.  Since Sonic have noted that the AWS is one of the alternative fittings they intend to provide, it has to be assumed that this loco will be sporting it, as showing in their image.  Hence this version will again require modellers wanting another number to have to remove the box as well, unless it is supplied as a separate fitting to be added if required.

To make them more acceptable to the average BR modeller, I would venture to suggest a different number for 9, and that 10 is supplied without the AWS box.

There also appears to be a yawning gap between types 3 and 4.  The former configuration, with original fittings, would have applied from 1925 up to 1939 at the latest, yet the early Maunsell livery and B numbering stopped from around 1931.  The first Southern cab with lowered boiler mountings, as type 4 only appeared from 1935, so there is scope for a type 3 a in the later livery, perhaps?

I would also propose a relatively easy win with the addition of Version 0) LBSCR No. 339, which ran in lined black from1914 to 1920 before receiving the double dome top feed, so running with no top feed, LBSC cab and original steam dome and chimney, and Ramsbottom valves, all existing options.  The advantage of this configuration is that it is closer in time to the favoured pre-grouping period, at least on the Brighton, of circa 1910, allowing an overlap, albeit slight, with locos in Stroudley liveries as well as the Marsh umber. (And it’s better looking without the top feed, IMHO)

[Dunsignalling]

24 minutes ago, Nick Holliday said:

It is rather disappointing that we are now expected to pay a deposit on items that we are not in a position to see how relevant the proposed versions are to a buyer’s expectations, especially where the liveries are concerned, and that, despite receiving expert advice, there seem to be rather too many elements whose accuracy may be in question, although I appreciate that the preparation of engineering samples is at a very early stage, and we will, hopefully, be receiving more convincing images in the near future.

Taking @Wickham Green too ’s comments on board regarding the Southern liveries, a gap in my knowledge, a few hours going through Bradley has allowed the preparation of a crude spread sheet that can, at a glance, suggest the likely configuration of any loco at a particular, within a year or two. 

I have gone through the current offerings, and noted which fittings are likely to be on the model, and also noting approximately how many different locos that configuration might apply to, and for how long:

1)      K Class 2-6-0 LBSC Black (Unlined) No. 346

Original cab, Ramsbottom safety valves and top feed from new.  Running period 1917 – 1923 (9 possible numbers)

2)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern – in LBSCR Umber with black lining No. 342

Original cab, Ramsbottom safety valves and top feed.  Running period 1923 – 1925? (3 possible numbers)

3)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Maunsell Dark Olive Green No.343 : assuming this is B343 it'll be the early standard livery ; applied roughly 1925 to 1930

Original cab, Ramsbottom safety valves and top feed.  Running period 1925 – 1932? (9 possible numbers B338 from 1924)

4)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Maunsell Dark Olive Green No.2346:  AT A GUESS this is the standard 1931 scheme but it COULD be with early Bulleid lettering from 1939

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1936 – 1949? (17 possible numbers if Maunsell green)

5)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Bulleid Malachite Green No.2353: description may be WRONG - 2353 received Bulleid lettering on unlined Maunsell green in1939-41

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1931 – 1949? (4 possible numbers)

6)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Bulleid Light Olive Green No.2337 : description may be WRONG - 2337 received Bulleid lettering on unlined malachite green in 1940/1

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1940 – 1947? (2 possible numbers)

7)      K Class 2-6-0 Southern Bulleid War Time Black No.2352: standard livery from1942 (2352 received BR number in Jan.'49 - retaining 'Southern' on the tender)

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed) Running period 1941 – 1949 (11 or more possible numbers)

8)      K Class 2-6-0 British Railways – Plain black No. 32348

Southern cab, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed)  Assumed livery Bulleid lettering and numbering, BRITISH RAILWAYS on tender.  Running period 1948 – 1950?  (1 possible number)

9)      K Class 2-6-0 British Railways – Lined black, Early emblem No. 32342

Southern cab, Ramsbottom Safety valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed & Weir pump removed) Running period 1951 – 1957 (1 possible number)

10)  K Class 2-6-0 British Railways – Lined black, Later emblem No. 32353

Southern cab, AWS fitted, Ross Pop valves, backing to tender rails and lowered boiler mountings (no top feed and Weir pump removed) Running period 1960 – 1962 (6 possible numbers)

As can be seen, based on what we think the liveries are going to be, that there seem to be 4 options that have only been considered as “one-off” liveries of limited application and or duration. (2 / 5 / 6 / 7).  There are also two strange choices in 9 and 10.  The periods of early and late crest BR are likely to be the most popular with modellers, yet the locos chosen are out of the usual.

9 – No 32342 during the period in question (1951-1958) was uniquely fitted with a boiler which retained the original Ramsbottom safety valves, whereas the other 16 of the class carried Ross pop valves, so either the model is wrong, or anyone wanting the other numbers will not only have to change the number, but alter the safety valves as well. (Perhaps supplied as separate items)

10 – No. 32353.  This was one of six K’s that was fitted with AWS equipment, which required a large battery box on the offside running plate.  Since Sonic have noted that the AWS is one of the alternative fittings they intend to provide, it has to be assumed that this loco will be sporting it, as showing in their image.  Hence this version will again require modellers wanting another number to have to remove the box as well, unless it is supplied as a separate fitting to be added if required.

To make them more acceptable to the average BR modeller, I would venture to suggest a different number for 9, and that 10 is supplied without the AWS box.

There also appears to be a yawning gap between types 3 and 4.  The former configuration, with original fittings, would have applied from 1925 up to 1939 at the latest, yet the early Maunsell livery and B numbering stopped from around 1931.  The first Southern cab with lowered boiler mountings, as type 4 only appeared from 1935, so there is scope for a type 3 a in the later livery, perhaps?

I would also propose a relatively easy win with the addition of Version 0) LBSCR No. 339, which ran in lined black from1914 to 1920 before receiving the double dome top feed, so running with no top feed, LBSC cab and original steam dome and chimney, and Ramsbottom valves, all existing options.  The advantage of this configuration is that it is closer in time to the favoured pre-grouping period, at least on the Brighton, of circa 1910, allowing an overlap, albeit slight, with locos in Stroudley liveries as well as the Marsh umber. (And it’s better looking without the top feed, IMHO)

I would have thought the choice of a further five numbers applicable to the late-crest AWS version should be enough to satisfy any modellers of the era unless they want seven or more of the same variant.

[Nick Holliday]

18 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

I would have thought the choice of a further five numbers applicable to the late-crest AWS version should be enough to satisfy any modellers of the era unless they want seven or more of the same variant.

Not  quite sure what you mean, but sadly Sonic's proposal, for accuracy's sake, means there are no options available for a late crest BR loco before 1960 or thereabouts. If you consider that the late-crest era covered the last six years of the class, then, if the AWS ones account for around 12 loco-years, the others represent around 90 loco-years, or over 7 times.

Edited August 10 by Nick Holliday

[PeterStiles]

Oh how quickly we descend from "oh this is the greatest news ever" down to a deconstruction of the manufacturer and their business practices based upon one line descriptions of the future product...

 

I (heart) RMweb...

[JSpencer]

4 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Technically, Bradley is a secondary source. But as his work is the dominant secondary source, one has to assume that where authors agree with him, they are following him: their work cannot be seen as corroborating him. But the question is: what primary sources did Bradley have access to? My memory of his books - it is many years since I read them - is that they are no better at citing sources than most other railway histories. It's behaviour which brings railway history into disrepute with historians generally.

 

He seemed to have had access to records in Ashford and other places before - I guess - they were mostly loaded in the bin.

Historians of the time seemed to have constraints in book size, probably severe time limits and were writing more details than before so were probably trying to avoid going overboard.

Today, the expectation is much more in depth and even more precise. Though in fairness Bradley was a stepping stone up, and what followed after were stepping stones up again (with less original source material to play with).

 

I have Oscar Parkes Battleship books making references to sources that no longer existed for later writers. They still stepped up, but there are "lost gaps" hinted at by Parkes.

[RodneyS]

 

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

Technically, Bradley is a secondary source. But as his work is the dominant secondary source, one has to assume that where authors agree with him, they are following him: their work cannot be seen as corroborating him. But the question is: what primary sources did Bradley have access to? My memory of his books - it is many years since I read them - is that they are no better at citing sources than most other railway histories. It's behaviour which brings railway history into disrepute with historians generally.

 

Bradley obtained access to Brighton Works and their records.

It is quite possible that the records he saw no longer exist.

 

I remember going to a talk given by Bert Perryman many years ago about the construction of his 5'' gauge model of 'Remembrance'.

He was allowed to borrow drawings from Brighton Works on the understanding that he would eventually return them.

His model took a long time to build and he was chased up many times.

Eventually he did return the drawings.  They were put in a pile with many others, taken outside in a wheelbarrow and put on a bonfire.

He was quite upset by that.

Rodney

[CUCKOO LINE]

I guess these days one would at least take a digital photo of any plans before returning them, just in case !

[Dunsignalling]

3 hours ago, Nick Holliday said:

Not  quite sure what you mean, but sadly Sonic's proposal, for accuracy's sake, means there are no options available for a late crest BR loco before 1960 or thereabouts. If you consider that the late-crest era covered the last six years of the class, then, if the AWS ones account for around 12 loco-years, the others represent around 90 loco-years, or over 7 times.

 

So get an early crest one and change it or, if you can't do a simple job like that, pay somebody who can (TMC are good at that kind of thing), or wait for another batch.

 

Alternatively, did either of the early crest ones run beyond 1.1.1960 In that condition? Don't forget that almost a quarter of SR steam locos went to the breakers still carrying early crest.

 

Not all the Ks got late crest anyway TTBOMK, and they would have had them added gradually, starting (maybe) in 1956, though as third-string locos they would not have been given any  priority.

 

Sonic are doing ten versions in one go. When I started Hornby did one version of each loco and you were lucky if they ever changed it. The gap between Winston Churchill and 41 Squadron was the better part of 20 years!

 

Today, everybody wants everything yesterday!

Edited August 10 by Dunsignalling

[Compound2632]

35 minutes ago, JSpencer said:

 

He seemed to have had access to records in Ashford and other places before - I guess - they were mostly loaded in the bin.

Historians of the time seemed to have constraints in book size, probably severe time limits and were writing more details than before so were probably trying to avoid going overboard.

Today, the expectation is much more in depth and even more precise. Though in fairness Bradley was a stepping stone up, and what followed after were stepping stones up again (with less original source material to play with).

 

 

 

18 minutes ago, RodneyS said:

 

 

Bradley obtained access to Brighton Works and their records.

It is quite possible that the records he saw no longer exist.

 

I remember going to a talk given by Bert Perryman many years ago about the construction of his 5'' gauge model of 'Remembrance'.

He was allowed to borrow drawings from Brighton Works on the understanding that he would eventually return them.

His model took a long time to build and he was chased up many times.

Eventually he did return the drawings.  They were put in a pile with many others, taken outside in a wheelbarrow and put on a bonfire.

He was quite upset by that.

Rodney

 

This all tallies with what I've been told offline. Apparently Holcroft knew Bradley. Obviously we should be very glad that Bradley was able to leave us this record of material since destroyed. And I absolutely agree with @JSpencer as to his being a stepping stone for later authors or perhaps a giant upon whose shoulders they have sat.

[Jack P]

5 hours ago, PeterStiles said:

Oh how quickly we descend from "oh this is the greatest news ever" down to a deconstruction of the manufacturer and their business practices based upon one line descriptions of the future product...

 

I (heart) RMweb...

 

 

I hear where you're coming from - but I do think the discourse in this thread has been rather respectful. It feels like the information shared is being done to improve general understanding of the class, or offer feedback to the manufacturer. 

 

The team at Sonic seem to be pretty receptive to feedback and open to conversation, and so i'd definitley encourage more of this if it means we end up with a better model at the end of the day.

 

[Dunsignalling]

7 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 

This all tallies with what I've been told offline. Apparently Holcroft knew Bradley. Obviously we should be very glad that Bradley was able to leave us this record of material since destroyed. And I absolutely agree with @JSpencer as to his being a stepping stone for later authors or perhaps a giant upon whose shoulders they have sat.

 

Over many years of reading, I have gained an impression that if anyone was able to go back in time and interview railway luminaries of the past; Mr Holcroft should be high on the list of subjects.

 

He seems to have led a fascinating career through pivotal times (pre-WW1 to post-nationalisation) and been influential well beyond his apparent status. 

 

John

[PeterStiles]

8 hours ago, Jack P said:

 

I hear where you're coming from - but I do think the discourse in this thread has been rather respectful.

Good point. Taken.

[Wickham Green too]

6 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

... Mr Holcroft ... seems to have led a fascinating career through pivotal times (pre-WW1 to post-nationalisation) and been influential well beyond his apparent status.

I re-read 'Locomotive Adventure' recently and - with all due respect to the guy - came away with the feeling that I'd have liked to know what else was going on around him at the time ....... though, of course it was HIS book and its size may have been constrained by the publisher.