Traeth Mawr -Painting Season, (mostly)

[ChrisN]

On 21/04/2020 at 16:20, MikeOxon said:

When you have an 'unplottable' station like Traeth Mawr, you never know what might turn up there, on a special working.  As an example, most people think the Tri-ang clerestories are based on a fictional prototype but they are certainly to be found at North Leigh - clearly, a lost diagram

 

On 21/04/2020 at 16:32, NCB said:

 

My approach as well. Dealing with the Cambrian and even the GWR I find there's a lot of instances where it's not possible to determine exactly what did or did not happen, and of course where you're dealing with an imaginary prototype you know that nothing happened anyway so it's OK to work in terms of what might have happened. And it's OK to have one's own particular take on what might have happened. Like the Triang clerestories; Dean could have designed them, even if he didn't!

 

At the moment I have several pannier tanks which have bunker steps, which I have recently found were acquired a bit later than my period. Does it worry me? Not a lot, although I might alter them. Eventually.

 

Nigel

 

 

On 21/04/2020 at 17:42, corneliuslundie said:

I agree that since Traeth Mawr exists in an alternative universe (like Sarn) "anything could have happened" but one does one's best to stick to what is likely to have happened. Which is why I have chosen a small ex Cambrian tank loco for Sarn, even though I don'tr think they ever appeared on the Kerry branch. I now have lots of evidence (thanks to Tanat Valley) that 2021 class class did appear at Kerry, so that is an option, but I shall still run the ex-Cambrian loco both because it was in the general area (OK, Oswestry) and because I like it. But I shall not for example be running a Large Belpaire Goods on the branch as it would have been too heavy.

So I think Chris's approach is sensible. But he needs to stick to Northern Division locos, not types which only appeared in the south. which is what he is doing. And like Chris I shall try to ensure that any model I make is an accurate model of that prototype whether it is actually known to have run on the line or not.

I am most impressed with your work Chris, and you challenge me to do better.

That does not mean that I am not glad to see Edwardian providing prototype information to help us get things right. I certainly need all the help I can get.

Jonathan

Sorry if the above sounds like pontificating.

 

Thank you one and all.  

 

It would be nice to have something that probably ran in that area, even though I know it never went down the Cambrian branch.  Likewise I shall run a  class 61 4-4-0 at the head of the evening train even though they never went there until the early 20th century.  It will have three crew members, one of course is an inspector and it is a trial run.  (Remember it is always Thursday 21st March 1895.)

 

I will see if anything else turns up or how a 655 might look instead.

 

Also, I have a number of 14xx locos and I know there is a conversion of one to a 517.  Now I know they never ran on that line, and it is a 'looks like' conversion but it will probably appear sometime.

Edited March 10, 2021 by ChrisN

[Donw]

Very useful info JAmes. I have the Williams book but found it a bit disappointing for pe-group days. And very disappointing to see the same duff info about Dogelley signal boxes as other books. I really wish I could find a picture of either of the two boxes in use (Cam and GWR)  from 1984-1922 era

I have a Scopio kit for a GWR saddle tank which I believe covers the 645 class. A quick check it does and the 1501 1854 and others. It also contains option for 3 and 5 section tanks.  I also cheked the Martin Williams book a couple of pages on there is another photo of 655 with the long tank thought to be at Corwen around 1910. There is also a picture of a 1501 class on shed at Bala thought to be around the turn of the century. I was intending to build mine as a 1501 with the long tank. Note the 645/1501 W'hampton engines had 14 spokes wheels but the swindon ones had 16 spoke wheels according to Scorpio.

 

Don

 

 

[ChrisN]

17 minutes ago, richbrummitt said:

An 850 is a small pannier 0-6-0T and all the others discussed on this page are large. Are there not problems of height, splasher size and other issues to overcome also? Might be better to look amongst the small classes rather than the 646/655/1501/1813/1854/1701/2721 &c. large classes.

 

I'd not realised before today that the body was meant to be an 850. It doesn't necessarily explain the cab looking Swindon-esque since 850/1901 were also ' Northern'.

 

Edit: I've looked back at pictures of the body and it doesn't look like an 850. Probably best just to build it. Maybe make up a number that wasn't used, but could have been, for the sake of (y)our fictional satisfaction?

 

Thank you.

 

Looking at it again it is described aas a 1701 class, although I must have got 850 from somewhere.  Even the 1701 had the Northern cab .  

 

As this will be the only, probably, GWR loco to be seen on the layout it will dwarf the Cambrian locos so will appear 'large', but I will certainly think of a fictitious number and see what could fit.

[Edwardian]

6 minutes ago, Donw said:

Very useful info JAmes. I have the Williams book but found it a bit disappointing for pe-group days. And very disappointing to see the same duff info about Dogelley signal boxes as other books. I really wish I could find a picture of either of the two boxes in use (Cam and GWR)  from 1984-1922 era

I have a Scopio kit for a GWR saddle tank which I believe covers the 645 class. A quick check it does and the 1501 1854 and others. It also contains option for 3 and 5 section tanks.  I also cheked the Martin Williams book a couple of pages on there is another photo of 655 with the long tank thought to be at Corwen around 1910. There is also a picture of a 1501 class on shed at Bala thought to be around the turn of the century. I was intending to build mine as a 1501 with the long tank. Note the 645/1501 W'hampton engines had 14 spokes wheels but the swindon ones had 16 spoke wheels according to Scorpio.

 

Don

 

 

 

I don't know how off the 1701 print/donor chassis might be in terms of frame length, but aside from that I don't see why Chris couldn't tweak his print (it's a 1701 class, or rather 1701 series of the 1854 class - 850 class a rather different beast) and represent 1511, which NBC says is the one at Bala around the turn of the Century.

 

I don't see the need to go 'fictional' while there are other options to explore.     

[corneliuslundie]

No signalbox I am afraid but ages ago Stephen Rowson sent me this photo of Dolgelly to pass on.

Jonathan

Edited April 21, 2020 by corneliuslundie
Spelling

[Donw]

4 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

I don't know how off the 1701 print/donor chassis might be in terms of frame length, but aside from that I don't see why Chris couldn't tweak his print (it's a 1701 class, or rather 1701 series of the 1854 class - 850 class a rather different beast) and represent 1511, which NBC says is the one at Bala around the turn of the Century.

 

I don't see the need to go 'fictional' while there are other options to explore.     

 

Well seeing as the Scorpio kit covers both 1501 and 1854 classes the shouldn't be too much difference.

 

Don

[Donw]

3 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

No signalbox I am afraid but ages ago Stephen Rowson sent me this photo of Dolgelly to pass on.

Jonathan

 

Thank you for that Jonathan. It is quite an old photo and may be before the two boxes came into use.  The Cambrian  Duttons box was the west side of the bridge. Ther was a Water taank close to the bridge and the box was a few yards along from it. I would love to know if that signal was retained for the new arrangement. It looks like it might have two arms.  It was there pre the Railways Act, later there was a signal there with a main arm for the line to Barmouth and a small arm for the sidings. It was linked to another by the box which was the main signal and which the repeater is not clear but I have seen it shown as distants on a diagram so I assume the one by the box was the main one.

 

Don

[Edwardian]

7 hours ago, Donw said:

 

Well seeing as the Scorpio kit covers both 1501 and 1854 classes the shouldn't be too much difference.

 

Don

 

Numeral soup:

 

1701 is a subset of the 1854 Class (Swindon)

 

1501 is a subset of the 645 class (Wolverhampton).

 

Chris is planning to use a 1701 body for a 645, or, probably better, a 1501.

 

To complicate further:

 

1854/1701 have slightly longer frames than 645/1501

 

But some 645/1501s had frames extended later.

 

655 class (Wolverhampton) is like the 654/1501 but was built with slightly longer frames, but is a very recently introduced  loco in Chris's time period. 

 

 

[Donw]

Interestingly there is a table inthe scorpio instructions listing front and back overhangs for various classes which I note includes 2721

 

Don

[Edwardian]

16 minutes ago, Donw said:

Interestingly there is a table inthe scorpio instructions listing front and back overhangs for various classes which I note includes 2721

 

Don

 

Excellent.  Please may we have these?

[Compound2632]

10 hours ago, Edwardian said:

 

Numeral soup:

 

1701 is a subset of the 1854 Class (Swindon)

 

1501 is a subset of the 645 class (Wolverhampton).

 

Chris is planning to use a 1701 body for a 645, or, probably better, a 1501.

 

To complicate further:

 

1854/1701 have slightly longer frames than 645/1501

 

But some 645/1501s had frames extended later.

 

655 class (Wolverhampton) is like the 654/1501 but was built with slightly longer frames, but is a very recently introduced  loco in Chris's time period. 

 

 

 

Warning - upcoming facetious remark, especially for James: "Moral: model a Midland 2-4-0."

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Warning - upcoming facetious remark, especially for James: "Moral: model a Midland 2-4-0."

 

That's just the tip of a very large iceberg; we haven't even, for instance, mentioned the likes of sandwich framed tanks or the small Wolverhampton classes. ....

 

I'm too old and senile to master the subject; the task is so enormous that, Forth Bridge like, by the time I've finished mugging up on the last classes, I've forgotten about those I first read about.

[ChrisN]

As we are all in lockdown and home schooling is what is, er should be happening.  So, here is some homework:  'How long should you leave between updates?'  Discuss.

 

The reason I say this is because I had decided at what point I should update but somehow that point keeps getting pushed back as I do other things before it.

 

So we were at the point where it was pointed out that the shape of the cab opening was wrong.  I felt I had four options.

 

1) Ignore it and only take photos from this angle. This was my fall back position.

 

2) Photoshop all my images.  This I dismissed, firstly as it was dishonest, and secondly, it was probably more work.

 

3) Cut out half the cab and remake it with a new half side with the correct opening.  This I was not sure about as the new half side was going to be completely smooth and the old side has been smoothed but is not perfect.

 

4) The favourite, and most difficult, was to cut the whole side away and replace it.  I was a bit concerned at how this would go but when I looked again at the model, all this planning had been done in bed, the floor of the cab was raised and it would be impossible to cut the whole side off completely.

 

So what to do?  Well, you ask, why not just make a fillet and put it in the opening and make it the right shape?  The reason I did not do this first was that, a) I did not know the thickness of the plastic, and all the raised mouldings were thicker than I could replace.  So, I found my box of Plastrut lengths and held different lengths against different bits, and worked out that the basic thickness was 20 thou, ish, and the mouldings were 30 thou.  

 

 

Those little white things are not scraps of plastic, they are the fillets.  Those are  1cm squares, so they are not big.  To get the right profile I laid the cab on the 20 thou plasticard and scored around the opening with my scalpel.  I then took the first cut fillet and scored around that .  It took two goes to get it right.

 

 

I then scraped off the raised edge and filed down what was remaining.  Using, polystyrene glue, yes I know there are better products but it works, and it sticks.  I was able to move them so they were level with the outside.  Sort of, as the raised edge was still there a little.  Once the fillet was dry this was attacked with the file and as the fillet was in place I could feel with my nail if it was flat with the side.

 

I then took a length of 10 thou thick, and 30 thou wide strip and glued it around the opening to make a new edge.  I actually glued the bottom half first, waited a day then glued the top to ensure it went round tightly.  I would have half preferred 20 thou thick as it is more in keeping with the other raised bits, but although I have a great selection of Plastrut, the one I did not have is, yes you guessed it 20 x 30 thou.  If I feel desperate I could always add another layer but I am not sure I want to.

 

 

The last part was to glue the top round the 90 deg at the top, a day later when it was dry.

 

So what next?  You will see I need to add steps on the side of the loco so maintenance can be done.  I found some L shaped Plastrut of 1.25mm.  The steps look the width of the chimney, so I measured the chimney I had.  It was about 8mm but, surprise, surprise the image is almost exactly the same size as my model and measuring it gave the length as 9mm.  So four, 9mm bits were cut from the length.

 

 

You can see that I have sanded back where they are due to go so that I am not gluing directly onto paint.  You may also notice that the step is now slightly curved as per Wolverhampton pattern.  It may not be exact but I do not wish to take it back any further in case I weaken it too much.

 

Finally, 

 

 

All four steps in place.  I started doing them by trial and error as when I looked at the first one it appeared too close to what appears to be a tool box, although it probably contains sand, (I have nor looked inside to see).  Looking at the photos again it seems to be slightly too far back but that might just be the difference in the model prototype and a 645.  I attached all four and then I decided I ought to be more systematic and began to use a set square to make sure they were at the same height as each other on the same side and checking from the top to make sure they were in the same place on each side, and from the front to make sure they were the same height each side.    'Why', you say, 'did I not do it scientifically and measure it all up from the start?'  I wondered that myself afterwards, but I think it was more the case of seeing where it looked right, as I do not have a drawing to work from, just pictures.

 

You may see in the background the crew, laying on the floor, but that is another story.

 

If you have been, thanks for looking.

 

 

Edited March 10, 2021 by ChrisN

[Compound2632]

2 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

As we are all in lockdown and home schooling is what is, er should be happening.  So, here is some homework:  'How long should you leave between updates?'  Discuss.

 

I'm aiming for a modelling post every day to keep lockdown lassitude at bay.

[corneliuslundie]

I started my thread with the intention of one post a week. Then it slipped and until the last few days it has been about two or three months. I shall really have to speed up to manage one a day. Perhaps tomorrow , . .

Jonathan

[Donw]

1 hour ago, corneliuslundie said:

I started my thread with the intention of one post a week. Then it slipped and until the last few days it has been about two or three months. I shall really have to speed up to manage one a day. Perhaps tomorrow , . .

Jonathan

 

Well you are doing them Dreckly aren't you.

 

Don

[MikeOxon]

8 hours ago, ChrisN said:

 'How long should you leave between updates?'  Discuss.

 

I don't think 'should' is appropriate.  Update when you have something that you want to write about

 

[Penrhos1920]

Just now, MikeOxon said:

 

I don't think 'should' is appropriate.  Update when you have something that you want to write about

 

 

Oh yes it is.  That way if you set yourself a daily posting target you’ll aim to model daily.

[BlueLightning]

I must say I'm with Mike here, I used to have a goal of updating every week, which I managed for quite a while on my Oak Hill thread, but before too long it did start to feel like I had to do modelling, even if I didn't want to, and it sucked the joy out of what I was doing, until I had a full burn out, and I then felt guilty for not keeping the weekly updates that I had been doing before.

 

Model when you feel like modelling, and update when you have something to show.

 

Gary

[MikeOxon]

On 21/04/2020 at 17:49, ChrisN said:

...

 

I will see if anything else turns up or how a 655 might look instead.

 

 

A good place to learn about GWR saddle and pannier tank varieties is Jim Champ's article at http://www.gwr.org.uk/nopanniers.html

 

If you want even more info, he's written a book 'Introduction to GW Locomotive Development'

[ChrisN]

23 hours ago, MikeOxon said:

 

A good place to learn about GWR saddle and pannier tank varieties is Jim Champ's article at http://www.gwr.org.uk/nopanniers.html

 

If you want even more info, he's written a book 'Introduction to GW Locomotive Development'

 

Mike,

Thank you.  I have known about the site, as I use it quite a bit, but I did not know about his book although I am not sure I want to go into too great a depth on it, and the cheapest is selling at £21.69 and the others I have seen are over £30.00.  There is a review on Google but it only has certain pages, and of course they do not have enough pages together to read.

[ChrisN]

To answer my own question in my last update, I think the answer should be you should update when you are not able to b modelling.  I did my update during an evening when I could have been modelling, and the next day I was out digging the garden and hurt my back so I was laying on the floor and could only be on my laptop.  Still, I did not waste my time.  I came across this.  It is a site I know quite well of Barmouth but I am not sure I have seen this picture before, as they put the images in date order and they say this is 1904, and I tend to try and keep to earlier images, but not always.  I am not certain of the date as they have the classic photo of the Dolgelley train from around 1880 and they say it is 1910, which it just cannot be.  Also they have no idea what they are looking at as you can see by the comments.  I am not on Flickr so could not add one myself.

 

So, this looks like a 1501 sub class.  I cringed.  Two reasons.  The tank is quite high, and it has wing plates which I have never noticed before but are on this one when you realise what you are looking at.  It also has the same tank.  What I want is a 645 like this.  On the site Mike quoted there is both a 645 of the right tank, and a 655 with the right shape tank but with the filler cap in the wrong place.  Yes I could move it, but that is something for sooner rather than later and I do not want to commit myself too soon.  There is also this interesting beast but the caption is completely wrong so it could be anywhere.  It also looks as if the filler cap is rear of the dome.  

 

Now the Great Western Magazine did a rather comprehensive article on the 517, which if I remember rightly, showed they never came near my neck of the woods, but the question is, did they do anything on the early saddle tanks?  If they did how would I find out?  

 

If you have been, thanks for looking.

[Simond]

Chris, 

 

if you mean GW Railway Journal, then the index is on line. http://www.gwrjournal.com
 

very useful

 

Atb

Simon

 

 

 

[ChrisN]

4 hours ago, Simond said:

Chris, 

 

if you mean GW Railway Journal, then the index is on line. http://www.gwrjournal.com
 

very useful

 

Atb

Simon

 

 

 

 

Simon,

Thank you very much.  I have bookmarked the site.  I would like to say it was most helpful, but having searched for, 645, 1701, 655, Locomotive allocations,Dean, Armstrong, Wolverhampton, Ruabon, Llangollen, Bala and Barmouth nothing of use came up.  On my first search for 'Saddle Tanks', to add insult to injury, it came up with "'850' Class Saddle Tanks, Duties, Allocations and workings".  

 

You cannot make this up really can you?  I will probably buy a copy just for information.  This is only up to the end of 2016 so if anything has come up more recently and anyone takes this journal I would be pleased to know.

[richbrummitt]

I cannot think of anything in the 113+ (if you count preview and the specials of BRJ) issues. There might be a little in Locomotives Illustrated 118 - that is where the photo of 769 I'm working to came from - but I've only seen the one picture that someone kindly provided to me. 769 is in early 1920s condition and seen at Merthyr.