7mm Pipe dreams

[Overseer]

Having assembled the body of a Parkside Dundas PS17 BR 12T Pipe wagon I didn't think it looked quite right so it was put back in the box and under the shelf to wait for inspiration. I wanted to use a Rumney Models lifting link RCH brake gear set on the wagon but didn't want to waste it if the wagon wasn't going to look right on completion. While looking at the photo of one of the wagons in 'Twilight of the Goods' (Don Rowland, Wild Swan 2019) it struck me what the problem with the kit is. On the prototype the curb rail which carries the door hinges is thicker than the floorboards visible at the ends, there is a chamfer at each end to accommodate the channel steel headstocks but this isn't on the kit. Because the curb rail is too narrow the hinges have been made too small in proportion so it doesn't look right.

Hopefully Don and Simon don't mind this photo of part of the photo appearing here to show the detail -


As supplied compared with the modified side. A strip of 0.5mm styrene has been added along the bottom of the curb rail, and the undersized hinges carved off. 0.5mm doesn't sound like much but I think it makes a big difference.





And the test hinge reconstruction, Evergreen 1.6mm rod with a .45mm hole drilled through and two small pieces of bent wire. Still to add the bolts back to the hinge plates.



After the hinges are done the underbaked bas relief chains will be carved off and replaced with fine chains. Now I think the Pipe will be worthy of the etched brass brake gear.

Thinking about a load for the wagon - what diameter were the pipes carried during the 1950s? Tubes were smaller diameter and longer but by how much?

 

[AJC]

Interesting observation, Fraser, I'll have to see whether the 4mm one is the same. They're unusual wagons, in subtle ways: the W irons are the lighter variety on the real thing - the 4mm version is dramatically wrong in this respect, having the heavy duty plate axleguards, but I wonder whether the 7mm version has the heavier version, with reinforced journals (hence the rivets) of the standard RCH W irons? That does mean that the solebars are probably correct, however, at 10" rather than 9" (I've not bothered to change that on my 4mm pair).

Food for thought, anyway.

Adam

 

[Overseer]

Work has been progressing on the Pipe during the odd spare hour.







Including the dangly bits, made of 40 link per inch chain and bits of very fine copper wire from mouse tails (computer mice not small rodents) and rings of brass wire from picture hanging wire wound round a 1.5mm drill. I think the larger hinges make a big difference to the appearance of the wagon. The Rumney Models brake gear is going together well, with adjustments to suit the Pipe, although I prefer the more common 7mm scale way of doing things with pivots in the prototypical places. Ambis coupling hooks replace the oddly shaped hooks from the kit. Still plenty to do including adding brackets etc to the solebars.

 

[S7BcSR]

Fraser, pipes varied greatly in size in the 50s and 60s, depending on the job. My father was, for a period, consulting on pipe inspection for both Stewarts and Lloyd's and Butterley. Pipes varied from 6" to 48" and on these, in fact anything over 20" he was required to crawl through the pipes to sign off for the various contracts. So your pipes can be from any material to hand but with flanges one end.
Rob

 

[Overseer]

Further to Rob's confirmation on pipe sizes I have dug up some old technical catalogues online, mostly American. The standard length of a pipe was 18 feet plus the flange. This fits in well with the length of the Pipe wagon, 18' plus space for flanges at both ends (pipes stacked opposite ways round to fit the most in, the flange was only on one end of each pipe) plus a bit spare at each end. Any short lengths required were called 'short pipes' and were special order.

The wagon has progressed and is nearly ready for paint. I have been tossing up whether to add the tarp cleats now that Adam has pointed them out, I am going to have to add them - peer pressure.







I am glad I changed the hinges, makes a big difference to the appearance. It strikes me that it should be an easy modification to the tooling for the kit to deepen the curb rail slightly and enlarge the hinges, not sure if Peco could manage altering the old school tooling though. One other small change with a big visual payoff is to slot the tops of the door control mechanism brackets so they look more like the prototype photo instead of a solid blob of plastic. Now to paint it as a fairly new unpainted unfitted wagon of the early 1950s.

 

[Overseer]

Some more progress on the Pipe. Brass bits primed with car spray can, body airbrushed with Humbrol 94 Matt Yellow Brown as the primary colour of freshly cut pine. Steelwork brush painted with gloss black to represent the gloss black painted or japanned steelwork. The intention is to finish the wagon in slightly weathered original 'unpainted' livery.



And the scary bit, a representation of the grain in the pine. It needs to be prominent enough to still be seen through the following washes and dry brushing. The curb rail is painted to look like red lead primer, or maybe bauxite, as the b/w photos show it to be painted but not the same colour as the steel or lettering patches. The lettering patches are matt Humbrol black, which hopefully will stay a slightly different colour to the gloss black when it is finished.




Painted grey would be much simpler but I doubt the unfitted wagons were painted grey before they were fitted with vacuum brakes and were painted bauxite. It is challenging to paint weathered unpainted timber without it looking like a grey painted wagon. I have also realised the nice brass tie bar between the W irons shouldn't be there, the unfitted wagons didn't have the tie between W irons. I need to draw and print the lettering, and apply it before starting the weathering.

 

[Dog Star]

It is challenging to paint weathered unpainted timber

Agreed and your result looks successful. What colour have you used for the graining?

Could the grain colour be an Antipodean special given that the Humbrol tinlet appears to be stored in the down-under fashion?

regards, Graham

 

[Overseer]

Agreed and your result looks successful. What colour have you used for the graining?

Could the grain colour be an Antipodean special given that the Humbrol tinlet appears to be stored in the down-under fashion?

regards, Graham

I will have to check the tin tomorrow, it is one of the browns. I keep all my Humbrol tins upside down as they last much longer, air doesn’t get in and the pigment settles to the top of the tin so easier to stir when turned upright and opened.

 

[Overseer]

The brown used is Humbrol 160 German Camouflage Red Brown. It is thinned so the base colour shows through. It is also quite useful as a rust colour.

 

[Overseer]

Newly complete unpainted wagon with signwriting


And the planks are starting to grey off



Some light weathering next. Really need to take some outside photos to show how it really looks more accurately.

 

[Dog Star]

Fraser, (@Overseer),

I am rarely moved to add comment after clicking the "like" button - this is one of those rare occasions. When you started the painting of the pipe wagon I was not clear as to how you were going to achieve an "unpainted" appearance... nor was I expecting such a believable result .

Terrific work.

regards, Graham

 

[Overseer]

Fraser, (@Overseer),

I am rarely moved to add comment after clicking the "like" button - this is one of those rare occasions. When you started the painting of the pipe wagon I was not clear as to how you were going to achieve an "unpainted" appearance... nor was I expecting such a believable result .

Terrific work.

regards, Graham

Thank you Graham. Not sure it is terrific but it is a impression which looks ok from a distance.

You didn’t ask about the paint - the wash coat is a pale grey with a couple of drops of silver added, and lots of turps (white spirit).

 

[Overseer]

Sorry to bore everyone with dirty wagon photos.

I took some photos outside in the sun and thought the Pipe needed a bit more work.


After a thin black wash it looked quite good but coming back to it it looked too dark and dirty so the wagon was attacked (gently) with a fibreglass brush to remove some of the wash. A light waft of dirt colour over the running gear and a little rust dabbed on gets it to this stage which is how it will stay - probably. One thing I wanted to capture was the blackening of bare timber around steel items. I don't think I mentioned that there was a thin coat of Humbrol matt varnish applied to the whole wagon after the grey wash in the previous post. I still haven't found a good replacement for the old Humbrol matt varnish and don't have much left.

The next 4 photos are how it looks under a bayonet fitting LED lamp when photographed with the phone. The phone tries to be too clever sometimes and doesn't record what it sees but what it thinks you want to see and can emphasis some colours more than others.





And with the same lighting using a Canon DSLR. I had to adjust the colour temperature as the camera doesn't cope well with the LED colours when left to its own devices.




And with the same lighting taken with a Canon Ixus snappy camera.


Now to finish off some of the other wagons on the shelf, maybe the LNWR Diag 84 open.

 

[Overseer]

Now I have a dilemma. The photo of the wagon I originally wanted to model turned up while looking through the downloads on a 10 year old iPad. The number is very close to the number I selected from the same Lot and it is almost certain that the livery would have been the same. Grey ironwork.....

and different lettering layout. No idea where the photo originates.

Not hard to change but the grey on unpainted timber livery is not that attractive. Some may remember the discussion about the livery for an unpainted Dapol steel ended open some time ago. It looks OK but a bit blah.



Now do I change it or not? I like the appearance of the wagon as it is but knowing it is not right might make me change it at some point.

The photo also shows the top plank is a different colour to the others, probably oak for the top plank with pine below. Wouldn't be obvious after a bit of weather.

 

[paulc]

Now I have a dilemma. The photo of the wagon I originally wanted to model turned up while looking through the downloads on a 10 year old iPad. The number is very close to the number I selected from the same Lot and it is almost certain that the livery would have been the same. Grey ironwork.....
View attachment 143781
and different lettering layout. No idea where the photo originates.

Not hard to change but the grey on unpainted timber livery is not that attractive. Some may remember the discussion about the livery for an unpainted Dapol steel ended open some time ago. It looks OK but a bit blah.
View attachment 143779
View attachment 143780

Now do I change it or not? I like the appearance of the wagon as it is but knowing it is not right might make me change it at some point.

The photo also shows the top plank is a different colour to the others, probably oak for the top plank with pine below. Wouldn't be obvious after a bit of weather.

Leave it , leave it .
Cheers Paul

 

[AJC]

If it were mine, I’d curse my ill luck and change it. But I wouldn’t try and force that view on anyone else.

Adam

 

[simond]

If it were mine, I’d say the other wagon had been painted on a different day by a different bloke, possibly at a different works.

and you’ve already got one in grey.

 

[Overseer]

I could just change the number so it matches the prototype photo the livery was based on, see page 87 of British Railway Wagons. I didn't really want to model the first one, B740000, but it would then be accurate. Whether the other early wagons were the same I don't know.

 

[John Ross]

Wagon as you have completed it looks good, I would leave it as it has character.

All the best
John Ross