gathering of A4s

[giner]

the green colour of No.8 and 9
Regards,Roy.

Which green? My immediate impression was that the two locos were painted in entirely different shades.

Agreed. Why would they even do that? Dwight D looks 'orrible.

[ROY@34F]

Thanks for your views Gents. I thought they were too light/wishy washy,maybe towards pea green,as Micky says.Should be a darker shade.I have'nt noticed it before on preserved engines,so I'm sure it can be done better these days.Probably a personal view.
Regards,Roy.

[1H was 2E]

Now I know that colour perception depends on lighting, surroundings and loads of other factors so one could argue for ever about whether a colour is right or wrong. However, lettering and numbering is different - it's physically unchanging. Perhaps because, in my wasted(???) youth I read the numbers of thousands of locos (all B.R.) I find it easy to spot something that's not quite right. So here's the 3 B.R.-numbered ones at the gathering - am I alone in noticing something just slightly odd?

[giner]

Hi 1H. I think you might have a point. the '9' on 60009 is not sitting quite right to my eye. Looks like it needs a slight tweak clockwise. And the letterspacing just feels a tad too wide.

60008 looks about right.

60007, there's something about the '6'. A bit 'fat', maybe?

The more I look, the dodgier my judgement gets . But are you seeing the same details as me?

[Bryan]

Are they Handpainted or Transfers?
If Handpainted then individual variations are bound to crop up.

[john coffin]

60009 both the 6 and 9 look wrong and the spacing looks weird

60007 the 6 looks the wrong size too and the spacing too.

Interesting thought though, I thought they were all built at Doncaster, so why did they not get the Doncaster 6 in BR times? or was that only on the metal smokebox plate?

Interesting, there seems no understanding why Doncaster used that longer rounded tail for the 6 in BR times for the smokebox plate/

Paul

[harvester]

Looking at the photos the "greens" seem to be reflecting a fair amount of blue from their sisters, this could give rise to what appear different colours. Seen outside with a dusting of use and reflecting grey summer sky I'm sure they will look darker and look like the ones I remember roaring thro Doncaster on the "Lizzie" in the late 50s and early 60s.

[1H was 2E]

I wasn't commenting on the different greens, but as you say the colour is changed by reflection from strong colours nearby. If the sky is clear and blue this also has an effect. Near the A4s was the SECR 4-4-0, and the tender of this is painted in the same colours side and back. Standing in a position where you can see both, one face is differently lit from the other, the two surfaces look very different shades.

My post was not intended to be a catch question - I thought that there were several things that 'hit' straight away. Interestingly, the post from Paul covers almost all I'd noticed, but included a point I hadn't thought about, the curly ER 6. The one that hasn't got spotted is that in Gill Sans I think that the centre of 6, 8 and 9 should be a circle. But I was most struck by the uneven spacing and the falling over 6 and 9. I have noticed that many locos on preserved railways, particularly diesels and coaching stock, have non authentic typeface. Maybe I'm unusual in noticing this straight away. But I DID have difficulty distinguishing green from blue on diesels in the dark (like those Toton blue repaints where they painted around the crest).

[giner]

It may well have been the circle in the 6 on 60008 that made it look "about right" to me initially.

[60800]

60008 is the most accurate to my eye in terms of numbering and lining (though I think she incorrectly wears the earlier shade of BR green), with 60007 only just falling behind in the 'boldness' of the numbers.

To put it simply, both 60009 and 61264 (B1) are wrong because Crewe did the paint jobs. Lining is wrong on both, lining spacing is wrong on both, number spacing is wrong on both, number height is wrong on both. The only thing that Crewe got right was the tender crest position on 60009 - yes even that is wrong on the B1. Remember that 60009's boiler cladding had to be repainted this year? Well, I did a thorough clean down of the B1 last week, and I tell ya, it's chipping and peeling everywhere - which no-one is happy about. Let's hope that the Q6 is repainted back at the NYMR - not Crewe's shops.

[1H was 2E]

Further on the subject of the shaky numbers and lining on the Streaks in B.R. livery.
Now there is a certain loco that was repainted into BR lined green at a loco works in 1964, and since then has reposed built into a museum (well, actually, two museums in turn) out of the sun and weather. It has, therefore, preserved the workmanship of the signwriters who were the people who painted many engines in BR livery. Therefore, the style could be regarded as an authentic record of what the livery details were.
In particular, the '6' on this loco is shown, together with the lining.
I hope I haven't ruffled any feathers but it's the only loco I know that's still in B.R. livery as B.R . painted it.
A final (puzzled) thought. Green, red and blue locos had the (straw) numbers outlined in black. If this was a transfer, was it also used on black locos, or were there also transfers without the edging?

[Bryan]

I take it everybody reading this thread has considered the variations liable between Companies, Regions, Works and individual signwriters?

[1H was 2E]

An interesting point Bryan. My recollection of spotting in steam days was the absolute uniformity of style of cabside numbers, the only variation being the large numbers signifying (living in the real Midlands) an exotic loco.
I always assumed that this consistency was because of the use of transfers, but the last '6' I illustrated does seem to have been signwritten and I can see slight imperfections in the shape.
So maybe this consistency was an illusion. In my own case, my recollection is that I was very observant; but then I never noticed the "Doncaster" variation (curly 6 and 9 on SB numberplates). so probably in reality I wasn't, and we are talking of 50 years ago.
But some of the cabside numbers at the Great Gathering did seem more "wobbly" than anything I remember in the old days.

[61070]

Bit late but here's 60008's cabside on 12 July 1962:
download/file.php?id=4825

[1H was 2E]

Very interesting. It seems that the spacing of digits of "60008" in service was more like that of "60009" in preservation, but "60008" now is more closely spaced (the pair of bolt heads providing a datum). The sign writing of three absolutely identical zeroes next to one another was a challenge even for skilled early 60's sign writers.

Trying very hard to remember I now believe that I can recollect, on my own visits to Crewe Works, running numbers being signwritten while we watched; and I also suggest that the 1962 "60008" may have been done by hand rather than transfers. My recollection of absolute uniformity was, it seems now, mistaken.