🚀 go-pugleaf

"Greg Rudd" <grudd@usyd.edu.au> wrote in message
news:d5pn6r$la9$1@spacebar.ucc.usyd.edu.au...
> Terry Flynn says:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > "Hunslet" <hunslet@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
> > news:tkji71hre02934ies2hn4h8jmolueb8mi0@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 04 May 2005 21:50:33 +1000, Roy Wilke  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >I sit corrected -- I assumed that 3801 Ltd was a private railway
> >> >operator,
> >>
> >> Yes, 3801 Limited is a "private operator" using a mixture of rolling
> >> stock on loan from StateRail and some stock owned outright (such as
> >> d/e locos 4908 & 4918).    These items are not bound by heritage
> >> requirements.   Thus it can, and has, painted the 49 class in
> >> non-standard liveries.   4916 with the RTM is regarded as the
> >> "heritage" representative of the class but if my memory is correct,
> >> that unit was donated outright by Freight Rail Corporation to the RTM
> >> and so there is no compulsion for it to stay in "heritage" colours -
> >> in this case, a modified candy.
> >>
> >>
> >> >Terry's apparent assertion that only he and he alone knows what colour
> >> >3801 ought to be painted in was starting to irk me.
> >>
> >
> > But I have had access to the correct colour. Don't you want to know the
> > correct colour?
> >
> >> Just what is/are the "correct" heritage colour/s cannot be simply
> >> resolved.   I had this problem with the painting of heritage electric
> >> locomotive 4638.   There just were no precise records.   Colour slides
> >> were unreliable.   I finally arranged for an external paint scrape and
> >> we worked off that.   No one could advise the original internal
> >> colours and so I had to take an educated guess based on written
> >> reports of the time.   (Dsicussions with older drivers gave differing
> >> responses!).   The arm-chair "experts" tell me that this is wrong, or
> >> that is wrong, but it is up to them to prove their assertions to my
> >> satisfaction.
> >> >
> >
> > My 38 colour is based on paint off the prototype. No arm chairing in
this
> > case.
> >
>
> Bully for you!! Are we meant to be impressed by this statement??  Which
you
> continually remind us of ad infanitum.
>

Just stating a fact so we know who the arm chair experts are.

> >> >BTW, wasn't there a period during WW2 that NSW's streamlined Pacifics
> >> >were painted in what would now be called a "low-visibility stealth"
grey
> >> >paint scheme?
> >>
> >> Yes, but it was simply grey undercoat.   War-time difficulties!
> >>
> >> Hunslet.
> >>
> >
> > I will speculate that it was more likely either a grey being used by the
> > Navy at the time  or the dark grey used on goods wagons. (no documentary
> > evidence to support either theory). My evidence is a colour print from a
> > book published in 1946.
> >
>
> Which being from a print published in a book would be of dubious worth
> except as a record,but you knew that, expert. On this one I would put my
> money on Pete's explanation pending new evidence if it comes to light.
>

Pet's theory is simply that, and should be viewed as such.. To date there is
no more
evidence than photographs and basic descriptions of  'Grey'. One piece of
evidence against the undercoat theory is one black and white photo shows a
shiny clean smoke box cone. Same book. Undercoat paint usually has a matt
finish. It's not conclusive evidence, so Pet's theory is still in the
running.

-- 
Terry Flynn


http://angelfire.com/clone/rail/index.html

HO wagon weight and locomotive tractive effort estimates

DC control circuit diagrams

HO scale track standards