Re: Weathering Model Steam Locos

mark_newton wrote: 
Wolf Kirchmeir wrote:

 > Not even a freshly-painted loco looked black: that shiny fresh paint
 > reflected a lot of blue from the sky, you see.

No, I don't see. In the last seven years I've been involved with the
repainting of five actual steam locomotives in gloss black. *All* looked
black on completion, *none* noticeably reflected blue from the sky when
rolled outside on a sunny summer's day.

What, if any, evidence do you have that they do? Apart from photographs,
which you've conclusively demonstrated do not give an accurate rendering
of the actual colour?

Well, memories, actually. Maybe your locos are painted satin-gloss rather than high gloss. A mirror bright gloss will reflect all kinds of colours, not just the sky's blue. Look at your freshly polished car, for example....

 > OP Mark Newton faults Pryke for not weathering locos to look like the
 >  colour pictures in the books he refers to. Very few of those
 > pictures show the actual colours: trust me, I lived a block from the
 > CPR's loco depot in Strathcona (South Edmonton) in the 50s, and saw a
 >  lot of actual steam locos.

So have I, and a *lot* more recently than the 1950s. And unlike you,
I've worked on them on a daily basis, and have gotten to know how
and why they weather as they do. I'm bitterly regretting not having made
it absolutely clear in my original post that I was referring to
unrealistic *patterns* of weathering, and not just the colours, which to
my mind are an secondary issue.

I grant you that Pryke has exaggerated the patterns, presumably so that they will actually be seen at the usual scale viewing distance of a couple hundred feet or more. He's also modelling locos that were more or less severely neglected.

Pryke's weathering includes the usual rust marks on the rear sides of
the tender, explained away as being caused by overflowing water. And yet
I've never seen a photograph showing this as frequently portrayed by
modellers - nor would I expect to.

Well, I've seen photos of SP lokies, for example, toward the end of steam, with all kinds of light and dark streaks and blotches on them, including on the sides and rear of the tender. B/w phots, mind you, not colour, so Lord knows what those streaks actually were.

Almost all US locos had drains on the tender deck, to prevent water
pooling there. Other roads, like the NKP for example, had flush decks to
shed the water.

But sheetmetal doesn't stay nice and flat, and tender decks can develop subtle depressions on which water will pool. And it doesn't take much water to cause rust, esp. if the air is heavy in acids. If anything, a thin coating of water will rust metal faster than a deep pool, since a lot more oxygen can transfuse through it to the metal. Overflowing water will cling to rivets, and start rust patches there, which can develop into streaks fairly quickly if neglected. But I agree, rust on tender decks isn't all that obvious. Rust in nooks and crannies is, however, because that's where water tends to stick (surface tension effects.)

Modellers OTOH, who have never seen the top of a real tender deck, just
assume that overflow water would collect there, and weather accordingly.


Some modellers, do. I don't. I like clean steam locos.

Almost all of the other assumptions made in the Mr. Pryke's article
about the way steam loco weathering patterns develop are based on
similar ignorance.

 > When railroads took pride in the appearance of their rolling stock,
 > locos were washed quite often, so that the weathering patterns were
 > quite different. A loco that rarely if ever got washed would develop
 > all kinds of rust spots and patches, as well those infamous white
 > deposits from water spills

Infamous?, No just another modellers' fantasy. But since you're so sure
of yourself, feel free to put up an example of a steam loco with garish
white streaks emanating from the "leaking" washout plugs...

 > and condensing steam [snip]

LOL! Now you're really displaying your ignorance, Wolf.

Unfortunate choice of words, sorry for that. I was thinking of blowdown valves, which eject steam that's not very clean at all. When it condenses, it leaves a lot of crap behind. There have been pictures posted to a.b.p.r showing the effects on the area around the fire box - some of those b/w photos indicate the firebox area and nearby drivers were light grey or white. Even the steam ejected from the cylinder cocks isn't clean, but carries oil and grease with it, which attracts dirt (but dark stuff, usually). I've seen blow down valves doing their thing, BTW, most recently in Austria, about three years ago. Lots of noise, too.)

What it comes down to is that people have different experiences. I take it you are involved with a preservation group, ie, you take care to keep your locos looking good. That means they won't show the effects of the kind of end-of-steam era neglect that Pryke is depicting, and (I admit) exaggerating for artistic effect.

I've noticed you're the type of modeller who isn't happy if he's aware of any departure from he what knows (or believes) to be prototype practice. That's OK, it's your style of practicing the art of model railroading/railroad modelling (the Ben King school of modelling.) I've seen wonderful work done by people at your end of the modelling spectrum. Other practitioners prefer a more impressionistic style, and I've seen wonderful work done by them too (the John Allen school.) I tend to be more middle of the road.
.