Given that me and Facebook don't get along very well (cos I'm too stupid to understand exactly what is going on), can somebody confirm what I think they are trying to say: that they are going to produce the "loaf-of-bread" EHO guards van? There's nothing on their website, but there is a "post" (?) on faceache about the eliptical roof EHO.....

Roachie

Bill, I really wonder why companies use Faecesbook instead of a web site. To my mind hard to find stuff on FB because it lacks the structure of a web site. Nevertheless as friend Poath says there was a photo of a pre-production EHO in the August AMRM, which is now on line.

In my mind a pity they are doing the loaf of bread monster. I would much rather have a low elliptical roof or even a Mansard roof. I already have a couple of MHOs and would like my EHO(s) to be more of a contrast. Of course I have a kit from Joe that I must complete - it will have Mansard roof.

Can't please everyone. There might be someone in a tragic's corner somewhere who likes the loaf of bread style EHO. There are some twisted minds in this world. ha, ha, ha.

Best regards,
John

Facebook gives people to comment directly about a certain topic and makes sense in this day and age .
It seems to work well for people like Auscision .... Look how many hits there pics get when discussing future projects and rumours.

Bill, I really wonder why companies use Faecesbook instead of a web site. To my mind hard to find stuff on FB because it lacks the structure of a web site. Nevertheless as friend Poath says there was a photo of a pre-production EHO in the August AMRM, which is now on line.

In my mind a pity they are doing the loaf of bread monster. I would much rather have a low elliptical roof or even a Mansard roof. I already have a couple of MHOs and would like my EHO(s) to be more of a contrast. Of course I have a kit from Joe that I must complete - it will have Mansard roof.

Can't please everyone. There might be someone in a tragic's corner somewhere who likes the loaf of bread style EHO. There are some twisted minds in this world. ha, ha, ha.

Best regards,
John

John

I have nil worries about having a loaf of bread EHO in my fleet, same as a standard MHO, to complement the Austrains LHO, if an EHO comes out then that will also be good, the thing is that mail trains often used to have more guards type vans on them then just one. In the days of parcels as well as passenger luggage they were needed for those purposes.

If we take the line that its a pity when some more obscure models are produced then we might as well model the modern image, as we need basically similar R/S & loco's just paint in some different similar colours, & shove some variously branded containers on them.

One of the most enjoyable aspect of modelling the earlier period of time is the variety that was seen in train compositions, including both goods & passenger services, even the humble branch line types, & more humble ballast trains, to which I am looking forward to the old BBP van that is being co-produced by Andian & Peter Boorman, a rake of say 4 riveted BBW's would compliment the van, & each ran into the 70's.

Of the SDS variety of EHO's a couple of them had steam heating service pipes on them, so would be nice to see that done, likewise MLV's with the steam pipes as well that were part of o/night trains.

If we take the line that its a pity when some more obscure models are produced then we might as well model the modern image, as we need basically similar R/S & loco's just paint in some different similar colours, & shove some variously branded containers on them.

One of the most enjoyable aspect of modelling the earlier period of time is the variety that was seen in train compositions, including both goods & passenger services, even the humble branch line types, & more humble ballast trains, to which I am looking forward to the old BBP van that is being co-produced by Andian & Peter Boorman, a rake of say 4 riveted BBW's would compliment the van, & each ran into the 70's.

It is funny the differences we see and what interests us as modelers. As a modern image modeler I see much more variety occurring in a modern container train than in almost any steam rea consist. A string of GY's or I/IA behind a J in Victoria or a string of S wagons in NSW to me all look the same. I see the intricate differences in container designs (sold side, curtain site, opentops, flatracks tanktaners not to mention the varity of variations seen in the design of ribs on the walls and doors) and the wide variety of flat and well wagons used to carry the wagons.

I guess as the saying beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Matt

It is funny the differences we see and what interests us as modelers. As a modern image modeler I see much more variety occurring in a modern container train than in almost any steam rea consist. A string of GY's or I/IA behind a J in Victoria or a string of S wagons in NSW to me all look the same. I see the intricate differences in container designs (sold side, curtain site, opentops, flatracks tanktaners not to mention the varity of variations seen in the design of ribs on the walls and doors) and the wide variety of flat and well wagons used to carry the wagons.

I guess as the saying beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Matt

Matt

There is a huge difference but it depends a lot on what trains you are viewing & how they are consisted. A modern train can have a great length of basically the same wagons, that being coal, wheat & the like, or some will have louvre vans in the consist or a huge array of multi coloured/branded containers above the deck, the wagons bodies for intended purposes look the same. I see a fair amount of Interstate traffic through Wyong, included some local container services, the only thing that breaks the monotony is sometimes the MP up front or a mixed train of empties & containers.

Certainly a long train of empty S trucks is not a great sight, but if you go into the 60's & even into the middish 70's the variety of trains overall was quite a deal more interesting, interstate flexi van trains, along with mixed container, open wagons, louvre vans made for very interesting consists, likewise a good range of loco's up front that were generally different in their looks according to their class type.

General goods trains were not all empty S trucks either, even trains with tarped wagons were quite different & depended on what was under the tarp, with the size & how it looked in the consist. With the exception of bulk wheat & some coal services the general variety in trains, both passenger & goods trains were overall very different. Few of them really looked identical to another one, reason was of course the different loading that was hauled by rail, especially to & from Rural destinations.

But the thing is that each generation sees things differently based on their interest & what they see daily.

I like the comment current train make up is boring.
Someone said it is generational and I think that statement is correct.
I am sixty four and I remember saying to myself who can be bothered photographing another T class as I have plenty of those.
Well I did until the Branch lines closed and time has moved on and guess what? I have virtually no photographs to speak of and they have gone forever into History.
The current container train make up is very familiar but I bet in ten years time when someone asks what was wagon PQQY? very little documented evidence will be available to give a clear picture of use etc.
Digital camera's have made it easier but you still have to take the photograph.
Regards PTE.
P.S. Bring on the 38' VR tank wagons.

I like the comment current train make up is boring.
Someone said it is generational and I think that statement is correct.
I am sixty four and I remember saying to myself who can be bothered photographing another T class as I have plenty of those.
Well I did until the Branch lines closed and time has moved on and guess what? I have virtually no photographs to speak of and they have gone forever into History.
The current container train make up is very familiar but I bet in ten years time when someone asks what was wagon PQQY? very little documented evidence will be available to give a clear picture of use etc.
Digital camera's have made it easier but you still have to take the photograph.
Regards PTE.
P.S. Bring on the 38' VR tank wagons.

There is so much interest across the board & era's, & for those of us who saw the whole train working in the branch line days, along with steam & 1st gen diesels, as well as worked on them, it was an age that was evolving in an ever changing way, certainly it sat idle for some years from probably the mid 70's until the end of the 4 wheelers & then basically until the introduction (in NSW) of the next generation of change with the 81cl, along with dire rationalisation & big loads/privatisation things changed all but suddenly.

Those brought up during the circus colour era love that scheme & the times, & the list goes on.  In the earlier years railway photography centred on taking photo's of what remained of the trains & those hauled by steam, we knew they were going, but not a lot & that includes me, even though on the job thought or foresaw the degree of changes that took place over time.  Initially we saw the painting of infrastructure as a sign of those items remaining, yet before long & in many cases too late the saying of if you see something being painted it was a death warrant, & became very true.

Problem was that by then so much of historical significance let alone importance was gone, & only older workers or those who lived around those events could totally appreciate it.  We had a comment last night at a model group I am in, where around 50% are U.S modellers the rest NSW, by a long standing U.S modellor that he was surprised at the variety in NSW trains, at a presentation I did in 3 parts the first with tarps & then timber transport, when compared to those in the states.

He commented how US trains were very similar across every border & system, with all using interchangeable R/S along with buildings etc, which he said actually reminded him very much of todays Australian railways, albeit with more modern vehicles, & emphasis on containers, coal & wheat.

In my mind a pity they are doing the loaf of bread monster. I would much rather have a low elliptical roof or even a Mansard roof. I already have a couple of MHOs and would like my EHO(s) to be more of a contrast. Of course I have a kit from Joe that I must complete - it will have Mansard roof.

Can't please everyone. There might be someone in a tragic's corner somewhere who likes the loaf of bread style EHO. There are some twisted minds in this world. ha, ha, ha.

Best regards,
John

Point of Order, Mr Speaker!

SDS are *not* doing the 'loaf of bread' version of the EHO (that is the one ILM did as a kit about 20 years ago).

SDS are doing the 'extended letterboard' version of the high semi-elliptical EHO, which has a noticeably different roof shape to the earlier 'loaf of bread' version.

This is a 'loaf of bread' EHO (photo of ILM kit from Ian Phemister's blog)


Whereas this is the 'extended letterboard' version that SDS is doing.

The letterboard is wider, making the sides higher, on the version SDS is doing and the end profile is curved, rather than flat as on the earlier 'loaf of bread'.




As to that slur cast on us lovers of the high roofed EHOs, I challenge you to brake vans at dawn, Mr Bushell!

I did actually suspect it is not LoB James, but was too careless to check carefully. Apologies. It was that bloody Roachie who mislead me!

I accept the ten demerits and will check more carefully in days to come. Nevertheless I would still prefer a low elliptical or mansard roof.

BTW I checked mansard on Dr Google to see if it should have a capital M. I had always assumed it was named after Mr Mansard, but appears not to be the case. From Wicki:

A mansard or mansard roof (also called a French roof or curb roof) is a four-sided [color=#0b0080]gambrel-style [color=#0b0080]hip roof[/color] characterized by two slopes on each of its sides with the lower slope, punctured by [color=#0b0080]dormer windows[/color], at a steeper angle than the upper.^{[color=#0b0080][1][/color][color=#0b0080][2][/color][color=#0b0080][3][/color]} The steep roof with windows creates an additional [color=#0b0080]floor[/color] of habitable space,^{[color=#0b0080][4][/color]} (a [color=#0b0080]garret[/color]), and reduces the overall height of the roof for a given number of habitable storeys. The upper slope of the roof may not be visible from street level when viewed from close proximity to the building.[/color]
The earliest known example of a mansard roof is credited to [color=#0b0080]Pierre Lescot on part of the [color=#0b0080]Louvre[/color] built around 1550. This roof design was popularised in the early 17th century by [color=#0b0080]François Mansart[/color] (1598–1666), an accomplished [color=#0b0080]architect of the French Baroque[/color] period.^{[color=#0b0080][5][/color]} It became especially fashionable during the [color=#0b0080]Second French Empire[/color] (1852–1870) of [color=#0b0080]Napoléon III[/color].^{[color=#0b0080][6][/color]}Mansard in Europe also means the attic (garret) space itself, not just the roof shape^{[color=#0b0080][7][/color]} and is often used in Europe to mean a gambrel roof.[/color]


PS.  I must check the bible of NSW passenger rolling stock to find out how many of each roof style EHO existed.

Ive had a look on SDS's web site and through this thread but haven't been able to find the time line for both types of EHO sds is producing . Anyone know? thanks

I did actually suspect it is not LoB James, but was too careless to check carefully. Apologies. It was that bloody Roachie who mislead me!

WTF??? Mr Bushell....are you casting nasturtions on me??? hahahaha.

I might have to join in on the duel at dawn....I have a couple of 40+ year old MRC MHOs that I'm willing to sacrifice in the name of "Guards Van Honour" but I may then be guilty of GVH!!! hahaha.

For what it's worth, I'm quite looking forward to the SDS model although I fear it will stick out like a sore thumb against my motley collection of Lima 12 wheelers and a couple of Trax FS/BS. I hope they will be sold as single items as I don't know too many modellers who would want/need more than one.

Roachie

Ive had a look on SDS's web site and through this thread but haven't been able to find the time line for both types of EHO sds is producing . Anyone know? thanks

I don't have my reference books at hand but the Masonite clad version probably started to appear in the late 1950's and lasted till the early 1980's (end of loco hauled passenger services). The earlier paneling lasted into the 1960's, possibly into the 1970's though there is always a chance one survived till being scrapped.

Terry Flynn.

BMT info and order pages - http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/bmtx.htm & http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/bmt1.pdf . $187 per 3 pack.

I don't have my reference books at hand but the Masonite clad version probably started to appear in the late 1950's and lasted till the early 1980's (end of loco hauled passenger services). The earlier paneling lasted into the 1960's, possibly into the 1970's though there is always a chance one survived till being scrapped.

Terry Flynn.

There is frequent confusion, I think expressed above, between Masonite panelling and plywood panelling.

Basically, the Masonite was narrow strips appllied over the original panels or tongue in groove boards with alumimium half round strips covering the joins.

Plywood usually replaced the original panelling, and while some early applications had panel joins, later applications used single sheets covering a section of the side (between doors, for example) or forming the whole side. Eventually some EHO vans were fitted with a one piece plywood shell.

One way of telling Masonite and plywood panelling is that Masonite cars usually retained the original curved lower body, known as "tumblehome". To my knowledge, all plywood cars had flat lower sides, and some had sliding doors, not possible with the tumblehome retained.

However none of the earlier brake vans had flat sides with tongue in groove panelling. This feature was introduced with the VHO and MHO vans, which were built with sliding doors. It is possible that the KP mail vans always had flat sides, since they always had sliding doors.

I think Masonite panelling was introduced in the 1950s and was used on LFX, CX and BX cars where the small panels and numerous doors did not require panel joins. Very few side door cars, mainly HCX branch line composite cars received plywood panels and were modified with flat lower sides.

Masonite was not waterproof and distorted after some time in traffic, and was superseded by marine ply which was effectively waterproof when correctly painted and maintained. Many EHO vans were equipped with plywood sides.

IHO 1757, illustrated on P165 of Coaching Stock Vol 1 shows the narrow panels and cover strips typical of Masonite panels alrhough this might be an early plywood modification. EHO 641 on page 161 shows the later plywood design with no panel joins visible. This particular car was built with domed ends bur was rebuilt with a slightly lower roof with flat ends. 641 was rebuilt in 1963.

M636C

To answer John Bushell's query, 22 of this type of van were built during 1914 and 1921.
Ten of the earlier design with full canopy ends were built in 1913-1914.

There were twenty Mansard roof type built from 1908 to 1910
Thirteen were built with a so called "low elliptical roof" in 1910-1911.
Nineteen had the "high elliptical roof" with square ends in 1912-1913.

I think the upper model represents an early plywood sheathed car. I don't think Masonite sheets were available in that width, or at least not used in that width owing to distortion.

I'm not sure that there were any such vans with flat sides and tongue in groove panelling, as in the lower picture.
I thought all these vans had tumblehome on the lower sides until rebuilt with plywood sides.
Cars in original condition had larger lookouts than the model illustrated.
While I don't doubt that at least one car may have looked like the lower model, I'd be surprised if many in the class looked like that.

M636C

One way of telling Masonite and plywood panelling is that Masonite cars usually retained the original curved lower body, known as "tumblehome". To my knowledge, all plywood cars had flat lower sides, and some had sliding doors, not possible with the tumblehome retained.

However none of the earlier brake vans had flat sides with tongue in groove panelling. This feature was introduced with the VHO and MHO vans, which were built with sliding doors. It is possible that the KP mail vans always had flat sides, since they always had sliding doors.

Can confirm from several photos that KL and KP mail vans (with sliding doors) had tumblehome sides. Masonite (or similar) panelling retained the curve. Plywood conversions were flat.

I think the upper model represents an early plywood sheathed car. I don't think Masonite sheets were available in that width, or at least not used in that width owing to distortion.

Sheeting of that width (not sure what material) was used on the curved lower sides of LFX/CX/BX. The panels were screwed at fairly close intervals to minimise distortions.
Canopy roofed EHO 1993 (now at Dorrigo) has that size panelling on Tumblehome sides – I have a photo clearly showing this. KP mail vans also used similar sized panelling.

To answer John Bushell's query, 22 of this type of van were built during 1914 and 1921.
Ten of the earlier design with full canopy ends were built in 1913-1914.

There were twenty Mansard roof type built from 1908 to 1910
Thirteen were built with a so called "low elliptical roof" in 1910-1911.
Nineteen had the "high elliptical roof" with square ends in 1912-1913.

I think the upper model represents an early plywood sheathed car. I don't think Masonite sheets were available in that width, or at least not used in that width owing to distortion.

I'm not sure that there were any such vans with flat sides and tongue in groove panelling, as in the lower picture.
I thought all these vans had tumblehome on the lower sides until rebuilt with plywood sides.
Cars in original condition had larger lookouts than the model illustrated.
While I don't doubt that at least one car may have looked like the lower model, I'd be surprised if many in the class looked like that.

M636Cm

For model railway purposes wether the prototype used Masonite or plywood is academic. What is important is are the SDS EHO's accurate. I have seen both pilot models, and both versions have the tumblehome side, as per the prototype being modelled. According to photographic evidence, the guards look out as modelled was a verry common modification and correct for both versions.

Terry Flynn.

To answer John Bushell's query, 22 of this type of van were built during 1914 and 1921.
Ten of the earlier design with full canopy ends were built in 1913-1914. ...

M636C

Thanks for saving me the trouble of hunting through the book for all that info M636C.

For model railway purposes wether the prototype used Masonite or plywood is academic. What is important is are the SDS EHO's accurate. I have seen both pilot models, and both versions have the tumblehome side, as per the prototype being modelled. According to photographic evidence, the guards look out as modelled was a verry common modification and correct for both versions.

Terry Flynn.

I believe only Masonite was used on cars that retained tumblehome.

I can look up (and post if required) the instructions in the carriage building text books produced by the NSWGR which show how to alter the body framing from the curve for tumblehome to flat for plywood by inserting a carefully shaped insert.

All cars with plywood sides were modified to remove tumblehome.

All the side door cars I have seen retaining tumblehome had masonite panelling. The few plywood cars were HCX type and had flat lower sides.

Smaller lookouts were fitted to many vans. Some canopy roof cars received mirror lookouts. While it is likely that a Masonite clad van would have this, it is less likely for one with tongue in groove panelling, although possible.

M636C

I believe only Masonite was used on cars that retained tumblehome.

All cars with plywood sides were modified to remove tumblehome.

If that’s the case, and I have no reason to doubt it, then the SDS model is of a Masonite sided EHO. The small picture doesn’t give too much away, but the model looks very nice to my eye. Agree entirely with Terry’s comments.

Regarding small guards duckets on a tongue and groove car, see the photo on page 161 of Coaching Stock Volume 1.

From https://www.facebook.com/SdsModels - "....We have tooled three versions of this van, matchboard sides with full ducket, matchboard sides with short ducket and Masonite sides with short ducket. All versions retain the correctly formed tumblehome body so characteristic of early Thow design..."

Not sure how long it has been up there for but anyone checked the new additions to the future release page lately:

[center][table][tr][td][img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/bitu1.jpg[/img][/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][font=Verdana]Bitumen and Heavy Oil Rail Tank Cars are the second release in our multi medium Evolution Models range.[/font]
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/nzmfmb.jpg[/img][/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][font=Verdana] MRC / MB Refrigerated Vans NZMF Containerized Milk Wagon [/font]
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/gsfutur1.jpg[/img][/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
[/center]
[center][table][tr][td][center][font=Verdana]Gas Rail Tank Cars [/font][/center]
[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
[/center]
[center][table][tr][td][center] [img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/jcws.jpg[/img] [/center]
[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
[/center]
[center][table][tr][td][font=Verdana]JCW / NQJW / RQJW 80' Container Wagon[/font]
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/twffut.jpg[/img][/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][font=Verdana]OT / TW / TWF / VTQF Rail Tank Cars[/font]
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/fxfut.jpg[/img][/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][font=Verdana]FX / VPFX Flour Wagon[/font]
[/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][img]http://www.sdsmodels.com.au/ehofut1.jpg[/img][/td]
[/tr]
[tr][td][font=Verdana]EHO Brake Van[/font][/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
[/center]

Well, I for one am REALLY looking forward to get a couple of FX wagons...