robertcwp
-
Posts
3,366 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Exhibition Layout Details
Store
Posts posted by robertcwp
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:Speaking of the P2s
I recently added this image of 2001 to my collection, having purchased the original large-format negative. I have no idea who the photographer was.
2001_nr-PottersBar by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
-
22
-
1 hour ago, Flood said:
26/8/21 Mk2B announced
9/6/22 Mk2B livery samples, + 8 months 1 day =
10/2/23 Mk2C announced
20/10/23 Mk2C livery samples
....
+ 8 months 1 day =
21/4/24 Mk2D announced??????
They would certainly go well with Deltics and not out of place behind a 50 or a 31/4 either.
50040_17-4-80 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
31407_Doncaster_1729@1747_18-6-78 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
9007_1E11 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
-
6
-
2
-
-
Test run of Mark 2b stock today. The train includes a Bachmann BG and a Hornby RB and FO.
-
6
-
-
On 28/03/2024 at 22:46, AJCT said:
Wonderful pics, Robert - thanks for posting. Don't suppose you have the running number for the BG in the Thornton Jn pic?
Alasdair
Sorry, no it's not readable even on the master scan.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Flood said:
The positions of the vents on my model were based on the B.R drawing and photographs, measurement of an actual Mk2C would be completely accurate. In addition, I have made the access hatch slightly smaller than those on the Bachmann Mk2F coaches. Thinking about it there is no reason why they should be any different but I originally made it to the Bachmann size and when compared to photos it seemed to wide (in comparison to the door and window positions).
I thought the 2f had a bigger roof hatch than 2c to 2e but might be mistaken. I believe 2f had a heater unit in the system which 2d and 2e did not as they had separate pressure ventilation for heating.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I have been doing some coupling experiments. My Mark 2b stock needs to be able to couple to Bachmann Mark 2a stock and assorted Mark 1 stock such as Bachmann BGs and RUs and Hornby RBs and FOs. I tried Hornby magnetic couplings but the NEM boxes on the Bachmann 2a stock are so far back that they don't work. I could use Hunt ones but am not keen. I tried changing the 2b coupling mounts to the short version that came with the carriages and they seem fine but then I found that a short Bachmann tension lock in the standard Accurascale mount gives much the same spacing. So, for now, it's short t/l couplings for me.
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, WestRail642fan said:
Hope these are popular enough for Hornby to later make the Silver Jubilee set and the resturant triplet used on the Flying Scotsman after 1938
If they can get the articulation to work, which it seems they can, then I hope so.
-
3
-
-
9 hours ago, Ollie K said:
Indeed - though it makes apparent sense that high speed test trains would’ve used the spare set, the Hoather pictures show ‘CORONATION’ lettering on the carriage sides (and no roof destination board mounts, which were present only on the unlettered spare set).According to ‘LNER Carriages’ by Michael Harris, the record run stock was set 103, the first of the streamlined trains to be fitted with the quick acting Westinghouse brake valve, which was subsequently rolled out across the fleet.
Source:
I did reach out to Hornby via the Engine Shed email address they encourage us to contact them on asking if this information had any bearing on which Coronation set they intended to produce, but never received a reply.
Just going off the bottom of this is Harris's comment about the brake third twin from set 103 being withdrawn due to the fire at Doncaster works, but this is contradicted by a photo in his own book of 1727/8 in BR days. It seems that, if any stock was damaged in the fire at Doncaster, it was repaired. Apart from the two twins destroyed at Huntingdon, for which there is photographic evidence of the wrecks, all the stock survived until the early 1960s.
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, Pint of Adnams said:
There were four sets, not just one (set 101 was the Silver Jubilee), sets 102 and 103 were the two Coronation sets, 104 the West Riding set, and 105 the spare, which did not have any name on the lower body sides. I'm not sure where Sam's four iterations of each came from but could be: as built; crimson and cream with fairings and the stainless steel lettering removed; maroon; and maroon with additional inner doors for those twins that did receive them (it's not confirmed that they all did).
So far Hornby has only used renders of the Observation Car numbered 1729, which is the second one. No information has been released yet as to the numbering of the first production, but the numbers need to be consistent within the sets, such that set 102 would be 1711-9, set 103 1721-9, both including the Observation cars, set 105 (spare) 1731-8, whilst the West Riding set 104 was numbered in the GN series rather than as East Coast stock, so 45801/2, 45811/2, 45821/2, 45831/2. Post-war, the West Riding used six of the eight carriages and that was probably the longest formation.
Spare set BTO/TO Twin 1737/8 was involved in a fire (stray coal thrown up and trapped underneath) at Huntingdon on 14 July 1951. Difficulty in escaping led to the requirement to insert the additional inner doors.
The 'West Riding Limited' twin first was also destroyed in the Huntingdon fire.
So far as I can establish, all the surviving twins gained extra doors after the fire and whilst still crimson and cream. What catches people out is that three of the four types had the extra door only on one side.
The Twin-FOs had the doors on one side of each vehicle such that the doors were on opposite sides of the train. Viewed from the outside, the additional door was visible on the right-hand vehicle. Each vehicle thereby lost two seats.
The BTO-TO twins and the RT-TO twins each had the extra door on one side of the TO (the side with the single seats, thereby losing two seats). The TO vehicles were laid out opposite ways round in terms of which side had the single seats so that on the BTO-TO twin with the brake to the left when viewed from the outside, there was no additional door visible, as shown in the photo of E1727/8E in LNER Carriages (Harris) page 70.
On the RT-TO twin with the RT on the left viewed from the outside, there was an extra door visible on the TO.
On the BTO-RT twin, the extra door was on the BTO on the side with the single seats only, so with the RT to the left and BTO to the right when viewed from the outside, you could see the extra door on the BTO.There are errors in the Harris LNER book regarding this stock.
-
2
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Kirby Uncoupler said:
Thanks Robert, these are two very useful photographs. Apart from the roller bearings and added centre door detail on the Twin First, look closely at the guttering. It's not continuous at either end, with sections removed? BK
Hard to tell for sure even on the full-size scan but it might be that part of the guttering has been replaced and the colours don't match. The far end is out of focus.
-
28 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:
Good evening Robert,
All the ex-LMS carriages have gone, and most of the ex-GWR ones sold today.
Regards,
Tony.
No problem.
-
16 minutes ago, davidw said:
Thanks Robert. Aren't those the West Riding twins, which Hornby could potentially make from the coronation tooling?
The twin first is from the 'spare set' and has roller bearings for use in The Talisman. The number on the other one is not readable as it's out of focus.
Apart from interior decor and lettering when new, all four sets were the same, albeit there were only two observation cars.
The West Riding twin first and one of the Coronation twin brake third/thirds were destroyed in the Huntingdon fire.
-
2
-
2
-
-
- Popular Post
- Popular Post
As a number of BR Eastern modellers follow this thread, I thought these two images that I have added to my collection might be of interest:
Twin-RS-SO_JUL-63 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
E1733-4E_YorkCW_28-9-63 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
-
35
-
2
-
This image might also be of interest. It shows the side of a second/kitchen second without the additional door:
Twin-RS-SO_JUL-63 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
-
4
-
-
1 hour ago, Johan DC said:
The designer of these (forgot his name) said that he had to design 32 coaches to have all 4 versions, apart from the observation Cars. To my shame, I don't know what those four versions are. Is the one above one of those?
I am aware that they have built the doors into the design. One of the 3D printed mock-ups they had on show included the door on one side of the twin first.
The question for me is when, if ever, Hornby will get round to actually doing the stock in maroon.
I hope they get the doors right. They were on both sides of the twin first, one on each half, and on one side of the other three twins. The Silver Jubilee set, which Hornby is not doing (yet) did not gain additional doors.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I'm hoping Hornby will do this stock in maroon with the extra doors, like this:
E1733-4E_YorkCW_28-9-63 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
-
4
-
2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:
Robert,
the only sure way to get all four wheels to sit on the track is to spring or compensate the axles. Despite what many think, track is rarely absolutely flat.
However, with OO/EM wheel flanges it shouldn't be too difficult the build a a short wheelbase vehicle or bogie that will remain on reasonably well built track without falling off. There are occasions where a flange meeting a badly made/fitted switch blade will lift and derail, but that is a another issue.
Jol
I know, but a few wagons on Retford were found to be significantly out of alignment such you could see that the axles were not parallel and they were prone to derailing. Minor imperfections don't matter in EM and compensation is not really needed. Another problem which affects RTR as well as kit-built stock is back-to-backs being out, but that is more easily sorted. I went through the whole cement train on Retford last weekend. It was prone to derailing but having given it a service, it seems fine now. Wheels accumulate dirt and that causes drag and can lead to derailments. I have spent countless hours over the last few years cleaning carriage and wagon wheels.
-
1
-
4
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:
A few things are beginning to dawn on me now with regard to the 'value' of the locos/stock I'm selling on behalf of bereaved/distressed families of late. All the locos/rolling stock are kit-built (Mo and I don't 'deal' in RTR), and, in the main, it's of a good/high standard. The most-recent locos run particularly well. Yet, I'm struggling to even get the cost of the components.
I took some locos to Doncaster, Preston and York, and, while a few sold, I still came back with several. Yet, I'd priced them at under the cost of a new kit and all the bits to build it. Granted, the making of locos (at least to the likes of me) is more important than buying them ready-made (why should I pay for something I can build myself?). And, from anecdotal evidence, it would appear that unmade kits (by that I mean in a virgin state) are more-desirable than the equivalent made-up item.
What I find hard to reconcile is the difference in price now between reasonable kit-built locos and current RTR. Most big RTR steam-outline locos (not DCC) are in excess of £200.00 - well in excess in some cases; in fact, are we reaching the £300.00 barrier? Though, in some cases, I've got near price-parity for equivalent types, for most of the time I'm well below it - and the models still don't shift!
I suppose RTR stuff is 'guaranteed', and, to be fair, the quality in terms of accuracy and finish is better than most kit-built equivalents, but are they as robust? Will they last as long? Do they give the same satisfaction? Who knows?
We'll keep on trying our best. The cause deserves it.
Some current RTR models are far from robust. Think of the issues with the new Hornby BR Standard 2MT for example. Others are disappointing in other respects, eg the awful attempt at BR green on the Hornby A2/2 and A2/3, plus some quality issues.
However, they do have some advantages over kits, especially for the 00 modeller, which most of those who model in 4mm scale are. RTR engines are better at negotiating tighter curves (eg the annoyingly sharp Peco double slip) and they mostly come ready for DCC and sound, if the owner wants it. My main layout is old-fashioned DC and I don't see the appeal of sound but any new layout of mine will be DCC only. They are also generally built 'square' although some can be wobbly runners. For most modellers, power is not really an issue as they won't be running scale length trains. Even RTR locos can often handle long trains with some additional weight, even if formed mostly of heavy metal kit-built carriages.
Here is an example of what modern RTR can do - this is a Hornby 'Commonwealth of Australia' on the Elizabethan stock (10 out of 11 are metal kits) on Retford. It was a test run - hence no lamps or headboards. Sandra converted the engine to EM and added extra weight but it retains its Hornby mechanism.
The main appeal of kits will probably be for those types not covered RTR, of which there are still many in the steam era.
For rolling stock, there are very significant RTR gaps, such as decent GWR, LMS or LNER catering cars and various non-passenger types, as well as huge gaps such as Gresley end-door stock. Kits have some appeal here but lots of modellers seem not to care too much whether their trains are as prototypical as their engines.
For wagons, kits cover many types not available RTR. However, even plastic kits can cause problems if not built 'square'. This is an issue that has manifested itself on Retford, where most of the troublesome wagons are kit-built ones that won't sit with all four wheels on the track at once. Most have now been weeded out and exiled to the back of the goods yard.
-
7
-
2
-
5
-
-
3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:
Good morning Robert,
A couple of communications, the answering of a few questions, and it looks like the ex-LMS carriages have already gone!
There are some very nice ex-GWR carriages, however. That said, I'll have them for sale at the Cotgrave Show this weekend, so there might not be a need for any photography.
Regards,
Tony.
Thanks, I have far too many carriages anyway!
-
5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:
There are some rather nice ex-GWR and ex-LMS carriages as well................
They should be worth a look!
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:
Good afternoon Chas,
When you next see me, and I appear to be in deep conversation, please make your presence known. Mo is always telling me that I should look around more, and see those who might be patiently waiting. Then (tactfully?) say to those with whom I'm in conversation for some time that there are others. It is difficult, though I need to be more aware.
This year, it's my perception that York was busier than ever; quite rightly so. To me, it's a 'far superior' show to Ally Pally. By that I mean it's much more of a modellers' show, particularly with regard to the trade support. If I'm wrong, please put me right, but was any trader at Ally Pally selling wheels, gearboxes, motors, loco kits, carriage kits, fittings and all the necessary bits and pieces to complete models? York doesn't really have 'box-shifters' as well. Granted, the layouts at Ally Pally will be as good as anywhere and it's wonderfully well-organised. However, parking is no longer free, I believe.
To me, York is still one of the best shows in the calendar; it really caters for those who actually 'make things', and need all the bits to do so (similar ones are the likes of Aylesbury and Wells, as well as the Society shows; there are others).
Yes, the ex-GC RU I had on display was the 3D-printed one . Nobody has told me yet that it's wrong!
Regards,
Tony.
I agree. The York show was excellent. Sorry I didn’t get to say hello during the day.
-
1
-
-
Full brake with deep upper crimson band - this one has the valances - also note the Thompson open on the right with the upper crimson band too:
60154_Doncaster_early-1950s by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
No upper crimson band on this BG, which is one without the valances:
55217_ThorntonJct_22-4-57 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
Brakes without the upper crimson band:
60911_Rickmansworth_1-11-57 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
V2 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
60048_ChalonersWhin_4-8-57 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
This is a 3-compartment one:
60151_York_24-3-57 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
Some other stock with the band:
61558 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
E1106E_Craigentinny_12-4-54 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
Leading one here is SC13834E:
68929_Harringay_1953 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr
-
2
-
3
-
1
-
-
The first run of Bachmann Mark 2a stock had a very dark blue and a more grey shade of Rail Grey. I put one of the second run of Bachmann Mark 2a stock, a Bachmann 2f and an Accurascale 2b together yesterday and I agree that the livery match is pretty good.
-
18 minutes ago, AJCT said:
I'm intending to rewheel mine for P4, and it looks a bit more complicated than is appropriate for my usual "prise-out-the-00-wheelsets" technique. How did you rewheel yours for EM?
The full brake was simply a swap for Gibson wheels. On the others that I have done for Retford (over 20), I bent the metal in slightly, clipped off the brake shoes and put Gibson or old Romford wheels in.
Wright writes.....
in Modelling musings & miscellany
Posted
No idea as no information came with the negative.