Jump to content

Ray Flintoft

Members
  • Content Count

    72
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

280 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes , it was an early example of resin boilers &they seemed to vary a lot . Mine wasn't too bad , only needing a bit of filling & rubbing down to make good .Even on the best kits there is always something to improve on to make it even more your own & yours certainly looks very realistic .As far as I can tell "Great Northern " got it's A.W.S in June 1959 so you are fine there . It was quite a common visitor when I was a young spotter at York station ( unlike the W.1 which rarely worked North of Doncaster) & was usually as I remember in pretty good condition . Look forwa
  2. Glad to see progress with the wiring , David . It will be great for you when you can actually run your engines around . Keep us all updated on progress after the delay caused by this damn virus . And Richard, " Great Northern " is looking very good . Keep the pictures of progress coming . How have you found the build , have you had any problems with the kit ? Best Wishes , Ray .
  3. Yet another new engine enters traffic during the never ending lock down . Just to show I don't just build pacifics this is a Nu - Cast K.1 2-6-0 .No .62042 was one of the last working from York , only moving to West Hartlepool on 30/04/067 . It's duties at York were usually making up trains in the engineers yard & tripping them to where they were needed for track work . Ray .
  4. Good afternoon , Tony , I too have a DJH Raven class A.2 which is on my to do list , no 149 of 175 . I bought this many years ago from M.G.Sharp for £ 68.95 . I can remember the City of Ripon kit being advertised but I didn't know of a kit for no . 2402 to 2404 which would have suited me better as I will be doing no. 2402 "City of York " ( for obvious reasons ) This of course will involve me in extra work on the rear frames & Cartazzi truck . The full L.N.E.R livery is also a daunting prospect but if I get there I will post a picture on here for all to see .
  5. I understand completely , David , the Hornby ( is it horny !!!)K.1 is a superb model & I wouldn't like to spoil it either . You could renumber it as a Fort William based engine & have it appear occasionally on 64B in transit to or from Doncaster works . As Tony says Dave Alexander made a very nice kit of the K.4 ( I have one on my to do list for next year ) which you may find second hand but I wouldn't recommend it for a first kit build . Regards , Ray .
  6. I wouldn't use the B.1 body myself as it has a much higher running plate & the front lower section is somewhat shorter than the K.1/1( sorry , Tony .) If you are happy to build the tender yourself then you'll be interested to know that the front curve down on my 61997 was made from thick card curved to shape & glued on , with a sheet of thin brass glued on top to give the sharp edge . High tec. or what ! I've had no problems with this & it is over 20 years old . What you could do with the B.1 is to transfer the slide bars as a cosmetic fitting to give the right appea
  7. Hello David , I see you have been asking on Tony's thread about the Thompson class K.1/1 . Most of the differences are quite minor such as the position of the lubricators & the sandbox fillers on the footplate . More awkward would be the curved front footplate & the different slide bar arrangement . The real stumbling block to using the Hornby model would be the tender as the 3,500 gall tender fitted to no. 61997 is noticeably smaller than the 4,200 gall tender . I'm not sure how you would get round this ! To show the differences I enclose a couple of shots of my attempt
  8. No , I don't have my own thread , David . The layout has been complete for several years & is in need of some remedial work , Also I don't feel I have enough time to spend on the web ( so many engines to build & so little time to do it in!!) I feel I am very much an average modeller & appreciate your kind comments & generous offer . I will continue to post the odd picture where it fits in with a topic being discussed but don't wish to take over your thread & look forward to work restarting soon on your rendition of 64B . Best Wishes ,
  9. Hi David , The kinked ejector pipe ( the steam pipe along the boiler you mention ) was already fitted to no. 60501 by 1950 so Hornby should really get this right . Another variation is that 60501 had no backing plates to the sandbox filler's during the 1950's unlike the others . I've set my layout in the period 1957-1968 to allow me to model engine's as I remember them best & give some latitude ( Jubilee's with yellow cab side stripes alongside A.2/2's for example) Anyway , some more "Big Thommo's" to look at . Best Wishes ,
  10. Hi David , Hope this helps . No. 60501 received the later B.R. emblem & A.W.S at a general repair out from Doncaster 23/10/58 . However she already had the lipped chimney , lowered lamp iron & front number plate before this date . Other things to note are the boiler handrails cut short on the smokebox & the shape of the ejector pipe ( the devil is definitely in the detail with class A.2/2 ) There is a good photo in T.I NO. 46.The Thompson Pacifics taken 01/8/58 which shows these details well . Only a week later ( aged 6 ) I was hauled by this engine from York to Newc
  11. Some superb models of Thompson pacifics from everyone . Love to see other people's work & thankyou to David for allowing us to hijack his thread . I'll put some more of mine up in a little while if people still want to see them . Regards , Ray .
  12. Very nice work , Richard . Here's an even dirtier York A.2/3 from the DJH kit . Lovely to see more of the under-rated Thompson pacifics in model form . Regards , Ray .
  13. Correction , I of course mean my Peco turntable !
  14. Very nice , David . You're engines always look the part & show how RTR can be made to look realistic . I don't think you need to fit fire irons as the B.1's ( or at least most of them ) had a fire iron tunnel on the tender . One less job to do !! I wish I had replaced the plastic handrails on my Peco tender as yours looks so much better . Regards , Ray .
  15. You may well be right , Mick , I haven't seen the PDK version . Perhaps in attempting to correct the height of the cab sides they have used a generic Thompson cab side , which as you say is incorrect for Great Northern . I built my model when it was a new releases from Crownline & there was no alternative . If I was to build a model of Great Northern now , I would probably follow the same route as you have , as it does look slightly superior to the Crownline kit . Cheers , Ray .
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.