Wright writes.....

[MJI]

I'm pretty certain the wires on GWR posts were stapled as mentioned above.  You can just about make this out on this Pendon pic:

 

http://www.pendonmuseum.com/gallery#prettyPhoto[trains]/3/

 

GWR are DEFINATELY stapled

 

I have repaired lineside fencing in the past

[gr.king]

Spelling check definitely required......

[johnarcher]

Spelling check definitely required......

Thank you for saying spelling check rather than spell checker - you don't need the latter unless you are casting a spell.

[kingfisher24]

Back to making things for myself, so a progress report on the ex-silver Jubilee triplet.

 

Mailcoach carriages 16.jpg

 

Here are the sides for the Dining First, having received six coats of Railmatch BR maroon using the trusty Winsor & Newton's Artists' sable No. 6. The trick is to paint the top halves first, then the bottom. So, twelve paint applications for each side; times six, meaning there are lots of opportunities for bits of crud to contaminate the surface. 

 

The skirts were cut off (how, will be in BRM eventually) and the remaining valances stuck to the bases of the sides with MEK, before the bottom halves were painted. Once the sides were painted maroon, their bottoms were masked off and the valance painted satin black. 

 

I have to say the initial surface finish on these carriages is not brilliant and the joining of the sides and valances is really difficult in order to achieve a smooth finish. Those factors and my method of painting militate against a 'perfect' finish. Indeed, having built and painted several carriages by this method (and reported on in the RM in the last century) I plead pragmatism in finally achieving a 'layout coach' finish. Readers of the latest BRM Annual will see examples of my brass-sided, spray-finished coaches, which on the Mailcoach products is an effect impossible to achieve in my opinion. Others have masked-off each window, then sprayed the sides but the finish is never the same as on brass.

 

Really close inspection of the image above will reveal surface blemishes in my work thus far.

 

Mailcoach carriages 17.jpg

 

I was able to spray-paint the made-up underframes. These are 90% guesstimation because the Isinglass drawing only gives you the dimensions of the trussing and all the best pictures show the set pre-War, with all the skirts in place.

 

The next stage will be to carefully scrape off any excess paint on the surfaces to be bonded, then fix the sides to the frames. Then make-up the interiors, line, letter and number the sides, then varnish, then fix on the roof details, then paint those, then fix them on. In the meanwhile the bogies will be painted, then the underframes will be weathered, then................................. An account in BRM.

 

Just to finish on fences, the magnificent contraption seen below is situated at the bottom of my garden. I assume it's for tensioning the wires, of which there appear to have been four. Two of the ratchets still revolve! There's a similar one on the M&GNR, between Bytham and Lound, but how many were needed for each run I've no idea.

Very nice work on the coach sides - i too am working on an ex lner articulated set which was in a train on the waverley route in july 1965 when scots guardsman worked an edinburgh to carlisle stopper when a twin set was marshalled behind the loco. This was I believe the last time a royal scot worked over the line. I am not entirely sure which set it was but, there is a good shot of the train leaving calton tunnel on the dvd by mr colour rail covering the waverley route. The underframe is not too clear in the shot as steam is leaking from everywhere it should not be, so your underframes gives me a rough idea.

[Tony Wright]

As promised, further progress with regard to the Mailcoach Silver Jubilee catering triplet.

 

 

Here are the sides for the RFO, fully-painted; six coats top, six coats bottom of Railmatch BR maroon. Close inspection will reveal the impossibility of avoiding the odd speck of detritus. The worst are picked off with a cocktail stick (often frustratingly taking the thing back to the clear plastic) but any tiny ones I just live with. With 72 independent paint applications, the odd bit of crud is inevitable, even though I don't paint whilst wearing a woolly sweater, nor in a dusty environment. 

 

 

A day spent lining, lettering and numbering resulted in progress thus far. A final coat of satin polyurethane varnish has been applied since this picture was taken, so that's a further six chances of adding specks to the finish (each side is brush-varnished in one go). The white windows in the Kitchen Car were painted in Railmatch Rail White on the inside; two coats. Even with six external coats, in powerful light the maroon was still a little 'transparent' in places, so I painted the interior of the sides satin black.

 

I note one 'disagree' to a previous post of mine regarding the painting of this triplet, and I'm puzzled as to why. If it's a disagreement with my use of 'adequate' rather than 'excellent', then I'm flattered, though I know I'm right. If it's a disagreement with my assertion regarding the the superiority of sables over all other fine brushes, then I'd like to know which ones are 'better'. Certainly not squirrel hair of nylon, surely?  

 

So, interiors to make and paint, bogies to paint, end detail to complete and paint, roofs to detail, fix and paint, corridor connectors to install, then weathering to the underframe and this triplet will be fixed in its set of 12 bogies, forming an Up service from Newcastle. Unusually, the First Class is at the north end (I had to change my couplings round having found this out). 

 

As mentioned, a full account will be appearing in BRM eventually. 

Edited November 24, 2014 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Just a further update before feet up for the day.

 

 

The set's now varnished and the bogies painted. At this stage in any model's construction, I always place it on a shelf right in front of my bench in the workshop. I then leave it for at least a day to glance at from time to time; just to check it's sitting properly and that any lining lines up. Once happy (I think I am), it's down to completion, then onto the layout, with any 'faults' invisible as it runs by - until I take a picture that is!

[coachmann]

Why give disagrees a seconds thought.   A neat triple pack there Tony and far better than they deserve to be. It is one thing manufacturing a clear plastic coach and printing a livery on it and quite another painting it by hand as you did. I was bedeviled with static that built up during handling.  

[edcayton]

Is it me, or do the outer bogies look too far "in" from the coach ends?

 

Ed

[Barry Ten]

Is it me, or do the outer bogies look too far "in" from the coach ends?

 

Ed

 

They look about right judging by the drawings under Tony's model - eg the outer end of the bogie is about in line with the inner edge of the door.

[micklner]

Tony, I hope the roofs are a better fit then on my Tourist set that were truly dire . Nice job so far. How have you articulated them ?

[Tony Wright]

Is it me, or do the outer bogies look too far "in" from the coach ends?

 

Ed

According to the Isinglass drawings and the close-up pictures I have, the outer edge of the single bogies should be level with a line between the inner edge of the door and the inner edge of the door window. If you scribe an imaginary vertical line on my models, they match those parameters.

 

A friend of mine was at university in Newcastle in the early-'60s and visited a scrapyard on the Tyne where this triplet set was disposed of. He took several pictures of both sides. Almost every window was smashed and hideous 'COND' signs in whitewash were applied to the right-hand end of each car. From those pictures (thanks David) I was able to plot the branding positions on the cars which, apart from the kitchen side of the Kitchen Car, are not central. Indeed, the corridor side of the car has its branding to the left (shorter) side of the door, and the BR roundel to the right (longer) side. I mention details like this, not to appear a pedant (I hope) but because it's important that models I make are 'right'. As I've mentioned already, I invite constructive criticisms (such as yours, Ed), but when I offer them myself I hope they're seen as that, and not just dismissed as irrelevant. Having been asked relatively recently to add brandings to professionally-built cars for a friend, it makes me wonder how much research for a model's manufacture actually takes place - but we've been there before. Certainly, were I building this set for a client, I'd expect them back if details weren't correct.

 

Not long after my friend's visit, the scrap men torched this triplet, leaving nothing but the metal. All the splendid interiors and the crafted woodwork went up in smoke! As it did with the 1938 'Scotsman' triplet which was also on the site. The one with the standing bar for service in 'The Northumbrian'. I have that one under construction as well. 

 

Edited because I don't know my kitchen from my corridor!

Edited November 24, 2014 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Tony, I hope the roofs are a better fit then on my Tourist set that were truly dire . Nice job so far. How have you articulated them ?

Thanks Mick,

 

Just on initial testing, the roofs' fit isn't too bad - though some filing and filling will be necessary.

 

I've articulated the cars in the manner suggested by Mailcoach, using their bogies and pivots. The problem often occurs that adjacent cars don't run parallel in relation to each other, which looks awful in motion with one end sticking out one side and the other the opposite. If this occurs, my dodge is to glue some strips of thin plastic strip (20 thou x 20 thou) to opposite sides of the pivot holes, 'forcing' adjacent cars to line up - as seen in the picture below.

 

 

It's also important that when everything is as it should be, the bogie is marked and its direction of travel indicated. This doesn't mean it won't work the other way (of course not), but since my sets only go one way, it's vital that they ride without rocking or wobbling. To help this situation, I glue small strips of sheet lead to the floor pan of the inner ends, so the load is on both bolsters. 

 

The 'split' in the end stretchers was necessary because after the MEK had hardened, the bearings were stiff. I've inserted a sliver of 5 thou plastic and re-welded them now.

 

That's probably enough for now, otherwise it's not worth writing it all up for BRM! Sorry. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony, I hope the roofs are a better fit then on my Tourist set that were truly dire . Nice job so far. How have you articulated them ?

Mick,

 

Me again..........

 

I was wrong! The fit of the roofs is awful. The last three hours have seen me finally sort out the fit. The tops of the ends are an entirely different profile to the internal profile of the roofs. The ends are too high at their apexes, and the roofs' internal end profile too flat. So, it's file away at the tops of the ends (and swear!), scrape away at the insides of the roofs at their ends (and swear even more!), only to find there are now gaps, requiring filling once the roofs are finally on. Not only that, the cantrail widths are different each side, so without longitudinal scraping (with the most profane outbursts!), the roofs' fit is offset. 

 

As alluded to by Larry, static ensures that every bit of scraped/filed-off plastic sticks to the surfaces. In hindsight, the lining and varnishing might have been better left until after the 'fight'. I hate plastic!

 

Just as a test, I've also tried the fit of the roof on the Mailcoach Tourist Brake I'm building simultaneously. That's worse, and far too long as well! The lining and varnishing will be done after the coach is complete with this one.

 

Over 20 years I've forgotten how much of a struggle these kits are to build/paint successfully. They're definitely not for the faint-hearted, inexperienced or those conscious of personal injury!

 

As for a commission, forget this triplet in my opinion. No matter how hard I've tried, the fit/finish is nowhere near as good as the Gresley conversions featured in the latest BRM Annual. Were I doing more of those conversions, I'd ask £175.00 for each one (ex parts), and I think customers would be satisfied. As for this SJ triplet, I'd 'ask' £200.00 per coach (ex the add on parts from MJT, etc. Ask is the wrong word really, because, as mentioned, I wouldn't touch it as a commission. At £650.00 (say) complete, none of my (ex) customers would be satisfied with it.

 

But, it's for me. Other than scratch-building, is there another way to make a Silver Jubilee catering triplet?

Edited November 25, 2014 by Tony Wright

[jwealleans]

I believe Mike Radford does an etched kit, Tony. I also think Mick has built it.

[coachmann]

I have used the button 'Friendly and supportive' Tony, but a better button (if available) would be 'Tough sh*t mate, you have my sympathy'. If I say I've done 'em all, it might sound like bragging, but DCL and I started producing RTR coaches in 1973 when there were few coach kits available. We must have tried everything new as it came along and quickly learned in the process which ones to avoid. Three of us learned so much that we started designing from scratch in the 21st Century!

Edited November 25, 2014 by coachmann

[Tony Wright]

I have used the button 'Friendly and supportive' Tony, but a better button (if available) would be 'Tough sh*t mate, you have my sympathy'. If I say I've done 'em all, it might sound like bragging, but DCL and I started producing RTR coaches in 1973 when there were few coach kits available. We must have tried everything new as it came along and quickly learned in the process which ones to avoid. Three of us learned so much that we started designing from scratch in the 21st Century!

Not bragging at all Larry, and your record speaks for itself. As a professional model-maker yourself, obviously there are kits to avoid. 

 

In my case (mainly locos) I avoided kits for two reasons; entirely different actually.

 

1. The kits were so poor at source and so difficult to make that so much time would be expended in making them, and the end result would be compromised because of the dodgy quality. 

 

2. The kits were so complex to make (even though all the bits fitted and were of good quality).

 

In the final analysis it would come down to quality and price. In the first example the finished thing would be of compromised quality, yet the price would still have to be high for the time expended in making them. In the second example (assuming I were capable of building complex kits), though the end result might be very good, the price would still have to be high because of the time expended. 

 

Both examples were not my market.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

In a nutshell, that's why - despite he many exhortations to 'have a go' - I'm reluctant to.  Spend good money and my precious time to try to hack together badly designed, badly fitting kits?  Much as I really really really want to - I just don't have the time or money to waste finding out that the product is intrinsically flawed.

 

That said - I keep looking at a SEF Buckjumper to get my feet wet

[gr.king]

I didn't think it particularly difficult to paint the clear sides of my Mailcoach Tourist Buffet. Painting the outsides in the colour of the INTERIOR finish first, before applying the exterior colour over the top, also neatly hides the thickness of side which is otherwise visible around the window edges if you paint the inside in the proper interior colour. The thing that did annoy me, as I noticed it only after "final" assembly (the first time around) was the excessively shallow roof profile compared to other models of LNER coaches. Having to take off, modify and re-fit a roof wasn't what I had in mind when I'd mainly bought the coach kit as a quick and easy change from more laborious and detailed coach builds.

[Cleefy]

In a nutshell, that's why - despite he many exhortations to 'have a go' - I'm reluctant to.  Spend good money and my precious time to try to hack together badly designed, badly fitting kits?  Much as I really really really want to - I just don't have the time or money to waste finding out that the product is intrinsically flawed.

 

That said - I keep looking at a SEF Buckjumper to get my feet wet

 

Know how you feel, it's a minefield out there. I took a leap of faith with a Judith Edge kit and fortunately it paid off. An aged and somewhat warped K's Q1 kit, perhaps not so much - at least it was cheap and it's all part of life's rich tapestry, or so I keep telling myself

 

If you're really risk averse, maybe try a simple Comet chassis kit? They're relatively inexpensive compared to full kits, and if it all goes breasts heavenwards you should at least be able to sell on the wheels and motor for something close to what you paid for them. A cheapo loco body off Ebay and the job's done - saves on all that painting malarky, too!

 

Be warned though - the first time you get a chassis you've made moving under its own steam, er electricity, there's no going back

Edited November 25, 2014 by Cleefy

[ecgtheow]

But, it's for me. Other than scratch-building, is there another way to make a Silver Jubilee catering triplet?

 

Yes, Tony, there is from Mike Radford at MARC Models, as someone else has replied. I've seen some Mike built & they looked very good. Also I assume that the parts fit, because they are recent kits.

 

William

[micklner]

I believe Mike Radford does an etched kit, Tony. I also think Mick has built it.

My SJ set see page 1 onwards on my thread was by a chap calling himself Bleathwood Models on Model Rail  forum , sadly he disapeared about two or three  years ago from they Forum.

 

 

Sorry Tony that my comments proved correct. I can make similar comments re the under frames and bogies too , all I can say is MJT do excellent replacements !!!!.

[LNER4479]

But, it's for me. Other than scratch-building, is there another way to make a Silver Jubilee catering triplet?

 

Yes, Tony, there is from Mike Radford at MARC Models, as someone else has replied. I've seen some Mike built & they looked very good. Also I assume that the parts fit, because they are recent kits.

 

William

Grantham's SJ set is MARC Models (built by Roy Mears)

 

 

(crop of a picture taken by your good self, Tony!)

[HerbertHopkins]

..

 

I was wrong! The fit of the roofs is awful. The last three hours have seen me finally sort out the fit. The tops of the ends are an entirely different profile to the internal profile of the roofs. The ends are too high at their apexes, and the roofs' internal end profile too flat. So, it's file away at the tops of the ends (and swear!), scrape away at the insides of the roofs at their ends (and swear even more!), only to find there are now gaps, requiring filling once the roofs are finally on. Not only that, the cantrail widths are different each side, so without longitudinal scraping (with the most profane outbursts!), the roofs' fit is offset. 

 

As alluded to by Larry, static ensures that every bit of scraped/filed-off plastic sticks to the surfaces. In hindsight, the lining and varnishing might have been better left until after the 'fight'. I hate plastic!

 

As for a commission, forget this triplet in my opinion. No matter how hard I've tried, the fit/finish is nowhere near as good as the Gresley conversions featured in the latest BRM Annual. Were I doing more of those conversions, I'd ask £175.00 for each one (ex parts), and I think customers would be satisfied. As for this SJ triplet, I'd 'ask' £200.00 per coach (ex the add on parts from MJT, etc. Ask is the wrong word really, because, as mentioned, I wouldn't touch it as a commission. At £650.00 (say) complete, none of my (ex) customers would be satisfied with it.

 

 

 

This brings back memories of an artic twin set I built for Gilbert (great northern) a few years ago. Quite understandably, no sensible professional builder would touch it so, as I had plenty of time on my hands at the time, I somehow got hoodwinked into building it. Like you, I had the devil's own job getting the roofs to fit, much filing, filling and foul language being used in the process!

 

My method of construction differed from yours in that I built the bodies as five sided boxes (two ends, two sides and the roof) which then slotted over the floor. IIRC, once I was as happy as I could be with the fit of the roofs, I filed off the cant rails and replaced them with microstrip. Also, I didn't paint them (sprayed with Halfords Ford Burgandy Red) until construction was completed. This involved what seemed like hours applying Maskol to the windows and then, later, more hours removing it all again!

 

Gilbert seemed quite pleased with the result and wanted me to build him another. However, my enforced idleness came to an end soon afterwards when I managed to find myself a job so, reluctantly, I had to refuse his kind offer!    

[Tony Wright]

Grantham's SJ set is MARC Models (built by Roy Mears)

 

Streamliner SJ_8448.JPG

 

SJ1_LR.jpg

(crop of a picture taken by your good self, Tony!)

Thanks Graham,

 

My crumbling faculties catch me out time after time now.; especially as Roy has run that same SJ set on Little Bytham (and I photographed it!). 

 

So, just to repeat, here it is on LB with a time-warp A4......... Heading into a flood or a ploughed field!

 

 

 

I've also repeated the picture you posted, but this time after I've taken out the clutter - a decision I made over an hour ago.

 

Thanks to Rob Davey as well for reminding me of the FO/FO Mailcoach set he made for Gilbert Barnatt for service in the Talisman. He actually added the extra door to each car's right-hand end, something, fortunately, not needed for the Silver Jubilee dining triplet. He made a very nice job of that ex-Coronation twin, and I love the irony in his last statement.

 

Edited to explain the funny picture - see next post.

 

Edited once more to take into account even more faculty degredation. The extra doors were added to the LEFT-hand end of the FOs. 

Edited November 27, 2014 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

 

Why the 'contamination' occurs in some of my pictures, I have no idea. Here's the 'correct' one for the above post.