Wright writes.....

[Theakerr]

Living across the pond and two hours out of Ottawa, I have pretty well been forced to physically work alone.  However, I do feel that i have beniftted from what can be described as a "Global Team".  First there is the BRMNA in Ottawa.   A motley bunch of guys and ladies with a very wide range of interests, but all willing to talk and provide cerebal input to all manner of issues.  There have been many cases where simply talking at the meetings or in later years via the internet, I have been able to solve a problem or improve on something i already had.  Then there is the internet and this forum in particular.  Again, another motley bunch of guys and ladies from whose collective wisdom has helped many times in many many formats.  

[Woodcock29]

Thanks for posting this update on Bill Richmond's layout, John.

 

It summarises very well my understanding from Bill's obituary that I published in our BRMA Journal The Clearing House in March 2014. 

 

Andrew Emmett 

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

I hope I didn't come across as being critical of your team approach.  I only have admiration for it.  But I feel that for me and perhaps many others, the go-it-alone approach is also apposite.  My problem has always been that I never stayed long enough in one place (or job) to garner the sorts of stable friendships that make the team effort relatively straightforward.

 

To give an example.  In the mid-1970s I decided with a colleague to take a decayed 1954 Jaguar XK140 and restore it in Singapore.  Which we did, quite successfully, winning second in class a few years later at the XK International concours d'élégance in the UK.  Since 1978 the two of us have never lived in the same continent at the same time, so it has been impossible for us to replicate this achievement, even if we wanted to.  The last time we met was over 10 years ago, but we keep in touch at least annually.  In fact, we have both moved on to other, very different interests.

 

When I look at my current project I see all sorts of things that are not quite right, but with the help of RMweb, I learn a bit here, a bit there.  The latest concerns the paving on the track next to a cattle loading dock.  By showing my best effort I today received a constructive critique which not only makes sense but will be incorporated.  Us jack-of-all-trades need all the help we can get!

 

Best regards, Paul

Paul,

 

You most certainly did not come across as being critical of my team approach - far from it. 

 

Talking of the 'go-it-alone' approach, as I've intimated, I find that worthy of the greatest praise. With that in mind, I've put together a few shots illustrating the 'do it yourself' philosophy, which I hope will prove of interest.

 

 

 

Firstly, there's John Musselwhite's rendition of Bourne in OO - sadly never completed and now dismantled. 

 

 

Perhaps the most famous of the lone modellers, the architectural work of Peter Denny representing a bit of Leighton Buzzard in EM. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this will be at Expo EM next week.

 

 

I don't think one can get much more self-sufficient than this - part of Keith Pearce's fantastically-entertaining OO system, showing a most-ingenious double-deck fiddle yard, designed and made entirely by himself. He even built the room (with his wife's help) in which it's situated. 

 

 

Well know as being described (in print!) as mad by me, Graeme King must be one of the most self-sufficient modellers currently plying their trade. He makes all the add-on parts for conversions such as this - in resin and etched nickel silver (with just a twitch of professional help with the etchings). He's made a conversion such as this for me. 

 

 

Though Graham Nicholas now has a growing band of 'helpers', the initial construction (and the subsequent majority of the work) on Grantham was entirely down to him, including the building and painting of this rather attractive B17 - from a Cornard kit with a Jamieson chassis!

 

 

All Ray Chessum's work on Guildford, in EM. I've been asked to return and do some more photography.

 

 

John Houlden's Gamston in OO - all his own work, including the building of this O2.

 

 

More ECML in OO, this time all the work of Norman Venus - and outside! It should feature soon in BRM. 

 

 

More up to date, this time in Scale Seven as well, by Simon Thompson. I think I've got the correct spelling of Y Crae.

 

These represent but a tiny fraction from my collection of model railway pictures, but they all illustrate vital components in their builders being truly described (in my book) as railway modellers. All display self-reliance, self sufficiency, self-belief and, above all, personal creativity. Folk can commission as much as they like, pay as much as they like or be part of as many 'teams' as they like in the creation of their model railways, but it's guys like the above to whom I take my hat off the most. Yes, as I've mentioned already, the teams I've been involved with have all been formed of most-accomplished modellers (with my adding my bit, I hope), but I've had to rely on the likes of them much more than the guys whose work is illustrated above.

 

Edited to make sure Keith Pearce (not Greaves) is correctly given the credit for the double deck fiddle yard. I can only plead crumbling faculties! 

Edited May 10, 2015 by Tony Wright

[gr.king]

Very nice to see a couple of pictures of John's "Bourne". What a pity that human factors led to that very well planned and executed layout ultimately going to the tip. It seemed as if one minute he was making sterling progress with the Sleaford branch, the next "the game was up" and nobody would offer the layout a home!

 

Looking at the Raven A2, the P2 and for that matter the J40 above I can't help thinking what a pity it is that I've never seen those on an appropriate layout at one of the Spalding club's shows. I dare say they'd make fine visitors to "Grantham" on a suitable occasion, although I wonder if some cautious platform clearance tests would be needed with the A2. It looks as if the cylinders could be set out well beyond the norm.

[Focalplane]

Tony, thank you for posting all those stimulating photos! My own efforts are about to be placed on hold for a few weeks, but there is a status report here:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/blog/1581/entry-16070-status-report-before-a-hiatus/

 

So much to do, so little time!

[micklner]

Some of mine via Graeme Kings lovely resin/etch assistance.

 

A2/2 Wolf of Badenoch conversion with Southern Pride sides added to old Bachmann Thompsons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Layout on below link is all mine as well sadly not as big as i would like!!.

 

 

[lee74clarke]

Paul,

 

You most certainly did not come across as being critical of my team approach - far from it.

 

Talking of the 'go-it-alone' approach, as I've intimated, I find that worthy of the greatest praise. With that in mind, I've put together a few shots illustrating the 'do it yourself' philosophy, which I hope will prove of interest.

 

Bourne 04.jpg

 

Bourne 07.jpg

 

Firstly, there's John Musselwhite's rendition of Bourne in OO - sadly never completed and now dismantled.

 

Buckingham 27.jpg

 

Perhaps the most famous of the lone modellers, the architectural work of Peter Denny representing a bit of Leighton Buzzard in EM. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this will be at Expo EM next week.

 

DSC_1275.JPG

 

I don't think one can get much more self-sufficient than this - part of Keith Greave's fantastically-entertaining OO system, showing a most-ingenious double-deck fiddle yard, designed and made entirely by himself. He even built the room (with his wife's help) in which it's situated.

 

Graeme King A2 3 conversion from Bachmann A2.jpg

 

Well know as being described (in print!) as mad by me, Graeme King must be one of the most self-sufficient modellers currently plying their trade. He makes all the add-on parts for conversions such as this - in resin and etched nickel silver (with just a twitch of professional help with the etchings). He's made a conversion such as this for me.

 

Graham Nicholas B17 02.jpg

 

Though Graham Nicholas now has a growing band of 'helpers', the initial construction (and the subsequent majority of the work) on Grantham was entirely down to him, including the building and painting of this rather attractive B17 - from a Cornard kit with a Jamieson chassis!

 

Guildford 02.jpg

 

All Ray Chessum's work on Guildford, in EM. I've been asked to return and do some more photography.

 

Gamston 15 08.jpg

 

John Houlden's Gamston in OO - all his own work, including the building of this O2.

 

Norman Venus 16.jpg

 

More ECML in OO, this time all the work of Norman Venus - and outside! It should feature soon in BRM.

 

Y Crae 15.jpg

 

More up to date, this time in Scale Seven as well, by Simon Thompson. I think I've got the correct spelling of Y Crae.

 

These represent but a tiny fraction from my collection of model railway pictures, but they all illustrate vital components in their builders being truly described (in my book) as railway modellers. All display self-reliance, self sufficiency, self-belief and, above all, personal creativity. Folk can commission as much as they like, pay as much as they like or be part of as many 'teams' as they like in the creation of their model railways, but it's guys like the above to whom I take my hat off the most. Yes, as I've mentioned already, the teams I've been involved with have all been formed of most-accomplished modellers (with my adding my bit, I hope), but I've had to rely on the likes of them much more than the guys whose work is illustrated above.

Hi Tony

I hope you are well? I have not seen the layout of Bourne before, real shame it was lost.

What was the story behind it disappearing?

Like your visitors P2 by the way

 

Lee

[t-b-g]

Lovely photos, especially the Leighton Buzzard one (but I am biased).

 

We will indeed be taking LB to EXPO EM at Bracknell next weekend.

 

What makes Buckingham stand out for me is that not only is it pretty much a one man layout but that almost everything was scratchbuilt. There are a tiny number of kit and even RTR wagon bodies with new sprung underframes and the three Triang clerestories but after that every loco, carriage and wagon was built from scratch. The same goes for lineside features like buildings and even down to fences, horse drawn vehicles etc.

 

I can pretty much guarantee that when we are running the layout at EXPO, we will be the only layout there where every loco and item of rolling stock was scratchbuilt by one person.

 

How many people would even consider that sort of modelling nowadays, let alone actually get on and do it?

 

Tony

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony

I hope you are well? I have not seen the layout of Bourne before, real shame it was lost.

What was the story behind it disappearing?

Like your visitors P2 by the way

 

Lee

I'm not entirely sure about the story behind the layout's demise, other than it was contained in the loft of a bungalow and the bungalow had been sold. Since there was not a suitable place to accommodate it, it was broken up. For a time, the idea of it finding a home for it somewhere in Warners' premises in Bourne was suggested, but it proved to be not possible. Really a great shame, for it was it was beautifully made. 

[Tony Wright]

Very nice to see a couple of pictures of John's "Bourne". What a pity that human factors led to that very well planned and executed layout ultimately going to the tip. It seemed as if one minute he was making sterling progress with the Sleaford branch, the next "the game was up" and nobody would offer the layout a home!

 

Looking at the Raven A2, the P2 and for that matter the J40 above I can't help thinking what a pity it is that I've never seen those on an appropriate layout at one of the Spalding club's shows. I dare say they'd make fine visitors to "Grantham" on a suitable occasion, although I wonder if some cautious platform clearance tests would be needed with the A2. It looks as if the cylinders could be set out well beyond the norm.

The Raven A2 passed Little Bytham's fast platform faces with ease, despite (as you rightly observed) some rather porcine cylinders. I didn't try it through the slow roads, but I'd imagine it would foul them because of their being on a curve, and thus a bit more restricted. When I laid out the platforms, I possibly didn't give quite enough clearance because the odd 'visitor' has subsequently touched them. DJH 'Austerities', whose cylinders are a touch wide, pass through with no trouble, as do the longest Thompson, Hawksworth and Mk.1 vehicles, but some 'fat-cylindered' visiting locos have brushed them. Still, speaking to some ex-professional railwaymen recently, that used to happen all the time. 'Deltic' at Newcastle and a 'Grange' removing platform edging slabs as it fought its way to Huddersfield spring to mind. 

[richard i]

If you really want to build on your own, build in the states - you have little choice. A lot needs scratch building as small items would take several weeks to get here and postage costs are high, so it is easier and faster to make your own. I have actually enjoyed the liberation of self building since moving Dettingen layout to the states.

[Tony Wright]

Some of mine via Graeme Kings lovely resin/etch assistance.

 

A2/2 Wolf of Badenoch conversion with Southern Pride sides added to old Bachmann Thompsons.

 

 

6 thom.jpg

 

1 thom.jpg

 

 

2 thom.jpg

 

3 thom.jpg

 

4 thom.jpg

 

 

5 thom.jpg

 

Layout on below link is all mine as well sadly not as big as i would like!!.

Some very nice work Mick.

 

May I just ask one or two questions, please? 

 

Are you sure the tender wheels on LNER green-painted engines should be green? Ian Rathbone always paints them black for me. 

 

Though it appears to be the case on the BG, have you also altered the roof profile on the other Thompsons? There still appears to be a 'crease' just above the cornice. 

 

Have you fitted heavy-duty bogies to the carriages? They're too much in shadow to see, but all the PV stock was fitted with them.

 

Finally, dependent on how long you've had the sides from Southern Pride, if they're the earliest ones I formed them. I hope you were happy with them. 

 

Keep up the good work. 

[cheesysmith]

Tony, I think what sets you musings apart, and makes you layout and postings so well followed is the insistence on a set of clearly followed standards that have been stuck to. This philosophy of yours is probably more important with a "group" layout (or one like yours with several helpers along the way) vs one where one person has done it all, and can matainence the standards themselves. I think the one person's layout are impressive because the shear determination and single minded skills displayed in producing what you have pictured inspire us all. After all, how any of use have hit a road block somewhere down the line in our hobby?

[micklner]

Some very nice work Mick.

 

May I just ask one or two questions, please? 

 

Are you sure the tender wheels on LNER green-painted engines should be green? Ian Rathbone always paints them black for me. 

 

Though it appears to be the case on the BG, have you also altered the roof profile on the other Thompsons? There still appears to be a 'crease' just above the cornice. 

 

Have you fitted heavy-duty bogies to the carriages? They're too much in shadow to see, but all the PV stock was fitted with them.

 

Finally, dependent on how long you've had the sides from Southern Pride, if they're the earliest ones I formed them. I hope you were happy with them. 

 

Keep up the good work. 

Tony

 

Tender wheels have been repainted when I saw the photo to black.

 

Roofs have been reprofiled as best I could get without destroying the rain strips. New coach board brackets and cornice were added.

 

Standard Gresleys using the current latest NEM  type Bachmann bogies, as you would say they are layout coaches.

 

Sides have been bought in the last couple of months at £7.50 as set they are a bargain and I don't see that typed very often anymore. I intend to also do a 1st Open in the near future. I have just won a donor Bachmann for £8.50 another bargain . These have all cost under £20 each to buy and convert so well pleased with them !! Also easier to do then the Hornby Gresley  MJT sides as all one piece as you would know already. All I added are MJT door handles.

 

cheers 

Edited May 10, 2015 by micklner

[unclebobkt]

The Raven A2 passed Little Bytham's fast platform faces with ease, despite (as you rightly observed) some rather porcine cylinders. I didn't try it through the slow roads, but I'd imagine it would foul them because of their being on a curve, and thus a bit more restricted. When I laid out the platforms, I possibly didn't give quite enough clearance because the odd 'visitor' has subsequently touched them.  ... . Still, speaking to some ex-professional railwaymen recently, that used to happen all the time. 'Deltic' at Newcastle and a 'Grange' removing platform edging slabs as it fought its way to Huddersfield spring to mind. 

 

 

      In the extract above where you use the word 'Odd.' - does that mean 'Occasional.' or 'Peculiar/strange.'? 

  Possibly it's the word 'odd.', rather than the word 'visitor.' should be in inverted commas?  ;-)

 

  As for the 'Grange.' vide RMWeb - Prototype Questions  - page 3.: 'GWR/BR. 6858. 'Woolston Grange.'.

  IIRC. the 'Granges'.' width o'all. was 8'., 11 5/8".; but as StationMaster luminously observed: 'It all depends on where the width was measured.',  or words to that effect.

      

[Tony Wright]

      In the extract above where you use the word 'Odd.' - does that mean 'Occasional.' or 'Peculiar/strange.'? 

  Possibly it's the word 'odd.', rather than the word 'visitor.' should be in inverted commas?  ;-)

 

  As for the 'Grange.' vide RMWeb - Prototype Questions  - page 3.: 'GWR/BR. 6858. 'Woolston Grange.'.

  IIRC. the 'Granges'.' width o'all. was 8'., 11 5/8".; but as StationMaster luminously observed: 'It all depends on where the width was measured.',  or words to that effect.

      

My use of the word 'odd' on this occasion was really in the vernacular, and can refer to both an occasional or peculiar 'visitor', especially if the locomotive can be described in both ways. Several which have fitted into that category include articulated locos (from all over the world) of both steam and diesel-outline (no electric-outline as yet), weird and wonderful brass contraptions (mainly in Far East brass) and a myriad of various kit-built and scratch-built locomotives. Some of the last-mentioned are definitely odd, however one uses that adjective, especially with regard to their running. Many just buzz, a few have generated smoke and one was the fastest accelerating BR Standard Five in existence (is that right Mr. Oliver?). Extremely odd! Happily, a majority (with just the occasional tweak), work beautifully - which can be odd with regard to many kit-built locos.  

 

My use of speech marks with regard to 'visitor' is probably clumsy, which I admit to. However, some locos which start off as visitors remain, usually because their owners and/or builders have nowhere else to run them, or I've acquired them; so it might be apposite. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony, I think what sets you musings apart, and makes you layout and postings so well followed is the insistence on a set of clearly followed standards that have been stuck to. This philosophy of yours is probably more important with a "group" layout (or one like yours with several helpers along the way) vs one where one person has done it all, and can matainence the standards themselves. I think the one person's layout are impressive because the shear determination and single minded skills displayed in producing what you have pictured inspire us all. After all, how any of use have hit a road block somewhere down the line in our hobby?

Many thanks (whatever your name is - I wish I knew, and I'm not trying to be funny). 

 

The 'set of clearly followed standards' for a group project is, as you intimate, something to be insisted upon. It really works best if all members of the group are (for want of a better description) multi-disciplined. By that I mean, every member is capable of doing most things (if not quite as well as the resident expert). Thus, in my case, I could fix a point, tweak a baseboard, adjust a signal, repair an electrical problem; though not quite as rapidly/successfully has he who actually built/installed whatever it was.  This is where the likes of the 'commissioner' is potentially stumped when things go wrong, where he/she can be a hostage to fortune. Hence my preferring model railway items which have been built by the owner, rather than RTR or commissioned items. A personal whim, nothing more. 

Edited May 13, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Work continues apace in preparation for the forthcoming Bookazine.

 

One of the chapters will concern the notion of a representative fleet of locomotives for a BR ECML depiction. A factor which might be of interest is how standards have moved on down the years.

 

 

Different standards such as illustrated by this pair. 60538 is a current Bachmann A2 (ex-60533) which I've 'fiddled' with (how will be published in the Bookazine). It is to be weathered. 60532 is a Wills kit on a re-wheeled Tri-ang 'Britannia' chassis with Jamieson motion and a DJH tender - all my own work from nearly 40 years ago (though the tender isn't quite that old). Other than as a piece of my modelling history, it's merit compared with the RTR example is extremely dubious, but should such pieces of personal antiquity be discarded in favour of something which anyone can 'achieve', or at least own?

 

 

 

At least this pair had to be built (by me, painted by Mr. Rathbone), so they are more personal but are they better than the RTR equivalent? I think so, but I'm biased. 60533 is from a Crownline kit, 60539 from a DJH one. 

 

Given the rise of RTR's excellence, it's so much easier now to recreate a representative fleet, at least for main lines. That said, and as I've already said, things can look a bit the same. 

Edited May 11, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Barry O]

yes Tony it was the fastest Std 5MT in the business - luckily not built or owned by me I might add! Now gone to pastures new!

 

What you haven't said is that some of the DJH kits (especially  the BR Standards suffer from having cylinders well outside the UK loading gauge (perhaps designed to give more clearance to Leading driver crank pins. if you look at the casting you can see where the extra metal has been added.. using a saw and file (or a Dremel mill in a modellers drill) remove this and they look so much better and will still go round 3' radius curves.. (and the same problem/solution is in the DJH O gauge Ivatt 2-6-2T kits.)

 

Baz

[Andy Reichert]

One has to wonder how many finely detailed, plastic bodied RTR locos will be in such good shape 40 years on. There are likely to be no spare parts for limited run models, once the initial run has been sold off. And hand crafting any of the finer details to the same standard, in case even only superficial damage has occurred, will be well nigh impossible.

 

Andy

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

The way forward for maintaining RTR locos that see regular layout operation is to buy as cheaply as possible a 'breaker' or two for spares. Between less popular variants that end up sold at large discount, and s/h purchases made as and when possible, this has been a relatively cheap process to date. I got into this habit while operating OO on an outdoor line on which the wear out proved pretty fierce; now operating indoors holding a  'breaker' appears to be a talisman against failure and incidental damage!

[Willie Whizz]

Hello Tony.

 

Your post 4656 says "Have you fitted heavy-duty bogies to the carriages? They're too much in shadow to see, but all the PV stock was fitted with them."

 

Now, I'm going to confess to a howling sin for an Eastern Region modeller:  all Gresley bogies look alike to me!

 

I've looked at pictures of carriages - real and model - which I know should be fitted with the heavy-duty variety and those which shouldn't.  But all that really stands out is that lovely wavy top-line ...

 

I think the main problems are that (a) as you say, whether real or 4mm-scale model, they are too often 'in shadow' to make out much other detail; and (b) no-one ever seems to publish a picture of the two side-by-side (or end-to-end) so that a simple visual comparison of the key features can be made.

 

Would it be possible please therefore, when you have time, to post on here a clear shot of two carriages end-to-end, one with each correct style bogie?  I suspect that would clear-up no end of uncertainty for me and others.

 

Do you think it would be a difficult job to add something to Bachmann or Hornby bogies to make a better visual representation of the HD type?  My carriage-building skills are growing, thanks in large part to inspiration from yourself and Coachmann's work here on RMWeb, but time is my enemy and if I can get 'close enough' to get the look fairly quickly by such means, that may have to suffice.

 

Many thanks

 

WW

[micklner]

Gresley HD Bogies the only obvious difference i am ware of is a additional line of rivets above the axle boxes. 

 

 

More of Thompson's finest !! This one is a commission job.

 

A2/1 circa 1945 later Highland Chieftain Bachmann A2 chassis , G King's resin V2 body, A2/3 smokebox and amended front end, etched valve gear. GBL A4 tender body and a Hornby Tender chassis and a few add-on bits . Yes I know the Cartazzi Truck is off in the photos but it does fit correctly !!

 

 

 

 

 

Re Tonys A2 photos a big difference in the heights of the Locos in the first photo. RTR version far from perfect but looks good in the picture as the do the others too.

[Dominion]

On heavy duty bogies, the Hornby Gresley Buffets have the extra line of rivets along the top.  Tom

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

Bogie comparison, HD at the bottom.  If you can't see the difference, the difference won't bother you!

 

 

I found this in my archive of 'stuff that I find interesting' and I'm pretty sure it came from RMWeb, so apologies to the original poster that I can't give you due credit.