Wright writes.....

[Michael Edge]

And most of the BR Standards?

 

Yes, I'm fairly sure it was the same wheel casting, all with triangular section rims.

[queensquare]

Tony Gee is right; Metropolitan Junction has been ballasted, but the glue has failed down the decades and large areas have just been lost. 

 

What astonished me more than anything else about it (other than the bespoke, hand-built track) were the signals (all scratch-built, of course) and the (still-working) fully-operational point rodding. No dummy rodding nonsense here - the sort I'm doing - but the points/crossings actually worked by proper cranks and rods; all scratch-built. 

 

Where are the modellers doing this sort of thing today (other than Tim Lee)? 

 

The layout is from a totally different era. An era of self-reliance, inventiveness, personal craftsmanship, creativity and good, old-fashioned railway modelling. Though nothing at the Woking Show could touch Arun Quay for the quality of the modelling, which of all the layouts do you think I found the most-interesting; by miles? 

 

I'll post some more pictures tomorrow. 

 

I do think there is a danger that we look at the past with rose tinted glasses. I agree fully that Metropolitan Junction is superb and very inspiring, I was discussing it with Gordon Gravett last night who felt the same. You are right to suggest that there are only a handful of modelers doing this sort of thing today but I suspect that there were only a handful of modellers doing it back in the day as well. 

Its a bit like the often heard complaint that music was much better when I was a lad/lass, we had proper bands then - until you see a chart show from you favourite period when you realise there was just as much dross around then as there is now. 

The Metropolitan Junction/Buckingham/Borchester type layouts remain inspirational not just because they were superb but because they were head and shoulders above anything else that was in the contemporary model press, much of which really wasn't very good. In that sense, I'm not sure much has changed.

 

Jerry  

[LNER4479]

100% mechanically operated and interlocked 36 lever frame here, Tony.

 

OK, arguably not 100% scratchbuilt as it is based around a Modratec lever frame and uses GEM angle cranks (still available!) and MSE signal parts but otherwise a lot of time and effort expended to set this all up as a 100% mechanical installation. Do feel free to come and have a look for yourself one of these days.

 

I'm sure there are others around with similar installations. Well-impressed however by a transportable set-up that can pull this off. I wonder how they pull off the trick of taking the mechanical motion across baseboard joints - or is it all confined to one board or with a separate frame for each board? Have oft pondered this conundrum over the years but it remains filed under 'hmm...'

[Jol Wilkinson]

 

Where are the modellers doing this sort of thing today (other than Tim Lee)? 

 

They are mostly elsewhere. i.e. not on RMweb.

 

Of all my modelling friends and acquaintances, only three or four are members of this forum. In the local S4 Society area groups (about 22 participants) I know of only one other RMweb member The EM and 00 modellers I also know reasonably well tend to be in local area groups and clubs but generally don't get involved in forums.

 

So is RMweb truly representative of today's model making community? Probably not in terms of numbers of those creating their own models.

[grahame]

They are mostly elsewhere. i.e. not on RMweb.

 

Of all my modelling friends and acquaintances, only three or four are members of this forum. In the local S4 Society area groups (about 22 participants) I know of only one other RMweb member The EM and 00 modellers I also know reasonably well tend to be in local area groups and clubs but generally don't get involved in forums.

 

So is RMweb truly representative of today's model making community? Probably not in terms of numbers of those creating their own models.

Interesting.

 

I have friends (and know modellers) who are not on any forum, and also many who are members of other forums (but not RMweb) or only lurk and don't contribute/post.

 

G

[t-b-g]

They are mostly elsewhere. i.e. not on RMweb.

 

Of all my modelling friends and acquaintances, only three or four are members of this forum. In the local S4 Society area groups (about 22 participants) I know of only one other RMweb member The EM and 00 modellers I also know reasonably well tend to be in local area groups and clubs but generally don't get involved in forums.

 

So is RMweb truly representative of today's model making community? Probably not in terms of numbers of those creating their own models.

Couldn't agree more. My small but highly skilled circle of friends does a lot of superb modelling but doesn't get involved with RMWeb. They are producing some lovely work in 4 & 7mm scales and we spur each other on and bounce ideas off each other but I think the general feeling is that they are not into "showing off" what we have done as it is mostly for our own amusement and they are not that good on, or interested in, computers and the internet. They prefer to spend their time building models. Edited September 11, 2018 by t-b-g

[grahame]

. . .  the general feeling is that they are not into "showing off" what we have done as it is mostly for our own amusement and they are not that good on, or interested in, computers and the internet. They prefer to spend their time building models.

 

Hmm, I wonder if that means there is a disproportionate number of people on RMweb who are more interested in computers, DCC, electronic wizardry and digital download magazines than actual traditional cutting and gluing/soldering modelling than in the overall model railway community. And if consequently RTR floats to the surface and become de rigueur on this forum with scratch-building being swamped and drowned in electronic trickery threads. Perhaps it helps explain why we seem to see less scratch and kit building on RMweb these days.

 

 G.

[Lecorbusier]

Couldn't agree more. My small but highly skilled circle of friends does a lot of superb modelling but doesn't get involved with RMWeb. They are producing some lovely work in 4 & 7mm scales and we spur each other on and bounce ideas off each other but I think the general feeling is that they are not into "showing off" what we have done as it is mostly for our own amusement and they are not that good on, or interested in, computers and the internet. They prefer to spend their time building models.

I hope people don't generally view RMWeb (or indeed any of the other web forums) as showing off. I find people posting and recording their efforts really helpful on a number of levels. The work can be inspirational, and if the process is recorded very helpful in understanding how such excellence is achieved. It is helpful for we beginners to post because it allows the more experienced to comment and help and I have found this aspect a real affirmation of human nature - the odd pat on the back doesn't go amiss either. It is also an area which can keep up morale and makes one feel part of a community if you can't get along to a local club.

 

It would be great if there was an opportunity to see images of some of the wider work out there which never gets posted on line and so unless you are lucky you never get to appreciate. I find Tony's loading of some of the photos he has taken over the years particularly stimulating in this regard.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Lecorbusier

[Clearwater]

I find it really interesting to read how people have made things - probably more useful than the finished photo. To hark back to the discussion a short while ago about modelling books, picking up different tips from different people and amalgamating them to what works for me is how I look to develop my own skills. Whether that’s in book, DVD or web page form doesn’t matter.

 

David

[Headstock]

Personaly, I find RM web a bit of a lifeline, nobody is really that interested down at the club. I was going to post a picture of the finished B16  but am now feeling rather paranoid about showing off. I think I need a new hobby.

[Clive Mortimore]

Personaly, I find RM web a bit of a lifeline, nobody is really that interested down at the club. I was going to post a picture of the finished B16  but am now feeling rather paranoid about showing off. I think I need a new hobby.

Show, please.

[Chris-GNR]

Personaly, I find RM web a bit of a lifeline, nobody is really that interested down at the club. I was going to post a picture of the finished B16  but am now feeling rather paranoid about showing off. I think I need a new hobby.

Nobody? I’m not sure that’s right Andrew.

[Headstock]

Show, please.

 

Thank's Clive, i'm on the final lap of interminable wheel cleaning, what a holiday. I shall take a picky later.

[t-b-g]

I hope people don't generally view RMWeb (or indeed any of the other web forums) as showing off. I find people posting and recording their efforts really helpful on a number of levels. The work can be inspirational, and if the process is recorded very helpful in understanding how such excellence is achieved. It is helpful for we beginners to post because it allows the more experienced to comment and help and I have found this aspect a real affirmation of human nature - the odd pat on the back doesn't go amiss either. It is also an area which can keep up morale and makes one feel part of a community if you can't get along to a local club.

 

It would be great if there was an opportunity to see images of some of the wider work out there which never gets posted on line and so unless you are lucky you never get to appreciate. I find Tony's loading of some of the photos he has taken over the years particularly stimulating in this regard.

I know what you mean and I did try to come up with other words for "showing off". I don't mean it in a "look how clever I am" way. They see it more as "I built this to please me and I don't feel the need to share it with the internet world which I don't really engage with anyway".

 

I don't post much of my work as it is often for other people and it doesn't feel right. I finish so little for myself that if I posted the start of a build, the finish might be years later. When I see people who build superb models in a week or less, that is far more inspiring than me doing something similar in months or years!

[Barry Ten]

Here's something that may be of interest, in that it's a model I bought second-hand which came with a few problems, most of which I've now resolved.

 

 

At the time I bought this DJH 7F (and apologies for the hand-held photo), there was no Bachmann model in the pipeline and the Gibson model (better, I gather)

was not available,  so this seemed the only obvious way of obtaining a 7F. While I'd built a few locomotives at the time I purchased this one, none had valve

gear, and none were eight-coupled,  so I felt that I needed a bit more experience before I tackled such a big beast.

 

The person who sold me this model also sold me (separately) a complete kit for a large-boilered example, which I've still to make. Unfortunately, the transaction(s)

turned acrimonious as both items were very delayed in the shipping, despite numerous promises that they were on their way. In the end (and I forget whether

it was the kit or the finished loco) I was forced to initiate a Paypal dispute. The seller's spouse then attempted to open a reciprocal claim against me, saying that

I was lying about not having received the item, which was supposed to have reached me weeks earlier. Within a day or two a parcel arrived, which (unfortunately

for the other party) contained a tracking history which showed that it had only just been shipped. Needless to say, the counter-claim against me was dropped, but

it left a very bad taste. Until that point I thought all railway modellers were lovely, trustworthy people!

 

As far as I remember, I was told that the finished 7F might have been built for Julian Birley's 4mm S&D layout, although given the subsequent porkies, I'm not too sure

what I ought to believe. I was also told it might have been built by Tony, but it doesn't bear Tony's handiwork at all, with a different style of pickups. I oiught

to dig out that old Railway Modeller in which the S&D layout featured, and see if I can identify the loco from its quirks.

 

In any case, it was quite well made and ran reasonably smoothly, with a well-assembled chassis and a Portescap motor/gearbox. However,

it hated 30 inch curves, despite being told it would cope with them.

 

I put it aside for a few years, resolving to look at it when I had more confidence in stripping and rebuilding the chassis. I reckoned that I'd have to remove the

valve gear and increase the play on at least one of the axles. In addition, the valve rod was drooping badly on one side, with the valve spindle nearly coming out

of the cylinder; not enough to affect the running but it looked terrible.

 

Last night, feeling upbeat, I got it out again and was all set to unsolder the valve gear when I had a brain-wave, one of those obvious-in-hindsight moments. The gear wheel

on the driven axle was hard against the side of the frames, preventing any side-play. All I had to do was loosen the grub screw, adjust the gear, and suddenly

the loco would go through 30 inch curves without complaint (including the tighter road through Peco curved turnouts, which it didn't like previously). I also

solved the drooping valve rod problem very easily, again a five minute fix. After all this time, I didn't even need to switch the iron on! I know these sound like

simple fixes, and they were, but they were only obvious to me now because of building many more engines since I acquired the 7F.

 

The model's had some bumps which are mostly confined to the tender, but one remaining annoyance, now that the running is good, is that the smokebox door

is very poorly aligned. I can't live with it as it is, so I'm wondering what is the best remedy, given that it seems to be soldered or glued very securely in place. I

thought about sawing it off with a razor saw, then reinstating it (or a replacement?) or just filing off the errant detail and then reinstating it in the correct

alignment? I think the latter might be simpler.

 

Al

Edited September 11, 2018 by Barry Ten

[St Enodoc]

100% mechanically operated and interlocked 36 lever frame here, Tony.

 

OK, arguably not 100% scratchbuilt as it is based around a Modratec lever frame and uses GEM angle cranks (still available!) and MSE signal parts but otherwise a lot of time and effort expended to set this all up as a 100% mechanical installation. Do feel free to come and have a look for yourself one of these days.

 

I'm sure there are others around with similar installations. Well-impressed however by a transportable set-up that can pull this off. I wonder how they pull off the trick of taking the mechanical motion across baseboard joints - or is it all confined to one board or with a separate frame for each board? Have oft pondered this conundrum over the years but it remains filed under 'hmm...'

Did you manage to find out from your Dad how he fixed the number plates to the levers? I'm going to need to do mine soon...

[queensquare]

Here's something that may be of interest, in that it's a model I bought second-hand which came with a few problems, most of which I've now resolved.

 

7F.jpg

 

 

Al

 

Marvelous, a proper engine

 

Jerry

[Clive Mortimore]

I know what you mean and I did try to come up with other words for "showing off". I don't mean it in a "look how clever I am" way. They see it more as "I built this to please me and I don't feel the need to share it with the internet world which I don't really engage with anyway".

 

I don't post much of my work as it is often for other people and it doesn't feel right. I finish so little for myself that if I posted the start of a build, the finish might be years later. When I see people who build superb models in a week or less, that is far more inspiring than me doing something similar in months or years!

This is a hard one. I like to think I am sharing with like minded people. I know I am not better than anyone else who is a member of RMweb, or someone who views the forum but is not a member.

 

But if people didn't share or show off how would others be inspired? I hope that when I do show my efforts that other people can say "I can do that", or "I can do better than that" and get on and do some modelling and enjoy what they do. I don't want to leave other potential modellers overwhelmed.

Edited September 11, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[LNER4479]

Did you manage to find out from your Dad how he fixed the number plates to the levers? I'm going to need to do mine soon...

Knowing him, probably Evostick which he uses for absolutely everything - including assembling metal kits (shh! Don't tell Sir!)

[jamie92208]

Here's something that may be of interest, in that it's a model I bought second-hand which came with a few problems, most of which I've now resolved.

 

7F.jpg

 

At the time I bought this DJH 7F (and apologies for the hand-held photo), there was no Bachmann model in the pipeline and the Gibson model (better, I gather)

was not available,  so this seemed the only obvious way of obtaining a 7F. While I'd built a few locomotives at the time I purchased this one, none had valve

gear, and none were eight-coupled,  so I felt that I needed a bit more experience before I tackled such a big beast.

 

The person who sold me this model also sold me (separately) a complete kit for a large-boilered example, which I've still to make. Unfortunately, the transaction(s)

turned acrimonious as both items were very delayed in the shipping, despite numerous promises that they were on their way. In the end (and I forget whether

it was the kit or the finished loco) I was forced to initiate a Paypal dispute. The seller's spouse then attempted to open a reciprocal claim against me, saying that

I was lying about not having received the item, which was supposed to have reached me weeks earlier. Within a day or two a parcel arrived, which (unfortunately

for the other party) contained a tracking history which showed that it had only just been shipped. Needless to say, the counter-claim against me was dropped, but

it left a very bad taste. Until that point I thought all railway modellers were lovely, trustworthy people!

 

As far as I remember, I was told that the finished 7F might have been built for Julian Birley's 4mm S&D layout, although given the subsequent porkies, I'm not too sure

what I ought to believe. I was also told it might have been built by Tony, but it doesn't bear Tony's handiwork at all, with a different style of pickups. I oiught

to dig out that old Railway Modeller in which the S&D layout featured, and see if I can identify the loco from its quirks.

 

In any case, it was quite well made and ran reasonably smoothly, with a well-assembled chassis and a Portescap motor/gearbox. However,

it hated 30 inch curves, despite being told it would cope with them.

 

I put it aside for a few years, resolving to look at it when I had more confidence in stripping and rebuilding the chassis. I reckoned that I'd have to remove the

valve gear and increase the play on at least one of the axles. In addition, the valve rod was drooping badly on one side, with the valve spindle nearly coming out

of the cylinder; not enough to affect the running but it looked terrible.

 

Last night, feeling upbeat, I got it out again and was all set to unsolder the valve gear when I had a brain-wave, one of those obvious-in-hindsight moments. The gear wheel

on the driven axle was hard against the side of the frames, preventing any side-play. All I had to do was loosen the grub screw, adjust the gear, and suddenly

the loco would go through 30 inch curves without complaint (including the tighter road through Peco curved turnouts, which it didn't like previously). I also

solved the drooping valve rod problem very easily, again a five minute fix. After all this time, I didn't even need to switch the iron on! I know these sound like

simple fixes, and they were, but they were only obvious to me now because of building many more engines since I acquired the 7F.

 

The model's had some bumps which are mostly confined to the tender, but one remaining annoyance, now that the running is good, is that the smokebox door

is very poorly aligned. I can't live with it as it is, so I'm wondering what is the best remedy, given that it seems to be soldered or glued very securely in place. I

thought about sawing it off with a razor saw, then reinstating it (or a replacement?) or just filing off the errant detail and then reinstating it in the correct

alignment? I think the latter might be simpler.

 

Al

 

You are not alone in having problems with sellers Al.   I bought a 7mm Gibson 2P kit via the O Gauge Guild sales and wants.  I was assured that it was a Midland one rather than an LMS one and that it had wheels motor and gears.  I arranged to take delivery and pay at Telford that year.  The guy turned up with the kit in a box labelled LMS 2P and when I opened it there was not motor or gearbox (minimum £45 to buy).   The guy said, are you sure you're bothered, you're getting a bargain.  he also went into a long rambling explanation about Alan G having produced a one off kit for an S & D 2P and put it in an LMS box.   I made the guy go and buy a new motor and gearbox and then paid him the agreed price.   I have since discovered that it contained 6' 9" wheels and have bought myself some 7' ones along with another £25's worth of assorted bits from Laurie Griffin and Slaters.   I will no doubt make other discoveries when I build it but I've still got a reasonable 2P kit for less than £300 in total.   I will just have to sort out the known bogie pivot problems when I build it.   I want it to go safely round bends.  Such is life and I will enjoy building it.

 

Jamie

[Barry Ten]

Just as a comedic follow-up to that 7F saga, I needed to order wheels for the large-boilered example. When I got them, all eight drivers were flangeless!

[Jon4470]

Something a bit different - but in line with the current talk about scratch building.

 

This is my first venture into scratch building a wagon - it’s also my first OO9 build.

 

I suppose there was no choice really (lack of options can be a good motivator I find

[Tony Wright]

I do think there is a danger that we look at the past with rose tinted glasses. I agree fully that Metropolitan Junction is superb and very inspiring, I was discussing it with Gordon Gravett last night who felt the same. You are right to suggest that there are only a handful of modelers doing this sort of thing today but I suspect that there were only a handful of modellers doing it back in the day as well. 

Its a bit like the often heard complaint that music was much better when I was a lad/lass, we had proper bands then - until you see a chart show from you favourite period when you realise there was just as much dross around then as there is now. 

The Metropolitan Junction/Buckingham/Borchester type layouts remain inspirational not just because they were superb but because they were head and shoulders above anything else that was in the contemporary model press, much of which really wasn't very good. In that sense, I'm not sure much has changed.

 

Jerry  

I agree Jerry,

 

Whatever activity one gets involved with, there will be dross. More dross than quality, in the past and now. Railway modelling is no exception. 

 

But today, is it a different kind of 'dross' in my view. I keep coming back to this point, and it would be wrong to call the current RTR standards 'dross', but I really do get bored at seeing the same things on layouts and in the press; not just locos and rolling stock, but structures as well. Back in the Metropolitan Junction days, the dross in the press would probably be poor modelling (RTR stuff, for instance, would not feature except in its own separate - relegated? - section). And, some of those tatty buildings on Metropolitan Junction are ancient Biltezee and Superquick mouldering items. So, no 'rose-coloured specs' there. 

 

It's just that I appreciate the self-reliance of the modellers who made what they needed. There was no moaning about why such-and-such is/was not available - their work was unique. And, despite the overall raising of standards throughout the hobby, how many shows from years ago featured (so) many layouts which were populated by stuff straight from the box? 

 

 

 

Allowances must be made for the great age (in layout terms) of MJ, but how many times does one see a Billinton Tank, a Claughton and a round-top firebox Nelson on layouts at exhibitions these days? Rarely throughout history, I admit, but so refreshingly-different to see among the general (though not universal) 'mobile' catalogues of what the RTR boys offer us. 

 

 

You mention Gordon Gravett. I don't care which period in the hobby's history one chooses, nothing has ever been any better than this! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

100% mechanically operated and interlocked 36 lever frame here, Tony.

 

OK, arguably not 100% scratchbuilt as it is based around a Modratec lever frame and uses GEM angle cranks (still available!) and MSE signal parts but otherwise a lot of time and effort expended to set this all up as a 100% mechanical installation. Do feel free to come and have a look for yourself one of these days.

 

I'm sure there are others around with similar installations. Well-impressed however by a transportable set-up that can pull this off. I wonder how they pull off the trick of taking the mechanical motion across baseboard joints - or is it all confined to one board or with a separate frame for each board? Have oft pondered this conundrum over the years but it remains filed under 'hmm...'

Very impressive, Graham,

 

I'd very much like to see it.

 

And, yet, (almost an 'however'), in all that personal creativity and invention, is that a Bachmann V2 and original Bachmann Thompson I see? Anachronistic? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Wright]

Here's something that may be of interest, in that it's a model I bought second-hand which came with a few problems, most of which I've now resolved.

 

7F.jpg

 

At the time I bought this DJH 7F (and apologies for the hand-held photo), there was no Bachmann model in the pipeline and the Gibson model (better, I gather)

was not available,  so this seemed the only obvious way of obtaining a 7F. While I'd built a few locomotives at the time I purchased this one, none had valve

gear, and none were eight-coupled,  so I felt that I needed a bit more experience before I tackled such a big beast.

 

The person who sold me this model also sold me (separately) a complete kit for a large-boilered example, which I've still to make. Unfortunately, the transaction(s)

turned acrimonious as both items were very delayed in the shipping, despite numerous promises that they were on their way. In the end (and I forget whether

it was the kit or the finished loco) I was forced to initiate a Paypal dispute. The seller's spouse then attempted to open a reciprocal claim against me, saying that

I was lying about not having received the item, which was supposed to have reached me weeks earlier. Within a day or two a parcel arrived, which (unfortunately

for the other party) contained a tracking history which showed that it had only just been shipped. Needless to say, the counter-claim against me was dropped, but

it left a very bad taste. Until that point I thought all railway modellers were lovely, trustworthy people!

 

As far as I remember, I was told that the finished 7F might have been built for Julian Birley's 4mm S&D layout, although given the subsequent porkies, I'm not too sure

what I ought to believe. I was also told it might have been built by Tony, but it doesn't bear Tony's handiwork at all, with a different style of pickups. I oiught

to dig out that old Railway Modeller in which the S&D layout featured, and see if I can identify the loco from its quirks.

 

In any case, it was quite well made and ran reasonably smoothly, with a well-assembled chassis and a Portescap motor/gearbox. However,

it hated 30 inch curves, despite being told it would cope with them.

 

I put it aside for a few years, resolving to look at it when I had more confidence in stripping and rebuilding the chassis. I reckoned that I'd have to remove the

valve gear and increase the play on at least one of the axles. In addition, the valve rod was drooping badly on one side, with the valve spindle nearly coming out

of the cylinder; not enough to affect the running but it looked terrible.

 

Last night, feeling upbeat, I got it out again and was all set to unsolder the valve gear when I had a brain-wave, one of those obvious-in-hindsight moments. The gear wheel

on the driven axle was hard against the side of the frames, preventing any side-play. All I had to do was loosen the grub screw, adjust the gear, and suddenly

the loco would go through 30 inch curves without complaint (including the tighter road through Peco curved turnouts, which it didn't like previously). I also

solved the drooping valve rod problem very easily, again a five minute fix. After all this time, I didn't even need to switch the iron on! I know these sound like

simple fixes, and they were, but they were only obvious to me now because of building many more engines since I acquired the 7F.

 

The model's had some bumps which are mostly confined to the tender, but one remaining annoyance, now that the running is good, is that the smokebox door

is very poorly aligned. I can't live with it as it is, so I'm wondering what is the best remedy, given that it seems to be soldered or glued very securely in place. I

thought about sawing it off with a razor saw, then reinstating it (or a replacement?) or just filing off the errant detail and then reinstating it in the correct

alignment? I think the latter might be simpler.

 

Al

Thanks for showing this, Al,

 

I can categorically deny that I am the builder of your loco; on a few counts.

 

Firstly, unless someone has removed my signature, I'd have signed it.

 

Secondly, I don't think I'd have put that front numberplate on.

 

Thirdly, I'd have fitted pony wheels with the right number of spokes.

 

Fourthly, it's very unusual for me to leave the motion in a bright state.

 

Fifthly, and most-importantly, I can't ever remember building an S&D 7F. 

 

Glad you sorted out its problems.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 11, 2018 by Tony Wright