Wright writes.....

[Atso]

I agree Andrew, regardless of they are RTR, kit built or scratch built, locomotives and stock do need weathering to bring them to life. My total locomotive weathering experience is limited to two locomotives and a handful of stock so far but more (all) will follow.

 

Apologies as I'm sure these have been shared here before.

 

 

My first attempt at weathering a locomotive. Nothing more than a waft with an airbrush and picking out some details.

 

 

I built this V3 for a friend. The weathering on this one was based on Martyn Welch's instructions in his book. Air brushing, streaking with a brush moisten with thinners, dry brushing, stippling and powders all played a part in doing this one. Annoyingly, the numbers still show the backing slightly. I only seem to have this problem when using Model Master decals for some reason. 

[Tony Wright]

17 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

That's not building, thats assembling. I will give you this, the young ladies are so good at their job that it the Duchess looks exactly like a one piece moulding. However, they should be complimented on their contribution to hundreds of UK model railways.

 

In the case of the layout photographed over the page, shame on you middle aged men, the locomotive looks to have been plonked straight out of the box, without any evidence of any input from yourselves. As I have suggested, that is probably why it looks plastic. For the hard of hearing down at the front, 'The little tank needs bringing to life, to break it up a bit, some subtle weathering, dust, oil, soot and even shinny paint, a crew, coal, lamps etc. Turner level scenics are great but not with lego land trains running about'.

Interesting observations, Andrew,

 

Thanks for posting. 

 

Your last point strikes a note with me. Indeed, I did point out to the layout operators that much of the stock was 'out of the box'. In fairness, the layout was built by two guys who've sadly now died, and none of the original (kit-built) stock came with it. Thus, it's had to be populated by RTR items in the main, and a programme of 'improvements' is under way. 

 

I have to say (and I've said this before), I do tire these days of seeing so much RTR stuff on layouts at shows, in the press and in the electronic media, often completely unaltered. Indeed, in some instances, I've seen an item purchased, the box opened and the thing plonked on the track for use throughout a show. I firmly believe this is short-changing those who've paid to come in. 

 

I think it's entirely acceptable to exhibit/display/show much-modified RTR items, especially if the work is that of he/she who's showing it. That said, even with a more natural appearance, there is still a 'sameness' present, impossible to 'achieve' by kit-building/scratch-building things. 

 

I also have to say (in fairness to the RTR boys/girls), they're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't. To be criticised for making a model 'too perfect' must be rather puzzling. 

 

The 'problem' would seem to be on several levels. To some, by altering/improving/personalising an RTR item its 'value' is immediately compromised. To others, even suggesting that one should 'have a go' and make things look more realistic by observation of the prototype is the clarion call to assault their keyboards in a storm of righteous indignation! There are those who just seem to refuse to try and either just use what they can buy or ask others to do their modelling for them. All, of course, have the right to please themselves and enjoy the hobby as they see fit. That said, why is it the case that those who strive to 'improve' things (many posters on here) are looked upon in some quarters as 'elitist' and 'dictatorial'? Especially when their principal aim is to help others. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Jesse Sim]

10 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

They do, Jol,

 

If you note, I've put 'scale' in inverted commas, for obvious reasons. 

 

And, what makes you think (by implication?) that I'm not with you 100% (there, I've used a 'Jesseism') with regard to (much, much) rather having something I've made myself than the product of a far-way factory, no matter how good it is? Why do you think I'm building a 'Semi' rather than just buying one RTR? 

 

My point (and it's been made before) is that the current RTR selection is to a higher standard than the majority of railway modellers can ever hope to aspire to (and achieve) in their personal model-making. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hunnid Percent ! 

[Jesse Sim]

May I offer this quick photo? 

 

A Raven A2 Pacific has the road with a parcels train, whilst a C1 waits for the clear with a Nottingham-Grantham.

 

I am really proud of this photo, it shows the new cutting I finished last week, the scratchbuilt bridge, kitbuilt wagons and an articulated set I made out of Hornby coaches. 

 

 

[uax6]

24 minutes ago, Atso said:

 

I built this V3 for a friend. The weathering on this one was based on Martyn Welch's instructions in his book. Air brushing, streaking with a brush moisten with thinners, dry brushing, stippling and powders all played a part in doing this one. Annoyingly, the numbers still show the backing slightly. I only seem to have this problem when using Model Master decals for some reason. 

 

The late (and great) Colin Parks used to remove the carrier film on his decals using a small amount of white spirit (I believe) and a small paint brush to rub the resultant rubbery gunk away.....

 

It would certainly be worth a try, as the film looks terrible!

 

Andy g

[Clem]

7 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

May I offer this quick photo? 

 

A Raven A2 Pacific has the road with a parcels train, whilst a C1 waits for the clear with a Nottingham-Grantham.

 

I am really proud of this photo, it shows the new cutting I finished last week, the scratchbuilt bridge, kitbuilt wagons and an articulated set I made out of Hornby coaches. 

 

 

That's brilliant, Jesse. Has a real ECML feel about it.... IS that a bus on the bridge? :-)

Edited March 5, 2019 by Clem

[Jesse Sim]

3 minutes ago, Clem said:

That's brilliant, Jesse. Has a real ECML feel about it.... IS that a bus on the bridge? :-)

Is it really a model railway if you don’t have a bus on a bridge? 

[Chamby]

The ‘too perfect’ thing is simple to explain.  For many years I have driven the same make and model of car, but through several iterations of design over the years.  After one ‘upgrade’ I was left feeling rather disappointed, yes the car was technically much better than the previous version, but somehow it had lost its ‘character’ in transition, so was less engaging to drive and own as a result.  Model locomotives are no different, I suggest.

 

Regarding the paying public, I think it is only the more experienced modeller who is ‘short changed’ by seeing RTR stuff.  Don’t forget that the average club exhibition will have many ordinary members of the public attending, for whom RTR will look just fine... and it represents a more accessible route of entry to the hobby.

 

Phil.

[Chamby]

14 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

May I offer this quick photo? 

 

A Raven A2 Pacific has the road with a parcels train, whilst a C1 waits for the clear with a Nottingham-Grantham.

 

I am really proud of this photo, it shows the new cutting I finished last week, the scratchbuilt bridge, kitbuilt wagons and an articulated set I made out of Hornby coaches. 

 

 

 

Blimey Jesse, that’s looking good!

[Clive Mortimore]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Does RTR get much better than this?

 

 

One of Hornby's latest original 'Princess Coronations'.

 

There's even a replacement bogie/pony with 'scale' wheels, plus bits to fit. 

 

Some years ago, I built a DJH streamlined 'upturned bathtub', which Ian Rathbone painted. What price anything like that now? Pity the poor kit-makers! 

How 'orrid.

 

The flying training wheels, the bogie wheels look too small. In fact it looks no better than the 1970s product, just more small parts to break off as you catch it when it falls out the modern packaging. .

 

The conversation following the post showing the thing above is quite interesting. My take on it is I enjoy making things but if there is an RTR one available I will buy it and make something that isn't sitting on the shelf. Much of my stuff isn't weathered, dusty not weathered, as I am no good at weathering (or cleaning my stock).

 

I am sure there are many who will buy this and think it a thing of beauty and good luck to them.

[Tony Wright]

7 minutes ago, Chamby said:

The ‘too perfect’ thing is simple to explain.  For many years I have driven the same make and model of car, but through several iterations of design over the years.  After one ‘upgrade’ I was left feeling rather disappointed, yes the car was technically much better than the previous version, but somehow it had lost its ‘character’ in transition, so was less engaging to drive and own as a result.  Model locomotives are no different, I suggest.

 

Regarding the paying public, I think it is only the more experienced modeller who is ‘short changed’ by seeing RTR stuff.  Don’t forget that the average club exhibition will have many ordinary members of the public attending, for whom RTR will look just fine... and it represents a more accessible route of entry to the hobby.

 

Phil.

Good morning Phil,

 

Why should anyone (regardless of their experience) pay to see something they can see for nothing in a shop window? 

 

I think you're right that RTR items represent a more-accessible route into the hobby (that's how I started), but surely it's more 'instructive' to show something that's been altered/improved/detailed/etc? That way, the inexperienced modeller can embark on the greatest journey this wonderful hobby has to offer - that of having a go! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

25 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

May I offer this quick photo? 

 

A Raven A2 Pacific has the road with a parcels train, whilst a C1 waits for the clear with a Nottingham-Grantham.

 

I am really proud of this photo, it shows the new cutting I finished last week, the scratchbuilt bridge, kitbuilt wagons and an articulated set I made out of Hornby coaches. 

 

 

You may, Jesse, you may..................

 

It's astonishing how well your modelling and your English has come on in leaps and bounds in the last two/three years. The former is axiomatic from your photographs and the latter is evident by your initial request on this post. Not long ago it would have been 'Can I show this...............' 

 

The only thing I'd suggest, is to qualify your entirely appropriate request with 'please'. 

 

Nine and a half out of ten my boy! 

 

Regards,

 

Wackford Squeers. 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Jesse Sim said:

May I offer this quick photo? 

 

A Raven A2 Pacific has the road with a parcels train, whilst a C1 waits for the clear with a Nottingham-Grantham.

 

I am really proud of this photo, it shows the new cutting I finished last week, the scratchbuilt bridge, kitbuilt wagons and an articulated set I made out of Hornby coaches. 

 

 

Good morning Jesse,

 

may I add my praise too. I've been following your thread recently, your work is astonishingly good.

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Interesting observations, Andrew,

 

Thanks for posting. 

 

Your last point strikes a note with me. Indeed, I did point out to the layout operators that much of the stock was 'out of the box'. In fairness, the layout was built by two guys who've sadly now died, and none of the original (kit-built) stock came with it. Thus, it's had to be populated by RTR items in the main, and a programme of 'improvements' is under way. 

 

I have to say (and I've said this before), I do tire these days of seeing so much RTR stuff on layouts at shows, in the press and in the electronic media, often completely unaltered. Indeed, in some instances, I've seen an item purchased, the box opened and the thing plonked on the track for use throughout a show. I firmly believe this is short-changing those who've paid to come in. 

 

I think it's entirely acceptable to exhibit/display/show much-modified RTR items, especially if the work is that of he/she who's showing it. That said, even with a more natural appearance, there is still a 'sameness' present, impossible to 'achieve' by kit-building/scratch-building things. 

 

I also have to say (in fairness to the RTR boys/girls), they're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't. To be criticised for making a model 'too perfect' must be rather puzzling. 

 

The 'problem' would seem to be on several levels. To some, by altering/improving/personalising an RTR item its 'value' is immediately compromised. To others, even suggesting that one should 'have a go' and make things look more realistic by observation of the prototype is the clarion call to assault their keyboards in a storm of righteous indignation! There are those who just seem to refuse to try and either just use what they can buy or ask others to do their modelling for them. All, of course, have the right to please themselves and enjoy the hobby as they see fit. That said, why is it the case that those who strive to 'improve' things (many posters on here) are looked upon in some quarters as 'elitist' and 'dictatorial'? Especially when their principal aim is to help others. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Morning Tony,

 

it's the juxtaposition between the scenic work and that of the locomotives and stock, a mismatch. Out of the box RTR blends quite well the less 'realistic the scenery becomes. The layout in the photo has scenics that are so beautifully observed that the stock jars, it being of a different aesthetic, 'perfect' but poorly observed. There is some sort of truth in the best modeling, perhaps that is why too perfect so often fails, it is just not true to life.

 

There dose seem to be something of a trend here, last week I complained at the stock in your photograph of the beautiful N gauge layout in a cutting, no lamps, no weathering, unbelievable toy town train formation. We as a hobby seem to becoming experts at observing scenery and turning a blind eye to the railway.

[jwealleans]

You'll get water in the milk if you don't get your finger out and put that roof on......

[Jol Wilkinson]

11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

They do, Jol,

 

If you note, I've put 'scale' in inverted commas, for obvious reasons. 

 

And, what makes you think (by implication?) that I'm not with you 100% (there, I've used a 'Jesseism') with regard to (much, much) rather having something I've made myself than the product of a far-way factory, no matter how good it is? Why do you think I'm building a 'Semi' rather than just buying one RTR? 

 

My point (and it's been made before) is that the current RTR selection is to a higher standard than the majority of railway modellers can ever hope to aspire to (and achieve) in their personal model-making. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony,

 

firstly, whose definition of scale? I could find no details on the Hornby website of what extra's are supplied with the model. However, as you had put inverted commas around "scale" I infer that it was Hornby's definition and hence could be open to debate.

 

I believe, fully, that you and I share similar views about creating our own, individual, models. I had no intention of implying otherwise. Very little on London Road came out of a box ready to install. Even then, the the excellent A C Stadden figures had to be drilled and fitted with handling/mounting wires and painted (the latter beautifully done by Cat Gibbs) and the DCC Concepts platform light repainted on LNWR colours. 

 

Whether people can or should aspire to achieving such results by their own efforts as the latest RTR locos and stock provide is a different matter. Few of us could achieve that finish, especially the lining, but that shouldn't deter us from at least discovering that we can get some satisfaction from creating our own models.

 

Jol

[Jesse Sim]

49 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

You'll get water in the milk if you don't get your finger out and put that roof on......

It’s currently undergoing tweaks to get perfect running. It was my first brass kit you know! 

 

Well you would know, through the constant early morning messages you were getting from me asking questions!! 

[Jesse Sim]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Jesse,

 

may I add my praise too. I've been following your thread recently, your work is astonishingly good.

Many thanks, it’s not the best, but I am very happy with what I have accomplished so far. 

[Jesse Sim]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

You may, Jesse, you may..................

 

It's astonishing how well your modelling and your English has come on in leaps and bounds in the last two/three years. The former is axiomatic from your photographs and the latter is evident by your initial request on this post. Not long ago it would have been 'Can I show this...............' 

 

The only thing I'd suggest, is to qualify your entirely appropriate request with 'please'. 

 

Nine and a half out of ten my boy! 

 

Regards,

 

Wackford Squeers. 

I do feel my English is getting betterer, cheers! 

 

Credit is due to you as well Tony, you really have given me a confidence boost the last year or two, as well as everyone else. 

 

Nine and half, I will not rest until I have reached a solid 10, is it hard to come by?

 

wackford what? I think I’m too young to understand.....’please’ enlighten me? 

 

Many thanks,

 

the long haired yahoo

 

Edited March 5, 2019 by Jesse Sim

[St Enodoc]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Now, the true disciple of the 'chosen path' (certainly not me) would have all the locos he'd/she'd made fitted with outside gear arranged so that their gear is adjustable! Thus, it could be altered to suit whether the loco is climbing or descending Stoke (though it's actually flat through LB itself).

Why not build them with the valve gear different on each side so that it corresponds to how the reverser would be set for each direction? After all, you can only see one side at a time...

[jamie92208]

20 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

 

 

wackford what? I think I’m too young to understand.....’please’ enlighten me? 

 

Many thanks,

 

the long haired yahoo

 

Wackford Squeers was a horrible headmaster in Nicholas Nickleby (I think) written by Charles Dickens.   He used to delight in caning (Whacking or beating) boys in his school.  

 

By the way Jesse that model is really looking good.   I'm gutted that I won't have chance to come and see it when we are in Sydney in April.  We are only there for 3 nights and divorces are expensive.

 

Jamie

[St Enodoc]

1 minute ago, jamie92208 said:

Wackford Squeers was a horrible headmaster in Nicholas Nickleby (I think) written by Charles Dickens.   He used to delight in caning (Whacking or beating) boys in his school.  

 

By the way Jesse that model is really looking good.   I'm gutted that I won't have chance to come and see it when we are in Sydney in April.  We are only there for 3 nights and divorces are expensive.

 

Jamie

Pity. You'll miss the Mid-Cornwall Lines as well...

[t-b-g]

If Tim Watson can create adjustable position valve gear in 2mm scale, it should be a doddle for mere mortals working in 4mm.

[jamie92208]

15 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

If Tim Watson can create adjustable position valve gear in 2mm scale, it should be a doddle for mere mortals working in 4mm.

Doesn't say a lot for me then Tony, I've not managed to do that yet in 7mm or even attempted to, however as the pile of unbuilt kits goes down, I might certainly give it a go. Perhaps on the 2P that's sitting there unbuilt.

 

Jamie

[Willie Whizz]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

Why should anyone (regardless of their experience) pay to see something they can see for nothing in a shop window? 

 

 

A small point perhaps, but it's not so easy these days to see something "for nothing" railway modelling-related in a shop window, especially if you don't specifically go looking.  I can't find the thread now, but I'm pretty sure I read on RMWeb very recently that the number of High Street stores selling serious stuff for our hobby is down by about half over 10 years.  

 

Any new entrant to the hobby who pays their money and goes to more than one or two shows will soon suss-out the difference in realism between layouts that use R-T-R "out of the box" and those that tweak and adapt it.  Whether and how they then get to feel sufficiently inspired and emboldened to do the same with their own stock is a related, but slightly different, issue though.  Messing about with a fiver's-worth of scenic materials and then scrapping the unsatisfactory result is one thing.  Taking a knife and a paintbrush to £150-worth of locomotive (that your spouse really can't see why you wanted to buy in the first place) is - for some - a very different kettle of fish, equivalent to jumping in at the deep end when you've only just learned to swim.  Great feeling once you've successfully done it, but requires an act of faith to start ...