Jump to content
 

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

I'm happy to call anyone in this hobby a modeller, whether or not they're making kits or scratchbuilding, or just putting together a layout from RTR and RTP elements. A week or two ago I was really taken with this 5 x 4 train set layout built by Chris Nevard, using off-the-shelf products. It could be done badly but in Chris's hands, the end result is (in my view) fantastically well achieved, with a better sense of realism than I've seen in a lot of layouts which involve scratchbuilding and the finer standards:

 

http://nevardmedia.blogspot.com/2019/03/trainset.html

 

I think what counts here is Chris's eye for spaciousness and convincing composition, rather than the origins of the various elements.  I had an 8 x4 layout as a kid, but (as much as I loved it) it looked busier and more cramped than this one. That's modelling, to me - taking what's available and putting it to good effect, whether it's a glorified train-set like this or one of the mega-sized prototype-based layouts we see on this forum.

Although I have often contributed here in  favour of the satisfaction and interest of making, I agree with all you say, and yield to nobody in my admiration of Mr Nevard's products.  I like the top two on here  -

http://www.nevard.com/showcase.htm

RTR, RTP buildings on one - yet all made something convincing (and personal) by fine scenic modelling and weathering, and a great eye for composition and colour.

Edited by johnarcher
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Kingzance said:

Is someone who cuts timber and builds baseboards, lays proprietary track, wires it all together, adds ballast, scenery and kit buildings but who buys RTR stock any less of a railway modeller? We all have some skills and can only admire others with a skill set to which we can only aspire. I class myself as being in the former camp (OO, not P4, EM or Scalefour) with minor forays into the latter but I do get inspired by the many superb illustrations we can find on RMWeb. These push me to better detail and higher levels of finish.

 

Turning that around, is someone who builds everything on a layout, any "more" of a modeller? Are we happy to elevate the less skilled but sometimes less willing to recognise those that have learned those techniques for their efforts in doing so?

 

12 hours ago, Craigw said:

 

I quoted the words of Apollo because I find them of interest. I have noticed on many Facebook groups as well as forums a sort of "inverse snobbery" Firstly, there are a lot of posts (far too many) where people tend to diminish their own effort. Not in a modest way but more in a way of trying to justify why they do things as they do which i find a bit off putting.

 

The second thing you see far more of is an outright aggression towards any modelling to a perceived higher standard. So many posts talk about "Rivet counters" and pedants with out any examples being present. One only has to look at the sheer personal venom that was directed at TW from some quarters over his opinion piece in Railway Modeller. I really do not see how this is healthy. If something is of no interest to me I scroll past it and most people seem to do just that.

 

Regards,

 

Craig w

 

Odd isn't it, that people who research a prototype to produce an accurate model are sometimes derided as "rivet counters" but a new product RTR announcement is often picked apart in detail by "knowledgeable enthusiasts".

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between Facebook groups and forums isn't confined to railway modelling. I have collected bootlegs by a certain band for many years (which were done with the bands permission). It was standard practice when this sort of thing was done through things like Yahoo Groups for the best quality to be maintained, ie. no compressed formats that destroy data like MP3 and YouTube audio, FLAC, shn, wav and CD only (in those days).

Now on a Facebook group for bootlegs of the same band there are a number of people who throw the word ‘elitist’ around when people talk about sharing uncompressed formats and are very aggressive about people trying to maintain quality saying I’ can’t tell the difference so I am right’.
 

This is why I find RMweb so essential to my enjoyment of the hobby. It is my own hypocrisy that I regard Facebook groups for both music and modelling as inferior, but the lack of adequate moderation on Facebook seems to breed those kind of views.
 

Long live RMweb and threads like Tony’s that promote quality and inspire those ready to learn.

Jamie

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
47 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Turning that around, is someone who builds everything on a layout, any "more" of a modeller? Are we happy to elevate the less skilled but sometimes less willing to recognise those that have learned those techniques for their efforts in doing so?

 

 

Odd isn't it, that people who research a prototype to produce an accurate model are sometimes derided as "rivet counters" but a new product RTR announcement is often picked apart in detail by "knowledgeable enthusiasts".

 

 

Surely "railway modellers" must be a broad church. My skills are way below many on RMWeb but I see myself as a "railway modeller" all the same. In some respects the very high standards that can be found on here actually deter people like me as I know I will never reach such levels and yet I want a railway that works, that attempts to reflect a period in history, that represents a compressed version of the prototype of the period without being that specific some detail could destroy the illusion - and after all, OO gauge is an illusion anyway! My layout has a dockside but we all know how overwhelming scale vessels can be so I am building a 1/100th scale steam powered paddle ferry and fishing smack from plans and photographs to create the scene, just as I shall use gradually increasing reductions in size to create the illusion of depth for the buildings as they appear further from the model. It is a massive challenge and one that sadly I should have started two decades ago. That also means I do not have time to build every part of it!

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Turning that around, is someone who builds everything on a layout, any "more" of a modeller? Are we happy to elevate the less skilled but sometimes less willing to recognise those that have learned those techniques for their efforts in doing so?

 

 

Odd isn't it, that people who research a prototype to produce an accurate model are sometimes derided as "rivet counters" but a new product RTR announcement is often picked apart in detail by "knowledgeable enthusiasts".

 

 

Tricky here, Jol,

 

We could be 'guilty' of creating a hierarchy of modelling if we're not careful.

 

The less-skilled should be encouraged. Without being falsely-modest, I often come into the less-skilled category in railway modelling, especially with regard to not making things to the 'correct' gauge (because I'm not skilled enough) and, especially, proper painting (because I'm too indolent).

 

The highly-skilled should also be recognised, and certainly not be derided for 'pushing the boundaries'. Without them, we'd still be sucking our thumbs as we watched vintage tinplate flying around! 

 

Is it safe to say that anyone who indulges in model railways is a railway modeller? I suppose the simple act of putting a circle of set track together on the floor, pushing in a feed, placing a loco and stock on the track and turning a knob is an act of railway modelling. I did it first by myself when I was seven/eight, but things have moved on since then. Where I'm not sure of the definition (and I've seen this) is where the owner of a layout (often built to a high-standard) does precious little (or nothing) with regard to actually 'making' something for it. Some even employ modellers as retainers so that those who are paid can effectively make/manage/run the system. On one occasion, when I commented that a back-to-back on a wheelset was incorrectly set (causing a derailment), I was told 'Put it on XXXXX's list of things to do'. I was staggered! On another occasion, the owner of the layout couldn't run it because 'The bloke who does things' hadn't arrived yet! Even more staggering, or what? Each to their own, I suppose. 

 

As for 'knowledgeable enthusiasts', who decides what their degree of knowledge is? I've met my fair share at shows, as I'm sure you have. Those who do 'know', are the ones we need to get to know. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

....As for 'knowledgeable enthusiasts', who decides what their degree of knowledge is? I've met my fair share at shows, as I'm sure you have. Those who do 'know', are the ones we need to get to know. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

That takes me straight back to the Goons:

 

“If I knew the little you know, then I’d know a little.  Do you know, Eccles?”

 

“Yes, I know Eccles...”

 

 

Edited by Chamby
Clarification
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

On adapting and using RTR and aftermarket goodies, this is a batch of GWR horse boxes I’ve done. The middle vehicle was the most satisfying. LHS current Hornby with Shawplan glazing and Masokits couplings, so, modified RTR. RHS Parkside kit with Shawplan glazing (modified to fit) and Masokits couplings, kit built. The centre vehicle however is a ‘mash up’  as the youth would say, of a Lima body, and Parkside underframe, components can be seen for No. four. This version was much more satisfying as there was research, and then customisation of the body and chassis components to make it work, the end result being almost indistinguishable from the RTR or kit built models. I’m currently working on RCH seven plank wagons again, adapting Oxfords model to represent ‘big four’ company built vehicles. 

B43A3596-22CF-4345-A6D2-9B47782A26BB.jpeg

  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

That takes me straight back to the Goons:

 

“If I knew the little you know, then I’d know a little.  Do you know, Eccles?”

 

“Yes, I know Eccles...”

 

 

I think the full phrase was, “ how little we know of the little that you know, if only we knew a little of the little that you know, then we would know a little. We better keep our little ears open.” 

With apologises to anyone who was not brought up on the goons as the staple listening material of their youth. 

Richard

  • Like 5
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, richard i said:

I think the full phrase was, “ how little we know of the little that you know, if only we knew a little of the little that you know, then we would know a little. We better keep our little ears open.” 

With apologises to anyone who was not brought up on the goons as the staple listening material of their youth. 

Richard

Required listening when I was a boy. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

We were introduced to the goons by my father in the 1980s in Norway as one of the very few records he actually owned. It seemed back then people had less stuff. We never felt we were going without things though. ........except the train set I kept asking for Christmas but was not got, “because you will quickly grow out of it.” Oh how little my parents knew how deep the bug had bit. 

Richard

  • Like 6
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

Still on constant play on Radio Four Extra.

 

If you said to me when I was a teenager in the 1980s watching "cutting edge" comedy that in 2019 I would be listening to 1950s comedy such as The Goons, The Navy Lark and Kenneth Horne, I would have laughed.

 

 

 

Jason

My problem with 1980s comedy was that most of it wasn't actually funny.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 9
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Required listening for me as a child was Radio's Light Programme (well  that's what it said on mum & dad's Bush -  no sniggering in the back there) the somewhat RTR programme,  The Clitheroe Kid.  Ironically I can still do that now and then courtesy of a (DAB) Bush Radio that looks the same and plays Radio 4 extra.  Great for when I do take time to actually do some modelling.

 

Bob

  • Like 3
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

My problem with 1980s comedy was that most of it wasn't actually funny.

 

Try telling my good wife that! She sits through hours and hours of the stuff... Blackadder series #2 onwards was pure gold, Only Fool’s and Horses dominated the decade (although I thought it deteriorated notably in its later stages) and of course, Last of the Summer Wine  and Open All Hours but apart from that, I’m hard put to think of anything worth watching from that time. 

 

It’s particularly depressing that anyone still thought that Terry Scott was worth studio time...

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I have to agree that "modern" comedy, I find anything but funny. Fortunately my Grandad ensured a steady supply of Goodies etc. and we still have a few 78s, one of which is the Ying Tong Song with I'm walking Backwards for Christmas. It was no shock to my family when I chose a Spike Milligan poem for school poetry day - On the Ning Nang Nong. I was definitely born in the wrong era!

 

Having said that - Blackadder, The Young Ones, Kenny Everett. Love them and they were all present through my childhood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, PMP said:

On adapting and using RTR and aftermarket goodies, this is a batch of GWR horse boxes I’ve done. The middle vehicle was the most satisfying. LHS current Hornby with Shawplan glazing and Masokits couplings, so, modified RTR. RHS Parkside kit with Shawplan glazing (modified to fit) and Masokits couplings, kit built. The centre vehicle however is a ‘mash up’  as the youth would say, of a Lima body, and Parkside underframe, components can be seen for No. four. This version was much more satisfying as there was research, and then customisation of the body and chassis components to make it work, the end result being almost indistinguishable from the RTR or kit built models. I’m currently working on RCH seven plank wagons again, adapting Oxfords model to represent ‘big four’ company built vehicles. 

 

 

Good morning PMP,

 

a friend of mine recently produced some detail enhancements for the Hornby GWR horse box. These included a set of 3d printed replacement leaf springs and hangers. The Hornby model has the original short length of springs that prevented those that were so fitted from being XP rated.

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

A lot of us must have been introduced to the Goons via our dads. Mine had a tape of some of the episodes which we'd get played during long car journeys, especially during holiday drives around the Lake District or North Wales. I found it pretty funny, even though it must have been 20 or 30 years old at the time. I could relate to it as belonging to the same strain of silliness that produced the Pythons and Hitch Hiker's Guide. I seem to remember a trad-jazz interlude half way through each episode?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Barry Ten said:

A lot of us must have been introduced to the Goons via our dads. Mine had a tape of some of the episodes which we'd get played during long car journeys, especially during holiday drives around the Lake District or North Wales. I found it pretty funny, even though it must have been 20 or 30 years old at the time. I could relate to it as belonging to the same strain of silliness that produced the Pythons and Hitch Hiker's Guide. I seem to remember a trad-jazz interlude half way through each episode?

 

Quite a lot of the shows had music content in them.

 

Apparently if you had music as well as comedy then you were classed as general entertainment so got more money for the budget. Even worked for TV on shows like The Two Ronnies, and believe it or not The Young Ones. According to a documentary TYO were told to put bands on the show as the scenery and special effects were costing too much.

 

 

Jason

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
21 hours ago, Steamport Southport said:

Probably shows how good the body of the old Lima model was for it's time, apart from the mistake on the roof. Less said about the chassis the better.

 

 

 

Jason

When Lima were on the ball, their body mouldings were fantastic, the Class 73 especially (I still think it stands up against the Dapol one), and always are a great starting point for some proper modelling.

 

However, their chassis's weren't always great, and don't get me started on the wheels.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having come to a stand with the building of the Alan Gibson 517 Class (why, when customers hand over a model to be built do they need to empty the contents of the box, then hand it over with some vital parts missing? I'm sure this is not a source problem), I've turned my attention to building the replacement Comet chassis for the Bachmann B1 I showed some little time ago. 

 

2068542968_6121203.jpg.18c5a1013fbb56bcb6d35f14bd41141c.jpg

 

Though this an excellent 'fix', it isn't a cheap option for replacing the legions of failing split-chassis B1s. I bought the complete set of frames/motion at the York Show and that comes out at over £35.00. Double that for the motor/gearbox (Canon/Comet - a superb combination) and with Markits drivers now at over £6.00 per wheel, plus axles, crankpins, carrying wheels and what have you, and it's well beyond £100.00. 

 

532488743_6121204.jpg.b9c04221fce7de86d9c6c99a329b79c9.jpg

 

This is the eighth Bachmann/Palitoy/Replica B1 which I've applied this treatment to. All now work far better than with the guts they had originally, especially after all available interior space has been packed with lead. 

 

Are the most-recent Bachmann B1 chassis available separately? If so, they probably won't be over £100.00. Still, it's my solution, and the old B1 body really isn't that bad, especially in a 'layout' setting.

 

I wonder what Mr. Carter would have thought of this. 

 

 

Edited by Tony Wright
typo error
  • Like 15
  • Agree 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Having come to a stand with the building of the Alan Gibson 517 Class (why, when customers hand over a model to be built do they need to empty the contents of the box, then hand it over with some vital parts missing? I'm sure this is not a source problem), I've turned my attention to building the replacement Comet chassis for the Bachmann B1 I showed some little time ago. 

 

2068542968_6121203.jpg.18c5a1013fbb56bcb6d35f14bd41141c.jpg

 

Though this an excellent 'fix', it isn't a cheap option for replacing the legions of failing split-chassis B1s. I bought the complete set of frames/motion at the York Show and that comes out at over £35.00. Double that for the motor/gearbox (Canon/Comet - a superb combination) and with Markits drivers now at over £6.00 per wheel, plus axles, crankpins, carrying wheels and what have you, and it's well beyond £100.00. 

 

532488743_6121204.jpg.b9c04221fce7de86d9c6c99a329b79c9.jpg

 

This is the eighth Bachmann/Palitoy/Replica B1 which I've applied this treatment to. All now work far better than with the guts they had originally, especially after all available interior space has been packed with lead. 

 

Are the most-recent Bachmann B1 chassis available separately? If so, they probably won't be over £100.00. Still, it's my solution, and the old B1 body really isn't that bad, especially in a 'layout' setting.

 

I wonder what Mr. Carter would have thought of this. 

 

 

 

Evening Tony,

 

that B1 is defiantly crying out for the beautifully proportioned Bradwell dome. Lance that boil on top of the boiler.

 

P.S. I seem to think that the Bachmann smokebox door is fictitious, Mr Bradwell offers a couple of replacement as do others.

Edited by Headstock
Add info
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Tony,

 

that B1 is defiantly crying out for the beautifully proportioned Bradwell dome. Lance that boil on top of the boiler.

 

P.S. I seem to think that the Bachmann smokebox door is fictitious, Mr Bradwell offers a couple of replacement as do others.

 

Isn't the Bachmann smokebox door modelled on those fitted to the original boilers on the first 40 or so locos from memory?

Over time and works visits they turned up on other locos including, slightly ironically, 61264 while 61000 was withdrawn carrying one of the later type of smokebox door. 

When originally preserved, and until fairly recently I believe, 61264 carried the same (early) style of door but at it's last major overhaul was modified to the later type.

61306, the other preserved B1 has always carried the later style.

I've spent ages going through pictures to get appropriate numbers to use on Bachmann B1s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...