Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Indeed- I remember a video of a visiting loco going somewhat above the speed limit which is what prompted my post. Of course it doesn’t need to be good track - just remember how fast Hornby Dublo could go!

Andy,

 

'Of course it doesn’t need to be good track' 

 

It damn well does! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

[john new]

6 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Andy,

 

'Of course it doesn’t need to be good track' 

 

It damn well does! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Hornby D 3-rail laid flat was excellent for the standards involved.  You slowed for corners but flat out on straights even through points they stayed on. Plenty of weight where it was needed helped. Also, courtesy of the spoon pickups very reliable running.  Have we improved on scale outline, yes, ease of using three rail wiring over two rail and reliable running (r-t-r) arguably  no. 

Edited July 25, 2019 by john new

[APOLLO]

Have you any track buckling problems due to heat Tony (or anyone else) ?

 

I have a little track movement in the loft. As my track up there is laid on Peco foam & is pinned down it'll return to normal when the weather gets back to normal. On my garage O layout again Peco track pinned to painted insulation board, loose ballasted with bird cage grit. Trains still running (reduced speed like Network Rail), just one sharp curve visibly heat displaced a tad.

 

I left slight gaps at the rail joiners in both scales to allow for expansion / contraction. Today is exceptional.

 

Brit15

 

 

[t-b-g]

23 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

An interesting (as usual) post, Tony,

 

Though the penultimate sentence needs reading more than once to make sense...............

 

I think 'realism' is the key word, as always. Look in any of the works of Nock or Allen regarding 'fast' runs, and the name 'Little Bytham' will appear probably more than any other. More 100 mph steam runs have been achieved here than any other place in the realm (maybe the world?), and it's where MALLARD went through at over two miles per minute 81 years ago, just prior to breaking the world steam record for all time. 

 

That being the case, why shouldn't I run fast trains through my model of the station? It's irrelevant whether or not there are any other railway models where such fast running is possible - it's possible on LB, and, as Sandra Orpen showed us on Sunday, she ran her trains very, very fast - and they were Down trains, too! I might add that a huge amount of fun was enjoyed as well - surely what railway modelling, in all its forms, is about? 

 

I know it's vital that short, slow trains should run perfectly, without stuttering or stalling. At high speed, any 'dead spot' is fizzed over with impunity, but (for different reasons) it's just as difficult to ensure that fast-running trains perform faultlessly. A Pacific has twelve wheels, plus eight on its tender, and well over 80 wheels under its express. That could be more than a hundred wheels under any one train, racing over loads of track joints, all with the potential of bringing something off the road. I would argue (you know I'm argumentative!) that's it's more critical under those circumstances to ensure that the track/wheel standards are more accurately made/observed than on some secondary system where trains just crawl along. Isn't that so of the real thing? 

 

And anyway, why should I (as part of a group, of which you've been a participant - a much-valued one) want to build a 'typical' model railway. Rather philosophically, what is a 'typical' model railway nowadays? If my more-recent observations in the media and at shows are anything to go by, it's mainstream OO, not based on a real prototype, is mainly RTR-based/RTP-based and is representative of the steam/diesel transition period on BR in the late-'50s/early-'60s. That last point is the only commonality I might see with LB, other than it being OO. Diesel/electric-era layouts seem to be even more RTR-based, often representing far too small a depot, where everything makes a lot of noise, but hardly moves at any speed! 

 

I know we have different views on what constitutes a 'successful' model railway. As you know, I model what I remember from my 'spotting days, where big engines hauled long trains at high-speed. Not everywhere, of course, and at places like Donny or York, they were under a rather tight rein. But, at Botany Bay (not far from you), they weren't half going a lick, and one had to be very brave near the platform edge at Thirsk as an A4 or (especially) a Deltic was going through at top speed.  I never saw steam at LB, but I can tell you the Deltics were really going fast through there, and even more so with the HSTs and the electrics. 

 

My 'needs' are simple. It must be a model of a prototype, it must be ECML in my 'spotting days and the trains must run fast. That and the fact that I must have built (most of) them. I can run fast trains, and I do!

 

It's my privilege to have so many visitors to see LB, and all comment on the 'good running' - the good, high-speed running. I don't know if it would be as 'popular' if trains just crawled along, and then fell off!  

 

Each to their own, of course.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

My sentence was rather spoiled by me typing are instead of era!

 

All the right letters, just not necessarily in the right order.

 

 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2019 by t-b-g

[RBAGE]

25 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

An interesting (as usual) post, Tony,

 

Though the penultimate sentence needs reading more than once to make sense...............

 

I think 'realism' is the key word, as always. Look in any of the works of Nock or Allen regarding 'fast' runs, and the name 'Little Bytham' will appear probably more than any other. More 100 mph steam runs have been achieved here than any other place in the realm (maybe the world?), and it's where MALLARD went through at over two miles per minute 81 years ago, just prior to breaking the world steam record for all time. 

 

That being the case, why shouldn't I run fast trains through my model of the station? It's irrelevant whether or not there are any other railway models where such fast running is possible - it's possible on LB, and, as Sandra Orpen showed us on Sunday, she ran her trains very, very fast - and they were Down trains, too! I might add that a huge amount of fun was enjoyed as well - surely what railway modelling, in all its forms, is about? 

 

I know it's vital that short, slow trains should run perfectly, without stuttering or stalling. At high speed, any 'dead spot' is fizzed over with impunity, but (for different reasons) it's just as difficult to ensure that fast-running trains perform faultlessly. A Pacific has twelve wheels, plus eight on its tender, and well over 80 wheels under its express. That could be more than a hundred wheels under any one train, racing over loads of track joints, all with the potential of bringing something off the road. I would argue (you know I'm argumentative!) that's it's more critical under those circumstances to ensure that the track/wheel standards are more accurately made/observed than on some secondary system where trains just crawl along. Isn't that so of the real thing? 

 

And anyway, why should I (as part of a group, of which you've been a participant - a much-valued one) want to build a 'typical' model railway. Rather philosophically, what is a 'typical' model railway nowadays? If my more-recent observations in the media and at shows are anything to go by, it's mainstream OO, not based on a real prototype, is mainly RTR-based/RTP-based, not that big and is representative of the steam/diesel transition period on BR in the late-'50s/early-'60s. That last point is the only commonality I might see with LB, other than it being OO. Diesel/electric-era layouts seem to be even more RTR-based, often representing far too small a depot, where everything makes a lot of noise, but hardly moves at any speed! 

 

I know we have different views on what constitutes a 'successful' model railway. As you know, I model what I remember from my 'spotting days, where big engines hauled long trains at high-speed. Not everywhere, of course, and at places like Donny or York, they were under a rather tight rein. But, at Botany Bay (not far from you), they weren't half going a lick, and one had to be very brave near the platform edge at Thirsk as an A4 or (especially) a Deltic was going through at top speed.  I never saw steam at LB, but I can tell you the Deltics were really going fast through there, and even more so with the HSTs and the electrics. 

 

My 'needs' are simple. It must be a model of a prototype, it must be ECML in my 'spotting days and the trains must run fast. That and the fact that I must have built (most of) them. I can run fast trains, and I do!

 

It's my privilege to have so many visitors to see LB, and all comment on the 'good running' - the good, high-speed running. I don't know if it would be as 'popular' if trains just crawled along, and then fell off!  

 

Each to their own, of course.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

A career in modern day politics might have suited you, Tony. Ignore the subject but make sure you get your point across. 

 

Anyway, it's a bit of a stark choice. Good fast running or a crawl and then derailment. Small engines, plying their trade, struggling to get to grips with a heavy train or pottering with a pick up freight might entertain some enthusiasts more than a big green express loco, maxi chat.

 

[RBAGE]

14 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

My sentence was rather spoiled by me typing are instead of era!

 

All the right letters, just not necessarily in the right order.

 

 

 

 

Eric Morecambe would be proud of you.

[RBAGE]

21 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Have you any track buckling problems due to heat Tony (or anyone else) ?

 

I have a little track movement in the loft. As my track up there is laid on Peco foam & is pinned down it'll return to normal when the weather gets back to normal. On my garage O layout again Peco track pinned to painted insulation board, loose ballasted with bird cage grit. Trains still running (reduced speed like Network Rail), just one sharp curve visibly heat displaced a tad.

 

I left slight gaps at the rail joiners in both scales to allow for expansion / contraction. Today is exceptional.

 

Brit15

 

 

It's been too hot to spend any time in the shed. Maybe I had better go and have a look.

[Richard E]

3 minutes ago, RBAGE said:

It's been too hot to spend any time in the shed. Maybe I had better go and have a look.

 

I've had a quick peek at mine - Peco track laid on ply, PVA and ballast to secure it and none of it has moved. Max min thermometer says 42ºC in the shed today so I've not stopped long. All electronics (points and signals operated by servos using MERG or Megapoint controllers) are working perfectly.

[Tony Wright]

33 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Have you any track buckling problems due to heat Tony (or anyone else) ?

 

I have a little track movement in the loft. As my track up there is laid on Peco foam & is pinned down it'll return to normal when the weather gets back to normal. On my garage O layout again Peco track pinned to painted insulation board, loose ballasted with bird cage grit. Trains still running (reduced speed like Network Rail), just one sharp curve visibly heat displaced a tad.

 

I left slight gaps at the rail joiners in both scales to allow for expansion / contraction. Today is exceptional.

 

Brit15

 

 

I've just learned that Cambridge has had the hottest temperature on record in July in this country. Cambridge is just an hour's drive away from here (traffic on the A14 permitting). 

 

Have I had any problems with buckling track on LB? No, but last year I had the occasional short circuit in the very hot weather of last summer - short circuits caused by the gaps between the switch rails and the 'V's on some points closing up. 

 

All LB's trackwork was laid in warm weather - Norman Solomon's scenic side track and mine in the fiddle yard. Plenty of expansion gaps were left, and they've proved satisfactory. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[RBAGE]

I had a seriously "carp" moment on a previous layout using SMP track. The sleeper base isn't as sturdy as Peco but the temperature wasn't as high as today.

[Tony Wright]

21 minutes ago, RBAGE said:

A career in modern day politics might have suited you, Tony. Ignore the subject but make sure you get your point across. 

 

Anyway, it's a bit of a stark choice. Good fast running or a crawl and then derailment. Small engines, plying their trade, struggling to get to grips with a heavy train or pottering with a pick up freight might entertain some enthusiasts more than a big green express loco, maxi chat.

 

'A career in modern day politics might have suited you, Tony.'

 

Would it?

 

Despite my numerous faults, I do tell the truth as I see it; though it might not be what folk always want to hear. 

 

Speaking of politics, I was once canvassed by a politico on my doorstep in Wolverhampton (his party is irrelevant) where I was asked 'Can we count on your vote in the forthcoming elections?' I answered, 'Of course. All you have to do is satisfy three requirements for me'. 'What are those?'

 

'One: immediate reinstatement of corporal punishment in schools to counter the rampant indiscipline in some establishments.

Two: immediate reinstatement of capital punishment for the murderers of children, and any members of the forces of law and order.

Three: immediate expulsion of any illegal immigrants if they commit crimes here'. 

 

He just looked dumbstruck. 

 

A career in modern politics for me? You're kidding, of course. 

 

And, was I ignoring the subject? I thought I was expanding on it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[t-b-g]

I would never suggest that the expresses on LB should all run slowly. Just that they shouldn't all run flat out all the time.

 

Ones going down the hill should be quicker than ones going up.

 

A nice bit of variety adds to the operational interest. A train checked by a signal, which then clears and the train accelerates away is much more satisfying to drive and to watch than one that goes round without the controller being touched other than to start and stop it.

 

We run fast 8 carriage expresses on the 140ft run on the extended Narrow Road. They slow for curves and junctions and then pull away again. The models will go round flat out but it just isn't as much fun. When they arrive, they get shunted and the locos go to shed. It is possible to build a railway that gives more than one type of operation. Of course it is hopelessly unrealistic as these expresses travel from one terminus to the other which is less than 2 scale miles away but what the heck, we enjoy it and we just pretend that they are travelling much further!

[Tony Wright]

10 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I would never suggest that the expresses on LB should all run slowly. Just that they shouldn't all run flat out all the time.

 

Ones going down the hill should be quicker than ones going up.

 

A nice bit of variety adds to the operational interest. A train checked by a signal, which then clears and the train accelerates away is much more satisfying to drive and to watch than one that goes round without the controller being touched other than to start and stop it.

 

We run fast 8 carriage expresses on the 140ft run on the extended Narrow Road. They slow for curves and junctions and then pull away again. The models will go round flat out but it just isn't as much fun. When they arrive, they get shunted and the locos go to shed. It is possible to build a railway that gives more than one type of operation. Of course it is hopelessly unrealistic as these expresses travel from one terminus to the other which is less than 2 scale miles away but what the heck, we enjoy it and we just pretend that they are travelling much further!

I'm in total agreement, Tony,

 

Indeed, not everything goes fast on LB (the slow, unfitted freights are restricted to a scale 25 mph), but it's such good fun to watch a 'Streak' - streaking through! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[CF MRC]

I like seeing trains in a prototypical location running at the correct speed. It is certainly slower than you think - which shows up especially well when you video them. On CF we generally keep the trains running at a slow pace as they are either working hard climbing Holloway Bank or slowing for the Cross.  However, it is also good to have a bit of variety of speeds with the shorter trains out accelerating the heavy mainline expresses. 

 

I can easily imagine myself looking along a boiler when operating from each end, looking at the line ahead, slowly accelerating as we tackle the climb up through Belle Isle. 

 

Tim

[thegreenhowards]

2 hours ago, john new said:

Hornby D 3-rail laid flat was excellent for the standards involved.  You slowed for corners but flat out on straights even through points they stayed on. Plenty of weight where it was needed helped. Also, courtesy of the spoon pickups very reliable running.  Have we improved on scale outline, yes, ease of using three rail wiring over two rail and reliable running (r-t-r) arguably  no. 

That was the point I was trying to make. You explained it much more comprehensively though!  Basically the courser the standards, the more you can get away with. Tony’s track is quite unusual in allowing good fast running on finescale track.

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

'A career in modern day politics might have suited you, Tony.'

 

Would it?

 

Despite my numerous faults, I do tell the truth as I see it; though it might not be what folk always want to hear. 

 

Speaking of politics, I was once canvassed by a politico on my doorstep in Wolverhampton (his party is irrelevant) where I was asked 'Can we count on your vote in the forthcoming elections?' I answered, 'Of course. All you have to do is satisfy three requirements for me'. 'What are those?'

 

'One: immediate reinstatement of corporal punishment in schools to counter the rampant indiscipline in some establishments.

Two: immediate reinstatement of capital punishment for the murderers of children, and any members of the forces of law and order.

Three: immediate expulsion of any illegal immigrants if they commit crimes here'. 

 

He just looked dumbstruck. 

 

A career in modern politics for me? You're kidding, of course. 

 

And, was I ignoring the subject? I thought I was expanding on it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony

 

I have never had a person seeking public office knock on my door. I hope one someone will as I dying to tell them that I will vote for them, irrespective of which party. I will also add (and this is true) "I have never voted for anyone who has won, so best of luck."

[grahame]

27 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Tony’s track is quite unusual in allowing good fast running on finescale track.

 

Can OO be considered 'finescale'? I always thought that the gauge needed to be close to scale to be termed that. I was under the impression that finescale was a set of standards closer to scale than the common commercial offering such as 2mm (using 9.42mm gauge) and P4 (18.83mm gauge) rather than N (9mm gauge) and OO (16.5mm gauge). Perhaps the rail height (code) also has something to do with it.

 

Mind you isn't it all a bit beyond the point of railway modelling and actually bothering to construct a model layout. So long as you make the effort, the track (and wheel) standards tend to be a personal choice and dependant on time, ability and funds. Just so long as the layout is personalised with some modelling effort, looks good and works well.

 

G

[RBAGE]

57 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

That was the point I was trying to make. You explained it much more comprehensively though!  Basically the courser the standards, the more you can get away with. Tony’s track is quite unusual in allowing good fast running on finescale track.

You should expect no less than reliable running on trackwork built by a professional.

The vast majority of modellers have to rely on their own efforts.

Yes, Norman Solomon's efforts are to be admired but don't be too disappointed if you can't match the quality of his work.

 

[PMP]

36 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Can OO be considered 'finescale'? I always thought that the gauge needed to be close to scale to be termed that. I was under the impression that finescale was a set of standards closer to scale than the common commercial offering (Snip)

‘Finescale’ doesn’t actually mean anything in practical terms though. Most people I know consider it more a state of mind or ethos than a set of standards. It’s hard to pin down, but I know it when I see it. Geoff Taylor’s Penmaenpool is OO and definitely ‘finescale’, but allows RTR equipment to work on it.

 

[stewartingram]

On 22/07/2019 at 06:02, 45568 said:

Andy, I do not normally post my work here but you may be interested in this Bec J17 I built around 20 years ago.

It has a Wills chassis, the replacement for the Tri-ang 0.6.0, and I think a DS10? Looking at her now, there is still room for a few finishing touches, but I think she catches the look of the real thing.

 I can remember the Bec kit being announced, 1960 I think it was, and the front cover of the ' M R Constructor' having one in a snow scene!

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

Sorry to go back a bit to resurrect this, but I wonder if anyone can help me please?

I too had a Bec J17, on the then new Wills etched "Triang" chassis. I sold it on many years ago though. But I still have my original Bec J17 on a proper Triang chassis - my 1st loco kit! Having seen others efforts with the kit, I want to give it a going over.

I've looked on the SEF website and found no mention of this chassis, so I presume it has either been dropped, or morphed into a "specific" chassis for some kit that has been upgraded. Does anyone know? Or maybe there is another kit from someone else that will do the job - bearing in mind the Triang dimensions.

I don't really need the wheels, motor or gearbox,  just the frames and rods.

 

Stewart

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, thegreenhowards said:

That was the point I was trying to make. You explained it much more comprehensively though!  Basically the courser the standards, the more you can get away with. Tony’s track is quite unusual in allowing good fast running on finescale track.

Andy,

 

Compared with the likes of P4, LB's track and wheels are a lot coarser than would be tolerated in the finest gauge.

 

Eddie Bourne of St. Merrin fame popped round a week ago, and he couldn't believe how fast I ran some of the trains on LB (my showing off, of course). That said, no real railway could have driven its trains so fast around the end curves. The minimum radius on the main line (out of sight) is three feet. What does that equate to on the real thing? A dockyard curve? A colliery curve? Maximum speed with an 0-4-0T, with continuous checkrail? 5 mph? I was driving some trains around them at well over a scale mile a minute! Again, showing off. But, it shows it can be done. Where I take issue with some P4 models (not Eddie's work) is where one cannot get a small loco on a light train at slow speed to travel over plain track over a short distance without it derailing. 

 

Once again, each to their own and horses for courses.............................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

4 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

Sorry to go back a bit to resurrect this, but I wonder if anyone can help me please?

I too had a Bec J17, on the then new Wills etched "Triang" chassis. I sold it on many years ago though. But I still have my original Bec J17 on a proper Triang chassis - my 1st loco kit! Having seen others efforts with the kit, I want to give it a going over.

I've looked on the SEF website and found no mention of this chassis, so I presume it has either been dropped, or morphed into a "specific" chassis for some kit that has been upgraded. Does anyone know? Or maybe there is another kit from someone else that will do the job - bearing in mind the Triang dimensions.

I don't really need the wheels, motor or gearbox,  just the frames and rods.

 

Stewart

Stewart,

 

SE Finecast still do a 'generic' 0-6-0 chassis (I've test-built one for Dave Ellis). It's in etched nickel silver and very good. 

 

The problem is, I don't know the wheel-spacing (it's asymmetrical). What's the spacing on a J17, given that the original BEC J17 was designed around a Tri-ang Jinty chassis?

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Wright]

32 minutes ago, RBAGE said:

You should expect no less than reliable running on trackwork built by a professional.

The vast majority of modellers have to rely on their own efforts.

Yes, Norman Solomon's efforts are to be admired but don't be too disappointed if you can't match the quality of his work.

 

It's a two-way thing as well.

 

Great track, but badly-built locos and stock are still going to produce something that doesn't work well, no matter how good the permanent way might be. 

 

'You should expect no less than reliable running on trackwork built by a professional.'

 

I've had visiting locos and stock which fall off all over the place on LB!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[stewartingram]

I've just had a quick measure, I make it (from the front) 31 + 33mm.

 

Stewart

[RBAGE]

2 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

It's a two-way thing as well.

 

Great track, but badly-built locos and stock are still going to produce something that doesn't work well, no matter how good the permanent way might be. 

 

'You should expect no less than reliable running on trackwork built by a professional.'

 

I've had visiting locos and stock which fall off all over the place on LB!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Yes but professionally built trackwork is a start point that many will never have the opportunity to benefit from.

 

The best built loco will suffer on badly built or layed track.