ScRSG Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 Tony, From your knowledge of the A4 tenders could you please list those with the extra strip on the tanks and any suggestions you may have as to modelling this? Ta Chas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff west Posted August 29, 2019 Share Posted August 29, 2019 2 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Our pleasure Geoff, Mo thinks that bungalow you both looked at in Swayfield has 'great potential'. Be great if you and your mum do move up this way. Regards, Tony. I think Mo is right, it could be made into a nice bungalow. There is certainly plenty of room for a shed. I think we should come up and have a proper look round, yes it would be great to move up your way. Regards, Geoff. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Tony Teague Posted August 29, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 29, 2019 2 hours ago, Tony Wright said: A photographic memory, Tony? Me? I have to wear my name tag at shows upside down, just so I can remember who I am! What's 'Lightroom'? I've never heard of it. My photographic filing system is very simple. Every model I own/have made has its own series of tiff pictures saved under its number. So, say, 60002 01 and so on. They're further cross-referenced by, say, Much-modified Bachmann A4 60002 01, or Wills A4 60014 01, and so on. When I want to find something, I merely type in 'search' on the computer and put in the number. They all then come up. I then just copy and paste them into another folder, select what I need, reduce the image sizes, save the images as jpegs then post them as appropriate on RMweb. Once done, I then empty the folder so as not to cram up the hard drive. Regards, Tony. I'm still impressed Tony - because your system at least relies upon you knowing which A4's you need to find pictures of! Oh - and Lightroom is the digital / software equivalent of a dark room. Tony 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 29, 2019 Author Share Posted August 29, 2019 1 hour ago, ScRSG said: Tony, From your knowledge of the A4 tenders could you please list those with the extra strip on the tanks and any suggestions you may have as to modelling this? Ta Chas With pleasure, Chas, Remember, some A4s did exchange tenders, but here's the BR list of all those A4s which (at one time or another) towed a tender with the extra strip at the base of the tank.............. 60001 60002; both 60001 and 60002 had streamlined non-corridor tenders with this feature. 60003 (possibly, with a corridor tender) 60006; with a corridor tender 60008; with a corridor tender 60009 (but not with every corridor tender she towed; maybe never) 60010 60011 60012 60013; with a corridor tender 60021 (but only when she towed a 1935 streamlined corridor tender) 60022 (but only when she towed a 1935 streamlined corridor tender) 60024 (only up until the last months of her life, when she then lost her corridor tender with the feature) 60026; with a corridor tender 60027 60031 I think this list is right (if my memory serves). Anyone finding mistakes, please advise. It's a feature which is so-rarely modelled on A4s, and I think it deserves highlighting. How do I represent it? by using 1.5 mm brass strip, soldered to the base of the tender's soleplate. I suppose for (lightweight) plastic tenders, Plastikard strip of appropriate size would do, glued on. Perhaps the following pictures might help.................... It's easy to see the strip on a streamlined non-corridor tender. And easy to see when it's not. It's more difficult to detect the strip on a corridor tender of full width. The easiest way to tell is that the base of the strip lines up with the base of the loco's valance. Like here. And here. No strip here, and the base of the valance is lower than the soleplate on the tender. The same here. The ends of the triangular outriggers supporting the tank are also visible. The strip covers these up. All of these above require the 'eye of faith', but I hope the detail is apparent. How do I know all this? Do you think I have some sort of condition? Please (all) observe copyright restrictions on these images. Regards, Tony. 2 1 13 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 29, 2019 Author Share Posted August 29, 2019 One more point regarding A4s................. As many know, I write quite frequently about them in BRILL, and always invite subsequent observations/criticisms on my observations. Much of what I write is often at odds with other published works; my having come to my own conclusions (which might not always be right). One chap scoffed at my conclusion of a date for a picture of 60031, claiming that it must have had electric warning flashes by 1961/'62. It didn't, until a bit later. Neither did 60002, and 60011 never received them at all (at least on the loco). And, what about the roller bearings on 60014's tender? Oh, those joys of loco-picking. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium t-b-g Posted August 29, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 29, 2019 (edited) On 26/08/2019 at 15:06, polybear said: An appeal to those clever and most knowledgeable people that frequent Tony's excellent thread - can anyone shed any light as to the origins of the following mouldings (Manufacturer and prototype) please? Another of those items collected at some long-forgotten exhibition in the dim and distant past.... Many thanks, Brian I have had a chat with a tame expert on such matters. The floor is a bit of a mystery but two Kirk kits were produced with markings on the floor to allow a motor bogie cut out. It certainly doesn't belong to the rest of the bits. The bogie centres are likely to be wrong for the Gresley carriage, so just shortening the floor may not give a good result. It may need altering in several places. The sides, ends and roof are very early Kirk and are indeed a 61' 6" Gresley full brake, which was very likely the first kit produced. They are early mouldings as the later ones had a central step moulded at each end on the curved portion of the roof and they also had a representation of the brackets for destination boards on he centre line of the carriage roof each side above the cantrail. Earlier mouldings didn't have these features. The early mouldings did not have anything like names and addresses moulded in like that, so it is likely that the floor is a much later component from a different manufacturer and may well have been produced under the present Cooper Craft ownership. Edited August 29, 2019 by t-b-g typo! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Barry Ten Posted August 29, 2019 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 29, 2019 50 minutes ago, Tony Wright said: One more point regarding A4s................. As many know, I write quite frequently about them in BRILL, and always invite subsequent observations/criticisms on my observations. Much of what I write is often at odds with other published works; my having come to my own conclusions (which might not always be right). One chap scoffed at my conclusion of a date for a picture of 60031, claiming that it must have had electric warning flashes by 1961/'62. It didn't, until a bit later. Neither did 60002, and 60011 never received them at all (at least on the loco). And, what about the roller bearings on 60014's tender? Oh, those joys of loco-picking. Sad as it might make me, I like to guess the year of the photos in Steam World, by not looking at the caption first. If nothing else, it encourages one to look closely at details. I've possibly mentioned this before, but in 40-odd years of looking at railway photos, I've never once seen a picture taken on my birthday (13/3/66). A week or so either side, but none at all on the day itself. Eventually I found some weather records for the UK in that period and discovered that there was a lot of rain around in mid March. Presumably there was no great incentive to go out taking photos of trains. Interesting perhaps to think that, even in the twilight years of steam, when photographers were in general out and about in large numbers, there may have been whole days, or even weeks, which are little documented. Al 3 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted August 29, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 29, 2019 4 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Picking up again on 'wonky' track, without the 'zoomed-in' effect, the dip quite isn't quite as noticeable. ... but the waggle of the second van as it drops into the dip is. Now that could look rather good - let's have video of a fitted freight going through at speed, shot from that angle! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium St Enodoc Posted August 30, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 hours ago, Barry Ten said: Sad as it might make me, I like to guess the year of the photos in Steam World, by not looking at the caption first. If nothing else, it encourages one to look closely at details. I've possibly mentioned this before, but in 40-odd years of looking at railway photos, I've never once seen a picture taken on my birthday (13/3/66). A week or so either side, but none at all on the day itself. Eventually I found some weather records for the UK in that period and discovered that there was a lot of rain around in mid March. Presumably there was no great incentive to go out taking photos of trains. Interesting perhaps to think that, even in the twilight years of steam, when photographers were in general out and about in large numbers, there may have been whole days, or even weeks, which are little documented. Al At one time I considered setting a layout on the day that I was born - Saturday 16/6/56 - but in the end I decided that it was too restrictive - no Star, no gas turbines, no diesels, no chocolate and cream Mk1s, and so on - so I broadened things up to cover the whole of the 1950s (and, if I'm totally honest, a teeny weeny bit of 1960 so I can run the lovely Bachmann Mk1 TPOs). 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 (edited) 9 hours ago, Compound2632 said: ... but the waggle of the second van as it drops into the dip is. Now that could look rather good - let's have video of a fitted freight going through at speed, shot from that angle! It's been done. Last year. And the 'drooping' van isn't totally caused by its being on the dip. Its suspension's down (not that it has any suspension) at its leading end. Honestly! Regards, Tony. Edited August 30, 2019 by Tony Wright to clarify a point 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, St Enodoc said: At one time I considered setting a layout on the day that I was born - Saturday 16/6/56 - but in the end I decided that it was too restrictive - no Star, no gas turbines, no diesels, no chocolate and cream Mk1s, and so on - so I broadened things up to cover the whole of the 1950s (and, if I'm totally honest, a teeny weeny bit of 1960 so I can run the lovely Bachmann Mk1 TPOs). John, If I set my layout in the year that I was born (1946), there'd not be much which needed painting in pristine condition, except the brand new Thompson A2/3s. Just about every prototype picture from the year reveals everything filthy dirty, and still run down from the ravages of war. One shot which sticks in the memory is of the World speed record holder, in appalling condition, with just the number '22' crudely stencilled on the cabsides. At least I wouldn't have to engage the services of professional painters! There'd be no BR (yet) of course, nor Peppercorn's wonderful A1s, but perhaps the occasional new B1 to lift the gloom. I don't find the year I've chosen (1958) restrictive at all, with one huge exception - no Deltics! Still, LB being my trainset, Rule. 1 applies and I happily run these most-favourite of locos through a station demolished at least 18 months before they first appeared. I now run CITY OF LONDON as well, four years after the platforms disappeared forever! Regards, Tony. Edited August 30, 2019 by Tony Wright to clarify a point 6 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 (edited) The recent comments about 'dips in the track' set my mind working (as usual, slowly!) with regard to how uncompromisingly-cruel model railway photography can be. I suppose all photography can be 'cruel' (I'm reminded of an occasion one day when a parent questioned me as to why the school photograph of her daughter made her look fat, particularly in the face. I declined to comment, and fought back a giggle), but just when I think I'm getting somewhere with my modelling, the poor building and errors are revealed in crystal clarity. Just to show that the 'dip' isn't quite as bad as it appears in that earlier shot, I've taken a few more photos this morning.................. From a similar viewpoint to the one of the A4 posted yesterday, I agree the dip is apparent, but not so pronounced because that 'dodgy' van (the fourth vehicle in the train) is not on it. Look closely, that same van does lean forward. As to a container on a 'Conflat', well! That leaning-forward van is more apparent in tight perspective (vans with dodgy suspension were not unknown on the prototype). The dip is nowhere near as apparent in this shot. Despite my reluctance to indulge in too much Photoshoppery, I've taken out the areas under the bridge as well as the general background. The dip is hardly apparent at all from this angle. However, take a close look at that new V2 I've built. The footplate under the cab is not parallel to the central footplate section at all and the cab rainstrip is not parallel with the eaves! See what I mean about 'cruel' photography? I wonder if those errors will appear in the shot the model of 'me' has just taken! The dip can just be seen in front of this A2/2 on the Down 'Flying Scotsman'. It's actually at the end of a point. Of course, from 'normal' viewing angles, the dip can't be detected at all. Especially with another train hiding it! My dear old Jamieson hand-cut A2/1 has now just past 43 years of age. Odd, that I managed to get the footplates straight on this. Clearly, I've not 'improved' my modelling at all over the last four decades. I even painted this one! Oh, and the 'white stuff' appearing to emanate from 60508's chimney is actual limestone in the cutting! Edited August 30, 2019 by Tony Wright to clarify a point 18 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Popular Post AY Mod Posted August 30, 2019 Moderators Popular Post Share Posted August 30, 2019 I was talking to Tony a little earlier and we talked about pan shots. I mentioned that I'd had a quick play whilst photographing an O gauge layout yesterday and he suggested adding it to the topic. I don't regard such shots as having much illustrative value when photographing layouts but it just seemed opportune to do one. High speed blur would have looked odd with an 8F trundling along with loose minerals so the scale speed was dropped to about 25 mph. 1/30 @ f2.8 320 ISO for the base shot with added photofrippery afterwards. The layout is Leamington & Warwick MRS's 'Kimble' which will feature in BRM December just before it's first outing at Warley show in November. 27 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 Cruelty by photography again! The wire of the foreground fence hugely detracts from the image; exactly as it would in a photo of the real thing if there was bright new fence wire OOF in foreground. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 2 hours ago, AY Mod said: I was talking to Tony a little earlier and we talked about pan shots. I mentioned that I'd had a quick play whilst photographing an O gauge layout yesterday and he suggested adding it to the topic. I don't regard such shots as having much illustrative value when photographing layouts but it just seemed opportune to do one. High speed blur would have looked odd with an 8F trundling along with loose minerals so the scale speed was dropped to about 25 mph. 1/30 @ f2.8 320 ISO for the base shot with added photofrippery afterwards. The layout is Leamington & Warwick MRS's 'Kimble' which will feature in BRM December just before it's first outing at Warley show in November. You're much better at this kind of thing than I am, Andy! Regards, Tony. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allegheny1600 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 (edited) 23 hours ago, Tony Wright said: With pleasure, Chas, Remember, some A4s did exchange tenders, but here's the BR list of all those A4s which (at one time or another) towed a tender with the extra strip at the base of the tank.............. 60001 60002; both 60001 and 60002 had streamlined non-corridor tenders with this feature. 60003 (possibly, with a corridor tender) 60006; with a corridor tender 60008; with a corridor tender 60009 (but not with every corridor tender she towed; maybe never) 60010 60011 60012 60013; with a corridor tender 60021 (but only when she towed a 1935 streamlined corridor tender) 60022 (but only when she towed a 1935 streamlined corridor tender) 60024 (only up until the last months of her life, when she then lost her corridor tender with the feature) 60026; with a corridor tender 60027 60031 I think this list is right (if my memory serves). Anyone finding mistakes, please advise. It's a feature which is so-rarely modelled on A4s, and I think it deserves highlighting. How do I represent it? by using 1.5 mm brass strip, soldered to the base of the tender's soleplate. I suppose for (lightweight) plastic tenders, Plastikard strip of appropriate size would do, glued on. Perhaps the following pictures might help.................... It's easy to see the strip on a streamlined non-corridor tender. And easy to see when it's not. It's more difficult to detect the strip on a corridor tender of full width. The easiest way to tell is that the base of the strip lines up with the base of the loco's valance. Like here. And here. No strip here, and the base of the valance is lower than the soleplate on the tender. The same here. The ends of the triangular outriggers supporting the tank are also visible. The strip covers these up. All of these above require the 'eye of faith', but I hope the detail is apparent. How do I know all this? Do you think I have some sort of condition? Please (all) observe copyright restrictions on these images. Regards, Tony. Hi Tony, All, I hope I'm not breaking any copyright by quoting you here? These are absolutely superb pictures and make Sir Nigel's magnificent machines look particularly good. May I ask, please? Are these pictures from a book, if so which one? Also, my apologies if I've missed it as I have had to 'skip' multiple pages on here on occasion but what do you think of the various RTR 4mm models of A4s, please? Hornby, Bachmann and Dapol (Black Label?). I know that none will be highly rated for haulage but I'm thinking more of how well they capture the 'look' of the original, as exemplified by the above pictures. Finally, no - of course, you don't have a 'condition', just a healthy fascination of and love for the prototype! Best regards, John. PS The "search" function is useful, of course! I just found an early discussion from around Feb 2017 (page c.580) but I'd still like to know how they all compare (please!) Edited August 30, 2019 by Allegheny1600 Used search 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 30, 2019 Author Share Posted August 30, 2019 3 hours ago, Allegheny1600 said: Hi Tony, All, I hope I'm not breaking any copyright by quoting you here? These are absolutely superb pictures and make Sir Nigel's magnificent machines look particularly good. May I ask, please? Are these pictures from a book, if so which one? Also, my apologies if I've missed it as I have had to 'skip' multiple pages on here on occasion but what do you think of the various RTR 4mm models of A4s, please? Hornby, Bachmann and Dapol (Black Label?). I know that none will be highly rated for haulage but I'm thinking more of how well they capture the 'look' of the original, as exemplified by the above pictures. Finally, no - of course, you don't have a 'condition', just a healthy fascination of and love for the prototype! Best regards, John. PS The "search" function is useful, of course! I just found an early discussion from around Feb 2017 (page c.580) but I'd still like to know how they all compare (please!) They're not from a book, John, But several have been used in BRILL and others will be used. RTR A4s in OO? My opinions, of course. Current Hornby; the best by a long way. Tender-drive Hornby; awful, but will pull a house down! Bachmann; old tooling (derived from the Trix/Lilliput model of yore). Tender not very good at all. More powerful than Hornby's current model. Dapol. Everything for the DCC-ite (at a price). Is lamped up for express passenger trains only. Hornby-Dublo/Wrenn; best left to the collectors. I hope this helps. Regards, Tony. 4 1 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allegheny1600 Posted August 30, 2019 Share Posted August 30, 2019 Many thanks for your concise summary, Tony, it was just what I wondered. I must admit, I am being drawn to the eastern side of the country more and more. Cheers! John. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted August 31, 2019 Share Posted August 31, 2019 I'm not sure that experience of the many A4s tried on Grantham would put the Bachmann versions (few tried) above the Hornby loco-drive China-made versions (many tried) in the power stakes. Possibly the opposite, with the Hornby locos certainly having greater speed potential with a load. 2 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wright Posted August 31, 2019 Author Share Posted August 31, 2019 9 hours ago, gr.king said: I'm not sure that experience of the many A4s tried on Grantham would put the Bachmann versions (few tried) above the Hornby loco-drive China-made versions (many tried) in the power stakes. Possibly the opposite, with the Hornby locos certainly having greater speed potential with a load. Are the Grantham Bachmann A4s those with older split chassis, Graeme? My more recent experience is that the latest Bachmann A4 chassis is very powerful. More powerful (in terms of haulage capacity) than the more-recent Hornby equivalents. I wouldn't give the old Bachmann A4 chassis layout room. Regards, Tony. 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Izzy Posted September 1, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 1, 2019 Hello Tony, If I may be so bold as to say, it looks to me re the ‘dip’ at the barrow crossing that it is rather that the length of track/rail before it has lifted a bit, making a hump, the sleepers being proud of the ballast. It might be that it looks more pronounced if the end of the barrow crossing is just where there happens to be a rail joint so it gives here. Although it’s true photography can be very cruel at times I do find it’s an invaluable tool for checking whether things are okay like this in this age of digital when multiple shots are so relatively easy and low cost. Remember the days of Polaroid backs for view cameras to check things before taking a ‘proper’ shot? Izzy 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattingleycustom Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 (edited) Re the Golden Age A4 (60027), notwithstanding the errors with the tender detailing, what is going on with the running plate 'curve' and the boiler bands having differing levels of prominence - as you said for over £1,000 I would expect more, in fact I would expect perfection. Glenn Edited September 1, 2019 by mattingleycustom spelling errors 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
micklner Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 (edited) Something a bit smaller , short videos of my recent build a 3D body with a scratch built chassis of the ex NER Petrol Inspection Car . Edited September 1, 2019 by micklner 10 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gr.king Posted September 1, 2019 Share Posted September 1, 2019 13 hours ago, Tony Wright said: Are the Grantham Bachmann A4s those with older split chassis, Graeme? My more recent experience is that the latest Bachmann A4 chassis is very powerful. More powerful (in terms of haulage capacity) than the more-recent Hornby equivalents. I wouldn't give the old Bachmann A4 chassis layout room. Regards, Tony. Good point. The only Bachmann A4s I've seen on Grantham are the older split-chassis variety as far as I'm aware. I'd completely forgotten that a new chassis had been introduced, at notably increased cost, to go with the now rather outdated chunky body moulding and fantasy tender. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Compound2632 Posted September 1, 2019 RMweb Premium Share Posted September 1, 2019 On 30/08/2019 at 11:45, Tony Wright said: The recent comments about 'dips in the track' set my mind working (as usual, slowly!) with regard to how uncompromisingly-cruel model railway photography can be. I suppose all photography can be 'cruel' (I'm reminded of an occasion one day when a parent questioned me as to why the school photograph of her daughter made her look fat, particularly in the face. I declined to comment, and fought back a giggle), but just when I think I'm getting somewhere with my modelling, the poor building and errors are revealed in crystal clarity. Just to show that the 'dip' isn't quite as bad as it appears in that earlier shot, I've taken a few more photos this morning................. From a similar viewpoint to the one of the A4 posted yesterday, I agree the dip is apparent, but not so pronounced because that 'dodgy' van (the fourth vehicle in the train) is not on it. Look closely, that same van does lean forward. That leaning-forward van is more apparent in tight perspective (vans with dodgy suspension were not unknown on the prototype). However, take a close look at that new V2 I've built. The footplate under the cab is not parallel to the central footplate section at all and the cab rainstrip is not parallel with the eaves! See what I mean about 'cruel' photography? Don't get me wrong, I've become a fan of the dip. Perfection - even (or perhaps especially) in models of LNER locomotives - would destroy the illusion. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now