Wright writes.....

[Chamby]

7 minutes ago, CF MRC said:

Does 60070 have a spelling mistake in its name “Gladiat*or?
 

Tim

 

Non, c’est Gladiateur.

 

[31A]

10 hours ago, Buhar said:

It is a bit of a pet-hate of mine, the idea that every weathering job, regardless of the area of operation, has to feature lime streaks. 

 

I agree; I think 60070 is the only loco I've painted such a streak on and also think it is a bit of a cliche on weathered models, but looking at pictures of A3s like those Tony posted earlier, it struck me how often they seemed to have a streak down the firebox.  I'm sure you're right about it being connected with the kind of water, but I wondered whether it might be connected with water treatment chemicals which were sometimes added to loco feed water?

 

[31A]

50 minutes ago, Chamby said:

 

Non, c’est Gladiateur.

 

 

Bien súr.

 

[t-b-g]

10 hours ago, uax6 said:

 

Funny you should mention the Singer Sewing machine. I spent a tenner on a hand cranked one a couple of years back for the daughter, and I regularly seem to get it out to repair items of clothing. Her pair of tracksuit bottoms for school yesterday (They had been worn once and the stitching had come apart) and then three pairs of hi-vis orange work trousers that needed odd repairs too.

 

Parts are easy to get hold of and it really does purr like a sawing machine. Every home should have one!

 

Andy G

 

Edit: Mine is a baby, its from about 1932, so hardly run in yet!

 

You set me thinking odd thoughts with that! Has anybody actually converted an old sewing machine into either a sawing or filing machine of some sort? Somebody must have tried something. 

[Andy Hayter]

58 minutes ago, 31A said:

 

I agree; I think 60070 is the only loco I've painted such a streak on and also think it is a bit of a cliche on weathered models, but looking at pictures of A3s like those Tony posted earlier, it struck me how often they seemed to have a streak down the firebox.  I'm sure you're right about it being connected with the kind of water, but I wondered whether it might be connected with water treatment chemicals which were sometimes added to loco feed water?

 

 

If as Tony has suggested, this is a problem more prevalent on the East Coast then it does point to the water quality, where much of the water was taken from hard water, chalk or, further north, limestone aquifers.

[t-b-g]

One thing we should remember is that the vast majority of colour photos were taken in the last few years of steam, when everything was being run down, neglected and if it stopped working, it got scrapped rather than repaired.

 

So we have nearly 200 years of railway history of which about 5 years is well covered by colour photography, when they were not at their best.

 

If you look back to the smaller number of photographs taken in the mid to late 1950s, rather than the early to mid 1960s, there is a big change in the state of things over that short a period.

 

So it is a bit of a trap to look at colour photos from 1963 and weather your locos for your 1955 layout based on how they looked.

 

Even in pre-grouping times, there is a big change in appearance from when the workforce went off to war in 1914/1915 through to grouping, compared to the days prior to WW1 when cleaners were plentiful and labour was at a cost the railways were happy to pay for.

 

In some respects, you should be able to almost tell a rough period for a layout from the state of the weathering as much as the liveries.

 

There is at least one layout where a superb modeller and great weatherer gave a number of locos a superb "end of steam" coat of rust and filth which then had to be gently "unweathered" to fit with the 1957 date of the layout.  

Edited November 7, 2019 by t-b-g

[Tony Wright]

12 hours ago, 31A said:

How come A3s always seemed to weep from the washout plugs and leave a nasty stain down the nice shiny paintwork?

 

Nice work Steve,

 

Thanks for posting.

 

I suppose because so many ER/NER sheds were in hard water areas then the weeps appear. That, and the fact that there weren't so many water softening plants as on the LMR for instance. 

 

I assume both A3s are modified Hornby? 60077 looks like one of the originals, complete with incorrect green-painted cab roof eaves. I can't tell if the area above the top beading on the tender is green (as supplied), but that should be black, too. I've mentioned this before, but bogie wheels?

 

I've taken a few shots of a selection of Bytham's weathered  A3s this morning - everything on the layout is weathered to some extent. 

 

 

This is an ancient Wills kit on top of a scratch-built chassis. After brush-painting it, I dropped some matt black into some satin varnish and then brush-painted a top coat of the mix, finally completed by dry-brush weathering to give that slightly 'oily' look. It rather shows its age (near 40)!

 

 

One of my modified Hornby A3s (which never get used). Renumbered/renamed/detailed by me, then beautifully-weathered by Tom Foster. Hornby's BR green at source never looks right to me. I must do something about that valve gear! 

 

 

This was an original Hornby A3, from which I've removed the German deflectors, added the extra handrails at the front, carved off the superfluous wiggly smokebox pipes on this side and (obviously) changed the bogie wheels. After I'd black-painting what was necessary, son Tom dusted it over with his airbrush to give that grimy uniformity. Again, the motion needs alteration. It took me a while to find this one in a drawer! 

 

 

I neither built nor painted this DJH A3, acquiring it by way of barter many years ago. After I'd detailed it (wiggly pipes), Tony Geary dusted it over with his airbrush. 

 

 

 

Another DJH A3 (ex-Charwelton and Stoke), this one built/painted by Alan Hammet. I think Tony Geary did the weathering (it was once his property), complete with limescale dribbles.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

[Chamby]

Hi Tony,

 

You often refer to the valve gear on the Hornby model requiring attention, can you explain a little more please?  In the first two of your photographs above, of a Wills and Hornby A3 respectively, the position of the valve gear appears almost identical and any differences look minimal to the untrained eye.  Why does the Hornby version rattle you so much?

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Phil

 

[Philou]

If I remember correctly, it's because they're 'stuck' in reverse gear .......

 

There's a lot of comment regarding valve gear much earlier in the thread.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

[micklner]

39 minutes ago, Philou said:

If I remember correctly, it's because they're 'stuck' in reverse gear .......

 

There's a lot of comment regarding valve gear much earlier in the thread.

 

Cheers,

 

Philip

They are in neutral position.

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, Chamby said:

Hi Tony,

 

You often refer to the valve gear on the Hornby model requiring attention, can you explain a little more please?  In the first two of your photographs above, of a Wills and Hornby A3 respectively, the position of the valve gear appears almost identical and any differences look minimal to the untrained eye.  Why does the Hornby version rattle you so much?

 

Thanks in anticipation,

 

Phil

 

Please look at the relative angles of the eccentric rod, Phil,

 

The front end on the Wills example is above horizontal (as it should be), whereas the Hornby one is below. This is caused by the expansion link being far too long at its bottom pivot. At only one small point in the gear's rotation should the front end of the eccentric rod be lower than the rear. With the Hornby model, it's like it all the time (or just about). It's particularly noticeable in motion - it just looks weird; hence my desire to alter it, though since I never use the two Hornby A3s I have, it's hardly a priority.

 

The problem has been discussed many times before. A few I know have corrected it, but most owners don't seem to care......................

 

Please look at the prototype images I posted on the previous page.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited November 7, 2019 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[Tony Wright]

Without wishing to prolong the issue of Hornby's A3 valve gear's principal fault, a few more examples.........

 

 

 

This was the donor loco for 60054 (complete with A4 boiler - a fantastic piece of attention to detail by Hornby). In this position, the front end of the eccentric rod should be a fair bit higher.

 

 

In this position, it looks ludicrous!

 

 

Not quite so bad in this position, but still wrong. 

 

 

And still wrong here.

 

It spoils an otherwise most-worthy model in my opinion.

 

[petrovich]

On 06/11/2019 at 16:51, Tony Wright said:

'many look as if they have been driven across a ploughed field or a tank training course'

 

How true!!!!!

 

 

Some more examples of degrees of weathering.................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whether one would apply limescale streaks from the washout plugs on otherwise pristine locos is a moot point. Or 'burn' the lower smokebox door, or squirt emulsified oil all over the place, and so on.....

 

As always, observe prototype pictures.

 

And (all), please observe copyright restrictions.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I would say wonderful photos, and they are, but the first one is taken at either early morning or more probably late evening with that lovely orange glow and therefore everything looks brighter. I will try not to make this too technical but coal has a shine to it the same applies to coal dust, water with lubricating oil in it  etc.etc. therefore the light at the time and the film used (that old chestnut) will cause various degrees of reflection and absorption therefore you cannot trust the colour on any film, glass plate and even an early digital camera image. All will differ if taken at the same time, place and light conditions.

My advice is you model it, therefore you weather it as you see fit, do not worry about what others say. Social media and forum threads have a lot to answer for (apart from this one).

 

Regards

 

Peter

[31A]

Thank you, Tony, for the comments and the pictures of your A3s.  I'll stick my neck out and admit I think A3s are the best looking British steam locos!

 

Yes, the A3s are both Hornby, not very much modified - in fact 60077 is just weathered.  I did this in 2007 and at the time I don't think I was aware that the green parts of the cab roof and tender top were incorrect; I ought to go back and correct them.  60070 has been modified (in 2008) to the extent that a whitemetal (origins unknown) double chimney has been fitted - I wasn't able to get this to 'sit down' on top of the smokebox as well as I'd've liked.

 

Re. the bogie wheels, perhaps I have a blind spot for these but to be honest I can't see that much difference between the Hornby ones and Gibson.  Here's 60039 "Sandwich", which as you can see started out as "Windsor Lad" (I didn't line up the figure 9 very well did I!).   This one has got Gibson bogie wheels fitted, mainly as a result of your exhortations!  Also front frames, steps and reversing rod from the Brassmasters detailing kit.  The brass chimney is an old Crownline item, fitted mainly to help use up some bits from my bulging 'bits box', and the smokebox handles are a very nice item from GW Models (it's not the 'dart' - that's invisible inside the smokebox as long as the door is shut) - I don't know whether these are still available.  I've also cut away the front of the bogie to help it look a bit less cumbersome.  Weathering is intended to portray a reasonably clean 'working' loco.

 

Have you any suggestions for improving the appearance of the Hornby A3's expansion link?  As well as being too long, it looks disappointingly two dimensional, i.e. only the front is modelled with the radius rod passing behind it rather than through it, which gives it a rather disappointing appearance compared with for example, the Bachmann A1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

Apart from the length of lower part of the expansion link, a couple of other areas that let the Hornby valve gear down are the proportions of the crosshead and slidebar.

 

In real life, the slidebar has a fairly thick top plate and two lower bars, The horizontal slot visible on the outside is a lot narrower than the thickness of the metal. The Hornby has a wide slot and two tiny strips of metal.

 

It is hard to tell from a front 3/4 view but I do recall that some RTR locos had a return crank leaning the wrong way too. Forwards on one side and backwards the other when the crankpin is at the bottom.

 

If you want to do a proper job on the valve gear, with forked joints and correct thickness of parts, it is possible but only a handful of people bother. Just look at any well made Finney kit to see what is possible.

[Headstock]

21 hours ago, Lecorbusier said:

I bought a hand driven one from 1911 of e-bay for a tenner .... stripped it down and refurbished it and am now using it to do the upholstery on my VW Camper ... excellent machine .... everything beautifully machined from steel and another couple of hundred years use left in it I would say.

 

...... before and after.....

 

Good evening LeCB,

inspired by your diligent work, I got the old family Singer out last night. I had intended to do a bit of modelling but Instead I chased down the machines life history. Funny how you can have had something around for a lifetime and never looked into its past.

 

 It's very similar to yours and is in full working order. Back in the day, when teen fashions came from the streets rather than the shops, I even used it myself. It's a model 66, made in 1915, the same lotus pattern as your machine but with a box lid that fits and locks over the top and extension piece to the main bed as well as a sewing table that the whole lot sits on, it weighs a ton. At some stage, it was retrofitted with a Singer electric motor that provides power to a lamp mounted on the far side and drives the wheel via a belt and is operated by a connected foot peddle. The manual for the original machine and that for the add on electric motor, peddle and lamp are all present, as well as other assorted bits and bobs. Forget about this model railway lark, I may knock up a bit of sewing tonight!

[micklner]

Some Hornby A1/3 conversions, I agree re the valve gear, but is a very minor fault when you look at the overall Loco. However for what you can pick up damaged repairables from ebay they are a tremendous bargain. All of these had minor damage when bought. Repired and new numbers etc.

 

 

Mentioned earlier a couple of the beautiful Hornby L1's  , 9002 is a another damaged rebuild ,with corrected lamp Irons ( ignore the rear bogie wheel!) and missing Cab steps replaced with scratch ones and drainpipes and new numbers , both have etched worsksplates.

 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, 31A said:

Thank you, Tony, for the comments and the pictures of your A3s.  I'll stick my neck out and admit I think A3s are the best looking British steam locos!

 

Yes, the A3s are both Hornby, not very much modified - in fact 60077 is just weathered.  I did this in 2007 and at the time I don't think I was aware that the green parts of the cab roof and tender top were incorrect; I ought to go back and correct them.  60070 has been modified (in 2008) to the extent that a whitemetal (origins unknown) double chimney has been fitted - I wasn't able to get this to 'sit down' on top of the smokebox as well as I'd've liked.

 

Re. the bogie wheels, perhaps I have a blind spot for these but to be honest I can't see that much difference between the Hornby ones and Gibson.  Here's 60039 "Sandwich", which as you can see started out as "Windsor Lad" (I didn't line up the figure 9 very well did I!).   This one has got Gibson bogie wheels fitted, mainly as a result of your exhortations!  Also front frames, steps and reversing rod from the Brassmasters detailing kit.  The brass chimney is an old Crownline item, fitted mainly to help use up some bits from my bulging 'bits box', and the smokebox handles are a very nice item from GW Models (it's not the 'dart' - that's invisible inside the smokebox as long as the door is shut) - I don't know whether these are still available.  I've also cut away the front of the bogie to help it look a bit less cumbersome.  Weathering is intended to portray a reasonably clean 'working' loco.

 

Have you any suggestions for improving the appearance of the Hornby A3's expansion link?  As well as being too long, it looks disappointingly two dimensional, i.e. only the front is modelled with the radius rod passing behind it rather than through it, which gives it a rather disappointing appearance compared with for example, the Bachmann A1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't really have any suggestions for improving Hornby's A3 valve gear, Steve.

 

I know my friend Roy Vinter has done it, but I can't find the picture right now.

 

 

I suppose the best rendition is by Finney. This is an O Gauge example, pictured at Telford over a decade ago. I think the builder has since died. It might be worth asking Brassmasters if they'll sell you a 4mm set of A3 valve gear. 

 

 

I know Dave Ellis of SE Finecast will sell you a valve gear set for an A3. Though still simplified, it's much more realistic than Hornby's 'thin' rendition. Or, you could get a set from Andrew at Wizard/Comet. That's also very good. 

 

Tony Gee is right in saying that the return crank leans the wrong way on Hornby's A3 (I think on the LH side - the opposite to Bachmann's A1 and A2).

 

I use Markits LNER bogie wheels. There is a huge difference between them and Hornby's. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

[Lecorbusier]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening LeCB,

inspired by your diligent work, I got the old family Singer out last night. I had intended to do a bit of modelling but Instead I chased down the machines life history. Funny how you can have had something around for a lifetime and never looked into its past.

 

 It's very similar to yours and is in full working order. Back in the day, when teen fashions came from the streets rather than the shops, I even used it myself. It's a model 66, made in 1915, the same lotus pattern as your machine but with a box lid that fits and locks over the top and extension piece to the main bed as well as a sewing table that the whole lot sits on, it weighs a ton. At some stage, it was retrofitted with a Singer electric motor that provides power to a lamp mounted on the far side and drives the wheel via a belt and is operated by a connected foot peddle. The manual for the original machine and that for the add on electric motor, peddle and lamp are all present, as well as other assorted bits and bobs. Forget about this model railway lark, I may knock up a bit of sewing tonight!

Hi Andrew,

 

I am afraid I have now bought another one ... the same type but this time a treadle including cast iron base and table ... all for the princely sum of £18.00 - another resto job this time with my daughter who will take ownership.

 

BBC Scotland did this documentary on the factory ... complete with dedicated railway!

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00051z7/the-singer-story-made-in-clydebank

 

This is a great archive showing how we used to make things in the old days .... raw materials in one end, completed product out the other. It reminded me of some of the LMS archives about the making of a Steam Loco.

 

 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, micklner said:

Some Hornby A1/3 conversions, I agree re the valve gear, but is a very minor fault when you look at the overall Loco. However for what you can pick up damaged repairables from ebay they are a tremendous bargain. All of these had minor damage when bought. Repired and new numbers etc.

 

 

Mentioned earlier a couple of the beautiful Hornby L1's  , 9002 is a another damaged rebuild ,with corrected lamp Irons ( ignore the rear bogie wheel!) and missing Cab steps replaced with scratch ones and drainpipes and new numbers , both have etched worsksplates.

 

 

Evening Mick,

possibly one of the finest looking RTR models, even if they need a properly engineered pony truck. Much better valve gear than the Hornby A3 (I wouldn't call the fault with the Hornby A3 valve gear minor, major clanger) If I was nick picking on the L1, the lack of frames above the front truck, the colour of the green ones, not nice. Hornbys inability to do GNR chimneys and the chunky sliding roof ventilators would be early candidates for replacement if I had one.

[micklner]

29 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Mick,

possibly one of the finest looking RTR models, even if they need a properly engineered pony truck. Much better valve gear than the Hornby A3 (I wouldn't call the fault with the Hornby A3 valve gear minor, major clanger) If I was nick picking on the L1, the lack of frames above the front truck, the colour of the green ones, not nice. Hornbys inability to do GNR chimneys and the chunky sliding roof ventilators would be early candidates for replacement if I had one.

Evening Headstock,

A3

How to replace the valve gear ? ok lets be realistic, the only viable way is to replace the complete chassis , due to the Hornby screw crankpin design I would be amazed if there is a way to fit any other type of valve gear to the pins, plus possible clearance problems due to the wider depth of the Hornby driving wheels than scale wheels etc etc.  Would a Comet chassis  ( or other alternatives if any ? ) look that much better ?

L1

Ventilators are a tad high I agree, that is only because they were made to open, very easy to replace if needed ,as you have said. I have no problem with the Chimney or Colour personally. I have never read a criticism of any of those points on the L1 before tonight. The front bogie which have never had a problem with on the three I own 9001-3, the exact oppositte in fact, one of mine derails the rear bogie instead on occasions !!

https://www.lner.info/locos/L/l1thompson.php

 

How much would it cost however to build a kit and paint to the Hornby standard, (if one now existed, I have only ever seen the ancient A.B.S/ ECML whitemetal version ever listed on ebay ) that could better the Hornby version, I dread to think !!

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by micklner

[31A]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

It might be worth asking Brassmasters if they'll sell you a 4mm set of A3 valve gear. 

 

I know Dave Ellis of SE Finecast will sell you a valve gear set for an A3. Though still simplified, it's much more realistic than Hornby's 'thin' rendition. Or, you could get a set from Andrew at Wizard/Comet. That's also very good. 

 

Tony Gee is right in saying that the return crank leans the wrong way on Hornby's A3 (I think on the LH side - the opposite to Bachmann's A1 and A2).

 

I use Markits LNER bogie wheels. There is a huge difference between them and Hornby's. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

Thank you, Tony, some useful suggestions that I may follow up.  I've just remembered, somewhere stashed away I've got a couple of Jamieson packets of etches for LNER valve gear - bought from King's Cross Models - which might be worth investigation.

 

[DougN]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 It might be worth asking Brassmasters if they'll sell you a 4mm set of A3 valve gear. 

 

Be careful with that as they are all forked joints which will look brilliant but will be a big challenge. Check out MRJ 66 and 67 for a A3 build and the photos of the valve gear.

 

 I am working through a Finney V2 (see photo on page 1570) I have yet to get to the valve gear as I am working slowly through the chassis. Since the photo the leading truck has been put together.... there seems to be a lot of parts compared to a comet kit but it does look brilliant. The first thing that got me was there is a bar across the front at the bottom of the truck which is lying flat. I had not even noticed it until comparing photos. I am also doing a early version of the truck! 

[31A]

37 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Hornbys inability to do GNR chimneys and the chunky sliding roof ventilators would be early candidates for replacement if I had one.

 

9 minutes ago, micklner said:

 

Ventilators are a tad high I agree, that is only because they were made to open, very easy to replace if needed ,as you have said.

 

When the Hornby L1 came out, I asked a friend what he thought of it.  He is a retired loco driver who had worked on L1s, and also a pretty decent modeller, who had built one from an ABS kit.  He said it looked OK but what were the big lumps on the roof?  Which made me think about the ventilators and on a couple of mine I have replaced the chunky moulded sliding ones with rectangles of thin metal sheet; aluminium I believe cut from drinks cans.  Here is 67773 which has had the cab roof ventilators replaced; it was second hand and had the front and rear headlights missing on the fireman's side (which I have replaced) and the windshield glasses missing on the driver's side (which I haven't replaced).  I must admit I hadn't noticed anything wrong with the chimney, either!  I agree the valve gear is much better on these, although the radius rod still passes a long way behind the eccentric link rather than looking as though it passes through it.  Sorry about the front coupling but it has to pull trains backwards as well as forwards!

 

 

 

[Headstock]

7 minutes ago, micklner said:

Evening Headstock,

 

Ventilators are a tad high I agree, that is only because they were made to open, very easy to replace if needed ,as you have said. I have no problem with the Chimney or Colour personally. I have never read a criticism of any of those points on the L1 before tonight. The front bogie which have never had a problem with on the three I own 9001-3, the exact oppositte in fact, one of mine derails the rear bogie instead on occasions !!

https://www.lner.info/locos/L/l1thompson.php

 

How much would it cost however to build a kit  and paint to the Hornby standard, (if one now existed, I have only ever seen the ancient A.B.S/ ECML whitemetal version ever listed) that could better the Hornby version, I dread to think !!

 

Thanks Mick,

I wouldn't consider a kit for the L1. However, good though it is, I wouldn't except the Hornby L1 as it comes. Why? Simple, for very little cost and time I can get an even better L1, one closer to the real engine by improving the Hornby version. I would also consider modifying the Hornby locomotive to the prototype configuration as a worthy and unique project. With regard to the truck, I demand that it should perform correctly under all circumstances. The application of simple engineering principals would insure that would be the case.