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

3 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

Well it would not be the first time that works were instructed to use up supplies of paint before changing to a new livery.  Given the post war austerity, I could see that if there were stocks of the blue paint it would have been first choice.  

The new livery had not been decided on then so all new and overhauled stock was being turned out in company colours but without the company markings and in some cases with BR Gill Sans numbers and lettering. The first batch of Thompson restaurant firsts were an example. Mock teak livery but BR lettering.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

Worsley works produce etches for some of the streamline stock. The West Riding and jubilee carriages, from memory.

Thanks, that was also mentioned by another member on this thread. At least it's one potential source but they seem only to be available for the full 8-car set whereas only four carriages' worth are needed for the two twins I have in mind. It would be beyond my skill level to build carriages around them whereas I know I can do a Mailcoach kit as I built one a long time ago, which I no longer have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Mike,

 

apologies for the protracted reply, the thread moves fast but I have finished the roof. Unfortunately, I seem to have accidentally deleted the original roof folder, however I did find two images that illustrate the basic idea. You can see there is a base plate, cut out to access the interior, A set of transverse formers, that conform to the end profile and a set of longitudinal strengtheners, some out of site, The roof frame is laid on it's back and tack glued to a sheet of 20 thou plasticard and left to dry. The sheet is wrapped around the transverse sections, glueing as you go and attached to the base plate. You need excess sheet to get a good grip and hold it in place while the glue drys. The excess is then cut of and the process of filing of the remainder is in progress in the first image. You can see that I was able to salvage the original transverse pieces from the original roof.

 

The end profile buts up to the brass end of the carriage.

 

A couple of coats of undercoat are applied and rubbed down to get a smooth finish and the roof is attached to the carriage.

 

925931372_B7Neroofundercoat.jpg.49395d3aab870e8ac42f56485e19102d.jpg

 

The finished roof, painted, gubbins attached and cornice and ends retouched in.

 

1695171368_BT7roof.jpg.e0ac38068560a84d37538b22790bb0c5.jpg

 

 

 

 

Andrew,

 

That is quite simply exquisite! How long does a coach like that take you?

 

Andy

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

2 hours ago, grahame said:

 

It shouldn't be a problem if content overlaps - it already does on many threads on RMweb. And it is perfectly acceptable to bookmark as a favourite, visit and post on multiple threads on RMweb. I don't see why anyone would or should be excluded from it as with WW.

 

For me it's a great idea to start a separate thread on Retford. That way all info, pics, development and comment about it would be in one place rather than spread around various threads or interspersed amongst other topics in WW.

 

 

If a layout like "Retford", especially at the moment, isn't worth its' own thread, then I don't know what is. The variety of rolling stock, operational interest and ongoing development would seem to be exactly what most modellers look for, even if the location and timescale are not their own preference. I would have though a discrete thread would encourage rather than discourage interest in the layout.

 

Quite why it would lead to folk leaving Wright Writes is a mystery to me. Surely most of us follow several threads, at least occasionally? The "Retford Mob" are habitual posters here anyway, on a variety of subjects. 

For me, the scope of the topics is the attraction of WW,(though, personally, I can do without the cricket, English grammar, and schoolboy reminiscences (unless they are railway related)). I accept others wont agree with that.

 

As an example ,without WW, how else would we have known about the Mike Trice V2?,  Here is mine, 

IMG_20200803_082351.jpg

  • Like 11
  • Agree 4
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, rowanj said:

The "Retford Mob" are habitual posters here anyway, on a variety of subjects. 

 

I think you'll find that most of the hard core Retforders as defined by the regular Thursday group or those that could be seen as part of the Retford Group demoing at exhibitions such as Nottingham and the EM expos are not on RMweb. Lurkers maybe, habitual posters, definitely not.

 

P

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

1 hour ago, thegreenhowards said:

Andrew,

 

That is quite simply exquisite! How long does a coach like that take you?

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy,

 

that is very kind of you to say

 

I haven't a clue, I work to deadlines but there is no pay for this stuff, pure love or sometimes hate. I just keep chugging away and something develops.

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

I think you'll find that most of the hard core Retforders as defined by the regular Thursday group or those that could be seen as part of the Retford Group demoing at exhibitions such as Nottingham and the EM expos are not on RMweb. Lurkers maybe, habitual posters, definitely not.

 

P

I have no idea who they are, or how many and didn't mean the term to be pejorative - all I was saying. or implying ,was that those who had posted on the subject of Retford's salvation and future were usually those who posted on other subjects too, so were unlikely to "jump ship" if Retford had its' own thread.  This will be my last word on the subject.

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

10 hours ago, Headstock said:

Going back to when the thread was about making things for yourself. Surely a layout like Retford has the talent in droves to build this sort of stuff and not be reliant on Hornby wishlisting?

Good evening Andrew,

 

I don't think anyone suggested that (in future) Retford should be reliant on RTR (from wish-lists - which I find tedious) or any manufacturers. It never was in the past, and I can't see it happening henceforth.

 

Other layouts might, but not any that I'm involved with (however small my input).

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Andrew,

 

I don't think anyone suggested that (in future) Retford should be reliant on RTR (from wish-lists - which I find tedious) or any manufacturers. It never was in the past, and I can't see it happening henceforth.

 

Other layouts might, but not any that I'm involved with (however small my input).

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Although Roy was quite happy to use RTR stock where it fitted the bill. How many Bachmann Mark 1s are there on Retford? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Andrew,

 

I don't think anyone suggested that (in future) Retford should be reliant on RTR (from wish-lists - which I find tedious) or any manufacturers. It never was in the past, and I can't see it happening henceforth.

 

Other layouts might, but not any that I'm involved with (however small my input).

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

as I have already said, Retford is none of my business, I promise not discuss it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Chuffer Davies said:

I can’t personally see the advantage of starting a new thread.  This thread, whilst hosted by Tony (W), is not limited to Little Bytham nor is it solely the domain of Sir.  Many of the contributors here and the topics covered would undoubtedly overlap if there were a new thread.  In fact, would a new thread actually result in a migration of contributors away from WW to the new Retford thread?  I think it might.


What do others think?

 

Regards,

Frank

Good evening Frank,

 

For my part, I'm delighted that Retford is being discussed on Wright Writes, and I'd hope it will continue.

 

If a specific Retford thread were to be started (in layout topics?), who would instigate it? I don't think anyone would have the right to but Sandra, so it would be up to her. 

 

It could be that there are many who don't know that Retford is being featured here, and might pick it up in the layouts' section. However, my personal experience of RMweb is that it's quite parochial in places, with many members only sampling a few threads.  Thus, knowing that Retford is being featured here there'd be no need to 'migrate'.

 

I've said on many occasions that WW is not my 'property', neither is it just a vehicle to feature LB. I'd venture to state that the standard of personal modelling shown on here over the getting-on-for 2,000 pages now is of the highest standard (abstracting myself), and Retford really adds to that. 

 

And (and I'm genuinely making this point), I don't see WW as 'scoring points' by being very, very active (thus increasing the page count, which, to some folk seems to be important). It's very, very active because the contributors are all modellers, with personal modelling stories to tell. And Retford's being saved is some story! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

  • Like 11
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

as I have already said, Retford is none of my business, I promise not discuss it again.

Good evening again Andrew,

 

Your comments on a variety of subjects are always welcome.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today was the first time since lockdown that a degree of 'normality' returned to Little Bytham.

 

It was actually operated again!

 

1161937798_GeoffandRay.jpg.93c910e0f502cc338037592d0907a64d.jpg

 

Good friends Geoff West and Ray Chessum arrived and we ran the railway. As can be seen, social distancing was observed and the layout worked (almost) perfectly. Apart from my not setting a road correctly, the sequence was run through in must have been a record time (around two and a quarter hours). Thanks gents for your diligence. I say 'almost', because two of the signals decided to stick and had to be 'wiggled' before they'd work again. The wiggling doesn't seem to have been entirely successful because trying them later, one stuck again. It would seem that the Viessmann solenoids (despite their now being protected against burning out) will not be the means of operating Bytham's signals in future. Graham Nicholas has valiantly replaced the over 100% failure of them in the last few years, but it's just throwing good money after bad. I cannot tolerate things not working reliably and consistently. 

 

If you're reading this, Tony Gee, then I have a commission for you with regard to installing servos to operate the signals. 

 

Running through Bytham's sequence today set my thoughts on what makes it 'successful'. It's based on some of the appropriate PTTs and the WTTs (though is only really a tiny sample), and results in around 60 train movements (with shunting) which should take about two and a half hours. Granted, today only one of the pick-ups shunted (though the other ran) but between two and two and a half hours (continuous) running should see it through. Which is enough in my view. Of course, what was paramount was that we all thoroughly enjoyed ourselves (we were joined by a third mate later for a time - at a distance!). There was no pressure, and a really good time was had by all. What more could one ask of an operating sequence? 

 

 

  • Like 15
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
  • Round of applause 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

Although Roy was quite happy to use RTR stock where it fitted the bill. How many Bachmann Mark 1s are there on Retford? 

You're quite right, Robert,

 

And I should have been more specific. 

 

I suppose I was comparing Retford with some other (often high-quality) layouts which are far more RTR-dependent. In some cases almost totally so.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Mick was talking about the twins, in reply to Roberts post. You know that is the truth.


This is the truth, as uncomfortable as it might be for you.

FE2B547A-0F2D-4ACA-A9C4-627A13BDEF43.jpeg.261a29772adcd8e32210770a96238f80.jpeg
 

Endex.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

I suggested a "Retford" thread on RMWeb to Roy once.

 

Anybody want to guess the response?

 

It is probably enough to say that I kept most of my anatomy and the thread didn't happen.

 

He had a number of concerns, including too many people knowing too much about what was going on when he preferred much of what went on to be "under he radar" and also that he thought that too much exposure would lessen the impact when the completed layout was finally revealed.

 


Interestingly whilst on your sabbatical there was an event which made Roy postpone running days for a while.  You’re quite right re Roy’s reluctance to over expose the layout during its construction, and whilst the running days were on hold I suggested that if there were a read only blog page available, he could put occasional progress pictures up so those interested could see how things were going, and also information requests for images etc of specific areas of interest. 
 

I must have caught him off balance as he agreed to it, and the Retford Wordpress blog page was established. We never got round to any entries, and unfortunately I’ve deleted the log in and associated emails between Roy and myself on it. 
 

Re who would set up a thread here, anyone can. It would obviously make sense to have the new owners blessing on it and perhaps input if she so desired. The layout clearly generates interest and it having a dedicated thread almost certainly wouldn’t detract from this thread, there’s a natural synergy between both layouts in my opinion.  The key element though is how much ‘publicity’ Sandra decides the project should have. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PMP said:


This is the truth, as uncomfortable as it might be for you.


 

Endex.

 

Nah, it's kids stuff. I'm not uncomfortable. Endex, should I salute?

Edited by Headstock
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, PMP said:


Interestingly whilst on your sabbatical there was an event which made Roy postpone running days for a while.  You’re quite right re Roy’s reluctance to over expose the layout during its construction, and whilst the running days were on hold I suggested that if there were a read only blog page available, he could put occasional progress pictures up so those interested could see how things were going, and also information requests for images etc of specific areas of interest. 
 

I must have caught him off balance as he agreed to it, and the Retford Wordpress blog page was established. We never got round to any entries, and unfortunately I’ve deleted the log in and associated emails between Roy and myself on it. 
 

Re who would set up a thread here, anyone can. It would obviously make sense to have the new owners blessing on it and perhaps input if she so desired. The layout clearly generates interest and it having a dedicated thread almost certainly wouldn’t detract from this thread, there’s a natural synergy between both layouts in my opinion.  The key element though is how much ‘publicity’ Sandra decides the project should have. 

Good morning Paul,

 

Any decision is, of course, up to Sandra. It would be an act of incredible rudeness for someone else to set up a Retford thread in my opinion; unless it was about the prototype or about another layout.

 

Roy (naturally) was very sensitive about 'security'. Who wouldn't be? I am. I know when I'd be at shows with him where we were both demonstrating/operating layouts (independently) he was always twitchy about leaving his masterpiece. 

 

Part of the (potential) problem was that the layout (and its location) became well-known through the number of open days (where over a 100 visitors might be in attendance). Not all were as honest as we'd  like to think our 'guests' should be (the theft of a couple of locos, and some small tools on one such occasion proved that!). Word of mouth would subsequently certainly increase the number of folk who knew about Retford.

 

It puzzles me at times as to how naive some folk are about 'security'. Nearly two years ago, I was astonished at the number of folk who commented about the fact that Mo and I would be in Australia for nearly three weeks. I admit, it wasn't a secret, but I only mentioned about it on our return. Andy York very sensibly removed a few of those 'advertising' posts. 

 

It's also known that I'll be at shows (that comes with the territory), but I never say beforehand (unless it's linked with an article), only 'reporting' about it when we return. 

 

Everyone must be wise with regard to security (both Retford's home and Bytham's home are well-alarmed), but as one becomes 'known' in the hobby then folk find out, and not all are honest. Ironically (or is it ironic?) the more a modeller's work becomes well-known, the less chance there is of selling stolen items on. Whichever low-life nicked that scratch-built Retford B1 must have known that he/she could never sell it on the open market. 

 

In an ironic way, kit-built/scratch-built items by well-known modellers might actually be safer at shows than run-of-the mill items (though never be complacent). I recall a sinking heart feeling when arriving at one show one morning (where WMRC was exhibiting Stoke Summit) to be told that it had been broken into overnight. 'Please check!'. Nothing had been touched on Stoke, but new RTR boxed items had disappeared from traders' stands. A similar thing happened at Quorn last year, where only easy-to-dispose-of RTR items were the target!

 

Stuff like that is easy to shift, but (as in my own case) most kit-built/scratch-built items will have been photographed (and, in many cases, those pictures will already have been seen in the press and/or on the likes of here). The fact that they're well-known makes them less-easy to move on, though there are always those odious types who'll 'steal to order' as it were. 

 

As I suggest, security in all its forms should be in all modellers' minds. As one becomes well-known in the hobby (as Roy was), then that's the balance I'm afraid - the element of risk increases. I've photographed some layouts where the owner/builder has sworn me to secrecy as to where it is and to whom it belongs. In some cases I've even written the article, or the owner uses an assumed name. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited by Tony Wright
typo error
  • Like 6
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Paul,. 

 

In an ironic way, kit-built/scratch-built items by well-known modellers might actually be safer at shows than run-of-the mill items (though never be complacent). I recall a sinking heart feeling when arriving at one show one morning (where WMRC was exhibiting Stoke Summit) to be told that it had been broken into overnight. 'Please check!'. Nothing had been touched on Stoke, but new RTR boxed items had disappeared from traders' stands. A similar thing happened at Quorn last year, where only easy-to-dispose-of RTR items were the target!

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 


Hi Tony, Thank you, I think you’re on the mark with your previous post. Ref the section quoted above, without scaremongering there were a few examples of display, and layout stock being taken a couple of years ago. They were reported here and elsewhere, ( one of mine was taken), since then I’ve been very careful at shows regarding stock and equipment security. With smaller layouts. I obviously have it easier than larger layouts owners. As far as I know non of the stolen items have ever surfaced. It certainly gave me a rude awakening.

brgds

Edited by PMP
Spellin
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I have an involvement with a slightly smaller (50' x 18'), and more southerly-located layout than Retford.

 

IMHO, the availability of appropriate r-t-r stock (especially for items required in large quantities) is to be welcomed, so long as it is made to the required standard, or can readily be brought up to it. On any large layout, one is seldom much less than a yard away from the trains and only the fiddle-yard operators get close enough to notice what's what!

 

Modelling time is an important factor, too. Time that can be more usefully expended on things that must be made than commonplace items that can be adequately provided commercially. There might also be an issue in finding  enough people interested in producing (say) a few dozen Mk.1s, 100+ 16-ton minerals, or a string of Presflos, to a sufficient (and uniform) standard, when almost everybody will assume they are Bachmann anyway!  

 

R-t-r can also provide for "plausible substitution", allowing operation to commence/continue whilst the absolutely correct items are "pending", e.g. running additional Mk1 sets that may be a bit "late" for the chosen period on specific services. 

 

Unless (as in the case of Retford, LB etc.) one has a particular attachment to the location, I've always had the nagging feeling that it's rather wasteful of effort and space to model a station at all if one is only interested in "watching trains go by" rather than working it prototypically. The likes of Stoke summit can offer much more effective use of both.

 

I also consider the "Exhibition Creed" that dictates something must always be moving can, all too easily, become ingrained even in those of us who savour the occasional stillness that fell over the busiest of stations.  

 

John

 

 

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
42 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Time that can be more usefully expended on things that must be made than commonplace items that can be adequately provided commercially.

That is the heart of the matter as far as I'm concerned.

Edited by St Enodoc
  • Like 2
  • Agree 7
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...