Wright writes.....

[Barry O]

when deciding the "new" OO layout in the Leeds Club we could have built a more local layout but it would have needed a lot of "new" stock. As we had 90+% of the stock required for Chapel en le Frith we went down that route. Time is a very precious commodity and gets more so as you get older. 

 

Other layouts have been transformed stock wise by the linking together of modellers who have been very happy to provide lots of stock "to help out" as they want to see the layout operate with the right stock and have either got it already or have built more stock to fill the Gaps.. (Grantham, Shap, Herculaneum Dock and Wentworth Juncton being some examples).

 

Baz

[TrevorP1]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

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. 

 

Agreed. By the time family life and other interests are taken into account I would perhaps be able to run a couple of engines and a few carriages. I might even have lost interest by now.

 

Having said that I look (hopefully) forward to the day when I can look at a photo of a train and think “OK then, I can get that coach from X and that from Y. I’ll build the rest”.

[Jesse Sim]

Thought I’d show a progress shot of the J10 rebuild.....

 

well here she is awaiting weathering and some other detailing, with a Parkside GW Banana Van-I had finished the transfers on that as well. 

[LNER4479]

19 minutes ago, TrevorP1 said:

I look (hopefully) forward to the day when I can look at a photo of a train and think “OK then, I can get that coach from X and that from Y. I’ll build the rest”.

100% in agreement and that is precisely how the train below was put together - nine Bachmann MkIs of the correct type, leaving me to concentrate on doing two Comet brass side overlay jobs to create the necessary full kitchen and third restaurant car (sixth and seven vehicles respectively). It's actually two coaches short of its prototypical formation but that's a sop partly to fiddle yard capacity and allowing the train to 'breath' within the landscape.

 

My priority will always be on building the layout - the trains provide the service that is being depicted, hopefully reasonably accurately.

 

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Barry O said:

modellers who have been very happy to provide lots of stock "to help out" as they want to see the layout operate with the right stock

In our world that probably started with Wallgate. Leeds Vic etc. perhaps less so but certainly Hartford Junction.

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Thought I’d show a progress shot of the J10 rebuild.....

 

well here she is awaiting weathering and some other detailing, with a Parkside GW Banana Van-I had finished the transfers on that as well. 

Looks good Jesse,

 

Well done!

 

Out of interest, yesterday I looked where your C2 might be. It's still at Heathrow, after over three weeks! So much for Parcel Force World Wide's 'promise' to deliver it in a week.....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Michael Edge]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

In our world that probably started with Wallgate. Leeds Vic etc. perhaps less so but certainly Hartford Junction.

We used to combine layouts in those days as well, Nick's Eyam was joined on to Wallgate once and Denroyd was joined on to the original version of Cwmafon. Borrowed stock is one of the reasons I've been forced to stick with 00 gauge rather than change to EM.

[St Enodoc]

25 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

We used to combine layouts in those days as well, Nick's Eyam was joined on to Wallgate once and Denroyd was joined on to the original version of Cwmafon. Borrowed stock is one of the reasons I've been forced to stick with 00 gauge rather than change to EM.

Yes, I remember Eyam + Wallgate but not Denroyd + Cwmafon funnily enough. Perhaps that was the year I was dragooned on to New Lydney...

[robertcwp]

On 03/08/2020 at 09:19, Major Clanger said:

A start had been made on fitting Sprat & Winkles to trains requiring to shunt, but some tweaking was still required, particularly to the newspaper train, as this had a tendency to divide on curves. There is also a mystery to the prototype operation of this train. It is advertised in the public timetable as a passenger train. When it arrives at Retford, it is required to back from the up platform to the up yard to detach or attach (possibly both), over a points that do not have a lock. Did all the passengers (probably not very many at 0430) have to get off? Were the points clipped and padlocked? Were blind eyes turned? I suggested to Roy that the train stayed in the platform and a shunting engine did the work, but the old railwaymen he had talked to said this was not the case, as no shunters had yet come off the shed at this time. Any ideas, anyone?

 

Would that have been the 1.50 am from Manchester London Road to Cleethorpes, which called at Retford 3.57 am to 4.12 am (1956 timings)?  If so, it detached three vans at Retford but did not attach any.  It took its time, not reaching Cleethorpes until 6.24 am.

[Major Clanger]

5 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

Would that have been the 1.50 am from Manchester London Road to Cleethorpes, which called at Retford 3.57 am to 4.12 am (1956 timings)?  If so, it detached three vans at Retford but did not attach any.  It took its time, not reaching Cleethorpes until 6.24 am.

Yes, that's the one. The obvious thing to do would be to just drop them in the platform, then the loco which takes out the train they are attached to (first one to Lincoln IIRC) could do the necessary. But Roy's info suggested otherwise.

[Major Clanger]

18 hours 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? 

A lot. But all have their roof ribs trimmed down. A start hadn't been made on renumbering, as there are quite a few with an M prefix, and probably some still with the same number too.

[robertcwp]

39 minutes ago, Major Clanger said:

A lot. But all have their roof ribs trimmed down. A start hadn't been made on renumbering, as there are quite a few with an M prefix, and probably some still with the same number too.

Bachmann Mark 1 roof ribs = high priority. Renumbering = lower priority as it's difficult to read the numbers when the train is on the layout at normal viewing distance. 

 

The Hornby Mark 1s have less prominent ribs on the roof. I shall seek Sandra's view on whether they are tolerable.  

[Tony Wright]

I think any 'sensible' modeller (those who build things rather than just buyers) will exploit what the RTR market has to offer. As has been noted, a lifetime is finite.

 

Regarding the likes of BR Mk.1s, I'd still only have a few complete passenger trains were it not for Bachmann's. There are over 90 on LB. However, none is as supplied. As Robert has mentioned above, there are things which need to be done to bring them 'up to standard'. My list includes............

 

1. Removal of the over-prominent roof ribs. This is vital - they are so gross, and because it's often the roofs we see first, the effect is ghastly. Yes, it takes time - it's odious and boring but it must be done. If I see a layout running Bachmann Mk.1s where this vital modification has not been done, I tend to turn away - unimpressed.

 

2. Removal of the original couplings, whether they be the tension-locks (ugh!) or the sort of pipes clipped into the pockets. Couplings must be on headstocks (not on bogies or collars) whether they be a discreet hook and bar (mine), screw shackles (which aren't right for gangwayed Mk.1s, anyway) or buckeyes. 

 

3. Weathering of roofs and underframes; essential, particularly the former.

 

4. Concertina gangways fitted. Little looks worse than huge gaps between adjacent cars, through which OUR hapless little passengers would fall and perish!

 

5. At the rear end of a train, the end board fitted, a buckeye dropped down (revealing a hook), a rear lamp and representation of the hoses.

 

6. Wheels changed; in fairness, unless the gauge needs to be altered, more-recent RTR wheelsets seem to be more-concentric, though I still change them. 

 

7. Cantrail carriage boards fitted (where appropriate).

 

8. Renumbering. I've done most on LB where there was duplication or where some had a 'W' prefix. Those with an 'M' prefix I've tended to leave because they weren't uncommon on the ECML. 

 

I've also used some of Hornby's Mk.1s. The roof ribs can be left alone (they're there but not over-prominent). The firm's BSOs have been most useful, complementing those I've made from kits. 

 

As for other ECML gangwayed carriages............

 

Hornby's Gresleys - a big no-no, unless they're donors. 

 

Bachmann's latest Thompsons. Excellent, though when will they become available in maroon?

 

Bachmann's older Thompsons. Only of any use as donors.

 

Ex-LMS carriages would appear on the ECML. I've used some of Hornby's and Bachmann's, but only after some of the mods listed above have been carried out. 

 

I think it's clear that only fools would shun what's available RTR in carriage stock. Since I don't believe anyone who posts on here is one, then it's a great idea to exploit what's on offer. But never just as-supplied. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[davidw]

23 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I think any 'sensible' modeller (those who build things rather than just buyers) will exploit what the RTR market has to offer. As has been noted, a lifetime is finite.

 

Regarding the likes of BR Mk.1s, I'd still only have a few complete passenger trains were it not for Bachmann's. There are over 90 on LB. However, none is as supplied. As Robert has mentioned above, there are things which need to be done to bring them 'up to standard'. My list includes............

 

1. Removal of the over-prominent roof ribs. This is vital - they are so gross, and because it's often the roofs we see first, the effect is ghastly. Yes, it takes time - it's odious and boring but it must be done. If I see a layout running Bachmann Mk.1s where this vital modification has not been done, I tend to turn away - unimpressed.

 

2. Removal of the original couplings, whether they be the tension-locks (ugh!) or the sort of pipes clipped into the pockets. Couplings must be on headstocks (not on bogies or collars) whether they be a discreet hook and bar (mine), screw shackles (which aren't right for gangwayed Mk.1s, anyway) or buckeyes. 

 

3. Weathering of roofs and underframes; essential, particularly the former.

 

4. Concertina gangways fitted. Little looks worse than huge gaps between adjacent cars, through which are hapless little passengers would fall and perish!

 

5. At the rear end of a train, the end board fitted, a buckeye dropped down (revealing a hook), a rear lamp and representation of the hoses.

 

6. Wheels changed; in fairness, unless the gauge needs to be altered, more-recent RTR wheelsets seem to be more-concentric, though I still change them. 

 

7. Cantrail carriage boards fitted (where appropriate).

 

8. Renumbering. I've done most on LB where there was duplication or where some had a 'W' prefix. Those with an 'M' prefix I've tended to leave because they weren't uncommon on the ECML. 

 

I've also used some of Hornby's Mk.1s. The roof ribs can be left alone (they're there but not over-prominent). The firm's BSOs have been most useful, complementing those I've made from kits. 

 

As for other ECML gangwayed carriages............

 

Hornby's Gresleys - a big no-no, unless they're donors. 

 

Bachmann's latest Thompsons. Excellent, though when will they become available in maroon?

 

Bachmann's older Thompsons. Only of any use as donors.

 

Ex-LMS carriages would appear on the ECML. I've used some of Hornby's and Bachmann's, but only after some of the mods listed above have been carried out. 

 

I think it's clear that only fools would shun what's available RTR in carriage stock. Since I don't believe anyone who posts on here is one, then it's a great idea to exploit what's on offer. But never just as-supplied. 

I'd heard a whisper maroon Thompsons would be announced today. Obviously a Chinese whisper. Pun unintended....

[jamie92208]

2 hours ago, Major Clanger said:

Yes, that's the one. The obvious thing to do would be to just drop them in the platform, then the loco which takes out the train they are attached to (first one to Lincoln IIRC) could do the necessary. But Roy's info suggested otherwise.

If it was a newspaper train then the papers would have to be unloaded usually then sorted and loaded i to local delivery vans. This was usually done across platforms and could take some time. Where would this have been done at Retford, across the platform or in a dock siding. There certainly doesn't appear to be enough time for three vans to be unloaded so could the train have detached them and sone other loco then put them away when empty.  I presume that, justvlike the famous Red Bank empties the various empty vans were collected by a return working later in the day. The Red Bank took the empties from three trains back to Manchester from IIRC Newcastle, Darlington and York and loaded to 21 vans.

 

Jamie

[Major Clanger]

4 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

If it was a newspaper train then the papers would have to be unloaded usually then sorted and loaded i to local delivery vans. This was usually done across platforms and could take some time. Where would this have been done at Retford, across the platform or in a dock siding. There certainly doesn't appear to be enough time for three vans to be unloaded so could the train have detached them and sone other loco then put them away when empty.  I presume that, justvlike the famous Red Bank empties the various empty vans were collected by a return working later in the day. The Red Bank took the empties from three trains back to Manchester from IIRC Newcastle, Darlington and York and loaded to 21 vans.

 

Jamie

The vans aren't for Retford's papers alone, but go on to Lincoln. What happens to them there I can't recall, but it will be in the carriage working book. The main portion of the train which went to Cleethorpes returned to Manchester via Doncaster.

 

I remember the 1970s version of the Red Bank train well, as it came through Castleford around 1400. Often a Class 40 namer, and lots of (filthy) vans. I think the local coal wagons were cleaner!

[JamieR4489]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

through which are hapless little passengers

I’ll leave that one for Jesse...

[jamie92208]

40 minutes ago, Major Clanger said:

The vans aren't for Retford's papers alone, but go on to Lincoln. What happens to them there I can't recall, but it will be in the carriage working book. The main portion of the train which went to Cleethorpes returned to Manchester via Doncaster.

 

I remember the 1970s version of the Red Bank train well, as it came through Castleford around 1400. Often a Class 40 namer, and lots of (filthy) vans. I think the local coal wagons were cleaner!

I often used to see them through Morley with a Peak.  The three loaded trains used to come through Morley between 2 and 2.30am, again often with Peaks on them. This would be about 1980 and when the box was still open I often used to call in to see the 'bobby' and natter with him and watch those three trains come through when I was on nights. One bobby talking to another bobby.

 

Jamie 

Edited August 4, 2020 by jamie92208

[robertcwp]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I think any 'sensible' modeller (those who build things rather than just buyers) will exploit what the RTR market has to offer. As has been noted, a lifetime is finite.

 

Regarding the likes of BR Mk.1s, I'd still only have a few complete passenger trains were it not for Bachmann's. There are over 90 on LB. However, none is as supplied. As Robert has mentioned above, there are things which need to be done to bring them 'up to standard'. My list includes............

 

1. Removal of the over-prominent roof ribs. This is vital - they are so gross, and because it's often the roofs we see first, the effect is ghastly. Yes, it takes time - it's odious and boring but it must be done. If I see a layout running Bachmann Mk.1s where this vital modification has not been done, I tend to turn away - unimpressed.

 

2. Removal of the original couplings, whether they be the tension-locks (ugh!) or the sort of pipes clipped into the pockets. Couplings must be on headstocks (not on bogies or collars) whether they be a discreet hook and bar (mine), screw shackles (which aren't right for gangwayed Mk.1s, anyway) or buckeyes. 

 

3. Weathering of roofs and underframes; essential, particularly the former.

 

4. Concertina gangways fitted. Little looks worse than huge gaps between adjacent cars, through which are hapless little passengers would fall and perish!

 

5. At the rear end of a train, the end board fitted, a buckeye dropped down (revealing a hook), a rear lamp and representation of the hoses.

 

6. Wheels changed; in fairness, unless the gauge needs to be altered, more-recent RTR wheelsets seem to be more-concentric, though I still change them. 

 

7. Cantrail carriage boards fitted (where appropriate).

 

8. Renumbering. I've done most on LB where there was duplication or where some had a 'W' prefix. Those with an 'M' prefix I've tended to leave because they weren't uncommon on the ECML. 

 

I've also used some of Hornby's Mk.1s. The roof ribs can be left alone (they're there but not over-prominent). The firm's BSOs have been most useful, complementing those I've made from kits. 

 

As for other ECML gangwayed carriages............

 

Hornby's Gresleys - a big no-no, unless they're donors. 

 

Bachmann's latest Thompsons. Excellent, though when will they become available in maroon?

 

Bachmann's older Thompsons. Only of any use as donors.

 

Ex-LMS carriages would appear on the ECML. I've used some of Hornby's and Bachmann's, but only after some of the mods listed above have been carried out. 

 

I think it's clear that only fools would shun what's available RTR in carriage stock. Since I don't believe anyone who posts on here is one, then it's a great idea to exploit what's on offer. But never just as-supplied. 

All good points.

 

Regarding Bachmann Mark 1 roof ribs, I made a start on my ones but decided other things were a higher priority. If I ever go back to the Mark 1s, I would sort out the other things too, which are numerous if you want to get them right. The more recent batches have completely smooth roofs, which I don't like either as they are too smooth. Their 117 and 121 DMUs have this issue too.

 

On my own layout, I keep the tension locks between carriages but on Bachmann Mark 1s I remount them on the bogies, where they work much better. On Hornby stock that tends to run in set rakes, principally the SR ones, I use their Roco-style couplings, which work well. I don't have time to change things that work and the couplings on the bogies or in swivel mounts are probably necessary for the tighter curves and double slips.

 

Weathering - agree but the priorities at present are finishing the DMUs and parcels vans then dealing with the steam fleet. That will probably take me several years at current rate of progress.

 

Gangways that touch - essential and pretty easy.

 

End boards - important but need to be on both ends, not just the rear. The front of a train was the higher priority. Can't do pipes, couplings etc  as my sets need Sprat & Winkles at both ends as trains reverse. They have tail lamps at both ends for the same reason. Does someone do a good representation of a dropped buck-eye?

 

Carriage roof boards - my layout is fictional so I don't use them. I have been thinking about them for Retford but haven't a clue what the actual wording would be.

 

Renumbering - life is too short. I can't read the numbers when the carriages are on the layout.

 

The Hornby BSO came about in part because, through an intermediary, I pointed out that it was at the time the most numerous Mark 1 gangwayed type not to have been done RTR and sent a photo of 60103 coupled to one leaving King's Cross. I'm warming to Hornby Mark 1s in general, except blue/grey where their livery rendition is awful. Their main drawback is the moulded pipes and end handrails.

 

Bachmann Thompson stock in maroon - given that they would probably fly off the shelves, I cannot work out why it takes Bachmann so long to do maroon. We had the same issue with the porthole stock. I'm beginning to wonder whether I will live long enough to see maroon Thompson stock. 

 

As regards stock for Retford, I'm planning to take some carriages with me when I'm able to visit and discuss which of them will be of use and what needs doing to them, then take them away again to do the necessary work.

 

 

[chris p bacon]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

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.

 

As I suggest, security in all its forms should be in all modellers' minds. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

Whilst I don't make any claim about having something the quality of Retford or LB, I have become very concious of security over the last couple of years.  I used to have an open door policy for anyone that was interested in seeing 'Sandy' progress, but I had to close that door some time ago and only now let those I know visit (I make Bern wipe his shoes). Part of the issue I have is that the layout has its own purpose built room in the house and access is via the living room,  this opens up too many possibilities for those I don't know but have tagged along with others.   It's rather sad but after some other comments I now don't post much about progress or show pictures either, Unwittingly we can give away too much information on forums so I now watch what I type.

Soon 'Sandy' will be off to a new home as part of a house move and being a little more 'remote' I may well resume posting about it as it will be too far off the beaten track for many visitors.

 

 

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Out of interest, yesterday I looked where your C2 might be. It's still at Heathrow, after over three weeks! So much for Parcel Force World Wide's 'promise' to deliver it in a week.....................

 

I would check that Tony, when I have had that before it was because the parcel had actually arived in the destination country but not been logged for tracking (turned out ok in the end)

[thegreenhowards]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I think any 'sensible' modeller (those who build things rather than just buyers) will exploit what the RTR market has to offer. As has been noted, a lifetime is finite.

 

Regarding the likes of BR Mk.1s, I'd still only have a few complete passenger trains were it not for Bachmann's. There are over 90 on LB. However, none is as supplied. As Robert has mentioned above, there are things which need to be done to bring them 'up to standard'. My list includes............

 

1. Removal of the over-prominent roof ribs. This is vital - they are so gross, and because it's often the roofs we see first, the effect is ghastly. Yes, it takes time - it's odious and boring but it must be done. If I see a layout running Bachmann Mk.1s where this vital modification has not been done, I tend to turn away - unimpressed.

 

2. Removal of the original couplings, whether they be the tension-locks (ugh!) or the sort of pipes clipped into the pockets. Couplings must be on headstocks (not on bogies or collars) whether they be a discreet hook and bar (mine), screw shackles (which aren't right for gangwayed Mk.1s, anyway) or buckeyes. 

 

3. Weathering of roofs and underframes; essential, particularly the former.

 

4. Concertina gangways fitted. Little looks worse than huge gaps between adjacent cars, through which are hapless little passengers would fall and perish!

 

5. At the rear end of a train, the end board fitted, a buckeye dropped down (revealing a hook), a rear lamp and representation of the hoses.

 

6. Wheels changed; in fairness, unless the gauge needs to be altered, more-recent RTR wheelsets seem to be more-concentric, though I still change them. 

 

7. Cantrail carriage boards fitted (where appropriate).

 

8. Renumbering. I've done most on LB where there was duplication or where some had a 'W' prefix. Those with an 'M' prefix I've tended to leave because they weren't uncommon on the ECML. 

 

I've also used some of Hornby's Mk.1s. The roof ribs can be left alone (they're there but not over-prominent). The firm's BSOs have been most useful, complementing those I've made from kits. 

 

As for other ECML gangwayed carriages............

 

Hornby's Gresleys - a big no-no, unless they're donors. 

 

Bachmann's latest Thompsons. Excellent, though when will they become available in maroon?

 

Bachmann's older Thompsons. Only of any use as donors.

 

Ex-LMS carriages would appear on the ECML. I've used some of Hornby's and Bachmann's, but only after some of the mods listed above have been carried out. 

 

I think it's clear that only fools would shun what's available RTR in carriage stock. Since I don't believe anyone who posts on here is one, then it's a great idea to exploit what's on offer. But never just as-supplied. 

Tony,

 

I think your list is rather over zealous and very much based on your experiences rather than on what is strictly necessary. Having said that, I agree with 3,4,5,7 and 8 and I’m 75% of the way through my fleet in doing those mods.

 

However, once concertina gangways are fitted the coupling is virtually invisible, so I can not see what is wrong with retaining tension locks or using other clip in couplings (Bachmann pipes or equivalent) if they work. I know you don’t get on with them but in my experience they work perfectly well and they’re very convenient. I’d rather concentrate on replacing them where they’re visible - particularly on wagons.

 

I think you admit that Modern RTR wheels are fine, so surely it’s an extravagance to replace them. If you are still doing so, I’d be happy to take them off you in exchange for a donation to CRUK!
 

And finally the oversize (pun intended) issue of roof ribs. They are clearly rather too prominent but I’m far from convinced that I would end up with an improvement if I tackle them. Unless I take them off completely (which would be even more wrong), I don’t understand how I could achieve an even finish. I suspect I’d just waste a lot of time and end up with a mess! I find that a coat of matt ‘Roof dirt’ (from Railmatch or Precision Paints) reduces the impact considerably and that is good enough for me.

 

Of all the above, I think concertina gangways make the most difference. They’re so easy to fit that I’m amazed that more people don’t do it.

 

Clearly my standards are not up to yours but I sleep easy in the knowledge that my Mks 1s have been ‘improved’ more than 90% of the others out there (quite possibly 99%!).

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Note: I see Robert has posted while I was finalising this post (tea intervened!) with many of the same points. Sorry for the repetition but at least there was a different emphasis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 4, 2020 by thegreenhowards
Adding Note on end

[MJI]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

 

Renumbering - life is too short. I can't read the numbers when the carriages are on the layout.

 

 

 

I did a set of 8, corrected bogies, corrected brake cylinders, about 3 hours.

 

Only problem was that most were later with window frames but I used Bachmann without frames.

 

6 or 7 were converted brake cylinders as well. Most were OK with Commonwealths, but had to B4 one and BR1 one

[thegreenhowards]

I have been having a ‘finish off projects’ session. This Wills A4 was started a couple of years ago and I gave up in frustration a couple of times because the fit of the parts was so poor. But after a lot of filing and filling with solder, it’s as good as it’s going to be.  I’ll have to replace some rivet detail with decals during painting.

It had no chassis, so I’ve mounted it on a Hornby example. It’s a long way short of a Hornby version in detail (and shape?), but it’s heavy and will pull very well - 24 RTR mk 1s with no problem.

 

Tony, I have a couple of questions for you:

1. I want to model Seagull, partly to pull the Elizabethan (which is a heavy rake). My rake is the 1957 formation and you’ve previously queried my use of ‘13’ on the basis it didn’t haul the ‘Lizzie that year. Did ‘33’ make many appearances?

2. I know Seagull had a cut down tender. I’m trying to work out exactly what I have to do to model that. Is it just removing the metal on the rear of the tender which I’ve coloured black in the shot below? And then reinstating the beading. The Wills tender seems to have rather high sides which will make blending in the cut out part challenging. Do you have a solution for that problem?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[robertcwp]

42 minutes ago, MJI said:

 

I did a set of 8, corrected bogies, corrected brake cylinders, about 3 hours.

 

Only problem was that most were later with window frames but I used Bachmann without frames.

 

6 or 7 were converted brake cylinders as well. Most were OK with Commonwealths, but had to B4 one and BR1 one

Did you alter the roof vents on the Commonwealth ones? Apart from the FK and RU, they were different if I recall correctly. The RU has other issues with the roof.

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, JamieR4489 said:

I’ll leave that one for Jesse...

Oh dear,

 

another blooper. I meant 'our', of course! Corrected now.

 

Many thanks,

 

Tony.