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

18 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Wonderful, Jesse,

 

Thanks for letting me know. 

 

She was oiled before being sent, so shouldn't need any more for a while. 

 

All you've got to do now is save up the pennies to pay for her.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Pay for what? 

  • Funny 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

somehow you've attributed Graham's words to me.

 

It's him and computers.   Ask him about getting onto the Skype call last night....

 

25 minutes ago, Atso said:

I've not heard of teaks being used in the streamliner sets before; is this a publicly available photograph?

 

It was sent to me privately and I'm not sure of the source/owner.   The Gresley Society publication on the streamliners from (I think) 2018 has the other two pictures I referenced.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, bbishop said:

 

So the LSWR had introduced fixed formations round about 1910.  And if you ask about holiday traffic, some sets were taken into works at Easter to have the strengtheners inserted within the set.  Bill

Thanks for reminding us of this. My experience was very much London Midland based and relates largely to the long distance, loco-hauled Cross-Country sets in the late 1980s.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Some time ago - about last Wednesday - there was mention of couplings for RTR carriages. I have several rakes of RTR carriages; I make no great claim to the accuracy of any of them except the 4-coach set of Hornby LMS Period 3 57 ft non-corridors. However, within each set I have replaced the tension locks with the Roco-style coupling. This, or any other type of fixed coupling, has the advantage that the set moves as a single unit, with none of the back-and-forth slack that one has with tension locks. This seems to me to be essential to simulate the movement of a passenger train. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
17 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Anything more than two tin cans and a length of thread and I'm lost. Charles Babbage had the right idea...

As a mechanical engineer I have to agree.

 

When I was still in short trousers I had one of these:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digi-Comp_I

 

I did a show-and-tell at school one day where I programmed it to operate a Meccano lift.

 

Great fun!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Bill,

 

I think it's accepted that the Bachmann A4 isn't as good as the alternatives - it's derived from the original Trix body from the 1960s, after all.

 

Mind you, that's not to say that the others don't have different 'issues'.

 

And, since Trix A4 (or Bachmann A4) bodies were good enough for Roy Jackson..........................

 

608226894_Retford72006.jpg.f50ad66a84d23dbc6306175e5637d812.jpg

 

1885692076_Retford12101931A4byfootbridge.jpg.73ef0cd12d2888fab54535a2597da949.jpg

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Prior to the arrival go the Trix model Roy spent a long time trying to "improve" the Hornby Dublo version of the A4 body with much cutting and filling but mostly not to his satisfaction, the newcomer was such a vast improvement that he then used/enhanced it for his Streaks instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
10 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

 

I saw my Dad for the first time since lockdown so we had a lot to catch up on. Whilst 6201 was critically admired, it was the blue 'un that attracted his interest most, not least because he saw them all in that condition in the early 1950s.

 

 

 

 

Nothing finer than a blue Duchess, in my view. Well, other than a blue King.

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

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Doug,

 

When you state 'streamlined' tender, I assume you mean the non-corridor type? The 1935-type corridor tenders were also streamlined - and the best-looking of all the A4 tenders with their radiused rear and lack of beading. Sadly, none has been preserved, and even when a 'new' corridor tender was made for BITTERN (something she never towed in service) it ended up as a 1928-type; an opportunity missed?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I had a look at the time at the brassmasters website, so yes, your right they have the 1928 corridor and the non corridor streamlined. Yes a little omission is the 1935 type. The tenders are purchased separately from the locos. So they can be used with other kits. The reason is probably so the 3 versions of the A1 /A3  and the A4's so the purchaser can choose the most appropriate tender. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 06/08/2020 at 07:30, Tony Wright said:

 

For what it's worth, most (if not all) current RTR steam-outline locos (in OO) will pull RTR plastic carriages to a number that most 'modellers' will be entirely happy with; their layouts won't accommodate longer, scale-length expresses/goods trains, anyway. And, I'm sure they're happy with that. 

 

 

Tony,

 

We've been here before, so I'll keep it brief but I can't let a comment like that go by unchallenged.

 

In my experience, a Hornby A4 will haul prototype length (say 13 coaches) RTR trains out of the box. And will pull prototype length part metal trains with a little weight added. For example they handle my Lizzie (load 11 with 10 brass sided) or any of my typical ECML formations with 11-13 coaches including a brass catering portion. They may slip marginally on starting but are otherwise sure footed. 

 

Admittedly, this is less true of the other RTR pacifics because there is less room for weight inside the body.

 

Andy

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
28 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

Nothing finer than a blue Duchess, in my view. Well, other than a blue King.

Any blue loco on a set of blood and custard coaches will do for me.

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Like this you mean?

Yes, that's very nice. I haven't got a video but I have got this:

 

1656854393_201606210046026KingJohnandCollettcoaches.JPG.4de405410e03722df023fb09ac46610f.JPG

All RTR I'm afraid except the restaurant car, which is a converted Hornby with Comet sides and lots of other bits. In fact the only Hornby bits left are the roof and the interior moulding.

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

24460610898_27aafdc03b_k.jpg
Merchant Navy 35015 Blue - 1 by Jeffrey Lynn, on Flickr

 

Yes, that is a Blood and Custard coach behind the loco, although the blood has gone a little dark! This locomotive may have the purists howling a bit: a Merchant Navy with home-mixed blue and LNER lining, made from two Airfix Battle of Britain bodies on a Hornby Dublo/Wrenn chassis with the external valve gear removed. The tender has brass sheet sides and fairing added to the original HD/Wrenn tender body.

Like John, I still like the combination of BR Express Steam Blue with the B&C coaches. The blue sat particularly nicely on the Bulleid locos, I think.

  • Like 12
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
20 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

... would you be so kind as to take a roof shot of your brake? I had trouble interpreting the layout of the ventilators on mine and think I may have added too many.

 

Al

Hi Al,

 

As requested…

 

The roof plan for both the LH and RH kit is the same and shows some ventilators marked with an ‘X’ and states ‘ventilators marked with an ‘X’ apparently not fitted on all vehicles’. I have no suitable roof images that show what should or shouldn’t be fitted – so I guessed. But also because I wanted to make them individual carriages rather than mirror images.

 

Below is the LSWR (4C95) RH brake. For the first three compartments, the plan/picture provided with the kit shows one ventilator over the centre line of the roof and one ventilator inset by about 4mm over the approx. centreline of the compartment. The toilet and the fourth compartment  have their vents inset 4mm from the centreline. The four ventilators over the brake section should be on the centre line but I chose to place them 8mm either side of the centreline, in line with the centre of the double doors. The kit was provided with 6 smaller torpedo vents – not sure what these were for. I should really add a fifth vent over the brake area - only noticed now - but I won't as I probably won't get in the right place.

 

1383783823_Roxey-LSWR-BTKRH(4C95)Dia139.jpg.44284427d14424e4f785e0d97a86b2d8.jpg

 

For the LH brake (4C96) I decided not to fit any compartment ventilators over the centre line of the coach (those marked with an ‘X’ on the plan). The four brake end ones are over the centreline as per the plan. The brake end also has one ventilator 4mm inset next to the fourth compartment – maybe that’s where the guard had a desk? Compartments one to three have one vent and compartment four has two vents; all inset by 4mm from the centreline. The grey patch between the end right hand two vents is filler as the roof had a bit of a dimple in it.

 

159209174_Roxey-LSWR-BTKLH(4C96)Dia131.jpg.30d8ee5c2fff636e4c7826434b51d6ed.jpg

 

I also added a .25mm x .75mm thin cantrail strip on all the carriages; rain strips yet to be added. They'll be from tape, and fixed after the final scrub. Hope that helps or maybe that’s an overly complex explanation – sorry!

 

I intend to model a representation of an LSWR 3 coach set that ran on the Somerset and Dorset between about 1950 and 1955 and from the information I have (Backtrack Vol 9 No 4 April 1995), it suggests the sets were a bit of a hotchpotch rather than built as a set from new. Some of the coach running numbers listed on kit instruction were in the S&D sets but I don’t have photos and those sets were mostly withdrawn before my period. Therefore I’m modelling something that may have happened in the early 1950s. I’m content that what I’m doing is close enough to be acceptable to me.

 

I don't think they will be sprayed this weekend. We're forecast a months worth of rain on Sunday....oh so like Britain!

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
22 hours ago, Iain.d said:

In the spirit of showing what we’re building, I thought I’d post a bit more progress on a 3 coach set of LSWR stock I’m part way through building. They’re similar to Al’s a post or two above but not as far advanced. Happy to show photos if others are interested.

 

The subject of couplings came up a page or two back and I thought I’d show how I couple my sets together. Its not my idea – I have no idea whose it was – it’s a copy of that shown in Stephen Williams’ The 4mm Coach Part One (page 20). First off I solder a 1mm piece of wire rod behind the headstock/on the buffer bases. I do this on both ends on all the coaches.

 

182983521_Roxey-LSWRCoupling(1).jpg.3901344ec38b7bf0a3a29af64748fecf.jpg

 

I then make up a simple hook from 1mm wire rod, bending it to shape and winding round a bit of thin wire from old electrical cable to represent the hose ribbing. I may add representations of hose couplings from washers or twists of thicker wire, if the mood takes me, all secured with tiny dabs of solder. The part with the hook is maybe a mil or two lower than the opposite end that passes through the headstock as it has to go below the headstock of the following coach – seems obvious, but I’ve got it wrong so many times.

 

2035533389_Roxey-LSWRCoupling(2).jpg.ec1b765e1acdf272bc06b99a16b19ef3.jpg

 

I temporality fit the corridor connectors to get the right tension / correct (ish) distance between the coaches. I realise these are too far apart compared to full size stock but it doesn’t look too bad as the void has something in it. I then solder the hook to the headstock.  The hook rubs on the bar – this seems smoother than it just rubbing on the back of the headstock. These LSWRs will go around 3ft radius curves on a test track without issue. I have no idea how they might fare on a full layout, reverse curves or a crossover….we’ll shall see one day! Nor do I know how the compressibility / tension of the bellows will last…time will tell.

 

1489142748_Roxey-LSWRCoupling(3).jpg.c1d04c7c38f5eebbd61a61590c708ec2.jpg

 

The reason I put a bar behind every buffer is in case I decide to add further stock at a later date and it’s easier to fit at the build stage.  The process it the same for plastic bodied stock/underframes except I use glue.

 

608753079_Roxey-LSWRCoupling(4).jpg.32c9dd21643b8783c51ac553e798fc00.jpg

 

This is how the set looks, the corridor connectors are held in place by friction for the picture and the photography has shown how grotty the sides are. They’ll get scrubbed over the weekend and if the weather is warm they might even see a coat of primer.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

Lovely coaches, and very neatly coupled, but the spacing is equal to what you'd have with tension-locks and way more than is necessary unless the rake has to negotiate train-set curves. In essence, a ruddy great gap is still a ruddy great gap, even if it is bridged. If you have 3' minimum radii you should be able to close them up by at least half.

 

Personally, I prefer CCUs with upside-down Roco heads, with the uncoupling loops removed. I fit them that way up because it tucks the link up tighter under the gangways so it's less visible. They place the buffers in contact (on straight track, where overscale spacing becomes most noticeable) and will still go round (discreetly concealed) No.2 curves if required. Note that the Bulleid ones shouldn't be touching.

 

John

 

Apologies for photo quality. Tripod not available.

 

P1280090em.jpg

P1280088cm.jpg

Edited by Dunsignalling
Added photos
  • Like 10
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
30 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Yes, that's very nice. I haven't got a video but I have got this:

 

 

All RTR I'm afraid except the restaurant car, which is a converted Hornby with Comet sides and lots of other bits. In fact the only Hornby bits left are the roof and the interior moulding.

It makes a nice combination.

 

Mine was also mainly RTR but with gangways, weathering, roofboards etc. The RK (Comet) and RTO (Southern Pride) were the exceptions. This was the formation of the original Mark 1 showcase train on the Heart of Midlothian.

Edited by thegreenhowards
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Lovely coaches, and very neatly coupled, but the spacing is equal to what you'd have with tension-locks and way more than is necessary unless the rake has to negotiate train-set curves. In essence, a ruddy great gap is still a ruddy great gap, even if it is bridged. If you have 3' minimum radii you should be able to close them up by at least half.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure about that. My spacing is about the same as Iain's, and it's on the limit with regards to the buffers touching on curves. My ruling radius is 30 inches which probably counts as train-set curves in some quarters, and it may squeak below that in one or two places, but I certainly couldn't reduce them any further without the additional expense and time of adding sprung buffers.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
59 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Lovely coaches, and very neatly coupled, but the spacing is equal to what you'd have with tension-locks and way more than is necessary unless the rake has to negotiate train-set curves. In essence, a ruddy great gap is still a ruddy great gap, even if it is bridged. If you have 3' minimum radii you should be able to close them up by at least half...

 

 

Thanks John. You are quite right – it is still a big gap. My ‘test curve’ is just a length of track pinned to 3ft that I could make tighter but I’ve left it the same for consistency.

 

When I get round to building a layout, I envisage a whole heap of rework of things I’ve completed but if I don’t do as much as I can at the build stage, I feel overwhelmed by part/unfinished projects. At least I will know these will run and I can modify/amend at leisure.

 

I've just taped a length of track to the kitchen bench top at 2ft 6in / 76cm radius and the coaches will travel okay with about 4mm between the buffer faces, there is though a lot of overhang. I'm happy as they are.

 

_K305679.jpg.cf12efe35b0ca10205e31f714221e1d9.jpg

Kind regards,

 

Iain

Edited by Iain.d
To add the sentence in italics and photo
  • Like 5
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

As promised (and thanks to Iain for his photos) some close-up shots of my LSWR coaches, including the roof details on the brake.

 

Brake:

 

lswr_brake.jpg.a9bcc003a4bc82e12e2b2bf1c1090912.jpg

 

Third:

 

lswr_third.jpg.84e92f5823abe97ed3d20f905393045a.jpg

 

Composite:

 

lswr_compo.jpg.78c95504bd9d0b4c95034bffb131c9fe.jpg

 

And roof of the brake:

 

lswr_brake_roof.jpg.40b4b704e9e4fd32409f3c7510a17c16.jpg

 

I confess I don't remember the decisions I took when adding these ventilators as it was done last year, from an incomplete set of plans (my kit had been wrongly packed).

 

Al

Edited by Barry Ten
  • Like 4
  • Craftsmanship/clever 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

As promised (and thanks to Iain for his photos) some close-up shots of my LSWR coaches, including the roof details on the brake.

 

Brake:

 

lswr_brake.jpg.a9bcc003a4bc82e12e2b2bf1c1090912.jpg

 

Third:

 

lswr_third.jpg.84e92f5823abe97ed3d20f905393045a.jpg

 

Composite:

 

lswr_compo.jpg.78c95504bd9d0b4c95034bffb131c9fe.jpg

 

And roof of the third:

 

lswr_brake_roof.jpg.40b4b704e9e4fd32409f3c7510a17c16.jpg

 

I confess I don't remember the decisions I took when adding these ventilators as it was done last year, from an incomplete set of plans (my kit had been wrongly packed).

 

Al

Thanks Al, they look really good. The vents on the brake are the same as one of mine (the one in accordance with the drawing) less the extra one in the brake area next to compartment four. And the colour looks good, being balanced by the roof. It doesn't look overly vivid or garish. I'd be happy with those. I fit the handles after painting, I don't trust myself to scrape the paint off without damaging the finish of the coach; ask me how I know!

 

Do the toilets on the Composite have vents? In my kit there were only 14 of the larger vents and 2 smaller vents for the toilets. I have just noticed I didn't fit the fillers to mine. A job for tomorrow.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

  • Like 1
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...