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

  • RMweb Gold
35 minutes ago, Iain.d said:

 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

 

I don't trust myself not to scrape the paint either. I fitted the commode handles prior to painting, and they're just touched over in brass paint. If I were planning to line the coaches, though, I'd probably have omitted them until later. I've already had to attend to a couple of minor scratches.

 

I've not done anything with the smaller vents yet, pending a closer look at the instructions and drawings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

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

Good afternoon Andy,

 

I like challenges,

 

However, I did state 'most' modellers. Will you not conceded that 'most' modellers don't have layouts capable of accommodating full-length trains? And that they're 'happy' with that, if not entirely?

 

And. will your RTR delights take a train like this? 

 

60030.jpg.2c6c6df751f63ac108af843b7ff5ebf8.jpg

Seen yesterday, but in a different context. This train is made up entirely of all-metal, kit-built cars. Not brass-sided over plastic donors, and all running on cast-metal bogies; all 13 of them. 

 

I know we've been here before (and probably will be again), but I assure you that if I coupled my Hornby A4 up to this, all it would do is polish the rails. 

 

I state again, the reason I prefer to build my own locos is two-fold. For one, all the Pacifics, V2s and the W1 have to be able to take a load like this, with no exceptions. The second is more personal, and again it's a matter of my choice. To have RTR locos, all you need is money! 

 

Am I coming across as some sort of conceited ass? If so, that's not my intention. Little Bytham is a very specific, prototype-based ECML layout; over which run prototype-length/weight trains. It's not my being prejudiced against RTR. It's just that, in most cases, it's no good to me. I admit, I am in a minority.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

 

Nice ballasting!

89.9% myself, the remainder by my good friend Ben and helpful tips from The Baz and another friend Mick, who doesn’t have RMWEB as he’s an American N gauge modeller. 
 

Thanks Red leader. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Bytham A4s having had their pictures taken yesterday, I thought I'd try the A1s today........................

 

60114.jpg.af8bca072a6586049c93b15bd72f89fa.jpg

 

60114 heads the Down 'White Rose'. The loco, built from a DJH kit, is all Tony Geary's work. All I've done is to remove its squeak! 

 

60116.jpg.999bbf4ad2264f2d8fccb9aaf6903033.jpg

 

60116 takes the Down 'Northumbrian'. I built the loco from a DJH kit and Ian Rathbone painted it. 

 

60117.jpg.befb4cf59d80f8b39726511733612c63.jpg

 

60117 has charge of the 11-car Up 'Yorkshire Pullman (a mixture of the later Hornby cars and Comet sides over earlier Hornby ones). Again, the loco is a DJH kit built by me and painted by Ian Rathbone. 

 

60119.jpg.57b834442f092a68942a7348a58046a9.jpg

 

Another Pullman, but this time the Down 'Queen of Scots'; the complete rake of ten cars made up of Comet sides on Hornby donors, running on MJT cast-metal bogies. 

 

Yet another DJH kit, I acquired 60119 from the estate of a deceased modeller. It was part-built, so I completed it and made it go. Geoff Haynes painted it. 

 

60120.jpg.69fcb2c7858ad08a83d4f3dcb3dc36d8.jpg

 

Yet another part-built A1 acquired from the estate of a late modeller; in this case from Geoff Brewin's (ex of Comet) legacy. 60120 was mainly complete, so all I did was to add detail and paint it. Tom Foster did the lovely weathering. She's heading the 14-car Up 'West Riding', made of an equal mixture of modified Bachmann Mk.1 cars and kit-built ones. 

 

More later.............

 

 

 

 

  • Like 17
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

89.9% myself, the remainder by my good friend Ben and helpful tips from The Baz and another friend Mick, who doesn’t have RMWEB as he’s an American N gauge modeller. 
 

Thanks Red leader. 

Good afternoon Jesse,

 

Do you mind shooting some moving footage of your Klondike and posting it on here, please? Just to see what she looks like in motion 'at home'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

  • RMweb Gold
39 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Am I coming across as some sort of conceited ass?

 

 

I think you come across as single-minded and having a particular set of standards which you have evolved over many years of modelling and which you adhere to and talk about.

There is no compulsion on anyone else to follow the same standards, but you give good reasons as to why you choose to!

Tony

 

PS Do I come across as a sycophant?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

60117.jpg.befb4cf59d80f8b39726511733612c63.jpg

 

60117 has charge of the 11-car Up 'Yorkshire Pullman (a mixture of the later Hornby cars and Comet sides over earlier Hornby ones). Again, the loco is a DJH kit built by me and painted by Ian Rathbone. 

 

 

Is it me, or does the signalman alongside 60117 look a bit like Herr Flick of the Gestapo?

Are you sure that in 1957 he hadn't been hiding out in Bytham since the end of the war??:victory:

 

  • Funny 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more of Bytham's A1s.................

 

60121.jpg.aac96321f16e29a526091f6ffbce3e1f.jpg

 

The morning Hull/York combined express (combined at Doncaster) heads south behind York-based 60121. Another DJH kit-build of mine, painted by Geoff Haynes.

 

60125.jpg.358fc49da7b41280c6cf9cd7b05ddc0a.jpg

 

Believe it or not, this is an original Bachmann A1 (not the one I had initially for review), complete with (amazingly!) its original motor. It's actually a good runner and, with added weight, will handle most of the expresses. All I did was to fit etched-brass smoke deflectors, new bogie wheels, detail it and match the rear of the footplate with the soleplate of the tender. Renumbering/renaming and light weathering completed the job to make 60125 SCOTTISH UNION.

 

60128.jpg.e3886a37459a13c84915eee813d24052.jpg

 

60128 shares 'Yorkshire Pullman' duty with 60117, and the locos are the same - the usual DJH/Wright/Rathbone combination. 

 

60130.jpg.b4871ec07d985ed7de4e234f302e9928.jpg

 

And KESTREL shares the 'Queen of Scots' job with 60119. Yet again, another DJH/Wright/Rathbone combo.

 

60136.jpg.1eab72e74a59a2836a90a17ad2451c57.jpg

 

And yet another A1 from the same DJH/Wright/Rathbone stable, this time in the form of ALCAZAR (fitted with a Thompson boiler). 

 

I wonder how many other layouts have more DJH A1s running on them than Little Bytham? 

 

 

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

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.

Much depends on the operational requirements of the layout(s) on which the stock is to run.

 

If sets won't need to be propelled, (especially over crossovers) you can get away with smaller gaps than if they do.

 

Curves can be deceptive. I once had to sort one out on a club layout, Tamerig Central when the "Bishport branch" flyover was repurposed to become the Somerset & Dorset line from the (then) new Bath Green Park layout. The ruling minimum was supposed to be 3' but this dog-leg measured at less than half that, roughly a r-t-r No.2 radius. It looked a bit tight even "by eye", but not that tight, probably because it was partly screened by the girders of the flyover.  It hadn't become obvious earlier because it only ever carried hauled moves in one direction by nothing bigger than 4-4-0s. West Countries and 9Fs were a different proposition....

 

What nobody ever spotted, to the end of the layout's days (without me pointing it out) was that I'd had to spread the end of the last span of girders outward by an inch at that end to make room for the easement. 

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

I think you come across as single-minded and having a particular set of standards which you have evolved over many years of modelling and which you adhere to and talk about.

There is no compulsion on anyone else to follow the same standards, but you give good reasons as to why you choose to!

Tony

 

PS Do I come across as a sycophant?

I put 'agree' on this. I bettter make it clear, I didn't mean the last sentence ;)

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

10 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Morning Tony,

 

Hope you don't mind the following small indulgence for a moment:

 

20200806_145520.jpg.c371d798745ed424ef561211ccb8f773.jpg

You might recognise the loco on the right ... well, in fact, the other one as well as it received critical and much appreciated emergency repairs at the loco doctor's workbench at the start of the Glasgow show.

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.

 

20200806_150821.jpg.a0e24c68153fa04b3250ac502aadfaea.jpg

Challenging the time-warp even further! If you can divert your eyes away from the loco 'eye candy' for a moment, lurking under the canopy on the right is an LMS Period II composite coach, kindly built by Barry O of this parish and now in regular service on the layout. Dad is delighted with it.

 

Good evening Graham,

 

I do remember the 'Semi' with the mangled valve gear. It must say something for the loco's power for it to be able to turn its motion into metal 'knitting'. Still, she behaved all the way through afterwards, and thank you for your contribution to CRUK.

 

Speaking of 'Semis', have you seen John Jennison's most-recent pictorial appreciation of this magnificent class from Irwell? For any lover of Stanier's masterpieces, it's a must. 

 

The pictures are brilliant (many by the peerless Bill Anderson) and a lot have not been published before, including several by Jim Carter, at Chester. I must have been standing close to him on a few occasions, though it's a pity the author doesn't know Up from Down at my home town in one or two cases. 

 

Still, that doesn't take away from the superlative presentation.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Teague said:

 

I think you come across as single-minded and having a particular set of standards which you have evolved over many years of modelling and which you adhere to and talk about.

There is no compulsion on anyone else to follow the same standards, but you give good reasons as to why you choose to!

Tony

 

PS Do I come across as a sycophant?

Thanks Tony,

 

Your words are very kind.

 

As is well-known, I do like a good bit of robust debate; I think it's one of the things which makes this thread what it is. As long as the debate is 'civilised', which it invariably is. 

 

I think we all have our own strong opinions on many model railway subjects, and I'm always eager to listen to the 'arguments' of those who've 'been there, seen it, done it'. Not those of theorists, or those who won't (rather than can't) try doing something for themselves. In a way, it's 'problem-solving', and I'll listen to those with solutions all day. Even if they're different from mine.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Andy,

 

I like challenges,

 

However, I did state 'most' modellers. Will you not conceded that 'most' modellers don't have layouts capable of accommodating full-length trains? And that they're 'happy' with that, if not entirely?

I can’t argue with that. I thought you were implying that an RTR Pacific wouldn’t haul a full length (Plastic) train and that’s what I was disputing.

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

And. will your RTR delights take a train like this? 

 

 

Seen yesterday, but in a different context. This train is made up entirely of all-metal, kit-built cars. Not brass-sided over plastic donors, and all running on cast-metal bogies; all 13 of them. 
 

That sounds like a challenge which ‘Sir Nigel’ and I would be happy to accept in due course. Of course I don’t know how heavy/ stiff your rake is but I know ‘he’ will pull 13 metal coaches on the flat.

 

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I know we've been here before (and probably will be again), but I assure you that if I coupled my Hornby A4 up to this, all it would do is polish the rails. 

 

I state again, the reason I prefer to build my own locos is two-fold. For one, all the Pacifics, V2s and the W1 have to be able to take a load like this, with no exceptions. The second is more personal, and again it's a matter of my choice. To have RTR locos, all you need is money! 
 

I recognise and agree with the second half of that. I just wish we could recognise the lovely kit built locos and stock shown on here for what they are - fantastic examples of personal craftsmanship. I don’t feel the need to justify my kit built locos on the basis that they’re better than RTR. Just that they’re different and they’re mine.

 

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Am I coming across as some sort of conceited ass? If so, that's not my intention. Little Bytham is a very specific, prototype-based ECML layout; over which run prototype-length/weight trains. It's not my being prejudiced against RTR. It's just that, in most cases, it's no good to me. I admit, I am in a minority.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

I can’t argue with that. I thought you were implying that an RTR Pacific wouldn’t haul a full length (Plastic) train and that’s what I was disputing.

That sounds like a challenge which ‘Sir Nigel’ and I would be happy to accept in due course. Of course I don’t know how heavy/ stiff your rake is but I know ‘he’ will pull 13 metal coaches on the flat.

 

I recognise and agree with the second half of that. I just wish we could recognise the lovely kit built locos and stock shown on here for what they are - fantastic examples of personal craftsmanship. I don’t feel the need to justify my kit built locos on the basis that they’re better than RTR. Just that they’re different and they’re mine.

 

 

Good evening Andy,

 

When this Covid thing has settled down to a 'new normality', you're most-welcome to come over, bringing SNG with you. I'm sure it'll pull whatever we choose to stick behind the tender. There is no substitute for adequate weight (I discount traction tyres). 

 

I've already had a few mates over here, socially-distancing and operating the layout from 'the far side' as it were. We're outside most of the time, and it should be 'safe'.

 

I think your last sentence sums up a very similar situation we find ourselves in. I feel I can justify heavy, kit-built locos as being 'superior' to most RTR equivalents, if only in terms of haulage ability. But the main reason is because they're unique, and personal.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

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

38 minutes ago, mullie said:

Modelling is a broad church, there is room for all of us. I tend to do a lot of lurking on this thread as much of it is beyond my sphere of knowledge, I simply enjoy seeing all the great modelling posted here and hope I can contribute in a small way.

 

Here is one of my lock down projects, four Airfix mineral wagons beaten into submission with Masokits W irons, MJT axle boxes and various bits of etched and Airfix brake gear, Wizard wheels built in EM.

 

IMG_20200807_192722769.jpg.17b1fd76be3c57ae76f4d0447af46497.jpg

 

Martyn

 

..... and all from sixty-year-old kits !!

 

Says a lot for good old 20th Century British engineering.

 

John Isherwood.

  • Like 6
  • Agree 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

I think the fact that the older kits are much better quality and make better models is also a commentary on the development of British engineering.

 

Mind you - Hornby Dublo, Airfix and Kitmaster all went to the wall BECAUSE the injection toolmaking was such (expensive) high quality that they could not sell the product at an economic price.

 

Now THAT'S a whole different commentary on the development / decline of British engineering.

 

John Isherwood.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
54 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

Mind you - Hornby Dublo, Airfix and Kitmaster all went to the wall BECAUSE the injection toolmaking was such (expensive) high quality that they could not sell the product at an economic price.

 

Now THAT'S a whole different commentary on the development / decline of British engineering.

 

Dart, dartboard, bullseye.  Absolutely the nub of the problem.  Well said, John.

 

Pete T. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It most definitely is a broad church. I think for me, the most rewarding aspect is making things, even when sometimes it seems like an epic hurdle. My biggest problem is staying focused on one project.

 

In some ways I’m rather lucky. Weathering professionally means I’m fortunate to handle a number of different models, some of which scratch that itch for say, something large and green/red. I get the enjoyment of weathering and photographing it without having to go the whole hog of ‘modelling’ it.

 

In the meantime I have my own projects, including Tony’s favourite.....’the little blue tw.....’

 

 

024E46FE-B3C9-4A9C-9206-43D19899B966.jpeg

  • Like 12
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...