Wright writes.....

[Iain Mac]

The commission requests can be a bit of a conundrum I've found too.

 

I have been requested to produce buildings (Perth Station and more of a sizeable nature) on various occasions.

I have to ask if there is a budget to work to, which sets the standard of work or.

It's a 300+ hour job to a standard I'd put my name to so what would the person commissioning consider a fair hourly rate? Intended to distance the probability of recieving a commission in all honesty.

I am working with a like minded modeller in producing Hawick in 1 :76.2. Time given materials recieved.

It is purly a passion at that, most of our, level (s) I feel.

Not to mention the personal benefits of apptitude testing, piece, tranquility and total pride.

 

Money's nice, I feel rich in other ways.

 

I probably should say or add, my dear lady wife and daughter also contribute to feeling of well being

Edited August 7, 2020 by Iain Mac
School boy error in the spelling department whilst Sir watches cane in hand. Please don't hurt me...

[PMP]

Here’s one very close to being completed, it’s been on and off the shelf of doom for a few years. A Craftsman 02, the drive having been brought up to date with an @High Level Kits gearbox and motor combination.

Reference recent discussion of MK1 roofs, I’ve also been giving  a couple a makeover, seen here. For me, I’m not sure the visual impact vs work on removing the ribs works. The roof colour is just primer, so I might view it differently once completed. Brake gear and end details yet to added.

 

[PMP]

4 minutes ago, Iain Mac said:

The commission requests can be a bit of a conundrum I've found too.

 

It's a 300+ hour job to a standard I'd put my name to so what would the person commissioning consider a fair hourly rate? 

A minimum of £8.72/hour is the easy answer, so roughly £2,500.... 

Having recently done a scenic comission it’s a challenge to get the right balance.

[Dave John]

Heh , odd isn't it Barry Ten. I too have been asked but I pointed out that basically I'm a wagon basher and modelling for money would really spoil the whole thing for me. 

 

I'm also not in the least bit fussed about sharing stuff. I upload silhouette files to the CRA forums, I am happy to email anyone that asks a copy of the bigger ones. Same goes for any pics I take, feel free to do whatever with them, even the whole photographic backscene from kelvinbank has been shared. 

 

Transfers are still a work in progress, but the design is there . 

 

 

[Iain Mac]

11 minutes ago, PMP said:

A minimum of £8.72/hour is the easy answer, so roughly £2,500.... 

Having recently done a scenic comission it’s a challenge to get the right balance.

 

Setting skill set value not aside, considerably more.

 

The barter economy and challenge are the real attractions I'd suggest.

 

Other than that truth should be foremost.

"I can't help and I earn more by other renenue streams per hour. Sorry".

[Iain Mac]

34 minutes ago, Dave John said:

I too have been asked but I pointed out that basically I'm a wagon basher and modelling for money would really spoil the whole thing for me. 

 

I'm also not in the least bit fussed about sharing stuff. I upload silhouette files to the CRA forums, I am happy to email anyone that asks a copy of the bigger ones. Same goes for any pics I take, feel free.....

 

 

 A man of my own heart.

 

Knowledge is based on constodianship not ownership. To those reseponsive of receipt it is free. And I believe we all have something to learn from everyone to a degree, be it interest.

Or CWS yearly's, centripetal force, close coupling, the list is indeed inclusive and vast for which my knew knowledge is grateful.

 

We do have to have financial capabilities for life but for me, my hobby will provide mutually beneficial symbiosis I would hope at most (least? Trying to get across benefit not fiscal so whichever suits appropriately)

I've know desire to set up a 499 issue partwork type thingy magazine and model to charge less than a tenner a fortnight for the never never.

 

The sharing or exchange of skills, knowledge and occasionally lessons to pitfalls to avoid along with healthy banter make, I am sure, many a hobby fine.

 

Right, apologies.

I haven't been reading any Buddist text so coming across as the Dali Farm is not intentional.

It's probably a consequence of time of evening family free.

[Jesse Sim]

10 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

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. 

I’d be happy to, I’d best clean the layout and clean some track, I’ll try and do it Sunday. 

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hello Tony

 

What constitutes a full length train?

 

Here is one on the real Buckingham Branch.

 

Photo from https://www.railcar.co.uk/images/13394

What does indeed, Clive, what does indeed?

 

I love this thread. Unless one is absolutely precise, accurate, unambiguous, spot-on with grammar and spelling, and with crystal clarity of expression, one will be rumbled (so beware!).

 

The problem is (if it is a problem?) is that I made a (foolish) assumption that my expression 'full-length' trains would be taken as implying (or suggesting), long trains. Never make assumptions.

 

So, let's rephrase my original assertion to............'unless one has a layout capable of running full-length trains, and by 'full-length' I mean long-distance, express passenger or goods trains, loaded to full capacity in terms of their consists (and not, say, representative of just a summer service when the likes of 'The Royal Scot' was limited load, and reduced from its normal 15 to eight, with reliefs run as well).................................................' And so on and so on. 

 

My posts would be even more 'wordy' than normal. And I'll bet, rather like in the story of The Monkey's Paw, there'll still be a chink in my 'argument'.

 

Lovely picture of that single-unit (though I'm entirely ignorant of what it is), but operating a layout where that is the maximum-length ('full-length') train might tax even those whose boredom-threshold is enormous. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[grahame]

57 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Lovely picture of that single-unit (though I'm entirely ignorant of what it is), but operating a layout where that is the maximum-length ('full-length') train might tax even those whose boredom-threshold is enormous. 

 

 

I'm not so sure why a short train should be any more taxing to people's boredom-threshold than a longer one. I'm quite happy to see a two car suburban EPB unit or a 20 coach class 373 Eurostar train. Neither impacts my boredom-threshold.

 

 

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

On the subject of making things for yourself...

 

I had an enquiry today from a modeller who wanted to know about the possibility of commissioning some work. I've never had such an approach before and I tried to give as honest and detailed response as I could, which was basically to decline (hopefully) politely.

 

I mentioned that i don't actually have much modelling time - I use what I have efficiently. I reckon I get a maximum of 90 minutes per evening but it's usually closer to 45 minutes and sometimes none at all, as with this evening, where the warm weather dictated a later than usual 5K running session.

 

I also mentioned that I'm finding my modelling to be a useful mental therapy during a particularly stressful time in my personal life, due to a family medical matter, and which has only been exacerbated by lockdown. Adding the pressure of building to a time scale would be a source of stress that I don't personally need in my life at the moment.

 

But by far the biggest consideration was that I build to a standard that "works" for me as the end customer, but which I would feel very uncomfortable about presenting to a client. As I completed the LSWR coaches, I mentally constructed a "snag liist" of issues that I would grumble about if I had paid someone else to do the same jobs. There are lots of things about my coaches (and other models) that are not quite right and wouldn't pass muster with many modellers, but which I cheerfully accept because they are my work, for myself, and disgrace no one's layout but my own. Importantly (to me) they are milestones on my personal modelling "journey" but none of them are perfect, and quite a lot of them are definitely in the "looks acceptable from 3 foot away" category, but they're not going to be sprawled seductively across any glamorous MRJ centrefolds any time soon. They are what they are and because I built them, I accept their flaws with tolerance and fondness, while hoping to do better next time. However, that's a million miles from feeling that my work is of a standard that I would feel comfortable charging for it, let alone knowing what sort of price to demand,

 

Al

 

 

 

 

An interesting situation Al,

 

I can comment from personal experience, having been a professional loco-builder for a good part of my working life (among other things). 

 

Ironically (if it is ironic), I began making locos on commission after a period of severe mental illness near a quarter of a century ago. I had to give up teaching because of it (though, on recovery, I did teach again for a time), and was looking for another means of earning a living as my mental health improved. I'd always built models, and would often take them along to Modellers Mecca in Wall Heath, where I was friends with the proprietor, Roy Millership. On my recovery, he asked would I build locos for him. He'd supply all the parts, and I'd build a loco for Modellers Mecca. Obviously, Roy took his percentage, but the pay was 'fair' (though I can't remember now what the rate was). I even painted them. Everyone was happy, and I had more than enough work, allowing me to make a reasonable living along with my photography and teaching part-time. 

 

I got to know most of my clients, and, in time, I was able to go 'independent', though still buying the bits from Roy. I also farmed out the painting to those far more proficient in the craft. A good friend was my accountant, and he told me my rates were too low. 'Do you get every commission you quote for?'. 'Yes'. 'Then you're too cheap!'.

 

So, I increased my rates, and lost one or two of my 'regulars', but, as my 'profile was raised', gained more. One regular came back after he's said I was too dear, and had tried elsewhere. 'It's just rubbish' was his 'apology' to me. 

 

My 'profile' increased through writing many, many articles in the press, often in the form of reviews of new kits. Kit manufacturers also approached me to test-build and write instructions for new products. By this time, of course, teaching had long-gone, and eventually I became full-time on BRM (which finished with retirement at 65, and another dose of the 'black dog'!). My full-time employment on BRM meant I no longer built loco on commission, except for mates, usually in the form of barter.

 

Why do I write all the above? Well, the question of 'rates of pay' has been brought up. When I finished (in 2003), my building rates were the equivalent of £25.00 per hour today. At today's prices, then, with my supplying all the bits, and the likes of Ian Rathbone or Geoff Haynes painting the finished model (say, a DJH A1), then the end price would be in the region of £1,200 (Jesse, if you're reading this, just think how much you've saved on your C2 by being my mate!). 

 

What does one need to do to be a 'professional' loco-builder (or any model railway builder)? I can only put my take on it; this being that when a loco is finished, it will work 'perfectly', won't stutter, won't jerk, will do in model form what its prototype will for real, and it'll be guaranteed for the rest of my life. Out of the hundreds I've made, only one has been returned because it was 'unsatisfactory'. One of the complaints was that the tender 'rattled over pointwork' - though in all other aspects of running, it was fine. The bloke's last words to me were 'It's not up to my standards'. Having seen his layout in operation, he got his statement the wrong way round - he should have said 'It's not DOWN to my standards!'. The fact that I having nothing to do with him now, rather sums it up.

 

Some commissions came in odd ways. I started building for Gilbert Barnatt (Peterborough North)  after he asked me to be an 'expert witness' in a case he was bringing against a bloke who'd built a B17 and a K3 for him. I was given the models to assess, and photograph. They were appalling and were of less value than their component parts, such was the mess made of their construction/painting. Needless to say, Gilbert won, and I then built him a B17 - at four times the price of the previous one! 

 

 

 

This is it, on his previous, loft-based layout. I made it from a Crownline kit and Ian Rathbone painted it. I did not supply the ghastly lamps nor the Hornby Gresley. 

 

I also built a B12 (painted by Ian) and some other types.

 

 

Of course, today, such kits are not necessary, with current RTR equivalents.

 

I hope some of the above comments are of some little interest. One note of caution, if I may? When your hobby effectively becomes part of your job, then what do you do in your spare time?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[micklner]

Boring ??

 

Even when this goes around its entertaining !! When the new Rails NER Autocar arrives even better, and no pulling needed either  !!

 

[Tony Wright]

13 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

I'm not so sure why a short train should be any more taxing to people's boredom-threshold than a longer one. I'm quite happy to see a two car suburban EPB unit or a 20 coach class 373 Eurostar train. Neither impacts my boredom-threshold.

 

 

See what I mean about not expressing myself entirely comprehensively?

 

I'll rephrase my original comment to 'But operating a layout where single-car DMUs are the longest passenger trains in operation and, on reaching their destination just run into the station and wait to depart again, merely to repeat the operation in the fiddle yard, before coming back again, and, because of economies, that single-car DMU is the only passenger service, and the layout only represents a weekend service when no freights run (not that there are any freight facilities), and because the branch is run on the 'one-engine-in-steam principle', then the 'box is switched out, would tax any operator's boredom-threshold (gasp!). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Lovely picture of that single-unit (though I'm entirely ignorant of what it is), but operating a layout where that is the maximum-length ('full-length') train might tax even those whose boredom-threshold is enormous. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony

 

To answer your question the DMU is one of two Derby Lightweight Single Driving Motor Brake Second Opens. The other one had a slightly different window arrangement at the brake end with a longer van portion.

 

As for boredom threshold, I think we all have our own likes and dislikes. I enjoy sitting back and watching two trains, long or short, just circulating around my layout. It is very relaxing and not boring.

 

I am not keen on shunting, something others like doing. So very rarely do the coal wagons and diesel tank wagons at the small loco yards get changed. All that shuffling back and forth is not fun to me and I get bored quite quickly.

Edited August 8, 2020 by Clive Mortimore

[Porcy Mane]

9 hours ago, PMP said:

Here’s one very close to being completed,

 

Don't forget to mask round the windies P. Even Hornby forgot the panda eyes on their green 08's.

 

https://flic.kr/p/dvfRqi

 

P.

 

[dibateg]

Professional builders -  I earned my living from building locos for six years. It wasn't full time and I found time for my own projects between commissions. All my work came by word of mouth, I never needed to advertise. I thoroughly enjoyed it as a job and was lucky to have the nicest clients - I ditched the one I didn't get on with, after the first job! I didn't charge enough to start off with, then went on to hourly rate, any prospective client that thought my work was too expensive was not the client for me.

 

  I'm fortunate in that now I don't need that income and can concentrate on my own projects. The enthusiasm is undiminished. I usually got an impressed reaction from  most people that asked 'what do you do?' - 'I build model railway engines for a living'.

 

I too have come across some very poor models ' professionally built'... A D11 held together entirely with superglue that fell apart faster than I could fix it, only the outer etch of the side rods had been used and they were bent and buckled...

 

Regards

Tony

 

 

[PMP]

13 minutes ago, Porcy Mane said:

 

Don't forget to mask round the windies P. Even Hornby forgot the panda eyes on their green 08's.

 

https://flic.kr/p/dvfRqi

 

P.

 

It’s on the ‘to do’ list! Bonnet stripes next, tidy them and the windaz, and we’ll be on the home stretch.

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Lovely picture of that single-unit (though I'm entirely ignorant of what it is), but operating a layout where that is the maximum-length ('full-length') train might tax even those whose boredom-threshold is enormous. 

 

I have never found that train length and operational interest have any direct correlation. I would agree that modelling a specific train that should have 12 carriages but only has 5 on a model is rarely effective but the difference between running a train which should have 5 and does have 5, compared to a train which should have 12 and has 12 on, is absolutely nil.

 

As an example, if those single car DMU types (there is one for the grammar experts, a single car multiple unit!) ran at Little Bytham in real life and you had one on the layout, it would probably stop at the station. That would give an operator more things to do than an express that goes through. So to me, operational interest isn't anything to do with train length. Any layout that just has one type of train or movement that gets repeated over and over will soon become dull for me to operate. It is a layout with varied operation that holds my interest better.

 

It isn't the length that matters, it is more about what you do with it. 

 

That last sentence reads like a line from a Frankie Howerd comedy so no sniggering please!

[PMP]

9 hours ago, Iain Mac said:

 

Setting skill set value not aside, considerably more.

 

The barter economy and challenge are the real attractions I'd suggest.

 

Other than that truth should be foremost.

"I can't help and I earn more by other renenue streams per hour. Sorry".

Absolutely agree. Mates rates tend to work well if you’re both happy with the exchange rate. It did catch me out once in the friend passed away before he could do the task, I’d far rather he were still here, and not yet started it!

 

A good while ago I was asked to do some work, with the expectation that it would be in effect on slave labour rates, as a similar engine was only £80 in the shops. I made my excuses and left.

[Major Clanger]

8 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

That last sentence reads like a line from a Frankie Howerd comedy so no sniggering please!

Tittering, surely?

[Northmoor]

16 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

My 'profile' increased through writing many, many articles in the press, often in the form of reviews of new kits. Kit manufacturers also approached me to test-build and write instructions for new products. By this time, of course, teaching had long-gone, and eventually I became full-time on BRM (which finished with retirement at 65, and another dose of the 'black dog'!). My full-time employment on BRM meant I no longer built loco on commission, except for mates, usually in the form of barter.

 

Tony, you've articulated very well why professionally-built kit locos are beyond the pockets of most people, but your point above about having written instructions reminds me it's something that rather more kit manufacturers should fork out for.  My experience of loco-building is nil, but I built plenty of wagons in my youth and some of the instructions were really very poor.  A few typed lines on an A5 sheet and a hand-drawn sketch does not constitute instructions.  Ironically, the clearest instructions were usually on the cheapest kits (e.g. Airfix).

 

2 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

As for boredom threshold, I think we all have our own likes and dislikes. I enjoy sitting back and watching two trains, long or short, just circulating around my layout. It is very relaxing and not boring.

 

I am not keen on shunting, something other like doing. So very rarely do the coal wagons and diesel tank wagons at the small loco yards get change. All that shuffling back and forth is not fun to me and I get bored quite quickly.

I can relate to the "sitting and watching the trains go by".  Layouts are so often influenced by our youth and for Tony it was watching ECML expresses and long trains.  It's what i did as a kid but on much quieter routes so there were long gaps between trains.  This is why the best exhibition layouts for me are the ones where I can stand and study them even when the trains aren't running.  There doesn't have to be an unrealistic amount of activity, there just has to be a landscape I can imagine being a part of.  Although Clive's layout doesn't really have scenery (yet), his dummy buildings and descriptions of the activity shown in photographs create just such a little world.  

 

And these imaginary worlds are always so much nicer than the big nasty real one.....

[t-b-g]

I am another who builds things for other people to earn a crust. The different attitudes of customers are very telling.

 

One chap was most indignant because I wouldn't match the price of a Dapol working signal. If they can make a fully working signal for less than £30 then I should be able to do the same. That was to include all the bits for a motorised signal.

 

Luckily, I have a number of regular customers who are very patient, understand that my home situation limits the amount of time I have and are just really good people. Some are more friends than customer. I have as much work in as I need, although the Covid problem has knocked the jobs that involved going to work on layouts elsewhere on the head for the time being, along with my duties at the Missenden Abbey sessions. 

 

I needed to earn some pennies and ended up doing it for a living almost by accident. I thought I would try it and if it spoiled my hobby, I would look for a real job instead.

 

It has proved quite the opposite. I have got to do all sorts of things that I wouldn't have done for myself, have met some great people and thoroughly enjoy it.     

[Clive Mortimore]

58 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I have never found that train length and operational interest have any direct correlation. I would agree that modelling a specific train that should have 12 carriages but only has 5 on a model is rarely effective but the difference between running a train which should have 5 and does have 5, compared to a train which should have 12 and has 12 on, is absolutely nil.

 

As an example, if those single car DMU types (there is one for the grammar experts, a single car multiple unit!) ran at Little Bytham in real life and you had one on the layout, it would probably stop at the station. That would give an operator more things to do than an express that goes through. So to me, operational interest isn't anything to do with train length. Any layout that just has one type of train or movement that gets repeated over and over will soon become dull for me to operate. It is a layout with varied operation that holds my interest better.

 

It isn't the length that matters, it is more about what you do with it. 

 

That last sentence reads like a line from a Frankie Howerd comedy so no sniggering please!

Hi Tony

 

Many moons ago I was going to build Kings Cross, it wouldn't have fitted in my garage but the station throat and the point work for the fiddle yard would. So the plan was to have the bits that would fit up and running using two coach trains. Unrealistic but the train and loco movements would have still been the same, ideal for practicing and having fun. If invited to an exhibition then the train shed and the full length fiddle yard would be brought into play along with full length trains.

 

Do other modellers do a similar thing when they do not have the room for the full layout or is that why we see so many biggish layouts having so many problems when they do go out as no one is familiar with them.

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

I would agree that modelling a specific train that should have 12 carriages but only has 5 on a model is rarely effective but the difference between running a train which should have 5 and does have 5, compared to a train which should have 12 and has 12 on, is absolutely nil.

 

12 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Do other modellers do a similar thing when they do not have the room for the full layout or is that why we see so many biggish layouts having so many problems when they do go out as no one is familiar with them.

I'm lucky enough to have a decent-sized space for my layout but I still run shorter trains (60% of prototype length, rounded up) because that's how I have made room for the track layout I want to operate. It's not for me to say, but there are others on here who might comment on whether it is "effective" or not.

[LNER4479]

Interesting views on commission building.

 

Since I 'semi'-retired (ha!) a couple of years ago, I have taken on a few commissions, as much to provide a bit of variety / interest as much as earning any money. Enclosed is the latest job on the workbench, for a guy in Australia who wants some interesting / representative vehicles to put behind his Locomotion Models GNR Atlantic (in GNR livery).

 

I'm probably not charging enough but - for me - this is beer money (well, railway modelling money more like, to buy the odd 'treat' every now and then). My 'take' on it is that someone is paying me to do what I love doing - making something! And the more interesting / challenging, the better for me. I certainly wouldn't want to rely on the money to pay the household bills, etc. If I were to log every hour spent and charge it at a 'craftsman wage', the price would be ridiculous - but I have to charge something so am happy with a price that is reasonable to me and seems to be 'in sync' with other costs / prices out there. I also feel that the more I charge, the more the customer has a right to complain if it's not to their satisfaction; it's best to stick with people you feel comfortable with and who appear reasonable in their manner towards you.

 

But I can see why many potential builders simply say 'no'; given the other things I'm also trying to do, maybe I should do that more myself!

Edited August 8, 2020 by LNER4479

[t-b-g]

31 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

 

I'm lucky enough to have a decent-sized space for my layout but I still run shorter trains (60% of prototype length, rounded up) because that's how I have made room for the track layout I want to operate. It's not for me to say, but there are others on here who might comment on whether it is "effective" or not.

 

I actually prefer shorter trains! When I say effective, I truly believe that from an operational point of view, shorter trains are better. If you need a station that is twice or three times the length of your longest train to make shunting look realistic, then if you want to do that with 14 carriages, you need a heck of a big layout. I keep going back to Buckingham, which is the most enjoyable layout to operate that I have ever had the pleasure to run. From the bufferstops to the last station point blade is almost exactly 8ft and the longest train is 5 bogie carriages and a 4-6-0. You can shunt that train from one platform to another without passing the advanced starter signal and with everything still under the close view of the operator.

 

The only thing I would suggest is ineffective is if you have 6 carriages and say that you are modelling the "Talisman" as it was in 1957. Even then, it is only ineffective if you try to pretend that the train is correctly modelled.

 

It is always up to each individual what compromises they are willing to accept. If somebody is happy running a 6 carriage "Talisman" then to them, it is perfectly acceptable as long as they don't try to con anybody into believing that it is any more than a representation. My preference would be to have an accurate model of a 6 carriage train but I have nothing against either approach.