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

51 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

It comes down to "running trains" and/or "operating a railway" once again.

 

We need changeable lamps on Buckingham as the locos work what are in effect "diagrams" that often include different types of train throughout the day.

 

Some of the locos can work up to 4 different classes of train. Even the station pilot gets a run out on the main line with a permanent way train.

 

I sometimes don't know which is closer to the real thing. A procession of trains, with the same loco always heading, say North, on the same train but never going back again but accurately portraying what a trainspotter would have seen from the lineside on a particular visit (they would no be there long enough to see most trains go back again), or the Buckingham approach with trains working back and forth along a line, working traffic to and from different destinations and working different types of trains in the process.

 

They both have their merits and their limitations.

 

I know which I prefer. 

 

 

 

Afternoon, Tony,

 

 I reject your notion of running trains verses operating. your interest is in creating plausible but invented diagrams on a model railway layout. I'm interested in copying actual diagrams from the real railway, I know the real diagrams that all my engines were working on a given day, I have research them in full, If there is no requirement to have a change of lamps I don't make them removable, it's a waste of time.

 

Making up workings, even based on prototypical practice doesn't appeal to me, though I appreciate its value to others.

Edited by Headstock
lost a bit
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Oh silly me, I forgot what you are building. Is this the same thing?

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/blue-diesels/45695255852/in/photostream/

 

One little detail, the second toplight in from both ends, is the pivoting type with rain guard, as in the dia 120 BY.

 

If so, it looks like this particular example has the bog standard retractable clipped buffer. I must admit, I sometimes cock these up, as BG'S were often deployed on the hook with gangways sealed, the Pullman buffing gear deactivated and the buckeyes down. I keep fitting the retacted casting, then having to remove them, drill them out and fit the extended buffers for screw link couplings.

 

 

 

Thanks Andrew,

 

That's a D111 - the first variant built. The Isinglass drawing of which I am reliant on states the D111 didn't have a ducket, but that as built at York should have had Oval-ish buffers. So the drawing is either incorrect or that particular coach has had replacements at some point. I don't put my full faith in the Isinglass drawing of course but either could be likely?

 

The D154 that I have chosen has the ducket and turnbuckle underframe, the D282 is the final version with Angle Iron.

 

The diagram neither confirms nor denies anything to do with the toplight detail. The etches certainly don't have that style.

Edited by Bucoops
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Woodcock29 said:

As I said earlier, yesterday we had a showing of a new exhibition layout called Spirsby built here in Adelaide by my mate Gavin. He has built the layout and I have supplied all the stock plus the GN somersault signals, signal box (still to be completed),  yard crane and 3-D printed GN station fence posts and seats. Whilst there are some details to be finished off on the layout its mostly finished.  The track plan is based on that on the ordinance survey plan. Its a country branch terminus to fiddle yard L shaped layout. To give the yard operator something more to do a loco depot has been built adjacent to the storage sidings. Here are a few photos. Some of the locos and a lot of the goods stock still need weathering.

 

In the background of some of the photos you can also see glimpses of Gavin's Great Moor Street layout.

Andrew

 

 

 

 

Now that is a sexy layout.

Edited by Headstock
not repeat images
  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, Headstock said:

 

Afternoon, Tony,

 

 I reject your notion of running trains verses operating. your interest is in creating plausible but invented diagrams on a model railway layout. I'm interested in copying actual diagrams from the real railway, I know the real diagrams that all my engines were working on a given day, I have research them in full, If there is no requirement to have a change of lamps I don't make them removable, it's a waste of time.

 

Making up workings, even based on prototypical practice doesn't appeal to me.

 

I didn't say versus. I said and/or to indicate that they don't have to be mutually exclusive.

 

Too many people like layouts where trains run from a fiddle yard, round a loop and back to a fiddle yard for me to suggest that it might be wrong in any way!

 

I have always considered that there are two basic types of layouts. Those that require operating and those that run trains. Generally, if a layout has a big fiddle yard and trains start from the fiddle yard, go round and end up back in the fiddle yard, I say that train has "run".

 

If a train terminates, changes engines, adds or detaches vehicle or generally gets altered in some way on its journey, I call that operating.

 

Some layouts are all one or the other and some do a bit of both. I am not saying that one is better than the other, just that they are different.

 

If you disagree with my descriptions, you have every right to do so! They are mine and mine alone and I don't expect anybody else to adopt or use them if they don't wish to.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 7
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
13 minutes ago, Woodcock29 said:

As I said earlier, yesterday we had a showing of a new exhibition layout called Spirsby built here in Adelaide by my mate Gavin. He has built the layout and I have supplied all the stock plus the GN somersault signals, signal box (still to be completed),  yard crane and 3-D printed GN station fence posts and seats. Whilst there are some details to be finished off on the layout its mostly finished.  The track plan is based on that on the ordinance survey plan. Its a country branch terminus to fiddle yard L shaped layout. To give the yard operator something more to do a loco depot has been built adjacent to the storage sidings. Here are a few photos. Some of the locos and a lot of the goods stock still need weathering.

 

In the background of some of the photos you can also see glimpses of Gavin's Great Moor Street layout.

Andrew

1863601449_IMG_0427ps.jpg.eeb69f96d56a9c2dec1177e294ae3269.jpg511879758_IMG_0418ps.jpg.13866655ea8b57708a0fc52ada699bb4.jpg1382297801_IMG_0410ps.jpg.013f437bf172c040335e08f7c728f195.jpg2104995738_IMG_0405ps.jpg.547289f22bd85389150ee31ef7382c54.jpg1447524037_IMG_0391ps.jpg.ad13793d385756c5bec647821aab4f6c.jpg1460423424_IMG_0379ps.jpg.4402de4e3694ae3fabae3020fe2d0d65.jpg643182351_IMG_0366ps.jpg.4aac29318db12407bc12e7f11cf116a2.jpg1350285915_IMG_0358ps.jpg.c18b0a699b0a89dd7a52c56c69da4705.jpg374139202_IMG_0355ps.jpg.9b1edd8a73dd00d93ff8e16f2510dab5.jpg1376403171_IMG_0335ps.jpg.328d66b8f0dd4e57ea30d32a21acd7e6.jpg

2045124605_IMG_0384ps.jpg.fb4ad0f88d5d2c39606b828eb80dcf25.jpg

 

 

Not often I see something and go all gooey!

 

Full of GNR Lincolnshire 1930s atmosphere. Certainly right up my street.

 

Now where is Spirsby on the OS map? About half way between Spilsby and Firsby?

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I didn't say versus. I said and/or to indicate that they don't have to be mutually exclusive.

 

Too many people like layouts where trains run from a fiddle yard, round a loop and back to a fiddle yard for me to suggest that it might be wrong in any way!

 

I have always considered that there are two basic types of layouts. Those that require operating and those that run trains. Generally, if a layout has a big fiddle yard and trains start from the fiddle yard, go round and end up back in the fiddle yard, I say that train has "run".

 

If a train terminates, changes engines, adds or detaches vehicle or generally gets altered in some way on its journey, I call that operating.

 

Some layouts are all one or the other and some do a bit of both. I am not saying that one is better than the other, just that they are different.

 

If you disagree with my descriptions, you have every right to do so! They are mine and mine alone and I don't expect anybody else to adopt or use them if they don't wish to.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Afternoon Tony,

 

LSGC fulfills all those criteria, as it is a goods yard, loop lines, carriage sheds a mainline that's a real line. It has operation for everything from station pilot duties, to pick up goods, to the attaching and detaching of goods on route, locomotive changes, LE movements as well as the background mainline activity. 

 

Even the roundy roundy bits have to be operated correctly, as it has rising and falling gradients that the operator has to respond to in order to keep their train under control. Off course they have to respond to demands from other operators operating.

 

It can scare the ****out of new operators though.

 

 

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

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Headstock said:

Not my thing, the right engine for the train will always my favourite.

 

Andrew, I don't think our approaches are that different. I still prefer to model the typical rather than the unusual, but I was just saying that restricting yourself to a given day can have unforeseen consequences. I chose a day in 1950 for working out the condition of locos I wanted to model. I was then shown copies of entries from a S. Manchester signalbox register showing half of the locos that passed through Chorlton on that particular day. Having already produced a model of 45649 Hawkins I was not then going to re-number it just because on the 34 occasions it was recorded as working a Manchester-St Pancras express between 23 Feb 1950 and 8 June 1950 it didn't work one on my chosen day in that period.

 

My point about variety wasn't suggesting a free-for-all, just a contrast to today when a non-available loco often means the train is caped or 30 years ago when the replacement traction could only have been something the driver was trained to drive (and in my area usually either a 47 or one or more 31s).

 

Incidently the same period identified above saw 98 different 8Fs and 88 4Fs recorded on a stretch of line (Manchester South District railway) with comparatively few goods and mineral workings.

 

Finally, RE Rose observed. That's what made the book fascinating to me - he contrasted the (changing) usual observed over an extended period with the unusual.

 

Simon

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
40 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Afternoon Tony,

 

LSGC fulfills all those criteria, as it is a goods yard, loop lines, carriage sheds a mainline that's a real line. It has operation for everything from station pilot duties, to pick up goods, to the attaching and detaching of goods on route, locomotive changes, LE movements as well as the background mainline activity. 

 

Even the roundy roundy bits have to be operated correctly, as it has rising and falling gradients that the operator has to respond to in order to keep their train under control. Off course they have to respond to demands from other operators operating.

 

It can scare the ****out of new operators though.

 

 

 

Indeed. Super layout and great to watch. The passing trains passing behind make a super backdrop and counterpoint to the activity at the front.

 

Of course no layout is perfect.

 

LSGC would be if it had just been set 50 years earlier! 

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

1 minute ago, t-b-g said:

 

Indeed. Super layout and great to watch. The passing trains passing behind make a super backdrop and counterpoint to the activity at the front.

 

Of course no layout is perfect.

 

LSGC would be if it had just been set 50 years earlier! 

 

I can't totally argue against that, LSGC is certainly not perfect and a pure GC setting has its merits. You would have to rip up quite a bit of the loop lines that were extended for wartime traffic. That would adversely effect operation.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
Just now, Headstock said:

 

I can't totally argue against that, LSGC is certainly not perfect and a pure GC setting has its merits. You would have to rip up quite a bit of the loop lines that were extended for wartime traffic. That would adversely effect operation.

 

I don't care!

 

A fully lined out and very smart Immingham on a fish train, an 11B on a clerestory Dining Car set or a GWR Dean Single on their service would more than make up for that.

 

I did see Andy Gibb's Whetstone layout at a couple of the handful of shows it did before it got scrapped. I recall being mesmerised by a tiny 0-6-0 (probably what became a J9 or 10 later) with a huge rake of PO coal wagons.

 

Sadly, I will never have room to build anything like LSGC or Whetstone and I don't have enough enthusiasm to build a layout that would only go out to shows any more so I will never be able to run such long trains personally but having Buckingham to play with isn't a bad consolation.

 

I do get to run some decent length trains on layouts that others have too, so that will do for me.

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

40 minutes ago, 65179 said:

 

Andrew, I don't think our approaches are that different. I still prefer to model the typical rather than the unusual, but I was just saying that restricting yourself to a given day can have unforeseen consequences. I chose a day in 1950 for working out the condition of locos I wanted to model. I was then shown copies of entries from a S. Manchester signalbox register showing half of the locos that passed through Chorlton on that particular day. Having already produced a model of 45649 Hawkins I was not then going to re-number it just because on the 34 occasions it was recorded as working a Manchester-St Pancras express between 23 Feb 1950 and 8 June 1950 it didn't work one on my chosen day in that period.

 

My point about variety wasn't suggesting a free-for-all, just a contrast to today when a non-available loco often means the train is caped or 30 years ago when the replacement traction could only have been something the driver was trained to drive (and in my area usually either a 47 or one or more 31s).

 

Incidently the same period identified above saw 98 different 8Fs and 88 4Fs recorded on a stretch of line (Manchester South District railway) with comparatively few goods and mineral workings.

 

Finally, RE Rose observed. That's what made the book fascinating to me - he contrasted the (changing) usual observed over an extended period with the unusual.

 

Simon

 

 

Too true,

 

a balance has to be struck, especially with an exhibition layout. The punter would get bored with thirty identical coal trains all with O4's on. Evil me would relish the idea but producing all those coal wagons would kill me. The unusual is common as muck in model railway land and the typical and everyday is like hens teeth on wheels. I get concerned when layouts start running too many special trains. What every day forgotten wonder, often more interesting, has been sacrificed for a bunch of opens, and a pet locomotive, on a dull as dishwater excursion train.  The latter have there place but I I don't have any pet locomotives. A B7 would be cool though. You can tell that my solder that was supposed to arrive on Friday still hasn't got here. I had better go dig something in the garden.

Edited by Headstock
  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I don't care!

 

A fully lined out and very smart Immingham on a fish train, an 11B on a clerestory Dining Car set or a GWR Dean Single on their service would more than make up for that.

 

I did see Andy Gibb's Whetstone layout at a couple of the handful of shows it did before it got scrapped. I recall being mesmerised by a tiny 0-6-0 (probably what became a J9 or 10 later) with a huge rake of PO coal wagons.

 

Sadly, I will never have room to build anything like LSGC or Whetstone and I don't have enough enthusiasm to build a layout that would only go out to shows any more so I will never be able to run such long trains personally but having Buckingham to play with isn't a bad consolation.

 

I do get to run some decent length trains on layouts that others have too, so that will do for me.

 

Iminghams, fish, 11B, Dean single, tiny 0-6-0's, PO wagons, oooh that's a hard one.

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

  • RMweb Premium
41 minutes ago, 65179 said:

 

...My point about variety wasn't suggesting a free-for-all, just a contrast to today when a non-available loco often means the train is caped...

 

 

Is it a bird?

 

Is it a plane?

 

No - that there thing is Super-train!

 

 

(Apologies Simon).

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
27 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

In the world of model railways, that may be the very definition of "understatement".

 

Over the last six months, the usual Buckingham operating sessions have had to stop but recently I have come up with ways, other than the Automatic Crispin (still to be restored to working order) to run the layout solo. It means setting points and signals at one station then moving to the other to drive but it is a great way to spend an hour or two.

 

Working solo also means that if something goes wrong, I can investigate without keeping the others hanging around waiting.

 

This afternoon, the Buckingham station pilot stuttered a bit. Great lumps of dirt were removed from the pick ups but on closer inspection, the carbon on the brushes has worn through and the brass carrier arms are running on the commutator.

 

I wonder how many miles the little thing has run in 70 or so years to get that much wear!

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I have puzzled long and hard about signalbox steps as I build quite a few.

 

I have decided that the neatness of a ready made step from Plastruct, thinned along the edge of the treads, is preferable to anything I might be able to make myself.

 

 

I am indeed using the Plastruct steps! They are cut and ready, but I note the idea about thinning the edge of the treads. Thank you.

The problem is the rather ornate diagonal cross arrangement on the handrails that the NER CD used on this design.

(Sorry about the strange perspective, I cropped an earlier scan used for a different purpose!.

 

 

 

Post_steps_01.jpg.7ee04a7d1d5c6fdd128a9128c48a4e5b.jpg

 

You will see that my version has the steps at the opposite end. Fortunately Battersby Cabin was the same way round as mine so I have good pictures to copy from. Having got this far I don't want to rush!

 

 

 

 

Post_15.jpg.dbda390e34f85c1f0fdcbeadb8611be4.jpg

 

However, just now while cutting the grass I had an idea!

 

When it has developed a bit more I'll post a picture.

 

I like your box, with the lovely finials. Is it a GN prototype?

 

 

 

Edited by drmditch
  • Like 13
  • Craftsmanship/clever 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
2 minutes ago, drmditch said:

 

I am indeed using the Plastruct steps! They are cut and ready, but I note the idea about thinning the edge of the treads. Thank you.

The problem is the rather ornate diagonal cross arrangement on the handrails that the NER CD used on this design.

(Sorry about the strange perspective, I cropped an earlier scan used for a different purpose!.

 

 

 

Post_steps_01.jpg.7ee04a7d1d5c6fdd128a9128c48a4e5b.jpg

 

You will see that my version has the steps at the opposite end. Fortunately Battersby Cabin is the same way round as mine so I have good pictures to copy from. Having got this far I don't want to rush!

 

 

 

 

Post_15.jpg.dbda390e34f85c1f0fdcbeadb8611be4.jpg

 

However, just now while cutting the grass I had an idea!

 

When it has developed a bit more I'll post a picture.

 

I like your box, with the lovely finials. Is it a GN prototype?

 

 

 

 

You might find something suitable at York Modelmaking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
20 minutes ago, drmditch said:

 

I am indeed using the Plastruct steps! They are cut and ready, but I note the idea about thinning the edge of the treads. Thank you.

The problem is the rather ornate diagonal cross arrangement on the handrails that the NER CD used on this design.

(Sorry about the strange perspective, I cropped an earlier scan used for a different purpose!.

 

 

 

Post_steps_01.jpg.7ee04a7d1d5c6fdd128a9128c48a4e5b.jpg

 

You will see that my version has the steps at the opposite end. Fortunately Battersby Cabin was the same way round as mine so I have good pictures to copy from. Having got this far I don't want to rush!

 

 

 

 

Post_15.jpg.dbda390e34f85c1f0fdcbeadb8611be4.jpg

 

However, just now while cutting the grass I had an idea!

 

When it has developed a bit more I'll post a picture.

 

I like your box, with the lovely finials. Is it a GN prototype?

 

 

 

 

I see your problem!

 

Some of the LD&ECR boxes had similar diagonals.

 

Luckily, some had much simpler handrails and a few had just a single post at the base and the top with a single handrail and no intermediate supports at all.

 

You don't need t guess which one I went for as you have seen the evidence.

 

I did make one with diagonals like that once and I built them up from three layers of 10 thou plasticard strips. The first layer was full sized for that section of the steps but just had one diagonal, the next layer had the opposite diagonal and I then infilled the opposite bits and added a third layer.

 

It wasn't quick but it was possible to get a consistent and neat job.

 

It is worth getting it right on your model. It is really top drawer modelling and it would be a shame to skimp on the last bit.

 

Edit to add that the LD&ECR signalboxes were pretty much a copy of GNR designs although if you look at the photos of them along the line, there were huge and really odd detail differences and I haven't found two exactly the same. Mine has features from three boxes built into one as I am modelling a fictional location and didn't want mine to be recognisable as any real box, keeping up the "every one different" tradition.

Edited by t-b-g
To add content
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 10/09/2020 at 21:25, Tony Wright said:

 

Apart from what you do, does modelling in this style still take place? Most diesels I see on layouts these days seem to be mainly RTR, with just a few mods. 

 

I suppose the truth is it's no longer necessary.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

It doesn't matter about necessary, it is more about fun. Here's an ancient Hornby Class 21/29 made to look more like a Class 29. A few windows  filled in with grilles made of micro strip, plastic moulded big grilles removed and A1 Models etches in place, spurious moulded lines removed. The 07 is a Silver Fox resin body with the moulded handrails removed, the plan being to fit brass 0.45mm wire handrails and build a modified High Level Kits 03 chassis to go under it. The yellow box in the background is a 2 tone grey Class 31 that I got relatively cheap and am backdating it to BR blue, which are singularly more expensive.

 

Yes, both available rtr, but that doesn't give me an excuse to play with my relatively unused air brush and compressor set.

 

IMG_0938.jpg

Edited by 96701
I wrote mater instead of matter. I don't suppose my mum cares about train sets.
  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites

Woodcock29, Love the pictures of Firsby, fairly familiar with the area as my first wife (deceased) came from Louth and we did a lot of our courting in that general area finding the one (front) room pubs.  In your pictures I see a LNER J11, I also see that it has a vacuum brake but it does not have a vacuum ejector pipe.  I posted a comment a couple of pages back about discovering that both my Little Engines J11s did not have a vacuum ejector pipe and that I would probably have to fit one.  I am sort of hoping that you can tell me something i have missed and I do not have to fit them.  Thanks

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...