Wright writes.....

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Andrew

 

My point was that this thread is about 'learning'

 

Excellent, then you or somebody else could help me out with some  information, on the type and the dimensions of chains used for securing steel loads?

 

27 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Dennis

 

WD 2-8-0 No.90693 was 'clearance tested' over the S&D with a brake van on 9 December 1958.

 

In January 1959, sister loco No.90125 arrived for a test working on the 11.00am Bath (Green Park)-Evercreech Junction goods. She was booked to work the train on 21 January but 'went off the boil' and had be worked back on shed by No.53804, which duly worked the train.

 

No.90125 did work the train on 22 January. Behind the loco was a 4-wheel fitted van, then an SR Van BY, three SR 4-wheel 'utility vans' and another fitted van - highly unusual on S&D freight trains - then about 30 or so mixed wagons and vans.

 

To quote briefly from one of Ivo Peters' albums: 

Off they set, gingerly, from Shepton Mallet, but by Prestleigh speed was building up at an alarming rate and the engine no longer had control of the train. Somewhat disturbed, the inspector called out to the driver, "Will you be able to pull up by the junction, driver?" to which he got the very abrupt reply , "Junction be b.....! We will be b.... lucky if we have stopped by Cole!" Whereupon the vacuum fitted vans were hastily brought into action...and the 'Austerity' 8Fs were not seen again on the S&D.

 

Once upon a time, the Log Book of the Bath (Green Park) Shed Running Foreman was in my possession but, sadly, that started a month later than these trips.

 

Brian

 

 

 

There you go, much better than anything that I could hope to contribute.

Edited December 31, 2020 by Headstock

[Mallard60022]

Boring, but Comet sides on a SP Body + detailing, if SP do not have the etched sides, make great coaches (as many of you already know); one can even experiment using the clear sides as windows and not cutting those clear sides as with other RTR conversions and using 'trad glazing'.

I have done a couple like this and they are OK IMO.

May the New Year be fruitful for you all; stay safe and well and may the bean feasts, that will be the first exhibitions,  be a place to meet and smile.

Phil

[Barry O]

The Lakes is represented by a 4 coach rake of ex LMS coaches on "Shap".. no nameboards yet but they are here waiting for a chance for the layout to visit exhibitions again and the boards will be fitted.  (I do have the whole of the Lakes set available , but I doubt whether it will be run as a full rake. However they didn't always have a tank engine on this train.. a Jubilee is to be seen currently on the layout pulling this part of the Lakes - a truly magnificent rake of multiple rakes!

 

Baz

[BMacdermott]

9 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Excellent, then you or somebody else, could help me out with some  information, on the type and the dimensions of chains used for securing steel loads?

 

 

Hello Andrew

 

There are some very good close-up photos of chains (on wagons) in: The British Railways Collection, British Railways Wagons, Their Loads & Loading. Bill Grant and Bill Taylor. Silver Link Publishing.

 

Brian

[davidw]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

The 'blooming' SP Mk.1 is now complete (or as complete as it'll ever be). 

 

 

More and more it's convinced me that my modelling medium is definitely NOT plastic.

 

The advantage of having (very nice) finished, pre-printed sides is militated by the risk of damage throughout the build process (though the surface damage is negligeable now).

 

 

It's definitely nothing more than a 'layout coach'.....................

 

 

Seems okay to me. You could always replace with brass sides in due course. SP or Comet.

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by davidw

[Headstock]

10 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Andrew

 

There are some very good close-up photos of chains (on wagons) in: The British Railways Collection, British Railways Wagons, Their Loads & Loading. Bill Grant and Bill Taylor. Silver Link Publishing.

 

Brian

 

Thanks Brian,

 

Vol 1 looks quite useful.

 

A second question if you don't mind, also to anybody else who may be able to contribute. I'm looking for a model chain manufacturer that produces long link chain, sometimes called paperclip chain, as opposed to cable chain that model railway manufactures supply. The latter is defiantly not the type used to secure steel loads. All contributions are welcome.

[BMacdermott]

Hello Andrew

 

That was very interesting to have a look into! 

 

Try www.pandahall.com. Photo from one of their pages (which I can't seem to 'link' here!)

 

Brian

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BMacdermott]

Hello again Andrew

 

Try via this PDF.

 

Brian

 

 

Panda Hall.pdf

[cctransuk]

14 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello Andrew

 

That was very interesting to have a look into! 

 

Try www.pandahall.com. Photo from one of their pages (which I can't seem to 'link' here!)

 

Brian

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do correct me if I am misinterpreting this - but those chains would seem to be far too large for the smaller scales.

 

John Isherwood.

[Headstock]

36 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello again Andrew

 

Try via this PDF.

 

Brian

 

 

Panda Hall.pdf 35.14 kB · 2 downloads

 

Thanks Brian,

 

10x5x1 is far to big. I have gathered my own photographs and I'm currently working on twenty six links across the bed of a bogie bolster or boplate. I thought that someone may be clued up on this in terms of real world knowledge, apparently not. It seems to be something never explored or talked about in model railway communities and real railway men who would have experience of such things are getting thinner on the ground. Add to that, the current world situation means that I haven't been able to get out and potentially get my hands on the real thing or any surviving documentation from the likes of the NRM. The type of chain dose matter, because the links in cable chain are round, not only dose it looks way over scale at 26 links across the bed of a wagon, it doesn't look right anyway, especially if you except almost half again as many links in length to keep the individual cross section looking correct. So far the best option I have come across is this

 

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/91853937/wholesale-gold-fill-paper-clip-chain?ref=search_recently_viewed-6

 

I currently have no knowledge of blackening or otherwise colouring gold or silver fill. I include a hand peg for scale

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by Headstock

[Michael Edge]

4 hours ago, D.Platt said:

Good afternoon All

First hope everybody has recovered from Christmas and wish you all a back to Normal 2021,and may we all get to see an exhibition sometime this coming year.

Like a lot of others on this thread I have benefitted  from having this wonderful hobby this last year, the work I’ve completed would have probably taken me two or three years to complete.

This is my latest loco build , apart from fixing the cab doors and a clean up I have to decide which chimney to go for ! After looking at lots of photos ,did they have two types fitted ? The white metal one supplied with the kit seems better than the turned brass one that I bought years ago for it, decisions, decisions !!

 

I'm not sure about the chimneys but the angle of the cylinders is definitely wrong - DJH made a complete mess of this.

[BMacdermott]

Hello Andrew

 

If you go into the link I supplied via PDF, they show all manner of chain. My photo was a 'sample'.

 

Brian

[Headstock]

7 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

Hello Andrew

 

If you go into the link I supplied via PDF, they show all manner of chain. My photo was a 'sample'.

 

Brian

 

I have thanks, 

 

 

[Mallard60022]

3 hours ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Andrew

 

My point was that this thread is about 'learning'...if, as you say, you 'know nothing about the S&D', it is well worth looking into. I didn't mention 'contributing'.

 

Brian

Certainly is Brian and those trains are worth researching for various folk, to ensure they use the correct Stock on the correct routes on the correct dates. Especially as there were loads of ER coaches of many Diagrams that ran on that lovely route during Summer Holiday periods. Sets of SR coaches too on alternate Saturdays on Cleethorpes/ Sidmouth/Exmouth Services and return in 1960/1/2. Those SR Sets than got 'borrowed' by the local C & W Team off Cleethorpes to various local destinations going west towards bandit territory such as Leeds and beyond.

Hours of fun and entertainment in the books of Ivo Peters.

Phil

[D.Platt]

35 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

I'm not sure about the chimneys but the angle of the cylinders is definitely wrong - DJH made a complete mess of this.

Not to sure about the angle of the cylinders, but I agree that it’s not one of DJH’s finest, I couldn’t use the valve gear, ( luckily I had a Kemilway set spare ) the instructions were ****, I don’t have a scale drawing , but feel the gap from the top of the wheels to bottom of footplate is to small, I think it’s a bit of a botch up from DJH between their 76xxx and a  77xxx.

One thing that I’am pleased with is using a high level gearbox for the first time, so not the most accurate model but as Tony would probably say a good layout loco.

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, davidw said:

Seems okay to me. You could always replace with brass sides in due course. SP or Comet.

 

Thanks David,

 

It'll be staying like it is. 

 

I'm more and more coming around to the idea of 'short-cut' modelling. By that, I don't mean slipshod creations, but modelling produced for the environment it's going to operate in.

 

The train the coach in question is in is 13-cars long; mainly modified Bachmann Mk.1s, with kit-built catering cars (Gresley, which was typical of the time). I think it fits in OK, especially as it bowls by at a mile a minute. 

 

It's in the 'Little Bytham environment', and is good enough for that. A carriage, in a train, made to be seen at 'stand-off' scale and merely a tiny part of an overall scene. 

 

I think my approach is pragmatic as well. When I look at some of the carriage-building seen on here of late, I'm staggered at how good it is. 'Showcase' modelling would not be a wrong description, even 'museum' standard modelling; it's that good. What's also amazing is that the examples shown are made to run, and not just for static display. Now, this is where the pragmatism comes in: I ask myself the question 'Could I model that well, say, to Headstock's standard?'. The answer, of course, is an emphatic 'No!'. And, even if I could, how long might it have taken me to make/modify over 250 carriages to that standard? I'm not Methuselah! 

 

So, I'm happy in the main with what I can produce; 'layout' items of rolling stock, running in 'layout' trains on a layout. Just like these.......................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More to follow.......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

Next shots (there are too many for one post)......................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All really 'layout trains'.

 

 

[Tony Wright]

And the last.....................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All the pictures in my last three posts were taken this year. Which seems a fitting way to finish 2020.

 

I hope readers will agree that all these shots illustrate 'layout trains' in the layout setting for which they were made.

 

To me, on a personal level, it's important for me to have made/modified all the locos which are seen hauling them. That said, due thanks must be given in part for the superlative painting of Ian Rathbone and Geoff Haynes, as well as the weathering of Tom Foster. As is known, one thing I insist upon is when a model is pictured and commented on, credit must ALWAYS be given for whose work is on/in it. 

 

Almost all the passenger carriages illustrated show my work, either as complete builds, restorations or modifications, but the freight stock is mostly the work of others (with just a few items built by me). 

 

I think, in the final analysis, the making of things for my railway is the most important factor to me. That they're to a 'consistent' standard is also important - consistent enough to rejoice as 'layout' locos and stock. Also 'consistent' enough to complement the work of others on LB; or, at least I hope so.

 

I hope this is a fitting way to sign off for this year. My most grateful thanks to all contributors to WW, and it leaves me now to say have the happiest of New Years. Even happy enough to eventually meet up again at shows! 

[Tony Teague]

Tony

I completely get what you are saying about pragmatism and 'layout' coaches; there are indeed some 'museum quality' productions shown on here.

The benefit of this distinction for some of us mere mortals, is that whilst we might dismiss the idea that we could ever achieve the 'museaum standard', your 'layout' standard is certainly something we might aspire to.

I'd be perfectly happy if my best coaches looked as good as those in your rakes!

Happy new Year!

Tony

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I think my approach is pragmatic as well. When I look at some of the carriage-building seen on here of late, I'm staggered at how good it is. 'Showcase' modelling would not be a wrong description, even 'museum' standard modelling; it's that good. What's also amazing is that the examples shown are made to run, and not just for static display. Now, this is where the pragmatism comes in: I ask myself the question 'Could I model that well, say, to Headstock's standard?'. The answer, of course, is an emphatic 'No!'. And, even if I could, how long might it have taken me to make/modify over 250 carriages to that standard? I'm not Methuselah! 

 

 

Get away with you, Exhibition my a**e. The only difference between me and thee, is if I was producing 250 carriages, I would quickly realise that I would only be require to build about twenty five to thirty locomotives, that's me being pragmatic. Thus the time saved on not building the other hundred or so locomotives, could be spent mixing paint and pondering chain links. As long as everybody is personal happy with what they are doing, who cares how they do it.

Edited December 31, 2020 by Headstock
add point

[MJI]

Bogies, seen a few, but I find the Dart Casting MJT ones very good castings, could we pursuade them to do some 10ft?

[thegreenhowards]

Tony,

 

Great layout trains and it’s good to see them again. What the photos don’t show is how well it all works. That, for me, is the most remarkable feature of LB and I know that’s down to your zeal. I’ve never visited another layout which works so reliably - the odd operator error excepted.
 

I think the SPM BSO looks fine. The main problem is the glossy finish and other than that it fits in well enough for me. I wonder if a coat of Testors Dullcote would tone it down. Or would that cloud the windows too badly? I’ve thought about trying it on mine but never plucked up the courage.

 

One question if I may. The Queen of Scots has a light blue headboard which I believe was Scottish Region. Would this have been carried all the way to London? Or would it have come off with the ScR loco (at Newcastle?) and returned to Scotland being replaced by a dark blue or black headboard?
 

Happy new year to you and Mo.

 

Andy

[mullie]

In my view LB is a very high quality piece of work.  As a lone modeller I find it both inspirational and aspirational. Following your progress and the numerous very high quality contributions from others has certainly encouraged me to up my game.

 

As a result of which I try to make each model a bit better than the last. I no longer chase the latest red or blue box and enjoy my modelling a lot more often by recycling and detailing older models and building things from scratch or kits.

 

Thank you to all for sharing your work and a happy new year to all who contribute.

 

Martyn

[bbishop]

Van body built, and it's square!  But isn't 4mm fragile!  Bill

[davidw]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks David,

 

It'll be staying like it is. 

 

I'm more and more coming around to the idea of 'short-cut' modelling. By that, I don't mean slipshod creations, but modelling produced for the environment it's going to operate in.

 

The train the coach in question is in is 13-cars long; mainly modified Bachmann Mk.1s, with kit-built catering cars (Gresley, which was typical of the time). I think it fits in OK, especially as it bowls by at a mile a minute. 

 

It's in the 'Little Bytham environment', and is good enough for that. A carriage, in a train, made to be seen at 'stand-off' scale and merely a tiny part of an overall scene. 

 

I think my approach is pragmatic as well. When I look at some of the carriage-building seen on here of late, I'm staggered at how good it is. 'Showcase' modelling would not be a wrong description, even 'museum' standard modelling; it's that good. What's also amazing is that the examples shown are made to run, and not just for static display. Now, this is where the pragmatism comes in: I ask myself the question 'Could I model that well, say, to Headstock's standard?'. The answer, of course, is an emphatic 'No!'. And, even if I could, how long might it have taken me to make/modify over 250 carriages to that standard? I'm not Methuselah! 

 

So, I'm happy in the main with what I can produce; 'layout' items of rolling stock, running in 'layout' trains on a layout. Just like these.......................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More to follow.......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

And the last.....................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All the pictures in my last three posts were taken this year. Which seems a fitting way to finish 2020.

 

I hope readers will agree that all these shots illustrate 'layout trains' in the layout setting for which they were made.

 

To me, on a personal level, it's important for me to have made/modified all the locos which are seen hauling them. That said, due thanks must be given in part for the superlative painting of Ian Rathbone and Geoff Haynes, as well as the weathering of Tom Foster. As is known, one thing I insist upon is when a model is pictured and commented on, credit must ALWAYS be given for whose work is on/in it. 

 

Almost all the passenger carriages illustrated show my work, either as complete builds, restorations or modifications, but the freight stock is mostly the work of others (with just a few items built by me). 

 

I think, in the final analysis, the making of things for my railway is the most important factor to me. That they're to a 'consistent' standard is also important - consistent enough to rejoice as 'layout' locos and stock. Also 'consistent' enough to complement the work of others on LB; or, at least I hope so.

 

I hope this is a fitting way to sign off for this year. My most grateful thanks to all contributors to WW, and it leaves me now to say have the happiest of New Years. Even happy enough to eventually meet up again at shows! 

 

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Next shots (there are too many for one post)......................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All really 'layout trains'.

 

 

Terrific atmospheric shots Tony.