Wright writes.....

[dibateg]

Whether to weather? It's interesting to be mentioned in the same post as Beeson! I have never built a model from scratch... I always think that weathering brings our models to life, and it brings out the detail. Hopefully I'll be able to create a scene where the model in it's environment looks a s real as possible.  I do find the concern about the the resale value of models curious. I have my models for my enjoyment, not the next person that owns them. The resale value is immaterial  really as long as they don't get thrown away. Who knows, by the time of my demise, they may have little value or interest to anyone. We all have our own preferences.  So everything  I have is, or will be weathered to some degree, even my 2P, which was running specials at the end of it's life:-

[Tony Wright]

9 minutes ago, 31A said:

 

Thank you Tony, you are too kind - but I don't usually attempt lining on steam locos!

 

Ah, 

 

But remember, what you do is all your own work. There is always great merit in that.........................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

1 minute ago, dibateg said:

Whether to weather? It's interesting to be mentioned in the same post as Beeson! I have never built a model from scratch... I always think that weathering brings our models to life, and it brings out the detail. Hopefully I'll be able to create a scene where the model in it's environment looks a s real as possible.  I do find the concern about the the resale value of models curious. I have my models for my enjoyment, not the next person that owns them. The resale value is immaterial  really as long as they don't get thrown away. Who knows, by the time of my demise, they may have little value or interest to anyone. We all have our own preferences.  So everything  I have is, or will be weathered to some degree, even my 2P, which was running specials at the end of it's life:-

Wonderful, Tony, wonderful (you, obviously, don't mind your name being mentioned). 

 

I totally agree with your sentiments. I care not a jot if what I do to my models affects their (potential) resale value (other than dropping them on the floor!). 

 

What are we trying to achieve? Realism in my view. Everything on a real railway is weathered. Even as I type this, there are Azumas flying by. Yes, they're kept clean, but there's road dirt on the bogies and the roofs are dirty. One run down the line by an ex-works steam loco (or diesel) and there'll be soot marks on the top and brake dust residue apparent.

 

Like you, my models 'please' me for what they are. In my case, they're how I remember them - work-stained. 

 

In reality, I'm under no illusions as to what LB's locos/stock might be worth after my demise. Those most interested will be my age in the main. My contemporary trainspotters, intent in recreating what they saw in their 'formative' years. My contemporary generation which is already beyond its Biblical allocation of years!  A diminishing potential market? 

 

Anyway, I've got another J6 to complete, paint and weather. Onwards......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[LNER4479]

Re layout photos just posted.

 

I'm pretty certain that 'Settle & Carlisle' is actually 'Moorcock Junction' by the late Andy Calvert (I assume it's OK to name the deceased?)

 

Edited January 15, 2021 by LNER4479

[grahame]

6 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Re layout photos just posted.

 

I'm pretty certain that 'Settle & Carlisle' is 'Moorcock Junction' by the late Andy Calvert (I assume it's OK to name the deceased?)

 

 

Indeed it is. I have a few snaps that I took of it after it was sold. Here's a few;

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[polybear]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

And a James Harewood (of New Zealand) Midland 4-4-0 in Scale Seven. 

 

Both these are 'museum-standard' locos, though both work beautifully (as expected). Beeson is long-deceased, but James is (as far as I know) still going. 

 

Two of the greatest builders of all time?

 

Though not intended for 'comparative' purposes, I'm sure Tony Geary won't mind if I slip an example of his 7mm work in here....................

 

 

Whether to weather? Discuss, please.

 

Does anyone happen to know who builds Pete Waterman's locos?  I believe he sold several via auction several years ago.

 

As for weathering, and based on Tony Geary's superb 9F above, for me it's an absolute yes.

 

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Before it had to be repaired. Should I carry on painting my models? This is all done with a sable and transfers.................................

 

Should you carry on painting and lining your own models?  Based on the results shown above I'd say absolutely yes - but doesn't it depend on whether or not you enjoy doing it?  If you hate every second of doing it and want to put it thru' the window then a bit of horse-trading does no harm.....

[Chamby]

Tony...  like Polybear says, if you enjoy painting your loco's, then you should do it, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the quality of what you've shown above.

 

Re: whether to weather, I suggest that no weathering is better than bad weathering, but when done well, following observation of the prototype, it can really enhance a model.  The ubiquitous muddy brown favoured by RTR manufacturers doesn't cut it with me, but some of the specialist suppliers do a nice job, and it is a skill that I am determined to acquire for myself.  One thing that I don't like though, is when weathering on a layout is too uniform and just makes everything look the same.  Just wafting a matt brown/grey over everything is not observed weathering. 

 

This photo shows a pair of the same model (Hornby's J92) - one has been renumbered and fitted with Kadee's but is otherwise out-of-the-box, the other is weathered by TMC, I picked it up from one of their clearance sales.  I still want to add more subtlety to the weathered version but as they say, a picture speaks a thousand words:

 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Chamby said:

Tony...  like Polybear says, if you enjoy painting your loco's, then you should do it, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the quality of what you've shown above.

 

Re: whether to weather, I suggest that no weathering is better than bad weathering, but when done well, following observation of the prototype, it can really enhance a model.  The ubiquitous muddy brown favoured by RTR manufacturers doesn't cut it with me, but some of the specialist suppliers do a nice job, and it is a skill that I am determined to acquire for myself.  One thing that I don't like though, is when weathering on a layout is too uniform and just makes everything look the same.  Just wafting a matt brown/grey over everything is not observed weathering. 

 

This photo shows a pair of the same model (Hornby's J92) - one has been renumbered and fitted with Kadee's but is otherwise out-of-the-box, the other is weathered by TMC, I picked it up from one of their clearance sales.  I still want to add more subtlety to the weathered version but as they say, a picture speaks a thousand words:

 

 

I find some of the weathering that people go mad about too shouty, too look at me, aren't I clever. I think that there is a case to be made that good weathering, even the heaviest, should almost go unnoticed or at least not dominate over other elements. That said, I do find the majority of layouts rather clean and sterile.

 

On another note, it is interesting for me to compare the change in styles over twenty years, between Tebay and Shap. The latter would definitely be a nice place to have a picnic and watch the trains go by. While on the former, you would die from hyperthermia if the wandered off to far from a brazier. 

Edited January 15, 2021 by Headstock
Spell checker correction.

[CUTLER2579]

Tony.

any chance that you have some photographs of Fordley Park & Leighford that you could post for your younger modellers to see and for us old uns to reminise about.

 

Derek.

 

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Re layout photos just posted.

 

I'm pretty certain that 'Settle & Carlisle' is actually 'Moorcock Junction' by the late Andy Calvert (I assume it's OK to name the deceased?)

 

It is Graham,

 

It was Andy's 'last great project', though, when he started it, he probably didn't realise it.

 

I think he's one of the most-influential N Gauge modellers of all time (influential to other scales as well). 

 

It was a privilege to pop over at regular intervals to Barrow on Soar, photograph what he was doing (originally Nether Stowey) and finish the day with an excellent pub meal and a pint. 

 

He was a great 'disguiser', at a time when much in N Gauge was rather crude. Change the pony/bogie wheels on a loco and the effect was instant. 'Bury' the over-heavy trackwork, and it looked like a 'scale' road. 

 

He died far too young. At his funeral, it was 'standing room only', outside as well because so many attended. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

1 minute ago, CUTLER2579 said:

Tony.

any chance that you have some photographs of Fordley Park & Leighford that you could post for your younger modellers to see and for us old uns to reminise about.

 

Derek.

 

Good afternoon Derek.

 

I'm afraid not. Both those layouts were shot on film (Fordley Park, originally by Brian Monaghan) and, though I have the prints and negatives, they'll need scanning (something I can't do).

 

Both layouts spawned more articles - 'The Locomotives of Fordley Park' and 'The Locomotives of Leighford'. I squirm now at what I was producing in those far-off days. 

 

All part of history, I suppose.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[CUTLER2579]

Tony,

I have copies of magazines with photographs of both layouts in them,however they are stored away in the loft of the garage and I can't access them at present ( Torn Shoulder Tendon). I thought when I saw them in real life that they were very good layouts for there time and were a credit to the  Wolverhampton Club.

Keep safe,Regards,Derek.

[Steven B]

Tony's latest batch of layout photos prove one thing to me. It doesn't matter if you're running RTR or scratch built stock - you need to get the ground cover and back scene right for a layout to go from good to outstanding.

 

The likes of Pempoul and Copenhagen Fields fields look great because of the scene the trains run through. The texture of the scenes are perfect - something very easy to get wrong.

 

Steven B.

Edited January 15, 2021 by Steven B

[steam-driven boy]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

And, for the moment, some more 'rediscovered' layouts............................

 

 

No idea about this one, except it's N Gauge. 

 

Hi,

I have this one down as St Aidans, not to be confused with at least one other of that name. I've tidied the Derby '06 show guide away beyond recovery for now so I can't supply further details. Some of my snappery from the show:

 

 

Nice couple of trophies there!

 

Regards, Gerry.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

Does anyone happen to know who builds Pete Waterman's locos?  I believe he sold several via auction several years ago.

 

As for weathering, and based on Tony Geary's superb 9F above, for me it's an absolute yes.

 

 

Should you carry on painting and lining your own models?  Based on the results shown above I'd say absolutely yes - but doesn't it depend on whether or not you enjoy doing it?  If you hate every second of doing it and want to put it thru' the window then a bit of horse-trading does no harm.....

I photographed all Pete's collection, Brian.

 

Geoff Holt and George Mackinnon Ure built the Gauge 1 items, and Geoff built some of the O Gauge locos. 

 

The Beeson Atlantic was Pete's, and I think he had some of Tony Reynald's peerless work as well. 

 

It's an amusing story behind how I was commissioned to photograph The Waterman Collection. It would be at one of the first NEC shows, and Pete had part of the collection on display. One of the items on show was a Gauge 1 LMS Beyer Garratt built by Geoff Holt. Geoff came over to me and asked if it were possible to photograph it, getting everything in focus. 'Of course' was my reply. 

 

We went over to collect it to take to my portable studio, whereupon some 'follower' of Pete announced it was impossible to get such a huge model all in focus. Pete looked on and took this guy at his word. 'Can you do it?' he asked me. 'Yes, I've got a camera with movements'. 

 

So, I took its picture, along with several others. When they were processed, I sent them to Pete. On receipt, his comment was 'That guy was talking b*ll*cks!'. The next comment was 'When can you come up to Cheshire and down to London to photograph the rest?'. 

 

The rest, as they say, is history.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Northmoor]

17 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

So, I took its picture, along with several others. When they were processed, I sent them to Pete. On receipt, his comment was 'That guy was talking b*ll*cks!'. The next comment was 'When can you come up to Cheshire and down to London to photograph the rest?'. 

 

I've met Pete W on a couple of occasions and that would have been one of his more polite phrases!

 

You can tell he'd been a railwayman from the sharp end, but he's a good advocate for railway enthusiasm.

 

Rob

[grob1234]

Just a quick one from me regarding the discussion back in June/July about the Comet V2 chassis which I’ve had a few issues with. It merely backs up what others have said, so builders beware!!

 

There is a problem with the motion assembly on the comet chassis. The relationship between the motion support and the slide bars was all wrong as I initially built it. Additionally, the crosshead was interfering with the front of the slide bars at the most forward portion of travel. After much swearing and cursing, (oh bother, and damn you for example) I did a bit of research, and found that the slide bars were about 2mm too long. So, I unsoldered them, lopped off 2mm and refitted them. Next was to tackle the motion support bracket. Measuring off the isinglass drawing, showed the depth of these to be about 8mm. Mine were closer to 10mm. So, I re bent the brackets, and trimmed off the excess. Now I feel that the relationship is correct (or less wrong) and the motion support bracket just touches the end of the slide bars. Now I just need to repaint the cylinder castings as the paint bubbled with all the extra soldering I was doing, and then refit the valve gear. Simple.

 

 

 

And the finished article, much better I think. Let's hope it works.

 

[thegreenhowards]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Whether to weather? Discuss, please. 

 

Tony,

 

I think the answer to this is it depends on what you're trying to achieve. For a working loco on a scale model railway trying to depict a scene from a point in history, clearly the answer is "yes". I suspect that includes all layouts that you're likely to be involved in!

 

However, the answer would be very different for a museum quality loco built for a display case. I'd prefer to see that in pristine condition, partly to show off the workmanship but also because its purpose is different. It's broadly the model equivalent of the Doncaster Works shot showing off the livery in all its glory. There are also occasions on a model railway where it would be valid not to weather. As an extreme example consider a model of the Isle of Sodor. As the model is trying to represent the fiction presented in the books then weathering would not be valid. Other examples might include a model railway which is trying to present an idealised version of history. If that is a stated aim then I think it's valid to display the models in ex works condition.

 

Where the hobby falls down in my view is the standard RTR satin finish which is neither one thing nor the other. There have been attempts to present models with a gloss finish to represent them being ex works - I like this and have a couple running round like that on my layout. But the standard Bachby finish needs either shining up or weathering down - that's not to say I've done all mine but I am working on it!

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

[Tony Wright]

3 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Tony,

 

I think the answer to this is it depends on what you're trying to achieve. For a working loco on a scale model railway trying to depict a scene from a point in history, clearly the answer is "yes". I suspect that includes all layouts that you're likely to be involved in!

 

However, the answer would be very different for a museum quality loco built for a display case. I'd prefer to see that in pristine condition, partly to show off the workmanship but also because its purpose is different. It's broadly the model equivalent of the Doncaster Works shot showing off the livery in all its glory. There are also occasions on a model railway where it would be valid not to weather. As an extreme example consider a model of the Isle of Sodor. As the model is trying to represent the fiction presented in the books then weathering would not be valid. Other examples might include a model railway which is trying to present an idealised version of history. If that is a stated aim then I think it's valid to display the models in ex works condition.

 

Where the hobby falls down in my view is the standard RTR satin finish which is neither one thing nor the other. There have been attempts to present models with a gloss finish to represent them being ex works - I like this and have a couple running round like that on my layout. But the standard Bachby finish needs either shining up or weathering down - that's not to say I've done all mine but I am working on it!

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Good afternoon Andy,

 

I'm sure you're right (you're definitely right with regards to the layouts I'm involved with). 

 

It would also take a 'brave' person to weather a museum-standard model; painted to a museum standard by those who've liveried the likes of Pete Waterman's collection - Larry Goddard, Brian Badger and Beeson himself. 

 

Though all the locos I've had professionally painted have a 'degree' of weathering, I'm not daft enough to obliterate such wonderful work. If 'heroic' weathering is called for, I'll paint a loco myself!

 

Perhaps there are two distinctions here. The 'glass case'/museum standard model which, even if it does work, will never be run on a layout (and running on a layout has inherent risks to paintwork/detail). Then there's (literally?) the 'layout' model, which is made to work, look realistic (weathered) and will run the risk of getting damaged in use. You know which one I prefer. 

 

By the way, I'll never 'consider' an Isle of Sodor layout. As for an 'idealised' model railway, that'll never be ideal for me.

 

I can (and do) admire some of the 'glass case' models it's been my privilege to photograph. They are the ultimate in modelling ability (indeed, they're better-built than the real things) and they definitely have their place; in a museum or a private collection.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[TrevorP1]

48 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

 

You can tell he'd been a railwayman from the sharp end, but he's a good advocate for railway enthusiasm.

 

Rob

 

I've met Pete Waterman only once. I'll keep the details sketchy to avoid possible embarrassment. He was at a railway I had the priviledge of working on in order to perform an 'official function'. As soon as he spotted people in overalls he broke away from the 'suits' and headed for us. Somebody tried to drag him away but he made them wait. Eventually he had to go, saying "I'll be back in a bit!". He was! A 'proper bloke' I think.

[Tony Wright]

Just in case anyone thinks this thread takes itself too seriously at times, three delightfully-absurd Norman Turner wagons..................

 

 

A flying pig van. The pigs inside actually whirl around, activated by an ingenious series of rods and cams. 

 

I love the couplings!

 

 

And a funny play on words.

 

 

And one for the real 'hair shirts'.

 

I'm amazed what I'm finding on some of these discs.....................

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2021 by Tony Wright
tautology

[James Fitzjames]

8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Should I carry on painting my models? This is all done with a sable and transfers.................................

Yes: I would kill for a K4 built and painted to that standard. Re. weathering, Tony Geary's 9F speaks volumes in favour.

Edited January 15, 2021 by James Fitzjames
Typo

[Headstock]

18 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Being of LMS/LMR persuasion myself, I regard him as my modelling muse. I never met him, but his writings were inspiration enough (as well as forever being  a hero of mine for his role on bringing the incomparable No.46229 first back to the NRM and then into working order for mainline railtours - yes, I know many others were involved as well!).

 

I noted your estimate of the number of articles you've written yourself and started me thinking. DJ was also a prolific writer (as well as a prolific producer of drawings). Aided and abetted by the likes of Bob Essery, the railway and modelling press of the 1970s and 1980s were awash with LMS-biased articles and projects.

 

Could it be the case therefore that, since his passing, the LMS/LMR has not had such a high profile? Meanwhile, with 400 articles to your own name in more recent times (and I'm sure there are others who could be named), does the LNER / ECML currently enjoy a correspondingly higher profile?

 

Just a thought!

 

Good afternoon Graham,

 

my comparison between Tebay and Shap wasn't a criticism, Shap has plenty of atmos, just of a different type. Picnicking by the lineside is relevant to your point in this post. Tebay was a great favourite with the crowds and real railwaymen, not so much the 'in crowd' (there is a story there but I would have to PM), it was the first to provide a spotters handbook. 

 

The LNER is the ultimate train spotters railway, having more classes and sub classes of locomotive than the LMS. It also has a system of identification that is more user friendly than the LMS, collectors love categorization systems. The classes of LNER locomotives are often geographically unique, so that the GE, or NE areas for example, all have their own individual identities.

 

When I was a kid, modelers use to make things, this was less necessary with the LM, as you could go out and buy an LMS express locomotive, a mixed traffic locomotive or a heavy freight locomotive.  I think that more 'proper' modelers were naturally drawn to the LNER  and they had a free run and things for some time, as the RTR manufactures were slow to catch on. Now a days they have realised the potential in the vast range and variations within classes to sell to the largest market, the collectors. Simon Kohler noted in a recent interview that Big boys sell in large numbers across a range of peoples model railway interests. The LNER has a large number of locomotives with 'Big boy' appeal. Hornby's upcoming releases feature various iterations of Hush Hush A2, and P2. Big prestige locomotives and incidentally a new range of generic coaches not much change in the last thirty years.

 

There has been a whole series of almost identikit layouts based on the southern end of the ECML, all set in the roughly the same period and running the same trains. You have to wonder how much one is copying the other. For example, once the research into trains is done once, it needn't be done again. Over twenty years ago, Tony did an influential article on modelling the Elizabethan. It was recently proposed to submit a new article, modelling the same train and using exactly the same methodology. Not much has changed!

Edited January 15, 2021 by Headstock

[MJI]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Just in case anyone thinks this thread takes itself too seriously at times, three delightfully-absurd Norman Turner wagons..................

 

 

A flying pig van. The pigs inside actually whirl around, activated by an ingenious series of rods and cams. 

 

I love the couplings!

 

 

And a funny play on words.

 

 

And one for the real 'hair shirts'.

 

I'm amazed what I'm finding on some of these discs.....................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those are excellent, made me laugh.

 

And so realistic as well, and I like the details like No1, P155, CHAR, Return empty to sty

 

 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon Graham,

 

my comparison between Tebay and Shap wasn't a criticism, Shap has plenty of atmos, just of a different type. Picnicking by the lineside is relevant to your point in this post. Tebay was a great favourite with the crowds and real railwaymen, not so much the 'in crowd' (there is a story there but I would have to PM), it was the first to provide a spotters handbook. 

 

The LNER is the ultimate train spotters railway, having more classes and sub classes of locomotive than the LMS. It also has a system of identification that is more user friendly than the LMS, collectors love categorization systems. The classes of LNER locomotives are often geographically unique, so that the GE, or NE areas for example, all have their own individual identities.

 

When I was a kid, modelers use to make things, this was less necessary with the LM, as you could go out and buy an LMS express locomotive, a mixed traffic locomotive or a heavy freight locomotive.  I think that more 'proper' modelers were naturally drawn to the LNER  and they had a free run and things for some time, as the RTR manufactures were slow to catch on. Now a days they have realised the potential in the vast range and variations within classes to sell to the largest market, the collectors. Simon Kohler noted in a recent interview that Big boys sell in large numbers across a range of peoples model railway interests. The LNER has a large number of locomotives with 'Big boy' appeal. Hornby's upcoming releases feature various iterations of Hush Hush A2, and P2. Big prestige locomotives and incidentally a new range of generic coaches not much change in the last thirty years.

 

There has been a whole series of almost identikit layouts based on the southern end of the ECML, all set in the roughly the same period and running the same trains. You have to wonder how much one is copying the other. For example, once the research into trains is done once, it needn't be done again. Over twenty years ago, Tony did an influential article on modelling the Elizabethan. It was recently proposed to submit a new article, modelling the same train and using exactly the same methodology. Not much has changed!

Good afternoon Andrew,

 

I'm not sure if the ever-popular southern end of the ECML layouts copy (or copied) each other. I once was asked to supply some pictures for a friend who was giving a talk on 'A Journey up the ECML to Doncaster by Model Railways'. I had plenty of material.

 

Off the top of my head now, the list included Kings Cross (x2), The Gresley Beat, Copenhagen Fields, Welwyn North, Hitchin (x2), Arlesey, Biggleswade, Tempsford, Huntingdon North, Peterborough North (x2), Greatford, Little Bytham, Stoke Summit, Grantham, Gamston, Retford, Bawtry and so on. Strictly speaking, The Gresley Beat isn't an actual location, but it couldn't be anywhere else but the Kings Cross approaches. All but two (which are/were commissions) were built by clubs or individuals, in some cases with very different approaches to the task. I doubt if any 'copied' any other, though several of the trains will have been made-up from the same components (at least five 'Elizabethans' created from the same sources, for instance). 

 

There must be other layouts depicting other locations on the line which I've not photographed. 

 

Why, I wonder, is there such a proliferation of layouts depicting the southern section of the ECML? The comparative LNWR main line to Crewe has nowhere near as many, does it? I've photographed a representation of Brinklow, and Rugby, but that's it. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited January 15, 2021 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point