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

6 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

 

I can’t believe that ‘Sir’ is recommending that I copy another model, let alone one from Hornby!

 

Seriously, I agree that it would be waver thin in 4mm but it is noticeable in prototype photos, so worth including even if it has to be slightly over scale to be noticeable. Maybe the transfer backing sheet would service the purpose as you suggest. Hornby seem to stick the transfer straight on although my 60013 (bought second hand) has builders plates where the coat of arms should be so I can’t check close up.

 

 

I was aware from your previous posts which are bookmarked and regularly referred to. My donor has a single chimney but I’ve still got to work out how to apply the tender base strip to a Hornby tender.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Good evening Andy,

 

In email correspondence with Eric, it seems you're OK with not having to put the strip at the base of 9's 1935-style streamlined corridor tender to represent the loco in 1957. So, single chimney and later tender emblem (with wrong-facing lion on the offside, probably). 

 

By next year, she had a tender with the strip.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I haven’t reached my peak yet or even a plateau. I do try and improve each item I build particularly in regard to painting and weathering but I feel I’ve a long way to go.

 

When I look at some of the locomotives which Roy built for Retford I realise that I can never attain that standard which is quite depressing but I carry on and do the best I can.
 

Retford does have some very old stock which should possibly be replaced such as a train partly made up of Kitmaster coaches which could be at least fifty years old. Do I replace them? The answer is probably yes but I’m reluctant to get rid of them for they actually look quite good and they are part of the history of the railway. Retford is a model railway with a lot of history and whilst I don’t want to preserve it in aspic, I do want to respect the builder who built it but at the same time maintain, improve and hopefully finish it.

 

Sandra

Good evening Sandra,

 

I'd carry on doing exactly what you're doing. Retford is legitimately now your property and, as such, it's up to you what you do with it. 

 

I don't think it demeans the memory of the great man who initially created it if you seek to improve things. Not at all. Speaking personally, after my demise (though I'll not know anything about it), if whoever acquires all my model railway stuff chooses to alter/improve what I've done, so what? If it makes it more detailed/more accurate, then good. 

 

You're right; Retford is a large piece of the history of model railways, but it's not a thing from the past. It's on-going, it's evolving and, when it's finished, what better way of remembering Roy? Not as a memorial as such, though it will acknowledge the past.  

 

Don't worry if you don't ever attain the standards Roy set. I assure you, you're in a very large majority of modellers, of which I'm also one. However, it's important that your own work is on Retford, and, from what I've seen, it's more than good enough. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Tony,

 

Colin Boocock was a former collegue of mine when the DM&EE existed (now, all those years ago!) we both worked at the Railway Technical Centre in Derby. He is a very decent type of chap, if I recall, he became involved in the railway running in Markeaton Park Derby.

Obviousely you must comment on his book as you see fit! Mr Bullied was though, the last great steam locomotive engineer so lets hope Colin's book does him justice.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

It's a splendid book, Richard.

 

A wonderful piece of work.

 

Mr Bulleid's locos are perfectly-described, warts and all.....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't think I recommended that you copy another model, Andy.

 

I just asked how Hornby applied the coats of arms. 

 

You're right in stating that the plates are visible in prototype pictures (usually because dirt has accumulated around them after cleaning), but, to scale, it would still be only wafer-thin. 

 

I honestly don't know; I'm lucky in that my choice for the A4s carrying coats of arms had lost hers by 1958 (probably earlier) so the lower cabside is just blank. Did Hornby do 60013 then, with a worksplate? Since I only usually build models of the locos I saw, then I'd have to consider just 60009 or 60010 in future, both of which (it would seem) carried their coats of arms to the end. That said, the last time I saw 60010 she was minus her chimney, and I can't remember if her cabside plates were still on. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Hi Tony

 

I have looked through all photo I have of A4 60013 dating from the late 1950's until 1962 and cannot find a single photo of her with the coat of arms on the cab side.

 

Regards

 

David

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Never rely on memory, especially one like mine!

 

I was convinced (and had noted it many moons ago) that 60009 had a streamlined corridor tender with a strip added to its soleplate in the late-'50s/early-'60s. Yet, having checked again through all my sources, can I find the picture I was thinking of? 

 

Andy (Sparkes) you're quite safe in omitting it from your model of 60009. 

 

Thanks to Eric (Merlin) for the further information.

Edited by Tony Wright
to add something
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, landscapes said:

Hi Tony

 

I have looked through all photo I have of A4 60013 dating from the late 1950's until 1962 and cannot find a single photo of her with the coat of arms on the cab side.

 

Regards

 

David

Thanks David,

 

I've looked through lots of my sources and in every picture I've seen of 13 in BR days there's nothing on the cabsides below the numbers. 

 

I wonder when it lost the coats of arms? 

 

On these minutiae of details we ponder.............................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks David,

 

I've looked through lots of my sources and in every picture I've seen of 13 in BR days there's nothing on the cabsides below the numbers. 

 

I wonder when it lost the coats of arms? 

 

On these minutiae of details we ponder.............................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi Tony

 

My best guess would be when 60013 paid a visit to Doncaster Works during her career.

 

You have got me wondering now so I will investigate further to see if I can find a dated photo of her with the plaque on her cab side.

 

Watch this space.

 

Regards

 

David

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to 60009's tender (for those who are still awake!).

 

By the end of 1963, she'd acquired one of the trio of cut-down tenders (ex-the '48 Exchanges; FLYING SCOTSMAN ended up with the other two). 

 

1876433576_60009DoncasterShed14_11_63.jpg.7a3e07940eae178b76cd36e6daea73d9.jpg

 

Was this the occasion of her last shopping? Wasn't she the last steam loco repaired at Doncaster? 

 

Coat of arms prominent on the cabside.

 

It would seem that 60010 also lost her coats of arms at some time in BR days.

 

1462858590_60010Doncaster11_11_62.jpg.3930bfa20b3715e8ef3e3915a235a5be.jpg

 

Doncaster, at the end of 1962. 

 

I ponder on occasions how much of all this sort of stuff is really relevant? The minutiae of detail differences on locos fascinates me, and I try to incorporate those differences into the models I make. But how many people know, or even care? 

 

 

  • Like 10
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Bucoops said:

 

What body are you using? I've had to do quite a few modifications to the RDEB one.

 

Agreed the trussing could be better but I'll probably stick with the etched ones. I have used nuts instead of the supplied washers for where they are attached to the queen posts.

A 51L kit, with MJT floorpan.  The sides go together much the same as MJT, with separate panels.  I will probably use nuts for the next turnbuckle underframe.  

Considering the vacuum reservoir, I wondered if they were located crosswise-It seems difficult to understand that they were a standard fitting on 61'6" stock, and not on short stock.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 hours ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I haven’t reached my peak yet or even a plateau. I do try and improve each item I build particularly in regard to painting and weathering but I feel I’ve a long way to go.

 

When I look at some of the locomotives which Roy built for Retford I realise that I can never attain that standard which is quite depressing but I carry on and do the best I can.
 

Retford does have some very old stock which should possibly be replaced such as a train partly made up of Kitmaster coaches which could be at least fifty years old. Do I replace them? The answer is probably yes but I’m reluctant to get rid of them for they actually look quite good and they are part of the history of the railway. Retford is a model railway with a lot of history and whilst I don’t want to preserve it in aspic, I do want to respect the builder who built it but at the same time maintain, improve and hopefully finish it.

 

Sandra

 

Hello Sandra,

 

Retford was very much a work in progress and Roy was gradually working on, or acquiring from people like John Houlden, better stock. I feel that he would be delighted if he knew somebody was carrying on with that work.

 

He once said to me that once he was gone, he would like to think of somebody taking it on and keeping the project going but he couldn't see it happening.

 

Well it has!

 

I can't think of anybody who would want or expect you to keep it just as it is now.

 

Roy thought very highly of you and was impressed by your modelling. That puts you in a fairly exclusive club as he was pretty hard to impress.

 

So I don't think you should have any concerns over upgrading the older models. Roy would have done it eventually if he had still been around.

 

I can't imagine you being anything but respectful towards the task. I think you feel about Retford the same way I do about Buckingham.

 

Best wishes,

 

Tony

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

If you rub down the raised lining "stripe" a Kitmaster coach looks fine.. and it doesn't have those annoying roof "strips".. they have fully flush glazed windows and run well with brass bearings and metal wheelsets fitted.

 

Baz

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

  • RMweb Premium
9 hours ago, Dylan Sanderson said:

Hi Tony,

 

Came across this photo this morning on Social Media, though you might like it!

 

Big Bytham!

IMG_7833.jpeg.6869d14f395b8f7af94cd67772320f88.jpeg

 

That is a cracking photo.

 

Those GNR ground signals look in really nice condition. The S&T people have looked after them and given them a fresh coat of paint. It is surprising how long such things lasted, long after the somersault signals on the main lines.

 

Those are the sort of details I love to see in photos. Sometimes, for me, the loco hardly gets more than a quick glance.

 

I have seen many colour photos of A4s but very few of GNR ground signals!

 

Edit to add I just zoomed in and you can just make out a slightly blurry lever number on the red disc. That was old GN practice.

Edited by t-b-g
To add content
  • Like 7
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't think I recommended that you copy another model, Andy.


 

I was only teasing you!

8 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I just asked how Hornby applied the coats of arms. 

 

You're right in stating that the plates are visible in prototype pictures (usually because dirt has accumulated around them after cleaning), but, to scale, it would still be only wafer-thin. 

 

I honestly don't know; I'm lucky in that my choice for the A4s carrying coats of arms had lost hers by 1958 (probably earlier) so the lower cabside is just blank. Did Hornby do 60013 then, with a worksplate? Since I only usually build models of the locos I saw, then I'd have to consider just 60009 or 60010 in future, both of which (it would seem) carried their coats of arms to the end. That said, the last time I saw 60010 she was minus her chimney, and I can't remember if her cabside plates were still on. 
 

Mine has been converted from another loco. It’s neatly done and I hadn’t realised until the discussion about the coat of arms and works plate. I’ve found pictures online of Hornby models with the coat of arms.

 

No. 9 did lose its coat of arms at some point as the pictures of her working on Aberdeen -Glasgow services don’t have it.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Mr Bulleid's locos are perfectly-described, warts and all....................

 

Many thanks Tony and my spelling has warts and all......

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks David,

 

I've looked through lots of my sources and in every picture I've seen of 13 in BR days there's nothing on the cabsides below the numbers. 

 

I wonder when it lost the coats of arms? 

 

On these minutiae of details we ponder.............................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Yeadon has a photo of 13 with the coat of arms. The photo Is dated to between ‘51 and ‘55 based on it hauling a non corridor tender. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I ponder on occasions how much of all this sort of stuff is really relevant? The minutiae of detail differences on locos fascinates me, and I try to incorporate those differences into the models I make. But how many people know, or even care? 

 

 

Tony,

 

I find it fascinating. There’s little point in changing the nameplate on a loco and then getting all the other distinguishing features wrong. I also find the research interesting.... if frustrating at times. I think more than anything, I know I will never have the technical/ artistic skills to produce museum quality models, but this is one thing I can get right (with help from my friends on here - thank you all).

 

Regards

 

Andy

Edited by thegreenhowards
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I ponder on occasions how much of all this sort of stuff is really relevant? The minutiae of detail differences on locos fascinates me, and I try to incorporate those differences into the models I make. But how many people know, or even care? 

 

 

 

Tony, I think the question perhaps should be... why does it matter?   Anything other than absolute accuracy down to the point of counting individual rivets, takes you into the slippery subject of what level of accuracy is acceptable.  That, as we have discussed before, is different for different people, and can vary considerably across different aspects of modelling, from lamps to crests to shades of green, subtleties in the profile of tumblehomes or roof profiles... the list is endless! 

 

The reality is is that joe public and the majority of railway modellers for that matter, have no idea whether a tender should have an extra strip across the bottom of it, or not.  They probably haven’t even noticed that some tenders have them, and others don’t.  The fact that different styles of tenders were swapped between locomotives at different times in their lifespan makes it a very specialised and minority subject such that few would be able to criticise from retained knowledge, whilst observing a model in the exhibition hall.  Even on this forum, we have to constantly refer to photographic sources to check up on such details. 

 

So, playing devils advocate here... what are people’s thoughts on why it does matter?   I don’t think I will ever get a model 100% correct... so why do we beat ourselves up so much about these historical minutiae?

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

  • RMweb Gold
2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

snipped....

 

I ponder on occasions how much of all this sort of stuff is really relevant? The minutiae of detail differences on locos fascinates me, and I try to incorporate those differences into the models I make. But how many people know, or even care? 

 

 

 

What you see as wrong, and what you accept in context varies so much, so just a few observations of mine. I would rather get it right than wrong (ditto for manufacturers) but can accept oddities - examples:-

  1. I have an old Tri-Ang Sir Dinadan, I bought it 2nd hand painted black, it isn't a good Arthur nor is it an S15 (what it is numbered as) but I can live with it as it looks sufficiently Maunsell to be representative.
  2. The Hornby-Dublo Deltic, way out dimensionally but has the heft none of the plastic modern one's have.
  3. With both the above my brain fills in the errors.
  4. Watching TV tonight,
    1. several instances on the Susan Calman programme where the she was supposedly going south (the voiceover), from local knowledge of N Yorkshire she was obviously going north.
    2. On the Bill Nighy programme umpteen continuity boobs, the most obvious the O/H gear supposedly on the S&C if the voicover represented what was on screen.
  5. Dancing - my wife is a dancer and gets really livid when the dance steps don't match the music, I don't notice! 
  6. One of the early James Bond movies, supposedly in the Med with a pronounced tide mark and motor boats to classic UK designs!

My point is none of the above really spoils/spoilt my enjoyment, even when I notice the differences, unless it is so truly awful that I switch off, or in exhibitions walk away.

 

I wouldn't notice some of the A4 errors mentioned above, I can accept a roughly generic A4, but that said if it is new tooling why get it wrong! The key - have they at least tried. What really p****s me off though is the haven't even tried brigade with layout descriptions like - "somewhere on the south coast" (Kent looks nothing like Cornwall and the points in between) and buildings using foreign kits that scream non-UK, modern diesels on a rake of PO wagons etc, etc. 

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

Tony, I think the question perhaps should be... why does it matter?   Anything other than absolute accuracy down to the point of counting individual rivets, takes you into the slippery subject of what level of accuracy is acceptable.  That, as we have discussed before, is different for different people, and can vary considerably across different aspects of modelling, from lamps to crests to shades of green, subtleties in the profile of tumblehomes or roof profiles... the list is endless! 

 

The reality is is that joe public and the majority of railway modellers for that matter, have no idea whether a tender should have an extra strip across the bottom of it, or not.  They probably haven’t even noticed that some tenders have them, and others don’t.  The fact that different styles of tenders were swapped between locomotives at different times in their lifespan makes it a very specialised and minority subject such that few would be able to criticise from retained knowledge, whilst observing a model in the exhibition hall.  Even on this forum, we have to constantly refer to photographic sources to check up on such details. 

 

So, playing devils advocate here... what are people’s thoughts on why it does matter?   I don’t think I will ever get a model 100% correct... so why do we beat ourselves up so much about these historical minutiae?

 

An interesting reply, and my answer to Tony's question is that it is an individual's choice.

 

Today I photographed a lovely RTR 00 Bachmann Patriot BR 45506 in lined 'British Railways' black, and I believe Bachmann have got just about everything right on this model. However I was thinking about the first two of the class, among the last before Stanier? and being rebuilt Claughtons the first two in 1930 were built at Derby, Midland if ever anything, and LNWR Claughtons being rebuilt, well, what a colourful mix Fowler must have had to manage.

 

The first two which became LMS 5500 and 5501 in 1934 also received new names, the former becoming 'Patriot', with subscript 'In memory of the fallen LNWR employees 1914-1919', quite moving really, all in brass, and interestingly these two engines kept the larger driving wheel-centres of their Claughton donors, but little else.

 

I doubt it would be simple to rebuild 45500 'Patriot' without incorporating these large-boss wheel centres yet most wouldn't notice or care?  But I would.

So I cheated and edited the wheels, numbers and nameplate...  and if Tony will permit my non-modelling changes, here she is. As 45500  Patriot' in 1949 redolent in LNWR-style livery. LNWR Claughton 5971 'Croxteth' lives on! 

 

45500_Patriot_portrait10_1abcd_crop2_r1820.jpg.3adf0e348654485bf194b62ad3714867.jpg

 

Well, the driving wheel centres do.

 

 

 

 

In short, I think the level of detail, valence-colours, angle of valve gear, thickness of wheel profile and gauge is all personal. 

 

 

 

Edited by robmcg
addition, changed name from Croxfeth to Croxteth. Also changed valve spindle cover area...
  • Like 8
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

80103446_WIGANAREATRACKRELAYING196667011.jpg.68de002180a88acdfb5ecf79c85caa90.jpg

 

515653109_WIGANAREATRACKRELAYING196667017.jpg.a45197c49906e9e6a2efff0b911cb887.jpg

 

For me modelling is about atmosphere. Whose bothered about a missing rivet or three ? These pictures dhow what we generally saw, smoke, steam, filth, and all the bits n bobs of our old railways, signals, signal boxes etc.

 

Relaying at Pigs Nut (Boars head)  junction just north of Wigan around 1966/7.  Nice signal box. Mate at schools dad was a signalman here and I visited with him once. Now that box had atmosphere (Capstan full strength !!).

 

Smoky place was Pigs Nut !!

 

1556977621_WIGANAREATRACKRELAYING196667013.jpg.e2f2e891db526692039bee74b1ce2342.jpg

 

Brush 4 on a London express rejoining the WCML off the Chorley to Boars Head line which closed shortly after the photo was taken.

 

Boring place now, Pendolinos and EMU's etc. Even the lineside Pub is shut !!

 

IMG_1527.JPG.eda97a48eafa00408c242d3c8756e057.JPG

 

Brit 15

  • Like 13
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, robmcg said:

 

An interesting reply, and my answer to Tony's question is that it is an individual's choice.

 

Today I photographed a lovely RTR 00 Bachmann Patriot BR 45506 in lined 'British Railways' black, and I believe Bachmann have got just about everything right on this model. However I was thinking about the first two of the class, among the last before Stanier? and being rebuilt Claughtons the first two in 1930 were built at Derby, Midland if ever anything, and LNWR Claughtons being rebuilt, well, what a colourful mix Fowler must have had to manage.

 

The first two which became LMS 5500 and 5501 in 1934 also received new names, the former becoming 'Patriot', with subscript 'In memory of the fallen LNWR employees 1914-1919', quite moving really,  all in brass over the centre driver like all proper engines.  and interestingly these two engines kept the larger driving wheel-centres of their Claughton donors, but little else.

 

I doubt it would be simple to rebuild 45500 'Patriot' without incorporating these large-boss wheel centres yet most wouldn't notice or care?  But I would.

So I cheated and edited the wheels, numbers and nameplate...  and if Tony will permit my non-modelling changes, here she is. As 45500 in 1949 redolent in LNWR-style livery.

 

45500_Patriot_portrait10_1ab_crop2_r1820.jpg.93aad25f23247d54658f7024a7dc037c.jpg

 

In short, I think the level of detail, valence-colours, angle of valve gear, thickness of wheel profile and gauge is all personal. 

 

 

 

 

Evening Rob,

 

The first thing I notice is that its got Stannier valve spindle guides. NOOOOOOOOOOO! Not being an expert on RTR, is this because they have used an inappropriate Jubilee chassis? 

 

57 minutes ago, Chamby said:

 

Tony, I think the question perhaps should be... why does it matter?  

 

It matters because its our history and people enjoy collecting the differences, some even like making a difference. See wot I did there?

 

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

14 hours ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I haven’t reached my peak yet or even a plateau. I do try and improve each item I build particularly in regard to painting and weathering but I feel I’ve a long way to go.

 

When I look at some of the locomotives which Roy built for Retford I realise that I can never attain that standard which is quite depressing but I carry on and do the best I can.
 

Retford does have some very old stock which should possibly be replaced such as a train partly made up of Kitmaster coaches which could be at least fifty years old. Do I replace them? The answer is probably yes but I’m reluctant to get rid of them for they actually look quite good and they are part of the history of the railway. Retford is a model railway with a lot of history and whilst I don’t want to preserve it in aspic, I do want to respect the builder who built it but at the same time maintain, improve and hopefully finish it.

 

Sandra

 

Don't throw those Kitmaster carriages away, even if you don't run them on Retford.... they are beautiful examples of 1961 modelling! 

 

All the best.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
13 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Tony,

 

Colin Boocock was a former collegue of mine when the DM&EE existed (now, all those years ago!) we both worked at the Railway Technical Centre in Derby. He is a very decent type of chap, if I recall, he became involved in the railway running in Markeaton Park Derby.

Obviousely you must comment on his book as you see fit! Mr Bullied was though, the last great steam locomotive engineer so lets hope Colin's book does him justice.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

Colin was one of my first bosses when I was sent to Scotland as a graduate. We've been friends ever since. I believe that he started his career at Eastleigh.

 

As you rightly say, he is Chairman of Famous Trains.

 

https://www.famoustrains.org.uk/

 

He's also very involved with The Railway Children charity.

 

https://www.railwaychildren.org.uk/

 

A true railwayman to the marrow and a top gent.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
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...