Wright writes.....

[96701]

I have been to many exhibitions. I have seen many layouts that are not of an era in which I am interested. I have seen many layouts that are not of locations in which I am interested. I have seen modelling that that has left me inspired, breathless, and amazed. These layouts have been small, large, in small shows like Ross, Monmouth, Cheltenham and large shows like York and Warley. I take my hat off to people who can make models that can withstand the rigours of exhibitions. I take my hat off to those who exhibit models that make me go wow, and those who exhibit models that don't make me go wow, because how do they know what will make me go wow? Mainly it is the overall impression that makes me look deeper. The ones that really get to me are the ones that make me look deeper still, that little wooded valley, that row of buildings, that little view across the level crossing, that huge vista of 4 track main lines.

 

There surely is no one thing that makes us go wow, or just yes. I must admit that magazine photos of layouts rarely inspire me, nor do photos on this forum. There is nothing like the seeing a layout in the flesh. I remember seeing Stoke Summit somewhere and thinking that it was a super layout, but not for me. I have neither the space in which to build such a thing, nor the money to buy the stock.

 

I love the smaller looking layouts, but I have about 10 foot by 12 foot available to me which begs to be a roundy roundy purely because of the dimensions. There isn't going to be a station, that is going to be "off scene". What there is going to be is the concept of Gloucester with loco hauled stock going past a Depot and then having to be reversed to continue the journey on the other side of the triangle. Yes, another bleeding TMD. My entire layout will not be based in any way, shape or form on the layouts that have made me go wow. Go figure.

[Chamby]

7 hours ago, 96701 said:

...

There surely is no one thing that makes us go wow, or just yes. I must admit that magazine photos of layouts rarely inspire me, nor do photos on this forum. There is nothing like the seeing a layout in the flesh.

....

 

May I ask, what are you viewing the photo’s on this forum on?  I find it makes a huge difference.  I use either my smartphone, tablet or a Mac with a 28” screen to access RMweb and have to say that where posters use hi-res images they normally look absolutely stunning on the Mac.

 

I agree that you can’t beat seeing layouts in the flesh, but often posters take photos from angles and positions that are simply inaccessible at exhibitions or physical viewings.  4479’s post above is an example, what an excellent picture!  And in lockdown especially, I do get a ‘wow’ when people share such motivating images.  Photo’s bring these threads to life, and as they say... “a picture paints a thousand words”.   (Note to self).

 

[t-b-g]

The joy of a web forum for me is discovering a layout, or a model, which perhaps never goes to a show or has never been in a magazine (or has appeared in one that passed me by).

 

A super photo of a layout or a model I am familiar with is nice to see but the ones that give me the "wow" factor are the surprises.

[Pebbles]

22 hours ago, gr.king said:

 

I think the best course of action is to send a private message to Tony, as per his invitation above. He knows much more about the way the parts of these kits fit together.

I suspect that the visible outer parts of the SEF valve gear will be the easiest parts of the new package to adapt to the DJH loco, and that more ingenuity may be required to adapt the brackets to fit the chassis. Maybe the brackets from the A1 valve gear, that you seem to have, can be combined with the outer parts of the SEF A2 valve gear?

I'll leave the subject to Tony and others now.

This is not simple. The DJH kit has an extended wheelbase of 27mm x 27mm as apposed to the SEF correct 26mm x 26mm. I have no idea what simple course of action to advise. I would however ask why SEF find it possible to supple parts while other manufacturers have a problem.

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, 96701 said:

I have been to many exhibitions. I have seen many layouts that are not of an era in which I am interested. I have seen many layouts that are not of locations in which I am interested. I have seen modelling that that has left me inspired, breathless, and amazed. These layouts have been small, large, in small shows like Ross, Monmouth, Cheltenham and large shows like York and Warley. I take my hat off to people who can make models that can withstand the rigours of exhibitions. I take my hat off to those who exhibit models that make me go wow, and those who exhibit models that don't make me go wow, because how do they know what will make me go wow? Mainly it is the overall impression that makes me look deeper. The ones that really get to me are the ones that make me look deeper still, that little wooded valley, that row of buildings, that little view across the level crossing, that huge vista of 4 track main lines.

 

There surely is no one thing that makes us go wow, or just yes. I must admit that magazine photos of layouts rarely inspire me, nor do photos on this forum. There is nothing like the seeing a layout in the flesh. I remember seeing Stoke Summit somewhere and thinking that it was a super layout, but not for me. I have neither the space in which to build such a thing, nor the money to buy the stock.

 

I love the smaller looking layouts, but I have about 10 foot by 12 foot available to me which begs to be a roundy roundy purely because of the dimensions. There isn't going to be a station, that is going to be "off scene". What there is going to be is the concept of Gloucester with loco hauled stock going past a Depot and then having to be reversed to continue the journey on the other side of the triangle. Yes, another bleeding TMD. My entire layout will not be based in any way, shape or form on the layouts that have made me go wow. Go figure.

This is the 'Wow!' factor for me Phil.............................

 

 

 

 

Very much incomplete and still a long way to go.

 

A report on Retford will be appearing in the spring issue of BRM.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

9 minutes ago, Pebbles said:

This is not simple. The DJH kit has an extended wheelbase of 27mm x 27mm as apposed to the SEF correct 26mm x 26mm. I have no idea what simple course of action to advise. I would however ask why SEF find it possible to supple parts while other manufacturers have a problem.

Ross' problem has now been sorted...................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[landscapes]

Hi Tony

 

Going back to A4 60013, I have looked through some of my books and so far the only photo I have found with the commonwealth crest on the cab side was taken sometime between February and April 1955.

 

Regards 

 

David

Edited January 25, 2021 by landscapes
Spelling

[gr.king]

45 minutes ago, Pebbles said:

This is not simple. The DJH kit has an extended wheelbase of 27mm x 27mm as apposed to the SEF correct 26mm x 26mm. I have no idea what simple course of action to advise. I would however ask why SEF find it possible to supple parts while other manufacturers have a problem.

That being the case, perhaps the job will require the "rogue" A1 slidebars, crossheads, con-rods and Walschaerts that Ross seems to have, plus a set of Gibson coupling rods, either of the correct length or a set of universals made up to the correct length.

[Chuffer Davies]

1 hour ago, Pebbles said:

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Chuffer Davies
No longer relevant.

[t-b-g]

A few post ago we were advised that the problem had been sorted out, so further suggestions may be a bit superfluous.

[The Fatadder]

17 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've been contacted by Squires to see if I'll help in the way I've helped Dave Ellis in the past. That is to say, test-build new kits (and there are several new/revamps on the horizon), write instructions and provide photographs. 

I think this is very good

news, all to often when these ranges are transferred on new owners the range stagnates, so the fact that Squires are planning to improve and expand the range is incredibly promising  

[sandra]

Tony,

A few days ago I mentioned the Kitmaster coaches on Retford. There are now only six of them and they’re all in one eleven coach train. Most of the passenger trains on Retford are models of actual prototype trains but there are two generic trains which are not models of any specific working and the Kitmaster set is one.

 

Here are two Kitmaster coaches which I think show them not to be too bad, indeed when they were introduced in the early 1960s they were an enormous improvement on what had gone before.

This is the Kitmaster train crossing the flat crossing. It’s being pulled by the latest locomotive I’ve added to the Retford roster. This is 60118 Archibald Sturrock built from a DJH kit. I don’t know who built it but I bought it completed in OO gauge but without a motor. I’ve converted it to EM gauge and fitted a motor. It needs more work doing to make it completely satisfactory but it does pull this train with no problem. There was a Kitchen Car in this train which on examination I found was converted from a Triang Mk 1 coach. I replaced it with a spare kit built Kitchen car which I just happened to have.

This is the other generic train mostly made of coaches very kindly lent to me by Geoff West. This is a twelve coach train made of mostly metal coaches and is very heavy. It’s pulling out of the GN fiddle yard. This also illustrates another new Retford locomotive, 60520 Owen Tudor. This was built and painted by me from a DJH kit. I’m pleased to say it can haul the train without difficulty.

 

I do want to convert these two sets into accurate models of specific trains. I will have to get my friend Robert Carroll on to this task as he knows a lot more about East Coast carriage formations than I do.

 

Sandra

[robertcwp]

22 minutes ago, sandra said:

Tony,

A few days ago I mentioned the Kitmaster coaches on Retford. There are now only six of them and they’re all in one eleven coach train. Most of the passenger trains on Retford are models of actual prototype trains but there are two generic trains which are not models of any specific working and the Kitmaster set is one.

 

Here are two Kitmaster coaches which I think show them not to be too bad, indeed when they were introduced in the early 1960s they were an enormous improvement on what had gone before.

This is the Kitmaster train crossing the flat crossing. It’s being pulled by the latest locomotive I’ve added to the Retford roster. This is 60118 Archibald Sturrock built from a DJH kit. I don’t know who built it but I bought it completed in OO gauge but without a motor. I’ve converted it to EM gauge and fitted a motor. It needs more work doing to make it completely satisfactory but it does pull this train with no problem. There was a Kitchen Car in this train which on examination I found was converted from a Triang Mk 1 coach. I replaced it with a spare kit built Kitchen car which I just happened to have.

This is the other generic train mostly made of coaches very kindly lent to me by Geoff West. This is a twelve coach train made of mostly metal coaches and is very heavy. It’s pulling out of the GN fiddle yard. This also illustrates another new Retford locomotive, 60520 Owen Tudor. This was built and painted by me from a DJH kit. I’m pleased to say it can haul the train without difficulty.

 

I do want to convert these two sets into accurate models of specific trains. I will have to get my friend Robert Carroll on to this task as he knows a lot more about East Coast carriage formations than I do.

 

Sandra

It's good to know the spare kitchen car has found a home.

 

I would very much like to see the King's Cross-Glasgow train modelled as I think it is the only one of the major daytime Anglo-Scottish trains that is not represented. The issue is that it needs an ex-Coronation open second/restaurant second pair and possibly a Thompson open first (I can't find a photo good enough to confirm). A Mark 1 FO might suffice and everything else can be covered RTR or from existing stock on the layout.

 

Is the empty stock train still on the layout? That could do with becoming a proper empty parcels vans train. 

 

I currently have a few more RTR carriages in the works, mostly my spare Bachmann Thompson stock. Quite when they will make it to 'Retford' is anyone's guess. Same goes for the spare lamps I have.

 

Another project would be to have a Mark 1 kitchen car and a proper RSO in the Heart of Midlothian. The remainder is now fine.

 

The Dunwich-Scarborough excursion is another train you won't find in the carriage workings.

 

Lots more carriage boards to do as well. Having been not entirely satisfied with some of those I tried out (others are fine) and with not all the main trains covered, I have been experimenting with making some.

[robertcwp]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

This is the 'Wow!' factor for me Phil.............................

 

 

 

 

Very much incomplete and still a long way to go.

 

A report on Retford will be appearing in the spring issue of BRM.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

For me, the 'wow factor' comes from being able to see scale-length trains running on a layout that is big enough to see them in their proper setting. Little Bytham achieves that too (in rather less space).

[robertcwp]

On 23/01/2021 at 10:37, Tony Wright said:

 

 

 

The GN fiddle yard is small, isn't it? 

 

 

 

For comparison, this was a photo I took of the GN fiddleyard in 2016:

P1060458m by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, sandra said:

Tony,

A few days ago I mentioned the Kitmaster coaches on Retford. There are now only six of them and they’re all in one eleven coach train. Most of the passenger trains on Retford are models of actual prototype trains but there are two generic trains which are not models of any specific working and the Kitmaster set is one.

 

Here are two Kitmaster coaches which I think show them not to be too bad, indeed when they were introduced in the early 1960s they were an enormous improvement on what had gone before.

This is the Kitmaster train crossing the flat crossing. It’s being pulled by the latest locomotive I’ve added to the Retford roster. This is 60118 Archibald Sturrock built from a DJH kit. I don’t know who built it but I bought it completed in OO gauge but without a motor. I’ve converted it to EM gauge and fitted a motor. It needs more work doing to make it completely satisfactory but it does pull this train with no problem. There was a Kitchen Car in this train which on examination I found was converted from a Triang Mk 1 coach. I replaced it with a spare kit built Kitchen car which I just happened to have.

This is the other generic train mostly made of coaches very kindly lent to me by Geoff West. This is a twelve coach train made of mostly metal coaches and is very heavy. It’s pulling out of the GN fiddle yard. This also illustrates another new Retford locomotive, 60520 Owen Tudor. This was built and painted by me from a DJH kit. I’m pleased to say it can haul the train without difficulty.

 

I do want to convert these two sets into accurate models of specific trains. I will have to get my friend Robert Carroll on to this task as he knows a lot more about East Coast carriage formations than I do.

 

Sandra

Very well done Sandra,

 

Both new items of motive power are fully 'Retford locos'. 

 

I'm putting together an EM chassis for either an A2/2 or an A2/3. Which would you like it to go underneath on Retford? 60506 or 60513, 60516 or 60523?

 

Both trains look fine to me. I have many pictures of rakes which don't appear in the CWNs (probably extras). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

It's good to know the spare kitchen car has found a home.

 

I would very much like to see the King's Cross-Glasgow train modelled as I think it is the only one of the major daytime Anglo-Scottish trains that is not represented. The issue is that it needs an ex-Coronation open second/restaurant second pair and possibly a Thompson open first (I can't find a photo good enough to confirm). A Mark 1 FO might suffice and everything else can be covered RTR or from existing stock on the layout.

 

Is the empty stock train still on the layout? That could do with becoming a proper empty parcels vans train. 

 

I currently have a few more RTR carriages in the works, mostly my spare Bachmann Thompson stock. Quite when they will make it to 'Retford' is anyone's guess. Same goes for the spare lamps I have.

 

Another project would be to have a Mark 1 kitchen car and a proper RSO in the Heart of Midlothian. The remainder is now fine.

 

The Dunwich-Scarborough excursion is another train you won't find in the carriage workings.

 

Lots more carriage boards to do as well. Having been not entirely satisfied with some of those I tried out (others are fine) and with not all the main trains covered, I have been experimenting with making some.

Good evening Robert,

 

Have you investigated Ian Wilson's Pacific Models carriage destination boards? I've used lots of them.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[robertcwp]

Just now, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Robert,

 

Have you investigated Ian Wilson's Pacific Models carriage destination boards? I've used lots of them.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Yes, I have some but not tried them on Retford yet.

[Headstock]

I also make my own destination boards.

[sandra]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Very well done Sandra,

 

Both new items of motive power are fully 'Retford locos'. 

 

I'm putting together an EM chassis for either an A2/2 or an A2/3. Which would you like it to go underneath on Retford? 60506 or 60513, 60516 or 60523?

 

Both trains look fine to me. I have many pictures of rakes which don't appear in the CWNs (probably extras). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Tony,

 

Thats really kind of you, I’m so grateful. I already have 60506, so my choice would be 60513 Dante which I believe was a New England locomotive and probably quite common at Retford.

 

It’s interesting that you and Robert have posted pictures of the GN fiddle yard.

For comparison here’s  a photo of the GN fiddle yard which I took this morning. As you can see it has expanded over the years. It could do with further expansion particularly on the down side as there are far more up trains compared to down trains.

 

Sandra

[Tony Wright]

5 minutes ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

Thats really kind of you, I’m so grateful. I already have 60506, so my choice would be 60513 Dante which I believe was a New England locomotive and probably quite common at Retford.

 

It’s interesting that you and Robert have posted pictures of the GN fiddle yard.

For comparison here’s  a photo of the GN fiddle yard which I took this morning. As you can see it has expanded over the years. It could do with further expansion particularly on the down side as there are far more up trains compared to down trains.

 

Sandra

Thanks Sandra,

 

DANTE it will be.

 

How nice to see so many locos carrying lamps now.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[AndyID]

Hi Tony,

 

Greetings from the Pacific Northwet (although it is actually snowing!)

 

I thought you might find this interesting or at least slightly entertaining.

 

 

What's going on here is that there is an "electronic flywheel" (consisting of four small capacitors - those blue things in the video) attached across the motor. In the first video they are disconnected then they are connected in the second video. Everything else is exactly the same.

 

This is DC of course and the capacitors act as a short term battery that maintains a supply to the motor despite any interruptions in the supply from the track.

 

The main advantage is that it maintains very low speeds without interruption. It's really much better than a mechanical flywheel because it stores a lot more energy and it does not put any additional load on the motor.

 

I have incorporated this into several locos now and (I think) the results are rather impressive.

 

Cheers!

Andy

 

(PS It's also inexpensive.) 

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, AndyID said:

Hi Tony,

 

Greetings from the Pacific Northwet (although it is actually snowing!)

 

I thought you might find this interesting or at least slightly entertaining.

 

 

What's going on here is that there is an "electronic flywheel" (consisting of four small capacitors - those blue things in the video) attached across the motor. In the first video they are disconnected then they are connected in the second video. Everything else is exactly the same.

 

This is DC of course and the capacitors act as a short term battery that maintains a supply to the motor despite any interruptions in the supply from the track.

 

The main advantage is that it maintains very low speeds without interruption. It's really much better than a mechanical flywheel because it stores a lot more energy and it does not put any additional load on the motor.

 

I have incorporated this into several locos now and (I think) the results are rather impressive.

 

Cheers!

Andy

 

(PS It's also inexpensive.) 

Good morning Andy,

 

Though such things bewilder me (I just did O-level Physics), I'm sure they work.

 

However (being me, there's always one of those), I obtain 'perfect' running by having plenty of pick-ups, excellent wiring and by keeping my track thoroughly clean. That way, stuttering is eradicated. 

 

Though I'm not citing what you've just promulgated, I've come across several 'electronic' panaceas for all running ills. I'm sure they help, but, on personal investigation, it's almost invariable that there's something wrong with the loco/track/feeds at source. The symptoms are being addressed, not the root cause. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[t-b-g]

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Sandra,

 

DANTE it will be.

 

How nice to see so many locos carrying lamps now.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

It is indeed. I always think it is one of those relatively small jobs (small per loco but big when there are lots of them!) that makes a difference proportionally greater than the work involved.

 

There were lots of jobs, big and small, that Roy didn't live long enough to complete. Lamps on locos was just was one of them!

 

It is good to see progress on the layout being made. 

[bbishop]

16 hours ago, Headstock said:

I also make my own destination boards.

 

In 1922 the upper train left Bournemouth at 1150am and arrived at York at 7.46pm, continuing to Newcastle arriving at 10.05pm.  The southbound train left Newcastle at 1 04am, York at 3 00am, arriving at Bournemouth at 2.00pm.  The Bournemouth - York portion (LSWR or GCR) couldn't travel further because the LSWR stock wasn't dual fitted.  Presumably the train was a Sam Fay initiative.   Bill