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

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

I don't understand this current obsession with lighting on models; I can only assume that those demanding this feature on steam / early diesel era models never saw the prototype.

 

 

The lights in some models might be too bright, but there's still a case for lights in models if they're fitted at a realistic level. Coach

lighting may have been dim in the past, but it was still obvious enough from outside:

 

brief-encounter-train-station.jpg.fe9ac9a567a886357f6aacbc7897a7df.jpg

 

This is a light level that looks realistic to me:

 

shill146.jpg

 

If the room lights are on, the station and coach lights are too dim to be easily seen and the station lamps are only

just discernible. 

 

 

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

Tony,

 

One reason that I used posters was that it seems virtually impossible to find steam era contempory photos of approaching trains at night - almost certainly because it would have been impossible to capture moving oil lamps at night with the then-available photographic equipment. The best that you could hope for would be a time-exposed streak of light - unless you went to the lengths that Ansel Adams did in the USA!

 

 

image.png.418593e068fdd219a327f1789e195cb2.png

 

image.png.f1153bd6f302b708782a99e6d41c2aa7.png

 

On the other hand, BR poster paintings - many of which were the work of Terence Cuneo - are meticulously observed reproductions of what the artist saw from the lineside. The relative insignificance of the loco oil lamp illumination at night is exactly how I recall my own night time observations of passing trains.

 

CJI.

Thanks John,

 

Wasn't O Winston Link the 'king' of American night-time railway photography?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

The lights in some models might be too bright, but there's still a case for lights in models if they're fitted at a realistic level. Coach

lighting may have been dim in the past, but it was still obvious enough from outside:

 

brief-encounter-train-station.jpg.fe9ac9a567a886357f6aacbc7897a7df.jpg

 

This is a light level that looks realistic to me:

 

shill146.jpg

 

If the room lights are on, the station and coach lights are too dim to be easily seen and the station lamps are only

just discernible. 

 

 

Your model scene looks incredibly realistic Al,

 

Thanks for showing us.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
22 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

I've progressed my S&D passenger brake to the point where it's able to run in a train - here's a very short clip. Don't blink!

 

 

Lovely - that's the most enjoyable 14 seconds I've spent today! :)

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 

The lights in some models might be too bright, but there's still a case for lights in models if they're fitted at a realistic level. Coach

lighting may have been dim in the past, but it was still obvious enough from outside:

 

brief-encounter-train-station.jpg.fe9ac9a567a886357f6aacbc7897a7df.jpg

 

This is a light level that looks realistic to me:

 

shill146.jpg

 

If the room lights are on, the station and coach lights are too dim to be easily seen and the station lamps are only

just discernible. 

 

 

 

You can't use a frame from Brief Encounter as an example! Its a Lean film with with Robert (The Third Man) Krasker as cinematographer. There were so many banks of lights set up on the platform, its a wonder the canopy didn't burst into flames. It probably did, hence wonderful shadow effects in the dark. Krasker was greatly influenced by the light and shadow of German expressionist cinema, nothing about the lighting is genuine in the platform scene shown above. 

 

8 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

John, I have installed working lamps on three of my locomotives as I have been interested in developing this aspect of railway operation.  The DCC Concepts lamps are a good product in this regard, much closer to scale than some Springside products, for example.  With a bit of experimentation using resistors, the level of illumination can be set so that the illumination is unnoticeable in daylight but becomes visible in a dimmed or darkened room.  Using ‘daylight’ LED’s and a coating of yellow tinted varnish, I am happy with the effects that can be achieved but as to whether it is worthwhile, it’s very much a moot point, unless you regularly run your models in the dark...  which is why I haven’t fitted more.  I have also fitted working tail lamps to my guard vans and some coaching stock, again with 50,000 ohm resistance and these are very effective.  The following photo taken in a dimmed room (but the digital camera has compensated with the background exposure, so the lights show a little brighter than actual).

 

65F4C755-A33C-4A43-A741-01996A423CDD.jpeg.f6233a5ae10fb3b7a19be809e9a87a98.jpeg

 

The posters you use to illustrate your point raise a couple of interesting points.  The illumination from the firebox in the second illustration is far more significant than the lamping, maybe that is why the RTR manufacturers are moving in this direction?  Also the effect of smoke, and reflected light is very prominent.  Given that glaring omission in our model world, the lighting issue is less significant in my view, if modelled sensitively.

 

The exception I would make relates to the modern railway scene and the use of high-intensity lighting on the prototype.  I had the joy of seeing Union of South Africa on a rail tour a few years back, on the long, straight section of line between Maidenhead and Reading.  The first thing you saw of her approaching in the distance was her high intensity lamp.  Arguably an essential detail item then, for modern preserved mainline steam.

 

Phil

 

 

 

 

 

Evening Phil,

 

it looks reasonable for night time, it wouldn't be visible during the day, hence the white lamps. Turn them off for better realism, red paint is about spot on for daylight tail lights.

 

The 'Trains in the Night' record cover,  has some typical itty bitty oil lamps shooting out their non existent  beam of darkness.

 

2115180383_TrainsintheNight.jpg.981e03b45a550cd63d0be61f94105c00.jpg

 

 

 

.

 

 

Edited by Headstock
forgot to add Krasker film credit.
  • Like 6
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

John, I have installed working lamps on three of my locomotives as I have been interested in developing this aspect of railway operation.  The DCC Concepts lamps are a good product in this regard, much closer to scale than some Springside products, for example.  With a bit of experimentation using resistors, the level of illumination can be set so that the illumination is unnoticeable in daylight but becomes visible in a dimmed or darkened room.  Using ‘daylight’ LED’s and a coating of yellow tinted varnish, I am happy with the effects that can be achieved but as to whether it is worthwhile, it’s very much a moot point, unless you regularly run your models in the dark...  which is why I haven’t fitted more.  I have also fitted working tail lamps to my guard vans and some coaching stock, again with 50,000 ohm resistance and these are very effective.  The following photo taken in a dimmed room (but the digital camera has compensated with the background exposure, so the lights show a little brighter than actual).

 

65F4C755-A33C-4A43-A741-01996A423CDD.jpeg.f6233a5ae10fb3b7a19be809e9a87a98.jpeg

Phil

 

 

 

 

I share your fondness for those DCC lights Phil - for loco fronts and brake van rears - and have been using them for a while.

 

I can also understand peoples' misgivings about them (and other similar products) though, as they don't always look entirely realistic.

I sometimes think - purely in regard to my own modelling activites, I'm not presuming to speak for anyone else - that the lighting side of things taps into a simple boyhood fondness for things that light up. The combination of things that move and light up is a powerful one for the imagination...

 

Coaches with internal lighting are a similar case. As has been commented already, typical model coach lighting is often far brighter than the prototypes ever were, but the fascination with seeing them work, creating that little world inside the carriage and then being able to see the passengers enjoying their journey, never diminishes for me. I particularly like the Train Tech Coach Lighting strips, that use motion sensors and light when the carriage moves. I detach the coin cell holders and re-locate them under the carriage body, so that the batteries can be changed without dismantling the coach.

  • Like 6
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

Since I've got three more of these to build,

 

Four would give you the outer ends of two typical S&DJR local sets of the 1890s-1920-ish period: brake / 5-compt third / 4-compt first / 5-compt third / brake. The thirds are straightforward, being the same as MR Diagram 493.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
51 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Four would give you the outer ends of two typical S&DJR local sets of the 1890s-1920-ish period: brake / 5-compt third / 4-compt first / 5-compt third / brake. The thirds are straightforward, being the same as MR Diagram 493.

 

The four kits (four different types) came up for sale as a job lot a year or two ago so that's all I've got for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I won't fit lights to anything on principle. I detest night-time running on layouts and stay away from group sessions when I know it'll be happening.

 

No doubt it's OK if all you want is to watch trains go by, but if you actually need to do anything, working in the dark is a prototypically accurate PITA that doesn't get 76 times smaller.

 

The difference is, of course, that I nowadays have a choice in the matter.:jester:

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Round of applause 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have sympathy with those who don't like or don't want (unrealistic?) lighting on their models. I, too, am not very interested in night time modelling, and viewing and operating a layout in the dark. Where's the fun in that - you can't see where you put down your glass of wine or beer (or cup of tea). And, to a large extent, is where do you draw the line at what you add lights to?

 

For me, modelling an inner city urban scene would mean that not only would the trains (including their head-codes and inside passenger compartments) and stations (buildings, platform lights and signals) be lit, but I'd have to also light road vehicles (front and rear and inside buses - and doesn't that just draw attention to the fact they are stationary?), lots and lots of buildings, street lamps, advertising signs, illuminated road signs and so on just to create a vibrant city night-time scene with the usual excesses of lighting to ensure that it never sleeps. That would mean a huge investment and workload. 

 

No, I'll just stick with daytime modelling when street and station lights are turned off, and, in the
1980s unlike now, cars didn’t drive around with their headlights on before at least lighting-up time or it got dark.

 

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 5
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Headstock said:

Whilst awaiting the drying of paint, I began the first course of action in rescuing my sad RTR A2/3.


Hornby have made quite a job of paying tribute to the problematic front end arrangement of the original locomotives.  Five points required my attention at the front end, as shown in the image below.

 

189395767_MushyPeas.jpg.9a3d7c0d4afe891996d7ecd19a36d040.jpg

 

1. The right hand superheater cover was badly positioned on the smokebox. Fortunately, it was also badly glued in place, it was easily removed without damage, by pressure applied from a finger nail, carefully inserted under the edge of the cover.


2. The middle platform, alongside the smokebox of the right hand running board, was sloping down hill from left to right. Who ever put the deflector on, put it on straight in relation to the Smokebox and boiler handrail. However, this left a gap at the bottom edge, one that increased in size towards the front of the deflector. On the front lower platform, above the bufferbeam, the gap was about half a mil between the platform and the underside of the deflector. 


On dismantling the loco body, it was discovered that the saddle was distorted, it being higher at the front than the rear. As a result, when the running board was screwed on to the body, the saddle distorted the middle platform, bending it downwards towards the front.


3.Not visible in the photo is the  daylight gap between the chassis and the body. This was caused by the brass insert threads for the body retaining screws, being glued in place at an angle and the body being force screwed in place on the chassis. The fore and aft positions, are shown in the photographs below, after I had filed the wonky brass thread inserts, flush with the underside of the body. This was required in order to get the body to sit down on the chassis. The body retaining screws have been inserted to show the extreme angle of the threads.

 

1998703217_forwardbodysecuringscrew.jpg.95ea64568707c14afe083d7168010a75.jpg1214836564_Rearbodysecuringscrew.jpg.6836ddbd872babd3ccb163fa1aea816d.jpg


4. As pointed out by Tony G, the cylinders are wrongly located in relation to the running board, with a rather unsightly gap. This is due in part to the problems mentioned in 3. but all areas of the chassis and its associated brackets, that came into contact with the body, required fettling to get everything to sit down nice and square.


5. I removed the sandbox fillers from the upper platform for a number of reasons. They were interfering with straightening out the running board, a certain amount of flash/ sprue attachment required removing and they were misaligned and were also standing to vertically compared to the real thing. The running board itself, required a combination of carefully support and robust tweaking around the dropdown to straighten it out.


Most of the above is now complete, with the cylinders on both sides fitting snugly up under the running board. The Saddle has been reprofiled, the unsightly daylight gap is now gone and the running board is now nice and square, The body now screws on to the chassis without distortion.

 

83705898_A2-3frontendremodeling.jpg.ecb4da855d32f7a40c47d1ee2fd0569f.jpg


In the process of the above work, the valve gear fell apart on the right hand side, par for the course with RTR I'm told. It has now been repaired and is fully operational. The reversing leaver and speedo bracket both fell off and will be re-fixed along with super heater covers.  While the deflectors are off, I will fit brackets, as they are rather flimsy in their attachment to the platform, it will also look better.  I will also cut off the lubrication and atomiser pipe runs on the smokebox and replace them with 5 amp fuse wire. I will probably make my own drain cock pipes as well. For whatever reason, to my eye, the little plastic RTR ones supplied, always look super fake .


I can start to see the attraction of modern RTR. I didn't appreciate in the past, the amount of hours of modelling enjoyment they provide.  The loco is starting to look a little happier and so am I.

 

P.S. I also sorted out the return cranks, both were facing backwards. Much improved bogie wheels though.

Meanwhile, there's some guy (or gal) from the Chinese sweat shop that put that loco together, swiping his iPad, saying: 'dammit - thought I might have got away with that wonky screw insert ...'

 

That's awful, isn't it? I know that the whole Chinese manufacturing thing makes our models more affordable than our European counterparts but ...

  • Like 5
  • Agree 5
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Meanwhile, there's some guy (or gal) from the Chinese sweat shop that put that loco together, swiping his iPad, saying: 'dammit - thought I might have got away with that wonky screw insert ...'

 

That's awful, isn't it? I know that the whole Chinese manufacturing thing makes our models more affordable than our European counterparts but ...

 

Good morning Graham,

 

looking around, there seem to be quite a few modern RTR locomotives that are not that well assembled. It's quite common to see big gaps between cylinders and motion brackets, and the running board. I assume they are not designed to be that way? It's one of those things that people seem to just accept without giving it much thought. To be fair to the Chinese workforce, the design of this locomotive is somewhat overcomplicated, with much of that overcomplication being due to the unsuitable nature of the materials used. There is plenty of opportunities for the assembly process to go wrong, as the fit of the parts doesn't appear to be that good. I would love to have a go at putting together the full kit of parts, just to see if it's possible without a great deal of fettling.

 

Value for money is a recurring theme on this thread. Perversely, I am getting my value for money by tinkering with my object of desire. If it was perfect straight out of the box, the power of purchase would only last so long before another fix would be required.
 

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

5 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Meanwhile, there's some guy (or gal) from the Chinese sweat shop that put that loco together, swiping his iPad, saying: 'dammit - thought I might have got away with that wonky screw insert ...'

 

That's awful, isn't it? I know that the whole Chinese manufacturing thing makes our models more affordable than our European counterparts but ...

Interesting Graham,

 

In recent conversation, it would appear a batch of Thompson Pacifics got through QC by mistake. In fairness (though it's really none of my business), the problem is being addressed.

 

I don't know whether Andrew's (Headstock) A2/3 was one of the batch, but he seems to be enjoying himself...............

 

Is 'assembling' an RTR model akin now (on a much larger scale, of course) to 'assembling' a kit? I have to say, I've seen far more badly-put-together kits (particularly locos) than I have ones which have been built properly. Not even mentioning their running qualities (or lack of them), most kits are badly assembled (particularly those with white metal parts) because not enough attention has been paid to cleaning the castings, ensuring an excellent fit. This means the absolute removal of all flash.

 

Here's a case in point.....................

 

1909006852_DJHA301.jpg.ba9d93def0c51b62852478487821b467.jpg

 

1612534497_DJHA302.jpg.9a3fbaeea5fb2e8a300f6b311ee47ba4.jpg

 

 

I'm just starting building (another) DJH A3. This is the one-piece footplate casting as supplied (were this kit bought new, I'd be tempted to ask for a replacement). That nearer valance is going to require a lot of work. Though it's not a direct fit to anything else, the crisp appearance will be lost unless I'm very careful in cleaning it up, especially over the cylinders where a snug fit will be required. Also, unless I'm extra careful in cleaning out the splashers, then running might be compromised. The cross-feed nibs will easily go. 

 

What's my point in showing this? Although not as complex, modern RTR locos now come with separate footplates, separate cabs, separate boilers and so on........... Unless any 'flash' is diligently-removed prior to assembly (in a Chinese sweat-shop?), then a poor fit will be the result.

 

In many ways, I have a sympathy with the RTR manufacturers. The 'market' has dictated that all sorts of variations are catered for in each type (there are two different cabs and two different boilers in the case of the A2/2s produced by Hornby, and two different boilers in the case of the A2/3s; not to mention different chimneys/domes/sandbox fillers and smokebox doors). All of which means the need for assembly.

 

What was the 'assembly' required on the body of that ancient 'Princess Coronation' you showed us some little time ago? Unless I'm mistaken, the body is a single lump of mazak, with only the tinplate smoke deflectors and the wire handrails (only on the smokebox/boiler/firebox, not on the cab ends) as separate items. Can you imagine a 'serious' RTR manufacturer offering that simplicity today? They'd sell next to none! In contrast, its 'rival', 46245, is made of hundreds of separate parts, all too easy to get out of alignment.

 

My own childhood Tri-ang locos had one-piece moulded plastic bodies (including the handrails!), with only the buffers as separate fittings. No chance of misalignment there, unless they were made of the earlier (bendy) plastic or were left out in the sun! 

 

As Andrew alludes to, the modern RTR locos are good value for money (if only because he has to work on them), despite the occasional QC issues. Going back to that DJH A3, I don't think the kit is now available (so commands a premium on eBay?), but, if it still were, with all the parts needed to complete it, it would probably be near twice as much as the RTR equivalent. Just think how much that would impact on Grantham, were the RTR A1s/A3s not available. 

 

Granted, there should not be QC issues with any product.  For those who can't build a complex loco, or can't afford to have one built for them (in my case, at seven times the price of an RTR equivalent!), then I think modern RTR locomotives are rather good, especially at the prices asked.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I don't think assembly "issues" are anything new. I remember when Bachmann introduced their all-wheel-drive mechanism to their inherited Swindon Warship. 

 

I fitted two of the first releases with frame-mounted Kadee couplers along with full skirts and pipework at either end. It was a task that required a pretty comprehensive strip down because (amongst other things) the bogies had to be modified to maintain their flexibility while clearing the coupler boxes.

 

When reassembled, both locos ran significantly better than they had before.

 

While I could still remember how, I did a couple more for friends (but without the mods); in motorsport, it's called "blueprinting".

 

John

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
12 hours ago, grahame said:

I do have sympathy with those who don't like or don't want (unrealistic?) lighting on their models. I, too, am not very interested in night time modelling, and viewing and operating a layout in the dark. Where's the fun in that - you can't see where you put down your glass of wine or beer (or cup of tea). And, to a large extent, is where do you draw the line at what you add lights to?

 

For me, modelling an inner city urban scene would mean that not only would the trains (including their head-codes and inside passenger compartments) and stations (buildings, platform lights and signals) be lit, but I'd have to also light road vehicles (front and rear and inside buses - and doesn't that just draw attention to the fact they are stationary?), lots and lots of buildings, street lamps, advertising signs, illuminated road signs and so on just to create a vibrant city night-time scene with the usual excesses of lighting to ensure that it never sleeps. That would mean a huge investment and workload. 

 

No, I'll just stick with daytime modelling when street and station lights are turned off, and, in the
1980s unlike now, cars didn’t drive around with their headlights on before at least lighting-up time or it got dark.

 

Fully undertand your position Grahame and lighting effects are definitely not to everyone's taste. A bit like sound effects, which I don't like but many do.

I agree about operating in the dark; perhaps I should have explained that I attempt to simulate something like dusk - by the use of different lights and/or partial curtain-drawing - so that there's enough light to see what I'm doing, but at a sufficiently low level that the lighting on the layout is still effective.

I'd also agree about the need to provide lighting for other things, but I enjoy lighting buildings, platforms and other structures too, so I've always done that in tandem with the locos and rolling stock.

I haven't yet done so for road vehicles, but they are on my list...

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

2 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

 

I'd also agree about the need to provide lighting for other things, but I enjoy lighting buildings, platforms and other structures too, so I've always done that in tandem with the locos and rolling stock.

I haven't yet done so for road vehicles, but they are on my list...

 

I wish you good luck with your lighting endeavours. Perhaps you'll post up suitable pics when all the lights are installed.

 

But TBQH installing lighting in N/2mm scale cars is probably rather trickier (but not impossible) than OO/4mm ones and I'll need many dozens lit as well as tens of buses. And with several 20 storey tower blocks on the layout (along with shops and a whole host of other buildings) I wouldn't relish the challenge of lighting them. Plus those little lights that shine down on road signs, all the traffic lights, street lights, illuminated hoarding boards, etc.,

 

But never say never, perhaps one day . . . 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

The only time I run my trains 'in the dark' is to identify a stray short on the locos' frames.

 

Impossible to see in 'daylight', at 'night' the sparks really show up!


I have also found that my current (old and due to be replaced) DAB radio provides excellent warning of RF arcing.
 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 3
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...