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 Premium
6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

As a 'layout loco', I think it's fine.

 

I've wrestled with my conscience slightly at paying only £200.00 (the others went for more), but, with a 'superior' RTR equivalent available, what chance for a kit like this to realise even its component parts? Twice the price of the RTR equivalent for something not as good-looking? 

 

I rather like it, however...................

 

Bearing in mind all your unpaid hard work at testing, inspecting, carrying out repairs, packing and posting the locos off to appreciative new homes and the amount of money raised - not only for the Widow but for CRUK too - I'd say that absolutely no wrestling is required. :smile_mini2:

  • Like 1
  • Agree 15
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, polybear said:

 

Bearing in mind all your unpaid hard work at testing, inspecting, carrying out repairs, packing and posting the locos off to appreciative new homes and the amount of money raised - not only for the Widow but for CRUK too - I'd say that absolutely no wrestling is required. :smile_mini2:

Thanks Brian,

 

If one takes such jobs on, then what you so kindly list form the consequences...............

 

I think I've done all right with getting 'reasonable' prices for the models (many of which have now gone). However, in some cases, I've found it impossible to even reach the current cost of the components, were a loco un-built. 

 

I had some very sound advice from PMP on Thursday, where he effectively said, in many cases, you have to write-off the cost of someone building/painting a model. Just try and reach the cost of the components, plus a bit. In one case, what was realised would not have paid for the painting. But, that's the way it is.

 

I had a phone call from a friend the other day, asking my advice on how to find new homes for over 100 'professionally-built/-painted' locos, the property of a late friend of his. It's on behalf of the chap's daughters (he was a widower, I assume), both of whom have no idea what they might be worth or what to do with them. 

 

I've told him I'll not be taking the job on (no thank you, especially after what happened on Monday), but I'll come over and take a look and then get in touch with Hattons, Rails of Sheffield or any other businesses requesting second-hand models for sale. 

 

I think what takes the most time is not so much the wrapping and posting, but the checking and getting to work the kit-built locos in collections. Many I've come across, just don't work properly; not how I'd describe 'good runner'. I've managed to get most of the current locos to run well, but any duds have been sold-on at very low prices. I don't have the time, nor the inclination to rebuild them mechanically. It would seem 'good runner' describes a loco which will just make it in both directions along a dead-straight yard of Peco track................ Yes, just! Described by professionals as such, believe it or not. In my days as that animal, anything not running perfectly would have come back very, very fast! From my observations, if a loco is well-painted, that'll do. If its life will be forever in a glass case, in static mode, that's all that matters. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Brian,

 

If one takes such jobs on, then what you so kindly list form the consequences...............

 

I think I've done all right with getting 'reasonable' prices for the models (many of which have now gone). However, in some cases, I've found it impossible to even reach the current cost of the components, were a loco un-built. 

 

I had some very sound advice from PMP on Thursday, where he effectively said, in many cases, you have to write-off the cost of someone building/painting a model. Just try and reach the cost of the components, plus a bit. In one case, what was realised would not have paid for the painting. But, that's the way it is.

 

I had a phone call from a friend the other day, asking my advice on how to find new homes for over 100 'professionally-built/-painted' locos, the property of a late friend of his. It's on behalf of the chap's daughters (he was a widower, I assume), both of whom have no idea what they might be worth or what to do with them. 

 

I've told him I'll not be taking the job on (no thank you, especially after what happened on Monday), but I'll come over and take a look and then get in touch with Hattons, Rails of Sheffield or any other businesses requesting second-hand models for sale. 

 

I think what takes the most time is not so much the wrapping and posting, but the checking and getting to work the kit-built locos in collections. Many I've come across, just don't work properly; not how I'd describe 'good runner'. I've managed to get most of the current locos to run well, but any duds have been sold-on at very low prices. I don't have the time, nor the inclination to rebuild them mechanically. It would seem 'good runner' describes a loco which will just make it in both directions along a dead-straight yard of Peco track................ Yes, just! Described by professionals as such, believe it or not. In my days as that animal, anything not running perfectly would have come back very, very fast! From my observations, if a loco is well-painted, that'll do. If its life will be forever in a glass case, in static mode, that's all that matters. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

We are going through the locos, both kit-built and RTR for two deceased club members. They are mainly EM gauge, so restricted customer base. Most of the kit-built are either poor or non runners, despite being supposedly 'professionally' built. Most I have got to go, but not running well. I think Expo EM will be the point of sale for the EM stuff, as a more concentrated customer base there. 

(I help Roger Sawyer on the stand, so know a little bit about the market).

The RTR stuff is mainly slightly damaged or in some cases suffering from Mazak rot. So do you repair and spend time doing so, or do you sell, 'as is'?

 

 

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

16 minutes ago, andytrains said:

We are going through the locos, both kit-built and RTR for two deceased club members. They are mainly EM gauge, so restricted customer base. Most of the kit-built are either poor or non runners, despite being supposedly 'professionally' built. Most I have got to go, but not running well. I think Expo EM will be the point of sale for the EM stuff, as a more concentrated customer base there. 

(I help Roger Sawyer on the stand, so know a little bit about the market).

The RTR stuff is mainly slightly damaged or in some cases suffering from Mazak rot. So do you repair and spend time doing so, or do you sell, 'as is'?

 

 

I don't really deal with selling RTR stuff on.

 

Andy York very kindly allows Wright writes to be a vehicle for the sale of kit-built locos on behalf of bereaved families, and I wouldn't want to 'abuse' that privilege by selling RTR items.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

  • RMweb Premium
52 minutes ago, andytrains said:

The RTR stuff is mainly slightly damaged or in some cases suffering from Mazak rot. So do you repair and spend time doing so, or do you sell, 'as is'?

 

 

 

I would suggest that it depends how much you value your own time, and what increase in sale price results.  Ten hours' work for an extra tenner is a poor deal in my book, for example.

  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
22 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

I meant to reply earlier to this but I forgot in the swarm of coupling posts! I agree that Kadees are great although even they don’t always want to couple on a curve. What put me off them was a combination of the price and the difficulty of fitting them to stock without NEM pockets and particularly to the Bachmann mark 1s with pockets in the wrong place.
 

Last time I looked they were about £5 a pair compared to £1 for the magnets. I have about 200 coaches, so that amounts to a significant difference in price. Perhaps it was a false economy, but I do find the magnets very good 99% of the time. 
 

Andy

 

Indeed, I was disappointed to see the price of a pack of four Kadee NEM uncouplers suddenly rise dramatically during lockdown, after a period of poor availability: by as much as 50% at the majority of retailers.  This will definitely be a deterrent to people currently making a decision upon which system to standardise on.  

 

As a result, I have started to use more of the Hornby/Roco couplers within ‘permanently’ fixed coach rakes, with Kadees installed just on each end.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, Chamby said:

 

Indeed, I was disappointed to see the price of a pack of four Kadee NEM uncouplers suddenly rise dramatically during lockdown, after a period of poor availability: by as much as 50% at the majority of retailers.  This will definitely be a deterrent to people currently making a decision upon which system to standardise on.  

 

As a result, I have started to use more of the Hornby/Roco couplers within ‘permanently’ fixed coach rakes, with Kadees installed just on each end.

 

 

It pays to shop around for Kadees. I was at the Palmerston North Train show yesterday and the price for a a pack of  #19's varied between NZ$10.30 at one trader and NZ$20at another!

Kadee, in White City, Oregon do provide a mail order service with very reasonable airmail postage.

Like you I find Roco couplers useful for fixed formations with Kadees at each end.

 

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

4 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

As some of you may know, I’ve started a new layout, Woolmer Green. Brighton Junction was built over a 3-4 year period and gone within a week. Progress is going well, boards have been cut, one half of the viaduct cut out as well. I couldn’t help but take this photo, I’m very keen to start taking prototype photos. 
 

E90168C4-41D9-4982-8D0B-7CBA93A01528.jpeg.0278ef6318a59de6631f8760090c5041.jpeg

E309C6A4-5101-4BC8-B4A3-601C4B99F0A0.jpeg.ed8e0cf6206aa3763bed7014b0203397.jpeg

 

Very evocative photo of No.2744 Grand Parade with a wonderful assortment of Pullmans in tow.

 

Grand Parade (the 2nd) was the youngest of the A3s and the very opposite of Flying Scotsman.

 

Glenn

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

As some of you may know, I’ve started a new layout, Woolmer Green. Brighton Junction was built over a 3-4 year period and gone within a week. Progress is going well, boards have been cut, one half of the viaduct cut out as well. I couldn’t help but take this photo, I’m very keen to start taking prototype photos. 
 

E90168C4-41D9-4982-8D0B-7CBA93A01528.jpeg.0278ef6318a59de6631f8760090c5041.jpeg

E309C6A4-5101-4BC8-B4A3-601C4B99F0A0.jpeg.ed8e0cf6206aa3763bed7014b0203397.jpeg

No rest for you is there? Must be all that coffee... ;)

  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon everyone... I've got a bit of a conundrum, so hopefully posting it here and getting some professional thoughts can help solve my issue!

 

I've just moved house, settled in and have discovered I can build a Model Railway, Cassette-Cassette, which will measure (not including cassettes) 3306mm x 221mm (10.8ft x 8.7inches in old money). The reason it'll be these measurements, is because I'll be building them on Scale Model Scenery Baseboards that fit perfectly into 77L storage boxes when not in use (this is essential, I only have room for 3x 77L storage boxes).

 

I have some criteria that the layout must adhere too:

 

  1. Late 1950s British Rail (Ex-North Eastern Railway, North Yorkshire or Northumberland)
  2. Little to no compromise, I want the layout to be as realistic as possible (I've made to many compromises with previous layouts, which ruins it for me).
  3. I don't mind using a fictional track plan
  4. Track will be Peco Code 75 Bullhead and DCC

Is it physically possible to build a 'realistic' model railway that's just 221mm wide? On first thoughts, I thought something similar to the layout 'Hartburn' might be feasible, but on second thoughts I'm not too sure due to my limited depth.

 

Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I'm really struggling to think of something at the moment!

 

Many thanks in advance everyone

 

 

IMG_0373.jpeg

IMG_0374.jpeg

  • Like 9
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
19 minutes ago, Dylan Sanderson said:

 

Is it physically possible to build a 'realistic' model railway that's just 221mm wide? On first thoughts, I thought something similar to the layout 'Hartburn' might be feasible, but on second thoughts I'm not too sure due to my limited depth.

 

Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I'm really struggling to think of something at the moment!

 

Many thanks in advance everyone

 

 

IMG_0373.jpeg

IMG_0374.jpeg


Only you can answer the ‘realistic’ question, as only you know what compromises you will accept. Had you not put up Hartburn, that’s one example I’d have suggested. A lot will depend on if you want rural, or urban. There’s plenty of linear rural Northumberland stations that you could adapt which have interesting operations 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

 

45 minutes ago, Dylan Sanderson said:

Afternoon everyone... I've got a bit of a conundrum, so hopefully posting it here and getting some professional thoughts can help solve my issue!

 

I've just moved house, settled in and have discovered I can build a Model Railway, Cassette-Cassette, which will measure (not including cassettes) 3306mm x 221mm (10.8ft x 8.7inches in old money). The reason it'll be these measurements, is because I'll be building them on Scale Model Scenery Baseboards that fit perfectly into 77L storage boxes when not in use (this is essential, I only have room for 3x 77L storage boxes).

 

I have some criteria that the layout must adhere too:

 

  1. Late 1950s British Rail (Ex-North Eastern Railway, North Yorkshire or Northumberland)
  2. Little to no compromise, I want the layout to be as realistic as possible (I've made to many compromises with previous layouts, which ruins it for me).
  3. I don't mind using a fictional track plan
  4. Track will be Peco Code 75 Bullhead and DCC

Is it physically possible to build a 'realistic' model railway that's just 221mm wide? On first thoughts, I thought something similar to the layout 'Hartburn' might be feasible, but on second thoughts I'm not too sure due to my limited depth.

 

Does anyone have any suggestions for me? I'm really struggling to think of something at the moment!

 

Many thanks in advance everyone

 

 

IMG_0373.jpeg

IMG_0374.jpeg

 

The width is pretty restrictive but I don't think it is beyond the realms of possibility.  I think the trick to use the width as well as possible is to have a single track line through, towards one side of the board, leaving room for a platform and a station building behind the track. If that is kept to one end of the layout, say around 3ft long, then you have room for a loop at the other end, on the same side as the platform, with perhaps sidings each way (think 2 crossovers). The lovely P4 layout Bolsover had that basic design (with a few additions) and it creates a nice long but narrow effect. There would even be a small amount of space for a scenic surround, with perhaps an overbridge at the station end as one exit and trees or a building to mask the exit at the other.

 

I attach a not to scale scribbled sketch of the sort of thing I have in mind.

 

1482775646_Sketchplan.png.94c80aa443115b436154af85c6803fd4.png

 

There were plenty of lines in that part of the world with very minimalist plans, as the work of a certain Mr Futers has illustrated many times.

 

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's amazing to me at least what some railway modellers achieve in a small space so don't give up, but so far it seems that only large radius points are available in Peco bullhead OO track & each is 25.8cm long, so with 4 of those in 2 crossovers (total length 103.2 cm) the loop is only going to have capacity for very few wagons to shunt into the sidings at each end. If you could accept smaller radius points not currently available in the Peco bullhead range it would give you a little more capacity for the layout plan above?

 

William

Edited by ecgtheow
typing error
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I attach a not to scale scribbled sketch of the sort of thing I have in mind.

 

Or, as a variation on that theme, you could not have the second (right hand) crossover at all but just continue to the right hand cassette as a single line plus loop, which you then use a cassette to undertake any run round or shunt manoeuvre.

 

Reason for saying that is picking up on your 'little or no compromise' comment. If you're using Peco Code 75 bullhead then, if you use the current points, which are in fact the same footprint as the 'large radius' type, then two together as a crossover occupies something like 1.75 feet. Double that (two crossovers) and you're now up to 3.5 feet, ie used up a third of your length on just pointwork. Shorter radius points might look ... well ... too short and, although Tony's design is a nice model railway design, many loops on the real thing, even on a branch line, could be surprisingly long.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend of mine has an O gauge layout which is only 15" wide.  It's based on Tollesbury, but the track plan could work anywhere.  It's surprisingly fun to operate and more difficult than it looks to shunt.   Have a read of this and if you can't work out the track plan from the pictures I can probably find the magazine article and send you it.   It would easily fit onto 9" boards in 4mm.

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

  • RMweb Premium

659CAB96-E96B-4153-AB0D-F9101755B2F1.jpeg.0d6a8efc9ed921628b1fe9074c1b1531.jpeg

This is my  Shelfie4 layout in HO. The footprint is roughly 10” depth by 6’ long, designed to fit on top of IKEA bookcases. You can get quite a bit of enjoyment and challenges out of shelf layouts. Deadwater and Kielder might offer some inspiration.

  • Like 7
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
25 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Or, as a variation on that theme, you could not have the second (right hand) crossover at all but just continue to the right hand cassette as a single line plus loop, which you then use a cassette to undertake any run round or shunt manoeuvre.

 

Reason for saying that is picking up on your 'little or no compromise' comment. If you're using Peco Code 75 bullhead then, if you use the current points, which are in fact the same footprint as the 'large radius' type, then two together as a crossover occupies something like 1.75 feet. Double that (two crossovers) and you're now up to 3.5 feet, ie used up a third of your length on just pointwork. Shorter radius points might look ... well ... too short and, although Tony's design is a nice model railway design, many loops on the real thing, even on a branch line, could be surprisingly long.

 

In the plan illustrated, the loop is a double ended siding which allows a goods train going either way to shunt by running round a few wagons rather than needing to be long enough to pass a full train. You could just about get a goods off the running line to allow a passenger or other goods to pass by.

 

I have been trying to remember one real place I saw with that arrangement and it has come to me now. It is Withcall on the GNR Bardney to Louth line.

 

I once started a "half station" with part of the layout shunted by the traverser fiddle yard but after a few test playing sessions I personally found that I much prefer having the whole operation on scene. It just didn't work for me as an operator although I have enjoyed watching layouts that are worked like that. That is just my view and I fully appreciate that others may see it otherwise.

 

 

 

 

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

9 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

In the plan illustrated, the loop is a double ended siding which allows a goods train going either way to shunt by running round a few wagons rather than needing to be long enough to pass a full train. You could just about get a goods off the running line to allow a passenger or other goods to pass by.

 

I have been trying to remember one real place I saw with that arrangement and it has come to me now. It is Withcall on the GNR Bardney to Louth line.

 

I once started a "half station" with part of the layout shunted by the traverser fiddle yard but after a few test playing sessions I personally found that I much prefer having the whole operation on scene. It just didn't work for me as an operator although I have enjoyed watching layouts that are worked like that. That is just my view and I fully appreciate that others may see it otherwise.

 

 

 

 

I thought that South Willingham on the same line would be an interesting subject for a "Plank" layout.

  • Like 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...