Wright writes.....

[LNER4479]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

At one tutorial I gave, I was very less-than-complementary about a builder's work when he waved a brass loco kit in front of me stating 'It's ******* (insert which expletive suits) rubbish!'. Since I knew the kit to be a good one (having built one myself) and knew the proprietor as a friend, I responded with 'It's your work which is ****** rubbish! Did you check that the frames were square, that the axles ran freely in their bearings, that the motor/gearbox was sweet, that the rods were free and that the motion didn't bind?'. 'No, I just put it all together then tried it' was his response. As for the bodywork - I asked him if he were a plumber by trade! Yet, vociferous bods like him will have an eager audience. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony,

 

Been looking for a perfect opportunity to bring this to your attention and you've just given me a perfect 'in'. I wonder if the person who attempted this would match your description above?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/334184802461?hash=item4dcef7689d:g:4xcAAOSwcKlhbA3t

 

In case you don't want to follow the link to Ebay, then here are a couple of screen grabs to give you an idea:

 

To be fair to the seller, it's only being advertised 'for spare parts' (although quite what they might be I can't imagine?).

 

I think that in the generally rarefied world of Wright Writes, where many (most?) of us are 'real' modellers (by your definition), we should occasionally remind ourselves that the vast majority of Hornby's sales are accounted for by 'passive' (your definition) purchasers and more than a few kit sales end up like the above.

 

BUT - absolutely agree with the sentiment that a good kit should be rightly complimented as such.

[grahame]

9 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Hello Tony,

 

Been looking for a perfect opportunity to bring this to your attention and you've just given me a perfect 'in'. I wonder if the person who attempted this would match your description above?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/334184802461?hash=item4dcef7689d:g:4xcAAOSwcKlhbA3t

 

In case you don't want to follow the link to Ebay, then here are a couple of screen grabs to give you an idea:

 

 

 

Is that an example of what they call heavy metal steam punk?

;-)

 

[ecgtheow]

4 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

"Do kit makers ever know how much others appreciate their efforts. Perhaps more so now with Internet forums. 

richard"

 

Those that post regularly on forums such as RMweb seem to get a lot of praise, especially if they have a thread /topic of their own.

 

Those producers who don't use forums much, if at all for whatever reason, rarely get a mention, unless it is a query about availability, response to emails, delivery delay, etc. It seems odd that people ask about some of these subjects, rather than contacting the supplier directly where appropriate and possible.

 

Having designed a number of kits for one producer, very rarely has anyone said they have enjoyed the results of my work, other than people I know personally (and who soon would also let me know if they had problems). When a model built from a kit appears in an RMweb thread, the builder is often congratulated on his work but unlike the RTR producers, the kit manufacturer rarely gets any plaudits. Tony Wright is rather the exception to this, offering praise where he feels it is due.

Jol,

 

Take heart. I don't build many loco kits (actually only 2 built) as I don't have the time while getting my layout finished, but a friend has built many LRM LNWR loco kits for me, most of which I think you design, & the builder universally praises the quality of the kits & the results are superb. I have few photos of them but I guess that's it's probable that you designed the kit for the Precedent model loco below.

 

William

 

 

[Steamport Southport]

4 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Those producers who don't use forums much, if at all for whatever reason, rarely get a mention, unless it is a query about availability, response to emails, delivery delay, etc. It seems odd that people ask about some of these subjects, rather than contacting the supplier directly where appropriate and possible.

 

Having designed a number of kits for one producer, very rarely has anyone said they have enjoyed the results of my work, other than people I know personally (and who soon would also let me know if they had problems). When a model built from a kit appears in an RMweb thread, the builder is often congratulated on his work but unlike the RTR producers, the kit manufacturer rarely gets any plaudits. Tony Wright is rather the exception to this, offering praise where he feels it is due.

Slightly edited

 

 

There's the answer in bold and already in the post.  

 

How can someone get an answer from the manufacturer when they can't, won't or even flatly refuse to reply to emails, letters, phone calls, etc.? Despite often having those details on the website.

 

Most of the threads about small suppliers where there are complaints are due to a total lack of communication from the seller. Suppliers that are good at communicating with the purchaser don't seem to get mentioned as they are easy to buy from. Usually those are also the ones with good websites that are updated regularly and easy to use.

 

 

 

Jason

[Jol Wilkinson]

1 hour ago, ecgtheow said:

Jol,

 

Take heart. I don't build many loco kits (actually only 2 built) as I don't have the time while getting my layout finished, but a friend has built many LRM LNWR loco kits for me, most of which I think you design, & the builder universally praises the quality of the kits & the results are superb. I have few photos of them but I guess that's it's probable that you designed the kit for the Precedent model loco below.

 

William

 

 

Hello William,

 

thanks but the Improved Precedent isn't one of mine, it's from the original george Norton Connoisseurs Choice range. Despite their age as a hand drawn design they make up into a nice model, as yours is.

 

I designed the Jubilee 4-4-0 four cylinder compound and subsequent LNWR locos apart from the little 0-4-0 T Ramsbottom Shunter. I also did the NER G1/LNER D23 and a number of LNWR carriages, underframes and bits and pieces for John at LRM. The last thing I did before a detached retina and subsequent operations has made things rather difficult, is the etched underframe for the LNWR D17 20T six wheel brake van, which should be available soon.

 

Jol

[Jol Wilkinson]

4 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Slightly edited

 

 

There's the answer in bold and already in the post.  

 

How can someone get an answer from the manufacturer when they can't, won't or even flatly refuse to reply to emails, letters, phone calls, etc.? Despite often having those details on the website.

 

Most of the threads about small suppliers where there are complaints are due to a total lack of communication from the seller. Suppliers that are good at communicating with the purchaser don't seem to get mentioned as they are easy to buy from. Usually those are also the ones with good websites that are updated regularly and easy to use.

 

 

 

Jason

 

Jason

 

I fully agree that some Small Suppliers don't appear to se the need to communicate with their customers. However, some people seem to find it easier to post a question on RMweb than use the Contact Button on a website or an email address. If they are having a problem contacting a supplier, then it is unlikely that others have had success.

 

It is also clear that some buyers don't look at websites properly. Despite providing details on purchase, payment and delivery options and terms, some people seem to ignore that information and individually ask for the information by email. 

 

Bringing poor service or unsatisfactory products to the attention of others is a good thing. However it should be tempered with an understanding that many of our Small Suppliers don't have the resources of big business to hand for dealing immediately with problems or queries (and we all know how bad/slow some of those large businesses are in dealing with unhappy customers), so need to manage working hours and expenses effectively.

 

Jol

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Hello Tony,

 

Been looking for a perfect opportunity to bring this to your attention and you've just given me a perfect 'in'. I wonder if the person who attempted this would match your description above?

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/334184802461?hash=item4dcef7689d:g:4xcAAOSwcKlhbA3t

 

In case you don't want to follow the link to Ebay, then here are a couple of screen grabs to give you an idea:

 

To be fair to the seller, it's only being advertised 'for spare parts' (although quite what they might be I can't imagine?).

 

I think that in the generally rarefied world of Wright Writes, where many (most?) of us are 'real' modellers (by your definition), we should occasionally remind ourselves that the vast majority of Hornby's sales are accounted for by 'passive' (your definition) purchasers and more than a few kit sales end up like the above.

 

BUT - absolutely agree with the sentiment that a good kit should be rightly complimented as such.

Thanks for that, Graham.

 

Astonishing; believe it or not, words fail me! Speaking of words, I've now corrected my incorrect 'complimentary'. Hoist and petard spring to mind; quite rightly so.  

 

And, speaking of (good) models, Jonathan Wealleans tells me that this K3 will be making its debut on Grantham at the Leeds Show this coming weekend. 

 

 

It's a Bachmann body on a South Eastern Finecast chassis, with an SEF cab, modified Bachmann motion and Bachmann tender. It certainly sports the right-sized (Markits) drivers. It was a project I helped Tom Foster with, which Jonathan subsequently acquired. Whether Tom finished it, or Jonathan did, I don't know, but I'm told it's now complete for service on Grantham. Jonathan promises me he'll take its picture. I look forward to seeing it. 

 

Speaking of Grantham, some 'tasters' for the coming weekend, all taken at past events.............

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wish you and the team all success at the Leeds Show. I'll post these images in the appropriate exhibitions' thread.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Bernard Lamb]

15 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

 

 

It is also clear that some buyers don't look at websites properly. Despite providing details on purchase, payment and delivery options and terms, some people seem to ignore that information and individually ask for the information by email. 

 

 

 

 

 

Jol

Some people do not even bother to look at the website.

They go straight to ebay and pay way over the odds.

I used to help out at events for a publisher (motor sport) and we usually had a few copies of long out of print books which were sold at list price.

You would often get people telling you how much they had recently paid and when you asked why they had not enquired about availability they said that they had never thought of doing so.

Totally OT. I sent out a bulk circulation email with details of an event the other day. One person emailed me back asking what date it was while another person sent in a  booking that ignored all the points you mention. At least they managed to find the correct date.

Bernard

[ecgtheow]

1 hour ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Hello William,

 

thanks but the Improved Precedent isn't one of mine, it's from the original george Norton Connoisseurs Choice range. Despite their age as a hand drawn design they make up into a nice model, as yours is.

 

I designed the Jubilee 4-4-0 four cylinder compound and subsequent LNWR locos apart from the little 0-4-0 T Ramsbottom Shunter. I also did the NER G1/LNER D23 and a number of LNWR carriages, underframes and bits and pieces for John at LRM. The last thing I did before a detached retina and subsequent operations has made things rather difficult, is the etched underframe for the LNWR D17 20T six wheel brake van, which should be available soon.

 

Jol

Jol,

 

Happy to report that I have an example of your work designing the Jubilee model. It's excellent. I will try to take a photo soon of it & post it on here. I probably have other examples of your design work too but I don't know the order in which they were introduced. Rest assured I am a very satisfied customer.

 

William

[Northmoor]

51 minutes ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Jol

Some people do not even bother to look at the website.

They go straight to ebay and pay way over the odds.

I used to help out at events for a publisher (motor sport) and we usually had a few copies of long out of print books which were sold at list price.

You would often get people telling you how much they had recently paid and when you asked why they had not enquired about availability they said that they had never thought of doing so.

Totally OT. I sent out a bulk circulation email with details of an event the other day. One person emailed me back asking what date it was while another person sent in a  booking that ignored all the points you mention. At least they managed to find the correct date.

Bernard

To paraphrase:

"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the General Public".

[t-b-g]

3 hours ago, ecgtheow said:

Jol,

 

Take heart. I don't build many loco kits (actually only 2 built) as I don't have the time while getting my layout finished, but a friend has built many LRM LNWR loco kits for me, most of which I think you design, & the builder universally praises the quality of the kits & the results are superb. I have few photos of them but I guess that's it's probable that you designed the kit for the Precedent model loco below.

 

William

 

 

 

That kit was a Malcolm Crawley design. I had the pleasure of watching him draw some of it, as already said by hand, on his ex Doncaster Plant Works drawing board.

 

I don't think he did the tender. From memory, that was already available from a previous kit.

 

Some time later, I built one of these for Narrow Road. I didn't build many Norton/Crawley kits as Malcolm had so many that were available for use that I just didn't need to but I picked up a secondhand example, unstarted, for a good price.

 

I decided to build it at Malcolm's place, as I used to visit him twice a week for a modelling session. Although Malcolm did the artwork, George Norton wrote the instructions and that combination of them being done by two different people wasn't always helpful. A few times I tried to work out where a bit should go, or which way up it should be, from George's words and a fairly scrappy diagram. I would ask Malcolm and most times his answer was "I did that 8 years ago, how do you expect me to remember?".

 

Luckily, he still had the GA that he worked from, so I could find what I needed to know from that.

 

Nice looking locos and now to be had RTR. I wonder how many of the kits will sell now?   

[Chamby]

21 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Hello William,

 

thanks but the Improved Precedent isn't one of mine, it's from the original george Norton Connoisseurs Choice range. Despite their age as a hand drawn design they make up into a nice model, as yours is.

 

I designed the Jubilee 4-4-0 four cylinder compound and subsequent LNWR locos apart from the little 0-4-0 T Ramsbottom Shunter. I also did the NER G1/LNER D23 and a number of LNWR carriages, underframes and bits and pieces for John at LRM. The last thing I did before a detached retina and subsequent operations has made things rather difficult, is the etched underframe for the LNWR D17 20T six wheel brake van, which should be available soon.

 

Jol

 

Hi Jol,

 

Did you perchance see the programme on Yesterday (Freeview channel 26) last night about Hornby?  It showed the modern method of model making... all done with scanning technology and computers.  It made me realise that there is much less of an art in model design now, it being rather more about the use of technology.  Perhaps this is why we're seeing the emergence of new RTR suppliers, now the process is becoming less of a dark art and more openly available?

 

Phil

Edited October 20, 2021 by Chamby
Corrected TV channel

[Barry Ten]

5 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

 

In case you don't want to follow the link to Ebay, then here are a couple of screen grabs to give you an idea:

 

 

 

The pipes are nice and wiggly, I'll give it that.

[ArthurK]

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Jason

 

I fully agree that some Small Suppliers don't appear to se the need to communicate with their customers. However, some people seem to find it easier to post a question on RMweb than use the Contact Button on a website or an email address. If they are having a problem contacting a supplier, then it is unlikely that others have had success.

 

It is also clear that some buyers don't look at websites properly. Despite providing details on purchase, payment and delivery options and terms, some people seem to ignore that information and individually ask for the information by email. 

 

Bringing poor service or unsatisfactory products to the attention of others is a good thing. However it should be tempered with an understanding that many of our Small Suppliers don't have the resources of big business to hand for dealing immediately with problems or queries (and we all know how bad/slow some of those large businesses are in dealing with unhappy customers), so need to manage working hours and expenses effectively.

 

Jol

 

 

 

NORTHEASTERN KITS

I will always respond to Email regarding enquiries about kits or castings.  That is my primary means of communication. I will also respond to PMs on this site. I do not have a Website

 

ArthurK

[Jol Wilkinson]

28 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

That kit was a Malcolm Crawley design. I had the pleasure of watching him draw some of it, as already said by hand, on his ex Doncaster Plant Works drawing board.

 

I don't think he did the tender. From memory, that was already available from a previous kit.

 

Some time later, I built one of these for Narrow Road. I didn't build many Norton/Crawley kits as Malcolm had so many that were available for use that I just didn't need to but I picked up a secondhand example, unstarted, for a good price.

 

I decided to build it at Malcolm's place, as I used to visit him twice a week for a modelling session. Although Malcolm did the artwork, George Norton wrote the instructions and that combination of them being done by two different people wasn't always helpful. A few times I tried to work out where a bit should go, or which way up it should be, from George's words and a fairly scrappy diagram. I would ask Malcolm and most times his answer was "I did that 8 years ago, how do you expect me to remember?".

 

Luckily, he still had the GA that he worked from, so I could find what I needed to know from that.

 

Nice looking locos and now to be had RTR. I wonder how many of the kits will sell now?   

Hi Tony

 

the RTR LNWR Improved Precedent will undoubtedly capture the OO market but how well it does with EM and P4 modellers will depend on how easy it is to convert. kit sales of pre-group models is really quite small with OO representing well under half, so the impact for John at LRM will not be significant.

 

5 minutes ago, Chamby said:

 

Hi Jol,

 

Did you perchance see the programme on Channel 5 last night about Hornby?  It showed the modern method of model making... all done with scanning technology and computers.  It made me realise that there is much less of an art in model design now, it being rather more about the use of technology.  Perhaps this is why we're seeing the emergence of new RTR suppliers, now the process is becoming less of a dark art and more openly available?

 

Phil

 

Hi Phil,

 

no, I forgot all about it although I did see the first programme. 

 

I believe scanning of prototypes has been the preferred option for RTR manufacturers for some years. It makes life easier for the designers and reduces research time, staring at GA's, finding good photos, etc. None of the kits I have designed are of preserved locos (one prototype carriage is still in existence and there is still an LNWR platform trolley somewhere, I am sure), so I appreciate the work involved in researching  something which disappeared  almost a century or more ago. However, that's all part of the fun .

 

Scanning technology and it's value in CAD probably explains why most (all?) new releases are of preserved locos . I'll wait for someone to contradict that as my knowledge of RTR, beyond pre-group is rather thin. That's why I don't see much likelihood of other pre-group models than those preserved one available for scanning, becoming available RTR.

 

 

For those wishing to model the pre-group or even the post grouping years, then building your own becomes a necessity. A realistic model such as Little Bytham, despite the recent introduction of various LNER Pacifics, and other locos, wouldn't be possible without the wide range of loco and rolling stock kits available and the enthusiasm to build them to create an accurate layout.

 

[Compound2632]

20 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Scanning technology and it's value in CAD probably explains why most (all?) new releases are of preserved locos . I'll wait for someone to contradict that as my knowledge of RTR, beyond pre-group is rather thin. That's why I don't see much likelihood of other pre-group models than those preserved one available for scanning, becoming available RTR.

 

The drivers are not just the technology and not just the survival of examples in preservation but the NRM seeking marketing opportunities. But there has been one notable recent example of a pre-grouping locomotive model produced the hard way, working from drawings etc., there being no preserved example - the Bachmann 1532 Class 0-4-4T; there are others at the development stage: the Model Rail Brighton Class E 0-6-0T (though there are pieces in preservation, I understand); and the TMC NER Class O 0-4-4T, which I think is being developed on the back of the work being done towards a full-sized replica.

 

But you'll look in vain for models of specific (as opposed to generic) RTR stock for these engines to pull.

Edited October 19, 2021 by Compound2632

[Tony Wright]

One Crownline loco kit I forgot to mention when I was listing those I've made was the B17.

 

 

 

 

I built 61620 originally for Little Bytham (in OO) but pictures of B17s running on the main line between Grantham and Peterborough are as rare as hens' teeth, even though the type could be seen regularly at both locations. 

 

Thus, she now runs on EM frames and is on loan (probably permanently) to Retford, where she's far more at home, running on the boat train. 

 

I'm sure I've taken pictures of her complete on Retford, but I can't find them at the moment. Perhaps Sandra Orpen has some. 

 

Geoff Haynes painted/weathered CLUMBER perfectly.

 

As did Ian Rathbone on this Crownline B17 I built for Gilbert Barnatt.

 

 

Seen on his previous layout, it's a pity about those gross lamps.

 

Images of her appear from time to time on Peterborough North.  

 

 

[LNER4479]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for that, Graham.

 

And, speaking of (good) models, Jonathan Wealleans tells me that this K3 will be making its debut on Grantham at the Leeds Show this coming weekend. 

 

 

It's a Bachmann body on a South Eastern Finecast chassis, with an SEF cab, modified Bachmann motion and Bachmann tender. It certainly sports the right-sized (Markits) drivers. It was a project I helped Tom Foster with, which Jonathan subsequently acquired. Whether Tom finished it, or Jonathan did, I don't know, but I'm told it's now complete for service on Grantham. Jonathan promises me he'll take its picture. I look forward to seeing it. 

 

Speaking of Grantham, some 'tasters' for the coming weekend, all taken at past events.............

 

I wish you and the team all success at the Leeds Show. I'll post these images in the appropriate exhibitions' thread.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Thanks for that Tony. I have to say that I rather lost count of the K3s that Jonathan brought along - a veritable plethora of the things. Most appropriate for c.1938 as there were very few V2s about at that date and the K3s were very much the front line mixed traffic type.

 

Thanks also for your good wishes for this weekend's show. You will no doubt be delighted to know that, as well as some additions to stock, there are also various improvements and additions to the layout that we have been working on over the last few months. I'm holding back on any photos to give a bit of exclusivity to the Leeds show team but rest assured there will be a full report following the show. The plan to is to continue with these developments up to the Doncaster show in February when we might laughingly call the layout 'complete' or at least as developed as it's going to be.

 

[2750Papyrus]

To my mind, one of the best-looking locos ever.  I love the pre-paint shop picture!

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Hi Tony

 

the RTR LNWR Improved Precedent will undoubtedly capture the OO market but how well it does with EM and P4 modellers will depend on how easy it is to convert. kit sales of pre-group models is really quite small with OO representing well under half, so the impact for John at LRM will not be significant.

 

 

Hi Phil,

 

no, I forgot all about it although I did see the first programme. 

 

I believe scanning of prototypes has been the preferred option for RTR manufacturers for some years. It makes life easier for the designers and reduces research time, staring at GA's, finding good photos, etc. None of the kits I have designed are of preserved locos (one prototype carriage is still in existence and there is still an LNWR platform trolley somewhere, I am sure), so I appreciate the work involved in researching  something which disappeared  almost a century or more ago. However, that's all part of the fun .

 

Scanning technology and it's value in CAD probably explains why most (all?) new releases are of preserved locos . I'll wait for someone to contradict that as my knowledge of RTR, beyond pre-group is rather thin. That's why I don't see much likelihood of other pre-group models than those preserved one available for scanning, becoming available RTR.

 

 

For those wishing to model the pre-group or even the post grouping years, then building your own becomes a necessity. A realistic model such as Little Bytham, despite the recent introduction of various LNER Pacifics, and other locos, wouldn't be possible without the wide range of loco and rolling stock kits available and the enthusiasm to build them to create an accurate layout.

 

Thanks for the kind comment about Little Bytham, Jol.

 

It's interesting to consider the locos which would have been seen on the prototype in the summer of 1958 (and the last decade of the M&GNR), which are currently available RTR in OO. Of course, some of these are more recent entries on to the market than when Little Bytham was started (13 years ago). 

 

Out of interest, let's see.  

A1. Bachmann.

A2. Bachmann.

A2/2. Hornby.

A2/3. Hornby.

A3. Hornby.

A4. Hornby/Bachmann/Dapol.

B1. Hornby/Bachmann.

B17. Hornby (tenuous, as explained in my previous post). 

D16/3. Hornby.

J11. Bachmann.

J39. Bachmann (is it still available?). 

K1. Hornby.

K3. Bachmann.

L1. Hornby.

N2. Hornby (running-in on its way back south after shopping at the 'Plant').

O1. Hornby.

O23 and O2/4. Heljan.

O4/1. Bachmann. 

V2. Bachmann.

Ivatt 4MT. Bachmann.

4F. Bachmann.

Britannia. Hornby.

BR Standard Five. Bachmann (tenuous).

BR Standard 4 2-6-0. Bachmann. 

Austerity. Bachmann.

9F. Bachmann. 

 

I'm sure I've missed some out, though it's still an impressive list in my view. And, to come we've got a forthcoming A5 and W1 RTR. 

 

Now, the fact that I've got so few of those listed above doesn't imply a dissatisfaction with them as such, only that most are useless for taking the very heavy trains found on LB. That, coupled with the fact that (as is known) I much prefer to make my own locos means I'm never going to be RTR-reliant. Yes, I know I've made recent programmes for Hornby, and I stand by what I said in those about how good the products are, but they were more aimed at what can be done to improve/alter/detail/renumber/rename/weather Hornby RTR locos/rolling stock, mainly with the less-experienced in mind. In that respect, I hope they proved of value.

 

Which leaves us with what's missing off that RTR loco list.

A1/1, A2/1, original A2/2, B16/1, B16/2, B16/3, C12, D9, D16/3 with decorative valances, J3, J6, J17, J69, K2, K5 (tenuous), O2/1, O2/2 (forthcoming from Heljan?), O4/3, O4/6, O4/7 and O4/8 (have I missed any off?). A fair few still to being going on with. I've built all the above, of course. 

 

I wonder how the other main lines are catered for RTR? Of course, these are all steam-outline. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Wright]

42 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Thanks for that Tony. I have to say that I rather lost count of the K3s that Jonathan brought along - a veritable plethora of the things. Most appropriate for c.1938 as there were very few V2s about at that date and the K3s were very much the front line mixed traffic type.

 

Thanks also for your good wishes for this weekend's show. You will no doubt be delighted to know that, as well as some additions to stock, there are also various improvements and additions to the layout that we have been working on over the last few months. I'm holding back on any photos to give a bit of exclusivity to the Leeds show team but rest assured there will be a full report following the show. The plan to is to continue with these developments up to the Doncaster show in February when we might laughingly call the layout 'complete' or at least as developed as it's going to be.

 

Thanks Graham,

 

When is Shap next out, please?

 

Wherever/whenever it is, would you like to borrow this?

 

 

Seen before, but of possible interest to you?

 

It's Hornby's latest die-cast 'Semi' which I've detailed and Geoff Haynes has varnished. It's currently with Geoff for some light weathering.

 

Whatever load you choose to put behind her on Shap (if you should choose to do so), she'll take. With ease!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

45 minutes ago, 2750Papyrus said:

To my mind, one of the best-looking locos ever.  I love the pre-paint shop picture!

Would you like to see another?

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Chas Levin]

12 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

Having designed a number of kits for one producer, very rarely has anyone said they have enjoyed the results of my work, other than people I know personally (and who soon would also let me know if they had problems)...

Hello Jol, another factor is that people frequently don't know who designed a kit - it often isn't mentioned on suppliers' sites or in the instructions. I only knew about some of your designs because we had exchanged posts elsewhere on RMWeb.

 

At the risk of courting controversy I think the designer's name should be prominently featured: even with my fairly limited kit-building experience, it seems to me that he (or she) is pretty key to a successful and enjoyable build...

[APOLLO]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

At one tutorial I gave, I was very less-than-complimentary about a builder's work when he waved a brass loco kit in front of me stating 'It's ******* (insert which expletive suits) rubbish!'. Since I knew the kit to be a good one (having built one myself) and knew the proprietor as a friend, I responded with 'It's your work which is ****** rubbish! Did you check that the frames were square, that the axles ran freely in their bearings, that the motor/gearbox was sweet, that the rods were free and that the motion didn't bind?'. 'No, I just put it all together then tried it' was his response. As for the bodywork - I asked him if he were a plumber by trade! Yet, vociferous bods like him will have an eager audience. 

 

Soldering irons at 6 o'clock !!!!!!!!!!!

 

Brit15

[robertcwp]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

One Crownline loco kit I forgot to mention when I was listing those I've made was the B17.

 

 

 

 

I built 61620 originally for Little Bytham (in OO) but pictures of B17s running on the main line between Grantham and Peterborough are as rare as hens' teeth, even though the type could be seen regularly at both locations. 

 

Thus, she now runs on EM frames and is on loan (probably permanently) to Retford, where she's far more at home, running on the boat train. 

 

I'm sure I've taken pictures of her complete on Retford, but I can't find them at the moment. Perhaps Sandra Orpen has some. 

 

Geoff Haynes painted/weathered CLUMBER perfectly.

 

 

 

Clumber appears on Retford in this video: https://youtu.be/zeSVolvqK_4

 

This was a test of the second boat train set (behind the Britannia) with Clumber passing on the existing boat train (although the carriages have been shuffled around between these and other trains).  Yesterday, whilst I was visiting, Sandra and I ran the full sequence, including the boat train in both directions.