Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, 30368 said:

Good morning Tony,

 

How could you doubt yourself? Wonderful work and a great inspiration to average modellers like me.

 

Keep up the good work please...

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

That's very kind of you Richard,

 

However, I cocked-up helping a friend because he thought that making tiny working motion was beyond him. In a perverse sort of way he was actually pleased that I'd messed up.

 

No matter, the problem will be resolved and we'll all end up happy. 

 

If nothing else, it proves the maxim that 'pride comes before a fall'. 'It won't be a problem' said I! How wrong can I be? 

 

I should have heeded the advice of a friend I was speaking to before Tom Foster arrived, when I asked him his advice on building things in OO9. 'Don't!' is what he said. 

 

Aren't the examples of overcoming physical problems inspiring? So much for those who claim that they can't build anything.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

I should know more about the 4mm GWR selection of models I mentioned some time ago by the weekend.

 

Yet again, it's a collection of a deceased modeller, and comprises some score of kit-built locos, plus carriages and wagons. I'm told that there are several unbuilt kits as well. 

 

I'll check it all, take pictures and then offer the items for sale - 10% going to CRUK. 

[TrevorP1]

5 hours ago, FarrMan said:

Now that I have an excuse to do some practical modelling at last, though as my Grandson is only 6 weeks old at present, I am not in a rush, could I pick the assembled brains on this thread on the question of couplings. The plan is to resurrect his father's model of Hemyock, which never got beyond laying track when he no longer had time for it about 30 years ago (a 120 mile round trip to and from school each day, mainly on single track roads does not leave much spare time). The track will need relaying, but the baseboards should be reuseable. Short trains and shunting will be involved, and a 'one engine in steam' policy practiced. I like the sound of the Hunt's couplings, but apart from holding the stock with the dreaded hand, would they be suitable for a lot of uncoupling and recoupling? Is there any automatic uncoupling system with the Hunts? One thing that I have learnt from this thread is to avoid tension locks like the plague! All advice most welcome.

 

Also advice on best ways to make authentic looking buildings, or where to find it would be very helpful.

 

I hope Tony does not mind this digression.

 

Lloyd

With regard to Hunt couplings I use them on most of my coaches, bogie vans and the like. I’m very pleased with them but they’re not really suitable for shunting and engine changes etc as the vehicles need to be ‘pulled apart’. For fixed sets and making up trains in the fiddle yard I find them excellent.

 

I have no experience of Dinghams etc but folk on here use them with success and I would think they’re good for yard work etc.

 

If you’re starting from scratch steer clear of tension locks. Having said that I still use them, mounted much closer than normal, on goods stock but it is more a case of ‘too much work/expense to change’ rather than a desire to keep them.

 

Just my experiences, others here have different methods with great success.

Edited November 1, 2021 by TrevorP1
Typo

[john new]

1 hour ago, Jesse Sim said:

But what if EVERYONE has seen this picture? 

 

I think it’s more of a gimmick or inside joke now between modellers to place a bus on a bridge. 

I also agree it has become somewhat of a cliche and in-joke but actually was (still is?) quite useful. Where the bridge is the scenic break it can act as an eye catcher to hold the viewer into the scene before the next train emerges coming “on set”. The fact that it has become the cliche and butt of jokes means we have to think of something else these days. That said though I’d rather have a bus on the bridge, cliched joke notwithstanding, than some of the flashing lights and other scenic gimmicks that have crept into 21st C modelling.

 

Potential origin - Was the Thomas versus Bertie the bus story one of Awdry’s originals or just from the much more recent TV series? Either way a sub-conscious prompt.

 

There are also several published pictures of the real railway with buses/trams/trolley-buses on the bridge, a real bonus for the photographer capturing the background interest. I definitely recall at least one lovely atmospheric shot with a TB crossing the bridge at Doncaster.
 

Edited November 1, 2021 by john new
Grammar correction.

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Aren't the examples of overcoming physical problems inspiring? So much for those who claim that they can't build anything.

I read the stories from the "experienced regulars" on here, saying that they can't quite make what they used to, and I (and probably many others) think, "Oh, they'll only manage to make something outstanding, then?".

[Dave John]

There is some evidence that the bus on a bridge cliche might go much further back in modelling history than we thought ............. 

 

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, TrevorP1 said:

With regard to Hunt couplings I use them on most of my coaches, bogie vans and the like. I’m very pleased with them but they’re not really suitable for shunting and engine changes etc as the vehicles need to be ‘pulled apart’. For fixed sets and making up trains in the fiddle yard I find them excellent.

 

I have no experience of Dinghams etc but folk on here use them with success and I would think they’re good for yard work etc.

 

If you’re starting from scratch steer clear of tension locks. Having said that I still use them, mounted much closer than normal, on goods stock but it is more a case of ‘too much work/expense to change’ rather than a desire to keep them.

 

Just my experiences, others here have different methods with great success.

For a "grandfather/grandson" layout, I'd probably stick with tension locks - but I'd aim to use all the same type, all at the same height, all at the same projection in front of the buffers and with any droop/floppiness eliminated.

[Jesse Sim]

3 hours ago, john new said:

I also agree it has become somewhat of a cliche and in-joke but actually was (still is?) quite useful. Where the bridge is the scenic break it can act as an eye catcher to hold the viewer into the scene before the next train emerges coming “on set”. The fact that it has become the cliche and butt of jokes means we have to think of something else these days. That said though I’d rather have a bus on the bridge, cliched joke notwithstanding, than some of the flashing lights and other scenic gimmicks that have crept into 21st C modelling.

 

Potential origin - Was the Thomas versus Bertie the bus story one of Awdry’s originals or just from the much more recent TV series? Either way a sub-conscious prompt.

 

There are also several published pictures of the real railway with buses/trams/trolley-buses on the bridge, a real bonus for the photographer capturing the background interest. I definitely recall at least one lovely atmospheric shot with a TB crossing the bridge at Doncaster.
 

I agree completely, I’d rather have a bud on a bridge then some of the other stuff you see. It’s more natural. Plus I think of myself as somewhat of a comedian/practical joker and I feel such happiness when I laugh and point out that my bridge has a bus on it. 

[St Enodoc]

10 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

I agree completely, I’d rather have a bud on a bridge then some of the other stuff you see. It’s more natural. Plus I think of myself as somewhat of a comedian/practical joker and I feel such happiness when I laugh and point out that my bridge has a bus on it. 

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

[polybear]

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

 

As everyone knows.....

No buses for an hour - then two come along at the same time....

[Woodcock29]

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

You think that's a problem! I've got 6 suitable buses and 2 overbridges. However, I do have  an underbridge and a level crossing.

[Tony Teague]

4 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

 

Build a bus garage

 

[john new]

5 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

Bus depot backing onto the tracks, prototype, Poole, Dorset, just on the Bournemouth side of the town’s central level crossing.

[4630]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

 

 

20 minutes ago, john new said:

Bus depot backing onto the tracks, prototype, Poole, Dorset, just on the Bournemouth side of the town’s central level crossing.

There’s another prototype example at Chichester.

[2750Papyrus]

6 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

I agree completely, I’d rather have a bud on a bridge then some of the other stuff you see. It’s more natural. 

I'm surprised you're drinking Budweiser, especially where you can be seen!

Edited November 2, 2021 by 2750Papyrus

[john new]

3 minutes ago, 4630 said:

 

 

There’s another prototype example at Chichester.

From memory I think there was also one just east of Bournemouth Central, but that may have closed as a lot of new build gone on and I’ve not been that way during the pandemic.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2021 by john new

[Tony Wright]

16 hours ago, FarrMan said:

Now that I have an excuse to do some practical modelling at last, though as my Grandson is only 6 weeks old at present, I am not in a rush, could I pick the assembled brains on this thread on the question of couplings. The plan is to resurrect his father's model of Hemyock, which never got beyond laying track when he no longer had time for it about 30 years ago (a 120 mile round trip to and from school each day, mainly on single track roads does not leave much spare time). The track will need relaying, but the baseboards should be reuseable. Short trains and shunting will be involved, and a 'one engine in steam' policy practiced. I like the sound of the Hunt's couplings, but apart from holding the stock with the dreaded hand, would they be suitable for a lot of uncoupling and recoupling? Is there any automatic uncoupling system with the Hunts? One thing that I have learnt from this thread is to avoid tension locks like the plague! All advice most welcome.

 

Also advice on best ways to make authentic looking buildings, or where to find it would be very helpful.

 

I hope Tony does not mind this digression.

 

Lloyd

Good morning Lloyd,

 

I don't mind any digression.

 

Where I require coupling/uncoupling to take place on Little Bytham, I use the Sprat & Winkle system (for dedicated rakes, I make my own hook and bar couplings, towing off the headstocks).

 

The following images have probably been seen before, but some time ago. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The system is more-difficult to fit on bogie stock, but it can be done. 

 

It's a kind of 'tension-lock', but the opposite way and far more-discreet. All that's required are strategically-placed magnets in the four foot.

 

I think conventional (industry standard) tension-locks might be the way to go for you, though make sure they're all compatible (many are not). This incompatibility is not confined to tension-locks. I watched operations on a layout last week which used Kaydees (is that the spelling?). The number of times trains separated was far too many for me. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Chamby]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I've got seven or eight buses but the layout will only have five bridges. What should I do?????

 

Work out what percentage of the road length on your layout is on a bridge.   Place a similar percentage of your buses on a bridge, to the nearest whole bus.

 

Invoke the laws of probability!

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, john new said:

Bus depot backing onto the tracks, prototype, Poole, Dorset, just on the Bournemouth side of the town’s central level crossing.

 

59 minutes ago, 4630 said:

There’s another prototype example at Chichester.

If I can find room, it would be nice to have a bus and coach station (not depot) at Pentowan.

[St Enodoc]

12 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I watched operations on a layout last week which used Kaydees (is that the spelling?). The number of times trains separated was far too many for me.

As likely as not, that would be due to vertical misalignment of the track and/or inconsistent coupling height.

 

Kadees, by the way.

Edited November 2, 2021 by St Enodoc

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, St Enodoc said:

 

If I can find room, it would be nice to have a bus and coach station (not depot) at Pentowan.

 

Another prototype - Midland Red at South Wigston, Leics.; backing onto the Leicester - Rugby line. (There were always a few ancient, semi-withdrawn buses and coaches slumbering away in the yard next to the tracks).

 

John Isherwood.

[Roger Sunderland]

8 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Lloyd,

 

I don't mind any digression.

 

Where I require coupling/uncoupling to take place on Little Bytham, I use the Sprat & Winkle system (for dedicated rakes, I make my own hook and bar couplings, towing off the headstocks).

 

The following images have probably been seen before, but some time ago. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The system is more-difficult to fit on bogie stock, but it can be done. 

 

It's a kind of 'tension-lock', but the opposite way and far more-discreet. All that's required are strategically-placed magnets in the four foot.

 

I think conventional (industry standard) tension-locks might be the way to go for you, though make sure they're all compatible (many are not). This incompatibility is not confined to tension-locks. I watched operations on a layout last week which used Kaydees (is that the spelling?). The number of times trains separated was far too many for me. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I use Kadees on all freight stock, locos and coach rake ends and have found them almost faultless in operation. Separation is only an issue if couplings are not all mounted at the same height. They are, after all, the standard coupling in the US - think of those very long freights. I don’t think they would be so popular if separation was a problem.

[4630]

1 hour ago, john new said:

From memory I think there was also one just east of Bournemouth Central, but that may have closed as a lot of new build gone on and I’ve not been that way during the pandemic.

 

 

 

You're quite right there was.  If my memory and local history serves me right it was originally for Bournemouth's trams and then re-purposed for trolley buses, until their demise in the town in 1969.

 

I seem to recall, but I'm not completely sure, that the site then became a depot for Bournemouth Council vehicles.  I'm not sure of its current use, or if it even still exists, as I haven't lived in the area for a fair few years and I'm only an infrequent visitor these days. 

[4630]

29 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

 

If I can find room, it would be nice to have a bus and coach station (not depot) at Pentowan.

 

The Chichester example includes a depot on one side of a main road directly opposite the city's bus and coach station.

 

On the theory that 'a picture paints a thousand words', here's a Google Maps view which illustrates the position;

 

Chichester Bus and Coach Station & bus garage.

 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Roger Sunderland said:

I use Kadees on all freight stock, locos and coach rake ends and have found them almost faultless in operation. Separation is only an issue if couplings are not all mounted at the same height. They are, after all, the standard coupling in the US - think of those very long freights. I don’t think they would be so popular if separation was a problem.

Thanks Roger,

 

I think the problem was that not all the buckeyes were the same make. It was the long freights which separated. All Kadees are buckeye, but not all buckeyes are Kaydees? My description was, thus, incorrect. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.