Wright writes.....

[Steven B]

22 hours ago, Bernard Lamb said:

Yes. Given the understanding that you cannot scale either mass or tolerances.

Before the P4 people jump on me, I accept that they do have a point, but only in controlled situations.

Bernard

 

I'm obviously missing something - why can't mass be scaled? The mass of an object is its density multiplied by volume. For a model, the density would remain constant, whilst volume is reduced by the scale cubed.

 

Aren't the limitations more that we don't use the same material as the prototype (e.g. plastic rather than steel) and our boilers aren't filled with water? Or, that scale thicknesses for cab sides etc, would be too thin to be practical.

 

It's not running on a scale model earth (with scale gravity) that causes the problems!

 

Similarly, tolerances can be scaled - however, as has been pointed out, they soon become impractical to work with.

 

Steven B.

 

[drmditch]

Not so much of a problem for electrically powered railway models, but since water and air molecules don't scale down there can be big problems for model sailing vessels.

(I did try once!)

 

I suppose it might show in the size of the meniscus in a model water tank. using real water ?

 

 

[DenysW]

Water models are scaled down (rarely by more than 10:1 linear, 1000:1 volumetric) on Froude Number as better than Reynolds Number (I used to have to know this) and even then edge effects scaled poorly, and the results weren't fully right (but were better than ignorance). I think (not certain)  that this may be why OO scale 'smoke' doesn't look right: the Froude Numbers are wrong for the air the 'smoke' is ejected with.

 

However, scale effects like this are dwarfed by the approximations of not using coal to raise steam in an external combustion boiler. I think we're mostly debating what looks best compared to memories and to contemporary photographs, not what is a fully-accurate scale-model of the reality.

[5 C]

19 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Bernard,

 

my comment was meant to be rather more generalised. I trained as a engineer in the automobile industry but soon moved into the manufacturer/dealer/customer aftermarket  "interface". There I learned a different meaning of tolerance.

 

Jol

Ah yes, the stories I could tell on that subject. I'm sure we could fill a thread all by ourselves. 

[Tony Wright]

On 04/12/2021 at 21:31, 60526 said:

Tony,

There I was enjoying a nice pint of Black Sheep listening to the BRM panel discussion between Phil Parker, Chris Mead, Graham Nicholas and yourself, when I choked somewhat, I thought that I heard you say that "weathering should not be used to disguise mistakes". A quick reverse and yes you did say that. Now, the other day I was looking at buying one of the Hornby A2's, it would have been the most expensive RTR model that I have ever bought,model costs have caught up with me somewhat, I'd previously decided not to spend that sort of money on a model which I consider has the wrong colour green. I can understand you waxing lyrical about some of the newer Hornby models in the BRM videos, I'd agree the B1 is particularly good, but do you really believe that the A2 out of the box is the right coloured green? I'm not totally convinced, but the weathered A2 you have shown photos of seems to cover it up some what?

Charlie

Apologies for the late response Charlie,

 

I've been away tutoring for three days. 

 

The reference to 'disguising mistakes' was more to do with my own mistakes in painting finishing - piggly numbers and wobbly lining for instance. One should always ensure these are true before any weathering takes place.

 

You're right in thinking that Hornby's Thompson Pacific BR green is 'questionable'.

 

And, weathering certainly altered it.

 

 

Weathering by Geoff Haynes.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

On 05/12/2021 at 13:59, Chamby said:

Some stunning photographs of Retford on today’s virtual exhibition, thank you, Tony.

 

In one of Andy’s photo’s I spotted 60993 en passant, a certain Mr Thompson would not approve, I think!   Is there a bit of a story to be told there?   

They were not all my pictures of Retford, Phil,

 

Some of Andy York's wonderful ones were used as well. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

On 05/12/2021 at 14:02, richard i said:

My confession

forgive me father I have sinned.

the first sin is these are not ECML in BR era. 
the second is they have no lamps

the third I have not completed them as accurate to the prototype as possible.

but most of all in order to get two large lumps of brass to join I used two part epoxy, not solder. 
in my defense I tried to solder them but the iron was too weedy. They acted as such large heat sinks that I think even a Saturn 5 main rocket would not have provided enough heat. 
Tony will recognize these, but for others, these were involved in a car crash and Tony thought I might like the challenge of making them look like they did before they went bump. For example the single’s tender was in in 12 bits. Not all where the kit originally thought they should be. Some filler, filling and fudging has got them sort of back to how they might have looked before the crash.

they will stay this way for a while but might end up in the improvement line eventually. Can’t have too much distraction from the GCR otherwise all the stock I need will never get built.

richard

 

Good evening Richard,

 

What an incredible transformation! I thought they were nothing but scrap. 

 

Well done.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, landscapes said:

Hi

 

I recently saw the video of Retford uploaded I believe by Tony.

 

This is the first time I have seen your layout in action, absolutely stunning.

 

thank you 

 

David

Uploaded by me, David?

 

Hang on, I might have shot it but after that I'm totally 'in the dark'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

6 hours ago, railroadbill said:

Excellent video of yours on motor/gearbox combinations on the virtual show yesterday, Tony. Very informative, also to see locos with the different set ups actually running.  A question that arises, what different gear ratios for say pacifics, heavy freights and small locos did you use to get the excellent running you showed? 

Many thanks.

 

The short answer is 'I'm not sure'. I just use what seems to work 'the best' The locos with larger wheels (and go much faster) tend to have a lower gear ration, and those with smaller drivers (going slower) have a higher ratio.

 

All very unscientific, I'm afraid. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[PupCam]

On 05/12/2021 at 14:02, richard i said:

My confession

forgive me father I have sinned.

the first sin is these are not ECML in BR era. 
the second is they have no lamps

the third I have not completed them as accurate to the prototype as possible.

but most of all in order to get two large lumps of brass to join I used two part epoxy, not solder. 
in my defense I tried to solder them but the iron was too weedy. They acted as such large heat sinks that I think even a Saturn 5 main rocket would not have provided enough heat. 
Tony will recognize these, but for others, these were involved in a car crash and Tony thought I might like the challenge of making them look like they did before they went bump. For example the single’s tender was in in 12 bits. Not all where the kit originally thought they should be. Some filler, filling and fudging has got them sort of back to how they might have looked before the crash.

they will stay this way for a while but might end up in the improvement line eventually. Can’t have too much distraction from the GCR otherwise all the stock I need will never get built.

richard

 

 

A good job done there!

 

Is it me, or is your bookcase repeated in 100's  of houses throughout the land?  

 

Hmm would like a look at the Wetherset, Earley and Casserly books.  They seem to be missing from my bookcase but I think all the others are present and correct 

 

Alan

[landscapes]

16 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Uploaded by me, David?

 

Hang on, I might have shot it but after that I'm totally 'in the dark'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi Tony

 

Sorry my mistake, but thank you for filming it, it really is a fantastic layout.

 

Regards

 

David

[Tony Wright]

I've not long returned from a quite splendid three days spent in the fantastic clubrooms of the Leamington & Warwick MRC, where I was the tutor at a loco-/rolling-stock building course.

 

 

My apologies for my looking even more-ghastly that normal - I've not long ago broken a front crown and my dental plate no longer fits! 

 

I hope no one was frightened by my 'moving' appearance at the BRM virtual show at the weekend.

 

The seven excellent students produced some outstanding work; including................

 

 

In 4mm, a set of frames for a 94XX.

 

 

This D&S 4mm Siphon kit only had its box opened on Saturday morning!

 

 

One started earlier - a 7mm J39. The boiler work was a first attempt over the three days. 

 

 

The first time at building an O Gauge tender. This was all flat on Saturday morning. 

 

And a Midland 0-4-4T in 7mm. Again, its box was opened on Saturday!

 

 

As might be expected, I did no modelling - just bringing some examples.

 

My thanks chaps, for a fantastic time............

 

[St Enodoc]

11 hours ago, Dr Gerbil-Fritters said:

 

To be fair, the Nimrod was based on the Comet 4C airframe dating from the late 50s early 60s.  In fact, the first two were based on unfinished 4C airframes.  UK aerospace was, at that time, notoriously set up as a number of small manufacturers almost like cottage industries utilising extensive hand building and finishing.  This was a peculiarity of the UK aerospace industry, and caused no end of problems.  It was certainly no match for the precision and mass-production of the US industry at the time. 

 

If you would like to know more about just how poor the UK aerospace industry was in the post-war years, I can highly recommend 'Empire of the Clouds', by James Hamilton-Paterson, a very good corrective for the disease of Spitfire Induced English Exceptionalism...

For a slightly different but equally interesting perspective, try "Jet Age" by Sam Verhovek (ISBN 978-1-58333-436-2)

[St Enodoc]

11 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

That made me chuckle ... even before I Googled 'truculence'. I'd pretty much worked out what it meant already from your post, having spent a limited time in Roy's company before he became seriously ill. Nice one

You mean you worked on the railway and didn't know the meaning of truculence? You must have led a sheltered life...

[FarrMan]

14 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Many thanks.

 

The short answer is 'I'm not sure'. I just use what seems to work 'the best' The locos with larger wheels (and go much faster) tend to have a lower gear ration, and those with smaller drivers (going slower) have a higher ratio.

 

All very unscientific, I'm afraid. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

That sounds like good science to me. And simply explained as well. Simplicity is the mark of Genius!.

 

Lloyd

[FarrMan]

14 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've not long returned from a quite splendid three days spent in the fantastic clubrooms of the Leamington & Warwick MRC, where I was the tutor at a loco-/rolling-stock building course.

 

 

My apologies for my looking even more-ghastly that normal - I've not long ago broken a front crown and my dental plate no longer fits! 

 

I hope no one was frightened by my 'moving' appearance at the BRM virtual show at the weekend.

 

The seven excellent students produced some outstanding work; including................

 

 

In 4mm, a set of frames for a 94XX.

 

 

This D&S 4mm Siphon kit only had its box opened on Saturday morning!

 

 

One started earlier - a 7mm J39. The boiler work was a first attempt over the three days. 

 

 

The first time at building an O Gauge tender. This was all flat on Saturday morning. 

 

And a Midland 0-4-4T in 7mm. Again, its box was opened on Saturday!

 

 

As might be expected, I did no modelling - just bringing some examples.

 

My thanks chaps, for a fantastic time............

 

What lovely models. They must be a credit to their tutor.

 

Lloyd

[Tony Wright]

Just now, FarrMan said:

What lovely models. They must be a credit to their tutor.

 

Lloyd

Thanks Lloyd,

 

Though the credit must go to the pupils.

 

I merely showed them a few techniques and they just got on with it, producing...................

 

 

The frames and footplate for an O Gauge 56XX.

 

Later on we rolled the boiler parts. I showed the method using rolling bars, then the builder did the rest (my not being present). He then returned to what I'd done and made it better!

 

 

Making the frames for an O Gauge Midland 0-4-4T, including fully-sprung hornblocks. Can you believe I assisted in this procedure?!

 

 

And the frames for a Queen Mary brake van in O Gauge. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[FarrMan]

34 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Lloyd,

 

Though the credit must go to the pupils.

 

I merely showed them a few techniques and they just got on with it, producing...................

 

 

The frames and footplate for an O Gauge 56XX.

 

Later on we rolled the boiler parts. I showed the method using rolling bars, then the builder did the rest (my not being present). He then returned to what I'd done and made it better!

 

 

Making the frames for an O Gauge Midland 0-4-4T, including fully-sprung hornblocks. Can you believe I assisted in this procedure?!

 

 

And the frames for a Queen Mary brake van in O Gauge. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Credit to them as well, but it must be the way you showed them how. i would love to take you up on your invitation to visit you some time ago, but family circumstances make it difficult just now.

 

Lloyd

[Tony Wright]

5 minutes ago, FarrMan said:

Credit to them as well, but it must be the way you showed them how. i would love to take you up on your invitation to visit you some time ago, but family circumstances make it difficult just now.

 

Lloyd

Thanks again Lloyd,

 

Whenever is convenient, you're most welcome.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[60526]

14 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Apologies for the late response Charlie,

 

I've been away tutoring for three days. 

 

The reference to 'disguising mistakes' was more to do with my own mistakes in painting finishing - piggly numbers and wobbly lining for instance. One should always ensure these are true before any weathering takes place.

 

You're right in thinking that Hornby's Thompson Pacific BR green is 'questionable'.

 

And, weathering certainly altered it.

 

 

Weathering by Geoff Haynes.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

No need for an apology, you mentioned previously your tutoring. I've watched this latest Hornby model railways program on the Yesterday channel and they, Hornby, have this specialist who looks after such things as liveries. Along with Simon I assume they gave the nod to the models being release. Perhaps it was the Kent air that day, or lack of knowledge, from memory the colour is different from the pre-production model, your HD City shows what they can do, so what was going on? I like your model weathered by GH, but it looks to hide a lighter green. Still a cracking model.

I seem to have a resistance to paying high prices for these newer models, if you can afford it all well and good. This might go back to a reluctance after buying the original B'mann A1 and WD, both had faulty motors from new, the A1 went back under warranty but I let the WD slip and replaced the motor myself. But I don't think that it is the primary reason. Whilst I like seeing good models cruise along, such as on your Little Bytham layout, I get more satisfaction out of making the models, closely followed by modifying RTR. So whilst looking at the Hornby A2 and the B'mann V2 recently, I went and bought an old Nu-cast V2 complete with wheels for £55, I already have a Branchlines chassis for it, perhaps somebody might comment on the Nu-cast model, the firebox shape looks ok to me, the tender is a 1980's whitemetal casting, could it be improved?

Can I give a bit of a danger warning to especially any BR(E) modeller who has not yet visited LB, I've had the delight of visiting Little Bytham twice and both times I've come away with a "that would be nice" feeling, all those lovely rakes of coaches and wagons, Pullmans especially? I already had an unmade DJH A3, so that came out of the box when I got home, so did a SEF A3? Then went into overthinking mode, why are there differences, which one is the best, will the other need modifying? I've not been for about 5 years but from the visit I still have on my list to buy a SEF A4's, it will end up well over the price of a Hornby RTR, but seeing properly made models like this leaves a lasting impression; and a hole in your wallet.

Charlie

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, 60526 said:

No need for an apology, you mentioned previously your tutoring. I've watched this latest Hornby model railways program on the Yesterday channel and they, Hornby, have this specialist who looks after such things as liveries. Along with Simon I assume they gave the nod to the models being release. Perhaps it was the Kent air that day, or lack of knowledge, from memory the colour is different from the pre-production model, your HD City shows what they can do, so what was going on? I like your model weathered by GH, but it looks to hide a lighter green. Still a cracking model.

I seem to have a resistance to paying high prices for these newer models, if you can afford it all well and good. This might go back to a reluctance after buying the original B'mann A1 and WD, both had faulty motors from new, the A1 went back under warranty but I let the WD slip and replaced the motor myself. But I don't think that it is the primary reason. Whilst I like seeing good models cruise along, such as on your Little Bytham layout, I get more satisfaction out of making the models, closely followed by modifying RTR. So whilst looking at the Hornby A2 and the B'mann V2 recently, I went and bought an old Nu-cast V2 complete with wheels for £55, I already have a Branchlines chassis for it, perhaps somebody might comment on the Nu-cast model, the firebox shape looks ok to me, the tender is a 1980's whitemetal casting, could it be improved?

Can I give a bit of a danger warning to especially any BR(E) modeller who has not yet visited LB, I've had the delight of visiting Little Bytham twice and both times I've come away with a "that would be nice" feeling, all those lovely rakes of coaches and wagons, Pullmans especially? I already had an unmade DJH A3, so that came out of the box when I got home, so did a SEF A3? Then went into overthinking mode, why are there differences, which one is the best, will the other need modifying? I've not been for about 5 years but from the visit I still have on my list to buy a SEF A4's, it will end up well over the price of a Hornby RTR, but seeing properly made models like this leaves a lasting impression; and a hole in your wallet.

Charlie

Good afternoon Charlie,

 

Regarding Nu-Cast V2s, I have no problem in using them. They all go like stink and entirely look the part (as layout locos) to me. I've also made all mine for considerably less than a current RTR equivalent (painting aside). 

 

 

This is the first one I made (actually, the second, because I gave my first one away), over 40 years ago now. It's all my work, including a scratch-built chassis (the first one had the white metal lump). 

 

 

Of late, I've done some more. This one was started by the late Geoff Brewin (of Comet Models). I bought it from his estate, completed it (making a brass tender, which is less-lumpen), and Geoff Haynes painted it. 

 

 

I built another a couple of years ago, fitting a Comet chassis. Geoff also painted this example. 

 

 

And this year, Jesse Sim sent me one from Australia, ready-made, in hideous LNER green. 

 

I stripped it, detailed it and repainted it (which Geoff Haynes then weathered) and made a Comet chassis to go beneath it. 

 

I think locos like these should be viewed in a 'layout' context. You mention Bytham's running, and good running is essential. Like you, I much prefer making models than running them, but (like you) I'm only satisfied if they do run well.

 

In my view, one can have all the RTR locos one likes, in all their wonderment, but there's just that something about being able to say 'I made that.......................'

 

In finding the photographs above, I came across this prototype one I'd taken.

 

 

At York Shed, out of use, in October 1965. It's the same number as the last model shown, but later in its life, in BR green with separate cylinders. 

 

You mention Hornby's BR green. Who advises the firm and/or signs it off, I have no idea, but it's not quite right at source.

 

However......................

 

 

With coats of Klear and a Tom Foster weathering job, the transformation is amazing.

 

Where I take issue with the likes of this (and some other RTR locos) is that, because of the inherent slop in the chassis, they thrash around and waddle from time to time at speed (see my videos during the BRM virtual exhibition over the weekend). They are good models at source, but my kit-built ones ride far better. 

 

Those made from South Eastern Finecast kits for example.

 

 

 

 

I've built this trio over the last two years (all painted by Geoff Haynes). Though not as 'crisp' as the RTR equivalent in some cases, these ride far better and are much more capable of taking heavy trains. 

 

And, speaking of pulling heavy trains..........

 

 

I built this A4 from a South Eastern Finecast kit, and Ian Rathbone painted it. A Hornby equivalent won't even look at the trains this will pull.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Apologies; one image has appeared twice!

 

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Some might not have seen my video on motor/gearboxes which appeared at the BRM virtual show over the weekend.

 

 

 

Here it is..........

[sandra]

On 06/12/2021 at 12:01, Hollar said:

All this talk of W1s has revived a memory of the late Roy Jackson when he was duty Truculence demonstrator at Railex some years ago.  On his table was an exquisite P2, with the Bugatti nose and resplendent brunswick green livery.  There purely as a wind-up of course, but it looked absolutely wonderful . 

 

There and then I decided there and then that if I should ever have a mainline railway a BR P2 would be well above any wretched Thompson pacific on my priority list. Thereby proving, perhaps, that I shared more than a surname with Roy.

 

Tony

I don’t know what became of that P2, was it Thane of Fife? It was not on the railway when I acquired it. It may have been owned by someone else. I did think of buying a Hornby one, converting it to EM and painting it BR green but there areI more important things to do on the layout. 
 

Lately I have been working on freight stock. Some of the stock was owned by other people so I have gradually been trying to replace what was missing.

[Tony Wright]

31 minutes ago, sandra said:

I don’t know what became of that P2, was it Thane of Fife? It was not on the railway when I acquired it. It may have been owned by someone else. I did think of buying a Hornby one, converting it to EM and painting it BR green but there areI more important things to do on the layout. 
 

Lately I have been working on freight stock. Some of the stock was owned by other people so I have gradually been trying to replace what was missing.

Good evening Sandra,

 

I think it was MONS MEG, but it wasn't numbered 60504. Was it 60997, or something like that? 

 

Unfortunately, I never took its picture. 

 

I'm sure Roy built it, but, like you, I don't know what happened to it.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[t-b-g]

41 minutes ago, sandra said:

I don’t know what became of that P2, was it Thane of Fife? It was not on the railway when I acquired it. It may have been owned by someone else. I did think of buying a Hornby one, converting it to EM and painting it BR green but there areI more important things to do on the layout. 
 

Lately I have been working on freight stock. Some of the stock was owned by other people so I have gradually been trying to replace what was missing.

 

I think Roy's family must have kept that back, along with a few others. It was certainly Roy's and didn't belong to anybody else.

 

He was either given or got hold of an old Ks P2 and rather than run it in LNER livery, he decided to do in it BR Green with a BR number (60993?). Geoff Kent did his usual super paint and lining job. (993?) was the number it would have carried if it hadn't been rebuilt, so he just added 60 to the front of that. I think he built a new mechanism, as a 2-8-0. It was certainly number  6099 something but I can't be sure about the last digit.

 

It was really just a bit of Jackson humour. He would sometimes run it and then have some fun with the "experts" watching who hadn't noticed what it was and thought it was just another A4.

 

I recall that Pete Hill might have done a RTR version based on the Hornby model painted in BR livery too but from memory, his was in the early blue livery.

 

A further edit to add a photo I found. Not the best quality but it shows that my memory was good for once! 60993 "Mons Meg" it is.

 

Edited December 7, 2021 by t-b-g
To add content