Wright writes.....

[New Haven Neil]

On 09/01/2022 at 13:10, Jamiel said:

Having worked in film and television I have done a lot of work matching shots, and one thing that affects colour maybe more than the colour itself is the camera. Beyond that, the film, camera settings and the time of day (colour of light) which is lighting the subject.
 

I started a thread on this showing examples of models in blue and green shot under different lighting conditions with a DSLR camera.
 

 

 

http://www.jamielochhead.co.uk/jpegs/Trains/Colour12.jpg

 

http://www.jamielochhead.co.uk/jpegs/Trains/Colour11.jpg

 

(the forum has decided that these image links are not valid)

I hope that is of some interest.

Jamie

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's my Fowler!   It's not that colour either, it's much, much more dull, and is improved engine green, not that eye-searing orange!

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, 46444 said:

I hope Tony does not mind me posting this link here to a question I have posted on the Modellers Question section of this site? 

 

Being a thread of LNER knowledge I would imagine someone can point me in the right direction. 

 

I really like the LNER D49 Class in all guises and would like a fairly representative model of an D49/1 Shire Class for working on a Borders based layout. Perhaps an St. Margaret's or Haymarket example. 

 

The Hornby model has the 'as built' smoke box door and from my research 62706 retained this in BR times. I have the Dunn book on Gresley D49's. 

 

However most were fitted with a larger dished variation which may have consisted of two designs.

 

Does anyone know of a source for obtaining the dished design? 

 

I have a Hornby D49/1 Bodyshell, Hornby Railroad motorised D49 chassis and Bachmann 4000 Gallon GCR tender as fitted to most of the D49/1's during the early 1940's.

 

Like many I am surprised Hornby has never revisited this class. 

 

Thanks in advance and it is always a pleasure reading this thread. 

 

Regards, 

 

Mark 

 

 

Good evening Mark,

 

I think by BR days (certainly towards the ends of the locos' lives) most, if not all, D49s got the GNR-style of smokebox door (as did most other surviving NER-built locos). This was usually a slightly larger diameter than the original NER-style smokebox door, and much more-bulbous.

 

It can be seen on both these D49s...........

 

 

Shire, with ex-NER tender.

 

 

Hunt with GS tender.

 

Some time ago I was asked by Ben Jones when he was Editor of BRM if I'd do a conversion of a Hornby Hunt into a Shire in 'the simplest possible way'. It was for his dad's birthday. I was provided with the RTR Hornby Hunt (loco-drive) and a Bachmann GC tender. I wrote about it in BRM.

 

One of the things which needed changing was the smokebox door.........

 

 

This was the original (plastic) NER-style smokebox door (with the inner handle in that position, the smokebox would not have been airtight). 

 

Now, I know this is not much help to you, because I looked in my spares box for a suitable alternative.........

 

 

And found one. As to its origins, I have no idea. What was also needed was a brass disc to represent the front ring of the smokebox (this came from EAMES many, many years ago. It was part of the Jamieson range). 

 

And thus.............

 

 

 

It was fixed in place.

 

Quite a bit of surgery was also needed to the loco's body, as can be seen.

 

 

 

As I say, it was a simple conversion, retaining much of what Hornby supplied. To keep costs down (it was being given to a Yorkshireman from a Yorkshireman!), I painted it. 

 

Ben was delighted, his dad was delighted and I was pleased. 

 

The smokebox door dart is a bit chunky (origin unknown) and I'd have chucked the valve gear away and replaced it with something much finer, but the brief was................ However, I did replace the horrid bogie wheels with the correct, 12-spoked type. 

 

The PDK D49 has been mentioned..........

 

 

 

I can't recall who brought this beautiful model to Little Bytham, but I think it was built/painted by PDK. It has the original smokebox door. If PDK does the later-style one, I don't know.

 

I have another cast smokebox door and brass ring, so, if you'd like them, please PM me. If you do, I'll post them to you and you can make a donation to a charity of your choice. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

[t-b-g]

2 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Mark,

 

I think by BR days (certainly towards the ends of the locos' lives) most, if not all, D49s got the GNR-style of smokebox door (as did most other surviving NER-built locos). This was usually a slightly larger diameter than the original NER-style smokebox door, and much more-bulbous.

 

It can be seen on both these D49s...........

 

 

Shire, with ex-NER tender.

 

 

Hunt with GS tender.

 

Some time ago I was asked by Ben Jones when he was Editor of BRM if I'd do a conversion of a Hornby Hunt into a Shire in 'the simplest possible way'. It was for his dad's birthday. I was provided with the RTR Hornby Hunt (loco-drive) and a Bachmann GC tender. I wrote about it in BRM.

 

One of the things which needed changing was the smokebox door.........

 

 

This was the original (plastic) NER-style smokebox door (with the inner handle in that position, the smokebox would not have been airtight). 

 

Now, I know this is not much help to you, because I looked in my spares box for a suitable alternative.........

 

 

And found one. As to its origins, I have no idea. What was also needed was a brass disc to represent the front ring of the smokebox (this came from EAMES many, many years ago. It was part of the Jamieson range). 

 

And thus.............

 

 

 

It was fixed in place.

 

Quite a bit of surgery was also needed to the loco's body, as can be seen.

 

 

 

As I say, it was a simple conversion, retaining much of what Hornby supplied. To keep costs down (it was being given to a Yorkshireman from a Yorkshireman!), I painted it. 

 

Ben was delighted, his dad was delighted and I was pleased. 

 

The smokebox door dart is a bit chunky (origin unknown) and I'd have chucked the valve gear away and replaced it with something much finer, but the brief was................ However, I did replace the horrid bogie wheels with the correct, 12-spoked type. 

 

The PDK D49 has been mentioned..........

 

 

 

I can't recall who brought this beautiful model to Little Bytham, but I think it was built/painted by PDK. It has the original smokebox door. If PDK does the later-style one, I don't know.

 

I have another cast smokebox door and brass ring, so, if you'd like them, please PM me. If you do, I'll post them to you and you can make a donation to a charity of your choice. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

That is an interesting combination. I didn't know that D49s ran with the GCR self trimming tender.

 

 

[Tony Wright]

A splendid day's running on Little Bytham..................

 

And, what about this?

 

 

As Geoff West and I started operating Little Bytham, the postman arrived with this!

 

A gift to me made by Jesse Sim. Thank you Jesse, it's wonderful. 

 

And, thanks for the phone call. And, yes I did know that Hornby is to produce a complete Coronation set before I sold that kit-built one to you, but it'll be quite a bit more expensive, and you do now already have one. 

 

To continue..........

 

Geoff brought some models along which he'd bought from the bereaved families I've been selling them on behalf of. 

 

Including.............

 

 

 

 

 

This pair of DJH WDs. Both only needed a bit of fiddling to get them to run sweetly, and he's weathered them for realism's sake. 

 

The overlays on the drivers tell their age, but, as layout locos, I think they're splendid.

 

One which didn't work to start with was this DJH A1.............

 

 

Though visually nicely built and painted, its running was awful (despite its being built by DJH in the firm's Banbury days). However, between us we've now got it running really well.

 

This model was typical of the recent collections - good-looking, but a dud as a runner. As is known, what I did was get most of the locos running as well as I could (within reason), and then sell them as runners. Or, as in this case, sell them as non-runners or poor-runners (at a much lower price, of course), leaving the buyers to fix them.

 

Geoff fixed most of the problems with this, and I just tweaked it a bit this morning to give a powerful and smooth-runner now. 

 

He also brought along this Hornby Pullman car he's been modifying/detailing.............

 

 

It's an earlier Hornby car which now has correct bogies, curtains at the windows, a painted interior and proper ventilators. Concertina gangways, new couplings and weathering finish it off. 

 

Thanks for bringing these, Geoff. And, thanks again, Jesse. 

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

10 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

That is an interesting combination. I didn't know that D49s ran with the GCR self trimming tender.

 

 

Many did get these tenders Tony,

 

I think they received them when new-build V2s took the more-modern 4200 GS types from them. 

 

But whether they were self-trimming, I don't know - it's the one Bachmann made for the O4, so not self-trimming? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Woodcock29]

Tony the Bachmann tender you have used came with the D11 models, not the O4s and is a self trimming type. It has the water pick up handle so came with their D11/1.

 

Andrew

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Many did get these tenders Tony,

 

I think they received them when new-build V2s took the more-modern 4200 GS types from them. 

 

But whether they were self-trimming, I don't know - it's the one Bachmann made for the O4, so not self-trimming? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I have had a look in the RCTS Green book and that says that the tenders released for new V2s were replaced by ex NER types. The GCR tenders came when a further batch of Group Standard tenders were released for use with new O2s.

 

It says some of the GCR tenders were surplus due to the Q4s being rebuilt into Q1s and that they were the standard type (ie not self trimming) and didn't have water scoops. At the time the D49s received their GCR tenders, no self trimmers were surplus to requirements, so as far as I can tell, they never carried them. 

 

Although generally similar, the self trimming main body/tank was wider but the top side sheets were the same width as the standard ones, so it alters the flare slightly. The fire iron "stand" was different, being a crucifix rather than a U shape and the whole of the tender front was quite different, as was the front coal divider plate, which was flat in the centre but curved up at each side, rather than being a continuous convex curve.

 

So it looks different enough to stand out to a hardcore GCR enthusiast, although many would never notice!

 

 

[Jesse Sim]

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

A splendid day's running on Little Bytham..................

 

And, what about this?

 

 

As Geoff West and I started operating Little Bytham, the postman arrived with this!

 

A gift to me made by Jesse Sim. Thank you Jesse, it's wonderful. 

 

And, thanks for the phone call. And, yes I did know that Hornby is to produce a complete Coronation set before I sold that kit-built one to you, but it'll be quite a bit more expensive, and you do now already have one. 

 

To continue..........

 

Geoff brought some models along which he'd bought from the bereaved families I've been selling them on behalf of. 

 

Including.............

 

 

 

 

 

This pair of DJH WDs. Both only needed a bit of fiddling to get them to run sweetly, and he's weathered them for realism's sake. 

 

The overlays on the drivers tell their age, but, as layout locos, I think they're splendid.

 

One which didn't work to start with was this DJH A1.............

 

 

Though visually nicely built and painted, its running was awful (despite its being built by DJH in the firm's Banbury days). However, between us we've now got it running really well.

 

This model was typical of the recent collections - good-looking, but a dud as a runner. As is known, what I did was get most of the locos running as well as I could (within reason), and then sell them as runners. Or, as in this case, sell them as non-runners or poor-runners (at a much lower price, of course), leaving the buyers to fix them.

 

Geoff fixed most of the problems with this, and I just tweaked it a bit this morning to give a powerful and smooth-runner now. 

 

He also brought along this Hornby Pullman car he's been modifying/detailing.............

 

 

It's an earlier Hornby car which now has correct bogies, curtains at the windows, a painted interior and proper ventilators. Concertina gangways, new couplings and weathering finish it off. 

 

Thanks for bringing these, Geoff. And, thanks again, Jesse. 

 

 

 

 

That’s okay Tony, postage took longer then expected, it was a Christmas present. 
 

In case you didn’t know it’s a NER G2 van, I tried to copy the model off a photo I have of one with no roof door, in post 37 lettering with plank repairs and the old style lettering showing through. Hence why there are different shades of grey. 
 

Regarding Hornbys coronation, it was all in jest that phone call, I know you knew that, but I just thought clarify. Anyway, I’d rather have someone else’s workmanship and eventually once I build the DS coronation my own workmanship on my layout then Hornbys. I commented this on a Facebook post and was shot down in flames. Maybe it was the way I worded it…… 

Im feeling something in BR and suitable for your engineers train this Christmas, if you’re a good boy! I’ll be speaking to Mo to make sure you have been!!! 

 

[EHertsGER]

8 hours ago, 46444 said:

 

Thanks Mick. 

 

I'd forgotten about PDK.  I'll have a look. 

 

I knew someone may know of a source. 

 

Cheers, 

 

Mark 

I have one on my bench; it’s a nicely produced kit that goes together well. The only downside is that it does not include the flared side GS tender (for 201 Bramham Moor) , which involved some fabrication. PDK produce the 49/1 and 49/2 as two distinct kits, so take your pick! Recommended.

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

Tony the Bachmann tender you have used came with the D11 models, not the O4s and is a self trimming type. It has the water pick up handle so came with their D11/1.

 

Andrew

Thanks Andrew,

 

I should never make assumptions, though I've an idea I was told it came from an O4. 

 

In the light of more correspondence, would a non-self-trimming tender be more accurate for YORKSHIRE? .

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

I have had a look in the RCTS Green book and that says that the tenders released for new V2s were replaced by ex NER types. The GCR tenders came when a further batch of Group Standard tenders were released for use with new O2s.

 

It says some of the GCR tenders were surplus due to the Q4s being rebuilt into Q1s and that they were the standard type (ie not self trimming) and didn't have water scoops. At the time the D49s received their GCR tenders, no self trimmers were surplus to requirements, so as far as I can tell, they never carried them. 

 

Although generally similar, the self trimming main body/tank was wider but the top side sheets were the same width as the standard ones, so it alters the flare slightly. The fire iron "stand" was different, being a crucifix rather than a U shape and the whole of the tender front was quite different, as was the front coal divider plate, which was flat in the centre but curved up at each side, rather than being a continuous convex curve.

 

So it looks different enough to stand out to a hardcore GCR enthusiast, although many would never notice!

 

 

Thanks Tony,

 

I think tenders got moved around to some extent.

 

The preserved D49 has an ex-GC tender, so can anyone tell us the type it is, please? Self-trimming or not?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Michael Edge]

Morayshire has an ordinary GC tender, the only preserved self trimmer is the one with Butler Henderson. There weren't all that many self trimmers built, as far as I know they only ran with D11s, B3s and some B7s.

[PMP]

7 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

 

Im feeling something in BR and suitable for your engineers train this Christmas, if you’re a good boy! I’ll be speaking to Mo to make sure you have been!!! 

 

Only 349 shopping days left…

[gr.king]

34 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I think tenders got moved around to some extent.

 

The preserved D49 has an ex-GC tender, so can anyone tell us the type it is, please? Self-trimming or not?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

26 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

Morayshire has an ordinary GC tender, the only preserved self trimmer is the one with Butler Henderson. There weren't all that many self trimmers built, as far as I know they only ran with D11s, B3s and some B7s.

 

Has the GC tender with Morayshire had some post-preservation repairs of non-original pattern and/or some deliberate alterations to give it a bit more of the look of an early LNER group standard tender? Or was a limited amount of work done to bring these tenders into line with later standards when they were re-allocated to some of the D49s?

[t-b-g]

30 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I think tenders got moved around to some extent.

 

The preserved D49 has an ex-GC tender, so can anyone tell us the type it is, please? Self-trimming or not?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

22 minutes ago, Michael Edge said:

Morayshire has an ordinary GC tender, the only preserved self trimmer is the one with Butler Henderson. There weren't all that many self trimmers built, as far as I know they only ran with D11s, B3s and some B7s.

 

I had a look at some photos of the tender on Morayshire when I was building "Valour". It is, I believe, a unique variant, possibly modified in preservation days. I think it started as an ex ROD tender, as it has a round filler cap rather than the complex box shape in the back. So it has no water scoop or pick up gear. However, it has handrails added to the front side sheets near the cab, which I haven't seen on any other ROD/GCR/Robinson tenders.

 

I agree with Mike. I have never seen any evidence that self trimmers were ever behind anything other than the classes mentioned.

 

There were two variants of self trimmers though. There were some built for the Scottish Directors that had no water scoop or pick up gear but they still had the boxes on the back, so that if they were ever transferred to sections where pick up gear could be added, the work would be easier to carry out. They just lacked the actual scoop gear and the "ship wheel" type lowering gear on the front.

 

GCR tenders are almost as big a minefield as GNR types. Although there were only a tiny number of different main types, the detail variations were many and not always documented. Some had widened footplates at the front, some had sanding gear, some had straight side plates at the front and some had curved ones and they had different height front platforms, to match the loco footplate height.

 

Apart from that, they were pretty standard! 

[t-b-g]

2 minutes ago, gr.king said:

 

 

Has the GC tender with Morayshire had some post-preservation repairs of non-original pattern and/or some deliberate alterations to give it a bit more of the look of an early LNER group standard tender? Or was a limited amount of work done to bring these tenders into line with later standards when they were re-allocated to some of the D49s?

 

Some GCR tenders were rebuilt with totally new bodies on the original underframe. So underneath they look like a GCR type but the top looks more like a Group Standard. Yet another variation to cope with. I don't think Morayshire has one of these but I may be wrong. It looks more like an ROD type to me.

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

That’s okay Tony, postage took longer then expected, it was a Christmas present. 
 

In case you didn’t know it’s a NER G2 van, I tried to copy the model off a photo I have of one with no roof door, in post 37 lettering with plank repairs and the old style lettering showing through. Hence why there are different shades of grey. 
 

Regarding Hornbys coronation, it was all in jest that phone call, I know you knew that, but I just thought clarify. Anyway, I’d rather have someone else’s workmanship and eventually once I build the DS coronation my own workmanship on my layout then Hornbys. I commented this on a Facebook post and was shot down in flames. Maybe it was the way I worded it…… 

Im feeling something in BR and suitable for your engineers train this Christmas, if you’re a good boy! I’ll be speaking to Mo to make sure you have been!!! 

 

Good morning Jesse,

 

I didn't know what type of van it is, but, whatever it is, it's a most-natural model. So, thanks again.

 

All our phone calls are in jest, as you know I know, that you know, that I know, that you.............

 

What the model did (and it will run on the M&GNR bit) was set my mind thinking as to what I was building when I was your age, 50 years ago. Certainly not anything to the standard you've just produced.

 

I have no photographs to show what I was making 50 years ago, and anything from that time has long gone; either being given away, sold (to anyone with a white stick and a dog!), hopefully lost or destroyed. 

 

What was I doing? Motorising Kitmaster/Airfix locos, those still in production. I fitted a Tri-ang 2-6-2T chassis underneath a Kitmaster 76XXX Mogul by cutting the rear of the chassis off. I seem to recall fitting Romford wheels to it at the time, considering myself a 'scale' modeller, especially as I then fitted a Tri-ang 0-6-0 Jinty chassis beneath a BEC J11 I'd made (with Araldite!!!!!!), fitting Romfords as well. Where are these models now? Please, please, if anyone has them, please, please keep them a secret. I never want to ever see them again!

 

The oldest example of my work on Little Bytham is this superannuated K's O4, built in the early/mid-'70s, so getting on for 50 years old.

 

 

There is a wall in a bedroom in a house in Stafford which has an imprint of this loco's chassis embedded in the plaster, after I'd hurled it at the wall, with a volley of vituperative exclamations! It can't be seen right now (I assume still) because I filled that imprint with Polyfilla, but distant archaeologists might one day ponder what it represents. 

 

Foolishly, I built it with what was supplied, including the K's drivers! In time, I chose more-wisely and fitted Romfords to the frames (which, amazingly, were still useable). I'd fitted the K's motor, but that's long-gone. 

 

I keep this model as a curiosity piece, more to tell me how poor were my standards back then. However, on a layout, at more than three feet away? 

 

Other models from the same time include...........

 

 

This old Wills A2, running on a Tri-ang Britannia chassis fitted with Romfords. At least I eventually replaced its dome and made a DJH tender for it. Again, more of a curiosity piece. 

 

In my later-20s, I'd (hopefully) moved on.........

 

 

To my first scratch-built loco, this O1 (though fitted with a Ks tender). 

 

Not a patch on the RTR Hornby one, but 'mine' in a unique way. 

 

 

And building Jamieson kits. 

 

 

Even a hand-cut Jamieson kit, built when I was 29. 

 

What's the point of this rambling missive? If nothing else to assure you that you're on the road (well on the way, in fact) to becoming a very high-standard modeller. You've asked the right questions of the right people, taken on board what's important to you and are prepared to 'have a go', making things yourself rather than just being a purchaser/commissioner. 

 

I look forward to seeing even greater progress.

 

Thanks again, Jesse.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Woodcock29]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Andrew,

 

I should never make assumptions, though I've an idea I was told it came from an O4. 

 

In the light of more correspondence, would a non-self-trimming tender be more accurate for YORKSHIRE? .

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

The answer is yes but it has been answered through the various discussion points above by Mike and Tony G.

In answer to Graeme King's question about modifications to Morayshire's GC tender. The only mods I can see are the handrails on the front side plates which would originally have been at the front of the small side plates and offset outwards as per standard GCR practice and the fact at some point in time it has been fitted with LNER group standard buffers.

I've actually ridden on the front plate of this tender at Bo'ness back in 2008.

Andrew

[Woodcock29]

Further to my previous post here are some photos of Morayshire's GC tender taken in 2008.

 

 

I did wonder about the rear fire iron bracket in the photo below and whether that was an addition but they were present on the tenders generally fitted to J10s but not often evident on the later 4000 and 3250 gallon tenders.

 

 

The replacement front handrails can be seen below

 

[Michael Edge]

The back coal plate and the filler look like preservation replacements to me, they don't really match the originals, the ROD tenders had a straight plate at the back, same height as the raves. The front handrails are nothing like the GC type and it's a narrow footplate like the ROD ones but the drag beam is rectangular rather than shaped in to match the step plate.

Most preserved locos have had a lot of parts replaced, sometimes exactly like the originals but often very different.

[45609]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Some GCR tenders were rebuilt with totally new bodies on the original underframe. So underneath they look like a GCR type but the top looks more like a Group Standard. Yet another variation to cope with. I don't think Morayshire has one of these but I may be wrong. It looks more like an ROD type to me.

 

This is a rather odd GS look-i-like that was built onto the top of a GCR underframe

 

 

Also some evidence of modification of a GCR or ex ROD tender in BR days behind a D49. Note curved rear coal plate

 

 

Not found a photo yet of a D49 in revenue service that has front vertical handrails the same as Morayshire.

 

Cheers...Morgan

Edited January 11, 2022 by 45609
to correct a typo error

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Woodcock29 said:

Further to my previous post here are some photos of Morayshire's GC tender taken in 2008.

 

 

I did wonder about the rear fire iron bracket in the photo below and whether that was an addition but they were present on the tenders generally fitted to J10s but not often evident on the later 4000 and 3250 gallon tenders.

 

 

The replacement front handrails can be seen below

 

Thanks again, Andrew.

 

I think it's clear that some modifications have been made to MORAYSHIRE's tender in preservation days. 

 

One other point regarding your excellent pictures........... I was disappointed when, in building the Raven A2, I managed to remove some of the expertly-painted white lining, applied to the wheels' rims by Geoff Haynes. It would appear that my clumsiness has resulted in an accurate depiction! That said, Geoff is going to restore the complete rim-lining. 

 

Returning to the D49 conversion I did for Ben Jones..............

 

This was the starting point..........

 

 

I think this model was in the Hornby Railroad range, but at least it was loco-drive.

 

 

The conversion was a bit brutal!

 

All I had left to do at this stage was to add the cylinder draincocks and the little wedges to the boxes above the expansion links. 

 

 

In my ignorance (something I've got plenty of!), I had no idea that a self-trimming ex-GC tender was inappropriate (I didn't even know it was that type). I merely used what was supplied, lining it, adding real coal and a shovel.

 

 

The main thing is, it satisfied the brief, using what I was given. 

 

What's readily-apparent is that if I ever build/convert another D49, I'd better be very careful..........

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[geoff west]

17 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

A splendid day's running on Little Bytham..................

 

And, what about this?

 

 

As Geoff West and I started operating Little Bytham, the postman arrived with this!

 

A gift to me made by Jesse Sim. Thank you Jesse, it's wonderful. 

 

And, thanks for the phone call. And, yes I did know that Hornby is to produce a complete Coronation set before I sold that kit-built one to you, but it'll be quite a bit more expensive, and you do now already have one. 

 

To continue..........

 

Geoff brought some models along which he'd bought from the bereaved families I've been selling them on behalf of. 

 

Including.............

 

 

 

 

 

This pair of DJH WDs. Both only needed a bit of fiddling to get them to run sweetly, and he's weathered them for realism's sake. 

 

The overlays on the drivers tell their age, but, as layout locos, I think they're splendid.

 

One which didn't work to start with was this DJH A1.............

 

 

Though visually nicely built and painted, its running was awful (despite its being built by DJH in the firm's Banbury days). However, between us we've now got it running really well.

 

This model was typical of the recent collections - good-looking, but a dud as a runner. As is known, what I did was get most of the locos running as well as I could (within reason), and then sell them as runners. Or, as in this case, sell them as non-runners or poor-runners (at a much lower price, of course), leaving the buyers to fix them.

 

Geoff fixed most of the problems with this, and I just tweaked it a bit this morning to give a powerful and smooth-runner now. 

 

He also brought along this Hornby Pullman car he's been modifying/detailing.............

 

 

It's an earlier Hornby car which now has correct bogies, curtains at the windows, a painted interior and proper ventilators. Concertina gangways, new couplings and weathering finish it off. 

 

Thanks for bringing these, Geoff. And, thanks again, Jesse. 

 

 

 

 

Thanks Tony,

A most enjoyable day running LB, and we nearly got all the way through without any c**k ups.

 

Thank you again for the books.

 

Geoff.

[Tony Wright]

19 minutes ago, geoff west said:

Thanks Tony,

A most enjoyable day running LB, and we nearly got all the way through without any c**k ups.

 

Thank you again for the books.

 

Geoff.

Our pleasure Geoff,

 

The final cock-ups, of course, were mine. 

 

There was one 'layout' hiccup if you recall? Where that A1 on the 'West Riding' stalled on leaving the fiddle yard?

 

This one, on one of its other usual Bytham duties......

 

 

It was one I acquired part-built from the estate of a deceased modeller. He'd made the chassis (minus valve gear) as a runner and part-built the body. I completed it and Geoff Haynes did his usual superlative painting job. 

 

The builder had installed plunger pick-ups (which I'm not a fan of), which seemed to work OK, until recently (hence the stalling?). Now, as you know, I cannot tolerate dodgy locos, so, as as matter of urgency, I've investigated the problem.

 

Here comes the cautionary tale. Never make assumptions! 

 

I cleaned the plungers as best I could (thin blade and some clean Kleenex), and it seemed to be improved, yet, it still wanted to stall (not as much, but still irritating). 

 

I then tried the crocodile clips (which should have been my first port of call). Yes, with a clip attached to the frames (this loco is live to one side), then touching all the insulated wheels in turn with the other clip, no problem. What was the problem then? 

 

I then tried touching each 'live' wheel at a time. One was dead! Why? It was an insulated driver! 

 

How this loco has worked so well up to now, is beyond me. Electrically, it was a 4-5-2! It's obvious that the plungers had been working fine, but with a bit of dirt............ I was looking for the solution in the wrong place. 

 

It's not a problem now. Why not?

 

 

 

By drilling a hole between the centre of the wheel and the tyre, through the insulation, then pressing in some brass wire with an interference fit, then soldering it behind the tyre, I've made the errant wheel non-insulated. 

 

I suppose it's a testament to how flat Bytham's track is that the model has worked so well for the past four/five years, but I'd never have first-guessed that that was the problem. There is no problem now. 

 

The moral? Never assume anything.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[ScRSG]

 

Does this help the Morayshire tender debate?

 

 

(No idea about copyright holder, will delete if necessary)

 

Chas