Wright writes.....

[queensquare]

11 minutes ago, Anglian said:

Piggly numbers – the companies making the transfers ought to do some research and produce decal sets of the full running numbers. I think it's a bit much expecting modellers to be able to line-up a row of tiny digits. To overcome this I've designed decal sets (for small scale aeroplanes) to get round the potential issue but it can be very time consuming to do. The sheets I've had printed are waterslide so nudging the decal into a precise position isn't too bad.

 

I must admit that I dont worry too much about correct numbers on stock - even in 4mm I'm not convinced it matters overly. When you see a train rolling by on LB, how many of you can read the numbers on the stock and compute if they are correct or not. Piggly numbers stand out, random numbers in a straight line just blend in.

In my own favoured 2mm I put any random number on from the transfer sheet so long as its in the right place. Sometimes I don't even bother with that - more than once I've had compliments about the tiny lettering on some of my PO wagons when often its just a series of dots and dashes!

 

The phone snap below, taken on the country side of my Bath layout, illustrates how insignificant the wagon numbers are. 

Jerry

[Buhar]

Hi Tony,

 

I was just looking at the BRM Annual for 2007 which featured the building of your shed.  "Good for 10 years" you said.  Well, it's coming up to 12 years and you've not mentioned the need for any repairs, although I presume you've re-coated it.  10 years seems plenty when you build it, but tempus fugit...

 

Is the only insulation that 25mm expanded polystyrene still?  How did you get on in the various cold snaps we've had and how do you heat it?

 

Alan

[Atso]

I generally do what Jerry does and not worry too much about the numbers on my N gauge rolling stock; although this is often because I have insufficient know prototype numbers as it is because they can't be seen.

 

 

 

Apologies for the GWR Loriot K masquerading as an ex-NER MAC.

 

 

In the case of the open and mineral wagons, now that these have been weathered, the numbers are also illegible anyway!

 

Finally, I've nearly completed the Toad E build.

 

 

I've taken a leisurely pace on this one with the total time being around nine hours. If I was building to commission, I could probably do this within a day, but as I said earlier, who would pay a going rate for a brake van? 

 

 

 

 

[DougN]

I have a request to all, Does any one know where I can get a nice  3F Jinty dome for a Gibson kit ... ? this is for 4mm in brass or whitemetal. 

 

OK the kit has been through 2 owners (Which means it is probably old enough to vote!) and ended up on my build line... now it has a converted Portescap so the chassis is closer to completion but I still need a dome!  

 

I have looked through Wizard models list and Markits (though I don't seem to be able to find the domes!) Once upon a time Perseverance, I think had them, but unfortunately another manufacturer that has gone. This is the lose we are all suffering from as the retailers who once stocked these items such as Mainly trains are no longer with us... it makes it very difficult to get the builders aids! 

 

Any one have any suggestions! 

[polybear]

3 hours ago, DougN said:

I have a request to all, Does any one know where I can get a nice  3F Jinty dome for a Gibson kit ... ? this is for 4mm in brass or whitemetal. 

 

OK the kit has been through 2 owners (Which means it is probably old enough to vote!) and ended up on my build line... now it has a converted Portescap so the chassis is closer to completion but I still need a dome!  

 

I have looked through Wizard models list and Markits (though I don't seem to be able to find the domes!) Once upon a time Perseverance, I think had them, but unfortunately another manufacturer that has gone. This is the lose we are all suffering from as the retailers who once stocked these items such as Mainly trains are no longer with us... it makes it very difficult to get the builders aids! 

 

Any one have any suggestions! 

 

How about London Road Models - they do 3F Kits:

 

https://traders.scalefour.org/LondonRoadModels/locos-tenders-chassis/midland-railway/

 

edit: Just realised these are Tender Locos, so not sure if the Dome would be suitable for a Jinty...

 

Also: 

Phoenix Precision Paints (they took on DMR Kits, incl. castings)

 

 

 

HTH

Brian

Edited July 4, 2019 by polybear

[queensquare]

7 hours ago, Atso said:

I generally do what Jerry does and not worry too much about the numbers on my N gauge rolling stock; although this is often because I have insufficient know prototype numbers as it is because they can't be seen.

 

 

 

Apologies for the GWR Loriot K masquerading as an ex-NER MAC.

 

 

In the case of the open and mineral wagons, now that these have been weathered, the numbers are also illegible anyway!

 

Finally, I've nearly completed the Toad E build.

 

 

I've taken a leisurely pace on this one with the total time being around nine hours. If I was building to commission, I could probably do this within a day, but as I said earlier, who would pay a going rate for a brake van? 

 

 

 

 

 

Lovely stuff Steve, I particularly like the NPCS. I have one of you GNR 6 wheelers to do at some time.

 

Jerry

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Anglian said:

Tony,

Thank you for a wonderful walk through of some of your coaching stock. It's very interesting to make the comparisons between hand built and ready to run and to see how the later has improved over time. The thing I notice is that it's not until the Bachmann Thompson that the R-T-R glazing is as good as that of the hand built version.

 

The other aspect that I find interesting is the different level of gloss to the finish. Larry G's being quite glossy. Do you have a view on whether gloss or matt better replicates the right prototypical appearance at 4mm scale, or is it a case of both, depending on the age of the vehicle?

Piggly numbers – the companies making the transfers ought to do some research and produce decal sets of the full running numbers. I think it's a bit much expecting modellers to be able to line-up a row of tiny digits. To overcome this I've designed decal sets (for small scale aeroplanes) to get round the potential issue but it can be very time consuming to do. The sheets I've had printed are waterslide so nudging the decal into a precise position isn't too bad.

The question of whether model coaching stock should be glossy, semi-gloss or matt is one which has taxed the makers/painters of such things for a long, long time.

 

Obviously, prototype carriages (especially those with metal sides) would have been finished in gloss paint, and even gloss varnish. How long would they stay like that in service, though? The sides might be cleaned regularly, but not the roofs, ends, underframes and bogies.

 

As far as I know, Larry Goddard paints all the carriages he makes, or those which others have made which he paints, with gloss paint, probably cellulose. I've never seen anything he's made/painted which he's weathered. Though the finish is very good, I'm not sure if it's always 'realistic'. I'm not being critical of his work (far from it, it's to a very high-standard), but I always weather (at least) the roofs, underframes and bogies of any of my carriages. That's why I think carriages with bright, white roofs always look slightly absurd, especially on a steam-age depiction. I'm quite happy to leave the sides of my carriages gloss, but not as glossy as LG's carriages. If you look closely, you'll see (as part of my repairs, to be fair) that I've painted a roof in matt paint, and certainly taken down the frames/bogies on LG's carriages on LB. No doubt, to the purist/collector, this is anathema, but since I'm not pure and never collected anything (apart from batsman's scalps!) I really don't care.

 

I think the 'trick' is to not have everything the same. Paint finishes will fade in time, and the effects of weathering will be dependent on geography and the various time intervals between repainting.

 

Perhaps some further examples?

 

 

In the main, the RTR boys/girls provide a dull or even matt finish on their carriages. Here's a (slightly-modified) Hornby Gresley BCK. Apart from it not being a particularly good model at source, this is too 'flat' a finish for my tastes.

 

 

This is a Larry Goddard conversion from the same carriage, but with MJT sides over-laid. This is in a high-gloss finish, which I don't dislike, but a friend of mine (the owner of the carriage) has weathered the roof, ends, underframe and bogies. 

 

 

I don't mind a gloss finish on some of the conversions I undertake; this is a Hornby donor with Kemilway side. Everything apart from the sides is weathered-down, though. 

 

 

Another of my Hornby conversions, but this time with the sides not so glossy. I use Halfords Ford Burgundy Red acrylic in a rattle can, sprayed directly to the models. For a high-gloss, I hold the can closer, and for a semi-gloss, I hold it further away. Trial and error, really. The numbers on this are all individually-applied. 

 

 

The same paint on a plastic Kirk Gresley, again applied to be semi-gloss. The numbers on this are in one piece, supplied on a sheet by Modelmasters. 

 

 

On items such as Mailcoach products, where the the sides are one-piece clear plastic, then sable-painting has to be employed (at least as far as I'm concerned). Having built this this ex-Silver Jubilee triplet diner, I gave it all four coats of 

Railmatch BR maroon, finishing it off with a coat of polyurethane satin varnish. Since I don't own a bow pen, all my lining is waterslide transfers, applied with varying degrees of success.

 

 

Another Mailcoach carriage, this time a Tourist BSO, painted in the same way as the triplet.

 

 

And a Mailcoach Tourists SO/SO, this time varnished with a mix of satin and matt polyurethane varnish to give a slightly duller finish.

 

 

The opposite of a dull finish, this Mallard Gresley BG has been painted in very high-gloss (by, I think, Larry Goddard, though it's not signed, which is unusual). It came my way in a rather 'tatty' state (you can see my repairs at the near end), and I weathered the roof, ends, underframe and bogies.

 

 

Carriages fresh from overhaul would have very glossy sides. This ex-1938 Flying Scotsman triplet was painted by Geoff Haynes to my specification, with dull roof and weathered underframes and bogies. 

 

I suppose, what I'm after is 'realism' of finish in context. The context of Little Bytham. Please remember as well that all the above examples are 'layout' carriages. They're definitely not 'showcase' models (I'm not that skilled!), they're built/painted (within my limitations) to run on a fairly large layout and to be viewed as 'part of the scene'. 

 

 

Stock for 'The Elizabethan' was lifted, repaired as necessary and repainted before the summer season. It was always kept very clean in service; I know, I saw it very often. Thus, my model of it depicts this, but the roofs, underframes and bogies are all weathered-down.

 

Won't it be good to have the correct girder bridge finally in place? 

 

I suppose, in the final analysis, not every loco nor every item of stock should look the same.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

   

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

I must admit that I dont worry too much about correct numbers on stock - even in 4mm I'm not convinced it matters overly. When you see a train rolling by on LB, how many of you can read the numbers on the stock and compute if they are correct or not. Piggly numbers stand out, random numbers in a straight line just blend in.

In my own favoured 2mm I put any random number on from the transfer sheet so long as its in the right place. Sometimes I don't even bother with that - more than once I've had compliments about the tiny lettering on some of my PO wagons when often its just a series of dots and dashes!

 

The phone snap below, taken on the country side of my Bath layout, illustrates how insignificant the wagon numbers are. 

Jerry

I have a confession, Jerry,

 

(It's said it's good for the soul!)

 

When you see a train rolling by on LB, how many of you can read the numbers on the stock and compute if they are correct or not?

 

Though I think my carriage numbers are correct, what about the goods stock? It's highly likely that many of the modified 16T RTR mineral wagons (for instance) have the same number! Not next to each other, but still the same. On some which I've made/painted, I don't even know if they've got the right numbers (I just choose them from transfer sheets for mineral wagons). On at least two or three, it's a different number on each side, because I cocked up some of the transfers! Some (and is this a crime?) have no more that white dots and squiggles because I ran out of numbers! 

 

Oh dear!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, Buhar said:

Hi Tony,

 

I was just looking at the BRM Annual for 2007 which featured the building of your shed.  "Good for 10 years" you said.  Well, it's coming up to 12 years and you've not mentioned the need for any repairs, although I presume you've re-coated it.  10 years seems plenty when you build it, but tempus fugit...

 

Is the only insulation that 25mm expanded polystyrene still?  How did you get on in the various cold snaps we've had and how do you heat it?

 

Alan

It's still in good nick, Alan,

 

I have re-coated a couple of times since it was erected, and no repairs have been necessary. 

 

The insulation is the same, and it provides a very stable environment. I have two electric convector heaters which keep it warm in the cold weather, and just open the doors and windows in the summer!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, DougN said:

I have a request to all, Does any one know where I can get a nice  3F Jinty dome for a Gibson kit ... ? this is for 4mm in brass or whitemetal. 

 

OK the kit has been through 2 owners (Which means it is probably old enough to vote!) and ended up on my build line... now it has a converted Portescap so the chassis is closer to completion but I still need a dome!  

 

I have looked through Wizard models list and Markits (though I don't seem to be able to find the domes!) Once upon a time Perseverance, I think had them, but unfortunately another manufacturer that has gone. This is the lose we are all suffering from as the retailers who once stocked these items such as Mainly trains are no longer with us... it makes it very difficult to get the builders aids! 

 

Any one have any suggestions! 

How close is the dome of a Jinty to a 4F, Doug?

 

If it's very similar, Dave Ellis at SE Finecast can supply one.

 

I'll have a look through my stock of hundreds of domes and see if I can find one for you.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Atso said:

I generally do what Jerry does and not worry too much about the numbers on my N gauge rolling stock; although this is often because I have insufficient know prototype numbers as it is because they can't be seen.

 

 

 

Apologies for the GWR Loriot K masquerading as an ex-NER MAC.

 

 

In the case of the open and mineral wagons, now that these have been weathered, the numbers are also illegible anyway!

 

Finally, I've nearly completed the Toad E build.

 

 

I've taken a leisurely pace on this one with the total time being around nine hours. If I was building to commission, I could probably do this within a day, but as I said earlier, who would pay a going rate for a brake van? 

 

 

 

 

Wonderful work, as always, Steve,

 

Thanks for showing us.....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[31A]

35 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

The question of whether model coaching stock should be glossy, semi-gloss or matt is one which has taxed the makers/painters of such things for a long, long time.

 

Obviously, prototype carriages (especially those with metal sides) would have been finished in gloss paint, and even gloss varnish. How long would they stay like that in service, though? The sides might be cleaned regularly, but not the roofs, ends, underframes and bogies.

 

As far as I know, Larry Goddard paints all the carriages he makes, or those which others have made which he paints, with gloss paint, probably cellulose. I've never seen anything he's made/painted which he's weathered. Though the finish is very good, I'm not sure if it's always 'realistic'. I'm not being critical of his work (far from it, it's to a very high-standard), but I always weather (at least) the roofs, underframes and bogies of any of my carriages. That's why I think carriages with bright, white roofs always look slightly absurd, especially on a steam-age depiction. I'm quite happy to leave the sides of my carriages gloss, but not as glossy as LG's carriages. If you look closely, you'll see (as part of my repairs, to be fair) that I've painted a roof in matt paint, and certainly taken down the frames/bogies on LG's carriages on LB. No doubt, to the purist/collector, this is anathema, but since I'm not pure and never collected anything (apart from batsman's scalps!) I really don't care.

 

I think the 'trick' is to not have everything the same. Paint finishes will fade in time, and the effects of weathering will be dependent on geography and the various time intervals between repainting.

 

Perhaps some further examples?

 

 

 

In the main, the RTR boys/girls provide a dull or even matt finish on their carriages. Here's a (slightly-modified) Hornby Gresley BCK. Apart from it not being a particularly good model at source, this is too 'flat' a finish for my tastes.

 

 

 

This is a Larry Goddard conversion from the same carriage, but with MJT sides over-laid. This is in a high-gloss finish, which I don't dislike, but a friend of mine (the owner of the carriage) has weathered the roof, ends, underframe and bogies. 

 

 

 

I don't mind a gloss finish on some of the conversions I undertake; this is a Hornby donor with Kemilway side. Everything apart from the sides is weathered-down, though. 

 

 

 

Another of my Hornby conversions, but this time with the sides not so glossy. I use Halfords Ford Burgundy Red acrylic in a rattle can, sprayed directly to the models. For a high-gloss, I hold the can closer, and for a semi-gloss, I hold it further away. Trial and error, really. The numbers on this are all individually-applied. 

 

 

 

The same paint on a plastic Kirk Gresley, again applied to be semi-gloss. The numbers on this are in one piece, supplied on a sheet by Modelmasters. 

 

 

 

On items such as Mailcoach products, where the the sides are one-piece clear plastic, then sable-painting has to be employed (at least as far as I'm concerned). Having built this this ex-Silver Jubilee triplet diner, I gave it all four coats of 

Railmatch BR maroon, finishing it off with a coat of polyurethane satin varnish. Since I don't own a bow pen, all my lining is waterslide transfers, applied with varying degrees of success.

 

 

 

Another Mailcoach carriage, this time a Tourist BSO, painted in the same way as the triplet.

 

 

 

And a Mailcoach Tourists SO/SO, this time varnished with a mix of satin and matt polyurethane varnish to give a slightly duller finish.

 

 

 

The opposite of a dull finish, this Mallard Gresley BG has been painted in very high-gloss (by, I think, Larry Goddard, though it's not signed, which is unusual). It came my way in a rather 'tatty' state (you can see my repairs at the near end), and I weathered the roof, ends, underframe and bogies.

 

 

 

Carriages fresh from overhaul would have very glossy sides. This ex-1938 Flying Scotsman triplet was painted by Geoff Haynes to my specification, with dull roof and weathered underframes and bogies. 

 

I suppose, what I'm after is 'realism' of finish in context. The context of Little Bytham. Please remember as well that all the above examples are 'layout' carriages. They're definitely not 'showcase' models (I'm not that skilled!), they're built/painted (within my limitations) to run on a fairly large layout and to be viewed as 'part of the scene'. 

 

 

 

Stock for 'The Elizabethan' was lifted, repaired as necessary and repainted before the summer season. It was always kept very clean in service; I know, I saw it very often. Thus, my model of it depicts this, but the roofs, underframes and bogies are all weathered-down.

 

Won't it be good to have the correct girder bridge finally in place? 

 

I suppose, in the final analysis, not every loco nor every item of stock should look the same.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

   

 

I prefer coaches to have a slight gloss to the sides; in colour photographs from the 1950s/60s it is not unusual to be able to see reflections in the coach sides, even on quite 'lowly' non gangwayed coaches, when everything else around is drab.  From your pictures above, I aim for something like the Gresley in the second picture, or maybe the Tourist Stock brake or the full brake.  Building coaches recently (BR red / cream or red liveries), Johnsons Klear is often the last coat after the transfers have gone on (this also brings out a richness in the colours) and this is followed by a waft of Humbrol satin varnish from an aerosol, which itself tends to be on the glossy side, I've usually found.  I do often then apply some light weathering mainly around the ends of the sides, door edges and lower panelling (if any); more or less depending on how clean I want it to appear.  The ends, underframe and roof are usually quite heavily weathered.

 

I was quite pleased with the finish of these; I didn't weather the sides at all and intend them to represent coaches which are quite recently ex works:

 

 

[Denbridge]

5 hours ago, DougN said:

I have a request to all, Does any one know where I can get a nice  3F Jinty dome for a Gibson kit ... ? this is for 4mm in brass or whitemetal. 

 

OK the kit has been through 2 owners (Which means it is probably old enough to vote!) and ended up on my build line... now it has a converted Portescap so the chassis is closer to completion but I still need a dome!  

 

I have looked through Wizard models list and Markits (though I don't seem to be able to find the domes!) Once upon a time Perseverance, I think had them, but unfortunately another manufacturer that has gone. This is the lose we are all suffering from as the retailers who once stocked these items such as Mainly trains are no longer with us... it makes it very difficult to get the builders aids! 

 

Any one have any suggestions! 

Have you tried Alan Gibson? He provided me with some Jinty castings a couple of years back.

[Steamport Southport]

Still in the catalogue. 

 

4M613 LMS Fowler 1'9½” dome

 

http://www.alangibsonworkshop.com/

 

247 Developments do them as well.

 

https://www.247developments.co.uk/loco_detailing.html

 

 

 

Jason

[Jol Wilkinson]

9 hours ago, DougN said:

I have a request to all, Does any one know where I can get a nice  3F Jinty dome for a Gibson kit ... ? this is for 4mm in brass or whitemetal. 

 

OK the kit has been through 2 owners (Which means it is probably old enough to vote!) and ended up on my build line... now it has a converted Portescap so the chassis is closer to completion but I still need a dome!  

 

I have looked through Wizard models list and Markits (though I don't seem to be able to find the domes!) Once upon a time Perseverance, I think had them, but unfortunately another manufacturer that has gone. This is the lose we are all suffering from as the retailers who once stocked these items such as Mainly trains are no longer with us... it makes it very difficult to get the builders aids! 

 

Any one have any suggestions! 

Doug,

 

don't forget that John at London Road Models will supply lost wax castings from his range of loco kits, which includes a Jinty. The range of castings is so big he can't find time to produce an up to date list but an email enquiry will get a response.

 

Jol

[PMP]

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I have a confession, Jerry,

 

(It's said it's good for the soul!)

 

When you see a train rolling by on LB, how many of you can read the numbers on the stock and compute if they are correct or not?

 

Though I think my carriage numbers are correct, what about the goods stock? It's highly likely that many of the modified 16T RTR mineral wagons (for instance) have the same number! Not next to each other, but still the same. On some which I've made/painted, I don't even know if they've got the right numbers (I just choose them from transfer sheets for mineral wagons). On at least two or three, it's a different number on each side, because I cocked up some of the transfers! Some (and is this a crime?) have no more that white dots and squiggles because I ran out of numbers! 

 

Oh dear!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

Oh dear! I fear you will be excommunicated for such behaviour.

I can recall a campanological culminations expert on a Facebook thread most stridently telling Phil Parker and myself just how wrong we were for such heresy, because he’d know they were wrong! Quite how an individual would know all the numbers and diagram types of every RCH seven plank wagon, is quite beyond me. I suspect they’ll fail epically if called to task with a random selection of correct and incorrect versions placed before them.

 

 

Edited July 4, 2019 by PMP

[The Fatadder]

11 minutes ago, PMP said:

 

Oh dear! I fear you will be excommunicated for such behaviour.

I can recall a campanological culminations expert on a Facebook thread most stridently telling Phil Parker and myself just how wrong we were for such heresy, because he’d know they were wrong! Quite how an individual would know all the numbers and diagram types of every RCH seven plank wagon, is quite beyond me. I suspect they’ll fail epically if called to task with a random selection of correct and incorrect versions placed before them.

 

 

They would have a much bigger issue with a lot of my stock.  Given funds and time are both at a premium, very few of my kit built coaches or wagons have a number, branding or lining on the non viewable side.  The intention is to go back and fix “one day” but whether that day will ever materialise is a different question...

[Barry Ten]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who doesn't get too worked up about wagon numbers.

 

 

I built this Cambrian sleeper wagon this week, and while the number on it is correct, the tare branding is totally fictitious. i was lucky indeed that the HMRS sheet carries a transfer for "Engineering Dept" but there's still some lettering that needs to be added, and that'll likely end up being small dots and dashes. I also haven't yet done the other side, and since just the transfers on this one took me two evenings, I'm not sure I'll be in a big rush.

 

I built a wagon (I think an LMS fish van) a while ago in which the kit gave no clue about the numbering, and none of my books did either, so I just made something up. The beauty of it is, I now can't quite remember which one it was! 

 

Al

Edited July 4, 2019 by Barry Ten

[Compound2632]

I hope no-one's saying there's actually anything wrong with being an obsessive wagon numerologist?

[Tony Wright]

23 hours ago, 31A said:

 

I prefer coaches to have a slight gloss to the sides; in colour photographs from the 1950s/60s it is not unusual to be able to see reflections in the coach sides, even on quite 'lowly' non gangwayed coaches, when everything else around is drab.  From your pictures above, I aim for something like the Gresley in the second picture, or maybe the Tourist Stock brake or the full brake.  Building coaches recently (BR red / cream or red liveries), Johnsons Klear is often the last coat after the transfers have gone on (this also brings out a richness in the colours) and this is followed by a waft of Humbrol satin varnish from an aerosol, which itself tends to be on the glossy side, I've usually found.  I do often then apply some light weathering mainly around the ends of the sides, door edges and lower panelling (if any); more or less depending on how clean I want it to appear.  The ends, underframe and roof are usually quite heavily weathered.

 

I was quite pleased with the finish of these; I didn't weather the sides at all and intend them to represent coaches which are quite recently ex works:

 

 

They're very convincing, Steve,

 

Thanks for posting.

 

However, the prototypes weren't always that clean. 

 

 

A steel-sided twin BSK/SK at Gamston in 1961.

 

 

My Tourist BSO might be a bit cleaner than this one.

 

Most ECML steam-age passenger rolling stock seemed to be kept clean, though. Note the different finishes in the following pictures, but the film emulsions of the day need to be taken into account.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anyone, please observe copyright restrictions on the above.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 5, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

I hope no-one's saying there's actually anything wrong with being an obsessive wagon numerologist?

Not at all,

 

However, does anyone know if the wagon numbers in these two trains are correct? 

 

 

This is a 'normal' viewing distance for visitors to Little Bytham. Note the next-but-last wagon to the right. Built by a friend 40 years ago, its number is just hand-done. 

 

John Houlden used to hand-number some of his wagons on Gamston. At exhibition-viewing distances, who could tell?

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

I've just had a most enjoyable day in the company of two friends who've visited LB.

 

One is a most-accomplished Scale Seven modeller, and he complimented me on the running of LB (thanks Dave, and for your most-generous donation to CRUK). No sooner had he said that, then a carriage on an M&GNR service derailed. Its concertina gangway had fouled the open gangway of the towing coach on a reverse curve. A quick adjustment, and all was well, but isn't that typical?

 

The other friend (a gifted musician) brought along a scratch-built J19 to be fixed. Its motor was noisy and a crank pin had come adrift. An adjustment to the gears, a new crank pin fitted, a tweak of the pick-ups and a drop of oil, and off she went - sweet as a nut! Thanks Philip for your most-generous donation to CRUK as well. He also brought along some foreign tram thing, where the plastic universal joints on the gear train seemed to have come out of alignment. I gave up straight away on that one! 

Edited July 4, 2019 by Tony Wright
typo error

[t-b-g]

If you total the wagons produced by Malcolm Crawley, Ken Hill and me (around 400) then add those produced by Mick Moore (around 350)and those on Retford from various sources, there will be well over 1,000. They are mostly kitbuilt but with a handful of scratchbuilt ones and a reasonable number of RTR types too.

 

I can't speak for whether or not the RTR ones still carry identical numbers on Retford as I had little to do with them but every single wagon from a kit or from scratch carries the correct number and the correct livery as far as we know. All apart from 3 or 4 "jokey" private owner liveries such as "Norton's Nuts and Cobbles". That was a gentle dig at the late George Norton by the late Malcolm Crawley as a response to "Crawley Scrap" from George (say it quickly!). I don't think you would ever get Geoff Kent building a meticulously researched wagon and just blobbing some spots on the side. 

 

If the information is available (which it nearly always is) and the correct transfers can be obtained (which they nearly always can) it is just as easy putting the right number on as a wrong one.

 

If it was a carriage in a named express, or the loco on "The Elizabethan" on LB, it would be researched down to the Nth degree to be made correct for the period.

 

Some of us accord the same attention to the humble goods wagon. Apart from anything else, a wagon in a goods yard will be "on scene" and standing still for much longer than an express and is therefore likely to be viewed much more than a train tearing by at 80mph.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dave Hunt]

Tony,

 

Many, many thanks for your hospitality today and for showing me how well LB runs (I wasn't going to mention the derailment on the M&GNR - honestly!). It goes to show how attention to the accuracy of trackwork and stock can achieve superb running that would be the envy of more than a few modellers I know and breaking Mallard's record with impunity through all that pointwork is admirable to say the least! Even apart from watching the trains run, though, just looking at the layout itself, the myriad details and cameos and the stock makes for a rewarding day. I must say, though, that it could do with a few more locomotives - it must be awkward trying to manage with just a couple of hundred!

 

Dave   

[Northmoor]

5 hours ago, PMP said:

I can recall a campanological culminations expert on a Facebook thread most stridently telling Phil Parker and myself just how wrong we were for such heresy, because he’d know they were wrong! Quite how an individual would know all the numbers and diagram types of every RCH seven plank wagon, is quite beyond me. I suspect they’ll fail epically if called to task with a random selection of correct and incorrect versions placed before them.

They might succeed, but they'd almost certainly fail to leave such an event with more friends than they arrived with.

 

Far fewer people will try to get every carriage (and even fewer, wagon) numbers different and correct, because virtually no-one spotted them in real life.  If we collected wagon numbers and not locomotives, we'd all have individual wagons and multiple Flying Scotsmans on our layouts.

Edited July 4, 2019 by Northmoor