Jump to content

Please use M,M&M only for topics that do not fit within other forum areas. All topics posted here await admin team approval to ensure they don't belong elsewhere.

Tony Wright

Wright writes.....

Recommended Posts

34 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

 

I think I can tell Mr Critic where to go because I am modelling for me. Now should I be building for others, or writing about model railways for a living then I might have to change my view.

 

Being prepared to tell someone to park their comments were the sun doesn't shine does mean I have to step back when I see someone make a nice model but it is wrong. I try to make them aware what the prototype was like without coming across as saying you made that incorrectly. Very hard to do, so most of the time it is best to keep my mouth shut.

 

 

Without wanting to be antagonistic or controversial, that does come across as a bit of you're happy to tell Mr Critic where to go but you are also happy to critique others modelling on occasion, or at least make them aware of variances with the prototype, although perhaps in a more considerate fashion.

 

I certainly don't like rudeness in critical appraisal and approach and overt criticism can destroy confidence. But would you be happy to receive a more considerate and less aggressive feedback about your modelling when it is on public display (either at an exhibition or published on forums or magazines)?

 

G

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

Without wanting to be antagonistic or controversial, that does come across as a bit of you're happy to tell Mr Critic where to go but you are also happy to critique others modelling on occasion, or at least make them aware of variances with the prototype, although perhaps in a more considerate fashion.

 

I certainly don't like rudeness in critical appraisal and approach and overt criticism can destroy confidence. But would you be happy to receive a more considerate and less aggressive feedback about your modelling when it is on public display (either at an exhibition or published on forums or magazines)?

 

G

Hi Grahame

 

There is a big difference between critisum and advice. When someone says you should go DCC or don't use tension lock couplings I feel I have the right to say, I am doing what I want to. When some says are you aware that loco 7890 had xyz on its roof and I haven't modelled it as such, then I will reappraise my bodge and amend. 

 

Hopefully if I say are you aware that loco 7890 had xyz on its roof it will help someone. Even more so if I have done the research and modelled loco 7890 to back up what I am saying.

 

If I am asked a direct question then I can be honest and say, you have made loco 7890 wrong and where it is wrong.  Likewise should I ask someone have I made 7890 right and I haven't then I cannot say to the person I questioned "stuff you I am building it how I want to."

 

As for be criticised when displaying ones wears in public, if you have attempted to make the model as accurate within your own abilities additional information should be helpful. Outright "you should have done it that way or this way" is not.

 

With my first Pig Lane I had some Airfix Esso tank wagons, they were that old the transfers just fell apart. So I used some Fox ones which were the wrong size and a later design, as a compromise. I was under the baseboards fixing something....which is a justifiable criticism....when I heard a chap mention the Esso badges. My mate politely said to the chap, " I'm sure if they are wrong, Clive knows they are". 

Edited by Clive Mortimore
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

 

There is a big difference between critisum and advice. When someone says you should go DCC or don't use tension lock couplings I feel I have the right to say, I am doing what I want to. When some says are you aware that loco 7890 had xyz on its roof and I haven't modelled it as such, then I will reappraise my bodge and amend. 

 

 

To me both criticism and advice is 'feedback' but it is the manner in which it is given that is often the big distinction and can be a breaking point. It could be considered critical to say "you are wrong in missing xyz of the roof of loco 7890" especially if voiced in a damning and unpleasant way.

 

But it seems like if the information is presented as helpful 'advice' then you are happy to amend your model. Which is great as that's the way I prefer it.

 

G

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/07/2019 at 23:34, Woodcock29 said:

Re: Bec J17

The kit in thegreenhowards' post above appears to be the later Bec version as a very close look at the photo appears to indicate it has the correct spectacle shape and the cab roof was more correct on this later version. (Edit: your latest photo posted whilst I was writing my post does indeed show it to be the later Bec version)

 

I rebuilt the earlier Bec version back in the 80s. My father had originally built it in the early 60s before we left the UK. I did at that time continue to use a Triang chassis albeit now fitted with Romfords and eventually a Buhler/Ultrascale motor/gearbox. I also fitted a better chimney and more correct diameter smokebox door.

 

A couple of years ago I was given a box of badly built kit locos which included a Bec J17 but the later version I think - can't check as I'm currently on holiday. I've been thinking about rebuilding this at some stage but as Tony often says one spends a lot of extra time rebuilding something someone else has botched! And there are too many other priorities at present.

 

Maybe the best option for a correct chassis would be to ask PDK as they do what appears to be the old Crownline brass J17 and I know they do sell separate parts as I've had chimneys and domes from them. The chassis maybe in a separate etch of its own?

 

Andrew

 

Going back to this post about the Bec J17 - was it really nearly 40 pages ago! - a replacement J17 chimney and dome are mentioned. Anyone know where these could be obtained? I've found a lost wax dome on Precision Paints website (£8 + postage!), but can't find mention of either anywhere else. Comparing them with the GERS drawing it looks like I shall need replacements.

Thanks to Tony, I have obtained a chassis from SEF, a nice easy kit which is nearly finished.

 

Stewart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try PDK as I got replacement chimneys and domes from them sometime ago. Actually I need to get more GC stuff from them soon.

 

Andrew

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

To me both criticism and advice is 'feedback' but it is the manner in which it is given that is often the big distinction and can be a breaking point. It could be considered critical to say "you are wrong in missing xyz of the roof of loco 7890" especially if voiced in a damning and unpleasant way.

 

But it seems like if the information is presented as helpful 'advice' then you are happy to amend your model. Which is great as that's the way I prefer it.

 

G

 

I think the most important part of the "feedback" is in the follow up. It's how the "critic" responds to the modeller's reply.

 

If someone were to inform or suggest that my particular number of Standard 2MT had a late crest and not an early emblem by the time my layout is set (just for example), my reply might be a) Thanks for letting me know, I'll take it under consideration; b) Thanks, I know, I just haven't gotten around to changing it; or c) Thanks but I'm happy with it as it is, because it's just representative and not a 100% accurate layout - some 2MTs DID have early emblems and I'm just going for a flavour of the time.

 

The response to all three options should be, to my mind, words to the effect of "fair enough".  Certainly nothing derogatory. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the SE&CR E1 with only a few small details left to be added:

 

I found the photos in the Maidment book invaluable for reworking the pipework and associated details on this side. The DJH casting

for the "thing" on the footplate didn't bear much resemblance to the photos but I was able to cut and file it into a better approximation.

Is it a Westinghouse apparatus, or a steam reverser? Not sure! I've only added about half the associated piping but what's there

is fairly correct, I think.

 

Next I will add lamp irons, then begin final filling and sanding in preparation for painting. There are some white metal guard irons to be

added but I'll either leave them to later, or replace with brass ones as I suspect they may be vulnerable. I am also unsure about that

projection above the whistles.

 

e1class.jpg.de78b7d8d3d093a0a11f946c3350bcd0.jpg

  • Like 9
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

...... oh, and I have the distinct beginnings of RSI in my right shoulder, as a consequence of excessive mouse usage.

 

 

John, can I recommend that you try a trackball mouse?  The sort that you just rest your hand on and spin a red ball with your fingers to move the cursor...  so much better if you’re experiencing RSI.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ and look at chair/desk height to minimise angle of dangle issues!

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that how criticism is taken also depends on the perceived authority of the critic.

 

I took some locos along to the Bristol Show to show Tony. He mentioned that the cab plates on my prairie didn't have the correct

GWR font (even though they'd come with the kit) so - although it was a pain - I took Tony's advice and replaced the plates, luckily

managing to dislodge the old ones without taking half the cabside paintwork with them. The model's now better for it.

 

I'd take the opinions of most of the regulars on Wright Writes seriously because the majority of correspondents are practical modellers,

all with different interests and approaches, but united by a desire not to be entirely reliant on the RTR trade. If (hypothetically) Clive

were to comment on something I'd shown, I'd pay attention because I know Clive's put in the graft with his modelling even if our

interests aren't quite aligned. I think we're all man enough to take a bit of robust commentary, in the interests of improving our models

and abilities. Where it can wound, I suppose, is where a model's beyond the point where much can be done about the mistakes. In

that case, I think, a tactful acknowledgement of the errors is all that can be expected.

 

Elsewhere on RMweb, there are a lot of contributors who rarely show any modelling but are willing to waffle and pontificate on

every topic under the sun. I'm afraid I treat their opinions much less seriously than those of the practical modellers who

frequent Wright Writes.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we should only publish photos of our models and exhibit layouts that we know are perfect. How many exhibitions, magazines or web pages would there to be left to look at? Approximately none. 

 

I am usually well aware of any shortcomings in my modelling. I am my own worst critic by far. There are often bits of work that I do that are close to being right. So close that to spend several more hours to make a tiny difference isn't time well spent. So I know my modelling is less than perfect. Always has been. Always will be!

 

I really don't need somebody else telling me, however constructively, where I fell short of perfection!

 

All I can ever say is that I did my best.

 

I see a huge gap between solicited and unsolicited comment. If I do something and I am not sure if it is OK, I will ask a friend or find a tame expert and ask them. Should this be in those colours at that date? Would the loco have had a new chimney by now? Is the weathering a bit overdone?

 

I certainly don't attend a show or look at photos and immediately get the urge, no matter how constructively, to say "I think that perhaps you might have got that bit wrong". I have been known to ask somebody what information they based their model on as I haven't seen a photo of one in that condition but if they answer that they just built it as supplied in the kit, I will leave it at that. If somebody is happy to build a model that way, I don't see it as my job to try to inflict my ideas of improvement on them whether they want it or not.

 

If they have enjoyed building it, are happy with the way it turned out and aren't looking for suggestions as to how it might be improved, that is all that matters to them and it is none of my business if I think that they might have done better.

 

One time I was exhibiting a layout and a good friend was watching it. He said "Would you mind if I made a comment about your coal wagons?". He had noticed that I was running 1923 RCH wagons on a pre WW1 layout.  He didn't know that I had borrowed the wagons as I was building correct ones from kits and hadn't finished them in time for the show.

 

But it was, in my view, the perfect approach. He didn't just dive in and tell me that they were wrong, however constructively. He found out if I was open to constructive comment first.

 

Since that day, I always do the same. I always ask first and never make an assumption that anybody wants to know what is wrong with what they have done.

  • Like 8
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hi Dave

 

You are right that using a commercial brick paper or even embossed plastic card most modellers do not model the queen closers.

 

Conversely, how many people notice what type of brick course the building is made of. I say this because I extended a building width wise, the front is Flemish bond and the rear is stretcher bond.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/001a.jpg.b2df31670a4641c69f0e9d1df570d6c0.jpg

Only because I didn't have any Flemish bond embossed plastic card at the time.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/003a.jpg.d813e5063612e9d076d6a716cdce85f0.jpg

 

No one ever commented on the types of brickwork.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/004a.jpg.d6bde67363f8610e636130019958169e.jpg

People did look closely as I had scratchbuilt the interior, including the sausages and chips Doris has on the hot plate.

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/009a.jpg.9bb660ab0a4cada3949c766322b4d406.jpg

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/010a.jpg.356c2156a6591da3768a18498c2a8be2.jpg

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_2019_08/011a.jpg.439a2d2f524d9691000e60ef35158ce4.jpg

 

 

Clive - having the 'public facing' wall or walls in something reasonably classy like Flemish bond, and the back walls in something cheaper like stretcher, or English Garden, is actually normal; almost the rule. Similarly, front/street faces in 'Accrington brick' (the glossy terracotta-ish stuff) and other walls in commons. Anyone building a netty or similar in Flemish Bond had more money than sense.

 

A problem thing to model well is, I suspect, the diaper effect obtained by using the dark 'burnt ends' of bricks to make patterns (often diamonds). I think the North Staffordshire was particularly fond of this effect in its station buildings, but doubtless there were others.Obviously it has to be tailored to the features of a particular wall, working round windows and scaled for length and so on, so a generic paper is unlikely to fit the bill.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, lanchester said:

Clive - having the 'public facing' wall or walls in something reasonably classy like Flemish bond, and the back walls in something cheaper like stretcher, or IEnglish Garden, is actually normal; almost the rule. Similarly, front/street faces in 'Accrington brick' (the glossy terracotta-ish stuff) and other walls in commons. Anyone building a netty or similar in Flemish Bond had more money than sense.

 

A problem thing to model well is, I suspect, the diaper effect obtained by using the dark 'burnt ends' of bricks to make patterns (often diamonds). I think the North Staffordshire was particularly fond of this effect in its station buildings, but doubtless there were others.Obviously it has to be tailored to the features of a particular wall, working round windows and scaled for length and so on, so a generic paper is unlikely to fit the bill.

I have modelled the Stationmasters House on Green Ayre.  This turned out to be a Georgian building that had been a foundry managers house. The photos from the front showed regular dressed stone on the sides facing the main road and the station approach. When I found photos of the other two sides they were in brick.   I ended up making the structure from 3mm ply, laser cut and then used scribed plasticard for the formal stonework and Das for the brickwork that I scribed when dry.  From further research another Georgian building just up the road was built the same way with dressed stone on the road side and regular building stone on the other walls.

160815-1.jpg.5fc28e913494cf44e432eb6af1d96e6e.jpg

The corner stones are DAS, moulded damp, all copied from photos.   That's the east wall that faced the station approach and the north wall which overlooked the foundry yard that became railway stables.

 

Jamie

  • Like 6
  • Craftsmanship/clever 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Anyone who exposes their work to the public should expect criticism. When it's uninformed, then it has no value other than to the ego of the critic. Criticism in its' purist form is intended to convey both the positive and negative aspects of the work in question. In our more cynical times- another vice which has become a virtue- it seems to mainly refer to the negative. I am happy to take advice, but am less interested in someone's opinion, unless it is factually based.

 

So feel free to say what you like about my almost complete Dave Alexander N10, which I'm building in parallel with ArthurK's version. Doing this has allowed me to upgrade what is a pretty basic kit by Dave Alexander (but a pleasure to build, for all that), I spent a bit of time on the cab interior, and though it's far from perfect, it now looks suitably "busy". I must find a fireman.....

 

As an aside, I'd tried Crystal Glaze in the past without total success. For this kit, where the cab windows are pretty small. I used Wilko Interior Wood Glue, and it worked fine. I'm sure other brands are available.....

 

The twin builds can be found at the link below.

IMG_20190816_164301.jpg

IMG_20190816_164327.jpg

Edited by rowanj
Added info
  • Like 11
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PMP said:

^^ and look at chair/desk height to minimise angle of dangle issues!

 

Thanks both.

 

My mouse, desk and chair usually suit me fine - it was a definite over-indulgence in mouse / keyboard work that caused the problem, which has responded to anti-inflamatory medication.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had that once and even resorted to one of the "natural" position mice. In the end I started using the mouse in my other hand. It did not take long to learn how to use it and rested the wrist that had the problem.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, cctransuk said:

I was astonished to find the variety of types which existed; the Derby Lightweights, for instance, comprised an entire family; rather than the small number of largely identical vehicles that I'd hitherto imagined.

DMUs are not boring once you start looking.

 

Early DLW - non-standard engines and transmission. 2-car power twin, note absence of lower centre marker light:

9023803027_e35820788f_z.jpgDerby-LW_nrLeedsCentral by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

West Cumberland set - retaining large window next to van doors, internal bar across front windows: 

3736037825_b318cd422f_z.jpgDerby-LW_forKeswick by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Later 2-car set with larger van area (there was an intermediate step in the van size evolution too) and divided front windows:

22247998385_28723f2681_z.jpgM79177-M79467_Preston_13-5-67 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

4-car set - note that there were no types in common with the 2-car:

35854071490_1e860a84d0_z.jpgDLW_8-Car_Waskerley_10-4-65 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Single unit and a motor composite from a later (yellow diamond) 2-car power-twin - note that even the two single cars were different - this one has a small window next to the van area:

31060161766_9c66c683e8_z.jpgM79190_M79901_Oxford_28-11-65 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

The other single car in later life - this had a larger window next to the van area:

6532997217_196fae9c78_z.jpgIris_Shenfield_1981 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

Then, of course, there were all the livery variations.

 

Commendably, Bachmann has made both the West Cumberland and later versions of the 2-car power-trailer.

 

 

 

Edited by robertcwp
  • Like 10
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

DMUs are not boring once you start looking.

 

Early DLW - non-standard engines and transmission. 2-car, note absence of lower centre marker light:

https://flic.kr/p/eKpmfPDerby-LW_nrLeedsCentral by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

 

 

I now know that the triangular box under the RH cab front window denotes a 'Red Triangle' (control code), Diagram 501 / 507, very early (first?) variant of the Derby Lightweights.

 

Yep - I've been doing my homework !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

With 410 locos to feature, three volumes will be a minimum. The idea is to have at least one picture of every B1 featured. 

 

The plan is not to include all the engine record cards (that's been done in Yeadon), but to highlight the myriad detail variations in appearance, and comment on the workings. I hope it'll be of use to modellers. We'll see, though it won't be a case of 'stuff the critics!' 

 

Sounds great, especially the comments on the workings and detail variations. I trust there won’t be any scrappage gen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DMUs boring......they are great to model, as John has pointed out the Derby lightweights were a family of similar looking coaches. Most types were within their own family groups, that is why they are great to model. 

100_5799a.jpg.fa994b79f151eca0da963f540e434034.jpg

They can also be used for teaching, counting to eight using DMUs.

  • Like 4
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at class 116; 3 different styles of cab and two alternative centre trailers before you consider later added gangways and livery variations.  No wonder RTR manufacturers are scared to get involved with them and keep churning out more 117s despite this class' more restricted geography and quantity.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

DMU’s will always be regarded as the grim reaper at the end of steam, to my mind anyway.  Much in the same way as the A2/2 symbolises the demise of the much more aesthetically pleasing P2.  (We’ve all been through that discussion of course). 

 

I can understand the interest... I can vividly remember as a commuting student, swaying side-to-side in a derby lightweight, as it farted its departure from Nuneaton towards Leicester, being mildly amused at the rude noise, then the driver playing ‘On Ilkley Moor bah t’hat’ on the two tone horn.  

 

But the huge variety and regional character of what went before was much more interesting, surely?

 

 

Edited by Chamby
Grammatical tweak
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

Here's the SE&CR E1 with only a few small details left to be added:

 

I found the photos in the Maidment book invaluable for reworking the pipework and associated details on this side. The DJH casting

for the "thing" on the footplate didn't bear much resemblance to the photos but I was able to cut and file it into a better approximation.

Is it a Westinghouse apparatus, or a steam reverser? Not sure!

It's the steam reverser, most SECR locos had this.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, cctransuk said:

 

I now know that the triangular box under the RH cab front window denotes a 'Red Triangle' (control code), Diagram 501 / 507, very early (first?) variant of the Derby Lightweights.

 

Yep - I've been doing my homework !!

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Correct! Applied only to the first eight sets built for West Riding services. They were power-twins with Leyland engines and an obsolete design of hydraulic transmission. Mechanically, they were similar to an experimental LMS diesel unit. Thereafter, Derby switched to something more like the GWR design for the mechanical side of things. The first eight sets were withdrawn in 1964 and I have yet to find a colour photo of them in service.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.