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.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
4 minutes ago, Craigw said:

I did a road trip with my wife in 2015 (8000km in three weeks) and on the way back passed through Narromine to discover trials for an airshow the next day.  My wife was very happy to stop and watch. I was watching and taking photos when this Avenger appeared and I was in love. Sounded fantastic and looked, well, you can see. Taken with Nikon D750 and 70-200 VR F2.8

 

Regards,

 

Craig Warton

Avenger.jpg

 

What a great photograph!

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

Strange when trying to add a new post RMweb brings up my last post like others have indicated previously!

 

Whilst we're on the subject of cameras I've been using the amateur range of Nikon DSLRs which generally suit my purpose.  Currently I use a D7000 and before that D70s.  In the 'old days' I was an Olympus man and thought the Zuiko lenses were second to none. However, for model railway photography I've gone over to using a compact camera, in fact the Canon G12 like that used by Gilbert Barnatt on his Peterborough North thread.

 

Now for something completely different (I hope Tony doesn't object) I've added a few photos I took at an Air Show here in Adelaide last weekend which show that even with amateur range cameras and lenses its possible to achieve quite reasonable outcomes. These were taken with the D7000 using a Nikon ED 70-300mm lens. Obviously not of professional standard they still look quite good - I've done a small amount of work on them mainly to crop a bit and to adjust the lighting. the variation in sky blue is interesting but that varies as much depending on the angle of the sun of course.

 

Andrew

DSC_2587 ps 1.jpg

DSC_1835 ps1.jpg

DSC_2109 ps 1.jpg

DSC_2267 ps 1.jpg

Why should I mind, Andrew?

 

Who would?

 

I've just finished reading a book about the Spitfire by John Nichol. I thoroughly recommend it. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 05/11/2019 at 16:48, Tony Wright said:

More and more at shows now, when I'm demonstrating modelling techniques, I 'build' a plastic wagon kit. 

 

1761785460_Parksideex-LNERhorsebox.jpg.2131bbae433c8ab8af6694a4aef5dccb.jpg

 

I started this Parkside LNER horsebox at Spalding on Saturday morning, completing it this morning. Though I've weathered the chassis, the bodywork still needs a touch of toning down. 

 

Soldering complex metal kits together can seem a bit daunting, but the plastic wagon kit is a splendid introduction to the delights of personal model-making. I'd be astonished if even the least-experienced modellers could not build/paint/complete something as simple-to-put-together as this. 

 

 

As it happens, I've just completed my own version of this kit.

 

 

Post_10.JPG.8688b41549a9572633e6dec7ef667bf1.JPG

 

Different modellers, different approaches!

(And my photography isn't very good either!)

 

I like to add some more features to the running gear (although only those which can be seen from the side!)

These include:

Making the cross-shaft thicker. I use insulation stripped from old layout wire

Adding the safety straps.

Adding (some) of the VB pull gear.

 

On this kit I re-made the lower footsteps with copper and brass elements soldered up. In the above picture the vertical support looks a bit bent, but I'm pretty sure that that happened with similar originals anyway. 

I also replaced the handrails and door handles with brass.

 

It was difficult to find any pictures of these vehicles in LNER livery, but there was some useful help on the LNER forum ... here and previous page) - I was able to add the additional vertical control pipe on the compartment end, 

Of course, this was built on my home workbench and not while demonstrating at a show!

(Not something that I would be able to do very well!

 

Thank you Mr Wright for encouraging us all.

(Now I have to get back to boring layout wiring!)

 

  • Like 9
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've now built three DJH C2s. The other was the one rejected by my 'customer' as being way below 'his' standard (the only loco I've ever built which anyone has been dissatisfied with). One observation of his was that the tender made a noise as it went over pointwork! At first I was 'hurt', but then I saw his layout at a show. Non-prototypical, an unworkable trackplan, incorrect liveries on carriages, non-working signals (good job, because their siting was nonsense), no lamps on locos, no crews, and it ran like a bag of rusty nails. I'm now delighted I didn't match his 'standard'! Why should I lower mine to do so? 

 

 

 

The idea of an  "standard" for exhibition layouts is an interesting thought. ;)

 

Andy

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
9 minutes ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

The idea of an  "standard" for exhibition layouts is an interesting thought. ;)

 

Andy


‘Exhibition Standard’, discuss. Use one side of the internet, you may start now.

 

That’ll break the Internet if anything will... :)

 

 

Edited by PMP
  • Like 1
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, drmditch said:

 

As it happens, I've just completed my own version of this kit.

 

 

Post_10.JPG.8688b41549a9572633e6dec7ef667bf1.JPG

 

Different modellers, different approaches!

(And my photography isn't very good either!)

 

I like to add some more features to the running gear (although only those which can be seen from the side!)

These include:

Making the cross-shaft thicker. I use insulation stripped from old layout wire

Adding the safety straps.

Adding (some) of the VB pull gear.

 

On this kit I re-made the lower footsteps with copper and brass elements soldered up. In the above picture the vertical support looks a bit bent, but I'm pretty sure that that happened with similar originals anyway. 

I also replaced the handrails and door handles with brass.

 

It was difficult to find any pictures of these vehicles in LNER livery, but there was some useful help on the LNER forum ... here and previous page) - I was able to add the additional vertical control pipe on the compartment end, 

Of course, this was built on my home workbench and not while demonstrating at a show!

(Not something that I would be able to do very well!

 

Thank you Mr Wright for encouraging us all.

(Now I have to get back to boring layout wiring!)

 

That's a far more detailed model than mine.

 

Thanks for showing us. You've used replacement ventilators as well (cast metal?) - the plastic ones supplied are really puny. 

 

Mr. Wright? No, Tony.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Andy Reichert said:

 

The idea of an  "standard" for exhibition layouts is an interesting thought. ;)

 

Andy

A most-interesting thought, Andy,

 

One which I haven't given much thought to, other than to compare the 'standards' of the one chap who was most-unhappy with what I made for him (and thus didn't pay me, though he kept the loco, ex-wheels and motor; despite my offering to supply him with an identical, unmade kit) and the 'standards' I set for my own railway modelling. 

 

Regarding exhibition layouts (or any layouts which folk visit?), my criteria (questions) would be (irrespective of scale)...............

 

Does it look like the prototype it's supposed to represent (even if it might not be an actual location)? 

 

Is the trackplan workable? And, are the visible curves of 'reasonable' radius (I hate seeing main lines going through tight 90 degree curves to go on-/off-stage)? 

 

Is it correctly signalled, and do the signals work?

 

Does it all work well, with no derailments or stuttering locos/stock?

 

Do the locos carry the appropriate lamps/discs, and are they all crewed?

 

Is the overall modelling standard consistent?

 

Does it show individual or group work, and not just be the product of opening boxes?  

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

Strange when trying to add a new post RMweb brings up my last post like others have indicated previously!

 

Whilst we're on the subject of cameras I've been using the amateur range of Nikon DSLRs which generally suit my purpose.  Currently I use a D7000 and before that D70s.  In the 'old days' I was an Olympus man and thought the Zuiko lenses were second to none. However, for model railway photography I've gone over to using a compact camera, in fact the Canon G12 like that used by Gilbert Barnatt on his Peterborough North thread.

 

Now for something completely different (I hope Tony doesn't object) I've added a few photos I took at an Air Show here in Adelaide last weekend which show that even with amateur range cameras and lenses its possible to achieve quite reasonable outcomes. These were taken with the D7000 using a Nikon ED 70-300mm lens. Obviously not of professional standard they still look quite good - I've done a small amount of work on them mainly to crop a bit and to adjust the lighting. the variation in sky blue is interesting but that varies as much depending on the angle of the sun of course.

 

Andrew

DSC_2587 ps 1.jpg

DSC_1835 ps1.jpg

DSC_2109 ps 1.jpg

DSC_2267 ps 1.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

A most-interesting thought, Andy,

 

One which I haven't given much thought to, other than to compare the 'standards' of the one chap who was most-unhappy with what I made for him (and thus didn't pay me, though he kept the loco, ex-wheels and motor; despite my offering to supply him with an identical, unmade kit) and the 'standards' I set for my own railway modelling. 

 

Regarding exhibition layouts (or any layouts which folk visit?), my criteria (questions) would be (irrespective of scale)...............

 

Does it look like the prototype it's supposed to represent (even if it might not be an actual location)? 

 

Is the trackplan workable? And, are the visible curves of 'reasonable' radius (I hate seeing main lines going through tight 90 degree curves to go on-/off-stage)? 

 

Is it correctly signalled, and do the signals work?

 

Does it all work well, with no derailments or stuttering locos/stock?

 

Do the locos carry the appropriate lamps/discs, and are they all crewed?

 

Is the overall modelling standard consistent?

 

Does it show individual or group work, and not just be the product of opening boxes?  

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

Hello Tony

 

You forgot it has to entertain the public. Here is the Pig Lane crew rehearsing before a gig exhibition.

 

 

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

No plane pictures I'm afraid (just plain)................

 

With Aussie, Jesse Sim's imminent visit, I thought I'd better get on and complete the DJH C2 I'm building for him.

 

2019956266_JesseSimcompleteC201.jpg.73c6bca7591c4d396edc1007632bcee3.jpg

 

Behind, is the being worked-on B16/3 started by Roy Jackson.

 

1389246186_JesseSimcompleteC202.jpg.7a1412f44af6e2df2451416db4258f63.jpg

 

I'm delighted with this loco's performance, and looks; as I hope Jesse will be. Geoff Haynes will paint it, and then it'll be on its way down under next year.

 

666286896_Trainsrunning24C2.jpg.5170014f0b333e7fdcd9e9dd90338aed.jpg

 

Paint it as with this one, seen running on Bytham's LNER weekend last year. It was really built for Grantham, and is now Jonathan Weallean's property. 

 

I've now built three DJH C2s. The other was the one rejected by my 'customer' as being way below 'his' standard (the only loco I've ever built which anyone has been dissatisfied with). One observation of his was that the tender made a noise as it went over pointwork! At first I was 'hurt', but then I saw his layout at a show. Non-prototypical, an unworkable trackplan, incorrect liveries on carriages, non-working signals (good job, because their siting was nonsense), no lamps on locos, no crews, and it ran like a bag of rusty nails. I'm now delighted I didn't match his 'standard'! Why should I lower mine to do so? 

 

 

Looks magnificent, once DCC has been applied it probably won’t work......those x-ray eyes of yours that makes DCC stuff stop working! 
 

see you in a week, at the Doc’s now awaiting for yes or no! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Hello Tony

 

You forgot it has to entertain the public. Here is the Pig Lane crew rehearsing before a gig exhibition.

 

 

Good morning Clive,

 

'You forgot it has to entertain the public.'

 

I didn't forget. If a layout (to me) answers 'yes' to all of my questions, then it's axiomatic that it's entertaining. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I'd post this here as it's a modelling thread rather than many of the others (which tend to be about wish-listing, unpacking boxes and manufacturer rumours). And it is that with my recent Fox transfers order I received this instruction that I'd not seen before (and perhaps others haven't either so it might be of interest):

 

DSCN1323.JPG.1fd6084aad08b35a6a67ff6334fa2edd.JPG

 

 A couple of comments, if I may . . .  'hot', rather than 'warm', gives the impression of possibly hotter that DHW at 60'C. And presumably the washing up liquid is as a wetting agent to break surface tension but surely with it's usual additives (glycerine to make the crockery shine, lanolin to be kind to hands [that do dishes], perfumes and probably foam stabilisers) is it the best recommendation? What about something like this: https://www.jacksonsart.com/golden-flow-release-119ml?channable=e17573.MTE0MjI0&___store=jacksonsart_en&gclid=CjwKCAiAzanuBRAZEiwA5yf4ugKikeKni_-c4Lt5ivZZ1VYGbLD2bgGPLKMZH23AlaTW9RdPs3X98hoCaKsQAvD_BwE

 

 

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Clive,

 

'You forgot it has to entertain the public.'

 

I didn't forget. If a layout (to me) answers 'yes' to all of my questions, then it's axiomatic that it's entertaining. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

 

i would disagree with that. I visited a show recently which had several (probably 8 out of a total of 12) layouts that were based on diesel depots of some type. All DCC, all sound fitted. They were well built, looked realistic and fulfilled all your criteria. Technically the running was top quality. Yet the entire operation on all of them was "noisy diesel crawling at walking pace light engine".

 

We didn't stay long as the Phil Spector "wall of sound" and the dreadfully boring operating drove us out.

 

So I would add well thought out, realistic and entertaining operation to any criteria on exhibition layouts.

  • Agree 5
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, grahame said:

I thought I'd post this here as it's a modelling thread rather than many of the others (which tend to be about wish-listing, unpacking boxes and manufacturer rumours). And it is that with my recent Fox transfers order I received this instruction that I'd not seen before (and perhaps others haven't either so it might be of interest):

 

DSCN1323.JPG.1fd6084aad08b35a6a67ff6334fa2edd.JPG

 

 A couple of comments, if I may . . .  'hot', rather than 'warm', gives the impression of possibly hotter that DHW at 60'C. And presumably the washing up liquid is as a wetting agent to break surface tension but surely with it's usual additives (glycerine to make the crockery shine, lanolin to be kind to hands [that do dishes], perfumes and probably foam stabilisers) is it the best recommendation? What about something like this: https://www.jacksonsart.com/golden-flow-release-119ml?channable=e17573.MTE0MjI0&___store=jacksonsart_en&gclid=CjwKCAiAzanuBRAZEiwA5yf4ugKikeKni_-c4Lt5ivZZ1VYGbLD2bgGPLKMZH23AlaTW9RdPs3X98hoCaKsQAvD_BwE

 

 

Interesting,

 

Hot water? When applying transfers I only ever use 'warm' water (just above centrally-heated {if winter} room temperature) which has been filtered - we live in limestone country. After the transfers have been released, they're applied to the model using 'Decalfix' or similar, and moved into final position with a cocktail stick. I've never used washing up liquid.

 

It works for me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
46 minutes ago, grahame said:

I thought I'd post this here as it's a modelling thread rather than many of the others (which tend to be about wish-listing, unpacking boxes and manufacturer rumours). And it is that with my recent Fox transfers order I received this instruction that I'd not seen before (and perhaps others haven't either so it might be of interest):

 

DSCN1323.JPG.1fd6084aad08b35a6a67ff6334fa2edd.JPG

 

 A couple of comments, if I may . . .  'hot', rather than 'warm', gives the impression of possibly hotter that DHW at 60'C. And presumably the washing up liquid is as a wetting agent to break surface tension but surely with it's usual additives (glycerine to make the crockery shine, lanolin to be kind to hands [that do dishes], perfumes and probably foam stabilisers) is it the best recommendation? What about something like this: https://www.jacksonsart.com/golden-flow-release-119ml?channable=e17573.MTE0MjI0&___store=jacksonsart_en&gclid=CjwKCAiAzanuBRAZEiwA5yf4ugKikeKni_-c4Lt5ivZZ1VYGbLD2bgGPLKMZH23AlaTW9RdPs3X98hoCaKsQAvD_BwE

 

 

 

I don’t understand why Fox recommend this.  I have found that their transfers with these instructions still work perfectly well with plain tepid water.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
44 minutes ago, grahame said:

I thought I'd post this here as it's a modelling thread rather than many of the others (which tend to be about wish-listing, unpacking boxes and manufacturer rumours). And it is that with my recent Fox transfers order I received this instruction that I'd not seen before (and perhaps others haven't either so it might be of interest):

 

DSCN1323.JPG.1fd6084aad08b35a6a67ff6334fa2edd.JPG

 

 A couple of comments, if I may . . .  'hot', rather than 'warm', gives the impression of possibly hotter that DHW at 60'C. And presumably the washing up liquid is as a wetting agent to break surface tension but surely with it's usual additives (glycerine to make the crockery shine, lanolin to be kind to hands [that do dishes], perfumes and probably foam stabilisers) is it the best recommendation? What about something like this: https://www.jacksonsart.com/golden-flow-release-119ml?channable=e17573.MTE0MjI0&___store=jacksonsart_en&gclid=CjwKCAiAzanuBRAZEiwA5yf4ugKikeKni_-c4Lt5ivZZ1VYGbLD2bgGPLKMZH23AlaTW9RdPs3X98hoCaKsQAvD_BwE

 

 

 

 

I've followed Fox's instructions without any difficulties, if that's any help. I pour some boiling water (from the kettle) into a deep saucer, put in a drop of washing up liquid, then take it upstairs. By the time I get there it's definitely hot rather than boiling and I haven't noticed any adverse effects with the washing up liquid. I also use Micro Sol to wet the area where the transfer's going to be, then apply it over the transfer once it's on. As for varnishes, I do use whatever's to hand - mosttly Humbrol satin or matt as I find it works as stated.

 

Al

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

i would disagree with that. I visited a show recently which had several (probably 8 out of a total of 12) layouts that were based on diesel depots of some type. All DCC, all sound fitted. They were well built, looked realistic and fulfilled all your criteria. Technically the running was top quality. Yet the entire operation on all of them was "noisy diesel crawling at walking pace light engine".

 

We didn't stay long as the Phil Spector "wall of sound" and the dreadfully boring operating drove us out.

 

So I would add well thought out, realistic and entertaining operation to any criteria on exhibition layouts.

But are all those formulaic diesel depots you mention really 'realistic', Tony? 

 

If my observations are anything to go by, most are not. Why? Because they're far too small. 

 

During my travels with a camera over the last 50 years, I've visited many diesel depots and taken pictures (many of which have now been published). Even small ones, like Buxton, would need a substantial amount of space to accommodate them 'realistically'. Yet, I see so many 'throbbing' (and very annoying) depictions of diesel depots which are not realistic and, if they were real, would be unworkable because of the tight restrictions of their model footprint. 

 

So, no, at least to me, they would not answer (some of) my questions posed with a 'yes'. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

No plane pictures I'm afraid (just plain)................

 

With Aussie, Jesse Sim's imminent visit, I thought I'd better get on and complete the DJH C2 I'm building for him.

 

2019956266_JesseSimcompleteC201.jpg.73c6bca7591c4d396edc1007632bcee3.jpg

 

 

 

 

I'm curious about the matchboard carriage in LNER livery behind the tender. That's not typical of main line stock on Tony's layout. May we know more about it please?

 

If the details have already appeared I apologize for my inability to find time to keep up with everything on this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Compared with some of the work on this thread this is very humble effort. However,  having been given and much appreciated advice from Tony on securing crankpins and washers I felt honour bound to (finally) get a decent chassis under at least one of my Hornby Granges. This is the result of a few hours work yesterday and my first attempt at building a chassis that will have to run.

 

Most will probably recognise it's a Comet product and, using the Poppy's builder box, it went together well once I got into it. There are many distractions at the moment (including decorating the kitchen, never a good experience) but my hope is to have a working chassis within the next few days. I'm hoping to tackle a coach kit after this but I have two more Granges to do eventually so I want to take my time to perfect a method that can be repeated easily.

 

Once again thanks or the advice Tony. It was a good feeling when I left the workbench last evening!

 

46FFDB04-9C89-4BE1-91FB-BB8671AFE79F_1_201_a.jpeg.a3bb0cb0ef5f5aacdee4114070039a8b.jpeg

 

 

  • Like 13
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

i would disagree with that. I visited a show recently which had several (probably 8 out of a total of 12) layouts that were based on diesel depots of some type. All DCC, all sound fitted. They were well built, looked realistic and fulfilled all your criteria. Technically the running was top quality. Yet the entire operation on all of them was "noisy diesel crawling at walking pace light engine".

 

We didn't stay long as the Phil Spector "wall of sound" and the dreadfully boring operating drove us out.

 

 

For me it doesn't necessarily only apply to diesel depots, I've seen and heard some pretty dull and noisy steam depots that have failed to entertain.

  • Agree 5
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...