Wright writes.....

[Pebbles]

1 hour ago, 43078shildoncountydurham said:

Hi Tony and the gang,

 

Hope you can all help, I was given the below from a friend, It was his uncles who past away,  I gather it’s a 60139 Sea eagle metal body kit...

1, any idea what the manufacturer is/was?
2, can I get a kit chassis for it?

 
Thank you as always..

 

Craig

 

[Pebbles]

1 hour ago, 43078shildoncountydurham said:

Hi Tony and the gang,

 

Hope you can all help, I was given the below from a friend, It was his uncles who past away,  I gather it’s a 60139 Sea eagle metal body kit...

1, any idea what the manufacturer is/was?
2, can I get a kit chassis for it?

 
Thank you as always..

 

Craig

 

[Pebbles]

south East Finecast A2 Dave Ellis can do a chassis and tender.

[Pebbles]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

'Was any loco from the same stable ever anything other than lumpen?'

 

Probably not, Graeme; probably not! 

 

That said, such kits are what you make them.............. Or make of them............

 

 

Is this really so bad? Of course, I've used substitute parts where necessary (the Westinghouse pump was a lumpen blob, as were the buffers), but I didn't have to resort to too much filling. In fact, solder filled any slight gaps. I've forgotten to fit the injectors beneath the cab - this evening's tiny job. 

 

 

A bit crude, yes, but still enjoyable to build. 

 

 

Of course, I don't expect it to be in the same class as this B12/3. I built this from a PDK kit and Ian Rathbone painted it perfectly. 

 

Given how much crisper the etched brass example is, does the cast metal one show any advantage?

 

 

It damn well does! Here's the McGowan B12/3 romping round LB on 14 kit-built bogies and a horsebox.  Despite its being ballasted, this is way beyond the PDK B12/3's capabilities. In case folk think this is nonsense, there is a prototype precedence. In September 1950, Grantham's 61553 took over the 14-coach 'West Riding' after 60112 failed at the Lincolnshire town. Despite having to take water at Huntingdon, the veteran arrived at Kings Cross unassisted only 50 minutes down. 

 

Out of interest (not having a Hornby B12/3, and not needing one), I tried a Hornby A3 and Hornby A4 respectively on this train. All they did was polish the rails! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

[Pebbles]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

'Was any loco from the same stable ever anything other than lumpen?'

 

Probably not, Graeme; probably not! 

 

That said, such kits are what you make them.............. Or make of them............

 

 

Is this really so bad? Of course, I've used substitute parts where necessary (the Westinghouse pump was a lumpen blob, as were the buffers), but I didn't have to resort to too much filling. In fact, solder filled any slight gaps. I've forgotten to fit the injectors beneath the cab - this evening's tiny job. 

 

 

A bit crude, yes, but still enjoyable to build. 

 

 

Of course, I don't expect it to be in the same class as this B12/3. I built this from a PDK kit and Ian Rathbone painted it perfectly. 

 

Given how much crisper the etched brass example is, does the cast metal one show any advantage?

 

 

It damn well does! Here's the McGowan B12/3 romping round LB on 14 kit-built bogies and a horsebox.  Despite its being ballasted, this is way beyond the PDK B12/3's capabilities. In case folk think this is nonsense, there is a prototype precedence. In September 1950, Grantham's 61553 took over the 14-coach 'West Riding' after 60112 failed at the Lincolnshire town. Despite having to take water at Huntingdon, the veteran arrived at Kings Cross unassisted only 50 minutes down. 

 

Out of interest (not having a Hornby B12/3, and not needing one), I tried a Hornby A3 and Hornby A4 respectively on this train. All they did was polish the rails! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

For many Years McGowen produce both B12/1 and B12/2. The B12/3 was evolved from the t

[Tony Wright]

59 minutes ago, 43078shildoncountydurham said:

Hi Tony and the gang,

 

Hope you can all help, I was given the below from a friend, It was his uncles who past away,  I gather it’s a 60139 Sea eagle metal body kit...

1, any idea what the manufacturer is/was?
2, can I get a kit chassis for it?

 
Thank you as always..

 

Craig

Craig,

 

It looks like a Wills A2 which has been stretched into an A1 by the addition of a new central footplate section and longer smokebox. 

 

However, I don't think the deflectors are Wills (unless they're cast metal, not etched). 

 

In the days before DJH brought out their A1 kit, I built my A1s by adapting Wills A2s, scratch-building chassis for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of five, this is the only one I have left, though, because of its visual limitations, I hardly ever use it. Still, it is all my own work, including the painting/weathering. 

 

As well as scratch-building the chassis, I made a new central footplate section and turned a new smokebox from copper central heating pipe. 

 

A chassis for yours? Does Comet make an A1 chassis? If not, an A3 chassis or A4 chassis has the same coupled wheelbase and (give or take) the same motion. The Cartazzi truck is in a different position and so is the bogie (though the wheelbase is the same). 

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Barry Ten]

No prizes for spotting that this is just a dummy trap point as well:

 

 

I'm sure someone will know, but presumably the signal ought to be set back a little further from the end of the trap - or the trap moved a bit nearer the junction. I think the outer rail is soldered to the main running rail, but the one in the middle is just glued in place. I'm still working my way nearer with the point rodding.

 

Al

[Tony Wright]

2 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

No prizes for spotting that this is just a dummy trap point as well:

 

 

I'm sure someone will know, but presumably the signal ought to be set back a little further from the end of the trap - or the trap moved a bit nearer the junction. I think the outer rail is soldered to the main running rail, but the one in the middle is just glued in place. I'm still working my way nearer with the point rodding.

 

Al

Thanks for this Al,

 

The signal needs to be moved at least three/four inches to the left of the picture. With it at danger, a loco immediately adjacent to it would be in danger of being derailed.

 

Non-working trap points? Fine; the eye just accepts them as being there and they're dead easy to 'install'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

15 minutes ago, Pebbles said:

For many Years McGowen produce both B12/1 and B12/2. The B12/3 was evolved from the t

 

 

W&M Collectables had some at Warley and Peterborough.....................

[43078shildoncountydurham]

24 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Craig,

 

It looks like a Wills A2 which has been stretched into an A1 by the addition of a new central footplate section and longer smokebox. 

 

However, I don't think the deflectors are Wills (unless they're cast metal, not etched). 

 

In the days before DJH brought out their A1 kit, I built my A1s by adapting Wills A2s, scratch-building chassis for them. 

 

 

 

 

 

Out of five, this is the only one I have left, though, because of its visual limitations, I hardly ever use it. Still, it is all my own work, including the painting/weathering. 

 

As well as scratch-building the chassis, I made a new central footplate section and turned a new smokebox from copper central heating pipe. 

 

A chassis for yours? Does Comet make an A1 chassis? If not, an A3 chassis or A4 chassis has the same coupled wheelbase and (give or take) the same motion. The Cartazzi truck is in a different position and so is the bogie (though the wheelbase is the same). 

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Thanks chaps,

 

Was thinking an easy way into kit building, you all have a great 2020..

[St Enodoc]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Yes, glue, John!

 

How else could plastic chairs be fixed to plastic sleepers? 

 

When Norman Solomon made all the trackwork for the scenic side of Little Bytham, I foolishly forgot to make plain to him the need for a trap point protecting the Down north lay-by's access to the Down slow. Thus, he didn't make it.

 

Now, this niggled me for ages, until Norman came back at a later date (if ever he's working in the area, he's always invited). I asked him whether it could be installed retrospectively. It could, but here's the total cheat - it's just a dummy! 

 

 

 

 

It doesn't work at all, so really is useless as a trap point. However, that's not the point (pun intended!); the eye is aware of its presence and just accepts it. It really does finish the lay-by off.

 

Speaking more of trap points (is it pedantry to insist upon their being present?), no real, main line railway would allow direct access from a siding or loop to a running road without a trap point or a sand drag guarding a move. And, not just main lines - the small GWR terminus at Moretonhamstead had one.  

 

It's similar with access to dead-end sidings off a running road (unless it's at termini). To gain access, a train must first run forward, then reverse in. 

 

The whole principles are based on safety. I keep on mentioning 'observation of the prototype', how a real railway (in steam days) was laid out and how it was operated. So many made-up model railway trackplans are just nonsense. In reality, no Board of Trade inspector would pass them! 

 

Yet, when I mention observation (and I do a lot!), from some directions I'm 'accused' of pedantry and even of being a zealot, or an elitist! I once criticised a layout in a magazine built with beginners in mind, where no trackwork safety features had been included at all. 'Most don't know' was the response. How sad - a wonderful opportunity to actually educate modellers (and not just beginners) was just discarded! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony, I was alluding to your preferred methods for building locos when I made that comment, with my tongue planted very firmly in my cheek!

 

Yes, of course you need to use glue if you are using plastic timbers and/or chairs. However, as you know, I use copperclad for pointwork and so soldering is the only way to go. For a trap point like that I replace the requisite number of timbers/sleepers with copperclad and solder the rail(s) in place. All my trap points are dummies too by the way.

 

Now, you've raised another talking point:

 

"It's similar with access to dead-end sidings off a running road (unless it's at termini). To gain access, a train must first run forward, then reverse in."

 

As with any rule, there are exceptions. At Par, on which my own Porthmellyn Road is based, there was, after track rationalisation in the 1970s, a signalled route from the down main into the Up loop and sidings, controlled by a ground disc. This route led directly to the buffer stops in the sidings, by way of a hand point for good measure. All I've done is to backdate the arrangement to suit the way I operate the layout.

 

I'm sure there were/are plenty of other examples around. So, as you say, the key is observation of what was done in real life rather than necessarily what the book said. Another example of "well, it works in practice but what about in theory?" (hummingbirds anyone?).

[john new]

Spent today building some baseboards for my grandsons' (x2) layout which will (hopefully) be finished off tomorrow. Yes we could have bought them in, and the woodwork would probably have been to a better standard if we had; but, as Tony says, where is the personal investment in that. 

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by john new
Punctuation corrected

[Clive Mortimore]

Trap points are very important, as is getting the right type in the right places. A wide to gauge trap point on the centre siding between platform 3 and 4 on Sheffield Exchange. The blades can be made to move, they are held in place by track pins. I still need to make a mechanism which will work the blades in opposite directions with one point motor .

 

 

Another reason for not getting it working, there is no room on the control panel in the area its stud contact should be, bad forward planning.

[Chamby]

20 minutes ago, Clive Mortimore said:

Trap points are very important, as is getting the right type in the right places. A wide to gauge trap point on the centre siding between platform 3 and 4 on Sheffield Exchange. The blades can be made to move, they are held in place by track pins. I still need to make a mechanism which will work the blades in opposite directions with one point motor .

 

 

Another reason for not getting it working, there is no room on the control panel in the area its stud contact should be, bad forward planning.

 

Nice one Clive... it also looks remarkably like a re-railer I have seen used somewhere on a fiddle yard!     

[Jol Wilkinson]

10 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

Nice one Clive... it also looks remarkably like a re-railer I have seen used somewhere on a fiddle yard!     

 

Are you thinking of this, one of the traverser exit line re-railers on London Road. Direction of travel is  right to left.

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Tony, I was alluding to your preferred methods for building locos when I made that comment, with my tongue planted very firmly in my cheek!

 

Yes, of course you need to use glue if you are using plastic timbers and/or chairs. However, as you know, I use copperclad for pointwork and so soldering is the only way to go. For a trap point like that I replace the requisite number of timbers/sleepers with copperclad and solder the rail(s) in place. All my trap points are dummies too by the way.

 

Now, you've raised another talking point:

 

"It's similar with access to dead-end sidings off a running road (unless it's at termini). To gain access, a train must first run forward, then reverse in."

 

As with any rule, there are exceptions. At Par, on which my own Porthmellyn Road is based, there was, after track rationalisation in the 1970s, a signalled route from the down main into the Up loop and sidings, controlled by a ground disc. This route led directly to the buffer stops in the sidings, by way of a hand point for good measure. All I've done is to backdate the arrangement to suit the way I operate the layout.

 

I'm sure there were/are plenty of other examples around. So, as you say, the key is observation of what was done in real life rather than necessarily what the book said. Another example of "well, it works in practice but what about in theory?" (hummingbirds anyone?).

Thanks John,

 

There are always exceptions to every rule. I suppose I was generalising (a dangerous thing to do!). 

 

Certainly, at Little Bytham (and at every ECML station layout I can think of) no dead-end siding can be accessed off a running line without reversal, and no access to a running line can be achieved without protection from a trap point or stub siding (occasionally a stub siding might be used to park a van or such). The notion of being able to run directly forwards into dead-end siding off a running line is something no engineer would advise, and any loop leading on to another line (say two lines into one, slow to fast) would be protected by a trap point or sand drag. 

 

Of course, this is in the days of steam. I recall reading about an incident at Winsford some years ago where a slow train (Pacers, I think) ran from the platform road on to the Down fast through a red signal and was immediately hit by an overtaking electric loco. The protecting trap point/sand drag had been removed because 'In all its years of existence it had never been used!'. 

 

Some examples of track protection on Little Bytham................... These shots have been used before, but in a different context.

 

 

Protection at the south end. The Down fast (third track from the left) is protected from the Down south lay-by (second track from the left) by a stub siding, and this lay-by (being a dead end) can only be accessed by reversing in. 

 

To the far right, a stub siding protects the Up slow from the goods yard. To access the goods yard initially from the Up slow, reversal is necessary at one point or another. The same is so for access from the Down side. 

 

 

Though the trackwork at the north end looks slightly complex, it's all safety first! 

 

From right to left respectively we have the goods yard headshunt, the Up slow, the Up lay-by (dead end), the Up fast (on which the express freight is running), Down fast, Down slow and Down north lay-by (dead end). Note that it's not possible to access the goods yard directly from either the Up slow or the Up fast; it can only be achieved by reversing first into the lay-by. Note also, right at the bottom, that the hand-controlled double slip on the headshunt has to have its levers giving potential access to a running line unlocked by the signal box. Again, safety first.

 

 

This shot appears in the current RM, but it shows the stub siding protecting both the Up slow and Up fast lines from the Up lay-by (dead end), access to which can only be achieved by reversal. A runaway might inconvenience the signalman, but anything would be travelling slowly. 

 

Once more, it comes down to observation. How did the real railway do things? Copy that then. 

 

I've mentioned protection where two running lines converge. 

 

 

At the top of Stoke Bank, the four-track ECML became two to pass through Stoke Tunnel. At the end of the Down slow there was a sand drag, protecting the Down fast. 

 

 

It ended in some heavy timbers, and was vital in case of a driver misreading the road. 

 

Such installations were everywhere (Norton Fitzwarren in the War?), though, with modernisation, they're disappearing fast. 

 

Do folk see why now I always advocate modelling an actual location? Even if they don't, observe prototype practice. And that's safety first!

 

Perhaps, with observation of the real thing, we might not get so many layouts where the trackplan is nonsense! However, I doubt it. 

 

So many seem so tiny these days. Are there that many modellers space-starved?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

26 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Are you thinking of this, one of the traverser exit line re-railers on London Road. Direction of travel is  right to left.

 

 

 

 

What a clever idea!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[LNER4479]

11 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Another example of "well, it works in practice but what about in theory?" (hummingbirds anyone?).

Wasn't it bumblebees, John?

[Barry Ten]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for this Al,

 

The signal needs to be moved at least three/four inches to the left of the picture. With it at danger, a loco immediately adjacent to it would be in danger of being derailed.

 

Non-working trap points? Fine; the eye just accepts them as being there and they're dead easy to 'install'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks for that, Tony. I've had a look under the boards and there's nothing in the way of relocating that signal to the left, so it shouldn't be a difficult job.

 

For the sake of my own understanding, when you talk of the loco being adjacent to it at danger, does that mean that it was permissible for part of a loco to

be next to the signal, or slightly beyond it, rather than stopped in advance of it? Forgive me if I've misinterpreted your words. 

[St Enodoc]

12 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

Wasn't it bumblebees, John?

Who knows? Who cares? Certainly not the bumblebees and/or hummingbirds, who just get on with it!

[St Enodoc]

24 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

Thanks for that, Tony. I've had a look under the boards and there's nothing in the way of relocating that signal to the left, so it shouldn't be a difficult job.

 

For the sake of my own understanding, when you talk of the loco being adjacent to it at danger, does that mean that it was permissible for part of a loco to

be next to the signal, or slightly beyond it, rather than stopped in advance of it? Forgive me if I've misinterpreted your words. 

The short answer, Al, is no.

 

Just a correction to your terminology (I was corrected by Mike the Stationmaster and once he tells you something you stay told!) - if you are standing facing the signal in the direction of travel to which it applies, anything in front of you is "in advance" and anything behind you is "in rear", as is your own rear of course.

 

In your photo, in advance is to the right of the signal arm and in rear is to the left.

 

The face of the arm is the "do not pass" point.

 

So, the slightly longer answer is that no part of a vehicle should be in advance of the face of the arm when it is On. Consequently, the signal arm must be in rear of the switch blades of any facing points that it is protecting, or the fouling point of any trailing points. That's what Tony was alluding to - the signal should be moved to the left so that it is in rear of the trap point switches.

Edited December 31, 2019 by St Enodoc

[LNERandBR]

40 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Some examples of track protection on Little Bytham................... These shots have been used before, but in a different context.

 

 

Protection at the south end. The Down fast (third track from the left) is protected from the Down south lay-by (second track from the left) by a stub siding, and this lay-by (being a dead end) can only be accessed by reversing in. 

 

To the far right, a stub siding protects the Up slow from the goods yard. To access the goods yard initially from the Up slow, reversal is necessary at one point or another. The same is so for access from the Down side. 

 

 

Though the trackwork at the north end looks slightly complex, it's all safety first! 

 

From right to left respectively we have the goods yard headshunt, the Up slow, the Up lay-by (dead end), the Up fast (on which the express freight is running), Down fast, Down slow and Down north lay-by (dead end). Note that it's not possible to access the goods yard directly from either the Up slow or the Up fast; it can only be achieved by reversing first into the lay-by. Note also, right at the bottom, that the hand-controlled double slip on the headshunt has to have its levers giving potential access to a running line unlocked by the signal box. Again, safety first.

 

 

This shot appears in the current RM, but it shows the stub siding protecting both the Up slow and Up fast lines from the Up lay-by (dead end), access to which can only be achieved by reversal. A runaway might inconvenience the signalman, but anything would be travelling slowly. 

 

Once more, it comes down to observation. How did the real railway do things? Copy that then. 

 

 

 

I never realised that it was permissible for lay-by sidings to be positioned between the main Slow and Fast lines. I've always thought that they'd be on the outside of the formation. Is that something unique to Little Bytham or was that done in other areas of the ECML?

[Barry Ten]

Ah - I think I was being a bit dim! I took Tony's mention of 3 - 4 inches to be actual layout inches, whereas (Tony will correct me if I'm wrong!) it was scale inches, which of course makes total sense to me now! The benefits of strong coffee.

[thegreenhowards]

Tony,

 

Thanks for your trap point illustration. They look good and easy to achieve...that is until I look at where they’re needed on Gresley Jn.! Can I ask for some advice? I have two sets of sidings that I think need protecting. The first is this one (sidings with five coal wagons and pipe and van):

 

I seem to have three options:

1. Fit it between the two points in the middle bottom of the photo;

2. Fit separate trap points on each siding; or

3. Relay the sidings (which probably won’t happen).

 

The second siding is below (with the coal wagons):

Should the trap point go inside the ‘gate’ (which isn’t yet built) or between the gate and the point onto the down slow? If the latter, should it face directly into the brick wall/ boiler house in the back scene as the alternative would be onto the running line which doesn’t make sense!

 

I’m sure you will tell me that this sort of question is why I should model a prototype, but all I can say to that is ‘next time’. In the meantime I want to finish Gresley Jn as accurately as I can.

 

Andy

[St Enodoc]

4 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Tony,

 

Thanks for your trap point illustration. They look good and easy to achieve...that is until I look at where they’re needed on Gresley Jn.! Can I ask for some advice? I have two sets of sidings that I think need protecting. The first is this one (sidings with five coal wagons and pipe and van):

 

I seem to have three options:

1. Fit it between the two points in the middle bottom of the photo;

2. Fit separate trap points on each siding; or

3. Relay the sidings (which probably won’t happen).

 

The second siding is below (with the coal wagons):

Should the trap point go inside the ‘gate’ (which isn’t yet built) or between the gate and the point onto the down slow? If the latter, should it face directly into the brick wall/ boiler house in the back scene as the alternative would be onto the running line which doesn’t make sense!

 

I’m sure you will tell me that this sort of question is why I should model a prototype, but all I can say to that is ‘next time’. In the meantime I want to finish Gresley Jn as accurately as I can.

 

Andy

First photo - I'd go for option 2. The point with the black ballast would probably be a hand point so the two traps would work together as a crossover with the point at the bottom right, from a single lever in the signal box.

 

Second photo - I'd put it outside the gate, leading away from the running lines towards the backscene as you say.