Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, Gravy Train said:

Hi Tony,

thank you for the kind comments and the photos and to you to Mike for the Box photo, I remember this model had an unusual slate roof arrangement but perhaps it was typical for the Maryport & Carlisle.

Little Bytham, looking impressive and point rodding, once started there is no turning back with this element of detailing.

Peter

Thanks Peter,

 

I hope you're keeping safe and well.

 

Ah, the point rodding. I must admit there were times when I questioned myself why I started it, but now, with most of it finished, it's been worth it.

 

Have you volunteered to do the rodding for Gilbert Barnatt's Peterborough North? Having made such a wonderful job of the buildings for it, you'd be perfect for the task. There's a lot needed! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

[Theakerr]

6 hours ago, gr.king said:

 

Have pictures of your Grimsby layout appeared on here at all, or elsewhere please? If not, could you treat us to a few glimpses?

I have put up an odd one, mostly of locomotives.  Will see what else I have and put some more up.

[Atso]

38 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

Indeed, he did. Though the GN 56'6'' BGs (that were cascaded to the GC section and operated until the 60s) are not in the Isinglass catalogue.

 

I believe that a number of people on RM web have ordered kits. I'm looking forwards to the results of these builds being published in order to get a feel for them.

 

If you're talking about the ECJS/GN type covering dia. 38, 39, 39A, 286, 287, etc, Isinglass do a drawing (No. 4/144) but it is listed in the Composite carriages section of the catalog for some reason. I only stumbled across it by accident when searching for the dia. 164K Composite for the Cambridge set.

 

I've had little success at printing 4mm scale stuff on my printer - although I know Mike Trice has managed it on his machine (same type). Mike has also been a great help keeping me on the straight and narrow regarding getting details more or less correct on my efforts - it is his knowledge and tutoring that has really allowed me to improve on my earlier efforts and he deserves much credit here.

Edited April 7, 2020 by Atso

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Atso said:

 

If you're talking about the ECJS/GN type covering dia. 38, 39, 39A, 286, 287, etc, Isinglass do a drawing (No. 4/144) but it is listed in the Composite carriages section of the catalog for some reason. I only stumbled across it by accident when searching for the dia. 164K Composite for the Cambridge set.

 

I've had little success at printing 4mm scale stuff on my printer - although I know Mike Trice has managed it on his machine (same type). Mike has also been a great help keeping me on the straight and narrow regarding getting details more or less correct on my efforts - it is his knowledge and tutoring that has really allowed me to improve on my earlier efforts and he deserves much credit here.

 

Thanks Steve,

 

I see it listed in composites rather than luggage vans, because it's a composite drawing? I see, how odd........... Steve Banks says there were eleven cascaded to the GC from several diagrammes. I have quite a number of photographs of them, they were quite prominent on a number of GC trains, one was often the leading bogie van on the Marylebone Nottingham Newspaper train. They were also pretty cool looking.  They had a number of features that mark the evolution  from the earlier bogie vans through to the LNER 61'6'' types.

 

You can't get much better than Mike Trice as an adviser. I can honestly say that your carriages really go further than just details, they capture the shape amazingly well.

[copleyhill007]

Fabulous photos Tony - that is the sequence of traffic and the development of the point rodding. I'm also bowled over by the standard of modelling in all aspects by rmwebbers. This is a great daily read and far better than the Metro daily newspaper. Thanks to everyone. Stay safe.

[Mark C]

Hello Tony

 

I think it does work - especially as the bridges integrate so naturally with their surroundings.  I'm probably biased though: the M&GN section is my favourite part (even though I live on the ECML) - I am about to start a layout based in Norfolk, for which Tom Foster (at your recommendation) has expertly weathered two Ivatt 4MTs, a D16 and two brake vans to get me started (see his page on here for photos).  The self-isolation/working from home regime has generated a resurgence in wagon building too...

 

Keep the photos of that end of the layout coming please.

 

Best regards

Mark

 

[Chamby]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

Any thoughts appreciated, please.

 

Do others have solutions for getting their trains on/offstage without the curves looking too tight (other than not having tight curves at all)?

 

 

I think you have done the right thing, Tony.  The M&GN as is, appears to offer much more potential than a static line would, it has been the source of many excellent photographs over many posts on here.  The tightening curves are invaluable, as I have also found:

 

At the risk of teaching people to suck eggs, I had a similar problem with my own layout which is just six feet wide but because of wide platforms along one length it has restricted the radius across the ends of the layout to 24 inches, with similar issues that you have recounted re: tightness and overhang.  Initially I built the curves as a simple 24 inch radius leading directly into a straight section of scenic track, the original thinking being that I wanted to maximise the straight length along the longer sides of the layout:

 

 

But for the reasons that you describe it just didn't look right, so I decided to create a transition curve to ease the approach to the curve and improve its visual appearance.  I used progressively larger radii tracksetta curves to form the transition:

 

 

This shows the difference between the outer line on the new transition curve, compared with the inner track on the original constant radius:

 

 

And finally the realigned track work, both tracks along the transition curve.  I have been pleased with the visual improvement, especially seeing as how little extra distance the track swings out towards the outer baseboard edge.  This simple change has dramatically improved both running and the visual impact of the tight curve, as the eye is mislead by the easier radius at the start of the curve, the realigned section has yet to be ballasted here.  Trackwork is PECO code 75 bullhead, with DCC concepts sleepers soldered/pinned/glued at the baseboard joins for extra strength:

 

 

As luck would have it, I am now delighted to be in a position to widen the layout by another two feet, so this curve will be re-engineered yet again to a minimum 33 inch radius, again with transition curves, to improve things further.  Then, fingers crossed, scenification can begin in earnest.

 

Some of us have to learn things the hard way!

Edited April 7, 2020 by Chamby

[Woodcock29]

4 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

Indeed, he did. Though the GN 56'6'' BGs (that were cascaded to the GC section and operated until the 60s) are not in the Isinglass catalogue.

 

I believe that a number of people on RM web have ordered kits. I'm looking forwards to the results of these builds being published in order to get a feel for them.

I have two on the way at the moment. Dia 164F and 78T.

 

Currently I'm building two of Bill Bedford's 3D printed 6 wheelers and some wagons as a distraction from the finicky business of the somersault signals!

 

I would love a GN 56'6" BG. I'm sure Andy says he can print anything John did drawings of or that the customer can provide drawings of.

 

Andrew

[jwealleans]

Quote

I would love a GN 56'6" BG.

 

It was my understanding that Rupert Brown was drawing it up.   I can't ask him at York this weekend, but the next time we communicate I will mention it.

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

I think you have done the right thing, Tony.  The M&GN as is, appears to offer much more potential than a static line would, it has been the source of many excellent photographs over many posts on here.  The tightening curves are invaluable, as I have also found:

 

At the risk of teaching people to suck eggs, I had a similar problem with my own layout which is just six feet wide but because of wide platforms along one length it has restricted the radius across the ends of the layout to 24 inches, with similar issues that you have recounted re: tightness and overhang.  Initially I built the curves as a simple 24 inch radius leading directly into a straight section of scenic track, the original thinking being that I wanted to maximise the straight length along the longer sides of the layout:

 

 

But for the reasons that you describe it just didn't look right, so I decided to create a transition curve to ease the approach to the curve and improve its visual appearance.  I used progressively larger radii tracksetta curves to form the transition:

 

 

This shows the difference between the outer line on the new transition curve, compared with the inner track on the original constant radius:

 

 

And finally the realigned track work, both tracks along the transition curve.  I have been pleased with the visual improvement, especially seeing as how little extra distance the track swings out towards the outer baseboard edge.  This simple change has dramatically improved both running and the visual impact of the tight curve, as the eye is mislead by the easier radius at the start of the curve, the realigned section has yet to be ballasted here.  Trackwork is PECO code 75 bullhead, with DCC concepts sleepers soldered/pinned/glued at the baseboard joins for extra strength:

 

 

As luck would have it, I am now delighted to be in a position to widen the layout by another two feet, so this curve will be re-engineered yet again to a minimum 33 inch radius, again with transition curves, to improve things further.  Then, fingers crossed, scenification can begin in earnest.

 

Some of us have to learn things the hard way!

It's very-effective Phil.

 

Are you going to put overbridges in the middle of the curves to further disguise the tight radii? It is a most-useful visual dodge. 

 

One other compromise (or series of compromises) I've had to employ is building in so much side-slop in the chassis I've built for locos on the M&GNR section in order to make sure they go round. The largest loco is a B1. There are a further eight others on the main line and none of those will go round 'upstairs' as it were. The same is so for the B12s, K2s, J6s or any other loco classes which coincide between the two systems. I have to say, I find this anathema to some extent, especially with the B1 and the K2 where clearances (because of their outside gear) are really tight, especially on the K2 behind the crossheads. If I run the 'sloppy' locos on the main line, they waddle far more than their fast track siblings, though it's not too noticeable on the MR/M&GNR. 

 

Anecdotal evidence suggest that 8Fs used to run to Bourne from the west, through Little Bytham. I have a DJH kit to build. That'll be interesting!

 

Of course, things like the modified Bachmann Ivatt 'Flying Pigs' have no trouble; they're designed for train set curves after all. That said, the scratch-built Ivatt 4 (for which I built the chassis and completed the body/tender for) goes round OK. It, too, has plenty of slop. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

13 hours ago, copleyhill007 said:

Fabulous photos Tony - that is the sequence of traffic and the development of the point rodding. I'm also bowled over by the standard of modelling in all aspects by rmwebbers. This is a great daily read and far better than the Metro daily newspaper. Thanks to everyone. Stay safe.

Thanks Dave,

 

I think the 'fabulous' photos are more the product of the cameras than anything else.

 

I mentioned the old folding Voightlander in one post. That's the one with which I took the pictures of Arnside when we went on that geography field course nearly 53 years ago! I can't remember the chap's name we were with (not Mr. maidenhair spleenwort!), but between us we calculated the exposures for taking the shots of the clints and grykes on that limestone pavement. There was a table on the back of the camera which needed knowledge of hard sums to work out - hence my need of his help! 

 

Great days!

 

Stay safe.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[grahame]

19 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm astonished at how much I'm able to do in this lock-down situation. 

 

 

Definitely, and there's no more hours in a day (probably thankfully for some). I seem to be using up modelling materials at quite a rate and will need to mail order more or I might run out before the lockdown is lifted.

 

Some more progress on my N/2mm scratch-built row/block. With this being a low relief model for the back of the layout there is no need to lavish too much attention and detail on it. I guess to some extent it can be considered a 'layout' building, much in the same way as some coaches and wagons have been called 'layout' ones in recent discussions.

 

 

Today I'm hoping to tackle making the roof ridge tiles and remaining windows including, hopefully, the dormer windows in the central building mansard roof. And with RTV silicon rubber and resin casing chemicals having recently been delivered I can also start on the GRP panels for the station footbridge. So I've plenty to do.

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

7 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Definitely, and there's no more hours in a day (probably thankfully for some). I seem to be using up modelling materials at quite a rate and will need to mail order more or I might run out before the lockdown is lifted.

 

Some more progress on my N/2mm scratch-built row/block. With this being a low relief model for the back of the layout there is no need to lavish too much attention and detail on it. I guess to some extent it can be considered a 'layout' building, much in the same way as some coaches and wagons have been called 'layout' ones in recent discussions.

 

 

Today I'm hoping to tackle making the roof ridge tiles and remaining windows including, hopefully, the dormer windows in the central building mansard roof. And with RTV silicon rubber and resin casing chemicals having recently been delivered I can also start on the GRP panels for the station footbridge. So I've plenty to do.

 

 

 

Lovely work Grahame,

 

Please keep the pictures and reports of it coming.......

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Headstock]

12 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

I have two on the way at the moment. Dia 164F and 78T.

 

Currently I'm building two of Bill Bedford's 3D printed 6 wheelers and some wagons as a distraction from the finicky business of the somersault signals!

 

I would love a GN 56'6" BG. I'm sure Andy says he can print anything John did drawings of or that the customer can provide drawings of.

 

Andrew

 

Thanks Andrew,

 

I'm looking forwards to seeing some of the finished kits.

[dibateg]

Lovely crisp pictures of 60156 and 63925 Tony, the figure looks just like you, is it the posture I wonder or the colour of the clothes? The M&GN section captures the rural byway crossing a busy trunk route. There can't be many layouts that feature this - Retford of course, any others?

 

Best Regards

Tony

 

 

[richard i]

In the vein of posting progress with our modeling, I offer this. I have got this far with a scratch built interior and started adding detail to the 3d print shell. 

 

I do have a question though. Looking and researching has not answered for me if the last window before the toilet was painted out white? I have seen it done on models, but not able to work out if that is the case from prototype photos. If it changed during its life, I am doing it in 1938 guise........I wonder why! 
many thanks for any advice,

richard 

[MikeTrice]

The last window before the toilet should be painted out white as you suggest. I have not had the opportunity to study this feature since upgrading my own Dynamometer Car but believe this was to protect the window that would have been beside the cooker. It can be seen in this state just before Mallard's speed run. When the vehicle was preserved that window and the toilet window were replaced with clear glass so visitors could see inside.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, dibateg said:

Lovely crisp pictures of 60156 and 63925 Tony, the figure looks just like you, is it the posture I wonder or the colour of the clothes? The M&GN section captures the rural byway crossing a busy trunk route. There can't be many layouts that feature this - Retford of course, any others?

 

Best Regards

Tony

 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

I think the posture is two-fold. One, it's definitely my slouch, and it's perfectly complemented by Tim's (Anglian) perfect painting. It's me, right down to the last scruffy detail. 

 

For me to be actually standing on Little Bytham Station in the summer of 1958, the figure of a near-12 year old would be needed, complete with short trousers, sandals and a WW2 gas mask canvas bag; full of banana sandwiches, a bottle of Tizer and a tatty Ian Allan abc!

 

Other layouts with two separate railways? As you say Retford (but on the grand scale compared with LB). Has anyone ever modelled Tamworth? Or Rugby Midland (that would be the ultimate two systems to me, with the massive GC girder bridge to the south; and the testing station).  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited April 8, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

The materials to complete the point rodding arrived today - great service from Wizard/MSE/Comet; thanks Andrew.

 

However, the enthusiasm to get on with it straight away was lacking (but not for long). Instead, I looked for a 'quickie' project.

 

How about another 'layout coach'?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using an old Airfix LMS BTK as a donor, I've made another one using Comet sides; but to a different diagram.

 

I took off the duckets with a piercing saw and reinstated them. The above-door ventilators came from a Southern Pride etch (odd that Comet don't provide these). 

 

An afternoon's easy work, and there you are. Painting and finishing awaits.

 

 

[richard i]

49 minutes ago, MikeTrice said:

The last window before the toilet should be painted out white as you suggest. I have not had the opportunity to study this feature since upgrading my own Dynamometer Car but believe this was to protect the window that would have been beside the cooker. It can be seen in this state just before Mallard's speed run. When the vehicle was preserved that window and the toilet window were replaced with clear glass so visitors could see inside.

Thanks. I can go forward with confidence now. 
richard 

[Northmoor]

Tony - is the roof on the wrong way round?  The roof vents don't seem to correspond to the compartments or the corridor.

 

Rob

[Buhar]

Hi Tony,

 

Good grief! There's not much support left on the donor sides!  I asked Red Leader about his technique and he is of the view that the brass sides alone are a point of weakness, especially when handling the model, so leaves as much plastic as he can.

 

I presume you need to do some juggling with the roof vents as well as turning it round (I realise it's not fitted yet).

 

Alan

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, Buhar said:

Hi Tony,

 

Good grief! There's not much support left on the donor sides!  I asked Red Leader about his technique and he is of the view that the brass sides alone are a point of weakness, especially when handling the model, so leaves as much plastic as he can.

 

I presume you need to do some juggling with the roof vents as well as turning it round (I realise it's not fitted yet).

 

Alan

 

When doing these Comet re-sidings, I take out the sides completely, and file away the thickness of the brass sides from the ends. That way, the width of the finished coach is correct - not over-width by twice the thickness of the brass sides.

 

The rigidity of the sides is achieved by soldering brass angle section to the tops and bottoms.

 

John Isherwood.

[Clive Mortimore]

23 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Tony - is the roof on the wrong way round?  The roof vents don't seem to correspond to the compartments or the corridor.

 

Rob

The roof will need sorting out as the water filler pipes should only go to the toilet which on later diagrams than the Airfix/Dapol model are located between the end door and the compartments not the middle of the coach. The compartment vents will need shuffling along as the compartments have been. From memory the roof panels are not the same. Without looking at some photos of the real things I am not 100% the vents are in the right place for the van end. Sorry to lazy to get my LMS coaches books out to state which diagrams.

 

I have the same job to do on my cut and shut version of the same type of BTK (BSK). Remember boys and girls there are more than one way to skin a cat. I am sure Tony's will turn out better than mine. His photos will for sure.

[Headstock]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

The materials to complete the point rodding arrived today - great service from Wizard/MSE/Comet; thanks Andrew.

 

However, the enthusiasm to get on with it straight away was lacking (but not for long). Instead, I looked for a 'quickie' project.

 

How about another 'layout coach'?

 

 

 

Using an old Airfix LMS BTK as a donor, I've made another one using Comet sides; but to a different diagram.

 

I took off the duckets with a piercing saw and reinstated them. The above-door ventilators came from a Southern Pride etch (odd that Comet don't provide these). 

 

An afternoon's easy work, and there you are. Painting and finishing awaits.

 

 

 

Aha, dia 666, with piped in filler for the ladies shower room in compartment three.

Edited April 8, 2020 by Headstock
No point repeating repeating images.