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

46 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

It might be something to do with the shape of the casting, Tony.  I've not long finished a NuCast one and from some angles mine looks out of square as well.

Thanks Jonathan,

 

It might well be slightly out of square.

 

And, as has been said many times, the camera is a 'cruel' critic.

 

I think I'm with Tony Gee in preferring the look of etched kits, though, from my own point of view, I much prefer mixed-media kits such as those produced by DJH. With most of those, one gets castings where it's most appropriate (boilers) and etchings where they're best (cab and tender sides, smoke deflectors and so forth). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

There have been photos produced where a wide angle lens has caused things that are straight and square in reality to look as though they are not, which is what I was getting at.

 

I remember having great battles with one or two kits, especially whitemetal ones. Casting was not an exact science for some of our kit makers (although others seemed to get better results than others) and parts that at first glance looked straight and square didn't when the parts were soldered together.

 

I think that is why I generally prefer etched kits. Thinner edges look better and and if a part was drawn the right shape and size, it generally comes out that way on the etch. You don't get the shrinkage and warping that can come with the casting process.

 

It was one of Roy Jackson's pet sayings. Build it straight, build it square. Once you have done those two, it makes the rest so much easier!

 

 

Thanks Tony,

 

'Build it straight, build it square. Once you have done those two, it makes the rest so much easier!'

 

That might be the reason why he dismantled that A2/2 body I built for him!

 

Regarding camera distortion; it can happen, especially where a wide-angle lens has forced the perspective. However, I don't employ a wide-angle lens for most of my photography. If something is 'banana-shaped', then it is. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tony,

 

Thanks for showing your improved RTR Pacifics. They certainly look the part to me. I assume your Bachmann ‘Boswell’ is based on 60130? If so, I’m not surprised you’re not happy with the haulage. I have generally found the earlier Bachmann A1s to be inferior in haulage terms compared to the later offerings. The ones with the decoder socket in the tender are particularly strong (although I appreciate that will just annoy you - sorry!). My own 60130 and 60123 (based on 60158) are limited to 8-10 coaches.

 

I have been experimenting today, just to make sure that I could back up my claims. I don’t have 14 all metal coaches spread over all my rakes, let alone in one. But I do have 10 metal sided coaches with white metal bogies in my Elizabethan. So I combined that  with my Newcastle rake including the all metal Ex silver Jubilee triplet (which you sold me ex Gamston Bank). This made a pretty heavy 22 coach rake.

I’ve stuffed my latest A4, 60007 - Sir Nigel himself, with as much lead as possible and tested it out on this rake. It could just about pull the rake out of the fiddle yard (with some wheels slip), but the coaches derailed on my curves, so I had to shorten it to provide a proper test. Here is a video showing Sir Nigel in action on 17 coaches including the 10 Elizabethan Thompsons, the metal triplet and four plastic coaches. 
 

 

 

I hope most would agree that that is a pretty respectable performance. I appreciate that such information is of little relevance to Little Bytham with your fantastic stud of kit built Pacifics, but I hope that it is reassuring to others who, like me, rely on RTR to bulk out our express steam fleets. 


A4s are probably the easiest because of the amount of space for lead within the body shell, but other Pacifics can achieve results which are almost as good.

 

Regards

 

Andy

  • Like 10

Share this post


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

Hi Tony,

 

Thanks for showing your improved RTR Pacifics. They certainly look the part to me. I assume your Bachmann ‘Boswell’ is based on 60130? If so, I’m not surprised you’re not happy with the haulage. I have generally found the earlier Bachmann A1s to be inferior in haulage terms compared to the later offerings. The ones with the decoder socket in the tender are particularly strong (although I appreciate that will just annoy you - sorry!). My own 60130 and 60123 (based on 60158) are limited to 8-10 coaches.

 

I have been experimenting today, just to make sure that I could back up my claims. I don’t have 14 all metal coaches spread over all my rakes, let alone in one. But I do have 10 metal sided coaches with white metal bogies in my Elizabethan. So I combined that  with my Newcastle rake including the all metal Ex silver Jubilee triplet (which you sold me ex Gamston Bank). This made a pretty heavy 22 coach rake.

I’ve stuffed my latest A4, 60007 - Sir Nigel himself, with as much lead as possible and tested it out on this rake. It could just about pull the rake out of the fiddle yard (with some wheels slip), but the coaches derailed on my curves, so I had to shorten it to provide a proper test. Here is a video showing Sir Nigel in action on 17 coaches including the 10 Elizabethan Thompsons, the metal triplet and four plastic coaches. 
 

 

 

I hope most would agree that that is a pretty respectable performance. I appreciate that such information is of little relevance to Little Bytham with your fantastic stud of kit built Pacifics, but I hope that it is reassuring to others who, like me, rely on RTR to bulk out our express steam fleets. 


A4s are probably the easiest because of the amount of space for lead within the body shell, but other Pacifics can achieve results which are almost as good.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Good evening Andy,

 

the thing is, there's lots of space in an A4 to stuff lead, a real K3 could quite easily handle that train (or even22 carriages) without too much bother, could the RTR model?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, gordon s said:

Bit late to the party for 2-8-0's, but I have been playing catch up for a few days. An O1 built by Graham from a Little Engines kit, but I've added some cosmetic changes. There is as much lead as I could get into the body and it now weighs in at 560gms. Amazingly the tender alone weighs 180gms and I have added any weight there at all. I'm surprised the small Mashima motor moves it at all, but low gearing and great grip from the overall weight means it will pull anything I can throw at it.

 

Thanks for pointing out the incorrect pony wheels on the front, Tony. I took on board what you said and have now fitted the correct wheels from Alan Gibson. Had a minor problem with a few sparks flying once I fitted them. Graham had wired the whole loco with a live chassis, so it picked on one set of driving wheels, with the opposite side on the tender and front pony truck completing the circuit. I hadn't appreciated at the time of ordering the existing pony wheels had a live side and the new wheels are fully insulated. In the end I removed the wire connection to the post truck and all is OK. To make up for that, I've hard wired the tender, rather than the live stud/wiper that was there before. It runs a lot better with that permanent connection and hasn't suffered at all for losing the front pick up point. At some time in the future I will have it rebuilt to a fully insulated chassis, but that will require new wheels and a rebuild of the valve gear, so way beyond my basic skills.

 

After much deliberation, I had to make a start on weathering stock, so started with the vans. They've come out OK, but still need some additional work to provide a little variation. Still miles behind most on this thread, but I am enjoying the slow but steady progress.

 

 

 

Good evening Gordon s,

 

the little engines O1 builds up in to quite a nice model in the right hands, yours looks very neat. I have to say though, you have an infestation of stunted LMS vans behind the drawbar, nice weathering though. There is an incredible irony in that the vans with the tallest sides of any other type, have been cut so short by the manufacturer. The tooling is getting on a bit, perhaps older than the little engines kit?

Edited by Headstock
stop clogging up the thread with repeat pictures.
  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

 

Good evening Andy,

 

the thing is, there's lots of space in an A4 to stuff lead, a real K3 could quite easily handle that train (or even22 carriages) without too much bother, could the RTR model?

Fair question - I did say that A4s are the easiest!

 

I think the answer is probably not, but it would still do a quite respectable job. I may have a play tomorrow if I find time. I do know that the motor in a Bachmann K3 is pretty strong because I have put a white metal body on the Bachmann chassis and it will haul my 45-50 wagon coal train as shown here.
 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, thegreenhowards said:

Fair question - I did say that A4s are the easiest!

 

I think the answer is probably not, but it would still do a quite respectable job. I may have a play tomorrow if I find time. I do know that the motor in a Bachmann K3 is pretty strong because I have put a white metal body on the Bachmann chassis and it will haul my 45-50 wagon coal train as shown here.
 

 

 

 

 

Evening Andy,

 

your coal train will not be equivalent to the train in the video, weight, drag, rolling resistance etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/05/2020 at 06:52, Tony Wright said:

 

 

Anyway, if I try to be honest, I'm not particularly interested in owning what just about everyone else can own (if they have the cash) with regards to model railways. 

 

 

I’ve mentioned this before, but that is how I feel now about the Hush Hush. Before Horny announced the model of the W1 it was exactly like the real thing, ‘Hush Hush’. If you went to a show or watched a video on YouTube of a LNER layout, you’d get a real kick out of seeing a W1, as not everyone had one, just like the real thing. Now that every man and his dog will have one, it won’t feel like the hush hush. That’s why I’ve ordered only the original build of the W1 and I’m sticking to ordering the rebuilt parts of Graeme King and making my own from a Hornby A4. 
 

Apologies for putting my two bobs worth in and I hope that made sense, it always make sense in my head but not when I type it out. 

  • Like 8
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Gordon s,

 

the little engines O1 builds up in to quite a nice model in the right hands, yours looks very neat. I have to say though, you have an infestation of stunted LMS vans behind the drawbar, nice weathering though. There is an incredible irony in that the vans with the tallest sides of any other type, have been cut so short by the manufacturer. The tooling is getting on a bit, perhaps older than the little engines kit?

 

Sorry to say Andrew, my knowledge beyond the basics is somewhat limited, but can you tell me a little more without clogging up Tony's thread. When I was weathering the van bodies, I did see that some were lower than others, but assumed that's the way they were in real life. Having Googled a bit this morning I did see a reference to old Mainline tooling, so is that what you are referring to?

 

There is just so much to try and take on board as you get deeper into this hobby. The transition from a train set to a model railway is a huge step and a never ending pool of learning.

 

I'm probably more relaxed about these things, but I do try not to make such fundamental errors...:D

  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, gordon s said:

 

Sorry to say Andrew, my knowledge beyond the basics is somewhat limited, but can you tell me a little more without clogging up Tony's thread. When I was weathering the van bodies, I did see that some were lower than others, but assumed that's the way they were in real life. Having Googled a bit this morning I did see a reference to old Mainline tooling, so is that what you are referring to?

 

There is just so much to try and take on board as you get deeper into this hobby. The transition from a train set to a model railway is a huge step and a never ending pool of learning.

 

I'm probably more relaxed about these things, but I do try not to make such fundamental errors...:D

 

Good morning Gordon s,

 

The annoying thing is that unscrupulous manufactures are selling these ancient bits of tooling, often on a newer chassis, as a premium product and at a premium price! I shouldn't nock yourself out too much, even the mighty TW has come a cropper of the stunted LMS van. I include an image of real LMS  and LNER vans that displays the distinctive tall sides and flatter roof profile of the real things. Airfix/ Dapol produce a more acceptable version, of the many thousands produced, it remains the only RTR LMS van.

 

LMS and LNER van profile.jpg

Edited by Headstock
add space between text and image.
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Hi Tony,

 

Thanks for showing your improved RTR Pacifics. They certainly look the part to me. I assume your Bachmann ‘Boswell’ is based on 60130? If so, I’m not surprised you’re not happy with the haulage. I have generally found the earlier Bachmann A1s to be inferior in haulage terms compared to the later offerings. The ones with the decoder socket in the tender are particularly strong (although I appreciate that will just annoy you - sorry!). My own 60130 and 60123 (based on 60158) are limited to 8-10 coaches.

 

I have been experimenting today, just to make sure that I could back up my claims. I don’t have 14 all metal coaches spread over all my rakes, let alone in one. But I do have 10 metal sided coaches with white metal bogies in my Elizabethan. So I combined that  with my Newcastle rake including the all metal Ex silver Jubilee triplet (which you sold me ex Gamston Bank). This made a pretty heavy 22 coach rake.

I’ve stuffed my latest A4, 60007 - Sir Nigel himself, with as much lead as possible and tested it out on this rake. It could just about pull the rake out of the fiddle yard (with some wheels slip), but the coaches derailed on my curves, so I had to shorten it to provide a proper test. Here is a video showing Sir Nigel in action on 17 coaches including the 10 Elizabethan Thompsons, the metal triplet and four plastic coaches. 
 

 

 

I hope most would agree that that is a pretty respectable performance. I appreciate that such information is of little relevance to Little Bytham with your fantastic stud of kit built Pacifics, but I hope that it is reassuring to others who, like me, rely on RTR to bulk out our express steam fleets. 


A4s are probably the easiest because of the amount of space for lead within the body shell, but other Pacifics can achieve results which are almost as good.

 

Regards

 

Andy

That's very impressive, Andy,

 

If ever proof were needed that an RTR loco will pull, that's it.

 

And, yes, BOSWELL was ex-KESTREL. With a little added weight its haulage-capacity was 'adequate' for the lighter trains. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

I’ve mentioned this before, but that is how I feel now about the Hush Hush. Before Horny announced the model of the W1 it was exactly like the real thing, ‘Hush Hush’. If you went to a show or watched a video on YouTube of a LNER layout, you’d get a real kick out of seeing a W1, as not everyone had one, just like the real thing. Now that every man and his dog will have one, it won’t feel like the hush hush. That’s why I’ve ordered only the original build of the W1 and I’m sticking to ordering the rebuilt parts of Graeme King and making my own from a Hornby A4. 
 

Apologies for putting my two bobs worth in and I hope that made sense, it always make sense in my head but not when I type it out. 

You need never apologise for putting your two bobs' worth in, Jesse,

 

It does make sense (where else but in your your head?), and I feel exactly the same way. 

 

It could be a kind of 'modelling arrogance' on my part, but I must admit I've been miffed at shows when Stoke Summit was exhibited from time to time. Miffed when folk commented that we must be keeping the likes of Hornby and Bachmann in business, with all those ER Pacifics on show. I got fed up of explaining that none was present!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

It could be a kind of 'modelling arrogance' on my part, but I must admit I've been miffed at shows when Stoke Summit was exhibited from time to time. Miffed when folk commented that we must be keeping the likes of Hornby and Bachmann in business, with all those ER Pacifics on show. I got fed up of explaining that none was present!

I used to get the same thing, on a smaller scale, when someone would look at my scratch-built model of Dunster signal box and say something like "You've made a good job of that Hornby signal box".

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a similar note regarding ‘armchair experts’. Once when I was showing at a classic car show a bloke told his young that my car was a Ferrari, I wish.  It’s actually a Lotus and is badged accordingly. I just let it pass, I couldn’t be bothered. I think sometimes it’s a good job I don’t hear some of the comments at exhibitions.

Regards ROBERT

553E1D1D-96EE-4BFB-83ED-B437A8F487AD.jpeg.055db0c706e16f1ae8f8a80f957a3232.jpeg

  • Like 5
  • Agree 2
  • Friendly/supportive 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather have a Lotus than a Ferrari.

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Miffed when folk commented that we must be keeping the likes of Hornby and Bachmann in business,

 

Graham Varley built a lovely Ivatt 2 from the Comet kit for Thurston.  When he came out to shows with us, if someone asked about it and we felt like winding him up, we'd comment loudly that it was a super detailed Triang model.   It never failed.

  • Funny 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Erichill16 said:

On a similar note regarding ‘armchair experts’. Once when I was showing at a classic car show a bloke told his young that my car was a Ferrari, I wish.  It’s actually a Lotus and is badged accordingly. I just let it pass, I couldn’t be bothered. I think sometimes it’s a good job I don’t hear some of the comments at exhibitions.

Regards ROBERT

553E1D1D-96EE-4BFB-83ED-B437A8F487AD.jpeg.055db0c706e16f1ae8f8a80f957a3232.jpeg

 

Is it RTR or kit-built?  

 

Also, it would look better if you fitted Markits wheels and wiggly wires...

 

;)

  • Funny 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chamby said:

 

Is it RTR or kit-built?  

 

Also, it would look better if you fitted Markits wheels and wiggly wires...

 

;)

The Elans  were available as kits but the Plus 2 was only available RTR!

The wheels are like Markits, they have one centre nut (spinner) which if not tightened properly fall off!
regards ROBERT

  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Funny 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Erichill16 said:

The Elans  were available as kits but the Plus 2 was only available RTR!

The wheels are like Markits, they have one centre nut (spinner) which if not tightened properly fall off!
regards ROBERT

Are the threads opposite hands on each side?

Share this post


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

 

Is it RTR or kit-built?  

 

Also, it would look better if you fitted Markits wheels and wiggly wires...

 

;)

Also available in P4?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Atso said:

Going back a little to locomotive haulage, I've been tinkering again with my N gauge C1 Atlantic. As it was last left it would just about pull five coaches which was pretty useless for my ambitions for Hadley Wood. Some redesigning of the 'Cartazzi' wheels and tender to convert them to split frame pickup (reducing drag) and a new drawbar to stop the considerable slop between the loco and tender (where the motor is mounted) has improved things considerably. Interestingly, this was achieved without adding any extra weight. I'm now looking forward to finally being able to put the finishing touches to this loco and not worry about it again!

 

 

Please excuse the temporary floor layout. I'm presently separated from my layout and usual workbench so this is the best I'll be able to manage for a while yet.

 

Good afternoon Atso,

 

What a beautiful locomotive.

 

Haulage capacity has always been of high interest to myself, or rather the interaction of loco and stock. One being able to pull and run freely and the other be pulled and run freely. If you build your own locomotives and stock it is basic 101 and is one of the elements that makes building things so much fun. I'm interested to hear of your experience with the Atlantic, there is more to successful haulage than just stuffing a loco full of lead.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Are the threads opposite hands on each side?

Yes.  Where I used to work in a previous life, we had a customer in Greece who was restoring a Triumph TR6 and complained to us that all his wheels fell off after spirited driving one day.  Guess what?  He'd fitted the splined hubs on which his wire wheels secured on the wrong sides of the car and thus fitted the centre knock-off nuts ('spinners') the wrong way round, too, despite the fact that all spinners clearly have stamped on them 'LH only' and 'RH only'.  When fitted the correct way round, the spinners are self-tightening - unless you drive everywhere in reverse of course.

 

By the way, we Triumph chaps used to say 'Lotus?  That stands for Lots Of Trouble, Usually Serious'.

 

Pete T.

 

Edited by PJT
Repeated 'of course'
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

One of my N gauge projects, Frogan’s Yard, is an inner city area small goods yard which I originally ran as Green Diesels however my original and first love of LMS has resurfaced as the pictures hopefully show. The problem I’m currently grappling with however is road transport to carry the off loaded goods away. 
 

I’m aware of a couple of options from PD Marsh and Langley but I was wondering if anyone could offer any further suggestions I would be grateful as the only road transport I’ve found of suitable age is a taxi.

 


 

860F6370-4EB8-430F-B3EA-CA8E1C59CE5B.jpeg

A9A06334-440C-49FE-A2E8-81B2315FF4BA.jpeg

Edited by Dragonboy
  • Like 10
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1

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.