Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Could it be that many exhibition layouts now under construction will never see completion? Or layouts having only just started on the circuit in the last 12 months might never be seen again?

 

I think that it may well be the case that this could happen, so perhaps we all have to think in a different way. 

We, also, are fortunate in having a permanent place for both our Alloa layout and our newest club layout of Larbert http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/106627-larbert/ , so we can continue to enjoy the building of it, which is surely also a part of our hobby?

As regards letting others enjoy our efforts then we can always use the thread on here, and also, perhaps use Youtube and as noted above by others to have invitations for visitors to come to us. Before lockdown we had arranged a visit by another group to come and visit and were expecting around 40, but inevitably this had to be cancelled due to the restrictions but we would hope that, eventually, we may be able to hold such visits again.

 

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

Tony

If a OO loco is converted to EM just pushing the wheels out and adding washers means that the loco looks wrong. An overlay on the RTR chassis gives the chassis a lot more reality.. Mike Edge has etches for Black 5s and A3s/A4s and they make the loco so much better.

Baz

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Barry O said:

Tony

If a OO loco is converted to EM just pushing the wheels out and adding washers means that the loco looks wrong. An overlay on the RTR chassis gives the chassis a lot more reality.. Mike Edge has etches for Black 5s and A3s/A4s and they make the loco so much better.

Baz

I'm sure they do Baz,

 

However, it's 'horses for courses with regard to the D11 (which, I assume is the loco that, in your view, looks 'wrong').

 

It'll be up to Sandra Orpen if she uses it on Retford, but, if so, any operator running it (it'll be on the GC-section) will be no nearer than five/six feet away from it - for much of the time 16' and more away. Are your eyes good enough to be able to detect that the frames are too narrow, at that sort of range? I know mine aren't. When I next visit Retford, I'll take a picture of 62661 in service, and you can judge for yourself. 

 

I'm not advocating a slipshod approach, merely a pragmatic one. Yes, of course, if one is building stock for a terminus-to-fiddle-yard 'plank' then go all the way.

 

I've told this tale before but it's worth reiterating. Roy Jackson and I were standing adjacent to the flat crossing on Retford when someone commented that he couldn't see any brakes on an N5 which was shunting at Babworth (over a scale half a mile away). I'm sure you can imagine Roy's reaction, but it went along the lines of telling the guy (who must have been daft) that he couldn't even see the (sexual reference here!) loco, let alone if it had any (further sexual reference!) brakes! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 12
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm sure they do Baz,

 

However, it's 'horses for courses with regard to the D11 (which, I assume is the loco that, in your view, looks 'wrong').

 

It'll be up to Sandra Orpen if she uses it on Retford, but, if so, any operator running it (it'll be on the GC-section) will be no nearer than five/six feet away from it - for much of the time 16' and more away. Are your eyes good enough to be able to detect that the frames are too narrow, at that sort of range? I know mine aren't. When I next visit Retford, I'll take a picture of 62661 in service, and you can judge for yourself. 

 

I'm not advocating a slipshod approach, merely a pragmatic one. Yes, of course, if one is building stock for a terminus-to-fiddle-yard 'plank' then go all the way.

 

I've told this tale before but it's worth reiterating. Roy Jackson and I were standing adjacent to the flat crossing on Retford when someone commented that he couldn't see any brakes on an N5 which was shunting at Babworth (over a scale half a mile away). I'm sure you can imagine Roy's reaction, but it went along the lines of telling the guy (who must have been daft) that he couldn't even see the (sexual reference here!) loco, let alone if it had any (further sexual reference!) brakes! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

I recall that it was said of Jim Whittaker of MMRS that if he couldn't see a detail from 3ft away then he wouldn't model it.  Most people thought that this referred to the model but in his case it referred to 3ft from the prototype.

Edited by Adam88
typo
  • Like 2
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

If that close up view of the D11 has the bogie in a central position, rather than pushed over to one side, it does look very odd seeing the dummy frames above the bogie so far out to the edge. They should be roughly in line with the back of the wheels, not the front.

 

Even allowing for over thick and under gauge wheels in EM, it looks quite wrong to me. I don't have a Bachmann D11, as although it is my beloved GCR, it is too modern for me, so I can't check but if that can be easily altered it would considerably improve the look.

 

The body looks really good, although I do have photos of 62661 with a very bent footplate at the front LH side, so depending on the period, the model may need dropping on the floor! There is a very nice D11 that Roy built on the layout. A few fairly quick and simple improvements to the mechanism could make this one look just as good. Without them, it will always be an obvious Bachmann one. With a few mods, it will be hard to tell them apart.  

 

My photo illustrates.

 

845705597_ButlerHenderson04052008070.jpg.cb5af5393beae33394a01ba99291f7b8.jpg

The outside face of the wheels shouldn't be level with the frames, it should be the back of them.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've just been in email correspondence with a friend where we were discussing (among other things) the current situation regarding exhibitions. 

 

By coincidence, my contact at Cancer Research UK phoned me earlier to see how I was and if there was anything she could do. Significantly (because of covid), our contribution to CRUK has only been around £250.00 this year, yet last year Mo and I sent over £3,000.00; no shows since late-Feb and, apart from a couple of passing friends, no visitors to LB, thus, no contributions of any size to the charity. 

 

Our mutual view is that we can't see any shows taking place until the autumn of next year at the earliest, if ever again. Whatever happens, it'll never be the same in future. We're lucky, we have our own railways/projects which don't need shows for them to run. I for one (being 'in danger' because of my age) would be very wary of attending an exhibition unless a vaccine becomes available, both as a visitor or exhibitor. 

 

Could it be that many exhibition layouts now under construction will never see completion? Or layouts having only just started on the circuit in the last 12 months might never be seen again?

 

A pessimistic view, I admit. That said, I've abandoned any plans for my building of Kiveton Park now. It would have been built for exhibitions, but it'll never happen now. 

 

On a more optimistic note, as covid restrictions ease, I can see a return of visitors to see LB, socially distancing, of course. In that respect, a layout 'which never leaves home' will be seen; and by many in the future, I hope. 


Firstly this is posted a a personal viewpoint and I stress not an official statement of either the SLS or the YMRS team (see logos in my sig’).

 

I concur with the timeline views expressed above regarding indoor gatherings of over 30 to perhaps a 100.  One option that may be relevant going forward is what I did with my Hornby Dublo display many years back now before committing it to its’ first show - I ran it in the bar of the local pub with donations for the Lifeboat (we live at the coast). Whilst I couldn’t repeat that there with anything more than about 8ft x 6ft the local Ex-B Legion club bar could take something considerably larger. Perhaps a way for those of us with portable layouts to bring back the idea of taking up railway modelling to the general public, refresh our desire to show off our creations, and raise money for a charity.

 

I think life will be very different for quite a while yet and we have to adapt to survive. There is an argument the calendar was becoming too overcrowded with new, and large, shows and only time will tell in what format, and how often, we get back to some form of public hobby shows.

 

Edited by john new
Errant comma.
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm sure they do Baz,

 

However, it's 'horses for courses with regard to the D11 (which, I assume is the loco that, in your view, looks 'wrong').

 

It'll be up to Sandra Orpen if she uses it on Retford, but, if so, any operator running it (it'll be on the GC-section) will be no nearer than five/six feet away from it - for much of the time 16' and more away. Are your eyes good enough to be able to detect that the frames are too narrow, at that sort of range? I know mine aren't. When I next visit Retford, I'll take a picture of 62661 in service, and you can judge for yourself. 

 

I'm not advocating a slipshod approach, merely a pragmatic one. Yes, of course, if one is building stock for a terminus-to-fiddle-yard 'plank' then go all the way.

 

I've told this tale before but it's worth reiterating. Roy Jackson and I were standing adjacent to the flat crossing on Retford when someone commented that he couldn't see any brakes on an N5 which was shunting at Babworth (over a scale half a mile away). I'm sure you can imagine Roy's reaction, but it went along the lines of telling the guy (who must have been daft) that he couldn't even see the (sexual reference here!) loco, let alone if it had any (further sexual reference!) brakes! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Well Roy did the chassis for the A3s he converted and then was less than amused to find that Mike Edge had done an etch overlay. Just don't take front on pictures of it...

 

Baz

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Adam88 said:

 

 

I recall that it was said of Jim Whittaker of MMRS that if he couldn't see a detail from 3ft away then he wouldn't model it.  Most people thought that this referred to the model but in his case it referred to 3ft from the prototype.

I recall David Jenkinson once stating that when making a model, get as many prototype pictures of it as possible (be it a loco, carriage or wagon). Then build the model, observing it from the same sort of angles as in the prototype pictures. Any detail which could be observed, incorporate into the model. Any detail which could not be seen, even if you knew it were present on the real thing (say a big brake cylinder between a loco's frames), don't bother with.

 

He was once taken to task for not putting all the conduits and associated gubbins on the underneath of the floor pan of a carriage he'd built. His response was 'If the only way you can see this sort of detail is if your carriage derails, tumbles down an embankment and lands upside down in a ditch, then don't build a layout where this is likely to happen!'.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 4
  • Round of applause 5
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, john new said:


Firstly this is posted a a personal viewpoint and I stress not an official statement of either the SLS or the YMRS team (see logos in my sig’).

 

I concur with the timeline views expressed above regarding indoor gatherings of over 30 to perhaps a 100.  One option that may be relevant going forward is what I did with my Hornby Dublo display many years back now before committing it to its’ first show - I ran it in the bar of the local pub with donations for the Lifeboat (we live at the coast). Whilst I couldn’t repeat that there with anything more than about 8ft x 6ft the local Ex-B Legion club bar could take something considerably larger. Perhaps a way for those of us with portable layouts to bring back the idea of taking up railway modelling to the general public, refresh our desire to show off our creations, and raise money for a charity.

 

I think life will be very different for quite a while yet and we have to adapt to survive. There is an argument the calendar was becoming too overcrowded with new, and large, shows and only time will tell in what format, and how often, we get back to some form of public hobby shows.

 

A sound post, John,

 

Thank you.

 

I think you're right that the calendar for shows was becoming very crowded. Mo and I have come to the decision that we were probably doing too many shows as it was - in one case, five consecutive weekends, four away. All of these were excellent, well-run and great fun (and allowed us to raise considerable funds for CRUK), but we're not getting any younger. 

 

I think it was also the case that more and more of the 'specialist', smaller traders were getting less and less inclined to attend (just the sort of trader which interests me), the result being that more and more of their patches were being taken up by new and second-hand RTR 'box-shifters'. Not my cup of tea at all, though they have their places.

 

As I've alluded to, as time goes on, my intention is to have visitors to see LB again - a sort of 'one layout' model railway show. There's space to socially distance, as long as no more three visitors at a time attend. Could this sort of thing be a new way forward in the hobby? I think your idea of taking a layout to various social clubs (which have plenty of space) is excellent, especially for fund-raising purposes. In a way, it's a return to the grass roots of the hobby. 

 

Whatever happens, I'm convinced that many shows will just disappear - we've had the heyday and thoroughly enjoyed it. It might well be that some clubs fold as well. 

 

The BRM virtual exhibition earlier on seemed to be a great success, so will we see more of those in future? 

 

One thing is certain; the hobby will never be the same again. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 4
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the BRM virtual exhibition has been mentioned. you may not realise that the Scalefour soc are doing just the same thing!

 

I am with you Tony one of my greatest pleasures has been to get to a exhibition in the UK. The only one that I have made it too was the Scaleforum in both Leatherhead and Aylesbury. The advantage was the bring and buy stands (i like kits!) and the smaller manufacturers of bits and pieces.  Infact I have just placed orders with Wizard models for a number items which I need, no single item over about 3 quid! So as "builders" of kits and actually using skills to put things together these are the traders that we need. 

 

The best thing about the move online is the small contingent like Jesse and I can actually attend with out the plane ticket! I can see a combination of tech and physical exhibitions comming on. My idea a while ago was for the specialist exhibitions was to have a computer set up on the info desk so we members could discuss with other members at the stand!  

  • Like 8
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, t-b-g said:

If that close up view of the D11 has the bogie in a central position, rather than pushed over to one side, it does look very odd seeing the dummy frames above the bogie so far out to the edge. They should be roughly in line with the back of the wheels, not the front.

 

Even allowing for over thick and under gauge wheels in EM, it looks quite wrong to me. I don't have a Bachmann D11, as although it is my beloved GCR, it is too modern for me, so I can't check but if that can be easily altered it would considerably improve the look.

 

The body looks really good, although I do have photos of 62661 with a very bent footplate at the front LH side, so depending on the period, the model may need dropping on the floor! There is a very nice D11 that Roy built on the layout. A few fairly quick and simple improvements to the mechanism could make this one look just as good. Without them, it will always be an obvious Bachmann one. With a few mods, it will be hard to tell them apart.  

 

My photo illustrates.

 

845705597_ButlerHenderson04052008070.jpg.cb5af5393beae33394a01ba99291f7b8.jpg

The outside face of the wheels shouldn't be level with the frames, it should be the back of them.

 

 

Thanks Tony,

 

I must admit to not noticing how far out the front frames are above the bogie wheels. Lack of perception on my part!

 

Though I can't now remember, they must be add-on features provided with the model.........

 

1444871894_BachmannGCD11ButlerHenderson31-145NRM01.jpg.e21915fe2b161fea25b1389f969dd16a.jpg

 

This is the NRM one as-supplied. Aren't you tempted?

 

910584500_D1162661.jpg.eb984a24d19162fb658a587c864e05e7.jpg

 

I must have fitted them on 62661 in her OO days. The 'sticking-out' effect is even more pronounced in 16.5mm. 

 

1502434523_BachmannD11.jpg.84950393eb7cb80edc2d3afd68c16d53.jpg

 

I think this is Barry Oliver's D11, or at least one he's weathered. Again, the front frames have been added.

 

785482843_D1062653bentfrontendandpatches.jpg.f9be2c33068aaa27efe169fbbc9065c9.jpg

 

Though this is a D10, the characteristic sagging front buffer beam is apparent. And, look at those cabside patches! 

 

1965042609_D1162660Darnall19_09.581976.jpg.1ae5249b9e996247d3d3ab9e14d52e2e.jpg

 

Another 'Director' droopy 'beam.

 

311758068_D1162662DarnallShed19_09.582035.jpg.938f7bb743aa9b5ac1ece9ba552ac0a6.jpg

 

just a hint on this one?

 

2361057_D1162668TraffordPrk18_06.5555F6.jpg.a37b238f8d6774fbc98164a5353aeea4.jpg

 

And maybe here.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, t-b-g said:

If that close up view of the D11 has the bogie in a central position, rather than pushed over to one side, it does look very odd seeing the dummy frames above the bogie so far out to the edge. They should be roughly in line with the back of the wheels, not the front.

 

Even allowing for over thick and under gauge wheels in EM, it looks quite wrong to me. I don't have a Bachmann D11, as although it is my beloved GCR, it is too modern for me, so I can't check but if that can be easily altered it would considerably improve the look.

 

The body looks really good, although I do have photos of 62661 with a very bent footplate at the front LH side, so depending on the period, the model may need dropping on the floor! There is a very nice D11 that Roy built on the layout. A few fairly quick and simple improvements to the mechanism could make this one look just as good. Without them, it will always be an obvious Bachmann one. With a few mods, it will be hard to tell them apart.  

 

My photo illustrates.

 

845705597_ButlerHenderson04052008070.jpg.cb5af5393beae33394a01ba99291f7b8.jpg

The outside face of the wheels shouldn't be level with the frames, it should be the back of them.

 

 

Sorry Tony,

 

I forgot this in my last post.............

 

'There is a very nice D11 that Roy built on the layout.'

 

205401261_Retford12101929D11.jpg.ba6da1f74f81192856ed1e8b101da92e.jpg

 

I don't think whatever I did to 62661 would make it as good as this..........

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I recall David Jenkinson once stating that when making a model, get as many prototype pictures of it as possible (be it a loco, carriage or wagon). Then build the model, observing it from the same sort of angles as in the prototype pictures. Any detail which could be observed, incorporate into the model. Any detail which could not be seen, even if you knew it were present on the real thing (say a big brake cylinder between a loco's frames), don't bother with.

 

He was once taken to task for not putting all the conduits and associated gubbins on the underneath of the floor pan of a carriage he'd built. His response was 'If the only way you can see this sort of detail is if your carriage derails, tumbles down an embankment and lands upside down in a ditch, then don't build a layout where this is likely to happen!'.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Interestingly,  even in 7mm scale David wrote that he didn't fit detailed interiors within his coaches, merely painting the insides black. He said no one noticed. They assumed the interiors matched the superb modelling of the rest and their brains filled in the blanks.

  • Like 6
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Modelling bent footplates, buffer beams, and other imperfections.

 

Thank you for the 'bent' pictures.

I will be back at Locomotion at Shildon today.

A quick survey last year (sorry, I lost my notes) revealed that very few of the locomotive exhibits have 'straight' footplates. We also had one visitor who complained that the 'air-smoothed' cladding on the Bulleid Pacific wasn't smooth. How many tenders have you seen where the side plating is actually as flat and smooth as most models depict.

 

When I first saw Graham Nicholas's 'Shap' layout, I couldn't help thinking that the prototypically unlevel name board on the Signal Box just looked wrong. 

 

Is there some function of scale here?  Does the eye not accept a distortion which may be quite accurate?

 

Has anybody been able to model such things convincingly?

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, drmditch said:

Re: Modelling bent footplates, buffer beams, and other imperfections.

 

Thank you for the 'bent' pictures.

I will be back at Locomotion at Shildon today.

A quick survey last year (sorry, I lost my notes) revealed that very few of the locomotive exhibits have 'straight' footplates. We also had one visitor who complained that the 'air-smoothed' cladding on the Bulleid Pacific wasn't smooth. How many tenders have you seen where the side plating is actually as flat and smooth as most models depict.

 

When I first saw Graham Nicholas's 'Shap' layout, I couldn't help thinking that the prototypically unlevel name board on the Signal Box just looked wrong. 

 

Is there some function of scale here?  Does the eye not accept a distortion which may be quite accurate?

 

Has anybody been able to model such things convincingly?

I honestly think it's impossible to copy the prototype exactly.

 

Examine these pictures for instance..............

 

1543706258_A460022Barkston24_05.612832.jpg.e16c442d330e638244f73ea70716a047.jpg

 

897594349_A460023DoncasterShed04_01.632937.jpg.1a00642ea09b1d3586f6a22c1bb548d2.jpg

 

Two ex-works A4s, fresh from Donny paint shop. Look at all the creases and dents in the boiler cladding and, particularly, on 60023's tender. Who'd be brave enough to deliberately reproduce this effect?

 

73817819_HornbyA401.jpg.a8222656f9962e22adaadeffaaba2d86.jpg

 

Is Hornby's A4 too perfect? A detailed/modified example, re-painted by Ian Rathbone. Not a crease or dent in sight.

 

303787856_C1367439Rotherwood23_08.581957.jpg.1f6d90821b7a5ce8ea722d376e3d6440.jpg

 

And who'd model the patches and creases in this? Or the buckled valance at the front?

 

681666825_T169912StocktonShed24_04.5543H88.jpg.abefe93002dd22b336b38db00bfbec82.jpg

 

Or the crease in this? And the buckled cylinder casing and bent valance...................

 

I've shown the following pair before, but they substantiate the point about modelling the prototype, accurately...... 

 

1852960484_D3062437benthandrail.jpg.a12087436cea3fc90f8cd556d75b6872.jpg

 

1032693394_D3462474benthandrail.jpg.0dd3ef744246cc59434d9bf3f38081e6.jpg

 

I had thought at first that a particularly-obese fitter had been fiddling with the domes, using the handrail as a step. However, one picture I saw of these ex-NB 4-4-0s had part of the motion hanging from the handrail, attached by a block and tackle. 

 

Model those handrails like these and it would just look wrong!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 10
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you make some good points regarding the bumps and dents on the prototype which in turn don't really scale down to a model without looking wrong. I remember on one of your Right Track DVDs (Detailing RTR I think), you produced a photograph of a B1 with slopping numbers on the cabside.....to produce on a model like that would just look poor.

 

Interesting regarding the addition of strips on tanks and models. Bachmann/Rails have actually decided to depict the welded strip to their forthcoming Caledonian 812 models (which I believe a number of them received in the twilight of their working lives).

 

 

CALEY 812.EP.V4.FRONT.jpg

CALEY 812.EP.V4.BACK.jpg

Edited by Hawin Dooiey
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I recall David Jenkinson once stating that when making a model, get as many prototype pictures of it as possible (be it a loco, carriage or wagon). Then build the model, observing it from the same sort of angles as in the prototype pictures. Any detail which could be observed, incorporate into the model. Any detail which could not be seen, even if you knew it were present on the real thing (say a big brake cylinder between a loco's frames), don't bother with.

 

He was once taken to task for not putting all the conduits and associated gubbins on the underneath of the floor pan of a carriage he'd built. His response was 'If the only way you can see this sort of detail is if your carriage derails, tumbles down an embankment and lands upside down in a ditch, then don't build a layout where this is likely to happen!'.  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hello Tony and Everyone

 

We all build models to our own level of detail, thankfully there is not a law stating what the minimum is. Some people like to get every thing on, like the bits you cannot see even when stood next to a real loco, coach or wagon, that is great. That isn't me, the way my layout is set up only a few locos that are in front of the control panel are close enough for me to see the finer details. The same loco when hauling a train can be over 20 feet away, I can see what class it is but not if it has its wiggly pipes in the right place. To me it is greater fun watching my trains moving than it is admiring them stationary.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I must admit to not noticing how far out the front frames are above the bogie wheels. Lack of perception on my part!

 

Though I can't now remember, they must be add-on features provided with the model.........

 

1444871894_BachmannGCD11ButlerHenderson31-145NRM01.jpg.e21915fe2b161fea25b1389f969dd16a.jpg

 

This is the NRM one as-supplied. Aren't you tempted?

 

910584500_D1162661.jpg.eb984a24d19162fb658a587c864e05e7.jpg

 

I must have fitted them on 62661 in her OO days. The 'sticking-out' effect is even more pronounced in 16.5mm. 

 

1502434523_BachmannD11.jpg.84950393eb7cb80edc2d3afd68c16d53.jpg

 

I think this is Barry Oliver's D11, or at least one he's weathered. Again, the front frames have been added.

 

785482843_D1062653bentfrontendandpatches.jpg.f9be2c33068aaa27efe169fbbc9065c9.jpg

 

Though this is a D10, the characteristic sagging front buffer beam is apparent. And, look at those cabside patches! 

 

1965042609_D1162660Darnall19_09.581976.jpg.1ae5249b9e996247d3d3ab9e14d52e2e.jpg

 

Another 'Director' droopy 'beam.

 

311758068_D1162662DarnallShed19_09.582035.jpg.938f7bb743aa9b5ac1ece9ba552ac0a6.jpg

 

just a hint on this one?

 

2361057_D1162668TraffordPrk18_06.5555F6.jpg.a37b238f8d6774fbc98164a5353aeea4.jpg

 

And maybe here.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

Now my memory has been jogged, perhaps I did get one. There was a cheap one on the Bachmann "returns" stand at Warley several years ago. I got it, looked at it and realised how much work would be needed to put it into true GCR condition and it got put away and forgotten.

 

Seeing the photos of the real thing and the RTR one together does raise a question about the top front corners on the firebox too. I hadn't really studied them before but there doesn't seem to be enough visible firebox front on the model.

 

It is funny because I always thought that Bachmann had captured the D11 really well and it had never registered with me before.

 

Perhaps it is an optical illusion caused by the angles and lighting of the photos. 

Edited by t-b-g
correct typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

The eye is very good a picking out relationships between items and also straight/parallel lines and this contributes to our view of a model's look.  Modelling in the narrower gauges this can cause issues below the footplate, something in the right place (like the D10 framing) looks wrong because of the relationship to the wheels.  We are fortunate in that nearly all UK prototypes have a running plate that breaks the eye's attempts to tie together items above and below it (especially viewed from the side) so we can tweak elements above and below that line to make them look right in terms of other relationships.  Guard irons are a good example, in 00 we have to set them to the narrow width of the wheels or else they look daft.  Equally, front frame extensions are viewed in relation to the smokebox and need to be set at their correct width rather than at the width of the model's frames. 

 

There are obviously exceptions like the open area behind the buffer beam on several Webb engines where the frames are visible. Modellers will have their own ideas about compromises and our compromises may be compromised by the need to make the thing work (Tony's dodge of offset piston rods and crossheads to allow for clearances).

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sutton Loco Works sell their screw link couplings separately. I picked some up for their stand at last year's York show. They are currently waiting for new stock though.

low-screw-links.jpg

 

https://sulzertype2.co.uk/product/cosmetic-screw-link-couplings-x8/

I have bought detail packs from Peter's Spares for the screw link couplings as well, as they have some nice other bits in them as well.

As they say on TV 'Other suppliers may also be available'.
 

Jamie

Edited by Jamiel
  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, polybear said:

Why not build it, or something - and "exhibit" the build step-by-step on RMWeb?  A far bigger audience than pretty much any Model Railway Exhibition.  It could also be used as a fund raising mechanism for CRUK.....

That sounds an excellent suggestion to me. It is not easy for me to attend any exhibitions, and as a novice, it is always of interest to see how different aspects of the model are constructed. That is one reason that I enjoy this thread so much.

 

Lloyd

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, john new said:


Firstly this is posted a a personal viewpoint and I stress not an official statement of either the SLS or the YMRS team (see logos in my sig’).

 

I concur with the timeline views expressed above regarding indoor gatherings of over 30 to perhaps a 100.  One option that may be relevant going forward is what I did with my Hornby Dublo display many years back now before committing it to its’ first show - I ran it in the bar of the local pub with donations for the Lifeboat (we live at the coast). Whilst I couldn’t repeat that there with anything more than about 8ft x 6ft the local Ex-B Legion club bar could take something considerably larger. Perhaps a way for those of us with portable layouts to bring back the idea of taking up railway modelling to the general public, refresh our desire to show off our creations, and raise money for a charity.

 

I think life will be very different for quite a while yet and we have to adapt to survive. There is an argument the calendar was becoming too overcrowded with new, and large, shows and only time will tell in what format, and how often, we get back to some form of public hobby shows.

 

Speaking/writing as a viewer and not an exhibitor, I tend to agree about there being too many shows but both large and small.  If you look through the listings in the magazines - though obviously not at the moment - and there are typically six shows every weekend for most of the year.  I'm not sure there are enough high quality layouts to fill so many shows.

 

Local to me we have the REC (Woking) and Farnham (Aldershot) shows every year, both generally very good indeed but I find the Farnham Club's smaller show being more consistent in quality of layouts.  The bigger Woking show normally has a couple of layouts which I don't linger at, not because the subject matter doesn't interest me but because they contain too many RTR/RTP items.   Such a layout has it's place in encouraging newcomers that the hobby is accessible, plus of course the Hornby-Dublo demo layouts are entirely RTR/RTP, but that it precisely the point of them.   It's just that to me, an exhibition is meant to be an exhibition of craftsmanship, not a trade fair. 

 

Perhaps you're right and the days of the biggest shows are over, but local, smaller shows will continue.  They probably have the advantage that the venues tend to be run by local/voluntary organisations instead of large events companies, so while the facilities are more basic, the rates are much cheaper.  I'm optimistic that by this time next year, we might be almost back to normal.  Brutal though it sounds, the virus may have now "harvested" the weakest victims and the lower infection rates now are partially a result both of public behaviour and the better general health of those not yet displaying symptoms.  I'm also confident that by summer next year, possibly well before, the most vulnerable will have been given a working vaccine, the development of which is advancing at an incredible rate in the pharmaceutical industry.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, polybear said:

 

Hi Tony,

 

Why not build it, or something - and "exhibit" the build step-by-step on RMWeb?  A far bigger audience than pretty much any Model Railway Exhibition.  It could also be used as a fund raising mechanism for CRUK.....

 

Good morning Brian,

 

Please forgive the tardy response to your question. 

 

Yes, building KP and reporting on progress on this thread (or a separate one?) might have a certain appeal. And, in the light of current no-exhibition trends, it might be the only way to show any layout. However, there are other priorities for me...................

 

I'll explain. It has to do mainly with Retford. If ever a layout recreated my trainspotting heyday, that's it. Whenever I see it, I'm transported back to that magical place (not that is now), witnessing (as Clem quite rightly observes) 'the greatest free show on earth'. But it still requires the 'eye of faith' to be fully-transported back, because it's not finished. 

 

I'm delighted (along with everyone else) that it's the intention of the new owner to finish it, but she can't do it alone. It'll be an immense privilege for me to be part (in a small way) of the group which completes it. There's point rodding, telegraph poles and all manner of detail which I can contribute to. Not only that, I'm currently building a J6 for it (yes, it's been started!) and I'm building EM frames to go under a V2 and an A2/3. There are also several items of rolling stock to re-gauge. 

 

I'm also tasked as being 'official photographer' as progress continues. 

 

So, you see now why I'll never embark on building Kiveton Park.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 6
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the subject of D11s, what is required to change a Bachmann Scottish version to an English one? The D11 is very much a low priority engine for my area, but not unknown; I acquired a Scottish one very cheaply, hoping to convert it. Would any parts be available?

 

Stewart

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.