Wright writes.....

[polybear]

21 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Isn't that the DoG which you most-generously donated for sale for CRUK, Phil? Many thanks again.

 

Did it have a Maxon motor? Whatever it was, it just breezed around Little Bytham, handling anything I chose to stick behind it. 

 

You allude to the care needed in assembling the 'box, but wasn't the question of cost another factor? I recall an excellent Chinese meal enjoyed with Geoff in St. Albans in early 2011 where he mentioned a new gearbox he was considering (presumably the same one?). One concern was the cost of the (high-quality) gears; which meant it could well be near Portescap prices, complete with motor, and yet still have to be built. 

 

Anyway, it was (is) much quieter than a Portescap, at least the later ones. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Hi Tony,

 

This is a Comet Motor and Gearbox, as sold by Major Clanger at Wizard Models.  Could it be the same one?

HTH

Brian

 

https://www.wizardmodels.ltd/shop/tools/coreless-motor-and-crossed-helical-gearbox-mgb1/

Edited September 7, 2020 by polybear

[SP Steve]

9 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon SP steve,

 

Nice to see a bit of kit bashing. The body should be narrower than contemporary passenger carriages, as all Gresley NPC's were. Thus the solebars should be more prominent towards the edge as you describe, that is assuming the kit is the correct width across the body. The solebar wan't a U channel however, rather an L channel with a bulb angle on the bottom edge. You may wish to look again at the dynamo position and orientation. Be wary of preserved examples, like some kits, they deserve their own diagram number.

 

The parts are not yet fixed into position so hence position of dynamo (the white metal one supplied in the kit looks over large so I've done my own).

 

I've measured the body side and ends which give a width 33.5mm or 8' 4 1/2" in prototype land - I'm guessing the 9' width quoted would be the total width across hand rails / foot boards?

 

I'm aware taking details from preserved examples is not without it's dangers but in this case I'm happy to go along with them.

 

I did look into using the kit as a basis for a D170 vehicle but not being an aficionado of Holden coach under frames (as the per the reclaimed kinds used on this diagram) I elected to keep it as the D120 type.

[Headstock]

52 minutes ago, SP Steve said:

 

The parts are not yet fixed into position so hence position of dynamo (the white metal one supplied in the kit looks over large so I've done my own).

 

I've measured the body side and ends which give a width 33.5mm or 8' 4 1/2" in prototype land - I'm guessing the 9' width quoted would be the total width across hand rails / foot boards?

 

I'm aware taking details from preserved examples is not without it's dangers but in this case I'm happy to go along with them.

 

I did look into using the kit as a basis for a D170 vehicle but not being an aficionado of Holden coach under frames (as the per the reclaimed kinds used on this diagram) I elected to keep it as the D120 type.

 

Nine foot is the extreme width, that is over the grab handles and upper stepboards, The body is 8'6'' at the widest point, the standard width for Gresley passenger brake vans.

 

As far as I recall, there was 6 inches in the wheelbase. Some would not be bothered by this but I think two mil is quite a bit. I like to celebrate the differences in railway vehicles, it's what modeling is all about to me. I can't be bothered, is not my thing.

 

Another link below, this time to the dia. 170 van. It's very similar to the 177 but a different arrangement of double battery boxes and the V hanger for the vac cylinder. BY again, not BYP.

 

 

Edited September 6, 2020 by Headstock

[Clem]

52 minutes ago, Headstock said:

On building, I have almost completed all four sides (plus van compartment sides) on my second dia 210 twin, oodles of panels, droplights and door stops, do I get a medal too?

A definite round of applause! Looking forward to seeing your D210s together, back to back. 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

Hi Tony,

 

This is a Comet Motor and Gearbox, as sold by Major Clanger at Wizard Models.  Could it be the same one?

HTH

Brian

I don't know, Brian.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Headstock]

43 minutes ago, Clem said:

A definite round of applause! Looking forward to seeing your D210s together, back to back. 

 

I may need some sort of super stretchy angle lense, it was hard enough photographing one twin side on. A composite image may be the best course of action. The dia 170 van above is your baby I think. notice that the top lights are completely plain and the V hanger under the right hand set of double doors. The double battery boxes, the strapping and support cages can be ordered from MJT.  I think that the dynamo would most likely be on the other side, directly across from the battery boxes, pointing to the left as we view the image. I will see if I can find some confirmation of that.

 

The later diagrams seem to have a greater overhang of the solebars than dia 120. Perhaps the original carriages had narrower underframes?  I wonder if Chivers have inadvertently taken the measurements off the wrong diagram?

Edited September 6, 2020 by Headstock
add queries.

[96701]

2 hours ago, polybear said:

 

Hi Tony,

 

This is a Comet Motor and Gearbox, as sold by Major Clanger at Wizard Models.  Could it be the same one?

HTH

Brian

If it is the MGB1, as per the link below, then yes.

 

http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/data/Catalog/pdf/MGB1v2.pdf

[Tony Wright]

34 minutes ago, 96701 said:

If it is the MGB1, as per the link below, then yes.

 

http://www.cometmodels.co.uk/data/Catalog/pdf/MGB1v2.pdf

Thanks Phil,

 

That's the one, the prototype of which was installed in Geoff's DoG. An incredibly powerful and smooth piece of kit!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Clem]

I've finished one side of the D246 glazing. The weathering of the frames should take care of the white edges to the glass panes,, although I have to be careful not to frost the panes. The camera is certainly quite cruel. It doesn't look half bad to the naked eye.

 

[Tony Wright]

A couple more comments on motor/gearbox combinations............

 

I hope I'm not 'accused' this time of endorsing one product to the disadvantage of another.

 

With the non-availability now of Mashima motors, Comet now produces a gearbox compatible with a Canon flat can motor.

 

 

It's easy to assemble and gives very smooth running. 

 

I've fitted the combo in several locos now..............

 

 

Including a DJH 9F. The 'box is just visible, but I can live with that. 

 

 

Anyway, from most viewing angles it's just about invisible.

 

The painting/weathering is Geoff Haynes' work. 

 

 

The builder of this other DJH 9F used a Portescap 1219, which he's disguised better. 

 

 

I also fitted the combo in this Nu-Cast O2/2 (changed into an O2/1 by the fitting of a side-window cab). The drive (on the third driven axle) is completely concealed in the firebox. 

 

This loco, though an LB piece of motive power, was incomplete and under test, so didn't need to carry lamps! 

 

I painted it and Geoff Haynes subsequently weathered it. 

 

 

Even from an elevated position the drive can't be seen. I fitted the nearer O2/4 (built from a Crownline kit) with a Portescap 1219 - again invisible. 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2020 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Headstock]

3 hours ago, Clem said:

I've finished one side of the D246 glazing. The weathering of the frames should take care of the white edges to the glass panes,, although I have to be careful not to frost the panes. The camera is certainly quite cruel. It doesn't look half bad to the naked eye.

 

 

Evening Clem,

 

I confess to doing nothing today. After a week of doing doing, I think I can take a day off.

 

The dia 246 looks pretty cool, how do you weather the window frames, it seems highly effective on the other Kirk revitalisations that you have done. For some reason, I can never get used to angle iron trussing on Gresley 51'1 1/2'' stock, it looks good though, part of the variation I like in models.

 

I shall look forwards to your rejig of the, not so dia 120 BY, into a dia 170 Hamster van, with a little wheel and everything. Of course, being then a five wheeler, it wouldn't be a BY anymore.

 

P.S. I wonder if it was the case that the solebars were wider apart on the 120 vans compared to those with second hand underframes. If this was so, did it dictate the position of the springs and axle boxes in relation to the W irons?

Edited September 6, 2020 by Headstock
add P.S.

[polybear]

10 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Phil,

 

That's the one, the prototype of which was installed in Geoff's DoG. An incredibly powerful and smooth piece of kit!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks Tony; I've just edited my original post as I'd omitted to include a link to the motor on the Wizard Models website (not sure how I managed that).

The DJH motor/gearbox now seems better value for money

[Clem]

8 hours ago, Headstock said:

The dia 246 looks pretty cool, how do you weather the window frames, it seems highly effective on the other Kirk revitalisations that you have done. For some reason, I can never get used to angle iron trussing on Gresley 51'1 1/2'' stock, it looks good though, part of the variation I like in models.

Good morning Andrew.

What a beautiful sunrise this morning! Regarding the window frames: well to be honest I've used 'Glue 'n' Glaze' this time rather than a very small amount of butatone to fix the windows in (my usual method) and whilst I haven't had to (typically) redo a couple of panes due to frosting this time, the white cut edges of the panes do show up more. So, in the course of general weathering of the carriage body, I'll need to pay attention to the window frames in order to mitigate the problem. 

I really like the angle iron trussing on the D246. It gives them a bit of a different look.

 

Another little snippet I've noticed in my perusal of photos of the train consists on the Grantham-Derby line that is that in some cases, the Gresley BT(4)s used have lookout duckets and are therefore do not appear to be part of the numerous lookout-less diagram 65s (used by me as a bit of a stop gap until I build more variation in). Unless some were retro-fitted with lookouts, these carriages appear to be diagram 128. 

[Clem]

11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

This loco, though an LB piece of motive power, was incomplete and under test, so didn't need to carry lamps! 

Isn't there a lamp code for partially built/lbuilt locos under test then? :-)

[Clem]

Another shot of the D246, this time, the brake end in natural lighting. Pressing on with the second side glazing shortly....

 

 

 

[dibateg]

Nice work Clem - 

I did these ones in 7mm a few years ago, I shall have to find them, they haven't been out of the box a for a few years, so I should do some new photos. Kirk bodies, Newbold underframes and JLTRT bogies. Can't remember the diagrams off the top of my head... Here they are on Heyside, I wonder if I tidied up where I took that number off on the brake section?

 

 

Interesting discussion on gearboxes, I prefer to avoid making them if possible, but would do if there was a difficult fit. They can be tricky to get working properly. I used to make up the DJH ones in 4mm scale and have done a couple of High Levels I've only made up one in 7mm scale and there are some nice ones available from MSC with a milled brass gearbox. Those are my unit of choice. Of course you can buy a whole loco for the cost of one in 4mm.

[Tony Wright]

49 minutes ago, Clem said:

Another shot of the D246, this time, the brake end in natural lighting. Pressing on with the second side glazing shortly....

 

 

 

That's a lovely model, Clem,

 

Thanks for showing us.

 

Out of interest, how good are the Hornby RTR non-gangwayed Gresley examples? I ask this because I think they're excellent (especially in comparison with the same firm's gangwayed Gresleys). Granted, it's not the same as making your own, but with a bit of detailing/weathering? 

 

 

 

All I've done with these two is change the couplings (immediately!) and dry-brush weather them, then straight away removing some weathering from the windows and panels with a cotton bud dipped in thinners. 

 

I'm very fortunate to own some non-gangwayed Gresleys built from Comet kits by others.

 

 

Including this Tony Geary-built quartet (he also built the A5). 

 

 

And, a close-up of one...................

 

 

John Houlden built this artic pair; representing the earlier 'scarlet' painting, but nicely weathered-down.  

 

I've confined myself to building the gangwayed carriages on LB in the main.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

I'm just reviewing some new books................

 

Out of possible interest?

 

 

One of the latest by Irwell. Fantastic pictures, a joy to look at, but a bit of a muddle when it comes to directions at times. 

 

 

Most-useful if one is contemplating narrow gauge modelling.

 

 

Lugubrious, but fascinating, and one for 'extreme' modellers who wish to incorporate detail only seen when a loco is in bits. 

 

Some interesting spelling as well! 

 

 

Some nice stuff in this, but I'm puzzled why ex-Caledonian locos operating north of the border are included. And, Standards on the Southern Region. Also, I'm not sure preserved railways constitute the 'final years'. Many of the locos are still going strong, their 'final years' a long way off!

 

Full reviews of these (and more) will appear in BRM. 

 

 

[Barry Ten]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"An narrow gauge"?

Edited September 7, 2020 by Barry Ten

[Clem]

53 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Out of interest, how good are the Hornby RTR non-gangwayed Gresley examples? I ask this because I think they're excellent (especially in comparison with the same firm's gangwayed Gresleys). Granted, it's not the same as making your own, but with a bit of detailing/weathering? 

Some really nice models and very nice weathering there, Tony. I think the Hornby non-gangwayed carriages are superb but the range is very limited, isn't it? I only know that my kirks are good enough when they can run along side the Hornbys and not look too crude and out of place. 

 

As I mentioned in my post, you can vary the BT(4)s by adding a ducket to make them D128s, although only 5 were built for the Southern section and 8 for Scotland. I entirely agree that where they made a sow's ear with the gangwayed ones, the non-gangwayed ones are the silk purse. It's just a shame that they've limited themselves to the obvious diagrams. I've so far not tried to cut and shut the Hornbys but it's probably something I'll try (maybe only once!).

 

1 hour ago, dibateg said:

I did these ones in 7mm a few years ago, I shall have to find them, they haven't been out of the box a for a few years, so I should do some new photos. Kirk bodies, Newbold underframes and JLTRT bogies. Can't remember the diagrams off the top of my head... Here they are on Heyside, I wonder if I tidied up where I took that number off on the brake section?

You'll needing them for Basford North, Tony. They look very nice in 7mm. I think they were around until 1959 when the Ivatt 4s first appeared in March of '59, although LM stock tended to swamp the carriage formations from that year with the Peppercorn Lavatory Composites and Brake thirds lasting the longest into '60 and '61.

[Tony Wright]

38 minutes ago, Barry Ten said:

 

"An narrow gauge"?

Well spotted - a blooper indeed. I'll mention it in my review.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

37 minutes ago, Clem said:

Some really nice models and very nice weathering there, Tony. I think the Hornby non-gangwayed carriages are superb but the range is very limited, isn't it? I only know that my kirks are good enough when they can run along side the Hornbys and not look too crude and out of place. 

 

As I mentioned in my post, you can vary the BT(4)s by adding a ducket to make them D128s, although only 5 were built for the Southern section and 8 for Scotland. I entirely agree that where they made a sow's ear with the gangwayed ones, the non-gangwayed ones are the silk purse. It's just a shame that they've limited themselves to the obvious diagrams. I've so far not tried to cut and shut the Hornbys but it's probably something I'll try (maybe only once!).

 

You'll needing them for Basford North, Tony. They look very nice in 7mm. I think they were around until 1959 when the Ivatt 4s first appeared in March of '59, although LM stock tended to swamp the carriage formations from that year with the Peppercorn Lavatory Composites and Brake thirds lasting the longest into '60 and '61.

Thanks Clem,

 

I haven't got many non-gangwayed carriages on LB because the CWNs tend to suggest gangwayed stock for the stoppers. Then, I'll find a picture of a three- or four-set, complete with non-gangwayed stock - often of some antiquity. In one picture (which I can't locate at the moment) of a V2 on a stopper at Essendine, included in the most-motley collection of carriages is a brand new carmine/cream Mk.1! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Flying Pig]

Apropos (fairly) recent references to the Cambridge - Oxford trains, I thought the Wright writes regulars might like to see this photo, captioned "D16/3 62618 heading away from Oxford towards Cambridge, 10/7/52.", which @Metr0Land found for the 16t Mineral thread. It's full of interest but doesn't seem to have spawned much discussion there.  I'm particularly intrigued by the three flush panelled carriages which all seem to have different roof profiles.

 

62618_Oxford_10-7-52 by robertcwp, on Flickr

[Tony Wright]

41 minutes ago, Flying Pig said:

Apropos (fairly) recent references to the Cambridge - Oxford trains, I thought the Wright writes regulars might like to see this photo, captioned "D16/3 62618 heading away from Oxford towards Cambridge, 10/7/52.", which @Metr0Land found for the 16t Mineral thread. It's full of interest but doesn't seem to have spawned much discussion there.  I'm particularly intrigued by the three flush panelled carriages which all seem to have different roof profiles.

 

62618_Oxford_10-7-52 by robertcwp, on Flickr

A fascinating photograph indeed.

 

I like the ex-GE practice of burnishing the smokebox hinge ring still in evidence.

 

The carriages appear to be ex-LMS in origin (I could be wrong, of course - could the third one be ex-GWR?), and the first one might be pre-Grouping. All seem to be non-gangwayed. 

 

It also illustrates Oxford's cosmopolitan situation. An ex-GWR station with an ex-LNER loco leaving it hauling ex-LMS carriages. I'll bet at the other end of the station there's an ex-SR loco on a mixed set about to depart.

 

I await comments from those with greater knowledge with interest 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 7, 2020 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Mike 84C]

Oxford 1952, for me it illustrates the simplicity of WR/GW signaling with the post to the left of the line it refered  to. The carriage sidings to the far right and the loco yard behind them and continuing to the river bridge.  Brought back mainly happy memories.