Jump to content

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

'Hurrah Henrys' and their 'trophy' female companions who rolled up in mint classics. Had they got their own hands dirty in the restorations?

Interesting choice of words Tony...

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

I meant no offence to you. But I do get annoyed when magazines present train formations which I know to be wrong or, at best, unusual, in order to be able to represent a train with RTR coaches. I would like magazines to set a good example. What an individual modeller does is up to them and if you’ve represented trains correctly then I’m delighted. That’s what I look for more than anything when I look at a layout.
 

Andy

More than half of my trains are made up of RTR coaches at the moment; there are lots of kits waiting to be built though. I do try (except for catering cars as mentioned earlier) to get the right classification (e.g. SK, CK, etc.) of coaches in the sets but unless I have actual photographic evidence I don't worry whether, for example, my ex-GWR SK is a Honrby Collett, Bachmann Collett or Hornby Hawksworth.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Agreed, and I'd guess even fewer know which way round the composite should be in a Southern loco-hauled 3-set.

 

John

 

So as not to keep anybody awake wondering, the first class end goes against the lower-numbered brake 3rd/2nd.

Thanks John! Very useful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rowanj said:

I am interested in what an authentic rake of coaching stock for a particular service should be, but only from an academic point of view. In practical terms, even with a loft to play with, I only have space to run 4 rakes of expresses, and even then of no more than 10 coaches.

 

So I have a reasonable Lizzie, and could have a Scotsman,Talisman, and Heart of Midlothian, but would then have no room for any of the ordinary expresses or reliefs, which give me the chance to mix and match stock, yet keep the rake reasonably real. So I go for the generic, knowing that the rake is theoretically wrong, but happy that the mix of Greeley, Thompson and  Mark 1 with some catering added looks Ok and has a passing resemblance to the working timetable.

 

Had I the space, I would love to have a whole fleet of appropriate rakes, but that isn't realistic for me and must surely be true for many modellers.  I built the SP Craven for personal pleasure and want to run it. So I do,even though it shouldn't be in the train where it currently resides.

 

 

 

My trains are 60% of the length of their prototypes, rounded - so a 10-coach train in real life becomes a 6-coach on the layout, for example. By condensing catering portions to a single car and by losing the odd SK or two it's quite easy to retain the essence of the prototype formation.

Edited by St Enodoc
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening  John,

 

fancy meeting you here.

 

The East coast mainline, is a big  subject for the average individual modeler to tackle. Even a life times work such as LB only scratches the surface in many respects. If passenger train formations are you thing, I would think it better for most to reign in their ambitions and look for something that is more easily doable. A case in point might be Clems work on the Grantham Nottingham Derby lines. That  area has a wonderful set of 'normal house' sized carriage formations* and some interesting motive power.

 

*Even some formations To and from KX.

Morning Andrew.

We all play with trains for a variety of reasons. My layout, which at my age (71) is likely to be my last, was chosen to represent where I did my spotting in the late 50's\early 60's, and is all about personal nostalgia. It is also all my own work, so is time and cash limited to what I can do with it. So I,m afraid that, although I get as much right as I can,, worrying about what I got wrong is not high on my agenda.

I do read about things like train formations, and have " improved" mine over the last few years, but I'm not obsessive about it. Actually, I run the layout very little, much more modelling time and pleasure being spent at the work bench.

 

  • Like 11
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 96701 said:

I get the message "Tony Wright cannot receive messages."  I would guess that your popularity has lead to your Inbox being full. No rush, I am a looooong way from replacing any BR1 bogies with Commonwealth, so if you don't mind storing them for a little while........

Thanks Phil,

 

I'll see what I can do with regard to deleting messages, though I've probably forgotten how to....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

Tony(s),

 

My response was a bit flippant and Tony T has hit the nail on the head. I got into kit building coaches by tackling a couple of SP BSOs to make a semi realistic rake. A series of articles which took the reader from RTR only, through a rake with a couple of brass sides and culminating in the Lizzie or similar would draw the reader in gently without seeming too daunting at first.

 

I’d write it myself based on my experiences if anyone was interested!

 

Andy

Good morning Andy,

 

Please consider writing something. 

 

Without being disparaging to your photography, why not consider bringing the finished rake(s) over here when restrictions are lifted and we can photograph them on Little Bytham. Or, I could take pictures on your layout (in time). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rowanj said:

Morning Andrew.

We all play with trains for a variety of reasons. My layout, which at my age (71) is likely to be my last, was chosen to represent where I did my spotting in the late 50's\early 60's, and is all about personal nostalgia. It is also all my own work, so is time and cash limited to what I can do with it. So I,m afraid that, although I get as much right as I can,, worrying about what I got wrong is not high on my agenda.

I do read about things like train formations, and have " improved" mine over the last few years, but I'm not obsessive about it. Actually, I run the layout very little, much more modelling time and pleasure being spent at the work bench.

 

We share many similarities John (except that I'm older, work as part of a team and have a reasonable amount of time for my 'hobby'). 

 

Getting things as right as one can is a perfectly reasonable aim, especially given the restrictions you're bound by. 

 

As is known, my 'space' restrictions with Little Bytham are not too bad (32' x 12', which isn't actually quite enough for a true-scale representation), which means I can model 'actual' trains, in their full length. In this respect, I admit to being on the obsessive side in that I wouldn't contemplate an ECML depiction in 4mm in less than 30', nor would I countenance shortening trains. Too many compromises would be the result. 

 

And, because of this, as Headstock has alluded to, it's been a modelling lifetime's work to build/adapt a representation of those wonderful trains of my youthful 'spotting years. But, as Andrew has also observed, I've only (if at all) scratched the surface of what, for a 'true' representation, is required. Though I have the likes of 'The Elizabethan', 'The Flying Scotsman', 'The Queen of Scots' and 'The Talisman(s)', they're only one set each. Two are really needed, one each way. I have no room for 'The Heart of Midlothian' (which would need two sets, anyway), nor 'The Aberdonian' and its like, plus umpteen other, non-named sets. 

 

I get round these 'serious deficiencies' by running a 'representative' sequence, lasting around two and a half hours (which, to be fair, is enough). It starts (passenger-wise) with the Down 'Morning Talisman' and concludes (appropriately?) with the Up 'Afternoon Talisman'. 

 

Happiness is Little Bytham! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

 

I've just surprised myself (and, no doubt, countless others!) by remembering how to empty (at least part of) my PM inbox. 

 

I now have 10% capacity, so I'm able to receive PMs again. It should last for another year.....................

  • Round of applause 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

More than half of my trains are made up of RTR coaches at the moment; there are lots of kits waiting to be built though. I do try (except for catering cars as mentioned earlier) to get the right classification (e.g. SK, CK, etc.) of coaches in the sets but unless I have actual photographic evidence I don't worry whether, for example, my ex-GWR SK is a Honrby Collett, Bachmann Collett or Hornby Hawksworth.

John,

 

I have the same problem with pre BR stock. The CWN clearly designates Mark 1s but older stock is more difficult to fathom. Sometimes, particularly in the early ‘50s, they are marked as ‘Transverse corridor’ (aka Thompson) or ‘End door Vehicle’ (certain Gresleys) and sometimes one can tell from the number of compartments or weight of the vehicle but often it’s guesswork or relying on photos. In practice I think that they were often used interchangeably, particularly in the less prestigious trains, so we’re only reflecting the prototype when we do the same.

 

As for your shortening of trains to six vehicles, I can appreciate that is necessary for many people but personally I would find it hard to reflect the character of an ECML express with more than a very minor trim. Losing an SK or two in a rake which has several is fine, but shortening the catering core would destroy the character for me. This would be particularly difficult when the catering is formed of a triplet! 

 

Regards

 

Andy

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Andy,

 

Please consider writing something. 

 

Without being disparaging to your photography, why not consider bringing the finished rake(s) over here when restrictions are lifted and we can photograph them on Little Bytham. Or, I could take pictures on your layout (in time). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Thanks Tony,

 

I’ll drop you a PM with some thoughts in a few days.

 

I will definitely take you up on your photography offer. One of the problems I have is that there are few places on Gresley Jn where I can photograph a full 11+ coach train to good effect. That’s one reason why I take so many videos for my Gresley Jn thread - it’s the best way of showing the full formation.

 

Regards

 

Andy


 

Andy

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

....Getting things as right as one can is a perfectly reasonable aim, especially given the restrictions you're bound by. 

 

....as Headstock has alluded to, it's been a modelling lifetime's work to build/adapt a representation of those wonderful trains of my youthful 'spotting years. But, as Andrew has also observed, I've only (if at all) scratched the surface of what, for a 'true' representation, is required....

 

You raise a really good point, Tony.  

 

As well as the physical limitations of our model world creations, time plays a big factor.  As the owner of a relatively young layout still under construction (and it is a one-man project), there is an endless list of things that I still need to do before it becomes anywhere near ‘right’.  Replacing a RB with an RBK in one rake of coaches falls well down the list of priorities, when a platform canopy still needs to be constructed and a turntable installed! 

 

I think we sometimes can forget that that most of the projects shared on these pages are part of a bigger ‘work in progress’, and the journey of getting all things right can be a very long one.  Which presents some interesting options regarding how this challenge is approached.  For example, is it better to do one part of an upgrade across the whole roster of rolling stock (eg: basic weathering it all) or to focus on one rake at a time and making it fully accurate, detailed and completed?  I find myself currently doing a bit of both!

 

But it is also interesting and helpful when things get pointed out on this forum.  It is easy to become blind to things that are just plain wrong, through familiarity, whereas it sticks out like a sore thumb when viewed through a fresh pair of eyes.

 

”Getting things as right as you reasonably can” is a well balanced mantra to adopt, I think.

  • Like 6
  • Agree 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

We share many similarities John (except that I'm older, work as part of a team and have a reasonable amount of time for my 'hobby'). 

 

Getting things as right as one can is a perfectly reasonable aim, especially given the restrictions you're bound by. 

 

As is known, my 'space' restrictions with Little Bytham are not too bad (32' x 12', which isn't actually quite enough for a true-scale representation), which means I can model 'actual' trains, in their full length. In this respect, I admit to being on the obsessive side in that I wouldn't contemplate an ECML depiction in 4mm in less than 30', nor would I countenance shortening trains. Too many compromises would be the result. 

 

And, because of this, as Headstock has alluded to, it's been a modelling lifetime's work to build/adapt a representation of those wonderful trains of my youthful 'spotting years. But, as Andrew has also observed, I've only (if at all) scratched the surface of what, for a 'true' representation, is required. Though I have the likes of 'The Elizabethan', 'The Flying Scotsman', 'The Queen of Scots' and 'The Talisman(s)', they're only one set each. Two are really needed, one each way. I have no room for 'The Heart of Midlothian' (which would need two sets, anyway), nor 'The Aberdonian' and its like, plus umpteen other, non-named sets. 

 

I get round these 'serious deficiencies' by running a 'representative' sequence, lasting around two and a half hours (which, to be fair, is enough). It starts (passenger-wise) with the Down 'Morning Talisman' and concludes (appropriately?) with the Up 'Afternoon Talisman'. 

 

Happiness is Little Bytham! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony,

 

I do think it’s possible to run a full sequence provided some compromises on speed of operation are made. On Gresley Jn (timetable based on Hatfield) I’m currently running through an almost complete sequence from midday to midnight. There were many more trains at Hatfield because of the Cambridge line and inner suburban terminators. My sequence has 154 trains in it and I’m still finding things to add!

 

There are three compromises:

1. A lot of rakes get used more than once. For example my Talisman rake gets three appearances for the up morning and down and up afternoon Talismen. This is possible by modelling the 1957 service as the same rake worked out and back. Of course I should still have two rakes with different coach numbers, but as you’ve said before ...who reads the coach numbers? Some sets like my quad art get used many more times than that! I do try to get a different loco on each time though to ring the changes. Goods stock also get used several times, particularly mineral wagons.
2. I have a few fixed rakes like the Talsiman, Lizzie and West Riding which were very distinctive. But the majority of ECML expresses were formed of 6-10 Mark 1s and a Gresley/ Thompson catering core. So I have the Mark 1s and catering cores in a pile of trays and pull out what I need for each train. To economise on coaches some are ‘borrowed’ from the fixed rakes. Coach roof boards are not always correct but I do have different ones on each side so that I can get it right more often than not. Rather like the numbers they’re rarely read!

3. Time! It takes a while to form each train up. I enjoy this as I research them in the CWN and then form them up from my stock but it’s not a spectator sport! I’m running the sequence through at one train a day. At that rate it will take almost half a year to run through the whole (half) day.

 

This works well for lockdown but when friends come round, I run a much shorter sequence based on what’s set up in my fiddle yard and a handful of cassettes. This tends to be similar to your sequence in length (40 movements over 2-3 hours) and is the practical maximum for a visit. 
 

Regards

 

Andy

 

 

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to reflect on how many of our Small Suppliers probably started by producing items they wanted and which weren't available or "good enough".

 

London Road Models started out to produce carriages for the London Road  layout and grew to become a significant supplier of mainly pre-group loco and rolling stock kits. I am sure that the other contributors to this forum can name many others. Photo etching made a more straightforward way into kit production and 3D promises to do the same, although much of what is available commercially doesn't yet match the quality (surface finish) of moulded plastic, cast w/m or etched kits.

 

If something you want isn't available (and no amount of keyboard bashing will guarantee that the RTR manufacturers will do so), then you could always have a go at producing it yourself or working with an existing supplier to create it.

 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

We run a sequence/timetable of around 100 moves on Buckingham with only 6 rakes of carriages and 6 fiddle yard roads.

 

Each set appears several times, sometimes as just one service (the Leighton Buzzard branch set just shuttles back and forth all day, just like it would in real life) but other sets double or triple up as a GCR express to Marylebone would, in reality, look just like one to Oxford. Changing locos and adding and removing tail loads and turning them round on the turntable fiddle yard all adds to the variety of the appearance and the operational interest.

 

Before I saw and operated Buckingham, my ideal layout would have had a huge fiddle yard with dozens of different trains but running the layout has changed my view entirely. Now all I need is an interesting sequence and a good variety of moves to carry out and I am sorted.

 

When we extended Narrow Road into a bigger layout, with 5 stations and 140ft scenic run we have done away with a conventional fiddle yard and modelled a second terminus station and added some carriage sidings. That way, the stock (every carriage is kit or scratchbuilt, not a RTR in sight) is out on view all the time, instead of being hidden away and only seen for a few seconds each time the layout is run. We thought "Why do all that work and hide it in a fiddle yard 99.5% of the time". So the layout is laid out like Buckingham on steroids and instead of a fiddle yard, we have an extra through station and a second terminus. We don't have hundreds of carriages, we manage with 9 rakes of passenger carriages, the longest being 8 bogie carriages, quite appropriate for the period modelled but it means we can build them all.

 

The layout and our approach doesn't suit everybody and I don't know how it would work at all if you were modelling a real location and creating true replicas of actual trains but it does for us. A Claughton on 8 LNWR carriages rattling past a Midland Compound on a rake of clerestories going the other way, while a branch train sets of from the bay and a loco backs down from the shed to attach to a train in another platform just makes me happy! 

  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rowanj said:

Morning Andrew.

We all play with trains for a variety of reasons. My layout, which at my age (71) is likely to be my last, was chosen to represent where I did my spotting in the late 50's\early 60's, and is all about personal nostalgia. It is also all my own work, so is time and cash limited to what I can do with it. So I,m afraid that, although I get as much right as I can,, worrying about what I got wrong is not high on my agenda.

I do read about things like train formations, and have " improved" mine over the last few years, but I'm not obsessive about it. Actually, I run the layout very little, much more modelling time and pleasure being spent at the work bench.

 

 

Good morning John,

 

what you set out to do with your layout comes across very well. The observer definitely gets an impression of your own spotting days. More than just nostalgia is represented, it is clear that a great deal of knowledge is recorded in your modelling. In addition, you are a maker of things, that adds another layer of interest for the observer. Stay safe and long may it continue.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had the pleasure of visiting Tony W and seeing Little Bytham for myself but for a layout that I hadn't been to see personally, a set of photos like that would be a really great illustration of what I was banging on about earlier!

 

I am not saying that every photo of every layout should be like that but I do find shots like those hugely interesting.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 16
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I am not saying that every photo of every layout should be like that but I do find shots like those hugely interesting.


I completely agree and this, IMHO, is where the print magazines are currently missing a trick in their illustration of layouts.

 

I understand the need for editors to make the best use of the available pages to show a layout off to its best.  But sometimes including a photo or two of, for want of a better description, the off-scene elements and how the layout fits into its setting would add to the overall description and illustration for the benefit of readers.  
 

  • Agree 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

I have had the pleasure of visiting Tony W and seeing Little Bytham for myself but for a layout that I hadn't been to see personally, a set of photos like that would be a really great illustration of what I was banging on about earlier!

 

I am not saying that every photo of every layout should be like that but I do find shots like those hugely interesting.

I have not had the pleasure of seeing Little Bytham 'in the flesh', but fully agree with Tony, Tony. From a design point of view, seeing how it all fits together I find fascinating. But also seeing those images where you try to work out if it is the model or the prototype are wonderful. As one who would love to get back into railway modelling, I find almost all comments on here (except mine) very helpful. With probably two house moves this year, one this month, it is as well that I do not have a delicate model to move as well as everything else.

 

Lloyd

  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tony, those photo’s of LB in its context are definitely worth showing, they are very informative.

 

Re: LB’s overall design, is there anything that you would change, with the benefit of hindsight?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wheel quartering, by company?
 

After an hour searching RMweb and Google, I am still trying to find the answer to a very simple question, which I am sure will be answered on this thread in seconds.
 

The kit instructions just say that the ‘wheels need quartering’. Great which way?
 

The kit is for a Lancashire and Yorkshire Class 23 0-6-0 saddle tank, later LMS and then BR.
 

I heave read that LMS locos quarter their wheels the opposite way to other companies (left hand lead?), so my question is if the left hand crank pins are a 12 O’clock, should the right cranks pins be at 9 O’clock or at 3 O’clock?
 

A secondary question, should I glue them in with cyano (Superglue/Rocket Cyano)? One of them keeps unscrewing, despite the connecting rods being OK on the other crank pins.
 

Thanks in advance.
 

Jamie

Edited by Jamiel
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.