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.

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Tony,

 

There are a number of features that are present on the South Yorkshireman that are not an issue on the Elizabethan. You will have replaced the aforementioned under scale bogies, as the PV stock had H D bogies throughout. The torpedoed vents that I used are horrible great chunky affairs, future builds standardised on a much neater scale version.  The Elizabethan of course didn't require torpedo vents.  The TK's suffer from the corridor windows having the windows transposed, a fault on the Comet artwork. I believe tis was corrected after the sale of the company. The paint finish is neatly applied but looks disappointingly RTR. Nowadays it would have more of a sheen, rather than just going with a semi gloss varnish supplied by a manufacturer. The Elizabethan has a much more realistic looking finish, even after all these years.

 

The roof boards brackets didn't work very well and still work lose, they need replacing. In addition to the battery boxes, the dynamo, vac cylinders and reservoir were replace on later builds, the original dynamo in particular looks quite comical. There are other more dated aspects to the build, for example retaining the original clip and fit attachment method between the bodies and the floor. What I learned from all this was, it was worth going that extra mile, as once something is finished it should be finished for life. In comparison a full set of Comet carriage kits was constructed for Tebay are still satisfactory all these years later.

 

I'm not sure of the date that the images were taken, I think after 1999 but before Tebay went of the circuit, I think in 2004. The images were shot in the club rooms at Shipley.

Thanks Andrew,

 

You raise a very interesting practical point (even a philosophical one?); that of a model being 'finished for life' (I like that phrase). 

 

Tracing my own model railway 'journey', I reached my personal plateau (I've never reached a peak) in the last decade of the last century, and haven't looked forward since. Thus, anything I've built in the last 20+ years is for 'life' now. In that respect, they're still 'satisfactory'. That's not to say those models shouldn't (couldn't?) be better (they really should be, and would be if I had the aptitude), but they are 'uniform' and all fit reasonably well into the overall 'picture' (now, Little Bytham). 

 

Older stuff still runs on Little Bytham and, down the years much of it has been 'upgraded'. By that, I mean the likes of brakes, lamp brackets/lamps and glazing on locos, etc. However, it becomes a case of ever-decreasing circles inasmuch as to 'fully' bring them up to the last 20-year standard, new motor/gearbox combinations, new wheels and, probably, complete repaints will be needed. When one is talking of 40+ locos, that isn't practicable, especially as they all still work very well (though older-fashioned open-framed motors with Romford gears are never going to be as sweet as modern cams with gearboxes). 

 

In this context the older stuff should only be viewed at a greater distance (the three foot rule?) as 'layout locos' and 'layout trains'. That said, your 'South Yorkshireman' is considerably more than just a 'layout train'. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Exposing (yet again!) my hypocrisy,

 

Good morning Tony,

 

Very pleasant if fresh day in Buxton.

 

I think you are a little too harsh on yourself! Overlooking something is not really hypocrisy... and you admitted your mistake, that is admirable!

 

I can think of a few very senior people that could do with a bit of contrition!

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Many thanks Eric, that’s very useful confirmation

 

I will have to get some transfers from Fox. I have the Sprinbok plaques in my Modelmaster pack but not the coats of arms. How do people model the coat of arms on the cab side as it was mounted on a plaque? The plaque seems to be painted green as per the rest of the loco, so I’m thinking of using a very thin sheet of plasticard or even a square of paper painted over with an attempt to match the Hornby green.

 

I'm aware that it only worked four times (Sir has already made me well aware of the facts!) but I model the 1957 Lizzie and as I have the rake in maroon with a buffet car there’s not much choice about that. I know 60012 was the regular Scottish engine that year, but I want an excuse to run 60009 because it’s my favourite A4 and as I model the south of the ECML, it’s the only real excuse (apart from a works running in trip). Four trips is better than none - I have 60013 on the train at the moment!

 

Andy

Good morning Andy,

 

Do you really need to make a backing piece for the coat of arms transfer?

 

Though I don't exactly know, the real coats of arms were painted on to mild steel plate; much thinner than the cabside steel. To scale it would be thinner than fag-paper; in fact, no thicker

than the transfer paper itself. I'd just put the transfer straight on. How does Hornby do it (if they do it)? 

 

Don't forget that 60009 retained a single chimney in 1957 and had the extra strip at the base of its tender.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

Good morning Andy,

 

Do you really need to make a backing piece for the coat of arms transfer?

 

Though I don't exactly know, the real coats of arms were painted on to mild steel plate; much thinner than the cabside steel. To scale it would be thinner than fag-paper; in fact, no thicker

than the transfer paper itself. I'd just put the transfer straight on. How does Hornby do it (if they do it)? 

 

I can’t believe that ‘Sir’ is recommending that I copy another model, let alone one from Hornby!

 

Seriously, I agree that it would be waver thin in 4mm but it is noticeable in prototype photos, so worth including even if it has to be slightly over scale to be noticeable. Maybe the transfer backing sheet would service the purpose as you suggest. Hornby seem to stick the transfer straight on although my 60013 (bought second hand) has builders plates where the coat of arms should be so I can’t check close up.

 

Quote

 

Don't forget that 60009 retained a single chimney in 1957 and had the extra strip at the base of its tender.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I was aware from your previous posts which are bookmarked and regularly referred to. My donor has a single chimney but I’ve still got to work out how to apply the tender base strip to a Hornby tender.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Edited by thegreenhowards
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

I can’t believe that ‘Sir’ is recommending that I copy another model, let alone one from Hornby!

 

Seriously, I agree that it would be waver thin in 4mm but it is noticeable in prototype photos, so worth including even if it has to be slightly over scale to be noticeable. Maybe the transfer backing sheet would service the purpose as you suggest.

 

The transfers from Fox (no connection) include an outline of the crest "plate", I would agree with Tony that the transfer is sufficient.

 

Chas

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

Some interesting books for me to review in BRM this month...................

 

Tony,

 

Colin Boocock was a former collegue of mine when the DM&EE existed (now, all those years ago!) we both worked at the Railway Technical Centre in Derby. He is a very decent type of chap, if I recall, he became involved in the railway running in Markeaton Park Derby.

Obviousely you must comment on his book as you see fit! Mr Bullied was though, the last great steam locomotive engineer so lets hope Colin's book does him justice.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

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

Some interesting books for me to review in BRM this month...................

 

1476015116_BulleidsLocomotives.jpg.1cdefdf78520594d83b02e7a75998be1.jpg

 

1060248795_ChesterfieldtoRotherham.jpg.5868015d1e97be89357ff2582b7faff8.jpg

 

Sadly, Vic Mitchell has recently died.

 

1091315013_RailwaysofOxford.jpg.1f03c22f890a29fb3e02030c2b2a74a5.jpg

 

1491958484_Stanier8F2-8-0sPartThree.jpg.fedaf69fac45d35666382c556765b202.jpg

 

420896002_StanierThreeCylinder2-6-4Ts.jpg.a5408489635fa403ed37b02671c1fe22.jpg

 

452030429_TheSlowTrain.jpg.258bfbeacfbf3d93ed85e480c78ed238.jpg

 

 

 

My credit card is relieved that there is nothing LNER related!

  • Agree 2
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

A few weeks ago there was a lot of talk on here around using Johnsons Klear to improve the colour on Hornby locos, given how much I dislike Hornby's shade of GWR green I want to give it a try.   My first test was on a Hornby 38xx body which is going to be resprayed eventually into GWR black, which did show an improvement in colour but a slightly patchy finish.  I put this down to the temperature of the Klear (which had just come in from the garage.)  It has also proved very difficult to photograph!

 

This was followed the next day with an application over a section of Hornby Pullman side (on a model on which I will be removing the sides as part of my attempt at converting it into something resembling a 1951 build VSOE Pullman.)   For a clean coach I think it makes quite a difference, I am going to experiment some more with the old side and see how the glossier brown looks once weathered.

43294227-CD97-4B7D-9FBB-E1DFEF51EE39.jpeg.6594c3c2bf4c4483fe33d6a88145245a.jpeg

 

Finally I wanted to test application, a lot of people have mentioned brushing the Klear on as opposed to spraying it.  I am always rather suspect with anything brush painted, having always struggled to avoid it looking streaky so figured it was worth while testing on something else before risking a King or a Castle.  Fortunately a 1999 condition Flying Scotsman has been sat on the shelf behind me for several years waiting for me to rewheel the tender back to OO (when I finally get round to sourcing wheels).  So it has been given two coats of Klear (the first looked a little streaky, the second a bit better but still not up to spraying standards.)  I think I will have to bite the bullet and put the stuff through my airbrush.   I do like the slight change in colour, and for a preserved steam loco the glossier finish is closer to the real thing than the RTR satin.   I have only painted the green areas (and ignored the wheels given they will need dirtying up).  It will need some light weathering to the smokebox, boiler top and footplate eventually...

8B97F1EB-1055-4B6F-9DEF-78905E9B35B1.jpeg.e7d1979b0f32998fb7d074d96b4c7cd2.jpeg

 

 

With the modelling out of the way, a question...

I have been putting the finishing touches to my TPO formation.  For the majority of the coaches I have used Comet gangways which will be fitted with card bellows to fill the gap.  However one job that is still outstanding is the fitting of retracted gangways  to the outer coach ends (and to the siphon G on the front with central gangways).  I dont think a normal moulded gangway doesnt look right for something that should be retracted, so I am very interested to see how others have tackled this problem.  

Thanks 

Rich

Edited by The Fatadder
Add Pullman photo
  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

 

I can’t believe that ‘Sir’ is recommending that I copy another model, let alone one from Hornby!

 

Seriously, I agree that it would be waver thin in 4mm but it is noticeable in prototype photos, so worth including even if it has to be slightly over scale to be noticeable. Maybe the transfer backing sheet would service the purpose as you suggest. Hornby seem to stick the transfer straight on although my 60013 (bought second hand) has builders plates where the coat of arms should be so I can’t check close up.

 

 

I was aware from your previous posts which are bookmarked and regularly referred to. My donor has a single chimney but I’ve still got to work out how to apply the tender base strip to a Hornby tender.

 

Regards

 

Andy

I don't think I recommended that you copy another model, Andy.

 

I just asked how Hornby applied the coats of arms. 

 

You're right in stating that the plates are visible in prototype pictures (usually because dirt has accumulated around them after cleaning), but, to scale, it would still be only wafer-thin. 

 

I honestly don't know; I'm lucky in that my choice for the A4s carrying coats of arms had lost hers by 1958 (probably earlier) so the lower cabside is just blank. Did Hornby do 60013 then, with a worksplate? Since I only usually build models of the locos I saw, then I'd have to consider just 60009 or 60010 in future, both of which (it would seem) carried their coats of arms to the end. That said, the last time I saw 60010 she was minus her chimney, and I can't remember if her cabside plates were still on. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
4 hours ago, jrg1 said:

Thanks Bucoops-you are at exactly the same stage as me, with Fox bogies and MJT suspension.  I scratched the turnbuckle underframe, as the 2D etches looked unsatisfactory to me.

 

What body are you using? I've had to do quite a few modifications to the RDEB one.

 

Agreed the trussing could be better but I'll probably stick with the etched ones. I have used nuts instead of the supplied washers for where they are attached to the queen posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Retracted gangways

5E9B27C0-CCC9-413D-9222-8A6234E5E306.jpeg.1eb307becf107ec39eed880faa17de78.jpeg
33D5C1A3-9686-48F1-BE1C-F81380C67554.jpeg.8aabdd3bee94e6c9b4834916cbf5195a.jpeg

different width plasticard to look like the bellows, paper on top and brass front.  Depth of plasticard was 0.25 and 0.5 alternating.

not perfectly accurate but once mucky black and at speed.....

richard 

  • Like 11
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
35 minutes ago, richard i said:

Retracted gangways


 

different width plasticard to look like the bellows, paper on top and brass front.  Depth of plasticard was 0.25 and 0.5 alternating.

not perfectly accurate but once mucky black and at speed.....

richard 

That looks an ideal solution, If I am seeing it correctly you have used 3 layers of 0.5mm + the outer brass layer and 3 of 0.25?  I think I should be able to draw up the GWR gangway pretty easily in CAD and run some off with my silhouette cutter 

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

Thanks Andrew,

 

You raise a very interesting practical point (even a philosophical one?); that of a model being 'finished for life' (I like that phrase). 

 

Tracing my own model railway 'journey', I reached my personal plateau (I've never reached a peak) in the last decade of the last century, and haven't looked forward since. Thus, anything I've built in the last 20+ years is for 'life' now. In that respect, they're still 'satisfactory'. That's not to say those models shouldn't (couldn't?) be better (they really should be, and would be if I had the aptitude), but they are 'uniform' and all fit reasonably well into the overall 'picture' (now, Little Bytham). 

 

Older stuff still runs on Little Bytham and, down the years much of it has been 'upgraded'. By that, I mean the likes of brakes, lamp brackets/lamps and glazing on locos, etc. However, it becomes a case of ever-decreasing circles inasmuch as to 'fully' bring them up to the last 20-year standard, new motor/gearbox combinations, new wheels and, probably, complete repaints will be needed. When one is talking of 40+ locos, that isn't practicable, especially as they all still work very well (though older-fashioned open-framed motors with Romford gears are never going to be as sweet as modern cams with gearboxes). 

 

In this context the older stuff should only be viewed at a greater distance (the three foot rule?) as 'layout locos' and 'layout trains'. That said, your 'South Yorkshireman' is considerably more than just a 'layout train'. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Good Evening Tony,

 

Being 'finished' for life is about being happy and satisfied with what you've done, I use it as a reminder when modelling is not always going to plan or if laziness tries to sneak in. All railway modelling is about compromise, it depends as an individual were you are happy to draw that line. with the South Yorkshireman, everything was new, the bar had yet to be set. By the time I had completed the MJT RF for the formation, I had started inserting doors into the Twin FO-FO. I realised my expectations were set too low, for what I could have done with the Bachman conversions. They are not bad carriages by any means. However, they still niggle at me, as not being as good as they could have been. This was due to my lack of experience of managing and working on such large project. It was always in the back of my mind, that one day I would come back and 'complete them'. 

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

 

I can’t believe that ‘Sir’ is recommending that I copy another model, let alone one from Hornby!

 

Seriously, I agree that it would be waver thin in 4mm but it is noticeable in prototype photos, so worth including even if it has to be slightly over scale to be noticeable. Maybe the transfer backing sheet would service the purpose as you suggest. Hornby seem to stick the transfer straight on although my 60013 (bought second hand) has builders plates where the coat of arms should be so I can’t check close up.

 

 

I was aware from your previous posts which are bookmarked and regularly referred to. My donor has a single chimney but I’ve still got to work out how to apply the tender base strip to a Hornby tender.

 

Regards

 

Andy

Good evening Andy,

 

In email correspondence with Eric, it seems you're OK with not having to put the strip at the base of 9's 1935-style streamlined corridor tender to represent the loco in 1957. So, single chimney and later tender emblem (with wrong-facing lion on the offside, probably). 

 

By next year, she had a tender with the strip.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sandra said:

Tony,

 

I haven’t reached my peak yet or even a plateau. I do try and improve each item I build particularly in regard to painting and weathering but I feel I’ve a long way to go.

 

When I look at some of the locomotives which Roy built for Retford I realise that I can never attain that standard which is quite depressing but I carry on and do the best I can.
 

Retford does have some very old stock which should possibly be replaced such as a train partly made up of Kitmaster coaches which could be at least fifty years old. Do I replace them? The answer is probably yes but I’m reluctant to get rid of them for they actually look quite good and they are part of the history of the railway. Retford is a model railway with a lot of history and whilst I don’t want to preserve it in aspic, I do want to respect the builder who built it but at the same time maintain, improve and hopefully finish it.

 

Sandra

Good evening Sandra,

 

I'd carry on doing exactly what you're doing. Retford is legitimately now your property and, as such, it's up to you what you do with it. 

 

I don't think it demeans the memory of the great man who initially created it if you seek to improve things. Not at all. Speaking personally, after my demise (though I'll not know anything about it), if whoever acquires all my model railway stuff chooses to alter/improve what I've done, so what? If it makes it more detailed/more accurate, then good. 

 

You're right; Retford is a large piece of the history of model railways, but it's not a thing from the past. It's on-going, it's evolving and, when it's finished, what better way of remembering Roy? Not as a memorial as such, though it will acknowledge the past.  

 

Don't worry if you don't ever attain the standards Roy set. I assure you, you're in a very large majority of modellers, of which I'm also one. However, it's important that your own work is on Retford, and, from what I've seen, it's more than good enough. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 30368 said:

 

Tony,

 

Colin Boocock was a former collegue of mine when the DM&EE existed (now, all those years ago!) we both worked at the Railway Technical Centre in Derby. He is a very decent type of chap, if I recall, he became involved in the railway running in Markeaton Park Derby.

Obviousely you must comment on his book as you see fit! Mr Bullied was though, the last great steam locomotive engineer so lets hope Colin's book does him justice.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

It's a splendid book, Richard.

 

A wonderful piece of work.

 

Mr Bulleid's locos are perfectly-described, warts and all.....................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I don't think I recommended that you copy another model, Andy.

 

I just asked how Hornby applied the coats of arms. 

 

You're right in stating that the plates are visible in prototype pictures (usually because dirt has accumulated around them after cleaning), but, to scale, it would still be only wafer-thin. 

 

I honestly don't know; I'm lucky in that my choice for the A4s carrying coats of arms had lost hers by 1958 (probably earlier) so the lower cabside is just blank. Did Hornby do 60013 then, with a worksplate? Since I only usually build models of the locos I saw, then I'd have to consider just 60009 or 60010 in future, both of which (it would seem) carried their coats of arms to the end. That said, the last time I saw 60010 she was minus her chimney, and I can't remember if her cabside plates were still on. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Hi Tony

 

I have looked through all photo I have of A4 60013 dating from the late 1950's until 1962 and cannot find a single photo of her with the coat of arms on the cab side.

 

Regards

 

David

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Never rely on memory, especially one like mine!

 

I was convinced (and had noted it many moons ago) that 60009 had a streamlined corridor tender with a strip added to its soleplate in the late-'50s/early-'60s. Yet, having checked again through all my sources, can I find the picture I was thinking of? 

 

Andy (Sparkes) you're quite safe in omitting it from your model of 60009. 

 

Thanks to Eric (Merlin) for the further information.

Edited by Tony Wright
to add something
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, landscapes said:

Hi Tony

 

I have looked through all photo I have of A4 60013 dating from the late 1950's until 1962 and cannot find a single photo of her with the coat of arms on the cab side.

 

Regards

 

David

Thanks David,

 

I've looked through lots of my sources and in every picture I've seen of 13 in BR days there's nothing on the cabsides below the numbers. 

 

I wonder when it lost the coats of arms? 

 

On these minutiae of details we ponder.............................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

Thanks David,

 

I've looked through lots of my sources and in every picture I've seen of 13 in BR days there's nothing on the cabsides below the numbers. 

 

I wonder when it lost the coats of arms? 

 

On these minutiae of details we ponder.............................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi Tony

 

My best guess would be when 60013 paid a visit to Doncaster Works during her career.

 

You have got me wondering now so I will investigate further to see if I can find a dated photo of her with the plaque on her cab side.

 

Watch this space.

 

Regards

 

David

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to 60009's tender (for those who are still awake!).

 

By the end of 1963, she'd acquired one of the trio of cut-down tenders (ex-the '48 Exchanges; FLYING SCOTSMAN ended up with the other two). 

 

1876433576_60009DoncasterShed14_11_63.jpg.7a3e07940eae178b76cd36e6daea73d9.jpg

 

Was this the occasion of her last shopping? Wasn't she the last steam loco repaired at Doncaster? 

 

Coat of arms prominent on the cabside.

 

It would seem that 60010 also lost her coats of arms at some time in BR days.

 

1462858590_60010Doncaster11_11_62.jpg.3930bfa20b3715e8ef3e3915a235a5be.jpg

 

Doncaster, at the end of 1962. 

 

I ponder on occasions how much of all this sort of stuff is really relevant? The minutiae of detail differences on locos fascinates me, and I try to incorporate those differences into the models I make. But how many people know, or even care? 

 

 

  • Like 10
  • Friendly/supportive 2
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.