Wright writes.....

[Woodcock29]

6 hours ago, jrg1 said:

A 51L kit, with MJT floorpan.  The sides go together much the same as MJT, with separate panels.  I will probably use nuts for the next turnbuckle underframe.  

Considering the vacuum reservoir, I wondered if they were located crosswise-It seems difficult to understand that they were a standard fitting on 61'6" stock, and not on short stock.

Hi John

As far as I know the 51ft underframes didn't have vacuum reservoirs - see my email.

Andrew

[robmcg]

2 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Rob,

 

The first thing I notice is that its got Stannier valve spindle guides. NOOOOOOOOOOO! Not being an expert on RTR, is this because they have used an inappropriate Jubilee chassis? 

 

 

It matters because its our history and people enjoy collecting the differences, some even like making a difference. See wot I did there?

 

 

Indeed you are right Headstock on so many counts, so I went back and changed it a bit...

 

Quite galling to see an error like that when you know about such things!  Thanks.

[Iain.d]

Back on New Year’s Day I started a simple Ratio 12 Ton box van that had been sitting on my shelf for far too long. Last night I finished it. I’m quite pleased with it; although a humble wagon kit it’s the first one I’ve made in many, many years.

 

 

I added some additional detail to the underframes, Alan Gibson sprung buffers and a set of adapted/modified screw couplings. Its brush painted with a bauxite(ish) colour and then sprayed with Mig Ultra Matt varnish. I did a bit of weathering using a Vallejo umber wash and a Games Workshop Nuln Oil – a first for me – and then a bit of dry brushing. Not on par with much of the weathering shown on here, but it’s a start.

 

Currently on the go I also have two recycled Hornby Stanier coaches; the build is close to completion. I might get chance to photograph those and show them tomorrow.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

Edited January 23, 2021 by Iain.d
Take something out

[Craigw]

6 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

 

 

So, playing devils advocate here... what are people’s thoughts on why it does matter?   I don’t think I will ever get a model 100% correct... so why do we beat ourselves up so much about these historical minutiae?

 

It matters to me because I derive my pleasure from making models as accurate as I can - or rather as accurate as I can that I am happy with my modelling efforts. 

 

For me the fun is in researching and building. Trying to make things as close to the real thing is important and is the way I "have fun" with my hobby.

 

You will read many comments that suggest that someone who is concerned about accuracy and modifies or rebuilds things does not have fun or enjoy the hobby. I get annoyed or frustrated about some things I am building but the reward when I finish is worth it.

 

Regards,

 

Craig W

Edited January 23, 2021 by Craigw

[t-b-g]

6 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

Lovely- my favourite A4!

Andrew

 

I would never have guessed that Mr Woodcock29!

[Tony Wright]

Some most-interesting comments overnight. Many thanks to all those who've posted. 

 

Whether one bothers about 'accuracy' (and that can be anything in railway modelling; from overall proportions, detail differences, if it looks like the real thing, how it operates, etc, etc, etc) is a highly-personal thing. 

 

On a personal level, I look at the issue in two principal ways. If, say, I'm considering a locomotive model, I ask myself two questions. One, how well is it made/finished (I'm not talking about RTR here) and, two, how accurate is it? Concerning two extremes here regarding A4s, one could be beautifully made/painted/weathered, but be full of anomalies - wrong tender, crest/plates present where/when they should/shouldn't be, chimney type, position of front guard irons/cylinder drain cocks and so - alongside an 'accurate' one which has been badly put together and painted with tar. As I said, two extremes. And, talking of 'extremes', one of the finest A4 models I've ever seen (in a scale much bigger than the master builder's normal work - he's well known on here, by the way) had the wrong Gill Sans (correct) '6' on its front numberplate. 'Right', but wrong, if you see what I mean; it should have been 'curly-tailed'. 

 

Repeating my question again, does it matter? It does to me; even more so because I write a lot of published stuff regarding, in particular, ex-LNER motive power. I'm frequently at odds with many published (standard?) works by the likes of Yeadon, the RCTS and, on rare occasions, Irwell. Some of my books (not those I've written) are covered with my scribblings in the margins, pointing out errors and inaccuracies. In fairness, on some occasions there'll be no record of, say, a tender change (60015, for instance, towing a 1928 corridor tender for just a week or two in 1959 or 1960) and much of the original information is collected from crumbling, hand-written notes; many, lucky to survive. 

 

It's also a mistake to foolishly claim something from memory. I was certain 60009 had (at least for a time) a tender with a strip, but I cannot now find the evidence I once believed. If I've mislead anyone, my apologies. 

 

One learns something every day. For instance, from that wonderful picture of WOODCOCK at Little Bytham which appeared a couple of pages ago, about which Tony Gee mentioned the splendid GNR rotating disc signals. Guess what Roy Vinter and I installed on the model? Yes, LNER/BR ones. Why? Because I went on later photographs (typical, isn't it about BR; the minute anything is repainted, it's a sure sign it'll be removed/scrapped?). And, what about the colour of the barge boards? in the picture, they're cream. On the model, they're green, because that's how they were in a later picture - and at Egmanton, Tuxford and Retford from my own photographs. Now I know, can I live with that? For the time being............. Again, does it matter? Yes, it does, and those things will be altered. Ignorance was bliss! Finally, regarding the picture, nobody has pointed out that 60029 is towing one of the cut-down tenders, ex-the '48 Exchanges (even though she was not a participant). The other two were being towed by 60033 and 60034 at the same time. 

 

I think there is a huge responsibility upon those who have their work published. Does that responsibility extend now to the likes of threads such as this? In a way, it reaches even more people than any book/magazine. Time was when it was the territory of the relative few; not now. 

 

That said, I would be horrified if folk were dissuaded from putting their work on here for fear of it being 'wrong' or even misleading. I'd much sooner see something an individual has made by themselves, no matter how 'imperfect'. That way, we learn, and improve.

 

Many thanks again. 

Edited January 23, 2021 by Tony Wright
to add something

[grahame]

9 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

Boring place now, Pendolinos and EMU's etc. 

 

 

Oooo. That sounds exciting.

And no doubt without all the smoke, smuts and dirt will have a cleaner nicer atmosphere. Each to his own.

 

But yep, capturing the atmosphere in modelling is important to me, although that doesn't have to be period smokey grubbiness and grime.

 

 

Edited January 23, 2021 by grahame

[Headstock]

6 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Indeed you are right Headstock on so many counts, so I went back and changed it a bit...

 

Quite galling to see an error like that when you know about such things!  Thanks.

 

Good morning Rob,

 

I have a soft spot for the pre Stanier LMS locomotives, in particular the Patriots. In some alternative history, I would liked to have seen a Fowler Pacific. Both modelers and RTR manufactures have this unfortunate obsession with fitting them with Stanier pattern valve spindle guides, it's pure evil. I think that you should send your adjusted artwork to those cads at Bachmann.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Headstock
add adjusted.

[Bucoops]

12 hours ago, jrg1 said:

A 51L kit, with MJT floorpan.  The sides go together much the same as MJT, with separate panels.  I will probably use nuts for the next turnbuckle underframe.  

Considering the vacuum reservoir, I wondered if they were located crosswise-It seems difficult to understand that they were a standard fitting on 61'6" stock, and not on short stock.

 

That sounds like the same kit - 

 

 

Have a measure up, especially of the body height. I have found the need to trim a bit off - 

 

 

Really need to get back on building mine - I'm at the point of working out how to fix the roof on and my first attempt failed and got a bit despondent. I'm very interested in how you get on with yours.

[Tony Wright]

Digging through some more of the old files.........................

 

Some early pictures of Retford.

 

These must have been taken not long after it was in its permanent home. Several appeared in the MRJ at the time under Retford Rising. Does anyone know when that was? 

 

 

I think this one was on the front cover.

 

 

The GN fiddle yard is small, isn't it? 

 

 

I wonder what happened to MALLARD?

 

 

Even one of my locos ran on it. The same one which ran on Narrow Road and the frames from which are now under COCK O' THE NORTH. 

 

 

It looks like somebody had started that signal, Graham................. But, where is it now? 

 

 

'The Elizabethan' was still under construction.

 

 

South 'box was still awaiting completion and painting. 

 

 

 

 

Roy had just completed the B16/1 on shed.

 

 

Did someone mention Kitmaster coaches?

 

 

North Junction. Just one building completed.

 

 

There's a superb footbridge in place now. 

 

 

What a vision! 

 

 

[Jon4470]

Interesting postings about accuracy recently. I totally agree that it is a personal thing. 

 

For me the key point is that, if I am going to build something, it may as well be correct. I also enjoy the research and challenge that this provides. However there comes a point where I just get on with it. Otherwise the risk is nothing will ever get built - either through fear that it is incorrect or because research becomes all consuming. After all, my greatest enjoyment comes from building things.

 

That brings me to another point raised about re-visiting previous builds. I tend to complete a model, learn my lessons, promise myself that the next one will be better and then move on to the next project. Maybe one day I’ll go back to previous projects and upgrade but, so far, the attraction of new projects has always won.

 

Jon

[APOLLO]

2 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Oooo. That sound exciting.

And no doubt without all the smoke, smuts and dirt will have a cleaner nicer atmosphere. Each to his own.

 

But yep, capturing the atmosphere in modelling is important to me, although that doesn't have to be period smokey grubbiness and grime.

 

 

 

Nowt like a bit of smoke, more than a bit needed though if you model the goods yard at Widnes pre war !!

 

 

Each to their own though. Boars Head is antiseptically clean these days, just 2 electrified lines in an overgrown deep cutting. Not even worth looking over the bridge parapet when visiting the pub (pub visits ? what are those !!).

 

This is an interesting view, wonder what these old engineers coaches were ? Looking towards Wigan (up direction) down the 1 in 105 bank, quite a challenge in steam days. The grade north slackened off here, but continued a few miles to the summit at Coppul.

 

 

Even back in steam days they had interesting Gizmo's

 

 

Climbing the bank in the 50's. a clear road signaled through Boars head and on to Standish. Get a move on mate, the Royal Scot is just a few blocks behind you !!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

We just can't model this type of scene - but we all try in our own way, and that is fine by me.

 

Brit15

[grahame]

4 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

Boars Head is antiseptically clean these days, just 2 electrified lines in an overgrown deep cutting.

 

 

Nice. Plenty of nature and man's intrusion kept simplified and clean but with interesting and excitingly fast trains still running.

 

[johndon]

24 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

These must have been taken not long after it was in its permanent home. Several appeared in the MRJ at the time under Retford Rising. Does anyone know when that was? 

 

Retford Rising was in issue 101 in 1998.

 

John

[t-b-g]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Some most-interesting comments overnight. Many thanks to all those who've posted. 

 

Whether one bothers about 'accuracy' (and that can be anything in railway modelling; from overall proportions, detail differences, if it looks like the real thing, how it operates, etc, etc, etc) is a highly-personal thing. 

 

On a personal level, I look at the issue in two principal ways. If, say, I'm considering a locomotive model, I ask myself two questions. One, how well is it made/finished (I'm not talking about RTR here) and, two, how accurate is it? Concerning two extremes here regarding A4s, one could be beautifully made/painted/weathered, but be full of anomalies - wrong tender, crest/plates present where/when they should/shouldn't be, chimney type, position of front guard irons/cylinder drain cocks and so - alongside an 'accurate' one which has been badly put together and painted with tar. As I said, two extremes. And, talking of 'extremes', one of the finest A4 models I've ever seen (in a scale much bigger than the master builder's normal work - he's well known on here, by the way) had the wrong Gill Sans (correct) '6' on its front numberplate. 'Right', but wrong, if you see what I mean; it should have been 'curly-tailed'. 

 

Repeating my question again, does it matter? It does to me; even more so because I write a lot of published stuff regarding, in particular, ex-LNER motive power. I'm frequently at odds with many published (standard?) works by the likes of Yeadon, the RCTS and, on rare occasions, Irwell. Some of my books (not those I've written) are covered with my scribblings in the margins, pointing out errors and inaccuracies. In fairness, on some occasions there'll be no record of, say, a tender change (60015, for instance, towing a 1928 corridor tender for just a week or two in 1959 or 1960) and much of the original information is collected from crumbling, hand-written notes; many, lucky to survive. 

 

It's also a mistake to foolishly claim something from memory. I was certain 60009 had (at least for a time) a tender with a strip, but I cannot now find the evidence I once believed. If I've mislead anyone, my apologies. 

 

One learns something every day. For instance, from that wonderful picture of WOODCOCK at Little Bytham which appeared a couple of pages ago, about which Tony Gee mentioned the splendid GNR rotating disc signals. Guess what Roy Vinter and I installed on the model? Yes, LNER/BR ones. Why? Because I went on later photographs (typical, isn't it about BR; the minute anything is repainted, it's a sure sign it'll be removed/scrapped?). And, what about the colour of the barge boards? in the picture, they're cream. On the model, they're green, because that's how they were in a later picture - and at Egmanton, Tuxford and Retford from my own photographs. Now I know, can I live with that? For the time being............. Again, does it matter? Yes, it does, and those things will be altered. Ignorance was bliss! Finally, regarding the picture, nobody has pointed out that 60029 is towing one of the cut-down tenders, ex-the '48 Exchanges (even though she was not a participant). The other two were being towed by 60033 and 60034 at the same time. 

 

I think there is a huge responsibility upon those who have their work published. Does that responsibility extend now to the likes of threads such as this? In a way, it reaches even more people than any book/magazine. Time was when it was the territory of the relative few; not now. 

 

That said, I would be horrified if folk were dissuaded from putting their work on here for fear of it being 'wrong' or even misleading. I'd much sooner see something an individual has made by themselves, no matter how 'imperfect'. That way, we learn, and improve.

 

Many thanks again. 

 

Looking at some photos, it looks as if some of the GNR signals might have stayed in place until the bitter end. So it might be a case that the ones you looked at that were LNER/BR pattern may well have been quite correct for the period of the model but one or two elsewhere hadn't been changed.

 

There is certainly a mix of the two types on some photos, taken after the station had closed but before everything was removed.

 

If I thought I could post photos on here just to share what I am up to with I like minded community, I would do so.

 

As a modeller, I know I can do a decent job but I also know that I am not perfect! Sometimes I will work really hard on something and get it very nearly right, close enough to satisfy me. Then I will post a photo and somebody will say "Nice but did you know you got that bit wrong" and after that just diminishes my satisfaction of what I have achieved with the model. I accept that is just me and that others don't feel the same but that is why I won't be posting photos on here again.

 

The photos of Retford are interesting. I am not even sure if that was the same Mallard that ran on the layout later. That may have been upgraded. You can see the original 6 roads each way fiddle yard, the controls at the front of the station and the lack of boards for West Carr Road (at the rear, opposite the goods shed). The photos were taken over a fairly wide timespan as much has changed.

 

The first proper Retford article in MRJ was in issue No 118, in 2000. The one with one of your photos from above on the cover was a progress report, actually written by Tim Shackleton, in issue 141 in 2003. The "Retford Rising" item was a little mini photo feature rather than an article and it was very much under construction. It looks as if the background might be the old barn he was allowed to use each year for a few weeks.

Edited January 23, 2021 by t-b-g
To add content

[APOLLO]

2 minutes ago, grahame said:

 

Nice. Plenty of nature and man's intrusion kept simplified and clean but with interesting and excitingly fast trains still running.

 

 

Then and now, looking south

 

 

 

Occasionally you can see a bit of smoke !!

 

 

Couple more

 

 

The lattice post signal to the left is quite unusual for the Wigan area / WCML. (Lancashire Union railway, later LNWR / L&Y joint)

 

 

The old station

 

 

I know which era I prefer !!

[Bucoops]

Hopefully we are at the beginning of the end of the mess this virus is causing. I'm posting this sitting in the car waiting for my parents to return from having their first vaccine dose. They are early 70s so the NHS is ploughing through the groups

 

I know it's not a railway related post but it's a good news one and we need a bit of that!

[grahame]

1 hour ago, APOLLO said:

 

I know which era I prefer !!

 

Probably not the one I prefer.

 

As I said each to his own. And it doesn't make others choices and preferences wrong. That's the beauty of railway modelling - the diversity on offer. Unfortunately there are very few who are able to appreciate it all.

 

 

 

 

[pete55]

Hello Tony,

with regard to the early Retford pictures, my estimate for the first 3 would be about the year 2000, and the last one would be approximately 2003 or 4. 

If you have pictures without the "shed in the shed" (Roy's enclosed workbench) in the background, they will be prior to October 2003 when I built it during that half term. I always wanted to paint it, but Roy was content with it as it was.

I think the control panels were moved from the front of the layout to the inside in early 2003.

 

As for Mallard, if it is no longer there, I would suggest it could be with the family in memory of Roy. I know the replica nameboards and headboards along the back walls, some of which I made, understandably went with family.

 

Pete

[Jol Wilkinson]

1 hour ago, Bucoops said:

Hopefully we are at the beginning of the end of the mess this virus is causing. I'm posting this sitting in the car waiting for my parents to return from having their first vaccine dose. They are early 70s so the NHS is ploughing through the groups

 

I know it's not a railway related post but it's a good news one and we need a bit of that!

Good news for your parents but I am afraid it is very much a postcode lottery. In Suffolk it is well below the national average (only 36% of over 80's vaccinated, against a national figure of 56%). I know of people in their 70s who have had the vaccine at local surgeries where they are now inviting in the over 60s. At the same time I have friends whose over 80 parents are still waiting. Let's just hope it evens out and all at higher risk get the vaccine sooner than later. 

[great central]

3 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

Snip:

 

If I thought I could post photos on here just to share what I am up to with I like minded community, I would do so.

 

As a modeller, I know I can do a decent job but I also know that I am not perfect! Sometimes I will work really hard on something and get it very nearly right, close enough to satisfy me. Then I will post a photo and somebody will say "Nice but did you know you got that bit wrong" and after that just diminishes my satisfaction of what I have achieved with the model. I accept that is just me and that others don't feel the same but that is why I won't be posting photos on here again.

 

 

 

 

 

Very much my feelings as well.  I'm a total amateur in terms of modelling although I have definitely improved what I do over the years.

Whilst I fully understand that anything placed on here does invite critical comments, it's sometimes the way that those comments are made I find demoralising.

I haven't really finished anything now in probably 10 years, I have over a dozen unstarted loco kits and many dozens of built but unfinished wagon and coach kits. I don't have infinite time for modelling, despite being past retirement age I enjoy my job and have no intention of giving up any time soon. 

 I have posted photos on here before and gathered a good few likes and so on, which does give a boost, but then to find out, not necessarily at the same time, that something I've done while satisfactory to me isn't perhaps that accurate.

A case in point being the recent revelation that Kirk Gresley coach kits are generally inaccurate. I can assemble a Kirk kit on spare days at work sometimes and to me it looks like a Gresley coach but it would seem unless I substitute half of the components for items from another manufacturer it doesn't now pass muster. I have quite a few of them and also one or two Mailcoach ones which I'm quite pleased with although the concensus (sp?) among those who know better are that the kits are generally awful and not worth bothering with.

In closing I will add a photo taken this morning from my workplace and say it gives me great satisfaction that it's a view that relatively few people get to experience.

 

[cb900f]

4 minutes ago, great central said:

 

Very much my feelings as well.  I'm a total amateur in terms of modelling although I have definitely improved what I do over the years.

Whilst I fully understand that anything placed on here does invite critical comments, it's sometimes the way that those comments are made I find demoralising.

I haven't really finished anything now in probably 10 years, I have over a dozen unstarted loco kits and many dozens of built but unfinished wagon and coach kits. I don't have infinite time for modelling, despite being past retirement age I enjoy my job and have no intention of giving up any time soon. 

 I have posted photos on here before and gathered a good few likes and so on, which does give a boost, but then to find out, not necessarily at the same time, that something I've done while satisfactory to me isn't perhaps that accurate.

A case in point being the recent revelation that Kirk Gresley coach kits are generally inaccurate. I can assemble a Kirk kit on spare days at work sometimes and to me it looks like a Gresley coach but it would seem unless I substitute half of the components for items from another manufacturer it doesn't now pass muster. I have quite a few of them and also one or two Mailcoach ones which I'm quite pleased with although the concensus (sp?) among those who know better are that the kits are generally awful and not worth bothering with.

In closing I will add a photo taken this morning from my workplace and say it gives me great satisfaction that it's a view that relatively few people get to experience.

 

Not the west end of Cowburn per chance ?

I wouldn't get upset about it, each to their own. 

Pete

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, grahame said:

 

Probably not the one I prefer.

 

As I said each to his own. And it doesn't make others choices and preferences wrong. That's the beauty of railway modelling - the diversity on offer. Unfortunately there are very few who are able to appreciate it all.

 

 

 

 

The problem with appreciating it all, in terms of personal modelling is that spreading ones efforts too widely tends to result also in spreading them too thinly.

 

Appreciating the work of others with interests that differ to our own is one thing, but achieving coherent results for ourselves, within a normal lifespan, demands that we consider what matters most at a personal level and focus thereon.

 

John

 

 

[great central]

3 minutes ago, cb900f said:

Not the west end of Cowburn per chance ?

I wouldn't get upset about it, each to their own. 

Pete

 

You've obviously been there

[cb900f]

8 minutes ago, great central said:

 

You've obviously been there

Sheffield S/man and Relief Dvr