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.

Wright writes.....


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, queensquare said:

Just to clarify;

My reference to models being signed was simply that I don't bother and nor do many other loco builders I know. I have nothing against it and, if asked to, I would  but I've never been asked.

 

The ego comment was aimed at those that think they are a 'name' in the hobby whatever that means, it had nothing to do with whether builders do or don't sign their work.

 

Jerry

Thanks Jerry,

 

I wonder what constitutes a 'name' in the hobby? 

 

I recall the great fun we had, side-by-side at the Southampton Show. I suppose we were invited to be demonstrators because we're both 'reasonably well-known' in the hobby. Does that mean folk know our names, and might even attend because the likes of us are there? I know when David and Alison (my best wishes to her) produced the show guide, we, and the other demonstrators, were mentioned. Perhaps it might not have been quite so encouraging if the guide had merely stated 'The demonstrators are all blokes (and blokettes) nobody has ever heard of'. 

 

So, how does one get a 'name' in this hobby? Could it be in my case by my writing hundreds of articles, several books (both on model and prototype subjects), taking thousands of photographs, constructing hundreds of models (many forming the basis of articles), test-building for manufacturers, writing the instructions for the same, assisting RTR manufacturers with new models (and being sworn to prior secrecy), attending hundreds of exhibitions as a layout operator (though I didn't do much of that), demonstrator/loco doctor/organiser/judge, attending scores of seminars/tutorials and giving loads of after-dinner speeches (one to come is after the Diamond Jubilee dinner of your Society - that should clear the hall!). 

 

I state the above as a fact, not to 'boast'. I'd suggest you're also a 'name' in the hobby. 

 

I think we might both agree that we've done the 'hard yards' over several decades, along with other 'names' (none of whom are on ego trips). Our work, both written/visual and in the flesh, has been subjected to scrutiny, criticism and assessment. That comes 'with the territory'. 

 

Where I take issue (after all, I'm a grumpy old man) is with some, more-modern 'names' in railway modelling. The so-called 'influencers' who, thanks to social media, set themselves up as self-proclaimed experts and film themselves giving a review of this or that model. Frequently, that model runs on track laid on to the floor (in a most-dodgy manner) and the comments on its accuracy show remarkable ignorance (in the truest sense of the word). Heh-ho, such is progress..................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

20 hours ago, Woodcock29 said:

A lot of NuCast kits got brass chassis in their later days. Half of the NuCast kits I've got came with brass chassis. The w/m chassis with my Q6 purchased in the late 70s was a piece of rubbish. I actually mounted it on a modified Ks O4 chassis, which were available as spares for 2 quid at the time. The wheel base wasn't perfect but didn't look too bad. It ran quite well with a Portescap 4C in it.

Andrew

Strangely enough my first complete loco kit I assembled was a NuCast Q6. Bought in Bill Stotts shop (which was a good shop to go to) It has Ks wheels and an MW005 motor and is still as powerful as it was when I built it. Its whitemetal chassis is still going Ok .. this is after it had been dropped through a loft hatch, mistreated by some one who borrowed it ( paint removed showed how low his bridges were) and being built by me(!). 

 

It is the wrong length but I was proud of it .. and still am.. for haulage it shows the Hornby Q6 a clean pair of wheels.

 

Baz

Edited by Barry O
  • Like 7
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello Tony and everyone, amidst the talk of professional builders, I offer progress shots of my current, non-professional work!

 

This is the London Road Models GNR C2 I've been working on - the chassis is basically finished, while the body has been taken up to the start of lining and bordering:

 

531813491_LRMC1220210723(1).jpg.630c514feb073f3a1e02768599be0c62.jpg

 

512294157_LRMC1220210723(13).jpg.e0f9194eb3f1e74318fae4b01a182948.jpg

 

1346548023_LRMC1220210723(9).jpg.6a9b5c9f95ae47d634dbd5fec22afa07.jpg

 

1972810644_LRMC1220210723(17).jpg.dca5f4947b9c456a2a549b0a050ab9b5.jpg

 

Running (a Mashima into a High Level RoadRunner+) is very good, though - typically - slightly smoother in reverse than forwards, which some pickup tweaking and running-in should hopefully cure.

The slightly scruffy borders in places between green, brown and black will be taken care of in the course of lining and applying the dark green borders, as will the unpainted tank and bunker beading, while the bunker floor will be underneath a coal load.

The roof is just clipped into place at the moment - it'll be properly secured, once all the lining's done, by two 14BA bolts into captive nuts. The conn rods are also just temporarily secured by washers cut from plastic electrical wire insulation.

 

If anyone can see anything wrong - I've just noticed that I need to remove the paint from the cab roof grabrail, for one thing - please do let me know...

 

Next, it's bow pens at fifty paces! :D

Chas ,

The buffers on the c12 look parallel to me . I'm no expert on eastern motive power but I think they were fitted with tapered buffers when built. Greater experts than I will confirm or deny.

 

Pete

  • Like 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 minute ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon John new,

 

It rather depends on your motive for building kits. If you are a creative type that enjoys learning and the making of things, your chance of success will be high. If you only see the making of things as an inconvenient way of processing objects of desire, or as nostalgia fix, you are more likely to fail.

 

 

The issue for me is the kits are complex and costly, valve gear in particular looks daunting and there are not that many non r-t-r types I would want. Example of something I would like is a DJH B16, preorder only and circa £320 plus paint and transfers over and above. That is a lot of £ to risk making a c*** up of. Yes there are some simple kits I am sure but I wouldn’t buy one just to build it if it is something not of interest. IF I get the one I have to work acceptably there are some affordable re-chassis kits I will try; it isn’t that I can’t solder brass.

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

13 minutes ago, Tony Teague said:

 

There have always been influencers, but in the past they gained kudos and credibility through demosntrating their skills  and abilities, whereas now the internet means that they just have to have, sometimess rather too much, confidence and a very loud voice. Actual achievement seems to count for very little.

 

 

As no-one else has said it, may I commend and congratulate you for what you have done on behalf both of bereaved families and of Cancer UK; I am certain that many hours of thankless work will have been involved for both you and Mo, although the outcomes must certainly have felt very rewarding.

 

Tony

Many thanks Tony,

 

You're very kind. 

 

I have a very loud voice as well!

 

As I've stated, the expressions of thanks have been very rewarding.

 

You must pop over again soon.

 

Best regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, john new said:

The issue for me is the kits are complex and costly, valve gear in particular looks daunting and there are not that many non r-t-r types I would want. Example of something I would like is a DJH B16, preorder only and circa £320 plus paint and transfers over and above. That is a lot of £ to risk making a c*** up of. Yes there are some simple kits I am sure but I wouldn’t buy one just to build it if it is something not of interest. IF I get the one I have to work acceptably there are some affordable re-chassis kits I will try; it isn’t that I can’t solder brass.

Good evening John,

 

B16s (of all three types) seem to score highly on RTR polls (as far as I know, though the 'wish-lists' hold no interest to me). Despite this, none seems to be on any RTR radar as far as I'm aware.

 

Your mention on the cost of a DJH B16 is very revealing. It is, indeed, a lot of money for the potential to cock-up. A B16/1, of course, needs no outside valve gear, but clearances behind the cylinders are incredibly tight. 

 

I had two B16s to sell from the collection - a B16/1 and B16/3. The former made more than the cost of its component parts (it was very nice) and the latter rather less (not quite so nice, and a real beggar to get to go properly, once I'd found its chassis). I got the best I could.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited by Tony Wright
typo error
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cb900f said:

Chas ,

The buffers on the c12 look parallel to me . I'm no expert on eastern motive power but I think they were fitted with tapered buffers when built. Greater experts than I will confirm or deny.

 

Pete

Hello Pete, thanks for the feedback. Initially, I just used the (Gibson) parallel buffers that were supplied with the LRM kit - at the start, I'd intended finishing it as an LNER loco in plain black. Then, when I decided to do it in GNR livery I too thought they might be wrong, as I'd found photos of GNR period prototypes with tapered ones... but, as I continued collecting photos (to assist me with detailing and livery) I also found ones with parallel buffers too, and still in GNR livery.

You may well be right that when first built they were tapered, but some definitely had parallel buffers fitted while still in GNR livery. There are quite a few such examples in the Photos section of the GNRS site but I'm not sure whether it's OK to post those on here so, with apologies for the poor quality, here's an example from a book:

 

1603297198_1-GNR-C121528(2)reardetail.jpg.3f77aa15fde940121f5f5f4b23f9ff3c.jpg

Edited by Chas Levin
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

Hello Pete, thanks for the feedback. Initially, I just used the (Gibson) parallel buffers that were supplied with the LRM kit - at the start, I'd intended finishing it as an LNER loco in plain black. Then, when I decided to do it in GNR livery I too thought they might be wrong, as I'd found photos of GNR period prototypes with tapered ones... but, as I continued collecting photos (to assist me with detailing and livery) I also found ones with parallel buffers too, and still in GNR livery.

You may well be right that when first built they were tapered, but some definitely had parallel buffers fitted while still in GNR livery. There are quite a few such examples in the Photos section of the GNRS site but I'm not sure whether it's OK to post those on here so, with apologies for the poor quality, here's an example from a book:

 

1603297198_1-GNR-C121528(2)reardetail.jpg.3f77aa15fde940121f5f5f4b23f9ff3c.jpg

Chas,

 

I stand corrected (I knew I would) however your photo is of a round bunkered/tank C12 as opposed to your model which is squarebunker/ tank. That's my excuse.;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cb900f said:

Chas,

 

I stand corrected (I knew I would) however your photo is of a round bunkered/tank C12 as opposed to your model which is squarebunker/ tank. That's my excuse.;)

Pete, good point! Looking through the photos I have on this laptop (and therefore more easily to hand than those in books), it does look like the ones with parallel buffers are round tank versions. I'll have a look through some books tomorrow too, to see if that seems to be the rule... I'm not too sure about changing them at this point though - think of the paintwork that would have to be re-done after de-soldering and re-soldering :rolleyes:!

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

On 21/07/2021 at 18:25, Roger Sunderland said:

Tony

You may remember Horfield, an exhibition layout set on the outskirts of Bristol, now, sadly, retired from the circuit. Steve Knight, who helped build and exhibit the layout, with his father Chris, now runs a very fine model shop in Poole, Model Railway Solutions. I recently told him I was looking to build a B1 using a Comet chassis. A couple of hours later he came up with the followingEECF9F6C-F831-418F-AE0E-64D1C787D950.jpeg.e04736df075948bf3196645064e77919.jpeg


The loco was purchased for Horfield to haul a heavy inter regional goods, 61063 was a Leicester engine. I am assured that it was built by one Tony Geary.

The body and tender body are Bachmann, the loco and tender chassis are Comet, all powered by a Portescap motor.

After some years in store it needed a bit of TLC but is now running beautifully on my layout. I have to say I was amazed by the weight. Every spare millimetre was filled with lead, so much so I had to remove a small amount to fit a decoder. Needless to say it romps away with a 10 coach train

I've been away from the computer for a bit - but I still have my old list and indeed, I had a trio - 61063, 61078 and 61206... I recall even installing a lead crew in one and that lead lined cab roof would be good protection from any nuclear incidents... Its heart warming to see them still in action and being enjoyed.

 

Regards

Tony

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
6 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon John new,

 

It rather depends on your motive for building kits. If you are a creative type that enjoys learning and the making of things, your chance of success will be high. If you only see the making of things as an inconvenient way of possessing  objects of desire, or as nostalgia fix, you are more likely to fail.

 

 

I trust that you are referring only to the building of locomotive kits. I have seen many model railways that show people demonstrating their creative abilities and show that they obviously thoroughly enjoy the making of things (including handbuilt track), but still choose to use rtr locos and stock. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 96701 said:

I trust that you are referring only to the building of locomotive kits. I have seen many model railways that show people demonstrating their creative abilities and show that they obviously thoroughly enjoy the making of things (including handbuilt track), but still choose to use rtr locos and stock. 

 

Good evening/morning 96701,

 

you would have to ask John new, he said kits but he didn't specify locomotives. I believe he was referring to the recent batch of locomotives shown by Tony, so locomotives is a reasonable assumption. However, he may have meant all kits.

 

I wouldn't segregate locomotives from any of the other 'making of things' that you mention. To repeat and expand, If you get intrinsic enjoyment from the making of track, trees, locomotives or paper aeroplanes, you are more likely to be successful in your endeavours.  if you see any of the above as an expensive and not very enjoyable over complicated chore, you are more likely to fail. If you don't enjoy it, don't do it.

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening John,

B16s (of all three types) seem to score highly on RTR polls (as far as I know, though the 'wish-lists' hold no interest to me). Despite this, none seems to be on any RTR radar as far as I'm aware.

 

Hello Tony

 

Below is how the B16s have fared in our 00 Wishlist Polls...

 

2013: All three were Middle Polling

2014-2016: The B16/1 was High Polling; the others Middle

2017: Poll didn't run

2018: As 2014-2016

2019: All were High Polling. The B16/1 was in overall equal position 70 (of about 800 items)

 

Brian (on behalf of the The 00 Poll Team)

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BMacdermott said:

 

Hello Tony

 

Below is how the B16s have fared in our 00 Wishlist Polls...

 

2013: All three were Middle Polling

2014-2016: The B16/1 was High Polling; the others Middle

2017: Poll didn't run

2018: As 2014-2016

2019: All were High Polling. The B16/1 was in overall equal position 70 (of about 800 items)

 

Brian (on behalf of the The 00 Poll Team)

Good morning Brian,

 

Thanks for that. The B16s seemed to have gained some popularity down the years of the polls.

 

Please don't think I'm being disparaging with regards to your wishlists/polls by stating I have no interest in them, though I would have been had I still been in full-time employment as a model railway journalist/photographer. 

 

I believe they provide a useful barometer for what railway modellers want, particularly locomotives - is it safe to assume that the majority of railway modellers cannot build locos? This is an observation, not a criticism. Most, I would hope, could build a simple wagon and/or kits for buildings. Does trackwork feature in the polls? Or, signals? 

 

What must disappoint manufacturers, and not just RTR ones, is that when something new is brought out there are the usual comments such as 'I would have bought it but it's the wrong livery/number/name/detail for me'. In the office one day, I was phoned up by someone 'complaining' that the latest Hornby Class 50 I'd just reviewed wasn't exactly the one he desired (out of 50 to choose from), because it had the wrong name/number and wasn't exactly in the NSE livery-style he wanted. I pointed out to him a list of paint/transfer/nameplate manufacturers, only to be told 'They're no good, I'll mess it up if I try that sort of thing!'. I then gave him a list of professionals who'd undertake such work, only to be dismissed with 'They're no good, I can't afford their prices!'. After telling him he couldn't have what he wanted, then, he accused me of being rude and would report me to my MD. I honestly couldn't have given a toss, and nothing more came of it. 

 

How common is it out there? 'Railway modellers' who are incapable of doing any 'modelling' for themselves?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, queensquare said:

 

Thanks Tony. I've never really given it much thought, I model pre-grouping in a minority scale with very little use of RTR so I'm certainly not in the mainstream.

 

Regarding  Southampton, we had a lot of fun there (and at other shows come to that), I miss the banter, hopefully we can get back to something like it at some point.

 

Returning to modelling, my Kirtley now has a coat of paint and some transfers. If it hadn't  been so hot this week I would have got it weathered and finished. Next week maybe.

 

Jerry

 

 

IMG_5472.jpg.781ba2fa35c48338172c82efe52d4258.jpg

 

IMG_3096.JPG.7838ac33435485463a776e78e6380539.JPG

 

IMG_3098.JPG.f0e623112941921099a6bcf29a54d4b0.JPG

Good morning Jerry,

 

Lovely work on the Kirtley; thanks for showing us.

 

I doubt if any demonstrators are what might be called 'mainstream'. If they were, then all they'd be demonstrating is how to open boxes, put things on the (Set) track and turn a knob (or, if modern, tap away at some tablet). I'm not being disparaging to those who derive pleasure from that, but they far, far outweigh the numbers of guys/girls who do the sort of things you and I do. 

 

I suppose your part-editorship of the MRJ gets you better-known, in a similar way to what happened to me during my time at BRM. 

 

Being 'better-known' doesn't mean, however, 'better-liked', at least in my case, but that 'comes with the territory'......................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 3
  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

How common is it out there? 'Railway modellers' who are incapable of doing any 'modelling' for themselves?

 

Judging by what I read on this website - the vast majority!

 

CJI.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
  • Funny 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
7 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening/morning 96701,

 

you would have to ask John new, he said kits but he didn't specify locomotives. I believe he was referring to the recent batch of locomotives shown by Tony, so locomotives is a reasonable assumption. However, he may have meant all kits.

 

I wouldn't segregate locomotives from any of the other 'making of things' that you mention. To repeat and expand, If you get intrinsic enjoyment from the making of track, trees, locomotives or paper aeroplanes, you are more likely to be successful in your endeavours.  if you see any of the above as an expensive and not very enjoyable over complicated chore, you are more likely to fail. If you don't enjoy it, don't do it.

 

 

The avoidance for me is locos and possibly some rolling stock kits in brass. I make stuff in other materials quite happily and have used brass in other instances including a scratch built traverser a few years back. The desire for fidelity has added complexity.

 

The sporting analogy is these kit designs need someone with International player equivalent levels of skill to build but are mostly bought by modellers of much lower ability. Buying a Man Utd top won’t make you more than a Sunday league player. What Tony’s posts about bad running showed to me was that many kits nowadays require an elite level skill set to build and most of us haven’t got it hence so many of the items going through his hands recently don’t run properly.

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Friendly/supportive 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
27 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Please don't think I'm being disparaging with regards to your wishlists/polls by stating I have no interest in them, though I would have been had I still been in full-time employment as a model railway journalist/photographer. 

 

I believe they provide a useful barometer for what railway modellers want, particularly locomotives - is it safe to assume that the majority of railway modellers cannot build locos? This is an observation, not a criticism. Most, I would hope, could build a simple wagon and/or kits for buildings. Does trackwork feature in the polls? Or, signals? 

 

In the office one day, I was phoned up by someone 'complaining' that the latest Hornby Class 50 I'd just reviewed wasn't exactly the one he desired (out of 50 to choose from), because it had the wrong name/number and wasn't exactly in the NSE livery-style he wanted. I pointed out to him a list of paint/transfer/nameplate manufacturers, only to be told 'They're no good, I'll mess it up if I try that sort of thing!'. I then gave him a list of professionals who'd undertake such work, only to be dismissed with 'They're no good, I can't afford their prices!'. After telling him he couldn't have what he wanted, then, he accused me of being rude and would report me to my MD. I honestly couldn't have given a toss, and nothing more came of it. 

 

Hello Tony

 

I didn't think for one moment that you were in any way being 'disparaging'. The greater majority of modellers don't/didn't have any interest otherwise we'd have been getting 100,000 voters and not the rough average of 2,500.

 

When the current team started running the polls in 2012 at the request of former MREmag editor and model railway historian, Pat Hammond, we did have a category entitled Other Items. This covered such as level crossings, turntables, signals, trackworkers, overhead line equipment etc etc but soon became apparent that we couldn't cover 'the detail'.

 

Take OHLE...whilst driving up the M1 adjacent to the WCML near Watford Gap Services, I counted six different types of catenary in about three miles! We soon dropped the category.

 

The vast majority of voters who have contacted The 00 Poll Team over the years have been 'jolly good eggs' and have appreciated the work that went into each one.

 

However, I do recall one irate pollster complaining to us that we hadn't listed Wagon A, with buffers B and wheels C, running in livery D. Such is life!:rolleyes:

 

Brian (on behalf of The 00 Poll Team)

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)

Hello again Tony

 

At Gilbert Barnatt's request, and with the assistance of Chris Knowles-Thomas, I have been running some loco and rolling stock Mini-Polls on the Peterborough North thread. 

 

Below are the results from the one involving B16s (but I haven't appended the PDF here). They were locos with 'a PN connection' and mainly 'freight' (to differentiate between the two later polls of Passenger - Tank and Passenger - Tender).

 

Brian

 

Results

 

Many thanks to the 19 voters who took part.

 

The number of votes to each item is shown in the left hand column and Comments Received are appended on a PDF as usual.

 

Please note that the results reflect the views of those who voted here and may not necessarily reflect those of the wider modelling community.

 

High Polling

12        J6 (64170-64279)

12        J39 (64700-64988)

11        J67/J68/J69 (68491-68666)

 

Middle Polling

9          B16/1 (in range 61410-61478, but some are B16/2 or B16/3)    

8          J17 (65500-65589) 

8          J52 (68757-68889) 

8          B16/3 (in range 61420-61468, but some are B16/2 and most B16/1)

7          B16/2 (in range 61435-61457, but some are B16/3 and most B16/1)

 

Low Polling

6          O4/8 (in range 63573-63915 with gaps)

6          J20 (64675-64699)

4          J19 (64640-64674) 

2          P1 Nos.2393 & 2394

 

 

Edited by BMacdermott
Spelling correction
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, john new said:

The avoidance for me is locos and possibly some rolling stock kits in brass. I make stuff in other materials quite happily and have used brass in other instances including a scratch built traverser a few years back. The desire for fidelity has added complexity.

 

The sporting analogy is these kit designs need someone with International player equivalent levels of skill to build but are mostly bought by modellers of much lower ability. Buying a Man Utd top won’t make you more than a Sunday league player. What Tony’s posts about bad running showed to me was that many kits nowadays require an elite level skill set to build and most of us haven’t got it hence so many of the items going through his hands recently don’t run properly.

 

 

Good morning John new,

 

I love brass, it's beautiful stuff to work with. I wouldn't touch the white metal B16 you mentioned with a barge pole. IMO, It's not worth the money that you are quoting. My own build of a B16, was from a more modern, much easier to construct and more accurate brass kit. The project was realised for about £85 pounds less than the price you mention!

 

I come back to the same point, if you love what you are doing, you will find away. I don't like football but to use your analogy, I don't think that Tony, most builders, or myself included, would claim to be International player equivalent. However, Sunday league player status is not a failure, it's a success. Failure is sitting on the side line complaining about the cost of the shirt.
 

  • Like 9
  • Agree 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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...