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

10 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

 Eventually I bought a relatively inexpensive smartphone, but the present irony is that the aforementioned app doesn't work properly on it. Grrr!

 

It might be me, but I'm getting the impression that modern technology is more unreliable, less able to do what it promises and becoming unnecessarily complex and frustrating to use. A bit like DCC I guess.

;-)

 

 

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

  • RMweb Gold
12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I imagine the end steps would have been removed by the time ETH was fitted. Does anyone know?

I'm not sure of the exact date but removal started on the LMR around the time that the AC electric service began running between Crewe and Manchester. It gradually spread around the country over a period of about five years, probably as workshop visits were due unless the stock was booked to run under the wires. There were some coaches where the steps had been roughly cut off and others had been carefully removed and the bolts put back in the holes but the paint not touched up.

Given the amount of stock of all regions that could run via Crewe or Birmingham on booked trains let alone specials I would doubt many if any got to the blue/grey era with end steps intact.

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

The BR maroon example (the real one) was built as part of Lot 105 to Dia. 171 by Metro-Cammell in the spring of 1956 (so, it could represent the vehicle as being brand new, since BR maroon was introduced in that year). 

 

The blue/grey example was built as part of Lot 424 to Dia, 172 by Charles Roberts at the start of 1959. I imagine it was turned out in maroon (and painted blue/grey in the mid-/late-'60s, or later?). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

The relationship between maroon liveried Mk1s and end steps began to change with the inception of painting the ends maroon. I understand that arose from BR workshops going over to spray-painting coaches, IIRC from about 1961/2, though I doubt the change was simultaneous across all locations.

 

The reason, of course, had nothing to do with colour and everything with the increasing spread of 25kv overhead electrification. I'd guess there was a target of getting LMR stock, and anything from other regions that might end up running over the WCML, done before that went live.

 

Photographs are not wholly definitive, but suggest that the removal of end steps, in many cases, probably coincided with the ends going red. Clearly, none should have retained them in blue-grey, but very few things in the history of our railways have ever been applied with 100% uniformity and I'd not rule out a very small number slipping through the net for a while! 

 

John

Edited by Dunsignalling
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

The relationship between maroon liveried Mk1s and end steps began to change with the inception of painting the ends maroon. I understand that arose from BR workshops going over to spray-painting coaches, IIRC from about 1961/2, though I doubt the change was simultaneous across all locations.

There are several photos of LMS stock ex-works heading south of Wolverton in 1961 with steps removed and freshly painted black ends. A lot of GWR stock still had the steps in 1964 but usually types which were restricted from other areas.

  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

my jaw dropped after she asked us 'Is everything I've WENT through clear to you?'. I just replied 'I don't understand'. I'm afraid the irony was lost.................

 

A sign of the times, I suppose.

 

...through which I have wenden?

Edited by gr.king
Clarification
  • Like 1
  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

It's amazing how you feel burnt out after a number of weeks of track laying, wiring and bridge building, but a change of pace makes everything better. A photo popped up in a group email, with the Grantham chaps, of C1 '4419' in the late 30s with out her booster, I was under the impression that she had it the duration of her career. It got me wondering if I could make her with a limited budget and a Bachmann C1. 

 

1475408526_LNERC144193.jpg.94a01c6690bfd9eb1cc044b5374a1b84.jpg

 

I am rather pleased with the out come, its not without it's faults but I think it captures the loco in all her unusual elegance, She'll be getting a new chimney soon and when I find a suitable dome it will be added as well. 

 

1872824383_LNERC144191.jpg.eb2d75bc87289868bd82309a9edc0ca3.jpg

 

She's not the best, but I am very happy with the outcome and it's been great to do something different. Back to wiring I go.......

Good evening Jesse,

 

There'll be a suitable chimney and a dome, plus numerous other LNER bits and pieces for you in the post on Friday.

 

The loco looks great!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am more than a little curious about other peoples experience making articulated (Jointed) con rods.  Until yesterday  I have always made my con rods as a single unit and always have had to play around to achieve a smooth running chassis.  Yesterday I made my first set of articulated con rods and there was virtually no fine tuning.  It could just be luck but on thinking about it I have reached the conclusion that articulated con rods will be easier to tune because there are only 2 holes (on an 0-6-0) that have to be tuned, albeit twice, compared with the three for a fixed set of rods. 

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

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

C2X.jpg.ead3a9f21559e28f61c39c00045a9e2a.jpg

 

I did nothing to the C2X other than tweak a pick-up or two, and away she went; happily hauling 40+ loaded coals.

 

710891661_UClass.jpg.76a9eb5f1a9acfca4047603accb00f80.jpg

 

This U Class shorted out on tighter radii, until I applied a smear of Araldite to the front face of the cylinder and the inside face of the steps on the insulated side (it has a live chassis). The result, even though the front pony wheels just touch those items, no short, and lovely running.

 

463078575_SR4-4-2T.jpg.e4986534c65d34f790e1207427fb60b9.jpg

 

This beautiful SR 4-4-2T (an I3?) 'Wouldn't pull the skin off custard' (to quote Tony). After removing the rear carrying wheels (which Tony managed to do - I was too weak!), I then extended the bearings 'northwards' with broach and mouse-tailed file. This resulted in those wheels then 'only going along for the ride' and not taking 50% of the loco's weight. It then bowled round with 12 bogies with absolute ease.

 

I've asked Tony to explain the origins of these models.

 

Thanks Tony for a most enjoyable day, and as ever, thanks also to Mo for her hospitality.

 

The three errant locos had each spent some time on my 'naughty step', and whilst Tony's solutions may sound simple they were clearly beyond me as a mere mortal!

 

The ex-LB&SCR double domed C2X No.2525 was built for me some years ago, but to be honest has not even been run in; I had noted it as being from a DJH kit but it may well have been Nu-Cast in origin and was built using the open framed motor as originally supplied. Aside from the small pick-up problem, the build & paint job are pretty good but I was really very surprised to see this little 0-6-0 pull away with a 40 wagon coal train!

 

I bought the ex-SE&CR U class No.1624 some years ago on E-Bay, which is always a risk; I think it is from a DJH kit, but could be SEF, and again it has an open frame motor. Whilst the builder is unknown, the build and finish looks good but it suffered from jerky, intermittemt performance on curves - which Tony seems to have correctly diagnosed and fixed within seconds Again, to see her pull away with somewhere over 40 coal empties was very gratifying.

 

Finally, whilst the ex-LB&SCR I3, No.2091 is a very heavy loco it didn't seem able to pull anything much without the wheels slipping. The model is from an SEF kit with yet another open frame motor, and is intended to haul the inter-regional 'Sunny South Express' which the original I3's did with aplomb, all the way from Rugby to the south coast; it now looks to me that it will be more than capable of that task - so thanks again Tony for fixing each of these!

 

Tony

 

 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
12 minutes ago, Theakerr said:

I am more than a little curious about other peoples experience making articulated (Jointed) con rods.  Until yesterday  I have always made my con rods as a single unit and always have had to play around to achieve a smooth running chassis.  Yesterday I made my first set of articulated con rods and there was virtually no fine tuning.  It could just be luck but on thinking about it I have reached the conclusion that articulated con rods will be easier to tune because there are only 2 holes (on an 0-6-0) that have to be tuned, albeit twice, compared with the three for a fixed set of rods. 

I agree, in my experience the jointed con rod prevents the whole lot from binding up due to the lateral side play of the wheel sets - which on my builds tends to be very limited on the leading axle but quite generous on the trailing axle to enable the loco to negotiate curves.

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

1 hour ago, Theakerr said:

I am more than a little curious about other peoples experience making articulated (Jointed) con rods.  Until yesterday  I have always made my con rods as a single unit and always have had to play around to achieve a smooth running chassis.  Yesterday I made my first set of articulated con rods and there was virtually no fine tuning.  It could just be luck but on thinking about it I have reached the conclusion that articulated con rods will be easier to tune because there are only 2 holes (on an 0-6-0) that have to be tuned, albeit twice, compared with the three for a fixed set of rods. 

Funny, isn't it? How there are always at least two ways (and more) of achieving success in getting a sweet-running chassis.

 

I've always found that rigid rods always work better. Very often (in my experience), the hardest chassis to get to run really sweetly are four-coupled ones. If I divide the rods on an 0-6-0, I'm effectively trying to get two 0-4-0s to work. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Jesse,

 

There'll be a suitable chimney and a dome, plus numerous other LNER bits and pieces for you in the post on Friday.

 

The loco looks great!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Good Morning,

 

You are a gentleman Tony, thank you very much. 
 

 

Edited by Jesse Sim
Spelling mistake, had to fix it otherwise I’d be writing lines
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

The BR maroon example (the real one) was built as part of Lot 105 to Dia. 171 by Metro-Cammell in the spring of 1956 (so, it could represent the vehicle as being brand new, since BR maroon was introduced in that year). 

 

The blue/grey example was built as part of Lot 424 to Dia, 172 by Charles Roberts at the start of 1959. I imagine it was turned out in maroon (and painted blue/grey in the mid-/late-'60s, or later?). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

I suspect the one turned out in the spring of 1956 will have been crimson and cream when new. Carriages for the Eastern didn't appear in maroon until later in the year, or so it appears from photos and contemporary reports. End steps were disappearing by the early 1960s, especially on LMR carriages, and this was before maroon ends came in circa 1964/5. 

 

I haven't seen a blue/grey Hornby BCK and have no interest in acquiring one as I have plenty of Bachmann ones, but if it's like their other blue/grey Mark 1s, the livery rendition will be terrible, with the blue far too dark and the grey more of a milky white colour.

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, robertcwp said:

I suspect the one turned out in the spring of 1956 will have been crimson and cream when new. Carriages for the Eastern didn't appear in maroon until later in the year, or so it appears from photos and contemporary reports.

I believe that the official changeover was in June 1956.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I believe that the official changeover was in June 1956.

But in reality not all regions changed at the same time. The LMR started outshopping stock in maroon a bit earlier in 1956 going by contemporary reports, which is perhaps not surprising as it was essentially the old LMS livery with simpler lining. The first all-maroon sets on the Eastern were the Talisman sets when that service launched in September 1956. York and Doncaster works were reported as still using crimson and cream in the summer of 1956.  I have seen it suggested that the Eastern considered a return to mock teak but have not seen any official documentation to that effect. Mark 1 FOs E3076-80 and BSOs up to E9315 were crimson and cream when new in 1956.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Theakerr said:

I am more than a little curious about other peoples experience making articulated (Jointed) con rods.  Until yesterday  I have always made my con rods as a single unit and always have had to play around to achieve a smooth running chassis.  Yesterday I made my first set of articulated con rods and there was virtually no fine tuning.  It could just be luck but on thinking about it I have reached the conclusion that articulated con rods will be easier to tune because there are only 2 holes (on an 0-6-0) that have to be tuned, albeit twice, compared with the three for a fixed set of rods. 

I always use jointed rods on an 0-6-0, only jointed on the crankpin, not the proper way. 

 

I think it's easier because you can set up one set of wheels at a time; it allows better sideplay, as mentioned above; and, I hesitate to say it, but the slightly greater flexibility just allows all the wheels to live more happily together because they only have to 'get on' with one other set of wheels. 

 

I've read before of Tony's thoughts on 0-4-0s being harder than 0-6-0s to set up but I can't say I have ever experienced this, and I have several 0-4-0s. Still, there's no logic to small mechanisms - they have a mind of their own. 

Edited by Barclay
  • Like 4
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Nothing "improper" about joining rods on a crankpin, plenty of full size locos had this arrangement, notably the LNW 0-8-0s. It might not be strictly correct for your prototype but it works perfectly in small scale and is more or less indistinguishable from a knuckle joint in operation.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, robertcwp said:

I suspect the one turned out in the spring of 1956 will have been crimson and cream when new. Carriages for the Eastern didn't appear in maroon until later in the year, or so it appears from photos and contemporary reports. End steps were disappearing by the early 1960s, especially on LMR carriages, and this was before maroon ends came in circa 1964/5. 

 

I haven't seen a blue/grey Hornby BCK and have no interest in acquiring one as I have plenty of Bachmann ones, but if it's like their other blue/grey Mark 1s, the livery rendition will be terrible, with the blue far too dark and the grey more of a milky white colour.

Good evening Robert,

 

Here's the Hornby blue/grey BCK.

 

461761539_HornbyMark1BCKR40023R4002302.jpg.d2799f68171dd7da1f758ad589f29cfa.jpg

 

I think my camera and lights have rendered the colours accurately. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Barclay said:

I always use jointed rods on an 0-6-0, only jointed on the crankpin, not the proper way. 

 

I think it's easier because you can set up one set of wheels at a time; it allows better sideplay, as mentioned above; and, I hesitate to say it, but the slightly greater flexibility just allows all the wheels to live more happily together because they only have to 'get on' with one other set of wheels. 

 

I've read before of Tony's thoughts on 0-4-0s being harder than 0-6-0s to set up but I can't say I have ever experienced this, and I have several 0-4-0s. Still, there's no logic to small mechanisms - they have a mind of their own. 

Good evening Barclay,

 

I don't know how many four-coupled mechanisms I've built, but it's certainly not as many as six-, eight- or ten-coupled; which reflects what would have been seen on the ECML in my chosen period. I'm trying to think, but a couple of D9s, several D11s, a couple of D2s/D3s, a few D16s, a D20, a D21, quite a few D49s, plus a few four-coupled from other railways. I've always found them harder to get running really sweetly because of a tendency for the rods to get out of the pure horizontal position from time to time. This can cause a slight jerk, where one rod catches up so to speak. This doesn't happen with rigid rods on six-coupled or more because the rods are (as near as makes no difference) always horizontal.  On the DJH 8F I made last year, the rods were arranged as rigid for the first three axles then a separate set for the rear one. Those last two wheels then were trying to 'catch up' as it were, until I soldered all the rods rigid. The result, super-smooth running. 

 

It could well be my ineptitude at building, of course, which I accept. However, I know what works for me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

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

Just watching a program on BBC 4 right now called Flying Scotsman: Sounds from the Footplate where they’ve strapped a load of cameras to the loco as she makes her way along the SVR. 
 

Looking at the footage from inside the cab, it’s amazing how much the tender moves around relative to the loco. 

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

I'm happy to report that (apart from two, which will be collected soon) the last of the locos I've had for sale of late have all now gone to new homes. Those last five went today, when two friends came round to run LB. We also popped over to see Ian Wilson's four layouts, so a most-entertaining day.

 

Seen before, but not on the layout, here they are....................

 

1951026133_DJHA260528.jpg.9eead1f753c4de3ac4e08db9ef5291d0.jpg

 

A 'soundly-built' DJH A2 (builder/painter unknown). Certainly not a top pro-job, and certainly not with regard to the painting. That said, a very fine runner and very powerful. 

 

202834868_ABSL1s6771967765.jpg.5f3ea440672d0f817d9ff1151670d380.jpg

 

A tale of two ABS L1s (builders/painters unknown). The nearer one is a running dud - it's friction-fit drivers shifted on their axles under load and it will need new ones to fully exploit its Portescap. 

 

The further one, despite its D11 motor is a very fine runner, though it's not got the pro paint finish of the other one. Both were priced accordingly. 

 

1240485859_SEFJ3964840.jpg.5e64b4b4064052f7f60aa65c1ff7352b.jpg

 

Less of a running dud, but still not a sweet mover. Again, it's got friction-fit drivers and these might well be slightly out of quartering. New Markits drivers are called for. The builder is unknown, but since these duds came from the same 'glass case' collection, the late owner probably never questioned who was responsible for his locos' constructions.  

 

The new owner has the ability to fix any problems with the locos, and he's very happy with his what he's now got. 

 

352194744_Nu-CastK162046GrahamVarley.jpg.cfc244d26f113c01ab8450dfae83bfca.jpg

 

The provenance for this beautiful Nu-Cast K1 is known (but I only found out today when its new owner looked in the box lid). It's the work of Graham Varley, and it's exquisite; in its running and in its building/finish. 

 

Thanks Brian and thanks Alan for your company and hospitality today. I had a great time. Yet again, a widow and CRUK benefit. 

 

 

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 1
  • Craftsmanship/clever 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Good Morning,

 

You are a gentleman Tony, thank you very much. 
 

 

Good evening Jesse,

 

Me a gentleman!

 

Anyway, I'll be sending you suitable chimneys and domes, plus smokebox doors, safety valves, buffers, backheads, cabs and numerous fittings for a variety of LNER locos. I'm also sending you sufficient parts to build a C12 (but no frames, which you can obtain from South Eastern Finecast). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Jesse,

 

Me a gentleman!

 

Anyway, I'll be sending you suitable chimneys and domes, plus smokebox doors, safety valves, buffers, backheads, cabs and numerous fittings for a variety of LNER locos. I'm also sending you sufficient parts to build a C12 (but no frames, which you can obtain from South Eastern Finecast). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Well I’d call you another name but that’s not suitable for RMWEB. 
 

Wow Tony, thank you so much, I’ve always fancied a c12, looks like an order to DJH soon. Did you want me to buy one and get it delivered to you for the D2? 

  • Like 1
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...