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

Norman Colliery is the first layout I have ever seen with intentionally distressed rail alignment to give that wonderful dip in the track. One might say it looks wrong for all the right reasons. 

 

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

That 195 looks amazing, but whats it doing running over colliery track? 

The first picture with the Drewery is a smashing shot, I love the hump. I'd love to try and get crippled fishplates modelable, doable in 7mm I guess, but probably not noticeable in 4mm.

 

Andy G

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

  • RMweb Gold
21 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've just spent a most-enjoyable weekend demonstrating at the East Midland (Nottingham, Clifton) Model Railway Show.

 

I'm told numbers attending were around 200 (which was 50% down on last year, just prior to the first lockdown, and a third of the figure from 2019). A sign of the times, I suppose. Those who did attend, enjoyed a very good event. May I please than the Bulwell Club for putting on such a good exhibition? 

 

May I also thank those with whom I spoke, either to explain what I was making or fixing their 'dud' locos. Amazingly, in all but one (a dead motor) I was able to get them running again! Thanks, then, for all the generous donations to CRUK. 

 

1530542504_mystandatClifton.jpg.1af57e6ba297c408ffc6b9bb330faa7b.jpg

 

This was my modest stand at the event.

 

I was also given the opportunity to photograph Geoff Brain's amazing colliery layout in O Gauge.

 

1680523713_NormanColliery03B.jpg.43dfdebf655b4b117ecde111f0d2349c.jpg

 

This will be featured in the Railway Modeller in due course. 

 

 

I had to look more than twice at Geoff's colliery photo to believe it was not the prototype. Stunning!

'Bad' track can be modelled successfully if plausible and in the right setting. Iain Rice has recently presented an article on this subject, MRJ No. 283 'Thoughts on modelling bad track'.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, uax6 said:

That 195 looks amazing, but whats it doing running over colliery track? 

The first picture with the Drewery is a smashing shot, I love the hump. I'd love to try and get crippled fishplates modelable, doable in 7mm I guess, but probably not noticeable in 4mm.

 

Andy G

Good morning Andy,

 

What's it doing indeed! It was the only O Gauge layout at the show, and I didn't have my mobile photo studio with me. It was thus 'posed' for a 'rail-tour'. That's my excuse, anyway! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, geoff west said:

Thanks for another most enjoyable day Tony.

Thanks to you Geoff,

 

'We' almost ran the sequence perfectly - one day I'll not cock-up, but it was wonderful fun. 

 

When you move up to these parts, we'll arrange regular running evenings, along with George. I'll even help you build your layout.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zr2498 said:

I had to look more than twice at Geoff's colliery photo to believe it was not the prototype. Stunning!

'Bad' track can be modelled successfully if plausible and in the right setting. Iain Rice has recently presented an article on this subject, MRJ No. 283 'Thoughts on modelling bad track'.

Good morning Dave,

 

The track on Norman Colliery is laid deliberately 'badly', though the running is still excellent. I think the mass of O Gauge means that locos/stock have a greater chance of successfully negotiating any humps and dips, and it is entirely convincing. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Dave,

 

The track on Norman Colliery is laid deliberately 'badly', though the running is still excellent. I think the mass of O Gauge means that locos/stock have a greater chance of successfully negotiating any humps and dips, and it is entirely convincing. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

It’s almost certainly easier in 7mm. 
6BF37B13-1653-4C60-9F89-A90FC5071E89.jpeg.721dc7e20d3101c0b2cd0c7c13db7fdb.jpeg

 

I do it in 4mm OO and EM, Shelfie 2 above and Albion Yard below (both OO/HO)D4F4B80C-59B9-4F3E-8A43-748EFD4D15C9.jpeg.90050877031d87eef5129f81f58ffefe.jpeg

It does take a long time and effort  to get ‘poor’ track to work well in 4mm especially if using 3-links and couplings like Dinghams. With TL’s it’s not much different to running on the carpet. I keep the vertical element to a minimum, and put kinks in at rail joints. It needs to be subtle though to capture a deviation, not interfere with reliability, and look ‘scale’ in both appearance and movements.

Edited by PMP
  • Like 15
  • Craftsmanship/clever 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not so sure 7mm is that easier. I model both British OO and American O, all laid with Peco track. Same problems occur with O as OO IF the track isn't right.

 

Basically my O layout has sharp curves, big heavy twin motored 8 & 12 wheel diesels run in multiple and 20 - 25 (max) car trains, some steep grades also. I'm pushing the limits, all of them. My track needs to be kink free on curves at rail joiners and any dips removed by packing / levelling. It runs very well when such problems are sorted - every derailment is investigated. It's not always the track either, some stock / locos are better than others on the road, coupler swings (longer stock), coupler height (track dips cause uncoupling with Kadees). It certainly doesn't help to have several makes of Knuckle couplers (Kadees NEVER fail, plastic Weaver break (slow replacement programme in progress), old Atlas are OK but clumsy. Metal wheels help too. My newer Atlas stuff has metal wheels, but most Weaver & old Atlas has plastic with varying running qualities.

 

I've done quite a bit of track maintenance this summer and though not 100%, the layout now runs like the prototype (occasional derailments par for the course!!).

 

 

Brit15

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

11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks to you Geoff,

 

'We' almost ran the sequence perfectly - one day I'll not cock-up, but it was wonderful fun. 

 

When you move up to these parts, we'll arrange regular running evenings, along with George. I'll even help you build your layout.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

It was great fun, and yes we almost made it through the sequence.

Looking forward to moving up there, it will be great to have regular running evenings along with George.

Thanks in advance Tony, that would be great to have your help with my layout.

 

Regards,

 

Geoff.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just assessing Hornby's latest Mk. 1 manifestations - the BCKs...................

 

1837078169_HornbyMark1BCKR40023R4002301.jpg.3bbae1a9988235e832fd1252040a5d48.jpg

 

I've taken off the tension-lock from the brake end and fitted the dummy buckeye. 

 

Though not having as many separate fittings as Bachmann's equivalents, they're reasonable models and more than adequate as layout coaches.

 

1816807347_HornbyMark1BCKR40023R4002303.jpg.3ea8bb26fe5ebe93ba859479c787d078.jpg

 

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

 

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Mobile phones - I have my son's cast off Razr, small, not smart, easy to use, will do for me. Switched off most of the time.

 

image.png.7ef58c7e39988bf21315ffe031fc30de.png

 

Went the day well ? (Google it).

 

Brit15

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

I've just bought my first new phone in 12 years. I'm not interested in phones at all but I needed a phone that would run the parkrun volunteer app, which allows one to time runners, scan their barcodes and upload the results. I thought it would be easy as all I needed to do was ask my existing provider to give me a smaller sim card, which supposedly could be done very easily in the shop. As you can guess it was anything but straightforward, and soon turned into farce involving endless hours calling ee, visiting their shops etc, culminating in my existing sim being deactivated before I had the new one, and therefore being without any phone at all when out of the house. Eventually I bought a relatively inexpensive smartphone, but the present irony is that the aforementioned app doesn't work properly on it. Grrr!

  • Friendly/supportive 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

Went the day well ? (Google it).

 

 

Blimey, that takes me back...  It wented!    Where did it went?   Reminds me of a conversation between Bluebottle and Eccles!  

 

Looking forward to Tony learning to speak 1337 on his new phone (!)

  • Like 3
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As to the BCK not sure on the bogies but can't find my oldest platform 5 spotting book.

 

The WR had a few XD mark 1s and I know of a SK and a FK on BR1s.

 

But step removal appeared to line up with blue grey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, MJI said:

As to the BCK not sure on the bogies but can't find my oldest platform 5 spotting book.

 

The WR had a few XD mark 1s and I know of a SK and a FK on BR1s.

 

But step removal appeared to line up with blue grey.

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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...