Jump to content
We are aware of the intermittent site speed issues at the moment. Please be patient and don't repeatedly click things as that compounds the issue.

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

33 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

It is a shame in many ways to use the wrong-spoked wheels, Tony, but I plead pragmatism.

 

Rob Kinsey started the 9F in question what must be 30 years ago (for Leighford), and the Model Loco kit came with the standard Romfords of the day (as did mine). Though the wheels had the right diameter, there were at least two too many spokes. For me to replace the drivers with the correct Markits ones now would cost me nearly £70.00, maybe more. Multiply that by a further three (to go underneath the other Model Loco/DJH 9Fs I've got) and the cost is just too prohibitive. I suppose it's a different outlook I have in a way - with over 200 locos I've built for Little Bytham, perhaps I turn a 'blinder eye' to some detail issues. Anyway, since the 9Fs are only seen in motion on the layout (as opposed to still pictures), the spokes are extremely difficult to count!

 

 

 

963324659_92042panning.jpg.4e9e50a35e72e4c2e729f85b3414d5d6.jpg

 

You're right, Roy did build the 9F for somebody else (who then promptly disappeared, and has never been traced since). Out of kindness, he gave it to me in exchange for chassis I made for Retford and coaches I gave him. It's a lovely model. I think Geoff painted it and weathered it. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

 

Hello Tony,

 

I couldn't begin to remember where I read it now but I have a vague recollection of somebody writing in an article that the Romford 20mm driving wheel was produced initially as a wheel aimed at the 3mm scale/TT Gauge market. It would represent a 6ft 8ins wheel in that scale.

 

It would explain why it has so many spokes for a 5ft wheel in 4mm scale.

 

I would agree with you that on a layout like yours, the number of spokes is of little consequence. It is only in still "frozen" photos where it shows. It is one of those things that matters more to some people than to others.

 

I may have mentioned it before but I have one loco that has 5 wheels with 16 spokes each and the 6th wheel has the grand total of 4 spokes. The real thing had 12 spoke wheels and I cut 3 spokes out of each quarter with a view to replacing them with 2 new dummy ones but never got around to it. The loco ran at many exhibitions like that and nobody ever noticed. I bought some correct wheels for it when you could purchase Sharman wheels from Mike Sharman himself and if I ever remember where I put them, they may yet get fitted. 

  • Like 9
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

It's a real shame that kits such as this disappear forever (I'm assuming no-one still markets it - perhaps under a different label?) :sad_mini:

A search for George Allen railway model kits turns up very little but it does appear that they were designed by George Pring. His name then turns up in connection with Kemilway. That footbridge kit doesn't appear to have been taken over by any other kit producer, although there seem to be several laser cut wooden ones on offer.

 

 

41 minutes ago, zr2498 said:

Agree. At least the designs should be sent to a repository of some kind, and either be available on request or held until a new business opportunity arises.

 

That is probably not really practical.

 

Setting up such a repository would rely on the goodwill of the original designer/manufacturer in giving the artwork, designs or tooling away. Product ranges have disappeared because the owner wouldn't sell them, they became superseded by newer and possibly better kits/model, the original owner passed away and his offspring didn't know what to do with it (or thought it was worth a lot more thn it was) and so on. Some ranges pass into new hands but the new owner loses interest, can't cope with re-organising and re-producing products (Coopercraft) and a variety of other reasons. On occasion pride has overridden common sense and a range of products has simply disappeared.

 

Fortunately some existing producers have taken over other ranges as the opportunity arose, including PPP, Wizard, Nucast Partners, London Road Models. Others have changed hands - eg. SEF/Stevenson Carriages which are now part of Squires. 

 

Older etched kits may will have been hand drawn and the original artwork may not still exist. It is possible that the etched tooling might, possibly with the etcher used to produce the kit components,  but after a long time it is likely that they could  have been scrapped. Some ranges are very badly documented (the original owner kept it all in their head) that resurrecting them is a very difficult task.

 

Finally, such a repository would need organising and funding. Any volunteers?

 

 

 

  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CF MRC said:

On Chiltern Green we ran a Midland Compound (converted from a Peco Jubilee- everything was in those days) which had a five wheel tender. The middle wheel (non visible side) worked better that way…

 

Tim

The late Ray Earl, who produced several very nice EM exhibition layouts (I think one was called Ambridge), sometimes only completed the viewer's side of his models, including carriages as well as buildings.

  • Agree 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

A search for George Allen railway model kits turns up very little but it does appear that they were designed by George Pring. His name then turns up in connection with Kemilway. That footbridge kit doesn't appear to have been taken over by any other kit producer, although there seem to be several laser cut wooden ones on offer.

One of the reasons that the 4mm versions of Kemilway finished was copyright piracy, and the footbridge was one of those designs that was copied. I believe they tried taking a legal route but it didn’t resolve the issues. 

  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Dave John said:

Hi Tony, just a wild guess, but there is something about the 4 wheel breakdown coach that suggests Drummond for the NBR. 

I think you're right Dave,

 

I acquired it, part-built from the estate of a deceased modeller. It's certainly etched brass, but the manufacturer's name is etched in what's best described as 'fancy handwriting', which makes it impossible to discern. I finished it. It is ex-NB.

 

Whether it would have appeared in an engineers' train so far south and as late as 1958 is open to conjecture, but (I think) it looks the part.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting Tony. 

 

I suspect it is a Decent Models Kit by John Boyle. The etch had parts for both the NB and CR versions. Main difference was the ends and roof shape. When Drummond moved from the NB to the CR he took quite a large roll of drawings with him, so there are a lot of similarities for stock of that period. 

 

I'd agree, it does look the part so enjoy what is actually a quite rare kit. 

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

7 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

The footbridge was made by Dave Scott from a George Allen kit of many, many moons ago. It's all-soldered, even if in the instructions gluing was recommended for some of the parts.

George Alan kits appeared at about the same time as the first bottles of superglue in non-industrial sizes (IS-12, then IS-150). Superglue was recommended for these early etched kits, presumably to reduce the risk of distortion.

Edited by St Enodoc
speling
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The late Ray Earl, who produced several very nice EM exhibition layouts (I think one was called Ambridge), sometimes only completed the viewer's side of his models, including carriages as well as buildings.

Ray and Cida didn't always put all the bits of rail in their points either! The non-viewing side of their rolling stock was labelled "Parcels" or whatever in large letters. Very much the theatrical approach, to great effect.

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

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Roger,

 

Do you remember this ghastly thing?

 

168176992_mysterycarriage.jpg.ab47d25cf896b634ca6c0f9ba13a3f14.jpg

 

Despite its being painted in LNER condition, it turns out it's a GWR bogie van.

 

What to do with it? Throw it away? Give it away? Or what?

 

50353939_mysterycarriage2.jpg.9040e92c8cbf94dd8f07544533282966.jpg

 

Having learned that it was ex-GWR, I looked in Russell's book and found the diagram. Now, this is bound to send all Heaven into a rage, but this actual van ended up in departmental service. Yes, it was much-modified, but it lasted until the mid-'50s. So a rub-down, repaint, lowering the body (it rode on stilts!) and a touch of weathering, and there you are. It's just the type of van which might have be seen in engineers' service, as part of a breakdown train. Is it accurate? Highly-unlikely, but could something like this 'trick the eye'?

 

Bytham's engineers' train is made up (in part) of a Mousa Models ex GNR non-gangwayed Brake Third and a pre-Grouping four-wheeler of unknown parentage. 

 

1054364935_engineerscarriages.jpg.4ec8f8f8e0464b19cdc7c02790756b57.jpg

 

John Isherwood very kindly made me some suitable transfers (thanks again, John), and Richard Wilson weathered the vehicles for me. 

 

Prior to their being weathered, I set up a breakdown train of sorts.

 

1836150887_Trains16breakdowntrain.jpg.6a56116643bd8455ba8db4d09d2cd5c9.jpg

 

I really have no idea if any of the models I've shown are really that accurate. However, they 'look the part', and out of all the marvellous guests I've had visit LB, nobody has ever told me they're wrong.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Ahem…

 

they’re wrong! 

  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

George Alan kits appeared at about the same time as the first bottles of superglue in non-industrial sizes (IS-12, then IS-150). Superglue was recommended for these early etched kits, presumably to reduce the risk of distortion.

Thanks for the clarification of the name, John, 

 

Alan, Allan, Allen, such are the different spellings of a popular name. 

 

Frequently, when folk cite their abcs of yore, they'll state Ian Allen (I've even seen it in print) instead of Allan. 

 

Though nothing to do with the publisher of countless trainspotting 'bibles', I've also frequently seen in print the description 'Beyer Garrett' to describe a type of articulated locomotive. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

The late Ray Earl, who produced several very nice EM exhibition layouts (I think one was called Ambridge), sometimes only completed the viewer's side of his models, including carriages as well as buildings.

Good morning Jol,

 

The late, great architectural modeller, Allan Downes, only modelled elevations of buildings which could be seen by the viewing public. 

 

On occasions, when plonking the camera to get a shot along, say, a street he'd made, one side would just be blank cardboard!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Roger,

 

Do you remember this ghastly thing?

 

168176992_mysterycarriage.jpg.ab47d25cf896b634ca6c0f9ba13a3f14.jpg

 

Despite its being painted in LNER condition, it turns out it's a GWR bogie van.

 

What to do with it? Throw it away? Give it away? Or what?

 

50353939_mysterycarriage2.jpg.9040e92c8cbf94dd8f07544533282966.jpg

 

Having learned that it was ex-GWR, I looked in Russell's book and found the diagram. Now, this is bound to send all Heaven into a rage, but this actual van ended up in departmental service. Yes, it was much-modified, but it lasted until the mid-'50s. So a rub-down, repaint, lowering the body (it rode on stilts!) and a touch of weathering, and there you are. It's just the type of van which might have be seen in engineers' service, as part of a breakdown train. Is it accurate? Highly-unlikely, but could something like this 'trick the eye'?

 

Bytham's engineers' train is made up (in part) of a Mousa Models ex GNR non-gangwayed Brake Third and a pre-Grouping four-wheeler of unknown parentage. 

 

1054364935_engineerscarriages.jpg.4ec8f8f8e0464b19cdc7c02790756b57.jpg

 

John Isherwood very kindly made me some suitable transfers (thanks again, John), and Richard Wilson weathered the vehicles for me. 

 

Prior to their being weathered, I set up a breakdown train of sorts.

 

1836150887_Trains16breakdowntrain.jpg.6a56116643bd8455ba8db4d09d2cd5c9.jpg

 

I really have no idea if any of the models I've shown are really that accurate. However, they 'look the part', and out of all the marvellous guests I've had visit LB, nobody has ever told me they're wrong.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

Re: Items of questionable origin but 'looking the part', I have a modified RTR breakdown train, posted here for comparison.  In need of weathering, but repainted and lettered using a set of transfers available from Fox's.  This is probably the 'lazy man's' equivalent!

 

These are otherwise unmodified models, comprising Bachmann's Ransome & Rapier crane, bogie well wagon, Hornby's generic 4-wheel brake, and Hornby's GWR clerestory brake.  An open wagon and box van have since completed the train.

 

IMG_4480.jpg.d5eb06fa281f0cdd1131e44e1bc8f340.jpg

 

Phil.

  • Like 17
Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Chamby said:

 

Re: Items of questionable origin but 'looking the part', I have a modified RTR breakdown train, posted here for comparison.  In need of weathering, but repainted and lettered using a set of transfers available from Fox's.  This is probably the 'lazy man's' equivalent!

 

These are otherwise unmodified models, comprising Bachmann's Ransome & Rapier crane, bogie well wagon, Hornby's generic 4-wheel brake, and Hornby's GWR clerestory brake.  An open wagon and box van have since completed the train.

 

IMG_4480.jpg.d5eb06fa281f0cdd1131e44e1bc8f340.jpg

 

Phil.

Thanks Phil,

 

The whole thing 'looks the part'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

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

15 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Roger,

 

Do you remember this ghastly thing?

 

168176992_mysterycarriage.jpg.ab47d25cf896b634ca6c0f9ba13a3f14.jpg

 

Despite its being painted in LNER condition, it turns out it's a GWR bogie van.

 

What to do with it? Throw it away? Give it away? Or what?

 

50353939_mysterycarriage2.jpg.9040e92c8cbf94dd8f07544533282966.jpg

 

Having learned that it was ex-GWR, I looked in Russell's book and found the diagram. Now, this is bound to send all Heaven into a rage, but this actual van ended up in departmental service. Yes, it was much-modified, but it lasted until the mid-'50s. So a rub-down, repaint, lowering the body (it rode on stilts!) and a touch of weathering, and there you are. It's just the type of van which might have be seen in engineers' service, as part of a breakdown train. Is it accurate? Highly-unlikely, but could something like this 'trick the eye'?

 

Bytham's engineers' train is made up (in part) of a Mousa Models ex GNR non-gangwayed Brake Third and a pre-Grouping four-wheeler of unknown parentage. 

 

1054364935_engineerscarriages.jpg.4ec8f8f8e0464b19cdc7c02790756b57.jpg

 

John Isherwood very kindly made me some suitable transfers (thanks again, John), and Richard Wilson weathered the vehicles for me. 

 

Prior to their being weathered, I set up a breakdown train of sorts.

 

1836150887_Trains16breakdowntrain.jpg.6a56116643bd8455ba8db4d09d2cd5c9.jpg

 

I really have no idea if any of the models I've shown are really that accurate. However, they 'look the part', and out of all the marvellous guests I've had visit LB, nobody has ever told me they're wrong.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

With the excellent weathering, it looks great, and very credible.  Just a thought.  Nothing shouts out GWR as loudly as those G-shaped grab handles.  Easy to cut off and replace with something more local, which only leaves the signature lookout ducket of course.

 

Tony

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Hollar said:

With the excellent weathering, it looks great, and very credible.  Just a thought.  Nothing shouts out GWR as loudly as those G-shaped grab handles.  Easy to cut off and replace with something more local, which only leaves the signature lookout ducket of course.

 

Tony

And a high proportion of coaches/NPCCS converted for departmental use lost their duckets in the process.

 

John

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

17 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Roger,

 

Do you remember this ghastly thing?

 

168176992_mysterycarriage.jpg.ab47d25cf896b634ca6c0f9ba13a3f14.jpg

 

Despite its being painted in LNER condition, it turns out it's a GWR bogie van.

 

What to do with it? Throw it away? Give it away? Or what?

 

50353939_mysterycarriage2.jpg.9040e92c8cbf94dd8f07544533282966.jpg

 

Having learned that it was ex-GWR, I looked in Russell's book and found the diagram. Now, this is bound to send all Heaven into a rage, but this actual van ended up in departmental service. Yes, it was much-modified, but it lasted until the mid-'50s. So a rub-down, repaint, lowering the body (it rode on stilts!) and a touch of weathering, and there you are. It's just the type of van which might have be seen in engineers' service, as part of a breakdown train. Is it accurate? Highly-unlikely, but could something like this 'trick the eye'?

 

Bytham's engineers' train is made up (in part) of a Mousa Models ex GNR non-gangwayed Brake Third and a pre-Grouping four-wheeler of unknown parentage. 

 

1054364935_engineerscarriages.jpg.4ec8f8f8e0464b19cdc7c02790756b57.jpg

 

John Isherwood very kindly made me some suitable transfers (thanks again, John), and Richard Wilson weathered the vehicles for me. 

 

Prior to their being weathered, I set up a breakdown train of sorts.

 

1836150887_Trains16breakdowntrain.jpg.6a56116643bd8455ba8db4d09d2cd5c9.jpg

 

I really have no idea if any of the models I've shown are really that accurate. However, they 'look the part', and out of all the marvellous guests I've had visit LB, nobody has ever told me they're wrong.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

Good afternoon Tony,

 

Perhaps their just more polite than I, or just haven't got a clue.

 

As flag waver for the unpopular opinion, i.e. copy the real thing. Your 'Departmental' train has never made much sense to me, it comes across as a rather interesting if random collection of vehicles. What is it, whats it doing, whats its job? Is it a break down train, a ballast train, or an odd mix of the two? It has a bit of sand, a bit of ballast and a couple of made up vehicles, a mix of revenue and departmental stock and lots of space for tools.

 

I cant say the new ex GWR full brake adds anything, except more confusion.  I'm not sure if the livery is supposed to be the late departmental red, or BR crimson lake? Wouldn't the former be anachronistic for your time period? The latter would explain the ''return empty to the western region'' legend. Presumably it is a unbranded stores van, delivering more tools from Swindon works to a random departmental train on the East coast mainline?

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chamby said:

 

Re: Items of questionable origin but 'looking the part', I have a modified RTR breakdown train, posted here for comparison.  In need of weathering, but repainted and lettered using a set of transfers available from Fox's.  This is probably the 'lazy man's' equivalent!

 

These are otherwise unmodified models, comprising Bachmann's Ransome & Rapier crane, bogie well wagon, Hornby's generic 4-wheel brake, and Hornby's GWR clerestory brake.  An open wagon and box van have since completed the train.

 

IMG_4480.jpg.d5eb06fa281f0cdd1131e44e1bc8f340.jpg

 

Phil.

 

Good morning Phil,

 

I have photographs and even moving images of a couple of the breakdown trains operating in your area. No they didn't use ex GWR clerestory carriages, two wheelers, GWR Crocodiles or the Bachmann breakdown Crain.

 

The above is understandable, given the limitations that you have to work under with RTR. The major improvement that I would suggest, would be the repainting of the anachronistic livery for your chosen time period of 1949.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good afternoon Tony,

 

Perhaps their just more polite than I, or just haven't got a clue.

 

As flag waver for the unpopular opinion, i.e. copy the real thing. Your 'Departmental' train has never made much sense to me, it comes across as a rather interesting if random collection of vehicles. What is it, whats it doing, whats its job? Is it a break down train, a ballast train, or an odd mix of the two? It has a bit of sand, a bit of ballast and a couple of made up vehicles, a mix of revenue and departmental stock and lots of space for tools.

 

I cant say the new ex GWR full brake adds anything, except more confusion.  I'm not sure if the livery is supposed to be the late departmental red, or BR crimson lake? Wouldn't the former be anachronistic for your time period? The latter would explain the ''return empty to the western region'' legend. Presumably it is a unbranded stores van, delivering more tools from Swindon works to a random departmental train on the East coast mainline?

Good afternoon Andrew,

 

I think the best thing will be to completely remove the train from Bytham. 

 

I've never claimed it was accurate; just based on the occasional photograph of engineers' trains here and there. 

 

'Perhaps their (sic) just more polite than I, or just haven't got a clue'. Who knows?

 

As for the WR van in question, perhaps I really should have thrown it away! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

  • Friendly/supportive 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Phil,

 

I have photographs and even moving images of a couple of the breakdown trains operating in your area. No they didn't use ex GWR clerestory carriages, two wheelers, GWR Crocodiles or the Bachmann breakdown Crain.

 

The above is understandable, given the limitations that you have to work under with RTR. The major improvement that I would suggest, would be the repainting of the anachronistic livery for your chosen time period of 1949.

 

Good afternoon, Andrew.  You are absolutely right of course, though perhaps I should have pointed out that this particular train does most of its running on our club layout, depicting the WR in west London.  So it is not photographed in its usual habitat!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Headstock said:

 

Good morning Phil,

 

I have photographs and even moving images of a couple of the breakdown trains operating in your area. No they didn't use ex GWR clerestory carriages, two wheelers, GWR Crocodiles or the Bachmann breakdown Crain.

 

The above is understandable, given the limitations that you have to work under with RTR. The major improvement that I would suggest, would be the repainting of the anachronistic livery for your chosen time period of 1949.

I thought only Rowland Emmett used two wheelers.  Bill

  • 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...