Giles Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Martyn, you are quite right to suggest that the world had changed since you first published your book - however..... The fact that there are new materials available (such as acrylics and 'washes') doesn't in any way whatsoever reduce the value of your techniques - it merely means there are yet more ways to achieve similar results - and sadly even more ways to mess up your locos and stock! The artistic eye, the observation, and many of the techniques are transferable in any case, and of course, just because new materials are more recent, doesn't make them 'better' by definition in all circumstances any way! To top it all, although there are some very good people weathering out there, although your modesty will not permit you to agree, there is none as good as you that I have seen, and I very much think I would not be alone in wanting to buy even a straight colour reprint of your book - let alone a re-worked mark II..... ......or a video! There is a whole generation of us who have learned the little we have from poring over your book - and been inspired by it - so thank you! Giles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 There is a whole generation of us who have learned the little we have from poring over your book - and been inspired by it - so thank you! Agreed, Giles. How about a thread on weathering industrial steam locomotives, Martyn? Just hope PGH and Coachman don't read it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weatherman Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 It is always gratifying to hear my efforts have been appreciated and perhaps helpful to others - the latter was always my original intent. Having decided, for the moment, that I wouldn't go any further with Book 2, more recently I've been contemplating producing some video tutorials for my website that would be freely available to view and download for anyone interested. My usual problem is having the time to organise them as I (fortunately) have such a busy work schedule, but if you think it could be a good plan, let me know and I'll consider further. I have been approached in the past by commercial companies to make weathering DVDs but some that I've watched haven't, in my view, been able to successfully show the finer subtleties involved whilst one or two have left me frankly wondering why they bothered at all unless purely done for the money. Fine for general purpose 'how to use an airbrush' etc but one prominent modeller (who shall remain nameless) left me quite angry by encouraging others to copy techniques that were, shall we say, fundamentally flawed. I'd be anxious to ensure anything I produced should be the best quality I can muster, particularly if by inference and reputation I'm recommending these could be sensible ways of doing things. Funnily enough, I've long held an ambition to model an industrial scene but have yet to build, paint and weather a suitable steam loco. I've done a couple of Rustons (48 & 88) and of course the Tin Turtle and am currently building an 07 diesel shunter, which will be in private owner colours and looking suitably weary. I want to fit a sound module in it but currently nobody produces an 07 chip, as far as I know. Not sure if an alternative readily available one could make a suitable substitute as the preserved 07 I've been in has quite a specific sound and I'd like to get as close as possible to it. As and when I get to the painting stage, I'll pop some pics on here for feedback if you like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giles Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Martyn - I think we would all absolutely love it it you WOULD do some video tutorials - either on line, or on a video to buy. If they're on line, I should very much want to be able to download them for future reference, if that were possible - but I'm sure there would be a queue of video production companies wanting to produce one if you were willing..... .......... Think of it as a service to the Community......! Giles Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weatherman Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 OK - food for thought. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris hndrsn Posted September 25, 2014 Share Posted September 25, 2014 ........ So, my questions: Does anybody have pictures, links or any other information about that simple modified 'thing' ? Or is there even a preserved one somewhere ? Thank you very much for your efforts in advance. Best wishes Dirk Hi, I just bounced across this thread after today receiving a copy of the book "The British Internal Combustion locomotive: 1894-1940" on page 31 there is an image of the armoured standard gauge 8 ton 40 hp Simplex loco. Basically the narrow gauge armour is mounted on the chassis you see of the post war civilian version. The drivers "hat" with vision slits is mounted on angle iron as the chassis is a little longer than the narrow gauge version. Otherwise the the layout and engine is apparently the same as the narrow gauge version. Cheers, Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris hndrsn Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Further to my earlier post, here is an image of the standard gauge "protected" armoured Simplex locomotives: It is described, in The British Internal Combustion Locomotive 1894-1940 by Brian Webb as weighing 8 tons, with engine and transmission similar to the 40hp 60cm gauge type. Overall dimensions were: length 14 ft 4in, height 9ft 7in, width 6ft 91/2in, wheelbase 4 5ft 6in, wheel diameter 37in; speeds were 3 and 7.2 mph. Hope this helps. Cheers, Chris Henderson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hespertalbahn Posted November 8, 2014 Author Share Posted November 8, 2014 Hello Chris, thank you for the hint. This book is already at hand. Best wishes Dirk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted November 19, 2014 Share Posted November 19, 2014 Further to my earlier post, here is an image of the standard gauge "protected" armoured Simplex locomotives: standard tinnie.jpg It is described, in The British Internal Combustion Locomotive 1894-1940 by Brian Webb as weighing 8 tons, with engine and transmission similar to the 40hp 60cm gauge type. Overall dimensions were: length 14 ft 4in, height 9ft 7in, width 6ft 91/2in, wheelbase 4 5ft 6in, wheel diameter 37in; speeds were 3 and 7.2 mph. Hope this helps. Cheers, Chris Henderson ISTR much discussion about this in the Industrial Railway Record. I think there was speculation about it not being built by Motor Rail in that form or if it was a post-war rebuild by Kent Construction or one of the other Motor Rail plagiarists. The 2ft. gauge used armoured Simplexes because they went right into forward areas but why would the R.O.D. need an armoured standard gauge shunter when the standard gauge didn't go up to the front? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris hndrsn Posted November 21, 2014 Share Posted November 21, 2014 Ruston, At Ypres the standard gauge, and Metre gauge went as far as and sometimes further than the 60cm gauge. Primarily for the railway howitzers. Howitzer positions at Ypres are recorded as being as close as 500m from the No Mans Land by the US Army writer of a paper on railway guns and I have a copy of the ADGTpt's map of the area which confirms that situation for late 1917. There are a number of pictures of post war standard gauge Simplex's with cast iron and other body work, but this is the only picture I have seen of wartime armoured body work adapted for standard gauge use. In my opinion to use such expensive metal for a post time "new" civilian build rather than tin plate seems worthless. Cheers, Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruston Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Ruston, At Ypres the standard gauge, and Metre gauge went as far as and sometimes further than the 60cm gauge. Primarily for the railway howitzers. Howitzer positions at Ypres are recorded as being as close as 500m from the No Mans Land by the US Army writer of a paper on railway guns and I have a copy of the ADGTpt's map of the area which confirms that situation for late 1917. There are a number of pictures of post war standard gauge Simplex's with cast iron and other body work, but this is the only picture I have seen of wartime armoured body work adapted for standard gauge use. In my opinion to use such expensive metal for a post time "new" civilian build rather than tin plate seems worthless. Cheers, Chris How is it expensive, or worthless? There were hundreds of these things sitting around in France after the war and many more sitting at the docks awaiting shipping at the time of the armistice. They were all suddenly redundant and were sold off cheaply. In fact MRTC themselves bought up at lot in order to recondtion and sell or hire for civil use. If, for example, you're building a prototype then taking the heavy body from an existing loco, to provide traction weight, is cheaper than making new castings. The WDLR running number shown on the loco corresponds to a 60cm gauge loco that was built in August 1917 and the Motor Rail works list doesn't show any standard gauge tractors or locomotives before 1920... So, whatever the loco in the picture I very much doubt that it was built in that form originally, or that it belonged to the R.O.D. Of course we can never be sure almost 100 years on but I'd need more proof than a dodgy airbrushed photo and a caption in one book... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.