Wright writes.....

[Anglian]

I'm not sue about that hyphen either. More appropriate punctuation probably exists.

 

 

That hyphen isn't a hyphen it's an em dash. Some may consider an en dash to be correct but both en or and em dash can be used. Their physical length will depend on the font used and it's possible that the designer set this using the keystrokes to give an en dash. In this instance it has been used correctly.

 

The correct use is:

 

Hyphen between two or more words that belong together for example, back-to-back.

 

The en or em dash is used as punctuation and is set with a space on either side as shown on the book cover.

 

This is a hyphen -

 

This is an en dash – 

 

The en dash is a glyph that professional designers and typesetters use. Typists tend to use a hyphen incorrectly when they should in fact be using the en/em dash. They also tend to have a really annoying habit of setting text with double word spaces after each full point when a single space is correct. Now perhaps somebody could teach me about punctuation within a sentence – subjunctive clauses et al.

 

Sorry now back to railways.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Anglian

[Tony Wright]

Aren't we back here to a variation on the RTR(P) vs kit build debate? I agree with the comments above that a good rtr catering vehicle should sell. To me an express looks 'wrong' without a buffet car of some description whether it is 3, 5, 7 or prototypical car length so I'd guesstimate that most people who buy brake thirds would also buy a catering car. However, if you are of a RTR(P) mindset, then even if you are aware that the car modelled actually isn't 100% technically correct! given you can't / won't make the correct versions, you'll live with the inaccuracy so long as the livery of the coach matches the rest of your rake or is within a margin of error (eg a crimson/ cream coach in a maroon rake etc). Copious rule 1 application.

 

Obviously if you care enough to have a 100% accurate catering vehicle you have to either learn to build or commission.

 

David

David,

 

I think the debate with regard to RTR or kit-built will go on for as long as this thread continues. 

 

If people are happy with things not being 'quite right' (whether it be to do with catering cars or not) then Rule 1 applies absolutely - and always should. 

 

I'm certainly not in the 100% category with regard to my own models and I'd be very worried if ever anyone thought that the catering vehicles I build were entirely accurate. I hope nobody models using my models solely as a guide - that would be very unwise. I'm flattered that the likes of Phil Ramsay has borrowed my Comet triplet set because he was building one for Gilbert Barnatt, and David West is borrowing one of my V2s to help him create more of his own. Others have also borrowed locos and stock to help them in their modelling, but I've always insisted that they're no more than guides. 

 

My principal motive in all of this is to encourage folk to have a go for themselves. That way, they shouldn't then need to commission anything. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Tony Wright

[St Enodoc]

Some perfectly observed and reasoned points, Willie.

 

If I've agonised over a missing less than 10% in length on LB it's because I'm a zealot. However, it still works visually overall because most trains are less than a third of the length of the layout. I'm lucky in that I don't have to lose any carriages from my prototype-length trains, 13 being the practicable maximum (I don't run the Aberdonian). 

 

You're probably right in that I might have looked at the issue of train lengths from the wrong end of the stick (we won't go into the origins of that expression). I decided which trains I wished to build, and built (with great help) a layout to accommodate them. Do most, then, build a layout in the space they have available and then decide what train lengths look right?

 

I still think RTR catering cars would be good sellers. Why Hornby brought out a Gresley Sleeper, I don't know, since most sleeping car trains have at least three different types of car. Most complete ECML sleeping car trains were quite long (11-15 cars, dependent on season/period), though by the time the trains had separated further north a single car could end up at, say, Lossiemouth or Inverness. A Gresley RF would have been a much better option in my view.

 

You might well be right in that folk might even pay a premium for a proper catering car. Who knows.

 

Speaking of premiums, there's a most interesting parallel thread on the value of model railway items. When it comes to insurance, most undervalue their collections.  

Some interesting discussions overnight (my time zone).

 

I'm lucky enough to have room for what Cyril Freezer called a Larger Layout, but I still have to reduce the length of my trains so that the length is commensurate with the length of the stations and so that they will fit the storage loops. Over the years I have settled on a length of 60% of the original, rounded up. Hence if the prototype train was 4 coaches long, on my layout it is 3 coaches long. In the 1950s, the summer weekday Cornish Riviera loaded to 10 coaches between Plymouth and Penzance so my version is 6 coaches long. The normal maximum load between Plymouth and Penzance was 15 coaches so my normal longest train is 9 coaches.

 

I achieve this by leaving out some of the more numerous kinds of coach in a formation. These are usually corridor seconds, but if I need to go further then something else will go as well. There weren't many restaurant cars west of Plymouth but on the odd occasion I have substituted a single coach for a restaurant pair.

 

Using the Down Cornish Riviera as an example:

 

Prototype = BSK, 4 x SK, SO (dining), RF, FK, CK, BSK = 10

 

Model = BSK, SK, SO, RU, CK, BSK = 6.

 

By doing this I believe that I can retain the "look and feel" of the prototype trains within the overall space that I have available.

 

Edited for spelling and a slight tidy-up.

Edited December 28, 2015 by St Enodoc

[Clearwater]

Thanks Tony and agreed. Following frequent exhortations on the joy of brass on this and other threads, I've followed advice suggested on rmweb for a suitable beginner's level coach kit and have invested in a comet brake third to try and build. I have open a George Dent book on kit building at the soldering chapter and will be rewatching your demonstration in a recent BRM DVD. If I don't try, I won't find out what I can do!

 

David

Edited December 27, 2015 by Clearwater

[nerron]

I have tried a number of different suppliers for crankpins - as Tony has said elsewhere Markits have family issues so supplies have dried up. I did try to support my local Models shop but they haven't got any and don't expect new stock for a while hence a trawl of the web. 

 

Try Scale Link.I have used them and found them to give good service.

 

 http://www.scalelink.co.uk/acatalog/Locomotive_Driving_Wheels_.htm

[coachmann]

Talking of coaches, I have ordered a BR maroon Hawksworth Brake Second in an Xmas sale. The conformation email suggests other coaches to complement my purchase.....

 

First Great Western Mk.III. .   

Virgin Mk.III........................  

InterCity Mk.IV...................   

Thomas & Friends 'Annie' and 'Clarabel' 4-wheelers......

Edited December 27, 2015 by coachmann

[t-b-g]

Talking of coaches, I have ordered a BR maroon Hawksworth Brake Second in an Xmas sale. The conformation email suggests other coaches to complement my purchase.....

 

First Great Western Mk.III. .   

Virgin Mk.III........................  

InterCity Mk.IV...................   

Thomas & Friends 'Annie' and 'Clarabel' 4-wheelers......

 

Now that train would raise some eyebrows!

[vitalspark]

I'm not sure our modelling improves because of photography but it certainly helps us spot the omissions which our amazing brains are capable of filling in!

 

How easy or difficult layout photography is often depends on the size of equipment in use but, whether you choose a capable compact as used by Andy Y or a bulkier DSLR, the common factor is the need for a good, stable (which generally equals heavy and expensive) tripod.

 

As ever, buying the right kit for the job is an investment and well worth skipping a camera upgrade to pay for. My old (and by no means top-of-the-range) Manfrotto cost more than my first 35mm SLR but has survived 30+ years of sometimes quite rough use with barely a scratch and has outlived five cameras; I'll certainly never wear it out.

 

John

 

We are fortunate to have access to high end Nikon equipment like D3s bodies and various low angle lenses but I would disagree that you always need a tripod..ok you do for general shots of the layout but often the most discussed and best received images are the ones taken at scale 'eye' level and for that you need the camera on the track and the more compact the better.

A decent compact or an inverted phone can see into places other dslrs cannot and often with surprising results.

Attached a few examples that might be familiar to some taken with an iPhone 5s.

 

And a much earlier very low res shot taken with an old Sony compact.

 

On earlier theme about hiding the fiddle yard at our last show at Wakefield the public did have access to rear of layout which of course attracted the usual undesirables,,,

 

Dave.

[Porcy Mane]

On earlier theme about hiding the fiddle yard at our last show at Wakefield the public did have access to rear of layout which of course attracted the usual undesirables,,,

 

I see you're working a night shift again. I feel like playing a fiddle looking at those two nearest the camera.  

 

P

Lovely pics though.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Porcy Mane

[vitalspark]

I see you're working a night shift again. I feel like playing a fiddle looking at those two nearest the camera.  

 

P

Lovely pics though.

XmasSmileSmr2.png

Dont know how they got past the front door..security need to sharpen up.

[Porcy Mane]

security need to sharpen up.

 

Social Security...

 

P

[AndyID]

If you alter the front wheels to be slightly turned it increases the realism greatly.

 

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks that. When I see lorries in beautifully modeled goods yards, the wheels are frequently "dead ahead". Mind you, I can understand why people might be reluctant to bend the axles on prized road vehicles.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Jol

 

As you say there are a lot of people who can supply 1/8" axle bearings but the price difference from different suppliers is quite an eye opener. 

 

Could it be that the provision of supplies to make up kits makes it more of a minority pastime? The time when you got a complete kits including all parts other than paint, transfers and a method of fastening it all together seem so remote now. Could that be putting people off trying a locomotive kit for the first time?

 

May be as an engineer I don't see spending time building Kits as anything other than adding value to my (and others ) stock - but again, as an engineer I increasingly see a lack of engineering knowledge of materials used in some of our kits and conversions. 

Barry,

 

a bit of research showed 1/8" bearings available from 16p to 25p each, a large percentage variation perhaps but not as wide as for wheels. However these often have different design/manufacturing processes so the variation per axle with crank pins from approximately £7.45 (AGW), through £12.69 (Markits) to £24+ (Exactoscale/Ultrascale) seems a little easier to understand.

 

Perhaps the lack of "engineering" knowledge applies to some suppliers who, without an engineering training but a desire to see a particular item available to meet their modelling wants/needs, decided to go ahead and produce it. Many of our current kits and bits suppliers started this way. Most had to learn how to design etch artwork, how to make patterns for castings, etc. Some had lower aspirations or ability than others, but most supply products without which we would be very much worse off.

 

Jol

[johnarcher]

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks that. When I see lorries in beautifully modeled goods yards, the wheels are frequently "dead ahead". Mind you, I can understand why people might be reluctant to bend the axles on prized road vehicles.

Yes, and also (does anyone agree?) some vehicles are apparently weightless. Tyres flatten where they touch the ground, so a small flat filed on the bottom of the tyre looks better too?

Edited December 28, 2015 by johnarcher

[Tony Wright]

Another day, another pupil.

 

 

Some excellent soldering done today by Grahame Wareham (Brush Veteran), in the making of his first loco kit; a DMR B2. I did some soldering, then he did some. I tacked part of the splashers, he did the rest. I soldered the firebox base on the far side, he did this side; and so on............................

He's got the cleaning up to do. 

 

 

I had hoped to do more on the LMR D2 over the holiday, but this is progress to date. As I say, it'll be at the St. Albans Show (complete - don't tempt providence!), along with the Poppy's jig and umpteen other items I'm building. 

 

Any chance of the above locos being available RTR? I very much doubt it. 

 

I've just noticed the awards section. Was there a category for loco and/or rolling stock kits? If so, I've missed it. 

[polybear]

Barry,

 

a bit of research showed 1/8" bearings available from 16p to 25p each, a large percentage variation perhaps but not as wide as for wheels. However these often have different design/manufacturing processes so the variation per axle with crank pins from approximately £7.45 (AGW), through £12.69 (Markits) to £24+ (Exactoscale/Ultrascale) seems a little easier to understand.

 

I find that one of the major concerns when placing small orders (e.g. one packet of crank pins) is the cost of postage.  Some traders exercise some leeway here, whilst others place a "minimum postage, no matter what" regime which can double the cost of an order quite easily.

[jrg1]

I find that one of the major concerns when placing small orders (e.g. one packet of crank pins) is the cost of postage.  Some traders exercise some leeway here, whilst others place a "minimum postage, no matter what" regime which can double the cost of an order quite easily.

A major consideration here in Australia!

[micklner]

 

 

 

 

I've just noticed the awards section. Was there a category for loco and/or rolling stock kits? If so, I've missed it. 

 The problem is how many all new 4mm kits are produced these days?

 

A rare event for  Locos these days. e.g You couldn't include re releases such as Brassmasters Finney range.

[richard i]

A kit section would highlight good kit offerings, buildings in brass and laser cut. High level and mike edge have some new locos/ chassis.

It is a missed opportunity to reward those cottage industries that move our hobby from collectors to craft. I have been told by an art teacher ( not TW) that it can not be art as building two kits of the same loco would come out the same.

[billbedford]

 The problem is how many all new 4mm kits are produced these days?

 

 

I suspect there are quite a lot of kits, or at least part kit, being produced, but they are done privately and are never marketed.

[wagonbasher]

not if I made them...!

 

Andy

[Dunsignalling]

A kit section would highlight good kit offerings, buildings in brass and laser cut. High level and mike edge have some new locos/ chassis.

It is a missed opportunity to reward those cottage industries that move our hobby from collectors to craft. I have been told by an art teacher ( not TW) that it can not be art as building two kits of the same loco would come out the same.

But painting them would never produce 100% identical objects..........

 

I agree with your teacher that anything made from a kit is not art any more than painting-by-numbers can be, but It is not possible to take the same position over scratch-built models.

 

I would also define complete layouts or dioramas as unique three dimensional objects directly comparable with other representational art forms.

 

J

[Mallard60022]

If some of the ***** in galleries is classed as art, then one of my kit builds could be a classic piece. 

H. Moore.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Mallard60022

[CUTLER2579]

Tony, 

 

you commented                 "Any chance of the above locos being available RTR? I very much doubt it. "

 

However I would have thought we may see a B2 from Hornby if the B17 is a good seller.

Hornby already have the Diagram 100A type from the Thompson B1  design, the 4200 gallon group standard tender to produce 61671

This would also lend itself to a Set in the name of the Royal Train with 61671 "Royal Sovereign"  or even 61632 posing as  "Royal Sovereign" in late 1958 early 1959.  

The variation of tenders may be an issue, as mentioned   No. 61671 kept its original 4,200 gallon tender, but the other locomotives had their Great Eastern (GER) type tenders replaced with larger tenders from other locomotives. Two (Nos. 61615 & 61632) received the old tenders from the two  withdrawn P1 Mikado  locomotives, whilst the others received tenders from  withdrawn C7 4-4-2 locomotives.

 

Kind regards,Derek.

[unclebobkt]

        ... .

  I agree with your teacher that anything made from a kit is not art any more than painting-by-numbers can be, but It is not possible to take the same position over scratch-built models.

  I would also define complete layouts or dioramas as unique three dimensional objects directly comparable with other representational art forms.       - J

 

        Pray define 'Art.'.