Wright writes.....

[jwealleans]

can you please advise if you know of any photographic references to these vans?

Andrew,

 

See my post 11735. Since then I've also found another, colour one: if you go to the Colour-Rail site, search for LNER D16/2 and look down to the colour shot of 8783 at Cambridge on a Royal working, it's passing one of these vans.

Edited October 3, 2016 by jwealleans

[Tony Wright]

I can't wait to read your vans/wagon book, a chapter on Dean/Churchward fitted brake gear would be most interesting. Seriously, if the van is to feature in a 'how to book' then it is important to show an accurate if simplified representation without compromising a layout rolling stock philosophy. People do read these things and then copy what they see. Regarding the other 350 vans/wagons, if any of these are Bachmann fitted LNER stock or the Hornby CCT then they will show pretty much how the under gubbins should be, both have adopted a realistic approach to representing this in the context of a layout van or wagon rather successfully. Apparently, some recent manufactures products have cocked up LNER brake gear with some style.

Thanks again Andrew.

 

I have several of the vans you mention so I'll examine those. 

[Woodcock29]

Andrew,

 

See my post 11735. Since then I've also found another, colour one: if you go to the Colour-Rail site, search for LNER D16/2 and look down to the colour shot of 8783 at Cambridge on a Royal working, it's passing one of these vans.

Thanks Jonathon

 

Regards

 

Andrew

[Tony Wright]

 

Though I can't imagine anyone travelling to Peterborough just to see this, it will be running on Canons Cross (one of Market Deeping MRC's layouts) over the weekend after next. I built it from a SE Finecast kit, which Ian Rathbone painted so well. By restricting the bogie movement (effectively making it a sort of non-coupled 0-8-0) and making the chassis electrically dead I was able to fit the bogie splashers. 

 

At the Wigan Show over the weekend, the conversations I frequently had, returned to the theme of kit-building and/or RTR. Most acknowledged how the current crop of (OO) locos are as good, and in many cases better than a kit-built equivalent. It set me thinking (once again) about my personal approach. 

 

 

This is one of my ancient Wills A4s, built long before any RTR A4 (in my opinion) was worth considering. RTR alternatives at the time included Hornby-Dublo, Wrenn, Trix and the original tender-drive Hornby one. I scratch-built a chassis for this and years later Ian Rathbone repainted it for me. It's had a replacement motor/gearbox, not because the original failed, but its open-framed 5-pole XO4-style motor and 40: gears were a bit noisy. Other than that, it's completed nearly 40 years of service and run many faultless miles on Fordley Park, Leighford, Stoke Summit and Little Bytham, as well as guesting on Biggleswade and Gamston Bank. It'll pull any train I hang behind it. At close (slightly-unfair, in my opinion) quarters, it's a bit lumpy now, but Ian's painting raises its standing. 

 

 

Ian also raised the standard on this A4 as well. It's an original Hornby CHARLES NEWTON, which came in plain black. I fitted a front number plate bracket, changed the bogie wheels and close-coupled the loco/tender. Visually, there's no doubt this is superior to the one old enough to be its father. However, the valve gear is weak and puny in comparison (not that my Jamieson set is brilliant) and the slide bar supports have long gone. Its performance is also weak in comparison and anything like 13/14 kit-built bogies is way, way beyond it, though easily within the capability of 60014. It's the only Hornby A4 I still keep, mainly because of the perfect painting - Hornby's BR green is far too blue at source in my view. 

 

Another topic of conversation at the weekend was the longevity of today's RTR locos, especially ones worked really hard (like mine, or what were mine). Today, I've had to fix a Hornby rebuilt BB; not what I'd expect for a loco having run just a few 'scale' miles - dodgy pick-ups and a motor jumping out of gear. 

 

I have no regrets in following my personal path of building the locos I require. A personal view, of course. 

[Headstock]

SE Finecast Schools.jpg

 

Though I can't imagine anyone travelling to Peterborough just to see this, it will be running on Canons Cross (one of Market Deeping MRC's layouts) over the weekend after next. I built it from a SE Finecast kit, which Ian Rathbone painted so well. By restricting the bogie movement (effectively making it a sort of non-coupled 0-8-0) and making the chassis electrically dead I was able to fit the bogie splashers. 

 

At the Wigan Show over the weekend, the conversations I frequently had, returned to the theme of kit-building and/or RTR. Most acknowledged how the current crop of (OO) locos are as good, and in many cases better than a kit-built equivalent. It set me thinking (once again) about my personal approach. 

 

Wills A4 painted by Ian Rathbone.jpg

 

This is one of my ancient Wills A4s, built long before any RTR A4 (in my opinion) was worth considering. RTR alternatives at the time included Hornby-Dublo, Wrenn, Trix and the original tender-drive Hornby one. I scratch-built a chassis for this and years later Ian Rathbone repainted it for me. It's had a replacement motor/gearbox, not because the original failed, but its open-framed 5-pole XO4-style motor and 40: gears were a bit noisy. Other than that, it's completed nearly 40 years of service and run many faultless miles on Fordley Park, Leighford, Stoke Summit and Little Bytham, as well as guesting on Biggleswade and Gamston Bank. It'll pull any train I hang behind it. At close (slightly-unfair, in my opinion) quarters, it's a bit lumpy now, but Ian's painting raises its standing. 

 

Hornby A4 slightly detailed, painted by Ian Rathbone.jpg

 

Ian also raised the standard on this A4 as well. It's an original Hornby CHARLES NEWTON, which came in plain black. I fitted a front number plate bracket, changed the bogie wheels and close-coupled the loco/tender. Visually, there's no doubt this is superior to the one old enough to be its father. However, the valve gear is weak and puny in comparison (not that my Jamieson set is brilliant) and the slide bar supports have long gone. Its performance is also weak in comparison and anything like 13/14 kit-built bogies is way, way beyond it, though easily within the capability of 60014. It's the only Hornby A4 I still keep, mainly because of the perfect painting - Hornby's BR green is far too blue at source in my view. 

 

Another topic of conversation at the weekend was the longevity of today's RTR locos, especially ones worked really hard (like mine, or what were mine). Today, I've had to fix a Hornby rebuilt BB; not what I'd expect for a loco having run just a few 'scale' miles - dodgy pick-ups and a motor jumping out of gear. 

 

I have no regrets in following my personal path of building the locos I require. A personal view, of course. 

Hi Tony,

 

I'm intrigued by the chassis bogie arrangement on the Schools, is this purely an aesthetic consideration, re the splasher, or is it linked to how the locomotive performs on the road. Beautiful locomotives by the way, the valve gear on 60014 looks far better than that on 60008.

[richard i]

The bogie iif it has less movement will guide the loco into corners better than if it is loose to swing around. If my physics is correct.

Richard

[Headstock]

Rather than the benefits of side control, I was wondering if the reference to it being a 0-8-0 had an effect on its pulling capabilities?

[coachmann]

There was nothing unusual about what Tony did with his Schools, although i hadn't heard of making one into a 0-8-0 before when 2-6-0 would have been feasible. I built 2-4-2T's as 0-6-2T's to prevent the front end from waggling all over the place. It was simply a case of restricting the side-play on the leading wheels and adding extra side-play on the leading drivers. The leading wheels continued to have limited vertical movement and so no weight was taken off the driving wheels. I built three GEM Compounds as effective 2-6-0's to eliminate the typical 4-4-0 waddle.

Edited October 5, 2016 by coachmann

[Headstock]

I always fit bogie or pony truck side control, nothing looks worse than the bogie going in one direction and the chassis going in the other. I must admit to owning an A3 that has a most curvacious wiggle on its rear end when pulling up a bank. I've yet to see the crew abandon the footplate so I've left it as it is a the moment. I see it more as a personality quirk, part of the charm of kit building.

[Rail-Online]

Thanks Jonathon

 

Regards

 

Andrew

Indeed there is one looking almost maroon in this 1930s shot. Would they have been painted 'mock teak' or simply brown in this period?

 

Tony

[Atso]

Hi Tony,

 

I hope you don't mind me hijacking your thread again but I wanted to share my latest soldering adventure. 

 

 

This is the 2mm Association's GNR cattle truck etched kit which was received yesterday. I spent an enjoyable couple of hours building the body yesterday (roof not attached yet) and a couple more this morning have seen the chassis built to a basic state. Soldering is something I'd never got the hang of but, thanks to those on this (and other) forums as well as your tutorial videos, I've managed to get to the point where (most of) the bits I want to solder actually remain attached to other bits!

 

Thank you for inspiring me to have a go...

[richard i]

Hi Tony,

 

I hope you don't mind me hijacking your thread again but I wanted to share my latest soldering adventure. 

 

 

This is the 2mm Association's GNR cattle truck etched kit which was received yesterday. I spent an enjoyable couple of hours building the body yesterday (roof not attached yet) and a couple more this morning have seen the chassis built to a basic state. Soldering is something I'd never got the hang of but, thanks to those on this (and other) forums as well as your tutorial videos, I've managed to get to the point where (most of) the bits I want to solder actually remain attached to other bits!

 

Thank you for inspiring me to have a go...

That looks great, I would be satisfied if my soldering was that clean in 4mm but in 2mm that is impresive.

Richard

[garethashenden]

That looks great, I would be satisfied if my soldering was that clean in 4mm but in 2mm that is impresive.

Richard

My 2mm soldering tends to be neater than my 4mm soldering. I think it's because I am more inclined to use solder paste in 2mm as opposed to solder wire.

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony,

 

I hope you don't mind me hijacking your thread again but I wanted to share my latest soldering adventure. 

 

 

This is the 2mm Association's GNR cattle truck etched kit which was received yesterday. I spent an enjoyable couple of hours building the body yesterday (roof not attached yet) and a couple more this morning have seen the chassis built to a basic state. Soldering is something I'd never got the hang of but, thanks to those on this (and other) forums as well as your tutorial videos, I've managed to get to the point where (most of) the bits I want to solder actually remain attached to other bits!

 

Thank you for inspiring me to have a go...

Steve,

 

Rather than my inspiring you to have a go, I think what you've done is more inspirational. That's exquisite soldering, so, please, hijack-away!

 

 

If anything, it shows up my less than scrupulous cleaning up with regard to my own soldering. I've taken on board the suggestions and altered parts of the brake gear and fitted brake blocks to the Isinglass model. The blocks/shoes came from my spares box and probably aren't dead right. From this low angle they're shown as too far away from the wheel treads, but this low-down sort of shot does exacerbate this effect.

 

 

 

John Houlden's completed D&S model of a very similar van has turned out very nicely.

 

If I achieve nothing ever again in this hobby, at least I'm chuffed that people are having a go at building their own models, especially those that aren't available RTR. Does it matter if it's less-than-perfect (like mine)? It's your personal creation and so much more of value because of that.

 

Today four friends from Essex came to run the railway. We had a great time. Gentlemen, my most grateful thanks. All agreed that the most important aspect of the hobby was the making of things. Two model in EM - superbly I have to say. The other two are content with OO and though one uses (modified) RTR locos/stock (because he's never had success in building locos) it's vital to him that he's made all the buildings for his layout of Grimsby. He's also made the baseboards, laid all the track, ballasted it, wired it and got the whole thing to work. Now complete, it seems he'll dismantle it and build a different layout. I asked why? 'Because I like making things'. Need I say more?  

Edited October 5, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony,

 

I'm intrigued by the chassis bogie arrangement on the Schools, is this purely an aesthetic consideration, re the splasher, or is it linked to how the locomotive performs on the road. Beautiful locomotives by the way, the valve gear on 60014 looks far better than that on 60008.

Andrew,

 

Though I stand to be corrected (as usual) the splashers on the rear bogie wheels of the Schools were to prevent muck being thrown up into the slide bars of all three cylinders. They used to be lined-out in some SR guises, which was very aesthetically-pleasing. 

[Tetarch60]

SE Finecast Schools.jpg

 

Though I can't imagine anyone travelling to Peterborough just to see this, it will be running on Canons Cross (one of Market Deeping MRC's layouts) over the weekend after next. I built it from a SE Finecast kit, which Ian Rathbone painted so well. By restricting the bogie movement (effectively making it a sort of non-coupled 0-8-0) and making the chassis electrically dead I was able to fit the bogie splashers. 

 

At the Wigan Show over the weekend, the conversations I frequently had, returned to the theme of kit-building and/or RTR. Most acknowledged how the current crop of (OO) locos are as good, and in many cases better than a kit-built equivalent. It set me thinking (once again) about my personal approach. 

 

Wills A4 painted by Ian Rathbone.jpg

 

This is one of my ancient Wills A4s, built long before any RTR A4 (in my opinion) was worth considering. RTR alternatives at the time included Hornby-Dublo, Wrenn, Trix and the original tender-drive Hornby one. I scratch-built a chassis for this and years later Ian Rathbone repainted it for me. It's had a replacement motor/gearbox, not because the original failed, but its open-framed 5-pole XO4-style motor and 40: gears were a bit noisy. Other than that, it's completed nearly 40 years of service and run many faultless miles on Fordley Park, Leighford, Stoke Summit and Little Bytham, as well as guesting on Biggleswade and Gamston Bank. It'll pull any train I hang behind it. At close (slightly-unfair, in my opinion) quarters, it's a bit lumpy now, but Ian's painting raises its standing. 

 

Hornby A4 slightly detailed, painted by Ian Rathbone.jpg

 

Ian also raised the standard on this A4 as well. It's an original Hornby CHARLES NEWTON, which came in plain black. I fitted a front number plate bracket, changed the bogie wheels and close-coupled the loco/tender. Visually, there's no doubt this is superior to the one old enough to be its father. However, the valve gear is weak and puny in comparison (not that my Jamieson set is brilliant) and the slide bar supports have long gone. Its performance is also weak in comparison and anything like 13/14 kit-built bogies is way, way beyond it, though easily within the capability of 60014. It's the only Hornby A4 I still keep, mainly because of the perfect painting - Hornby's BR green is far too blue at source in my view. 

 

Another topic of conversation at the weekend was the longevity of today's RTR locos, especially ones worked really hard (like mine, or what were mine). Today, I've had to fix a Hornby rebuilt BB; not what I'd expect for a loco having run just a few 'scale' miles - dodgy pick-ups and a motor jumping out of gear. 

 

I have no regrets in following my personal path of building the locos I require. A personal view, of course. 

Good afternoon,I have just found your blog, if that is the correct term, the RTR of today has ,one ,for me, big fault, you are stuck with whatever mechanism the manufacturer decides to put in their engine. Most steam outline models need a good size flywheel attached to the motor for smooth running and a momentum effect For what I mean just look how Bachmanns class 08 diesel shunter runs. All model locos in 4mm  should run as well as that, with the appropriate top speed. One observation, on your Little Bytham layout where the down siding meets the down slow/goods near to the M&GN bridge,there should be a set of trap points to prevent conflicting movements towards the down slow/goods. There was also a dolly signal at these points to authorise any movements out of the siding. If you look carefully at your 1957 copy of the BR plan you will see this feature. Hope this information will be of help.

[Atso]

Steve,

 

Rather than my inspiring you to have a go, I think what you've done is more inspirational. That's exquisite soldering, so, please, hijack-away!

 

Isinglass milk van 18.jpg

 

If anything, it shows up my less than scrupulous cleaning up with regard to my own soldering. I've taken on board the suggestions and altered parts of the brake gear and fitted brake blocks to the Isinglass model. The blocks/shoes came from my spares box and probably aren't dead right. From this low angle they're shown as too far away from the wheel treads, but this low-down sort of shot does exacerbate this effect.

 

Isinglass milk van 19 D&S Dia.jpg

 

John Houlden's completed D&S model of a very similar van has turned out very nicely.

 

If I achieve nothing ever again in this hobby, at least I'm chuffed that people are having a go at building their own models, especially those that aren't available RTR. Does it matter if it's less-than-perfect (like mine)? It's your personal creation and so much more of value because of that.

 

Today four friends from Essex came to run the railway. We had a great time. Gentlemen, my most grateful thanks. All agreed that the most important aspect of the hobby was the making of things. Two model in EM - superbly I have to say. The other two are content with OO and though one uses (modified) RTR locos/stock (because he's never had success in building locos) it's vital to him that he's made all the buildings for his layout of Grimsby. He's also made the baseboards, laid all the track, ballasted it, wired it and got the whole thing to work. Now complete, it seems he'll dismantle it and build a different layout. I asked why? 'Because I like making things'. Need I say more?  

 

Thank you very much for your kind words Tony and Richard. As garethashenden says, much use was made of solder paste for this model (is this cheating?) and the combination of nickle silver along with my poor photography probably hides most of the solder! Construction wasn't without problems, if you look closely at the bottom corner closest to the camera, you can see one to the straps is missing. This wasn't fixed very well to the model and my effort to correct this resulting in it pinging off into oblivion!

 

I'm enjoying working with metal and solder and have another two cattle wagons to build, these are of GER and LNER design. The LNER version is very much of the same design as the GNR one but the GER wagon is a moulded plastic body to be fixed to an etched chassis. My latest revision of my 3D printed J6 is going well and I'll need to start thinking about an etched chassis for this soon...

 

Part of the appeal of N gauge to me is that their isn't a huge range of rtr that fits in with my modelling period but just enough to save some work from time to time. One area that isn't well represented in my modelling is the massive variety of coaching stock in use in the 1930s as nearly everything I own are either Dapol or Minitrix coaches. I think some GNR stock will be required to balance things out a bit and I'll probably start with some Gresley 61'ers using the Dapol coaches as a starting point (much as per your own conversions using the Hornby donors).

 

Your Isinglass van looks wonderful, as do your locomotives poster earlier, and I look forward to seeing it painted.

[Headstock]

Andrew,

 

Though I stand to be corrected (as usual) the splashers on the rear bogie wheels of the Schools were to prevent muck being thrown up into the slide bars of all three cylinders. They used to be lined-out in some SR guises, which was very aesthetically-pleasing. 

 

It's a very nice bit of detail modeling, the nearest I have come to such an item is fitting the protective plate that prevents sand dropping onto the slide bars of V2's amongst others. I was wondering if you had made any special arrangements to ensure maximum pulling power from a  4-4-0. The van looks very good, by the way, I assume the D&S version has gas lighting?

[glo41f]

Tony

 

That Schools looks the bees knees. One of my favourite types even though I am not a Southern man. (It would be my second choice though!)  By co-incidence I found a 4mm schools body and tender together with a comet chassis and Markit wheel set in the garage. Where did that come from? Should I try to make it or pass it on? If I could match your one that would be a result!

 

The van looks better with the brake blocks I have to say even though you will not see them as they fly by LB. 

 

I feel you are doing an excellent job in your show demonstrations. By engaging in this way it is helping to drive the hobby forward and hopefully raise the standards generally.

 

Regards

 

Martin Long

[Tony Wright]

It's a very nice bit of detail modeling, the nearest I have come to such an item is fitting the protective plate that prevents sand dropping onto the slide bars of V2's amongst others. I was wondering if you had made any special arrangements to ensure maximum pulling power from a  4-4-0. The van looks very good, by the way, I assume the D&S version has gas lighting?

Thanks Andrew,

 

There are four 'dodges' to make sure the Schools pulls. One; there is a light spring on the bogie to not only make it ride well but ensure the balance of the loco is between the drivers. Two, the front end of the tender rests on the drawbar (not half the tender weight, just a bit; the leading tender axle thus just goes along for the ride). Three; the gearbox is from London Road in the form of a very flat 'V' which pushes the motor well forward, just out of the firebox. Four; as a result of three, the 'box is packed with lead. The result? That Schools will take 11 Pullman cars at 85 scale mph. 

 

Gas lighting on the D&S van? I have no idea.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony

 

That Schools looks the bees knees. One of my favourite types even though I am not a Southern man. (It would be my second choice though!)  By co-incidence I found a 4mm schools body and tender together with a comet chassis and Markit wheel set in the garage. Where did that come from? Should I try to make it or pass it on? If I could match your one that would be a result!

 

The van looks better with the brake blocks I have to say even though you will not see them as they fly by LB. 

 

I feel you are doing an excellent job in your show demonstrations. By engaging in this way it is helping to drive the hobby forward and hopefully raise the standards generally.

 

Regards

 

Martin Long

Thank you for your kind sentiments, Martin.

 

However, I'm not sure if I'm driving the hobby forward; remember, Iain Rice refers to me as the greatest Luddite since Ned Ludd himself! 

 

As mentioned, today four splendid friends came to 'play trains', which we did. One of the group (one of the EM modellers) asked me why I didn't believe in compensating my locos. He compensates all of his (which, to be fair, are all small). He was driving one of my SE Finecast A4s on the Scotch Goods, loaded to nearly 50 wagons. I was told compensation improves pick-up, road holding and adhesion. I asked him to stop the A4, then start it at a real crawl, negotiate a couple of slips, then accelerate away, without any stuttering, slipping or jerking. This it did. Why do I need compensation, I asked? In a way, rather than taking anything forward, I'm standing still! Very still! 

 

With regard to show demonstrating, if I can teach but a few souls how to solder then it'll have been worth it. If I can encourage folk to have a go themselves at modelling, then that will be even more worth it. Some (most accomplished) modellers over-complicate things in my view. Some (if I can be contentious) are even snobbish about their modelling, not in the least bit egalitarian. I don't do sophistication, don't do progress, hate modernity and have stood still for 40 years. How do I know this? Two Jamieson V2s I built were run today. There were two differences. One; a 40-year gap between them. Two, Ian Rathbone painted the one I built last year. Other than those, there were no differences. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Good afternoon,I have just found your blog, if that is the correct term, the RTR of today has ,one ,for me, big fault, you are stuck with whatever mechanism the manufacturer decides to put in their engine. Most steam outline models need a good size flywheel attached to the motor for smooth running and a momentum effect For what I mean just look how Bachmanns class 08 diesel shunter runs. All model locos in 4mm  should run as well as that, with the appropriate top speed. One observation, on your Little Bytham layout where the down siding meets the down slow/goods near to the M&GN bridge,there should be a set of trap points to prevent conflicting movements towards the down slow/goods. There was also a dolly signal at these points to authorise any movements out of the siding. If you look carefully at your 1957 copy of the BR plan you will see this feature. Hope this information will be of help.

Good evening,

 

Thank you for your comments. 

 

As I hope the following pictures show, the trap points and ground dolly you mention are actually on the model.

 

 

 

 

 

The working ground signals are the work of Roy Vinter, to whom any praise should be given. They are little works of art in my view. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited October 5, 2016 by Tony Wright

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Hi Tony,

Lovely work as always.

A couple of observations-sorry, if this is repetition, I have only just found the blog again-I always feel that there is something special about kit-built models, ie when built to a good standard, even if the contemporary RTR version is technically 'better'. Not to mention the satisfaction of building such ones self. Horses for courses though as RTR, modified RTR, kit bashing and kit building all have their place. But seeing nice kit built layout models seem to have - winces at using this now usurped and over used phrase - the x factor, in its purest sense.

For sometime now there appears to have been an issue with longevity, or lack of it, with certain RTR 'mechanicals' (chassis and gearboxes/gear-sets et al).

Even when the 'modern' batches of RTR were first introduced, several years back now - how time rushes by - those running RTR, over any real mileage, would report that the RTR chassis ended up running poorly whilst doing a good impression of one of those Olympic long distance walkers - ie unevenly. Some of the seaside type attractions with permanent 'exhibition' layouts had to resort to modified or kit built chassis so as to overcome such problems and maintain models that were reliable and wore well over large mileages.

Kindest regards,

CME

Edited October 6, 2016 by CME and Bottlewasher

[jwealleans]

I believe the D 86 and 87 vans were lit by oil lamps where not fitted with electricity.

[Headstock]

Yes, I meant to say oil, not gas. I guess anthracite would not be appropriate either.