Wright writes.....

[Mallard60022]

The original Gresley A1 frames were deficient in design-one flaw was lightening holes that were subsequently deleted to give more strength.  The original design was was superseded by the A4 arrangement; by the late fifties there was no discernible difference between an A3 and an A4 (Quoted from the RCTS Green Bible).  Fitting with double chimneys, optical alignment of frame assemblies, and stricter maintenance procedures based on Doncaster instead of outstations ensured superior performance.

Part of Flying Scotsman's problems appear to have been due to being flogged and strained.

 

Perhaps we were on the same ships?  Just why manufacturers and ship owners seemed to collude to install untried, unworkable junk on vessels, and then wonder why they have problems was always a mystery to myself and my co-workers.  Any engineer will quickly realise that highly rated machinery (eg High speed engines) will always be less reliable than medium speed engines.  The corollary here are the long-lived class 20's-proven, reliable, solid machines and the likes of the Claytons, class 21s, 22s, 23s and 28s.  As we used to say, boring is good-it means nothing is going wrong.   

I suspect being hoisted on and off ships and carted around the world didn't do it much good either? I know it is controversial in some peoples' minds, however I am glad it has been brought back to main line condition and is in the public eye. 'Joe and Joanne' public know about this locomotive and will go to see it and sometimes pay for that. Down south, when it has worked the Belmonnd Pullman, it has created huge interest and earned lots and lots of money. Long may that last.

Phil

[Tony Wright]

Morning Tony,

 

PTD (post travelling depression) is kicking in now   cant wait to come back!! The new track plan has been drawn up and i am in the process of mapping out where the track will be placed. Hopefully track laying will begin in late January, as it has been over 35^o  here most of the time and i have been very lazy busy...

 

The A2 has had a DCC chip wired in and it runs beautifully; as it should its DCC   

 

Merry Christmas to you and Mo, all the best for the New Year and hopefully see you in 2017!

 

From the Simos

 

-Steve, Donna, Ashlee and myself 

 

 

All the best to you and your family, Jessie.

 

The invitation to visit is always open for you here. It was great fun to have a non-old git in the house!

 

I'm delighted the A2 works well now it's DCC-fitted. It was the best of the late John Brown's locos. So far I've raised over £700.00 for his family/charity from selling his locos, including the A2, Garratt, H1 and B17. I've got the rest until mid-January - Z, Q7, C1, P2, J35, N15 plus others. Anyone out there interested? After that, they go to auction. 

[Tony Wright]

The recent discussions about the various Thompson locos made me think just how many models I've made of them (many on commission), how many I still own and how many which are the work of others which are now my property. I know I've made at least twice as many A2/2s as were in the class, though never models of EARL MARISCHAL and LORD PRESIDENT - most seemed to want MONS MEG or WOLF OF BADENOCH. 

 

 

Here are GREAT NORTHERN and a pair of A2/1s, 60510 and 60508. I built all of these, and Ian Rathbone painted 60113 and 60510. 60113 is from a Crownline kit, 60510 from a Nu-Cast kit and 60508 (which I painted) from a Jamieson hand-cut kit. I've made two other A1/1s and two other A2/1s. 

 

 

Here are my current A2/2s, from left to right, DJH (prototype kit), Crownline and DJH. I built these and Ian Rathbone painted them. 

 

 

Three of my current A2/3s (I've made fewer of these than A2/2s for some reason), from left to right Crownline, DJH and DJH. I built these and Ian Rahbone painted them. I hope the detail differences are evident.

 

 

I built none of these three. John Houlden built and painted the B16/3 (from a PDK kit), which Tom Foster weathered, Graeme King did one of his magnificent conversions of a Bachmann A2 into an A2/3, which I patch-painted, part relined, numbered, named and weathered, and John Houlden built, painted and weathered the J11/3 (from a Little Engines kit). I rebuilt the chassis. 

 

 

The K5 is a most singular model. I made this from a much-modified Wills K3, scratch-building a chassis and a tender for it, finally doing the painting and weathering. The left-hand L1 is a modified Hornby one by me and the right-hand one my ancient ECJM example, which Tom Foster weathered for me. 

 

 

A real mixture of Thompson freight classes, all made/modified/altered by me. The O2/4 (ex-O2/1) is from a PDK kit, the O4/8 is from K's O4 bits with a scratch-built boiler and cab, the left-hand O1 is my 40+ year old scratch-built one (or should I say, I built it and it got scratched?) and the other two O1s renumbered/detailed/weathered Hornby examples (far superior to my old scratch-built one). 

 

 

Finally, what is the collective noun for several B1s? As they were nicknamed 'Bongos', how about herd? 

 

Most of these are Bachmann/Replica bodies on Comet frames, mainly my work, though there's one each from Tony Geary and John Houlden. There's also a renumbered/detailed/weathered Hornby one (the weathering by Tom Foster) and my ancient Nu-Cast example and even more ancient Jamieson one. 

 

I have one or two other Thompson locos, but they merely duplicate what's illustrated here. I've astonished myself by not realising before I took these pictures, just how many Thompson locos I have. They were, after all, just as everyday a sight on the ER/NER/ScR (and other regions) as any Gresley or Peppercorn types. Since I make models of what I saw. then they have to be included, as they are, in their own right. 

 

So, as a celebration of his work at this celebratory time, may we see some more models of Thompson's locos, please? 

 

 

[Mallard60022]

 

B1s.jpg

 

Finally, what is the collective noun for several B1s? As they were nicknamed 'Bongos', how about herd? 

 

 

How about a slap? Think about it......................!

D. Rummer.

Edited December 24, 2016 by Mallard60022

[coachmann]

It's been seen before. Not one of mine I might add...Just another loco passing through the paintshops. Pity about the Romford bogie wheels but they were very typical of the era. It's faults are now't to do with me m'lud ....... 

 

Edited December 24, 2016 by coachmann

[stewartingram]

I've got to say, like Tony does, those Thompson pacifics, they were an everyday sight on the ECML. As such, I like them, and they add variety. An ECML with only A4s in sight, would be like today's railway with HSTs or 91s. And, to be honest, some of them have a certain "super-pacific" feel to me anyway. I don't have an opinion on either Gresley or Thompson, or Peppercorn either come to that. They were just part of my youth, from a magnificent scene never to be witnessed again. How I would like a Tardis to return me to Offord or Abotts Ripton  to once agin see those namers roll past.

Seasons greetings to everyone.

 

Stewart

Edited December 24, 2016 by stewartingram

[Flood]

Well the last time I photographed my Thompson Pacific it was in Summer sun with heavy shadows, so here are some photos taken today in Winter gloom. At least she now has decent bogie wheels.  It's such a pity that my compact camera won't go any lower than F2.8 because the depth of field is rubbish.

 

 

 

 

Graham H

Edited December 24, 2016 by Flood

[jwealleans]

A pair of Hornby B1s which I reworked for Thurston when they first came out.  Both were originally the named loco in LNER lined black (Roedeer?) which Hattons were selling off cheaply.  Renumbered to two of the Ipswich allocation.

 

 

61058 from a photo in (I think) Peter Swinger's LNER 4-6-0s.  This was chosen to keep the fine Hornby lining. 

 

 

61059 in action on Little Bytham.  This was a full repaint, Bradwell dome and chimney.  Lining by Fox, numbers HMRS Pressfix.  1059 was a particular depot pet so it's been only lightly weathered and had a couple of light coats of Klear on the cleaned areas.

Edited July 11, 2018 by jwealleans

[Tony Wright]

Well the last time I photographed my Thompson Pacific it was in Summer sun with heavy shadows, so here are some photos taken today in Winter gloom. At least she now has decent bogie wheels.  It's such a pity that my compact camera won't go any lower than F2.8 because the depth of field is rubbish.

 

60506 December (1).JPG

 

60506 December (2).JPG

 

60506 December (3).JPG

 

Graham H

That's a very fine A2/2, Graham. From memory, am I right in thinking it's a King/Bachmann conversion which you've undertaken? I particularly like the weathering - most natural. 

 

I think one thing which immediately jumps out at me are those excellent replacement bogie wheels (Markits?). Bachmann's are so unrealistic - even more highlighted on a Thompson Pacific because of the bogie being so far forwards. 

 

Please, keep up the good work, winter or summer. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[westerner]

Just to get away from these eastern region discussion about various designers I thought I d show you what I have been doing of late, back dating my maroon warship into the unique Sprightly

 

so from this

 

 

to this

 

 

and as you might expect Kernow is now doing a limited edition Sprightly, typical, but as Tony would/will say this one is at least mine.

 

I'm also back dating my D600 Warship by cutting the head code boxes of my Silver Fox model and I have just added handrails and lamp brackets. Headcode discs have been ordered.

 

[Willie Whizz]

...

 

The A2/2s were inferior to A3s, A4s and V2s on the Aberdeen road in terms of their ability (or inability) to haul heavy trains - they just slipped most of the time. As P2s, they could take trains of up to 550 tons (and more) with total assurance. No other class could do that. 

 

...

 

The big Thompsons might have been better at hauling goods trains, but do you think that was in ET's mind when designing his Pacifics? When new, the A2/3s took over much of the express passenger work from the war-weary Gresley Pacifics, but as soon as the Peppercorn Pacifics were built, they were moved away to depots with less-demanding passenger work. 

 

...

 

This has got me wondering ...

 

If (as it is being said) by the late 1940s it was widely felt by the professional railwaymen, the operating people and the designers that the Thompson Pacifics were, relatively speaking, 'duds' compared to the earlier Gresley and subsequent Peppercorn versions, why was it that when a small batch of Pacifics was required for the Great Central main line (to supplant B1s that were struggling with loadings and timings on the restored expresses there), several A3s were sent over - when the Thompsons could easily have been reallocated en bloc instead?

 

The number of engines needed was roughly the same; the loadings - though rising - were still less demanding than most on the ECML; and the smaller driving wheels would have suited the GC route better (there was certainly I understand a belief among the London Extension enginemen that a V2 was as good and often better than an A3 for the express work on their route).  And new A1s were coming on-stream in numbers by now. Surely therefore, if the A2/2s and A2/1 were really so very disliked, here was an ideal opportunity to "help" the other line with a reasonably clear conscience, by giving them a cohesive batch of locos that were readily capable of the required duties, whilst still being able to say "good riddance" to them from your own sheds.

 

Mind you, most of the A3s actually transferred weren't in good condition and took a lot of work by Leicester and Neasden to get them running sweetly once more.  So perhaps it was felt even a 'dud' A2/2 in mechanically decent nick was preferable to a 'dodgy' A3.  And yet, such work would have been required by the ECML sheds sooner or later anyway, so I don't find that idea particularly convincing.

 

So I do wonder ...  Perhaps this whole thing is one of those arguments that has grown with hindsight (especially to enthusiasts) - but wasn't nearly so apparent to those on the ground at the time as we like to think?

 

 

                "Merry Christmas to all, and to all a Good Night!"

[glo41f]

Well I never expected to see a model of the K5 here. The only one I knew of prior to this was that made by Barrie Walls in 7mm (and I bet that there is not another one of those.). Although allocated to the GE, I never saw this loco. Jonathan's B1s are fine too but 1069 should be shiner than that. It was kept in very fine nick as was B17 Helmingham Hall a model of which is in hand at the moment. It will be the first B17 I have done with a large tender. I really think we could put the Thompson thing to bed now chaps as it will never be resolved. You either like them or you don't. (I don't).

 

I am also working on a streamlined B17 which does not get Mr Walls approval but it is the nearest that I can get to an A4 on the GE!

 

It would have been interesting to see if the LMS Princess Coronations would have fared better than an A4 on the ECML. Again we will never know but they are handsome beasts. 

 

There is so far no sign of my Duchess of Montrose this Christmas (again!)

 

Best wishes to all at this time for a thoroughly entertaining and informative thread. I look forward to more in 2017.

 

Martin Long

[Tetarch60]

The recent discussions about the various Thompson locos made me think just how many models I've made of them (many on commission), how many I still own and how many which are the work of others which are now my property. I know I've made at least twice as many A2/2s as were in the class, though never models of EARL MARISCHAL and LORD PRESIDENT - most seemed to want MONS MEG or WOLF OF BADENOCH. 

 

A1 1 & A 2 1s.jpg

 

Here are GREAT NORTHERN and a pair of A2/1s, 60510 and 60508. I built all of these, and Ian Rathbone painted 60113 and 60510. 60113 is from a Crownline kit, 60510 from a Nu-Cast kit and 60508 (which I painted) from a Jamieson hand-cut kit. I've made two other A1/1s and two other A2/1s. 

 

A2 2s.jpg

 

Here are my current A2/2s, from left to right, DJH (prototype kit), Crownline and DJH. I built these and Ian Rathbone painted them. 

 

A2 3s.jpg

 

Three of my current A2/3s (I've made fewer of these than A2/2s for some reason), from left to right Crownline, DJH and DJH. I built these and Ian Rahbone painted them. I hope the detail differences are evident.

 

B16 3, A2 3 & J11 3.jpg

 

I built none of these three. John Houlden built and painted the B16/3 (from a PDK kit), which Tom Foster weathered, Graeme King did one of his magnificent conversions of a Bachmann A2 into an A2/3, which I patch-painted, part relined, numbered, named and weathered, and John Houlden built, painted and weathered the J11/3 (from a Little Engines kit). I rebuilt the chassis. 

 

K5 & L1s.jpg

 

The K5 is a most singular model. I made this from a much-modified Wills K3, scratch-building a chassis and a tender for it, finally doing the painting and weathering. The left-hand L1 is a modified Hornby one by me and the right-hand one my ancient ECJM example, which Tom Foster weathered for me. 

 

O2 4, O4 8 & O1s.jpg

 

A real mixture of Thompson freight classes, all made/modified/altered by me. The O2/4 (ex-O2/1) is from a PDK kit, the O4/8 is from K's O4 bits with a scratch-built boiler and cab, the left-hand O1 is my 40+ year old scratch-built one (or should I say, I built it and it got scratched?) and the other two O1s renumbered/detailed/weathered Hornby examples (far superior to my old scratch-built one). 

 

B1s.jpg

 

Finally, what is the collective noun for several B1s? As they were nicknamed 'Bongos', how about herd? 

 

Most of these are Bachmann/Replica bodies on Comet frames, mainly my work, though there's one each from Tony Geary and John Houlden. There's also a renumbered/detailed/weathered Hornby one (the weathering by Tom Foster) and my ancient Nu-Cast example and even more ancient Jamieson one. 

 

I have one or two other Thompson locos, but they merely duplicate what's illustrated here. I've astonished myself by not realising before I took these pictures, just how many Thompson locos I have. They were, after all, just as everyday a sight on the ER/NER/ScR (and other regions) as any Gresley or Peppercorn types. Since I make models of what I saw. then they have to be included, as they are, in their own right. 

 

So, as a celebration of his work at this celebratory time, may we see some more models of Thompson's locos, please? 

Good afternoon one and all. Firstly, wishing everyone the compliments of the season. Just had a look at all those Thompson engines, very nice indeed, Though I think I would make Great Northern an A3 and number it 60113, a project for the coming new year. A question Tony, what make is the soldering iron holder you use in the BRM Right Track Volumes 1&2 Locomotive Kit Building? the only ones I have seen lately are coil spring shape with a piece of plastic at the top of for the iron to pass through, not a very good arrangement. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. The most important thing that your Little Bytham layout shows, is the overall picture that matters most, not so much the gauge and standards used.

[Headstock]

This has got me wondering ...

 

If (as it is being said) by the late 1940s it was widely felt by the professional railwaymen, the operating people and the designers that the Thompson Pacifics were, relatively speaking, 'duds' compared to the earlier Gresley and subsequent Peppercorn versions, why was it that when a small batch of Pacifics was required for the Great Central main line (to supplant B1s that were struggling with loadings and timings on the restored expresses there), several A3s were sent over - when the Thompsons could easily have been reallocated en bloc instead?

 

The number of engines needed was roughly the same; the loadings - though rising - were still less demanding than most on the ECML; and the smaller driving wheels would have suited the GC route better (there was certainly I understand a belief among the London Extension enginemen that a V2 was as good and often better than an A3 for the express work on their route).  And new A1s were coming on-stream in numbers by now. Surely therefore, if the A2/2s and A2/1 were really so very disliked, here was an ideal opportunity to "help" the other line with a reasonably clear conscience, by giving them a cohesive batch of locos that were readily capable of the required duties, whilst still being able to say "good riddance" to them from your own sheds.

 

Mind you, most of the A3s actually transferred weren't in good condition and took a lot of work by Leicester and Neasden to get them running sweetly once more.  So perhaps it was felt even a 'dud' A2/2 in mechanically decent nick was preferable to a 'dodgy' A3.  And yet, such work would have been required by the ECML sheds sooner or later anyway, so I don't find that idea particularly convincing.

 

So I do wonder ...  Perhaps this whole thing is one of those arguments that has grown with hindsight (especially to enthusiasts) - but wasn't nearly so apparent to those on the ground at the time as we like to think?

 

 

                "Merry Christmas to all, and to all a Good Night!"

 

That's a good question,

 

the late 1940's saw a boom in rail traffic the likes of which was not seen for the rest of the BR period. The B1's replace an aging collection GC locomotives and supported the rundown 2 1/2 cylinder V2's and B17's. The B1's performed well at first, however, as the train sizes grew to deal with growth in post-war traffic they began to struggle. There was a great deal of discourse about the late running of express trains in the railway press at the time and much discussion about what the solution to the problem would be. I believe it was Cecil J Allen who pointed out that the sectional times being worked, with the weight of trains involved, were beyond the typical horsepower of a B1 sized locomotive. It was mooted at the time in the railway press, that a redistribution of A2 class locomotives would be a solution to the problem.

 

Contrary to opinion, the London extension was not a dumping ground for unpopular classes of locomotive. The best solution to the problem was unroutable the A3 class locomotives for a number of reasons. GC crews and sheds were already familiar with the big Gresley engines, the Pacifics had worked from GC sheds before the war and the V2 class had been a staple of GC services for a number of years. They were a much larger class than the A2's, which allowed the swapping of locomotives like for like with Top Shed and others.

 

Against the A2's, is that the East coast people wanted to keep them close to the works that serviced their many foibles if nothing else the A3's were reliable. It is likely that the A2's with their fifty-foot grate area would have been regarded as overpowered and thus wasteful of coal under GC operating conditions. Over on the East coast mainline, the routes V2's suffered more from neglect than any of the other big engines, it was probably felt that the A2's were better utilized on fast goods services, as the much preferred A1's displaced them from passenger workings. To take a more cynical view, the authorities must have recognized that even the most clapped out members of the A3 class were restored to good health after a spell on the GC. I suspect that those that knew the A2's well, thought better of sending troublesome engines off to deal with a problem receiving so much publicity. Better to shunt them off to where they could do the least amount of damage.

Edited December 24, 2016 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

Good afternoon one and all. Firstly, wishing everyone the compliments of the season. Just had a look at all those Thompson engines, very nice indeed, Though I think I would make Great Northern an A3 and number it 60113, a project for the coming new year. A question Tony, what make is the soldering iron holder you use in the BRM Right Track Volumes 1&2 Locomotive Kit Building? the only ones I have seen lately are coil spring shape with a piece of plastic at the top of for the iron to pass through, not a very good arrangement. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. The most important thing that your Little Bytham layout shows, is the overall picture that matters most, not so much the gauge and standards used.

Many thanks for your comments.

 

I'm afraid I can't remember the origin of my soldering iron stand; I've had it so many years. It is very substantial, consisting of a very heavy base and robust, coil-spring holder. Nothing on it is plastic, so nothing can melt.

 

Try Phil Atkinson at Hobby Holidays; he might have something similar. 

 

With regard to how Little Bytham 'looks' in an overall picture, the acid test will be undertaken in about three/four weeks time when it'll appear in the MRJ. 

 

Anyway, as this is Christmas Eve, everyone out there have a very Merry Christmas. 

[Tony Wright]

Well I never expected to see a model of the K5 here. The only one I knew of prior to this was that made by Barrie Walls in 7mm (and I bet that there is not another one of those.). Although allocated to the GE, I never saw this loco. Jonathan's B1s are fine too but 1069 should be shiner than that. It was kept in very fine nick as was B17 Helmingham Hall a model of which is in hand at the moment. It will be the first B17 I have done with a large tender. I really think we could put the Thompson thing to bed now chaps as it will never be resolved. You either like them or you don't. (I don't).

 

I am also working on a streamlined B17 which does not get Mr Walls approval but it is the nearest that I can get to an A4 on the GE!

 

It would have been interesting to see if the LMS Princess Coronations would have fared better than an A4 on the ECML. Again we will never know but they are handsome beasts. 

 

There is so far no sign of my Duchess of Montrose this Christmas (again!)

 

Best wishes to all at this time for a thoroughly entertaining and informative thread. I look forward to more in 2017.

 

Martin Long

Martin,

 

I built the K5 about 20 years ago, largely because I'd built an example of just about every other ex-LNER locomotive class operating on the ER. I never saw it, either, but there's a picture of it in the RCTS book working through Hitchin, on the GN main line. If it ran once on the GN, maybe it ran more times. Did it come from Cambridge on that day, I wonder? 

 

All the best,

 

Tony. 

[jrg1]

Martin,

 

I built the K5 about 20 years ago, largely because I'd built an example of just about every other ex-LNER locomotive class operating on the ER. I never saw it, either, but there's a picture of it in the RCTS book working through Hitchin, on the GN main line. If it ran once on the GN, maybe it ran more times. Did it come from Cambridge on that day, I wonder? 

 

All the best,

 

Tony. 

I am building the K5 as I have a photograph of it at Boston, and a record of it on shed at Lincoln-so I wager Little Bytham witnessed it as well.

[micklner]

A2/1's

 

 

 Built using Graeme's Resin and Etched parts mated to a  Bachmann A2 chassis and a Hornby Tender

 

 

 

Same again this time with the A2 Tender

 

 

 

 

 

A Nucast version, light years behind the above versions.

 

[Memphis32]

Re: soldering iron stands, the plastic bit isn't there for cost saving, it's to reduce the chance of damaging the plating on the tip. I've been using Weller irons for years, with that type of stand - I've never had any burning or melting of that plastic bit.

Edited December 25, 2016 by Memphis32

[Class O]

Re: soldering iron stands, the plastic bit isn't there for cost saving, it's to reduce the chance of damaging the plating on the tip. I've been using Weller irons for years, with that type of stand - I've never had any burning or melting of that plastic bit.

Its made of thermo setting plastic

[mullie]

Pleased to say I will be building things next year. Father Christmas delivered the following:

 

 

 

And a Comet J72 chassis

 

 

Wheels, gearbox and motor etc to be ordered after Christmas so as to spread the cost a bit. The link to Tony's video from the DJH site no longer works as the video has been taken down.

 

Ex GE coaching stock is in short supply, I don't yet have the skills for brass kits and secondhand D&S kits go for prices far beyond my budget so having bashed some old Triang clerestory coaches I am now using a GE Society drawing to bash a Ratio four wheeler into a conductor guard carriage. Length and height are broadly correct and I will live with the wrong shape of the window tops until I can build something more authentic. This is progress so far.

 

 

I think longer term something like a silhouette cutter could be useful for this type of work.

 

Happy Christmas. 

 

Martyn

Edited December 25, 2016 by mullie

[CoViAnna]

DELETED

In my naivety I assumed that as YouTube were a global concern they would respect copyright as I expect they would soon go after someone legally who crossed them. It seems not. So I have deleted the link and offer my apologies.

Edited December 26, 2016 by CoViAnna

[Tony Wright]

 

I'm glad to see that the Christmas spirit has brought out the modelling intent as well. 

 

Before friends arrived to share Christmas with us, I spent part of the morning taking apart the chassis of a K's K Class. It's the property of a dear friend and it didn't go very well. So, my holiday task is to make sure it does. The picture shows what I'm discarding, other than the frames. I'll report accordingly. 

Edited December 25, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

A2/1's

 

 

 Built using Graeme's Resin and Etched parts mated to a  Bachmann A2 chassis and a Hornby Tender

 

 

IMG_7781.JPG

 

Same again this time with the A2 Tender

 

1IMG_7231.jpg

 

1IMG_7227.jpg

 

1IMG_7230.jpg

 

 

A Nucast version, light years behind the above versions.

 

IMG_0098.JPG

Lovely stuff, as always, Mick. 

 

However, in the spirit of the day, may I point out one 'error', please? 

 

For some inexplicable reason, DUKE OF ROTHESAY was the only Thompson Pacific never to have the two little footplate steps at the bottom/front edge of the deflectors. 

 

Just out of some possible interest, though no group is considering building a new DUKE OF ROTHESAY, the P2 Group is effectively building a loco named after the same individual.

[Tony Wright]

I'm sure I'm probably not alone in finding Christmas telly even more banal than the rest of the year, so, yesterday, I finished off the bodywork on the SE Finecast A4 mentioned earlier in these pages. I promised to show the valve gear construction, and that will be done over the next couple of days (contemporaneous with sorting out the K Class). 

 

For now, though, thorough testing is important. I've mentioned that SIR NIGEL GRESLEY's job won't be on LB, but on a main line layout with a steep gradient, up which it'll be expected to haul a heavy train. So, load on 15 bogies, many kit-built and off she went. That should be enough!