Wright writes.....

[CME and Bottlewasher]

I think that the secret of getting a layout to look good is the consistency of standards used. This is why Buckingham and LB work so well visually. Sometimes, the 'consistency' can be a bit of an illusion, but if the viewer thinks that is what they see then I am happy with that. After that, it comes down to having mechanisms and track that work and operators who know how to run the layout at the correct speeds.

Setting your standards high at the beginning of a long project is important. At IMREX 1985, Sydney Pritchard visited our stand with a young Michael in tow. I didn't know who he was, which didn't get us off to a good start. He made us an offer (kinda difficult to refuse) of free track for CF. Peco had just launched the new finescale N gauge track, but that was no improvement on our code 55 track on Chiltern Green. He could not understand why we wanted to make the layout to the best possible 2mm FS standards. I half expected to find a horses head on the bed....

Tim

Hi Tim,

 

I agree.

 

I model in 7mm (so called Fine-Scale), I moved away from 4mm ('OO Fine-Scale' [sic]) because of proprietary track and because of pretty locos which after a while didnt run well on their RTR chassis.

 

I started off with very high standards-or should I say in my minds eye I did-for my 7mm adventure and even considered S7, common sense, as a lone modeller (with occassional help), prevailed as time, interest, momentum & cash all have to be taken into account.

 

As you and Tony have said though, striving for better, making things, making it all work well sometimes seems alien to two ends of the modelling spectrum. Eg. there is an element in the box collecting brigade of either accepting whatever is on offer RTR (w/o question), others criticise RTR models too the nth degree (and yet one never sees their own personal model rly empire-which by rights should be beyond compare). Then with certain P4 or S4 layouts, such look superb in photos, yet at exhibition? I have seen a high percentage of such suffering from plentiful failures, poor running, with locos that cant pull the skin off of a rice puddin. One poor fellow, with his fledgling P4 layout-which wasnt running at all well-admitted to me that he 'now wished he hadnt gone to P4, but had chosen EM or gone back to 'OO''.

 

Nowt wrong with 'Fine-Scale' or 'OO', horses for courses, model railways are a broad-church and it's a case of each to their own....yet our models require reliable movement, or else they become a static display.

 

Add into this continuous improvement and hopefully we can keep-as long as there are railway modellers-pushing boundaries whilst staying practical and keeping our models moving reliably and prototypically.

 

There is a BUT, I get the feeling that there is almost an agenda which encompasses a push towards RTR, 'people dont have time to build models or read constructional articles these days' (a crass example in precis and not verbatim). If such is true, is this just more pandering to globalised big business consumerism? Or is time so thin on the ground, tacit knowledge so eroded that folk cant make/find time to make - or learn to make - models, are we being herded and encouraged to think that way, so as to CONSUME, CONFORM and COMPLY? (paraphrased from the, as it has turned out to be, insightful, 'B Horror Movie' THEY LIVE and from lyrics by the modern rap/rock combo 'Rage Against The Machine'. Luckily I have a pair of the right type of sun-glasses eeeeeekkkk Ha Ha!).

 

Kind regards,

 

CME.

Edited January 25, 2017 by CME and Bottlewasher

[ianwales]

Ian

 

Here's my DJH version of 6004 built in 2000. From memory one issue was the cab roof which I think is the same as the roof supplied with the small boilered version but as the cab was slightly different on the larege boilered version the roof profile should have been changed. I built it for a friend but then when he started selling locos a couple of years ago I bought it off him as I have developed a bit of an interest in the LMS as well as my long term following of the LNER.

 

Andrew Emmett

 

Hi Andrew

 

Thanks for posting the photo of 6004

 

Ian

[chrisf]

Good morning Tony

 

My copy of MRJ arrived yesterday and I must say that I found your article on Little Bytham a good read and an excellent account of a fine layout.  In my view it does belong in MRJ despite your reservations about it being regarded as finescale.  There is no one definition of finescale but my take on it is that it includes a hefty chunk of attitude of mind.  Other elements might well include prototypical operation, faithful portrayal of the chosen scene and, above all, setting and maintaining a high standard of design and construction.  More of us than you might think have views which accord with yours.

 

Chris

[Iain Popplewell]

 

 I now feel that I'm now a modeller and a man. It's brilliant. I feel I could almost go to Scalefour North now and instead of creeping round on my belly in the shadows muttering "I'm not worthy I'm not worthy" as I normally do, I can swap tales of G W MODELS boiler rollers with the best of them.

 

Mind you I've got a long way to go to equal some of the stuff you see at Scalefour North.

 

 Quote from my posting of yesterday about how I feel about finishing my first etched kit. I think it about sums up my attitude to what constitutes real proper modelling, whether you would term this attitude finescale modelling is irrelevant. What counts is the modellers attitude and aspirations.

 

You might think from the above post that I aspire to be a P4 modeller, ( I'm a great admirer of what they do) but I model in 00 why because my baseboards look like this:

 

 

Why do they look like this? because I like curves and hills on railway layouts. The outer track has a minimum radius of 2ft so could be built as EM but I wanted a continuous run on the inner of the layout and 18inch radius was needed which pretty much rules out EM .If I'd had a bigger cellar I'd have eased the inner circuit and quite possibly used EM.

Whether a layout is finescale P4 00 EM is irrelevant, there are good layouts and bad, often the judgement is in the eyes of the beholder. But any layout has to work reliably, if it doesn't the finest modelling is ruined and you've got a bad layout. If you're good enough P4 is just superb but with the best will in the world you won't get it round 18 inch curves, horses for courses.

 

I wish more magazine articles were more aspirational and said stuff like my quote above, I feel there is a trend in magazines to stress RTR. Metcalfe buildings etc. but everyone has to start somewhere. Just a bit of encouragement to move on is needed. Proper modelling as I call it is great! whether you call it finescale or not!

Edited January 25, 2017 by iainp

[Jol Wilkinson]

While I largely agree with CME &B's comments in post 14277, it's my experience that you will see as much poor running on 00 and EM layouts at show.

 

I found it easier to build well running locos in P4 than I ever did in 00. I learned about setting things up properly and matching the components correctly. I have "sorted" poor running 00 locos for friends and have always found that by going back to basics and getting all the tolerances and fits sorted, things work.

 

I commented recently upon the superb running on Copenhagen Fields at a show and a friend (one of the operators) said it was down to the quality of the "engineering"  in the locomotives. Tony often talks about the work that goes into making his own locos run well. Roy Jackson also puts a lot of effort into building his locos. So its got little to do with the gauge/wheel standards, but more to do with how much effort you put in. That assumes you know what to do in the first place, but there has been plenty written and published over the years on "best practice", notably in MRJ and the excellent WSP books.

 

Jol

[CF MRC]

The 'engineering' that goes into the CF engines has got steadily simpler and simpler. It has to because an engine will cover 2 miles over the course of a weekend and simple maintenance is essential. Some commercial chassis will stand that, but they may not run as smoothly as we would like, so are replaced. We are now in the era of superbly engineered N gauge mechanisms that are very easy to convert to 2 mm scale. However, the locos with motors in the engine may not have the haulage power we need as the hyper detailed plastic bodies are occupied by relatively lightweight motors. I think the bottom line is that you get a formula that works and stick to it.

 

Tim

[Iain Popplewell]

 A cautionary tale. I've just got to tell you this;

 

 We've got a wood burning stove and I'd just lit the thing before sitting down to compose my above brilliant full of incite posting. I'd allowed myself 10mins before breaking off and turning down the air regulators on the stove but got engrossed in what I was typing. After 20mins I suddenly realised that shxt I'd left the stove on, and  I rushed into the living room to find the stove blazing away and well on it's way to meltdown. There was a knock at the door and I thought just blxxdy typical the postman arrives now! he'll just have to wait whilst I turn this stove down. I turned down the stove and hurried to the door to find the blxxdy firebrigade had arrived. One of the neighbours having phoned them because of the large amount of smoke coming out of my chimney.

 

Why the hell didn't the neighbour just knock on my door and tell me, or at least knock on my door once they had dialled 999. Very embarrassing. Why does it always happen to me?

 

Edit: Thanks for the sympathy Jamie you are a true friend. God I'm such an idiot.

Edited January 25, 2017 by iainp

[Brian Kirby]

Ian,

 

I have, and I think it was published in the early/mid-'90s in the Railway Modeller. It was of a large boiler variety. A similar thing appeared in a book for which I supplied the pictures, written by Dave Lowery. I painted the former and Ian Rathbone painted the latter.

 

I have very few copies of mags with my articles in these days. I had a major clear out some years ago and huge number were given to clubs. The book was given away, too. 

I built either the DJH large or small boiler Claughton about twenty years ago, it went together well, I remember the coupling rods had horizontal slots in the middle, instead of crankpin holes, but it seemed to work okay. I also recall the chap who received it, had asked for a LMS/LNWR transition livery, with a LMS crimson loco and the tender in worn LNWR lined black with LMS lettering. Well that was different.      BK

[Mike 84C]

Tony, a question. I have bitten the bullet, bought a Poppies Loco Box and have all the usual tools except for broaches! what sizes would you recommend for starters? I would probably buy sizes I shall never need!

Thanks Mick

[CME and Bottlewasher]

While I largely agree with CME &B's comments in post 14277, it's my experience that you will see as much poor running on 00 and EM layouts at show.

 

I found it easier to build well running locos in P4 than I ever did in 00. I learned about setting things up properly and matching the components correctly. I have "sorted" poor running 00 locos for friends and have always found that by going back to basics and getting all the tolerances and fits sorted, things work.

 

I commented recently upon the superb running on Copenhagen Fields at a show and a friend (one of the operators) said it was down to the quality of the "engineering" in the locomotives. Tony often talks about the work that goes into making his own locos run well. Roy Jackson also puts a lot of effort into building his locos. So its got little to do with the gauge/wheel standards, but more to do with how much effort you put in. That assumes you know what to do in the first place, but there has been plenty written and published over the years on "best practice", notably in MRJ and the excellent WSP books.

 

Jol

Great points well made, poor running isnt just the domain of so called 'Fine-Scale' (does that phrase make P4 & S4 super-fine-scale??) and as we know layout & track has to work well too. I love the look of hand-made track, yet I dont enjoy sticking a 100 chairs to a switch/crossing, so I fettle RTL track. In 7mm it looks okay (I can live with it). My locos and rolling stock, whether kit built or modified RTR, will have to do real mileage, a third or more of the time, in the garden, so it has to look right, run well and be robust. Clever types K.I.S.S from the get go, me? I have to start complicated and refine until I get to a working solution and K.I.S.S.

 

The 'engineering' that goes into the CF engines has got steadily simpler and simpler. It has to because an engine will cover 2 miles over the course of a weekend and simple maintenance is essential. Some commercial chassis will stand that, but they may not run as smoothly as we would like, so are replaced. We are now in the era of superbly engineered N gauge mechanisms that are very easy to convert to 2 mm scale. However, the locos with motors in the engine may not have the haulage power we need as the hyper detailed plastic bodies are occupied by relatively lightweight motors. I think the bottom line is that you get a formula that works and stick to it.

Tim

Im not as skilled as the modellers on CF, yet my models will have to work in the real world (sounds grandiose, I dont mean for it to/not my intentions), the current batch of RTR is an unknown in terms of longevity etc. With Mashima in difficulty/gone (and other motors in sporadic supply) the Chinese seem set to take over the world with small electrical motors-judging by batteries, electronics, Hi-Fi et al, these wont be as good as Japanese or German motors (having mentioned that the manufacture of such products is often outsourced to China these days anyway). Time will tell with my 7mm RTR. If I live long enough, these models may end up being replaced with kit-builds (that would be my ideal) and better motors gears, or the latter being retro fitted to said RTR.

 

Engineered simplicity isnt a skill I posses from the outset, my modelling 'skills', whether in SM32 or 7mm are hard won, moderately cleverly disguised bodging. But that works for me-thus far.

 

Tony, a question. I have bitten the bullet, bought a Poppies Loco Box and have all the usual tools except for broaches! what sizes would you recommend for starters? I would probably buy sizes I shall never need!Thanks Mick

May I interject Mick? Look at Proops or Squires you can buy a set of six smaller broaches for fine work, then for larger jobs, buy eg. a tapered reamer and/or specific broaches for larger apertures. You will be surprised at just how useful they are and how often you use them.

 

ATVB

 

CME.

Edited January 25, 2017 by CME and Bottlewasher

[landscapes]

Good morning Tony

 

My copy of MRJ arrived yesterday and I must say that I found your article on Little Bytham a good read and an excellent account of a fine layout.  In my view it does belong in MRJ despite your reservations about it being regarded as finescale.  There is no one definition of finescale but my take on it is that it includes a hefty chunk of attitude of mind.  Other elements might well include prototypical operation, faithful portrayal of the chosen scene and, above all, setting and maintaining a high standard of design and construction.  More of us than you might think have views which accord with yours.

 

Chris

 

Hi 

 

Many I ask a question to everyone using this post regarding MRJ, I have never purchased the publication before.

 

I was in our local WH Smiths this morning and no sign of it on the shelves, is it a publication you have to order and is deliver by post or is it available on the high street.

 

Regards

 

David 

[jwealleans]

Larger WH SMiths carry it, but it seems to be a local decision with little apparent logic to the outsider. Many on railway stations do carry it.

 

You can order via some online sites but the most reliable way is to subscribe.

[CME and Bottlewasher]

Hi 

 

Many I ask a question to everyone using this post regarding MRJ, I have never purchased the publication before.

 

I was in our local WH Smiths this morning and no sign of it on the shelves, is it a publication you have to order and is deliver by post or is it available on the high street.

 

Regards

 

David

 

Hi David,

 

Just before I clear off and leave everyone in peace....

 

MRJ is often available in WHS, or Martin's et al, but I found supplies to be intermitant so I have a subscription.

 

Not read MRJ before? You are in for a treat, such is the quality of the modelling within, you may find yourself reading up on subjects that dont relate to your own model-making interests-I do. Some have argued that the gene-pool for MRJ contributors is too small/nepotistic even-and getting smaller for obvious and less obvious reasons-yet I have seen a fair few articles from those who model 'OO', including Mr Wright's work (Stoke Summit et al.). From my POV we could do with more 'Modern Image' (sic) in 'the journal', but MRJ can, I would imagine, only work with what articles are submitted.

 

If you are struggling to get hold of a copy, telephone Cygnet (01235-816478)-they may post individual copies of current journals, they also do part subscriptions if you just wanted to dunk your toe in the water.

 

Enjoy, its like Pendon in print!

 

ATVB

 

CME.

[sandra]

Tony,

 

I bought MRJ this morning which includes your article about Little Bytham. I loved the article and the photographs illustrating it. As you know I think LB is magnificent and I can see no reason why your railway should not grace the hallowed pages of MRJ indeed I think LB is probably one of the best layouts to ever feature in MRJ. I do notice that in the second paragraph of the article MRJ have unfortunately transferred Little Bytham to the GWR main line, perhaps they have seen the delightful little 16XX pannier tank you have been building and which has appeared on LB.

 

I don't feel you need to apologise for the railway being in OO, that is the standard which most people adopt and whilst it would have been better if a wider gauge had been adopted in the early days of 4mm scale, that did not happen. Actually I think it's only really apparent in head-on views, from the side OO looks fine.

 

I am building a model of a main line station, Andover Junction, and whilst I contemplated building this in P4, I quickly realised that I did not have the necessary skill to build a main line in this scale. I'm not saying it can't be done, but certainly it could not be done by me. Therefore I am building my model in EM. This has proved easier than I expected as converting the stock to EM has not taken too long, the biggest problem has been building all the points for the fiddle yard. I envy those who can just go out and buy Peco points.

 

Loved the article and hope to see LB before too long.

 

Sandra

[landscapes]

Hi David,

Just before I clear off and leave everyone in peace....

MRJ is often available in WHS, or Martin's et al, but I found supplies to be intermitant so I have a subscription.

Not read MRJ before? You are in for a treat, such is the quality of the modelling within, you may find yourself reading up on subjects that dont relate to your own model-making interests-I do. Some have argued that the gene-pool for MRJ contributors is too small/nepotistic even-and getting smaller for obvious and less obvious reasons-yet I have seen a fair few articles from those who model 'OO', including Mr Wright's work (Stoke Summit et al.). From my POV we could do with more 'Modern Image' (sic) in 'the journal', but MRJ can, I would imagine, only work with what articles are submitted.

If you are struggling to get hold of a copy, telephone Cygnet (01235-816478)-they may post individual copies of current journals, they also do part subscriptions if you just wanted to dunk your toe in the water.

Enjoy, its like Pendon in print!

ATVB

CME.

Many thanks to you and others who replied to my question, if I was thinking of buying it you have definitely convinced me to do so.

 

I will look out for it at a larger WH Smith's or I may try Swindon Railway Station, I assume from the correspondence that this addition with the article on Tony's LB has only just been issued so I have time to order it if I can't find it on the high street.

 

Thanks again

 

Regards

 

David

Edited January 25, 2017 by landscapes

[Richard E]

Popped into WHS in York yesterday, no MRJ. I'll try and remember to look at the station tonight on the way home ....

 

Picked up BRM the other day on a whim - definitely put off buying RM now.

 

Next purchase or two, once wallet recovers from season ticket purchase (just under £8k for the year), will include a temperature controlled soldering iron and some low melt solder as, despite working in 'N', there are a couple of whitemetal kits to build, one is a 43xx Mogul, and one or two brass ones as well. And there is some serious carpentry to tackle for insulating the shed and building the baseboards too.

 

I think I'll have to corner Tony for a soldering lesson at a show before starting work, I'll leave him alone if I spot him in the Admiral Wells (missed him on Friday, I was there last night). As a final aside one of the Network Rail chaps I know drinks in the Admiral on a Friday evening.

[Brian Kirby]

Back on post#14270, Tony had regretted not switching to EM gauge, at a much earlier stage. Well Tony, you're in good company there, I heard first-hand the late great Frank Dyer of Borchester fame having the same regret, both persons being too far entrenched in finescale 'OO' by then, it would now take a lifetime to change, with perhaps limited reward? Little Bytham certainly deserves inclusion in the MRJ, show me a P4/S4 layout that runs full-length express passenger trains at top speed, alongside 40+ coal wagon trains, without even a hint of derailment. 

     Choice of gauge is one of life's dilemmas, do you build all your own trackwork and loco chassis, or stick to the easier and convenient 'OO', who hasn't been tempted by all that juicy RTR? I did wonder if a partial solution could be to mix gauges on one layout, perhaps 'OO' on the UP line, EM or P4 on the Down, obviously no chance of reversing trains, Tony could have done this on LB, but how would it look? The only layout(s) I can think of with this feature are the MRC/Tim Watson's (CF-MRC on here, took me three attempts to realize CF stood for Copenhagen Fields) Chiltern Green where the Slow lines were 'N' gauge and Fast lines were finescale 2mm and probably the aforementioned Copenhagen Fields?

     Whilst we're on gauges, here's a broken Peco Code 75 L/H Curved point rebuilt to 18.83 gauge, using Peco Pandrol clips and traditional wooden sleepers. I'd run out of Peco's slide chairs, so had to resort to bodging some scratchbuilt ones. Okay, it's not a strictly kosher B6 or B8, but it's an easy and quick way of building points, no blades or frogs to make, everything is superglued on, i've still to solder-up the frog and add a tie-bar, only replacement check rails have to be fashioned. I first built flat-bottom points from scratch on copper-clad, over thirty years ago now, and boy, are they hard work, much more filing and grinding than bullhead rail (well before you could buy ready-made blades and frogs). This point is 18.83 gauge, but built to near on EM standards, which is okay for most stock conversion, but not steam locos with splashers. I find it more reliable.

                                                               Cheers, Brian.

 

[CUTLER2579]

Richard,

I don't mean to be rude but your Season Ticket must be from somewhere to York and the Class will be an influence,but Where does it take you.

Regards,Derek.

[Barry Ten]

Hi 

 

Many I ask a question to everyone using this post regarding MRJ, I have never purchased the publication before.

 

I was in our local WH Smiths this morning and no sign of it on the shelves, is it a publication you have to order and is deliver by post or is it available on the high street.

 

Regards

 

David 

 

Hard to generalise; here in the valleys our family-run newsagent carries it, as well as almost all the other railway and modelling magazines you could name. Sometimes I wonder if it's just me buying them?

 

Alastair

[micklner]

Well done Tony excellent article in MRJ , first one bought for ages, some coverage of the ER region and Thommo Pacifics in photos  too !!

[Richard E]

Derek, it takes me past Little Bytham (real and model) twice daily to the original site of that station modelled by Gilbert (Great Northern) of this parish - Peterborough. And before you ask, it isn't first class, that'd be around £13,600 a year

 

At least retirement won't be quite so dramatic a drop in income as it might be for some other folk. Oh, I never planned to be in York for more than about 3 months, it just kind of happened too many years ago now and I ran out of time to make a house move viable.

 

Edit to add MRJ acquired on the way home.

Edited January 25, 2017 by Richard E

[Horsetan]

Popped into WHS in York yesterday, no MRJ. I'll try and remember to look at the station tonight on the way home ....

 

Ealing WHS has it.

[CUTLER2579]

Richard,, 

 

I had a feeling it may be from Peterborough with mention of the Lord Admiral @ Holme.I also believe you had a Layout called Hadley Green but I may be wrong. As you see I live in Grantham which is famous for holding up your service due to Bridge Strikes by  HGV's.

Thanks for being so kind as to put me out of my misery. I know my neighbour travels to Great Ormond Street hospital to work each day, but the main reason is for job satisfaction as she would be better off working locally. As she pointed out to me her ticket actually cost her an extra 25% as it was taxed before she got it.

 

Kind Regards,Derek

[glo41f]

The rebuilt Peco point by Mr Kirby of this parish is amazing. The picture of the original and modified one together just shows how awful the standard Peco track is. I am vastly impressed with the result Mr K.

 

I feel that we are all singing from the same hymn sheet on this thread. We are all striving to improve our skills however limited and the encouragement and support of the Great Leader is very welcome. I like to think that here are the souls trying to push the envelope in modelling terms. It also helps that there is a strong East Coast bias!

 

Reflecting back on modelling career to date, I do not think I would have migrated to 7mm today. However, I would use decent track as to me that is the key to depicting a railway scene of yore. Despite the "narrow gauge" 00 done like it is on LB or Peterborough North is really a huge advance on what was classed as "finescale" years ago. 

 

I greatly enjoy the wisdom of the comments here. Thank you chaps.

 

Martin Long

[Tony Wright]

Tony, a question. I have bitten the bullet, bought a Poppies Loco Box and have all the usual tools except for broaches! what sizes would you recommend for starters? I would probably buy sizes I shall never need!

Thanks Mick

Mick,

 

Since all my broaches are muddled up, I can't tell you the exact sizes. However, you need at least one which will open out holes in frames to the OD of Romford/Gibson top-hat bearings (beware, there are different 'wall' thicknesses). This is 4mm maximum diameter, so you need a set either side of that. Then a smaller set. 

 

You might find that some are never used, but you never know. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.