Wright writes.....

[Headstock]

The unicycling lion was apparently created by Abram Games, another extraordinarily talented designer, but it does seem to be uncharacteristically strait-laced compared with his normally delightful and joyous designs

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=abram+games+british+railways&safe=active&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiJw53KsbbXAhWC1RoKHV4RD6oQsAQIJw&biw=1375&bih=639#imgrc=xz4nU62rxb2JeM:

 

Not one of his best efforts, I suspect the client excised all the delightful and joyous bits. It's certainly more appropriate in its styling to Gill Sans than the later USAAF, red dragon combo.

[thegreenhowards]

Good morning Andy,

 

is your A2/2 A DJH kit? If so I'm slightly surprised that its slipping. It may also be worth checking that there isn't anything binding on a wheel or a dry axle bearing within the formation of the train itself. Despite the slipping, your locomotive seems to be running very smoothly with more than enough grunt in the motor.

 

With regard to the wobble on carriage number ten, having watched the film through a couple of times I can eliminate the possibility of a second shooter on the grassy knoll. Seriously though, the rear bogie on carriage number ten is tight through the check rails approaching the point complex in the bottom right of frame. The problem seems to be with the leading wheel set, possibly on the nearside, there is some indication that it may be ridding up on the far rail. The wobble imparted to the carriage is definitely as a result of the front wheel set lifting momentarily from the rail. With the  Kirk bogie pivots, I usually file them flat to the level of the sole bars and use a plasticard packing piece to set the ride height if required. That usually stops them getting the jitters while in motion.

Hi Andrew,

 

Yes the Wolf is a DJH kit, and you're right about binding - I have fitted tender pick ups, but they are temporarily disabled as Tony had some tweaks to help me get it running smoothly. The wires are tucked up inside the tender and braking one of the wheel sets a little. But I think the main thing is for me to add extra weight - I haven't added any yet.

 

You were also spot on with the back to back on carriage number 10. I corrected that and the wobbles through points improved, but there was still some. So I tried a trick that 'Sir' taught me on a previous visit which is to put two 8BA bolts up through the bogie either side of the pivot and tighten them so they are almost touching the underframe. This has cured any remaining wobble.

 

Your diagnosis from a distance is quite remarkable!

 

Andy

[thegreenhowards]

Andy

Great video!

Makes me wish that we had found time to run your stock here when you paid a visit - next time perhaps?

For the future - I have found personally, that it is easier to upload videos to You Tube and then paste a link in here.

Tony

Tony,

 

Thanks for the tip on You Tube, I'll try that next time.

 

How about I demonstrate the Aberdonian when you pay a return visit?

 

Andy

[Mallard60022]

Yes, the Wolf almost sounds like it's sound fitted in this video! It was slipping a little as Andrew noted - part of my 'homework' is to fit some weight.

 

Andrew, the coach that wobbles is quite old and I think that a rather unsophisticated attachment of Bachman bogies to a Kirk underframe is responsible. On more recent builds I've cut the bogie support from the underside of a donor Bachman coach and glued it onto the Kirk underframe - that seeems to cure the wobbling. Another job for the roundtuit pile!

 

Andy

Oh Andy, if you discover an even better way of connecting those Baccy Bogies to a Kirky that leaves no wobble, I'd be interested to see the method.

Presumably you get rid of those weird lumps on the Kirk underframe?

Thanks.

Phil

Edited November 11, 2017 by Mallard60022

[robertcwp]

How about this for a speed test:

https://youtu.be/eNSf1agolps

 

My HST had not been running well. This was a test after overhaul. It needs some weathering!

Edited November 11, 2017 by robertcwp

[thegreenhowards]

Oh Andy, if you discover an even better way of connecting those Baccy Bogies to a Kirky that leaves no wobble, I'd be interested to see the method.

Presumably you get rid of those weird lumps on the Kirk underframe?

Thanks.

Phil

Phil,

 

I've used three methods:

 

Method 1 is to remove the Kirk lump and replace it with the elegant MJT solution. This is clearly the best solution but is most cost and time effective when replacing the bogies with MJT ones as in this restaurant car.

 

Method 2 is to cut the Kirk lump off and replace it with the Bachmann mounting off a donor coach. This works very well, and was cost effective for me because I have a number of Bachy Thompson coaches being converted to MJT heavy duty for my Elizabethan rake.

 

 

 

Method 3 is the one I described above, which involved filing down the Kirk lump, glueing a washer on top to give a smooth bearing surface and drilling two 2mm holes in the bogies into which 8BA bolts should be screwed tightly. Then replace the bogie and screw in the 8 BA bolts until touching the Kirk underframe, then losening about half a turn. This is not very elegant but gives very good lateral stability. Ggg

 

You may well wonder given that I have the solutions why I took a Coach with a wobble to Little Lytham! I can only plead that I built this Coach before I knew about any of them, and had not got round to retrofitting such older coaches.

 

Let me know if you need more details.

 

Andy

 

Method 1

 

Method 2

 

Method 3

[Michael Edge]

All you need to do is to allow one bogie to rock laterally and the other to rock longitudinally - and prevent the opposite movement. 

[APOLLO]

Hence the term "Rock & Roll" !!!

 

Michael's method works, especially on long and tall O gauge freight cars. A quick tweak with a screwdriver on the bogie mount screws works wonders (one fairly tight, one loose), plus  sometimes a washer or two as required.

 

Brit15

[Hroth]

The unicycling lion was very much of it's time, but I would hardly call it 'USAF pop art' derived or inspired.  It looks more to me like the standard British slant on Art Deco, Queen Mary style, already a bit passe post war but the British establishment was slow to react.  The design had to satisfy the Transport Commission, a proper bunch of old fuddyduddies if ever there was on; they probably thought it was cutting edge!

Yes, the "Unicycle Crest" bears a remarkable similarity to the device on a Lipton's commemorative tea caddy for the British Empire Exhibition, 1924.

 

 

 

(Both images nicked off the internet as I couldn't find my own, they're on a backup disk somewhere...)

[Tony Wright]

It was good to see Andy's WoB and his Aberdonian batting round Little Bytham.

 

The solutions to any 'wobbly' coaches are very good. I've never found any merit in compensated bogies, so make all of my carriages ride on rigid bogies. I employ as large a bearing surface as possible underneath the carriage and make sure the top of the bogie is absolutely flat where the bearing surface rests. I've also found it very important to indicate which bogie goes on which end, and which way round, once non-wobbly running is achieved. Having concertina gangways actually touching between cars adds stability to a whole train as well. One thing I never do is to use proprietary couplings which pull either off the bogie itself or by a collar around its pivot. Every one of my cars is hauled by its headstock - just like the real thing! For articulated stock I use, as Andy has mentioned, two 8BA bolts passing through the bolster on to which one end of a car rides. These are adjusted for ride height and to give rock-free running. I'll take some pictures tomorrow. 

 

I've just returned from a most pleasant weekend spent at the Spalding Show, where I acted a demonstrator and loco doctor. With regard to the latter, some monies were raised for the Lincs Air Ambulance and the Pilgrim Hospital in Boston. May I thank all those who contributed, please? And, may I please than all the show's organising team? 

 

With two exceptions, I was able to fix everything which was presented to me. The mix was half and half kit-built or RTR. There was an exception in each category. A kit-built SE Finecast A4 was a disaster. It was glued together, and as I investigated the cause of its non-running, more and more bits fell off/apart. Whenever anyone recommends gluing etched-brass/nickel silver components together, reveal them to be the chumps they are. Would anyone on this thread glue chassis-components together? This builder did. I handed it back. The RTR dud was a Hornby T9. Its gear drive had split (not uncommon, I believe), and the nasty plug and socket connection to the tender had lost a wire. Again, I handed it back. Two Portescap-powered locos which had been standing in a show case for a quarter of a century were gummed-up solid. I released them (by forcibly turning the driven axle), lubricated them and ran them both for ten minutes each on a test bed, and they were fine. Other locos needing doctoring usually had dirty wheels and misplaced pick-ups - easily fixed. 

 

As for the show itself, though I didn't have too much time to browse, it seemed a good one and was very well-attended. 

 

 

Pete Goss's Worlds End won both the public and exhibitors' pots. 

 

 

My personal favourite was St. Merryn. Built in P4, this ran superbly throughout the show and is so natural in its appearance. 

 

I didn't take a camera with me, so these are images from previous shows. 

 

Speaking of running, on some of the layouts there were too many hands of God at times. Some ran very well - as well as they looked, but some others, even though they looked 'pretty', didn't work quite so well in my experience. On one, though the architectural modelling was excellent, the railway aspect just didn't 'work' in my opinion. Some dodgy locos, non-working signals (weirdly-placed) and a total lack of lamps did nothing to aid any railway realism on it. It was not alone in having non-working signals, nor in having a complete lack of lamps present on steam locos. Why is this? Do folk not observe real railways? One very nice layout had non-working signals, because none was ever there (it was prototype-based, in the Borders). There was a nice mix of kit-built and modified RTR on it, all of which had appropriate lamps. Most of the N Gauge layouts seemed to work well, as did an impressive O Gauge line. 

 

Regarding RTR, there was still too much of it on some layouts to suit my personal taste, but is that the way the mainstream hobby is going?  

 

It was disappointing to not find one trader who was selling the sort of things which interested me - loco and rolling stock kits in metal, motors, gearboxes, frame kits, detailing bits and pieces, wheels, and so on and so on. Did I not look hard enough? 

 

Amazingly, my three recent books all sold out on the principal bookstall. I hope those who bought them enjoy them. 

 

All told, and in fairness, an event well worth attending. 

 

Once again, thanks to all with whom I spoke.  

Edited November 12, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

This may be heresy, but I love the loud sound the trains make on little Bytham as they pass by at speed in the various videos posted.

Thanks Tim,

 

I don't think it's heresy at all. 

 

In my view, the mechanical noise the trains make as they race through is far better than any 'artificial' digital sound I've heard. As long as the locos don't go 'whir, whir, whir (which they don't), I'm very happy to listen to the whole ensembles 'rattle' and 'clatter' as they go by. One guy I built a loco for complained that the tender rattled as it went over pointwork (it didn't derail or wobble - just made a noise). It might come as no surprise that I have nothing now to do with him!  

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited November 12, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Anglian]

St. Merryn is beaten to the honours again by Worlds End at a show – I don't really understand this – the former is one of the best layouts I can ever recall seeing. I spent so long watching it at Huntingdon that they gave me a seat at the end of the layout, so I had a fantastic view down the line. 

 

The BR Logo – the Egyptian lion icon is less offensive, even if it really doesn't look enough like a 'British' lion really should, in my view, for it to be considered really appropriate. The typographic element is bit of a muddle and actually poorly executed.

Edited November 12, 2017 by Anglian

[LNER4479]

Looks like No.4498 has escaped to the Southern region!

 

 

More can be seen on 60022's SOSJ thread...

[Tony Teague]

Tony,

 

Thanks for the tip on You Tube, I'll try that next time.

 

How about I demonstrate the Aberdonian when you pay a return visit?

 

Andy

Sounds good!

Will be in touch.

Tony

[Clive Mortimore]

It was good to see Andy's WoB and his Aberdonian batting round Little Bytham.

 

The solutions to any 'wobbly' coaches are very good. I've never found any merit in compensated bogies, so make all of my carriages ride on rigid bogies. I employ as large a bearing surface as possible underneath the carriage and make sure the top of the bogie is absolutely flat where the bearing surface rests. I've also found it very important to indicate which bogie goes on which end, and which way round, once non-wobbly running is achieved. Having concertina gangways actually touching between cars adds stability to a whole train as well. One thing I never do is to use proprietary couplings which pull either off the bogie itself or by a collar around its pivot. Every one of my cars is hauled by its headstock - just like the real thing! For articulated stock I use, as Andy has mentioned, two 8BA bolts passing through the bolster on to which one end of a car rides. These are adjusted for ride height and to give rock-free running. I'll take some pictures tomorrow. 

 

I've just returned from a most pleasant weekend spent at the Spalding Show, where I acted a demonstrator and loco doctor. With regard to the latter, some monies were raised for the Lincs Air Ambulance and the Pilgrim Hospital in Boston. May I thank all those who contributed, please? And, may I please than all the show's organising team? 

 

With two exceptions, I was able to fix everything which was presented to me. The mix was half and half kit-built or RTR. There was an exception in each category. A kit-built SE Finecast A4 was a disaster. It was glued together, and as I investigated the cause of its non-running, more and more bits fell off/apart. Whenever anyone recommends gluing etched-brass/nickel silver components together, reveal them to be the chumps they are. Would anyone on this thread glue chassis-components together? This builder did. I handed it back. The RTR dud was a Hornby T9. Its gear drive had split (not uncommon, I believe), and the nasty plug and socket connection to the tender had lost a wire. Again, I handed it back. Two Portescap-powered locos which had been standing in a show case for a quarter of a century were gummed-up solid. I released them (by forcibly turning the driven axle), lubricated them and ran them both for ten minutes each on a test bed, and they were fine. Other locos needing doctoring usually had dirty wheels and misplaced pick-ups - easily fixed. 

 

As for the show itself, though I didn't have too much time to browse, it seemed a good one and was very well-attended. 

 

Worlds End 04.jpg

 

Pete Goss's Worlds End won both the public and exhibitors' pots. 

 

St Merryn 03.jpg

 

My personal favourite was St. Merryn. Built in P4, this ran superbly throughout the show and is so natural in its appearance. 

 

I didn't take a camera with me, so these are images from previous shows. 

 

Speaking of running, on some of the layouts there were too many hands of God at times. Some ran very well - as well as they looked, but some others, even though they looked 'pretty', didn't work quite so well in my experience. On one, though the architectural modelling was excellent, the railway aspect just didn't 'work' in my opinion. Some dodgy locos, non-working signals (weirdly-placed) and a total lack of lamps did nothing to aid any railway realism on it. It was not alone in having non-working signals, nor in having a complete lack of lamps present on steam locos. Why is this? Do folk not observe real railways? One very nice layout had non-working signals, because none was ever there (it was prototype-based, in the Borders). There was a nice mix of kit-built and modified RTR on it, all of which had appropriate lamps. Most of the N Gauge layouts seemed to work well, as did an impressive O Gauge line. 

 

Regarding RTR, there was still too much of it on some layouts to suit my personal taste, but is that the way the mainstream hobby is going?  

 

It was disappointing to not find one trader who was selling the sort of things which interested me - loco and rolling stock kits in metal, motors, gearboxes, frame kits, detailing bits and pieces, wheels, and so on and so on. Did I not look hard enough? 

 

Amazingly, my three recent books all sold out on the principal bookstall. I hope those who bought them enjoy them. 

 

All told, and in fairness, an event well worth attending. 

 

Once again, thanks to all with whom I spoke.  

Hello Tony

 

Having bumped into some geezer in a red apron, you know I was at Spalding. I agree about the architectural modelling on more than one layout was very good, the railway side wasn't. I did enjoy myself even if trying to see some layouts was difficult owing to the large number of people at the show. Excellent for the organisers. In total contrast I was Hull today. the layouts were of an equally high standard, and more railway like. No problem in viewing them as the place was empty. There were more exhibitors than punters in the afternoon. Not good for the organisers. I have had a wonderful weekend.

[Lecorbusier]

 

 

My personal favourite was St. Merryn. Built in P4, this ran superbly throughout the show and is so natural in its appearance. 

 

  

As I am having a bash at P4, this is encouraging ... particularly as I am currently embarked upon some trial track building. Fingers crossed. 

[Tony Wright]

As I am having a bash at P4, this is encouraging ... particularly as I am currently embarked upon some trial track building. Fingers crossed. 

Tim,

 

There is no better example than St. Merryn of how good a P4 layout can look and (most important) can run. This is because the team who built it is comprised of some very high-standard modellers. Standards achieved by only a few in my experience. That's not to say I don't believe you're incapable of building to high standards (you've shown your work), but the gauge is definitely not for all. It's definitely not for me because I'm not a skilled enough modeller. This is not false-modesty, just fact. 

 

It would seem that OO Gauge is not for all if the running on one 16.5mm system was anything to go by at Spalding (though it did get better, to be fair). Even EM was not exempt - pretty structures, but inconsistent running and non-working signals. 

 

I return again to my list of essentials with regard to my own modelling/model railway, and, because of these, my choice to work with a group and also to make many things myself, in OO. The list includes......

 

1. A prototype depiction of the ECML in BR steam days.

2. The size enabling the running of prototype-length express and goods trains - at speed. 

3. Because of 2, excellent trackwork, made, laid and wired to a very high standard, set on very good baseboards. 

4. Some 45 complete trains needed to run the sequence.

5. All signals to be fully operational.

6. All trains to carry appropriate front and rear lamps.

7. Running to be as 'perfect' as possible. By that I mean (other than due to operator incompetence) no stuttering locos, no jerking stock, every loco capable of taking its train and no derailments.

8. Buildings to be as realistic as possible (hence my need to work in a group).

 

There are other peripherals. 

 

Obviously, I can admire other railways in other gauges but only if they satisfy points 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8. St. Merryn did just that. Some others didn't at Spalding (and at many shows I attend). 

[Enterprisingwestern]

 Whenever anyone recommends gluing etched-brass/nickel silver components together, reveal them to be the chumps they are.

 

Tut tut Tony, I really must take issue with you here.

I know you prefer the soldering of metal kits, but to dismiss people who don't have the confidence or can't as chumps is going a bit far.

As has been said elsewhere on this thread, glued metal kits/structures are quite robust enough when correctly assembled, just because you found someone who didn't adequately prepare the surfaces or used an inferior quality of glue or used too much of it shouldn't be used as a stick to beat everyone else with. Were you aware of how proficient he was at soldering?, as bad as it was, the glued model was perhaps considerably better finished than if he had soldered it.

 

Mike.

[Tony Wright]

As promised, the list of Lawrence carriages in OO coming up for sale. I imagine the carriage number is at the end.

 

1 LMS Stove R. 32946

 

2. LMS Stanier 68' 3rd Dining Car. 142

 

3. LMS Stanier 68' Sleeping Car. 712

 

4. LMS Stanier Vestibule 1st/3rd. 9748

 

5. LMS Stanier Neutral. 7688

 

6. LMS Stanier Kitchen Car. 30078

 

7. LNWR Non-corridor arc-roofed 3rd Brake. 7289.

 

8. LNWR Corridor Full Brake arc-roofed. 8741

 

9. LNWR Motor Driver Trailer elliptical roof. 7321

 

10. LNWR Motor Trailer elliptical roof. 827

 

11. LNWR 68' elliptical roof Sleeping Saloon. 448

 

12. LNWR 44' elliptical roof Full Brake. 8006

 

13. LNWR Motor Trailer Brake elliptical roof. 7435

 

14. LBSC 6-wheeled Brake. 269

 

15. MR 48' 4 Compt Brake. 597

 

16. MR 48' All Third. 1477

 

17. MR 48' Composite. 144

 

18. LNWR Motor Trailer 1st/3rd elliptical roof. 2735

 

19. LNWR 57' Full elliptical roofed 3rd Corridor. 806

 

20. LNWR 57' Full elliptical roofed 1st Corridor. 4537

 

21. LNWR Motor Trailer Third full elliptical roof. 7424

 

22. GCR Barnum Saloon. 95

 

23. GCR Barnum Saloon. 97

 

24. LNWR 6-wheeled Brake Van

 

25. FR 1st/3rd Brake. 43 (made for Vaughan Robinson). 

 

26. MR Coke Truck. 85647

 

27. LNWR 57' Tri-Composite Brake non-Corridor, full elliptical roof. 954

 

28. LNWR 68' full elliptical roofed Sleeping Saloon 6032

 

29. LNWR 45' arc-roofed Corridor Full Brake. 8724

 

30. LNWR 57' full elliptical roofed Corridor Brake Third. 7131.

 

31. MR 45' non-corridor Composite baggage. 3543

 

32. LSWR All 3rd Gateway. 739

 

33. LSWR 1st/3rd Brake Composite Gateway. 3200

 

34. LNWR Day Saloon. 5122 (one of twin set, see next)

 

35 LNWR 42' Day Saloon. 5123 (see above)

 

36. LNWR 42' 3rd Class Club Car. 5238

 

37. LNWR 42' Lavatory Tri-Composite. 573

 

38. MR 40' Brake Composite

 

39. NSR 4-wheeled Milk Van. 319

 

40. WCJS 64' TPO. 452

 

41. WCJS 50' TPO. 197

 

42. L&Y Brake Third. 624

 

43. L&Y Composite. 1089

 

44. LMS 68' Dining Car. 231

 

45. LMS 57' Experimental Buffet Car. 40

 

46. NSR 6-wheeled Louvred Truck. 179

 

47. NSR Converted Carriage Truck. 121.

 

48. NSR 35' 6-Wheeled Lavatory Composite. 243

 

49. NSR 35' 6-Wheeled Third. 57

 

50. MR 31' 6-Wheeled Brake. 29

 

53. LMS ist Class Corridor Vestibule coach. 15540

 

57. LNWR Corridor Brake 1st. 5603

 

58. MR 1st Class. 3079 (Ratio)

 

59. MR 3rd Class. 345 (Ratio)

 

60. MR 3rd Class Brake Van. 112 (Ratio)

 

As far as is known, all the above were built by Lawrence/Goddard and (apart from the Ratio cars) are in metal. 

 

There is also a locomotive.

 

GCR Sir Sam Fay Class 427 CITY OF LONDON (built for JR Marloy)

 

Anyone interested, please PM me with e-mail and I'll pass on details. All are being sold through the GOG Executors Committee on behalf of a bereaved family. 

 

Many thanks. 

Edited November 13, 2017 by Tony Wright

[cctransuk]

Tut tut Tony, I really must take issue with you here.

I know you prefer the soldering of metal kits, but to dismiss people who don't have the confidence or can't as chumps is going a bit far.

As has been said elsewhere on this thread, glued metal kits/structures are quite robust enough when correctly assembled, just because you found someone who didn't adequately prepare the surfaces or used an inferior quality of glue or used too much of it shouldn't be used as a stick to beat everyone else with. Were you aware of how proficient he was at soldering?, as bad as it was, the glued model was perhaps considerably better finished than if he had soldered it.

 

Mike.

 

I'm afraid that I'm with Tony on this one - if you want to build a metal kit, first learn to solder. If you can't or won't solder, how are you going to wire-up the pick-ups?

 

I'm afraid that, because the box says "kit" on it, some people think Airfix model plane kits. Soldering is NOT a black art, for which some people are fundamentally unsuited - in fact, in my considerable experience it's a lot easier than trying to use epoxy or cyano glues to join components.

 

It's the idea of waving around a soldering iron that hurts if you touch the wrong end that scares these people, I believe. But you can stick your fingers together with cyano glue, or get a nasty rash from epoxies.

 

It should be printed in large red letters on all metal kits LEARN TO SOLDER BEFORE CONSTRUCTING THIS KIT. Anyone can do it - so no-one should kid themselves that they can't.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Tony Wright]

Tut tut Tony, I really must take issue with you here.

I know you prefer the soldering of metal kits, but to dismiss people who don't have the confidence or can't as chumps is going a bit far.

As has been said elsewhere on this thread, glued metal kits/structures are quite robust enough when correctly assembled, just because you found someone who didn't adequately prepare the surfaces or used an inferior quality of glue or used too much of it shouldn't be used as a stick to beat everyone else with. Were you aware of how proficient he was at soldering?, as bad as it was, the glued model was perhaps considerably better finished than if he had soldered it.

 

Mike.

Mike,

 

Thanks for your comments. 

 

There might well be folk out there who can glue together etched brass/nickel silver chassis and etched brass/nickel silver loco bodywork. If so, please, may I ask, show us your work? Not just a picture, but fully-working under exhibition-conditions for hour after hour with no bits dropping off. Have you glued together etched valve gear? 

 

I don't know how many locos (built by others) you've had through your hands, but I've had hundreds (perhaps over a thousand). In just about every case, those where most of the construction has been by glue, bits fall off, become detached or just disappear. With the A4 I mentioned, most of the chassis was glued together, the laminated rods were glued together, the cylinders were glued to the frames, the slide bars were glued together and the motion support bracket was glued to the frames. I say 'glued', but that suggests 'attached'. Attached, but for how long? Not very long! I am not ham-fisted - these bits fell apart in handling. 

 

I admit, there are certain bits I'll glue on to a metal loco. These include pick-up pads (for obvious reasons) and occasionally chimneys and domes where no load-bearing is required. 

 

As for not having the confidence to solder, what can it do to the confidence of the builder when his/her work falls apart? I stress again, are you really advocating (by implication) the gluing together of the working parts of a metal locomotive? If so, then I stand by my assertion. I stand by it further when such advice is given by 'experts' in print or in other media. 

 

As one who builds loco kits for review and who writes instructions for the building of them, if I advocated the gluing together of sheet metal components (or white metal?) in those reviews or those instructions, I'd consider myself one thing - a chump!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Enterprisingwestern]

I can't claim to have had the experience of your good self of inspecting a vast number of other peoples kits, I'm just going on personal experience.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

Modellers who can't solder perhaps don't build full loco kits, although I have seen fully glued etched kits, admittedly, not over a long timescale, which worked adequately, but there is no reason to not glue a wagon kit or scenic accessory together.

Despite yours and John Isherwoods assertions that soldering is not a black art, it is to some people and they would never consider it, just because the rest of us can doesn't make those who can't chumps.

Besides, I've had soldered bits fall off, so I must be in soldering chumps club!

 

Mike.

[chrisf]

Until I learned to solder I was very wary of the process and not at all confident.  In, I think, 2007 a one day soldering course was offered at Scaleforum with expert tuition.  It was possibly the best £20 I have ever spent.

 

Chris

[cctransuk]

Despite yours and John Isherwoods assertions that soldering is not a black art, it is to some people and they would never consider it .....

 

 

Then that's a clear case of won't solder - not can't solder.

 

If one adapts that attitude, one also has to accept that building Finecast A4s is not for you.

 

It's as simple as that !

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Headstock]

Talking about soldering, or in my case unsoldering. I managed to pop out the slightly wonky panel on the brake compartment doors from the BCK up thread. It is now back in position with only light retouching required.The carriage is now lightly weathered and lined out, just in time for the Wakefield exhibition next weekend. In the meantime back to wheel cleaning.