Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

Tony dare I say the photo of the B1 highlights the exposed nature of the front bogie with the axle showing!

 

All the talk of couplings, I wasted a year of my life soldering up hundreds of bits of wire making up the D&G style of coupling , setting them all up on the rolling stock and after a few years had to admit defeat as I found them to flimsy to withstand the constant riggers of running my layout which required auto uncoupling in the storage sidings, I’ve never liked wrestling with tension lock couplings so I went for the kadee couplings,a big investment but they have been very robust and once set up with the height jig give me reliable uncoupling.

But each to his own, my brother use to love his Peco simplex couplings !

Dennis

Dennis,

 

It does, and it's not daring to point it out; it should be pointed out, and it clearly shows my indolence in not making a dust shield from a strip of brass, Comet not supplying such a thing. 

 

I don't think there's enough 'constructive' criticism at times. It's all well and good folk basking in the number of 'likes' ticked off, but then they, or some of them (and some of the likers), then bleat and complain when someone has the temerity to point out an error or a poor picture. If one posts pictures, as I do, frequently, then expect to have what's in them scrutinised and criticised. I encourage it, so thanks for your comments. 

 

I have to say, I try to apply caution with some of my 'criticisms'. I see work which has been commissioned, and it's full of detail errors. Though I don't commission locos and rolling stock (I build my own, as you know), when I commission Ian Rathbone or Geoff Haynes to paint a model for me, I give them copious notes and photographic references to make sure the livery, condition of it and the likes of positions of 'plates and emblems are correct. Do some commissioners not bother, leaving everything to the commissioned? Though there's no doubt Ian's and Geoff's knowledge of their subject matter is extensive, they much prefer it if I give them a list. Certainly, when I was building professionally, I expected one from my customer. 

 

As for couplings standing up to the rigours of running a layout, in my experience (though not extensive), the 'finer' ones are OK for small layouts running lightweight trains, but not up to taking 50+ wagons or 14 bogies. I'm glad you've achieved success with Kadees, but, I wonder which would be more obtrusive; a shiny axle (exposed, to be fair, by my lighting the front of the loco with fill-in flash), which I could paint black or just make a dust shield for the bogie, or a 'massive' buckeye beneath (or sticking straight out of) a B1's front bufferbeam? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited March 8, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

I know at Doncaster you said the point rodding was a ball-ache to do Tony but it ain’t half worth it, really looks the part in these shots. And I take it the voice returned fairly swiftly!

 

Alex

Thanks Alex,

 

The voice has returned (cue groans all round!).

 

I'm pleased with how the 'rodding looks, but what's in the pictures is a tiny fraction of what's to be done. No matter, it's just do a bit at a time. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[grahame]

Both vans have been printed in Shapeways' Frosted Extreme Detail and have been finished mainly using sanding sticks from Flory Models and Albion Alloys. The early fish van with the outside framing was a little more time consuming to do as I used a small chisel attachment in a craft knife holder (held vertically) to get inside of the framing. I would estimate that (excluding washing, priming and drying times) that it would've taken around two and a half hours per van to get to this stage. That said, these were also used for a photoshoot on the techniques I used so the overall time spent of these particular vans has been somewhat longer than usual. The vans break down into three parts, the chassis, body and roof which does make getting around the details a bit easier.

 

The longest to finish has been a GNR six wheel brake van due to the amount of panelling involved. Hopefully the body for this will be finished by the end of the week but the chassis needs a redesign as I made a silly mistake in calculating the space required to fit the axles!

 

 

Thanks for that. You've certainly made a very good job in preparing the prints.

 

However, it is a shame that Shapeways 3D prints still need so much effort and time expended on them just to get them to the priming stage. Imagine you had a rake of just 10 to work on. At 2.5 hours on each it would take nigh on a week of full time effort just to remove the stratification ridges of 3D printing.

 

Roll on the time that 3D prints don't need this activity simply to 'correct' the inherent defect/problem and are supplied smooth and as designed. Unfortunately, for me, there doesn't seem to have been much improvement over quite a few recent years with what is available commercially (from companies like Shapeways) to ordinary users.

 

G.

Edited March 8, 2018 by grahame

[Tony Wright]

Just to prove that I'm not entirely indolent at 'finishing off' what's beneath the front bufferbeam of locos......................

 

 

All three locos have what they should have below the 'beam in this shot (which was taken with a short telephoto lens, and I don't like). 

 

 

60501 in her Stoke Summit days. Both the RCTS and Isinglass claim that 60501 was the only member of the A2/2s never to receive AWS. 

 

 

Don't believe everything you read in books!

 

Three more shots of 'complete' locos. 

 

 

 

 

If nothing else, the 'rodding can be seen as well. 

 

60506's lamps aren't at quite such jaunty angles anymore. 

Edited March 8, 2018 by Tony Wright

[gr.king]

Making sure that everything is "finished off" on any layout, particularly a large one, has to be a major challenge. You can't do everything at once, even if you can manage to remember all that needs doing!

[t-b-g]

When you look at the lamp on the prototype photo of 60501, two things come to mind. One is that the handle is almost invisible, even blown up to many times over 4mm scale.  The other is that the lamp is black, not white. I don't know what the actual date of the colour change was but there were certainly still a good number of black lamps around in the late 1950s.

 

On a layout I help out on, I have tried filing down the handles on some whitemetal lamps, removing one or two altogether if the casting broke as I was doing it. In addition, I have painted quite a few black. These look massively better than a rather "in your face" white one with a huge handle. Even the ones that are still white look much better with the handle removed or thinned right down.

 

It is an easy mod, takes a few moments to do but makes an improvement out of all proportion with the time spent.

[grahame]

Just to prove that I'm not entirely indolent at 'finishing off' what's beneath the front bufferbeam of locos......................

. . . . track? 

 

G.

[D.Platt]

Morning Tony

All your photographs are really good and your attention to detail is to behold that’s why the B1 stood out,I’ve tended to use the comet bogie etched kit.

You are right about what looks best on the front of the locos so I only have the kadees on the front of a few shunting locos ,I have now altered my coach rakes to your bar system ,just the kadee on front and rear coaches ( as I have to run from one fiddleyard to another then back again )

One of the great benefits of reading your blog and this whole website has lead me to have a go at trying to emulate yours and other modellers work , hence this year I have taken to making points,trees,static grass etc !

 

My son laughs at me now because when he showed me this website years ago I said I’ve no time for things like that !!

Dennis

[Mike 84C]

The B/W picture of 60501 on Stoke Summit  is brilliant, reminds me so much of the 50's/60's but that's  what realistic models in a realistic setting are meant  to do. 

   Without wishing to stir up the Thomson did this to that arguments, I'm more interested in why the A2/ whatever seems to have been such a good fast freight engine, even better than a 9F, several references have been made to bulk cement trains on this thread. Just interested. My experience of firing on the Hoo Jct to Handsworth cement from Banbury to OOC and back was that trains of cemflows fully fitted were very, very hard work. Driver shuts off, train stops! which is odd, you would expect lots momentum but not really. The DA  brake valves on the cemflows  were almost a liability being far to aggressive in operation but the real bummer for me was shovelling half a tender of coal from the back to the front then pulling more forward before you got relief! Happy days! maybe!

[Atso]

Thanks for that. You've certainly made a very good job in preparing the prints.

 

However, it is a shame that Shapeways 3D prints still need so much effort and time expended on them just to get them to the priming stage. Imagine you had a rake of just 10 to work on. At 2.5 hours on each it would take nigh on a week of full time effort just to remove the stratification ridges of 3D printing.

 

Roll on the time that 3D prints don't need this activity simply to 'correct' the inherent defect/problem and are supplied smooth and as designed. Unfortunately, for me, there doesn't seem to have been much improvement over quite a few recent years with what is available commercially (from companies like Shapeways) to ordinary users.

 

G.

 

Thanks Grahame,

 

I find your comments interesting as you are one of those who (like Tony and others) really do encourage modellers to have a go and try out new techniques to improve their modelling.

 

In terms of the amount of time required to fettle a print, how long does it take for you to complete a building or that lovely rake of scratch built wagons you entered into the NGS annual competition a few years back? I guess everything is relative and totally dependant on how much time and effort the modeller wishes to expend on creating the best quality model they can.

 

While I agree that it would be nice if we didn't have to deal with stratification on 3D prints at all, to say that there hasn't been much improvement over quite a few years is doing a disservice to the various bureaus offering these services at quite a modest cost. Yes, the technology exists to get a better print but at a price that is prohibitive to most modellers. In most cases this is due to the printing being done in much finer layers and therefore taking longer to print (although other factors, such as the cost of the materials plays a part also).

 

Personally, I'm satisfied at present with the compromise between quality, price and time. Most certainly, I am very happy with the level of detail on the vans and cannot see another cost effective way of producing the 'FISH' plate on the doors of one of the wagons (see enlarged image below - the plate size is 2.6mm by 0.9mm). The only alternative I can see would be to have etched this plate, along with the rest of the wagon in various thickness of metal, each requiring its own artwork. The end result would have been a lot more expensive and time consuming for me to both design and put together.

 

Ultimately, I hope to use these wagons as casting masters so that any interested modellers only have to clean up flash and assemble.

 

It is because of you (and those like you), that I have worked on my own skills to get the best I can out of my models. Your encouragement online, via N'spirations magazine and the NGS Journal to try out new things, learn new skills and to take your time to get the best results is something that I am now completely committed to.

[grahame]

The 'fish' plate is very impressive. But over the many years that I've occasionally ordered 3D prints from Shapeways my experience is that there hasn't been a real sea-change improvement in the stratification issue. One other major problem is that it can be a bit of a lottery with some 3D printed items being relatively acceptable for modelling use but other prints behind quite unusable and effectively ruined.

 

I think the issue of time to erradicate the ridges is not something that can be easily compared with other modeling time. After all when I make a building I don't have to spend time filing plasticard sheet flat and smooth or un-crease carboard. Removing 'flash' from a plastic moulded kit part is relatively easy and certainly less onerous than removing 3D ridges as the material is hard and brittle and often the ridges cover the entire model.

 

When encouraging others to have a go it does seem a little perverse that they need to spend an inordinate amount of time in sorting out material issues when it is difficult enough to get them to spend any actual constructional modelling time in the first place.

 

However, I really do hope that things will improve in the 3D printing world (to make it easier and more acceptable for small scale modelling) as I do appreciate it has great potential as a modelling technique and option.

 

G

[glo41f]

Lovely pictures here once again thank you. The 3d printed vans are really good and well done for the excellent work involved. It is a skill I would like to have but thusfar has eluded me along with so many other skills needed these days to survive.

 

On another matter with TV being so dire these days and the shed being none too inviting, I have been watching a lot on You tube. \there are some amazing railway films there and I was watching the BTC black and white film about York (in anticipation of my visit there over Easter to see the show). What should be the steam star of the show but one of Mr T's aberrations! Grrr!  Despite that the film is most interesting as it shows the complex interplay of all the railway activities there. How I would love to have seen it all first hand. There are a few shots of lad spotters in the film and I wonder if any of them recognise their younger selves in this or other similar films of the time.

 

I think your recent pictures have comprehensively demonstrated the point regarding front couplings on locos but I have to say I would not like to be a fireman moving those huge lamps about!  Perhaps Mr Gee has a point is painting them black to make them less obtrusive  though I thought that was a Midland region thing and I always felt for a signalman who was supposed to read the lamp code with black lamps on a black loco perhaps on a black day!

 

 

Martin Long

Edited March 9, 2018 by glo41f

[Tony Wright]

When you look at the lamp on the prototype photo of 60501, two things come to mind. One is that the handle is almost invisible, even blown up to many times over 4mm scale.  The other is that the lamp is black, not white. I don't know what the actual date of the colour change was but there were certainly still a good number of black lamps around in the late 1950s.

 

On a layout I help out on, I have tried filing down the handles on some whitemetal lamps, removing one or two altogether if the casting broke as I was doing it. In addition, I have painted quite a few black. These look massively better than a rather "in your face" white one with a huge handle. Even the ones that are still white look much better with the handle removed or thinned right down.

 

It is an easy mod, takes a few moments to do but makes an improvement out of all proportion with the time spent.

It's an ex-LMS lamp, as far as I know, Tony,

 

Being white-painted (and a larger lamp), the ex-LNER lamps' handles are more prominent. 

 

 

 

I agree, even the finest model lamps can look too big, though, on occasions, as shown here, we did put wire handles on the Springside lamps in place of the cast 'lumps'. Too big or not, their over-size is only more evident in still pictures in my view, and it's still worth fitting lamps.

 

As I say, a dab of dirty thinners does tone lamps down in most cases. To me it's a case of either or. Either one displays (correct) lamps on locos running on model railways (which might be too big, though those produced by ModelU and LMS are as near dead-scale as is practicable) or one omits them entirely. Neither is therefore right, but I know which is less-wrong. 

[Paul Cram]

We don't see many pre-grouping layouts full stop.

 

I always think that we have a chicken and egg situation. Not many people model pre-grouping because so little is available. Manufacturers (kit and RTR) don't produce pre-grouping stuff because so few people are modelling it.

 

A few companies are well served by kit producers and an honourable mention must go to London Road for their coverage of the LNWR, with locos, carriages, wagons and some lineside items. Even then, we don't see too many LNWR period layouts.

 

The GCR by comparison, has very little by way of good quality kits. A range was being produced but seems to have stuttered and stopped and most loco kits around are of some vintage and questionable quality. There a few wagon kits and a handful of carriage kits. The problem seems to be that only a few classes of loco survived into the late 1950s. Those that did have been done as RTR models apart from the N5. Most of the GCR locos didn't last much beyond nationaliastion and so are only suitable for GCR or LNER period layouts and they are both seen in tiny numbers compared to BR period.

 

So we have had 3 RTR locos, two of which were incorrect in details for proper GCR period, being BR or LNER period models in GCR livery. We have had a tiny number of GCR kits for carriages and wagons. And virtually nobody doing what Peter Denny used to do.

 

I may have posted this before but I feel the urge to do it again!

 

New Layout 032.jpg

 

Pollitt 4-4-0 and Robinson Atlantic, both scratchbuilt by the late Malcolm Crawley for our joint layout project that sadly stalled when he passed away. One day I will finish it but that will be after my little diversion into pre-grouping GCR in 7mm.

The NER is well served with kits. Almost all of the letter series locos are available with 1 or 2 others as well. I am presently completing an X.

[Chamby]

It's an ex-LMS lamp, as far as I know, Tony,

 

Being white-painted (and a larger lamp), the ex-LNER lamps' handles are more prominent. 

 

V2 60981 small.jpg

 

60024 on Up Elizabethan 02.jpg

 

I agree, even the finest model lamps can look too big, though, on occasions, as shown here, we did put wire handles on the Springside lamps in place of the cast 'lumps'. Too big or not, their over-size is only more evident in still pictures in my view, and it's still worth fitting lamps.

 

As I say, a dab of dirty thinners does tone lamps down in most cases. To me it's a case of either or. Either one displays (correct) lamps on locos running on model railways (which might be too big, though those produced by ModelU and LMS are as near dead-scale as is practicable) or one omits them entirely. Neither is therefore right, but I know which is less-wrong.

 

Those lamps with the replacement wire handles look SO much better than the moulded on version. It is a simple thing, but makes a big difference....

[t-b-g]

Malcolm Crawley used to say that a loco shouldn't haul a train on a layout unless it had three things often omitted from models. Lamps, a crew and fire irons. In real life, no steam loco would go off shed to haul a train without all three!

 

Now that decent scale lamps are available from LMS and Modelu, there is no excuse for using over scale ones any more either!

 

The layout I have been fitting black lamps to is indeed an LMS one, although I wasn't aware of reason for the distinction. I was just looking at prototype photos. All this 1950s stuff is way too modern for me and I know little about it!

 

It seems I got it right almost by accident, or perhaps it was by copying the prototype and not other models, just like we should.

[Tony Wright]

Malcolm Crawley used to say that a loco shouldn't haul a train on a layout unless it had three things often omitted from models. Lamps, a crew and fire irons. In real life, no steam loco would go off shed to haul a train without all three!

 

Now that decent scale lamps are available from LMS and Modelu, there is no excuse for using over scale ones any more either!

 

The layout I have been fitting black lamps to is indeed an LMS one, although I wasn't aware of reason for the distinction. I was just looking at prototype photos. All this 1950s stuff is way too modern for me and I know little about it!

 

It seems I got it right almost by accident, or perhaps it was by copying the prototype and not other models, just like we should.

Tony,

 

Malcolm was quite right, though not every loco I have has fire irons (especially where they're hidden in a 'tunnel'). 

 

 

Your point about over-scale lamps is well-made. These are Springside BR ones, and they're huge on the front of this modified Bachmann A1.

 

 

Lanarkshire Models Supplies' lamps are much nearer scale, as can be seen here, on the same loco. 

 

 

I think these are LMS ones as well, representing GWR side-on lamps on a modified Bachmann Pannier by Tom Foster. An interesting point is the spare lamps carried on brackets on the LH footplate; GWR/WR practice. 

 

Regarding the body colour of lamps, it would seem that GWR ones were red, at least pre-War. LMS ones were black (ex-MR ones red). LNER ones were black or (mainly) white. Most WR pictures show white lamps, ER and NER pictures white lamps and LMR/ScR pictures a mixture of white or black lamps (occasionally on the same loco). Most are dirty, but some gleam.

 

Edited to clarify points.

Edited March 9, 2018 by Tony Wright

[glo41f]

Arrrgh! The GW has invaded LB!  Is there no where safe from this viral infection? Mr  Cyril Freezer and his ilk have a lot to answer for. Blow me at one stage i was even tempted to the dark side but now put that down to an adolescent hormone change. (That said Stratford did have a 94xx allocated there for a while and apparently it was well liked by the staff!  Then there was the panniers sent to Scotland.)

 

Martin Long

[gr.king]

Unless you are absolutely convinced that you can see the slender and flimsy (in 4mm scale) loop handle on a loco lamp from normal viewing distances, when the lamp is in a realistic colour and typical state of (un)cleanliness, then don't overlook the option of the very small and neat lamps from RT Models.

 

Before everybody shells out money to festoon their locos with white lamps because it's "the thing to do", Tony Gee's earlier point, which seems to have attracted no attention, is of great importance too. At what date did the official colour for the casings of new loco lamps on the LNER / ER change from black to white, and for how long were black ones still widely seen? The "important" handle, I suggest, will be even less obvious on a black lamp seen against a black background on a loco.

[jamie92208]

Whilst we are on lamp colours can anyone tell me what colours Midland and early LMS ones were please.

 

Jamie

[Lecorbusier]

Whilst we are on lamp colours can anyone tell me what colours Midland and early LMS ones were please.

 

Jamie

My instinct is that they were black in the Midland Era .... all the images of Midland Loco's I have and have seen all have black lamps. I was sent this image by Dave Harris at the Midland Railway Study Centre Informing me that it is a Midland lamp but in early LMS livery.

 

[Tony Wright]

Unless you are absolutely convinced that you can see the slender and flimsy (in 4mm scale) loop handle on a loco lamp from normal viewing distances, when the lamp is in a realistic colour and typical state of (un)cleanliness, then don't overlook the option of the very small and neat lamps from RT Models.

 

Before everybody shells out money to festoon their locos with white lamps because it's "the thing to do", Tony Gee's earlier point, which seems to have attracted no attention, is of great importance too. At what date did the official colour for the casings of new loco lamps on the LNER / ER change from black to white, and for how long were black ones still widely seen? The "important" handle, I suggest, will be even less obvious on a black lamp seen against a black background on a loco.

Good points, Graeme, 

 

Thanks for posting. 

 

 

When freshly-painted (or new), white lamps can look very prominent; and don't assume they're always on straight, either. 

 

 

I think these might be RT lamps, without handles. They do look quite neat I think. 

[Tony Wright]

My instinct is that they were black in the Midland Era .... all the images of Midland Loco's I have and have seen all have black lamps. I was sent this image by Dave Harris at the Midland Railway Study Centre Informing me that it is a Midland lamp but in early LMS livery.

 

Untitled.jpg

Thanks Tim,

 

I hope I've not misled anyone, but when I photographed Bob Essery's MR locos in Scale Seven, they had red lamps. 

 

However, as Tony Gee suggests, never copy a model................ 

[jacko]

Bryan de Grineau's 'scot passes Scot' painted in 1937 shows the lamps to be black.  One has to assume he was there (or at least close by)  at the time so that's good enough for me

 

Graeme

[Lecorbusier]

Thanks Tim,

 

I hope I've not misled anyone, but when I photographed Bob Essery's MR locos in Scale Seven, they had red lamps. 

 

However, as Tony Gee suggests, never copy a model................ 

Tony,

 

I am far from an authority and would certainly defer to the venerable Mr Essery. I will see if I can get anything definitive from Dave Harris on the matter.

 

edit consulting 'Midland Style' .... In 1902 a change took place ..... Passenger locomotive headlamps were painted Crimson Lake lined black and yellow .... goods engine headlamps were black unlined.

Edited March 9, 2018 by Lecorbusier