Wright writes.....

[MJI]

I detest the old inch system, it is horrible to code. And everything has to be converted to and from mm.

 

And they have the cheek to complain that VERY occasionally it goes the wrong way at a boundary.

 

At least it enabled our installer to go over there and take the pee out of trump.

[zr2498]

34 minutes ago, MJI said:

I detest the old inch system, it is horrible to code. And everything has to be converted to and from mm.

 

And they have the cheek to complain that VERY occasionally it goes the wrong way at a boundary.

 

At least it enabled our installer to go over there and take the pee out of trump.

Reminds me of my time as a mechanical engineer with ICI. Any project (polyester film plants), that were based in the USA, mostly had the technical film manufacturing equiment made in Europe (metric - mm), and was then installed into a plant where all measurements were in feet and inches. As alignments needed accuracies of +/- 0.005mm per meter width image the pain we had with Imperial to metric conversion and vice versa. 

[Tony Wright]

I've just returned from a couple of most-enjoyable days spent at Hornby's headquarters in Margate.

 

I'm assisting the designers (in a very small way) in the preparations for the forthcoming 'Coronation' streamlined train, loaning documents, photographs and models which could be of assistance. 

 

I was delighted to learn that the BR versions of these wonderful streamlined cars are being considered as well; meaning that the likes of the South Yorkshireman, Master Cutler, West Riding and Talisman (among others) can be accurately modelled. 

 

The amount of diligent research being undertaken is incredible. This train is going to be a stunner!

 

And, there's one of the actual Observation Cars next door - re-re-built back into its original beaver-tail condition and painted in two-tone blue with all its adornments. 

[Coach bogie]

1 hour ago, zr2498 said:

Reminds me of my time as a mechanical engineer with ICI. Any project (polyester film plants), that were based in the USA, mostly had the technical film manufacturing equimpent made in Europe (metric - mm), and was then installed into a plant where all measurements were in feet and inches. As alignments needed accuracies of +/- 0.005mm per meter width image the pain we had with Imperial to metric conversion and vice versa. 

My wife, ex ICI Wilton; her division was sold to the Americans when she had to stop working in metric and move back to imperial as she travelled back and forth to Houston, and now has now been promoted to a position in Australia and has to go back to metric. At least they drive on the correct side of the road but we will have to get used to having road distances and car speed in metric. I better start packing as we have to be moved to Brisbane by Easter. I wonder if I can delay it so I can go to the York show first?

 

Mike Wiltshire

[MarkC]

1 hour ago, zr2498 said:

Reminds me of my time as a mechanical engineer with ICI. Any project (polyester film plants), that were based in the USA, mostly had the technical film manufacturing equiment made in Europe (metric - mm), and was then installed into a plant where all measurements were in feet and inches. As alignments needed accuracies of +/- 0.005mm per meter width image the pain we had with Imperial to metric conversion and vice versa. 

I had this. We had to do an emergency dry docking in Norfolk, Virginia, when the rudder on my ship fell off whilst doing we were doing 16 knots whilst going up the Delaware River...

 

We got the rudder stock out & had it mounted on a big lathe in the workshops ashore. The Superintendent, Class surveyor and myself were in discussions with the lathe operator as to how to machine out some surface damage to the tapered face of the stock - he started talking about turning off 'thous'. Some rapid mental arithmetic was needed then, once I realised that he was, of course, talking about thousandths of an inch, and we'd previously been looking at our (metric) ship's drawings, so we were in a metric mindset...

[davidw]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

I was delighted to learn that the BR versions of these wonderful streamlined cars are being considered as well; meaning that the likes of the South Yorkshireman, Master Cutler, West Riding and Talisman (among others) can be accurately modelled. 

 

 

I'm sure they'd be hit. May even appear before maroon Thompsons. Though I've probably built all the Thompson's I require.

Edited February 16, 2022 by davidw
Clarification

[MarkC]

Just now, Coach bogie said:

My wife, ex ICI Wilton; her division was sold to the Americans when she had to stop working in metric and move back to imperial as she travelled back and forth to Houston, and now has now been promoted to a position in Australia and has to go back to metric. At least they drive on the correct side of the road but we will have to get used to having road distances and car speed in metric. I better start packing as we have to be moved to Brisbane by Easter. I wonder if I can delay it so I can go to the York show first?

 

Mike Wiltshire

What? Next year? York's cancelled for 2022, Mike 

 

Good luck 'down under'.

 

Mark

[zr2498]

16 minutes ago, MarkC said:

What? Next year? York's cancelled for 2022, Mike 

 

Good luck 'down under'.

 

Mark

That news has really upset me But why?????

[Coach bogie]

25 minutes ago, MarkC said:

What? Next year? York's cancelled for 2022, Mike 

 

Good luck 'down under'.

 

Mark

NOOOOOOOOO.

 

I had not realised it was not on. I have just seen the press release dated the 10th. Bummer. Better go to Ally Pally so at least one show before I go

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Clive Mortimore]

59 minutes ago, MarkC said:

I had this. We had to do an emergency dry docking in Norfolk, Virginia, when the rudder on my ship fell off whilst doing we were doing 16 knots whilst going up the Delaware River...

 

We got the rudder stock out & had it mounted on a big lathe in the workshops ashore. The Superintendent, Class surveyor and myself were in discussions with the lathe operator as to how to machine out some surface damage to the tapered face of the stock - he started talking about turning off 'thous'. Some rapid mental arithmetic was needed then, once I realised that he was, of course, talking about thousandths of an inch, and we'd previously been looking at our (metric) ship's drawings, so we were in a metric mindset...

Carrying on with the dimensions stuff, when I worked for Marconi's as an inspector we had some covers that would not fit the box the components were in, so I got a copy of the drawing, all dimensions in mm, to be made of 1/8th inch stock. 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I've just returned from a couple of most-enjoyable days spent at Hornby's headquarters in Margate.

 

I'm assisting the designers (in a very small way) in the preparations for the forthcoming 'Coronation' streamlined train, loaning documents, photographs and models which could be of assistance. 

 

I was delighted to learn that the BR versions of these wonderful streamlined cars are being considered as well; meaning that the likes of the South Yorkshireman, Master Cutler, West Riding and Talisman (among others) can be accurately modelled. 

 

The amount of diligent research being undertaken is incredible. This train is going to be a stunner!

 

And, there's one of the actual Observation Cars next door - re-re-built back into its original beaver-tail condition and painted in two-tone blue with all its adornments. 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

the presence of a RTR twin FO-FO in BR condition, does not mean that the South Yorkshireman or Master Cutler can be accurately modelled, unless hobbyists are prepared to build some other  carriages to run with the twin. In the case of the South Yorkshireman, the twin FO-FO only ran in the formation for a couple of months before being transferred to the Master Cutler.  It remained in the Master Cutler service until the name only was transferred  to a not very successful ECML service.

Edited February 16, 2022 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

44 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

the presence of a RTR twin FO-FO in BR condition, does not mean that the South Yorkshireman or Master Cutler can be accurately modelled, unless hobbyists are prepared to build some other  carriages to run with the twin. In the case of the South Yorkshireman, the twin FO-FO only ran in the formation for a couple of months before being transferred to the Master Cutler.  It remained in the Master Cutler service until the name only was transferred  to a not very successful ECML service.

Good evening Andrew,

 

I should have pointed out that other building will be necessary to 'accurately' create the trains I mentioned. If nothing else, the twin FOs are a good start, but, even in the (only) eight-car afternoon Talisman, the Thompson catering pair will have to be built.

 

It was interesting running the ex-streamlined cars I'd made on Hornby's test track yesterday. They'd (just) go round the standard 4th radius Hornby set-track curves (around 23" radius), but struggled on the tighter ones. The designer of the Coronation artics is working on a system whereby the joint bogie's couplings will extend on tight radii (different from what's gone before). I'm told the sets will have to traverse 2nd radius curves.

 

This is a situation faced by all the RTR manufacturers; they get nearer and nearer to 'scale' models, yet they have to negotiate train set curves; in some cases laid on the floor!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited February 16, 2022 by Tony Wright
tautology

[Malcolm27]

Evening all,

 

On the subject of mixing imperial and metric dimensions the following tale might amuse.

 

As a rolling stock engineer back in the early 1990s I found myself doing some consultancy work in the US, basically advising the MTA in New York on their Capital Programme.  One of the projects was the refurbishment of Metro-North ML-9s.  These were what we would know as electro-diesels, although the Americans referred to them as dual-mode locomotives.  They were Co-Bos but built to the classic first generation diesel loco design, quite attractive for an oil burner!  Rapido produced a HO scale model of one a few years ago.  Now these were being refurbished by a outfit in South Carolina, if I remember correctly, but with new traction equipment from Siemens Europe.  When the said equipment arrived it wouldn't fit out of the box and you can guess why - loco drawings were in imperial, but Siemens had worked in metric!

 

There was also an issue with the fire loading of the locos with the NYC fire department, for the tunnel into Grand Central, but that is another story.

 

Best regards,

Malcolm

[MJI]

Oh and if I have to investigate any of the us issues I run up a proper build and use normal measurements.

 

Biggest issue was making sure floating point mm converted same as integer mm.

 

 

 

Most of our test orders are 254mm on their system

[Stanley Melrose]

In the late 1960s I was Ford of Europe's passenger car engine product planner.  Ford US decided to fit the then new European designed and manufactured OHC engine in the Ford Pinto.  We had numerous meetings to decide how engines could be supplied from Cologne and (later) the UK in sufficient volumes to meet US needs.  I still smile when I recall a Ford of Germany engineer standing up to advise the Americans that the engine had all been designed to metric measurements, including metric fastenings.  Of course, they protested but he became adamant that it wouldn't be long before the US had to embrace DIN standards to ensure that US made cars could be exported to Europe.

Of course they still use 8.5" x 11" paper instead of A4 but they'll get there one day.

 

Stan

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Andrew,

 

I should have pointed out that other building will be necessary to 'accurately' create the trains I mentioned. If nothing else, the twin FOs are a good start, but, even in the (only) eight-car afternoon Talisman, the Thompson catering pair will have to be built.

 

It was interesting running the ex-streamlined cars I'd made on Hornby's test track yesterday. They'd (just) go round the standard 4th radius Hornby set-track curves (around 23" radius), but struggled on the tighter ones. The designer of the Coronation artics is working on a system whereby the joint bogie's couplings will extend on tight radii (different from what's gone before). I'm told the sets will have to traverse 2nd radius curves.

 

This is a situation faced by all the RTR manufacturers; they get nearer and nearer to 'scale' models, yet they have to negotiate train set curves; in some cases laid on the floor!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Good evening Tony,

 

my latest twins have a 4 Millennial or 5/32 of a red faced Boomer between the articulated ends. They ride on center pivot articulated bogie, though the pivot doesn't take the weight. They are designed to negotiate a 3 Boomer or 914.4 Millennial curve. This they do with aplomb. The underframe on the dia. 210 is actually identical to the Twin FO-FO, though the three bogies are of different types. I must take some new pictures of the twin under construction, as the time consuming process of weathering, transfers, varnishing, glazing and adding the door furniture is now complete*.

 

I have to confess, if I broke into the Hornby secret experimental lab, I wouldn't care too much for a sci-fi bogie, designed for use on the carpet in the linen closet.  What about your made up wagons and mutant Gresley's, would be my battle cry, just before I was I was ejected from the premises.

 

This is the original completed twin, it only ran at one exhibition, although it was a five day event. It ran without a problem.

 

 

* Drying time mainly, though the glazing of compartment door carriages is always a bit of a marathon rather than a sprint. 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Headstock
add info

[St Enodoc]

5 hours ago, MJI said:

take the pee out of trump

Trum?

[St Enodoc]

4 hours ago, Coach bogie said:

My wife, ex ICI Wilton; her division was sold to the Americans when she had to stop working in metric and move back to imperial as she travelled back and forth to Houston, and now has now been promoted to a position in Australia and has to go back to metric. At least they drive on the correct side of the road but we will have to get used to having road distances and car speed in metric. I better start packing as we have to be moved to Brisbane by Easter. I wonder if I can delay it so I can go to the York show first?

 

Mike Wiltshire

Lots of good friendly railway modellers in the Brisbane area, Mike.

 

Let me and @Woodcock29 know when you've arrived and we'll put you in touch.

 

By the way, real road distances are measured in hours, not km.

[robmcg]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Andrew,

 

I should have pointed out that other building will be necessary to 'accurately' create the trains I mentioned. If nothing else, the twin FOs are a good start, but, even in the (only) eight-car afternoon Talisman, the Thompson catering pair will have to be built.

 

It was interesting running the ex-streamlined cars I'd made on Hornby's test track yesterday. They'd (just) go round the standard 4th radius Hornby set-track curves (around 23" radius), but struggled on the tighter ones. The designer of the Coronation artics is working on a system whereby the joint bogie's couplings will extend on tight radii (different from what's gone before). I'm told the sets will have to traverse 2nd radius curves.

 

This is a situation faced by all the RTR manufacturers; they get nearer and nearer to 'scale' models, yet they have to negotiate train set curves; in some cases laid on the floor!

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Another aspect of designing scale models to go around approximately 18"-radius curves has been the Bachmann 9F...  which although in theory capable of going around type 2 set track curves is far happier on type 3 in my experience..  

 

I am curious about Hornby's new 9F and whether it will have a scale wheelbase, brakes between drivers, and whether or not this is indeed possible with standard or typical 00 flanges. Perhaps Hornby will finally end the requirement to negotiate type 2 curves?

 

There are photos about of engineering samples of the new Hornby 9F but I haven't seen any photos with brake gear installed.  As I understand it pretty much all 00 models of 9Fs involve compromise in driving-wheel spacing and geometry.

 

Here below is one of my Bachmann 9Fs which shows how well this RTR model solves the problem... rather well in my opinion.

 

 

I know that this thread is primarily concerned with model-making but I like to think that our RTR model-developers are also 'making models'.

 

Also for those interested the photo is from a full frame Canon EOS RP with a mid-range RF 35mm macro lens, three exposures joined for sharpness,  Not quite your top Nikon lens...  but enjoyable.

 

 

 

  

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

Good evening Tony,

 

my latest twins have a 4 Millennial or 5/32 of a red faced Boomer between the articulated ends. They ride on center pivot articulated bogie, though the pivot doesn't take the weight. They are designed to negotiate a 3 Boomer or 914.4 Millennial curve. This they do with aplomb. The underframe on the dia. 210 is actually identical to the Twin FO-FO, though the three bogies are of different types. I must take some new pictures of the twin under construction, as the time consuming process of weathering, transfers, varnishing, glazing and adding the door furniture is now complete*.

 

I have to confess, if I broke into the Hornby secret experimental lab, I wouldn't care too much for a sci-fi bogie, designed for use on the carpet in the linen closet.  What about your made up wagons and mutant Gresley's, would be my battle cry, just before I was I was ejected from the premises.

 

This is the original completed twin, it only ran at one exhibition, although it was a five day event. It ran without a problem.

 

 

* Drying time mainly, though the glazing of compartment door carriages is always a bit of a marathon rather than a sprint. 

Good morning Andrew,

 

That twin looks exquisite. 

 

Why bother breaking into Hornby's experimental lab? Why not offer your help? Your expertise might prove invaluable. You might be invited down, put up in a good hotel, have an evening meal with Simon Kohler (where much is discussed), be given a guided tour of Hornby's facilities and be able to sit inside a real Coronation Observation Car! 

 

Unlike your models, Hornby's (in many cases) have to run in 'linen closets' or on the floor (often on a carpet). If the firm made cars which were separated by 'scale' distances, there'd be outrage from the core of main buyers. We've even got one current 'influencer' who conducts video tests of locos/rolling stock where his track is actually on the floor - poorly-laid at that. Pity the poor RTR manufacturers whose products are 'criticised' by that sort of standard. 

 

My artics employ two different types of conjoined bogie pivot. One is the D&S-style (familiar to you?) where there is a single pivot, and the other is the Mailcoach style, where there are pegs in the middle of each inner headstock which engage into two separate holes in the bogie's top. Neither would work on anything less that Hornby's maximum Set-Track radius, and even round that it was tight; hence the need for 'sci-fi' articulation. Hornby's designer is borrowing some of mine and another's articulated cars (thanks Sandra); not to copy them, but to get an idea how actual model artics can look/perform.  

 

I think it's sometimes forgotten that the likes of 'us' are a tiny proportion of those who indulge in the hobby of railway modelling. Those of 'us' who actually 'make' things, as accurately as we can (yours, particularly). By 'make', I mean building complex locomotives and rolling stock, not to mention trackwork, signals and the like. The vast majority are more than happy to just by RTR/RTP stuff, assemble it to their hearts' content and have great fun; but, only 'fun' if what they buy stays on some dodgy trackwork. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited February 17, 2022 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Another aspect of designing scale models to go around approximately 18"-radius curves has been the Bachmann 9F...  which although in theory capable of going around type 2 set track curves is far happier on type 3 in my experience..  

 

I am curious about Hornby's new 9F and whether it will have a scale wheelbase, brakes between drivers, and whether or not this is indeed possible with standard or typical 00 flanges. Perhaps Hornby will finally end the requirement to negotiate type 2 curves?

 

There are photos about of engineering samples of the new Hornby 9F but I haven't seen any photos with brake gear installed.  As I understand it pretty much all 00 models of 9Fs involve compromise in driving-wheel spacing and geometry.

 

Here below is one of my Bachmann 9Fs which shows how well this RTR model solves the problem... rather well in my opinion.

 

 

I know that this thread is primarily concerned with model-making but I like to think that our RTR model-developers are also 'making models'.

 

Also for those interested the photo is from a full frame Canon EOS RP with a mid-range RF 35mm macro lens, three exposures joined for sharpness,  Not quite your top Nikon lens...  but enjoyable.

 

 

 

  

Good morning Rob,

 

During my two days at Hornby, I didn't see anything of the new 9F (to be fair, I didn't even ask about it). 

 

And, I'm sure you're right that any OO models of 9Fs, whether they be RTR or kits, will have an extended coupled wheelbase. I don't mind this, especially if the only way to tell is with a scale rule.

 

Nice picture, by the way. I think it's as good as anything I might achieve, especially from that low angle; perhaps even better. 

 

This is not a criticism of your picture, by the way, but that NEM pocket in the pony is gross. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Bernard Lamb]

12 hours ago, Stanley Melrose said:

In the late 1960s I was Ford of Europe's passenger car engine product planner.  Ford US decided to fit the then new European designed and manufactured OHC engine in the Ford Pinto.  We had numerous meetings to decide how engines could be supplied from Cologne and (later) the UK in sufficient volumes to meet US needs.  I still smile when I recall a Ford of Germany engineer standing up to advise the Americans that the engine had all been designed to metric measurements, including metric fastenings.  Of course, they protested but he became adamant that it wouldn't be long before the US had to embrace DIN standards to ensure that US made cars could be exported to Europe.

Of course they still use 8.5" x 11" paper instead of A4 but they'll get there one day.

 

Stan

I wonder if the US ever finished getting all the NATO drawings redrawn in CAD and converted to metric.

A product that I worked on was at first converted into metric dimensions for both UK and NATO use and later redesigned in metric.

I don't think the US ever bought any of the fully metric product. 

Bernard

[FarrMan]

23 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I've never heard of scientists using Centimetres (in fact I've never seen them used since my GCSE Maths textbooks over 30 years ago), but training as an Engineer it was made clear that the only important units are every three orders of magnitude: Micron, Millimetre, Metre, Kilometre.

I have used scientific notation (x.y by 10 to the power of n), but had never heard of engineering notation until I had to teach it. It is similar to scientific notation, but you can have 1 to 3 digits before the decimal point, and n must be a multiple of 3 - hence mm, m, Km as you have said.

 

I have had a few experiences of mixed dimensions, but i think the strangest one was asx an undergraduate at Liverpool University during the changeover period. I think it was a soils lab. where we had to weigh samples. We had balances with weights to put on one side to nearly balance the weight of the sample, with the difference in weight being shown on a needle attached to the top arm against a suitable scale. The weights provided were in imperial, but the difference in metric! We this ended up with x ounces plus or minus y grams.

 

Lloyd

[Headstock]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Andrew,

 

That twin looks exquisite. 

 

Why bother breaking into Hornby's experimental lab? Why not offer your help? Your expertise might prove invaluable. You might be invited down, put up in a good hotel, have an evening meal with Simon Kohler (where much is discussed), be given a guided tour of Hornby's facilities and be able to sit inside a real Coronation Observation Car! 

 

Unlike your models, Hornby's (in many cases) have to run in 'linen closets' or on the floor (often on a carpet). If the firm made cars which were separated by 'scale' distances, there'd be outrage from the core of main buyers. We've even got one current 'influencer' who conducts video tests of locos/rolling stock where his track is actually on the floor - poorly-laid at that. Pity the poor RTR manufacturers whose products are 'criticised' by that sort of standard. 

 

My artics employ two different types of conjoined bogie pivot. One is the D&S-style (familiar to you?) where there is a single pivot, and the other is the Mailcoach style, where there are pegs in the middle of each inner headstock which engage into two separate holes in the bogie's top. Neither would work on anything less that Hornby's maximum Set-Track radius, and even round that it was tight; hence the need for 'sci-fi' articulation. Hornby's designer is borrowing some of mine and another's articulated cars (thanks Sandra); not to copy them, but to get an idea how actual model artics can look/perform.  

 

I think it's sometimes forgotten that the likes of 'us' are a tiny proportion of those who indulge in the hobby of railway modelling. Those of 'us' who actually 'make' things, as accurately as we can (yours, particularly). By 'make', I mean building complex locomotives and rolling stock, not to mention trackwork, signals and the like. The vast majority are more than happy to just by RTR/RTP stuff, assemble it to their hearts' content and have great fun; but, only 'fun' if what they buy stays on some dodgy trackwork. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Good morning Tony,

 

some interesting points as usual. I think that paragraph two hints at why I wouldn't be interested in paragraph one. Hornby and I are involved in different, though parallel hobbies and for different reasons.

 

I have used the Mail coach style of articulation. However, I haven't compared the two directly in a controlled manner, both work under the conditions they are intended for.  The articulated bogies of my examples that  employ different pivot positions, are quite different in the wheelbase. As a result, a direct comparison of how one compared to the other would be slanted.

 

Re the last paragraph. I don't think it's a case of forgetting about the majority of railway modelers, I'm not against purchasing RTR products for myself. Unfortunately the manufactures don't provide a lot of products that I would want to buy. When I did indulged in a tip top product last year,  presumably aimed at the vast majority of railway modelers, it made me sad, as it required lots of work to correct it's defects and bring it up to the standard of the illustration in the advert.

Edited February 17, 2022 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

15 hours ago, robmcg said:

 

Another aspect of designing scale models to go around approximately 18"-radius curves has been the Bachmann 9F...  which although in theory capable of going around type 2 set track curves is far happier on type 3 in my experience..  

 

I am curious about Hornby's new 9F and whether it will have a scale wheelbase, brakes between drivers, and whether or not this is indeed possible with standard or typical 00 flanges. Perhaps Hornby will finally end the requirement to negotiate type 2 curves?

 

There are photos about of engineering samples of the new Hornby 9F but I haven't seen any photos with brake gear installed.  As I understand it pretty much all 00 models of 9Fs involve compromise in driving-wheel spacing and geometry.

 

Here below is one of my Bachmann 9Fs which shows how well this RTR model solves the problem... rather well in my opinion.

 

 

I know that this thread is primarily concerned with model-making but I like to think that our RTR model-developers are also 'making models'.

 

Also for those interested the photo is from a full frame Canon EOS RP with a mid-range RF 35mm macro lens, three exposures joined for sharpness,  Not quite your top Nikon lens...  but enjoyable.

 

 

 

  

Me again Rob,

 

Your splendid picture motivated me to see what I could get in comparison....

 

 

Similar (especially as it's the same Bachmann 9F, though mine has been detailed/weathered), but the optics are obviously different. I cut off the main part of the protruding NEM socket on the pony, but it's still visible (if disguised). 

 

So, I got lower.........

 

 

Still not quite the same. I have to say, this is a very impressive model at source. 

 

And, even lower...........

 

 

This time by way of a further comparison, one of my Model Loco/DJH 9Fs (painted/weathered by Geoff Haynes). Why I didn't make/fit the triangular step supports for this, I don't know (I did on the Bachmann loco); a future job!

 

The Bachmann drivers are certainly superior, in that they have the right number of spokes. Otherwise, what's the point of my making 9Fs? Because that's what I do.

 

Nikon D3 with 35mm lens on the front set to F29; a single shot, giving adequate depth of field.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited February 17, 2022 by Tony Wright
to add something