Wright writes.....

[robertcwp]

On the subject of coke hoppers, out of curiosity, does anyone know when the Three Aitch kit was made?

[micknich2003]

Robert, with out looking through many old magazine, Three Aitch mid '70's.

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, robertcwp said:

I recall when Sandra first acquired Retford (along with the house that goes with it). There were barely enough serviceable locos for the trains and a fair bit of space in the fiddleyards where trains that had been on loan to Roy had gone back to their owners. Geoff West very kindly helped fill the void with stock for several trains and Tony supplemented the motive power with several engines (I can think of a V2 and an A2 - there may be others - as well as a B17 that can haul the boat train without difficulty). There was also some rather dated stock on the layout, including Kitmaster Mark 1s - good in their day but no match for Bachmann - and even a 1970s vintage Hornby Gresley carriage, now banished. 

 

Since then, the number of trains on the layout has increased, with the fiddleyards now just about full, even with an additional down road for a second boat train and converting the down goods on the GC to hold trains off scene, plus two new loops on the down GN. I have added lots of carriages, some wagons, a DMU and a B1, with a J11 and A4 awaiting regauging and a B1 stuck in the post somewhere.

 

I think Sandra's comment about having "added several locomotives" is modest. I can think of a K2, V2 (possibly two), two A2/3s, an A3, an A2 and a B16/3 - and possibly others - that Sandra has built, with another A2/2, A3 and B2 at an advanced stage. There is another B17 on the way (I forget how much of this was done by Sandra and how much by Tony). Then there are Sandra's rescue jobs for kit-built engines acquired second-hand, often for much less than the price of a kit, including at least two A1s (one of which was in a terrible state) and an A2/3. Add to that the RTR conversions including (I think) three A4s, an A1, an A3, a WD, a 9F (awaiting a 1F tender) and probably more.

 

I think there are around 65 trains on the layout, plus two pairs of light engines that shuttle back and forth on the GC. It takes a lot of motive power and stock to fill the layout.

 

 

Good morning Robert,

 

I think Sandra has done a wonderful job in (a relatively short time) producing so many loco for Retford; much-needed it would seem. 

 

I built the second B17 (which Sandra tells me also hauls the boat train with ease) using an early tender-drive Hornby B17 loco and tender body, fitted on to Comet frames for both. Sandra gave me a 'shabby' B17 body and tender, but a local mate gave me the two in excellent condition. They were in LNER green, and Sandra is painting the whole thing in BR condition. 

 

I've already put together the EM frames (loco and tender) to go beneath DANTE (wheels/drive/motion to add) and I've got the chassis parts to build the EM frames to go underneath GOLDEN FLEECE.

 

I have 'the best of both worlds' in a way; build one loco/tender body on top of OO frames for Little Bytham, then also build EM frames for that same loco/tender for Retford. CLUMBER's OO frames, SUGAR PALM's OO frames and the V2's OO frames are here. It's a privilege (in a small way) to be involved. 

 

Ray Chessum also re-gauged a Bachmann D11 of mine to EM (he also built CLUMBER's EM tender frames); it's much more-appropriate for Retford, anyway. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Chris Higgs]

8 hours ago, micknich2003 said:

Robert, with out looking through many old magazine, Three Aitch mid '70's.

 

Certainly 70s. I built one then (and still have it).

 

Chris

[sandra]

10 hours ago, robertcwp said:

At a more mundane level than kit-built pacifics, the Retford production line rumbles on. There were four (or more) loaded coke trains per day between Orgreave or Brookhouse and Frodingham, with returning empties. There is a train of coke empties on Retford, made up of the old Three Aitch kits. Hornby has recently done a pretty good coke hopper so the plan is to have a loaded train in the opposite direction. Step one is to rewheel some Hornby coke hoppers and fit three-link couplings. The latter task is awkward because of the die-cast metal underframe on the Hornby wagons. I did five this evening and have another nine in stock. There are already a few on the layout. On four of the wagons, I fitted three-link couplings to the existing Hornby hooks. The other one has a trial fitting at one end of a Smiths three-link coupling, set into a groove cut in the die-cast underframe. It simply has a hook at the other end and no coupling at present, but a Smiths one could be added if the experiment is successful.

 

IMG_0314am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

Thanks Robert,

 

You have done an enormous amount of hard work on Retford, I really appreciate it. There are 27 Three Aitch wagons in the current empty hopper train but they are of an earlier diagram than the Hornby wagons. The Hornby wagons have solid ends and wooden slatted raves. Whereas the Three Aitch kit was an all steel wagon with the raves slatted all round.

 

I have converted three of the Hornby wagons to EM gauge which is easy but the difficult part is fitting three-link couplings as the Hornby wagons have metal under frames to which plastic detail has been added. Thus the coupling represented on the model are actually plastic and rather fragile. Fitting metal couplings has proved difficult as it is necessary to drill into the metal and I’ve got through several drills trying to do this.This photo shows three of the Hornby wagons on the left with a Three Aitch wagon on the right for comparison. The Hornby wagons have been weathered to different finishes because photos of these trains show that there were considerable variations in the appearance of these wagons. The present train of Three Aitch wagons is a bit too uniform so we intend to mix some Hornby wagons into the train to add variety.

[Tony Wright]

13 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

One way to pin plastic centred wheels is to cut a slot at 30/45 degrees in the end of the axle with a piecing saw. After fitting the wheels drill up the slot into the wheel centre with a .5mm drill and then fit a piece of 5.mm wire into the slot and hole. Painting the axle end will retain it and if the wheels have to be removed, the pin pulls out of the slot. The slot/pin is less obvious than a Markits/Romford axle nut.

Thanks Jol,

 

I'll stick with Romford/Markits. I'm rather 'suspicious' of a product which has to be altered/modified before 'success' is achieved.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Chuffer Davies]

 I have only once had a plastic centred wheel fail, due to a cracked boss, despite my models having to work reasonably hard on full length trains on the Hungerford exhibition layout.  
I have a theory that when such wheels fail they will be the wheels on the primary driven axle (the one the gearbox is on) because these are taking the full weight of the train.  If my theory is correct then if the builder chooses to key any wheels to their axle then it is only the wheels on the primary axle that require keying, the others should be just fine with Loctite.

Can I ask those people who use plastic centred wheels, and who have had failures, if their experience supports my theory about it being only those wheels on the primary axle that fail?

Thanks,

Frank

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

I have been pondering the responses to the questions on primary evidence, and I think we need to be more careful in our questioning of historical analysis.

 

Some correspondents have quoted on not trusting some sources, and some have pushed for some support of secondary sources over primary sources.

 

Here's a reminder of the specific definitions:

 

Primary Sources are first-hand accounts of a topic, from people who had a direct connection with said topic. Primary sources include:

• Texts of laws and other original documents.
• Newspaper reports, by reporters who witnessed an event or who quote people who did.
• Speeches, diaries, letters and interviews - what the people involved said or wrote.
• Original research.
• Datasets, survey data, such as census or economic statistics.
• Photographs, video, or audio that capture an event.

Secondary Sources are one step removed from primary sources, though they often quote or otherwise use primary sources. They can cover the same topic, but add a layer of interpretation and analysis. Secondary sources can include:

• Most books about a topic.
• Analysis or interpretation of data.
• Scholarly or other articles about a topic, especially by people not directly involved.
• Documentaries (though they often include photos or video portions that can be considered primary sources).

So in the case of Gresley/Thompson, an example of primary evidence is the Use of Engine Power document from the National Archives at Kew, which has data on the use of the locomotives of the L.N.E.R., and an example of a secondary source is a timekeeper (say, OS Nock or Cecil J. Allen) writing about these locomotives after the event. 

 

For reference, one off timekeeping logs do not give a good overview of the work a locomotive did for the railway company, but mileages and availability statistics from the time do, together with engine record cards and another other primary evidence such as reports, board minutes or similar written at the time. 

 

Part of my work (which now extends to writing a book on Sir Nigel Gresley) has been the quantification of data from the primary sources.

 

This is as follows:

• the application and limitation of quantitative methods to historical problems
• levels of measurement and the appropriate classification and arrangement of historical data (tables, charts, graphs, histograms, etc.)
• summarizing historical facts: univariate descriptive statistics (frequency distributions, means, medians and modes, measures of dispersion, concepts of normality) 
• exploring historical relationships: bivariate descriptive statistics (correlation, measures of association including correlation coefficients, linear regression) 
• drawing inferences from historical data (sampling, distributions and confidence intervals; hypothesis testing; significance and probability, parametric and non-parametric measures of
• association and sample statistics; multivariate analysis)
• use of computer-based statistical packages (data entry and verification, classification and transformations, statistical manipulation, interpretation and presentation)

In other words, for railway history I am trying to apply academically accepted codes of practice and adopting a very different approach to most writers on railway history.

 

Now, I got lucky: because the National Archives at Kew has the full LNER archives and in those archives I found documents, such as the Use of Engine Power document, that allows us to do this.

 

Just as an example of my work:

 

 

By using the data that we have available, I can showcase the class B7's work during the second world war into 1946. This is an example of primary evidence that has been quantified.

 

By comparison, here is a similar overview for class B17:

 

 

We are able to see that mileages and availability of the two classes and then compare the stats. If we then cross reference this with other primary sources, such as the intended mileages between overhauls:

 

 

You can see that the two classes were expected to do similar work and be shopped, at a minimum of 60,000 miles.

 

Now, looking at the mileages and availability for the war years, we can see that the B7 was actually better in availability but was achieving significantly poorer annual mileages than the B17 class. Now, why there is such a discrepancy we cannot be 100% sure on. It could be allocated work, length of runs, or similar. But, both classes are expected to be shopped at, or around, 60,000 miles. 

 

We can say with some confidence that both locomotive classes are following the general trend on the LNER which is that availability remains static around 70% for the war years, which we can show by way of further quantifying of the original LNER data:

 

 

You may ask what is the point of this specific primary evidence? The point is clear - we are looking at each class individually and as part of the whole. Locomotive classes that are significantly below the averages for the fleet stand out. We can see trends in the data. We can match up reports, and secondary evidence (e.g. timekeeper's records - which are not primary evidence) to see if the secondary sources back up the primary data, or are in fact contradicted by it.

 

Further primary data can be found in documents such as this below:

 

 

Through documents such as these, we are able to understand better how these classes worked, what was expected of them by the railway company, and perhaps most interestingly, we are able to make reasonable and rational comparisons of locomotives that are considered by the company to be comparable.

 

Do we treat the secondary sources (which, for reference, are railway writers, writing after the event, with no citations or primary evidence quoted for their claims) as definitive or do we look closely at what was actually written and recorded by the railway company?

 

And this here is why we take a quantitative and qualitative approach to writing on railway history: we have to look at everything in context, understand why it was done a specific way, and we have to discount some secondary sources where the contemporary, primary evidence contradicts it. 

 

This is but one example of closer examination of the primary evidence with mind to secondary sources.

 

So why does all of this matter? Because serious writers and serious historians are held to high standards academically. This is the approach I have tried to take with the Thompson book, and am now doing with my Gresley book. 

 

One of this year's most unsurprising, but still hurtful, review of my book deliberately blurred the lines between secondary and primary evidence, and dismissed much of my work as just a work on excel spreadsheets (which they are, but that is sort of the point - you use the right tools for the analysis you need).

 

Until we very firmly start pushing back on the outdated methods of analysing railway history, and push back against some of the more damaging commentary (such as that given by societies or writers which do not focus on the primary evidence first and foremost), then we are not doing what is right by railway history: which is to be analysed in the most academic, most logical, and most analytical way it can be.

 

This isn't the first time I have said this, I doubt it will be the last time, and I am sure the same few voices will say the same things over, and over again in future regarding how railway history has been recorded and their views on it.

 

My Thompson book did of course take into account many of the issues that have been raised (accurate reporting by companies, accuracy of information, who said it, why, and in what context) but fundamentally things like the Use of Engine Power document, collected with over half a million stats by the railway company, are unlikely to be so inaccurate as to present a different version of the "truth". Something for those questioning the data to consider.

 

I'm not interested in changing the minds of those who have already made a decision based on poor historical writing. I am interested in making sure those who write after me are interested in doing so in the best possible manner. If someone comes along and provides primary evidence that contradicts my work, so be it. That is the academic way of doing things, and that is how railway history should have been written. It wasn't, for a very long time: and now we need a sea change in thinking so that future generations have better quality material to read on, be educated by, and allow them to do their own analysis.

 

I am grateful for other writers such as Peter Tuffrey, Tim Hillier-Graves, Andrew Hardy, William Brown and similar, whose works inspired me to keep going with my own and whose books I feel sit up there in LNER history as prime examples of secondary sources that have researched the primary evidence and analysed that together with the original secondary sources, done right. See also: Kevin Robertson on Leader, and similar. 

Edited December 19, 2022 by Simon A.C. Martin

[Barry O]

A couple of points if I may

 

1 if I can get Friction fit wheels to stay put anyone can.. has @Tony Wrightseen any failures on Carlisle when very heavy trains are being hauled? 

 

2  Nickel silver pick ups are very prone to Arcing. Probably why dc sound chips fail due to intermittent power loss/sparks.. don't ask me how I know.  

 

Baz

[robertcwp]

43 minutes ago, sandra said:

Thanks Robert,

 

You have done an enormous amount of hard work on Retford, I really appreciate it. There are 27 Three Aitch wagons in the current empty hopper train but they are of an earlier diagram than the Hornby wagons. The Hornby wagons have solid ends and wooden slatted raves. Whereas the Three Aitch kit was an all steel wagon with the raves slatted all round.

 

I have converted three of the Hornby wagons to EM gauge which is easy but the difficult part is fitting three-link couplings as the Hornby wagons have metal under frames to which plastic detail has been added. Thus the coupling represented on the model are actually plastic and rather fragile. Fitting metal couplings has proved difficult as it is necessary to drill into the metal and I’ve got through several drills trying to do this.This photo shows three of the Hornby wagons on the left with a Three Aitch wagon on the right for comparison. The Hornby wagons have been weathered to different finishes because photos of these trains show that there were considerable variations in the appearance of these wagons. The present train of Three Aitch wagons is a bit too uniform so we intend to mix some Hornby wagons into the train to add variety.

This is my somewhat brutal attempt at fitting a proper 3-link coupling:

 

IMG_0315am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

I cut a groove initially with a small saw then deepened and lengthened it with a cutting disc in my mini-drill, doing it a bit at a time so as not to heat up the metal too much. I then glued the coupling in the slot. I think a different glue might work better. For the others, I shall leave the Hornby hooks in place if possible and see how they go. 

 

Hornby did the ex-LMS version too, with the raves going round the end. However, their 1950s livery ones are the BR diagram.

 

Here are some coke hoppers in a mixed freight on the Midland. The sixth one is of the final diagram, with a welded, all-steel hopper without any raves (too modern for Retford in 1957):

 

48386_Souldrop_30-6-62 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

Edited December 19, 2022 by robertcwp
Add a bit.

[Jol Wilkinson]

15 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Jol,

 

I'll stick with Romford/Markits. I'm rather 'suspicious' of a product which has to be altered/modified before 'success' is achieved.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony,

 

when I modelled in OO - back in the Romford rather than Markits days - I was often disappointed by the wobble on Romford wheels. Sometimes I resorted to filing/machining the rear face of the wheel where the end of the axle sat against it, or filing the end of the axle flat sections in an attempt to improve things. Perhaps they are better know, 

 

I accept that not all plastic centred wheels are always easy to get right, although there are some tweaks that will achieve that, but modelling in P4, I have no option. Even in OO or EM I would probably still use them. But then I don't like whitemetal for loco kits either, so the ease/speed of building isn't an issue for me, especially as a small selection of locos is enough for me.

 

Jol

[Michael Edge]

5 minutes ago, Chuffer Davies said:

 I have only once had a plastic centred wheel fail, due to a cracked boss, despite my models having to work reasonably hard on full length trains on the Hungerford exhibition layout.  
I have a theory that when such wheels fail they will be the wheels on the primary driven axle (the one the gearbox is on) because these are taking the full weight of the train.  If my theory is correct then if the builder chooses to key any wheels to their axle then it is only the wheels on the primary axle that require keying, the others should be just fine with Loctite.

Can I ask those people who use plastic centred wheels, and who have had failures, if their experience supports my theory about it being only those wheels on the primary axle that fail?

Thanks,

Frank

I've not had many cases of wheels shifting on the axles, you may be correct but it does depend on how the failure occurred - quite often it is the result of motion locking up or derailment. If it does happen I strip the wheelset down and knurl the axle ends by rolling them with a coarse file, Ultrascale wheels get this treatment before fitting anyway. Gibson wheels do vary quite a bit in how well they grip the axle, for example 4844M are particularly slippy and they go in a lot of our kits.

We have had about 3 or 4 failures like this on Carlisle in the last few years, mostly with Ultrascale wheels though one was a diesel with Gibsons whcih gradually lost drive as the wheels shifted. Some of these locos do have to work very hard with long heavy trains and gradients.

[Tony Wright]

32 minutes ago, sandra said:

Thanks Robert,

 

You have done an enormous amount of hard work on Retford, I really appreciate it. There are 27 Three Aitch wagons in the current empty hopper train but they are of an earlier diagram than the Hornby wagons. The Hornby wagons have solid ends and wooden slatted raves. Whereas the Three Aitch kit was an all steel wagon with the raves slatted all round.

 

I have converted three of the Hornby wagons to EM gauge which is easy but the difficult part is fitting three-link couplings as the Hornby wagons have metal under frames to which plastic detail has been added. Thus the coupling represented on the model are actually plastic and rather fragile. Fitting metal couplings has proved difficult as it is necessary to drill into the metal and I’ve got through several drills trying to do this.This photo shows three of the Hornby wagons on the left with a Three Aitch wagon on the right for comparison. The Hornby wagons have been weathered to different finishes because photos of these trains show that there were considerable variations in the appearance of these wagons. The present train of Three Aitch wagons is a bit too uniform so we intend to mix some Hornby wagons into the train to add variety.

Good morning Sandra,

 

Those hoppers were certainly not uniform...............

 

 

Class O1 63768 during the period depicted on the model. 

 

One thing I note from a shot like this is the uniform filth on the loco (to the extent of its virtually obliterating the cabside numbers and BR device), yet the the front numberplate and shedplate are pristine; not uncommon. 

 

Retford (like Little Bytham) runs full-length (often huge) trains. Yet, is there room for really short ones? 

 

 

I know this is after the period depicted on Retford, but what a delightful 'shorty'. A small ex-GC tender, two 16T minerals and a brake van. 

 

A thing of note (though nor relevant to the model Retford) is the loco's left-hand German blinker. Its top edge and horizontal handrails are nowhere near 'horizontal'. Replicate that on a model and it'll look just like bad building!

 

Another Retford picture..............

 

 

Taken not long before the Up starter bracket was flattened by derailed wagons, it shows a 'typical' express of the time. A Gresley BG, another Gresley, then a Mk.1 and another Gresley.......... What the rest consists of, who knows? I cannot find an Up train with these four vehicles in my relevant CWNs. A summer Saturday? 

 

Note the different tones of the headlamps.

 

Did I say I would make a start on making Retford's telegraph poles? 

 

Please (all) respect copyright restrictions on these images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[gr.king]

16 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

 

 

At least one RMWebber has turned the Metcalfe kit into a fine model by cladding it with embossed brick and adding new roof slates and details.

 

It is certainly a good starting point and examples were all over the east to west main line.

 

Having seen the upgraded model I did stash one away and maybe, one day......

20+ years ago, just because it was an MS&L/GC item, I built the original Metcalfe kit, even carefully cutting out the black printed dummy "spaces" in the support frame for the roof overhang and colour-matching all of the exposed edges. I also remember having to put a brick-paper patch over an exposed white card area, even though I had assembled exactly as per the instuctions! I had nowhere to put the model so I "loaned" it (or so I thought) for use on a club layout until something better was made. A few weeks later I found that another member had altered and extended the model in my absence, so I never bothered asking for it back!

I now have one of the upgraded kits, un-built, bought about four years ago, and it may get used as the initial, temporary representation of the station building on a new project of my own. Nobody else will get chance to alter this one...

[robertcwp]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Robert,

 

I think Sandra has done a wonderful job in (a relatively short time) producing so many loco for Retford; much-needed it would seem. 

 

I built the second B17 (which Sandra tells me also hauls the boat train with ease) using an early tender-drive Hornby B17 loco and tender body, fitted on to Comet frames for both. Sandra gave me a 'shabby' B17 body and tender, but a local mate gave me the two in excellent condition. They were in LNER green, and Sandra is painting the whole thing in BR condition. 

 

I've already put together the EM frames (loco and tender) to go beneath DANTE (wheels/drive/motion to add) and I've got the chassis parts to build the EM frames to go underneath GOLDEN FLEECE.

 

I have 'the best of both worlds' in a way; build one loco/tender body on top of OO frames for Little Bytham, then also build EM frames for that same loco/tender for Retford. CLUMBER's OO frames, SUGAR PALM's OO frames and the V2's OO frames are here. It's a privilege (in a small way) to be involved. 

 

Ray Chessum also re-gauged a Bachmann D11 of mine to EM (he also built CLUMBER's EM tender frames); it's much more-appropriate for Retford, anyway. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Retford will be very well supplied! 

 

The Bachmann D11 is surprisingly powerful. I have previously posted this video of Sandra's one (if I recall correctly) on test just after she acquired Retford.

[micklner]

16 minutes ago, robertcwp said:

This is my somewhat brutal attempt at fitting a proper 3-link coupling:

 

IMG_0315am by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

 

I cut a groove initially with a small saw then deepened and lengthened it with a cutting disc in my mini-drill, doing it a bit at a time so as not to heat up the metal too much. I then glued the coupling in the slot. I think a different glue might work better. For the others, I shall leave the Hornby hooks in place if possible and see how they go. 

 

Hornby did the ex-LMS version too, with the raves going round the end. However, their 1950s livery ones are the BR diagram.

 

Here are some coke hoppers in a mixed freight on the Midland. The sixth one is of the final diagram, with a welded, all-steel hopper without any raves (too modern for Retford in 1957):

 

48386_Souldrop_30-6-62 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr

I simply cut the "shank" of the  Smiths Hook  shorter to suit the space available,  and then  file the "shank" to width and thickness as needed , they are made of Brass so it takes seconds to do. I have never had one fail so far.

[Bernard Lamb]

36 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Jol,

 

I'll stick with Romford/Markits. I'm rather 'suspicious' of a product which has to be altered/modified before 'success' is achieved.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

What Jol decribes is a variation on standard engineering practise. The use of a key way and key to prevent movement between two parts. The standard method of keeping a press tool in place in a press being a good example. I think that you are right to be 'suspicious' Tony. I would go further, wearing my QA, hat and say that it is bad design. If a method is not idiot proof then it should not be on sale to the general public. At least there should be a note in the instructions about what to do if you experience problems.

If it does not work for a man  of your knowledge and experience then I can see a lot of people having problems.

Bernard

[Compound2632]

13 minutes ago, Simon A.C. Martin said:

For reference, one off timekeeping logs do not give a good overview of the work a locomotive did for the railway company, but mileages and availability statistics from the time do, together with engine record cards and another other primary evidence such as reports, board minutes or similar written at the time.  

 

This, in particular. Sources such as timekeeping logs and indeed photographs provide a snapshot (literally, in the second case) of the performance or condition of a locomotive but they are inevitably biased. The timekeeper selects an interesting log for publication, the photographer selects an interesting subject - there is inevitably a sample bias. Official documents such as the mileage and availability statistics are free of that sample bias, so give a truer picture of the performance of a locomotive class as a whole.

 

At the root of the previous discussion on this subject was the tension between a Apollonian and a Dionysian view of the subject - the rational and the romantic, analysis and emotion. I'm sure that for all of us, our interest in railways was sparked by the Dionysian experience of the pacific thundering past at 80 mph with fourteen on (or whatever equivalent experience) but in trying to recreate this experience in model form we inevitably end up engaging in analytical activities - what were those fourteen coaches? 

 

It is, I think, this tension that makes serious modelling such an absorbing and rewarding activity, on a par with listening to or performing classical music. 

 

I claim no originality for this observation: it is from a piece by Canon Roger Lloyd in Bryan Morgan's The Railway-Lover's Companion (1963). It is hardly surprising to find a clergyman making this point, since it lies at the root of orthodox Christian theology.

[Jesse Sim]

27 minutes ago, Barry O said:

A couple of points if I may

 

1 if I can get Friction fit wheels to stay put anyone can.. has @Tony Wrightseen any failures on Carlisle when very heavy trains are being hauled? 

 

2  Nickel silver pick ups are very prone to Arcing. Probably why dc sound chips fail due to intermittent power loss/sparks.. don't ask me how I know.  

 

Baz

How do you know? 

[Tony Wright]

42 minutes ago, Barry O said:

A couple of points if I may

 

1 if I can get Friction fit wheels to stay put anyone can.. has @Tony Wrightseen any failures on Carlisle when very heavy trains are being hauled? 

 

2  Nickel silver pick ups are very prone to Arcing. Probably why dc sound chips fail due to intermittent power loss/sparks.. don't ask me how I know.  

 

Baz

Good morning Baz,

 

I don't think I've ever seen anything fail on Carlisle, though several of the locos I've photographed appear to have Romford/Markits drivers (with the axle ends disguised).

 

Do you know which drivers these locos have..................?

 

 

 

 

 

If not, does Mike Edge? 

 

I can only cite my own (limited) experience with friction-fit drivers.........

 

A Coopercraft B12/3; impossible to get a true-six-set, the loco still 'wobbles' in motion, even after I'd superglued three of the tyres back on (after they'd fallen off!).

 

A DJH 'Austerity''. Unhappy (at the time) with just an etched overlay on standard Romfords, I fitted friction-fit drivers (of quite beautiful appearance). None was true round and a couple shifted on their axles under load. Project abandoned until Markits brought out the correct WD wheel. 

 

Two of the thee locos which you've had of late to fit decoders in. Admittedly, not my work, but the friction-fit drivers were utterly hopeless. Now replaced with Markits (you'll be getting some more - fitted with nickel silver pick-ups!).

 

'Secondary' evidence relates to some of Retford's friction-fit driver-fitted locos needing their wheels pinning. 

 

So, twice-bitten (first-hand), immediately shy of friction-fit drivers, and ever since.

 

I concede, I'm not good/experienced enough to use them with success. I believe I'm not alone?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Northmoor]

39 minutes ago, Simon A.C. Martin said:

Primary Sources are first-hand accounts of a topic, from people who had a direct connection with said topic. Primary sources include:

• Newspaper reports, by reporters who witnessed an event or who quote people who did.

Secondary Sources are one step removed from primary sources, though they often quote or otherwise use primary sources. They can cover the same topic, but add a layer of interpretation and analysis. Secondary sources can include:

• Scholarly or other articles about a topic, especially by people not directly involved.

I find it really surprising that newspaper reports are considered reliable primary evidence, since it seems to be very difficult for the majority of (national media) journalists to not put a pre-conceived skew on a story.  I would consider newspaper articles to fit the secondary category (and still be unreliable).  British railways have always got a raw deal from national media; remember how the IC125's record-breaking 148.5mph run was reported on national news?  The main clip showed a cup of tea sloshing into a saucer.

 

As for quoting people, my mother was once quoted in a local newspaper report on a minor event.  Unfortunately, she had never said the words attributed to her and (she believed) no-one else involved with the event would have said them either.

[jollysmart]

11 hours ago, micknich2003 said:

Robert, with out looking through many old magazine, Three Aitch mid '70's.

 

If I remember correctly the Coke hoppers were made by Three Aitch expressly for Roy as he needed several trains worth of them at the time for Gainsborough Central. Roy showed me the new moulds when they arrived and I'm fairly sure they were very expensive, due to their intricacy, compared to the other Three Aitch moulds for the 0 gauge wagons they were using at the time. So mid 70's is correct.

[Guest Simon A.C. Martin]

6 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I find it really surprising that newspaper reports are considered reliable primary evidence, since it seems to be very difficult for the majority of (national media) journalists to not put a pre-conceived skew on a story.  I would consider newspaper articles to fit the secondary category (and still be unreliable).  British railways have always got a raw deal from national media; remember how the IC125's record-breaking 148.5mph run was reported on national news?  The main clip showed a cup of tea sloshing into a saucer.

 

As for quoting people, my mother was once quoted in a local newspaper report on a minor event.  Unfortunately, she had never said the words attributed to her and (she believed) no-one else involved with the event would have said them either.

It is a trite tiring to have to keep saying the same thing over and over. Whether primary or secondary, you should analyse the source and decide on its reliability based on whether it is corroborated, who has said it, and why, and of course pay attention to any bias or similar.

 

The point ultimately is to approach this in an academic way, which is to analyse, and not in a way which makes assumptions.

[SD85]

Post deleted

Edited December 19, 2022 by SD85

[t-b-g]

Part of the fun of the hobby for me is to come across a problem or a challenge and finding a way to beat it.

 

If everything was dead easy, I think I would soon find model railways a bit dull. It is all about challenging myself and learning skills, rather than how quickly and easily can I do something.

 

Whether that be taking kit components, checking them against the real thing and altering them until they look better, or whether it be finding a way to fix driving wheels onto an axle, they are certainly not insurmountable with a small amount of thought and skill.

 

I have "knurled" axle ends before now, squeezing the axle end in big pliers with serrated jaws. Just enough to raise a bit of a burr is all that is needed. 5 seconds per wheel and no problems.

 

You have to be interested in, or capable of, either building locos or altering existing ones before you even need to use any sort of driving wheels. That presupposes a certain amount of skill, or the interest in learning skills. So I am not sure driving wheels should be something that the general public can pick up and use in a foolproof way.