Wright writes.....

[Benjamin Brady]

Good Morning, 

 

A post of thanks to Tony for allowing part of the Weaver Hill team visit Little Bytham last week. We had an excellent day. It was great to be able to see the layout in all its glory and stock. I though the 3d printed barnum looked well on the back of the parly train. While on the topic of coaching stock I have to say I was very impressed with the low budget but very effective couplings used on the layout, so much so that I am going to have a go at doing the same. We were out with Weaver Hill yesterday and all of a sudden the couplings were jarring with me far more than they should. 

 

We both enjoyed the way the layout was brought to life with the stories of the figures on the model, the birthday party and platelayers. 

 

I managed a few phone photos and some on the camera which still need to be uploaded.  The mundane fast fish being one of my requested services to see.  

 

Once again, thank you.

[t-b-g]

15 hours ago, jwealleans said:

Some years ago in an earlier version of RMWeb, Adrian Marks (who no longer seems to frequent these pages, which is a great loss) sent me two colour pictures taken of different sides of the same GE carriage on the same day.   They are completely different shades of brown.  

 

I use either Humbrol 62 or 186 as a starting point and add a little black to vary the shade.   In acrylics there's a Vallejo colour very close to 62, I'd go from there.

 

I recall reading an article on one of the SR branchlines, possibly the one to Seaton. Somebody wrote that because one side of the carriage was subject to wind and weathering from off the sea and the other side was inland and sheltered, also because the sun always shone on one side, once a set had been used for a short while on the branch service, the two sides of the carriages were distinctly different shades of green.

 

The lighting in photos can make a huge difference too, As Bill Bedford says.

[Andy R]

On 05/05/2023 at 05:04, Tony Wright said:

Thanks for that Andy,

 

I had the pleasure of the company of two Australians today, and they thoroughly enjoyed themselves (though there was one derailment!). They're on an extended 'railway' trip to the UK - travelling behind steam where possible (though the Royal Scot broke down at Lockerbie) and visiting as many shows and individual layouts as possible. Little Bytham was on the itinerary, and, at very short notice (thanks Sandra) the incomparable Retford this afternoon. 

 

Later in the afternoon, a friend from Stafford came (he was in the area), and he enjoyed himself running LB.

 

I'm delighted with the comments written in my visitors' book. 

 

Visitors are always welcome to see LB; there are more next week! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Tony;

Now back home in NZ. Reflecting on my visit to your wonderful layout I have a query or two:

1. Is it possible for you to post a couple of photos of the simple coach coupler system you use- between coaches and between coach and loco? They work so well and get rid of those ghastly rtr ones.

2. Do you have any advice as to how one puts a ‘value’ on kit built locos that can be put up for sale? How do you arrive at a fair price? Other group members may have a view also?

 

Cheers- Andy R 

NZ

[polybear]

3 hours ago, Andy R said:

2. Do you have any advice as to how one puts a ‘value’ on kit built locos that can be put up for sale? How do you arrive at a fair price? Other group members may have a view also?

 

 

In the simplest terms I'd say it's worth what people are prepared to pay.  I'd suggest that it's often (virtually always?) the case that the value doesn't even equate to the component parts of the loco (kit, wheels, gearbox, motor, small accessories such as nameplates etc).

The build quality, the finish and the running characteristics make a significant difference as well, as will the loco in question (rarer examples on Ebay often selling for noticeably higher amounts than, say, an A1/A2/A3; if the loco is unavailable in RTR that also helps increase values).

If the loco has been built by a "known" builder of good reputation then that'll also help increase the value, as will a finish by a reputable painter.

I've been fortunate enough to buy several locos from Tony (mainly from deceased estates, though not all); the prices have sometimes been a little higher than for examples sold on Ebay but for me knowing that it's been checked, tested and honestly described by Tony adds to the value (Ebay is always a gamble), as does the fact that a proportion of the selling price is going to CRUK.

 

[Tony Wright]

19 hours ago, Benjamin Brady said:

Good Morning, 

 

A post of thanks to Tony for allowing part of the Weaver Hill team visit Little Bytham last week. We had an excellent day. It was great to be able to see the layout in all its glory and stock. I though the 3d printed barnum looked well on the back of the parly train. While on the topic of coaching stock I have to say I was very impressed with the low budget but very effective couplings used on the layout, so much so that I am going to have a go at doing the same. We were out with Weaver Hill yesterday and all of a sudden the couplings were jarring with me far more than they should. 

 

We both enjoyed the way the layout was brought to life with the stories of the figures on the model, the birthday party and platelayers. 

 

I managed a few phone photos and some on the camera which still need to be uploaded.  The mundane fast fish being one of my requested services to see.  

 

Once again, thank you.

Thanks Ben,

 

It was a pleasure to have you and Derek visit. Next time, we'll run the sequence.

 

The 3D-printed Barnum always attracts interest (I had it with me at the Stamford Show over the weekend, and many questions were asked abut it). 

 

 

 

 

 

Despite my bottling out on making the fancy door handrails, I think it stands up well enough and illustrates my approach to building 'layout coaches' just fine.

 

The two Comet Thompsons in the 'Parly' are also examples of layout coaches and are both John Houlden's work. They were built out of necessity because (at the time) the Bachmann RTR equivalents were just awful. However, the latest Bachmann Thompsons are rather good, and are now available in maroon. I bought one yesterday (for over £62.00!) and will show it later. 

 

The fast fish train is all Rob Davey's work (apart from the first van, which is that of Richard Wilson). 

 

It's hauled by either...........

 

 

A B1 (in this case Tony Geary's work).

 

Or..........

 

 

A V2 (in this case, my work - built from a Jamieson kit and painted by Ian Rathbone). 

 

 

When Mile Wild took the pictures for Hornby mag last year, he took this view (though under a stormy sky), which I tried to replicate here. 

 

The V2 has a Mike Trice 3D-printed body on top of a Comet set of frames and tows a South Eastern Finecast tender (all my work), which Geoff Haynes painted.

 

As with all I try to do, this is a 'layout loco', towing a 'layout train', running (guess where?) on a layout. I suppose I'd call myself a 'layout figure' as well. 

 

The other little figures/groups you mention are all based on anecdotes/pictures from folk who lived and/or worked at Little Bytham during the late-'50s (sadly, several of whom have now died) and were arranged under their supervision if possible. In a way, this makes the layout a kind of miniature social history, and I'm very grateful for those anecdotes, advice and, in many cases, access to family snapshots and paintings. Those who model 'make-believe' locations, have to invent their social histories, which can be fun, of course. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[DenysW]

5 hours ago, Andy R said:

 

2. Do you have any advice as to how one puts a ‘value’ on kit built locos that can be put up for sale?

Depends whether you are selling them or insuring them. This isn't insurance fraud, it's simply establishing the cost of getting an identical replacement made. When I last checked the bits for an LMS Garratt from DJH models were about £1000 - double that (at least) to have one built and painted. So £2000 would be the insurance value.

 

In terms of selling, there was a recent thread on this, and my conclusion was that you'd get 25-50% of what you paid, depending on how much effort you put in, and luck. All of this extra to @polybear's remarks. The easiest way at the lowest return was to sell the lot to a dealer, the most effortful was to list individual items on eBay. Auctions a halfway house, but also the most random in terms of return.

 

FWIW I don't count Tony as a 'dealer' in this. The warranty you get plus the fact that his 'stock' flies out the door puts him in a different category, but I'm not sure I could name it!

[melmoth]

9 hours ago, t-b-g said:

 

I recall reading an article on one of the SR branchlines, possibly the one to Seaton. Somebody wrote that because one side of the carriage was subject to wind and weathering from off the sea and the other side was inland and sheltered, also because the sun always shone on one side, once a set had been used for a short while on the branch service, the two sides of the carriages were distinctly different shades of green.

 

 

Something similar apparently happened on the Hemyock branch in Somerset. All the stations were on the same side of the line, so only the station side of the branch set were cleaned. Given the low speed and infrequent train service, the carriages didn't often wander off the branch for servicing, so the two sides weathered differently over quite long periods.

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, Andy R said:

Tony;

Now back home in NZ. Reflecting on my visit to your wonderful layout I have a query or two:

1. Is it possible for you to post a couple of photos of the simple coach coupler system you use- between coaches and between coach and loco? They work so well and get rid of those ghastly rtr ones.

2. Do you have any advice as to how one puts a ‘value’ on kit built locos that can be put up for sale? How do you arrive at a fair price? Other group members may have a view also?

 

Cheers- Andy R 

NZ

Good morning Andy,

 

Glad you got back safely.

 

My couplings? They really are simple, cheap and effective...............

 

 

Seen without the 30Amp fusewire additional pipes. 

 

Now with the addition of the pipes (only attached to the towing vehicle).

 

 

In crude (and cruel) close-up. Just two lengths of PCB sleeper strip, glued underneath, then the goalpost and hook made from .45 mm brass or nickel silver wire, with 30 Amp fusewire for the train-heating/vacuum brake conduits, all soldered solidly together. 

 

Visually...........

 

 

 

 

I think my couplings 'work'. 

 

They certainly work 'physically' inasmuch as they pull off the headstock (like the real thing) and not the bogies, can be propelled with equal ease as being towed and never come uncoupled. Granted, they're not even semi-automatic, but since LB's rakes in the main are dedicated, there's no need for coupling/uncoupling on the layout. If that's required (for the pick-ups), I use Sprat & Winkles........

 

 

 

Which work just fine. 

 

Ends of dedicated rakes..............

 

 

 

Look even more like the real things because they only need to run one way. (Note the tail lamps - no trains run on LB without appropriate lamps, front and rear). 

 

I use the same coupling system on good trains which run in dedicated sets as well...........

 

 

 

I'm not claiming that these are 'realistic' (though they're a lot more than tension-locks), but I can't be doing with faffing about with three-links or screw shackles! 

 

Your next question answered shortly................

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[polybear]

2 hours ago, DenysW said:

Depends whether you are selling them or insuring them. This isn't insurance fraud, it's simply establishing the cost of getting an identical replacement made. When I last checked the bits for an LMS Garratt from DJH models were about £1000 - double that (at least) to have one built and painted. So £2000 would be the insurance value.

 

Kitbuilt A1/A2/A3's often sell at around £100-ish on the 'bay (buyer beware, of course....) whilst a professionally built and painted will be north of £1K now; the former figure will be the "value" and the latter figure the value for insurance purposes.

 

2 hours ago, DenysW said:

FWIW I don't count Tony as a 'dealer' in this. The warranty you get plus the fact that his 'stock' flies out the door puts him in a different category, but I'm not sure I could name it!

 

IIRC Tony offers a lifetime labour guarantee on locos he's built; however those from deceased estates etc. understandably aren't sold on the same basis - though Tony does check them out beforehand, correcting defects where reasonable to do so or alternatively selling at a reduced value (often described as "cripples").

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm not claiming that these are 'realistic' (though they're a lot more than tension-locks)

I don't think they're any more or any less realistic but they're certainly less obtrusive, which is probably the whole point.

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Andy R said:

Tony;

Now back home in NZ. Reflecting on my visit to your wonderful layout I have a query or two:

1. Is it possible for you to post a couple of photos of the simple coach coupler system you use- between coaches and between coach and loco? They work so well and get rid of those ghastly rtr ones.

2. Do you have any advice as to how one puts a ‘value’ on kit built locos that can be put up for sale? How do you arrive at a fair price? Other group members may have a view also?

 

Cheers- Andy R 

NZ

In answer to your second question, Andy..............

 

With difficulty at times!

 

A few examples............

 

 

 

This was a loco (as with all the following) which came from the estate of a deceased modeller. As it stood (literally), it was a complete dud with respect to its working. It's mainly scratch-built (with a Comet tender). In order to make it 'valuable', I mechanically rebuilt it, and fitted £80.00's worth of DJH motor/gearbox combination; then sold it for £200.00 (my contribution being my time). I couldn't imagine anyone buying it as a non-runner.

 

 

 

Two DJH 'Duchesses'; the top one rather grotty, the bottom one much better. Both ran (the lower one very well), yet I sold them both together for around the cost of a complete unbuilt DJH kit. Could I have got more? Possibly, but I'm not 'in business'. 

 

 

A twin-Portescap-driven LMS Beyer Garratt. I had a potential buyer for this, but only if it were in BR guise..........

 

 

So, I asked Geoff Hanes to do just that; which he did, perfectly. It then made £250.00.

 

 

A selection. By far the most-valuable was the Bradwell J27, being beautifully-built and a lovely runner. The others were 'adequate', and all went to happy homes. 

 

One might have thought that, there being no RTR-equivalent, the D20 might have been the most-desirable, but it wasn't 'top drawer' so to speak. By the way, the moment an RTR equivalent appears, the value of a kit-built loco for the same can plummet (as was the case with the forthcoming G5).

 

 

A bit of a paradox in a way. Not a bad build of a DJH A1, and quite well-painted, but a horror story as a runner- ear defenders being needed!

 

I sold it to a friend (at a low cost because of its poor running - in had three 'speeds'; stationary, fast and even-faster!) and he considered re-motoring it, but decided against it (even though he detailed/weathered it). 

 

So............

 

 

I bought it back off him, rebuilt the frames/pick-ups and installed a new motor. I'm happy to say, it now runs on LB, though it wouldn't have done prior to my 'fixing' it. 

 

Here's my dilemma in a way. I don't have time to mechanically-rebuild so many kit-built locos which pass through my hands (a surprisingly large number [or is it?] which don't run well). Some need no more than a tweak, clean and oil, but, in many cases, a new drive (at least) is required. To factor that sort of cost in (and if I charged for my time!) would make many locos un-saleable. So, I do my best. 

 

 

Another 'problem' loco. Built from a Millholme kit for an A2/2 (Ugh!!!), it's got a banjo dome and a far-too-fat tender. Not only that, it's devoid of much detail and ran poorly. What to do? Hornby had not long released its RTR equivalent, so this went for around £75.00. It really was the best I could hope for, so thanks to a friend for buying it.

 

 

Another 'not so sure'.

 

Who fits banjo domes on to post-War LNER Pacifics? The builder of this SE Finecast A3 did. Not only that, it didn't run that well. 

 

So, off with the dome, fix on a replacement (which Geoff Haynes match-painted perfectly) and then make sure it ran.........

 

 

Perfectly, on Little Bytham. 

 

Not only that.............

 

 

I thought the original front numberplate was poor, so fitted one of Ian Wilson's Pacific types, and Geoff Haynes weathered her beautifully (which he has to be paid for, of course). I also substituted Markits bogie wheels - the originals (don't know their origin) were very fine - too fine for OO. 

 

Why go to all this trouble? Because it makes a loco much more-saleable at a greater price than left as they were (important to widows/distressed families, especially as 10% of all sales goes to CRUK). 

 

The most I've ever got for an individual model.............

 

 

Was £750.00 for this Finney A3 in EM. However, it turned out to be a better-looker than a runner, and has needed more spending on it and a lot of extra work (I feel a bit guilty, though I cannot guarantee the work of others). It's an excellent example of a 'glass case' model, which many kit-built locos I see are best at! 

 

Now, to those models you donated............

 

 

 

 

 

Not having any motors makes them more difficult to sell, though I tried at the weekend; with no success at all! Even reducing the prices to £50.00 for the tender locos and £40.00 for the 94XX, brought no response at all (other than 'If they had motors, I'd buy them straight away' at an increased cost, of course). 

 

I'll try next weekend at Ely. 

 

I hope the above answer some of your queries.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

7 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I don't think they're any more or any less realistic but they're certainly less obtrusive, which is probably the whole point.

Thanks John,

 

Better-described.

 

They're also far more-reliable with regard to running in my (limited) experience than tension-locks, especially on bogie vehicles where the latter are attached to a bogie. Under load, the bogie-fitted couplings can snatch and 'jump', derailing the bogie.

 

Granted, mine aren't even semi-automatic. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Barry Ten]

Some preliminary scenic progress on my N valleys layout:

 

 

 

See my blog for more information.

 

https://www.rmweb.co.uk/blogs/entry/25947-paynestown-further-scenery/

 

Al

[Ollie K]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:My couplings? They really are simple, cheap and effective...............

 

 

Seen without the 30Amp fusewire additional pipes. 

 

Now with the addition of the pipes (only attached to the towing vehicle).

 

 

In crude (and cruel) close-up. Just two lengths of PCB sleeper strip, glued underneath, then the goalpost and hook made from .45 mm brass or nickel silver wire, with 30 Amp fusewire for the train-heating/vacuum brake conduits, all soldered solidly together. 

 

Visually...........

 

 

 

 

I think my couplings 'work'. 

 

They certainly work 'physically' inasmuch as they pull off the headstock (like the real thing) and not the bogies, can be propelled with equal ease as being towed and never come uncoupled. Granted, they're not even semi-automatic, but since LB's rakes in the main are dedicated, there's no need for coupling/uncoupling on the layout.

 

I use the same coupling system on good trains which run in dedicated sets as well...........

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Tony, do you have any images to illustrate how tight a curve radius your coaches (or wagons) with the bar and hook system can manage?

 

I’ve always thought them an elegant solution when I’ve visited LB, but wondered how they’d fare on more cramped layouts. Could they cope with third or fourth radius set-track (perish the thought)?

[sjp23480]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Who fits banjo domes on to post-War LNER Pacifics? The builder of this SE Finecast A3 did. Not only that, it didn't run that well. 

Tony,

 

Could you expand on this comment.  I recall seeing you reference banjo domes earlier in the thread 

 

I am not an expert on LNER Pacific's, but I do have a couple to build so would like to know if there is a rule of thumb for them?

 

Many thanks

Steve

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, OliverBytham said:

Tony, do you have any images to illustrate how tight a curve radius your coaches (or wagons) with the bar and hook system can manage?

 

I’ve always thought them an elegant solution when I’ve visited LB, but wondered how they’d fare on more cramped layouts. Could they cope with third or fourth radius set-track (perish the thought)?

Good afternoon Ollie,

 

The minimum radius my rolling stock has to negotiate on the main line is 3', so I set the couplings as appropriate. 

 

The same couplings work just as well on the M&GNR (which is down to 2' radius), but the hook is longer. I disguise the greater gap (as best I can) by fitting two concertina corridor connectors (one on each carriage) rather than just the one (on the towed carriage) on gangwayed stock on the main line.

 

The following shots show the carriages in action..............

 

 

 

 

 

 

They are a bit too far apart, but without gaps between the gangways, the effect is just about OK. 

 

I have no idea of the radii of Hornby or others' set-track. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

47 minutes ago, sjp23480 said:

Tony,

 

Could you expand on this comment.  I recall seeing you reference banjo domes earlier in the thread 

 

I am not an expert on LNER Pacific's, but I do have a couple to build so would like to know if there is a rule of thumb for them?

 

Many thanks

Steve

Good afternoon Steve,

 

The thorny subject of banjo domes has afflicted RTR makers and kit manufacturers ever since the likes of Roche, Skinley and Ian Beattie saw fit to put the wretched things on their drawings of the likes of A3s, A2s, A1s, the A1/1 and V2s.

 

In truth the only locos ever fitted with banjo domes (other than the two V4s, which were distinctly different) were those in the final batch of A3s (LNER numbers 2500-2508). What was underneath was a perforated steam collector (which looked like a banjo in plan view). The metal bashers made their covers follow this compound shape, until someone decided (and I've never seen it ever recorded) that is was much quicker and much easier to make a streamlined dome cover, with a straight taper in plan view, not like a peardrop. 

 

Those A3s only kept a banjo cover to their domes until their first boiler change, when the type disappeared (at least by the War). 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

As intimated earlier, yesterday I acquired a latest Bachmann Thompson in BR maroon............

 

 

It's the CK and very nice, but at over £62.00? Is that going to be the benchmark price for OO Gauge RTR carriages in future? 

 

I'll junk the couplings, fit my own, add concertina gangways and weather the underframe, bogies and roof for service on Little Bytham.

 

Speaking of weathering.............

 

 

Yesterday, I also acquired this rather grubby (but quite natural) ex-LMS BG off Richard Wilson. Thanks Richard. 

 

Now with my couplings, it's next stop will be Little Bytham. 

 

 

[davidw]

9 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

As intimated earlier, yesterday I acquired a latest Bachmann Thompson in BR maroon............

 

 

It's the CK and very nice, but at over £62.00? Is that going to be the benchmark price for OO Gauge RTR carriages in future? 

 

I'll junk the couplings, fit my own, add concertina gangways and weather the underframe, bogies and roof for service on Little Bytham.

 

 

 

 

I've bought six. Ruth was a little upset. Though I did get them a bit cheaper than £62.00..…

Edited May 15, 2023 by davidw

[MikeParkin65]

15 minutes ago, davidw said:

 

I've bought six. Ruth was a little upset. Though I did get them a bit cheaper than £62.00..…

Think these are still subject to Bachmanns 'fixed' price policy - their dealers can only discount up to a an agreed %. Most are the market for £58.50 or thereabouts which is decent for an RtR coach of this quality at the moment. The CK and BSK will sell out quickly but the various versions of First class may linger, perhaps long enough to be discounted further.  Same happened with the maroon LMS Portholes - all you can get now is the brake first.

[ScRSG]

2 hours ago, OliverBytham said:

Tony, do you have any images to illustrate how tight a curve radius your coaches (or wagons) with the bar and hook system can manage?

 

I’ve always thought them an elegant solution when I’ve visited LB, but wondered how they’d fare on more cramped layouts. Could they cope with third or fourth radius set-track (perish the thought)?

Or for LB and other such layouts with 3ft minimum radius would it be possible to have the coaches even more close coupled?

Chas

[davidw]

1 hour ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Think these are still subject to Bachmanns 'fixed' price policy - their dealers can only discount up to a an agreed %. Most are the market for £58.50 or thereabouts which is decent for an RtR coach of this quality at the moment. The CK and BSK will sell out quickly but the various versions of First class may linger, perhaps long enough to be discounted further.  Same happened with the maroon LMS Portholes - all you can get now is the brake first.

Why CK and BSK, I would have thought the SK would be more popular?

[MikeParkin65]

57 minutes ago, davidw said:

Why CK and BSK, I would have thought the SK would be more popular?

Agree, meant SK when I wrote ‘CK’.  

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, ScRSG said:

Or for LB and other such layouts with 3ft minimum radius would it be possible to have the coaches even more close coupled?

Chas

Possibly Chas,

 

But I've reached the 'happy compromise' in a way. The cars are close-coupled enough to look good enough in motion, yet still give plenty of clearance on the curves. To fix them closer together (say another mil' or two) might cause running problems; at the moment I have none in that regard.

 

Obviously, they're further apart than true scale (I believe some model coupling systems 'expand' on curves, but I never use them). Indeed, it looks like that latest Thompson car has such a system, but since it's incompatible with mine, it'll be lopped-off and discarded. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Think these are still subject to Bachmanns 'fixed' price policy - their dealers can only discount up to a an agreed %. Most are the market for £58.50 or thereabouts which is decent for an RtR coach of this quality at the moment. The CK and BSK will sell out quickly but the various versions of First class may linger, perhaps long enough to be discounted further.  Same happened with the maroon LMS Portholes - all you can get now is the brake first.

Good evening Mike,

 

I bought the coach in question from Trains 4 U, at the Stamford Show, so, obviously, no discount there (not that I'd expect it, and I will, if I can, support local traders). 

 

I certainly won't be buying any more, because I have no need of them, having so many kit-built Thompsons on LB.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Tony Wright
to add something