Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

With all the motion on, that Pro-Scale B1 was given its final road-testing prior to going off to be painted.........

 

 

 

Unflattering to Bytham's trackwork these head-on views might be, but the main purpose of the shots is to show the length of the train (which includes several white metal wagons). Yes, a still shot proves nothing about a loco's haulage capabilities, but Tony Teague seemed convinced as the B1 bowled by at a scale 60+. 

 

 

[Michael Edge]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Dear friend, Tony Teague popped round today for one of his regular visits...........

 

Bringing with him some incredibly-interesting models, which included........

 

 

 

This SR 0-4-0 diesel shunter.

 

 

This C14.

 

 

 

This amazing third-rail electric shunter.

 

 

This diminutive shunter.

 

 

And, wait for it, this Jidenco SR 4-4-0.

 

I'll leave Tony to explain which is which and what is what; much is Mike Edge's work in one form or another.

 

All ran very well...................

 

 

I only built three of them but I think I may have designed the other two…

[Northmoor]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

 

This amazing third-rail electric shunter.

 

I think this may now hold the record for, "Most unlikely prototype to run at Little Bytham".  I look forward to seeing one day that someone has brought along a "Kriegslok".....

[Tony Teague]

9 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I think this may now hold the record for, "Most unlikely prototype to run at Little Bytham".  I look forward to seeing one day that someone has brought along a "Kriegslok".....

Yes, and amazingly it seemed to be able to haul a short train despite the absence of any 3rd rail!

Tony

[t-b-g]

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

With all the motion on, that Pro-Scale B1 was given its final road-testing prior to going off to be painted.........

 

 

 

Unflattering to Bytham's trackwork these head-on views might be, but the main purpose of the shots is to show the length of the train (which includes several white metal wagons). Yes, a still shot proves nothing about a loco's haulage capabilities, but Tony Teague seemed convinced as the B1 bowled by at a scale 60+. 

 

 

 

Did many B1s run with the numberplate above the top hinge strap? It is a variety that I don't think I have seen before. It just looks a little odd to my eyes.

[Tony Wright]

6 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

Did many B1s run with the numberplate above the top hinge strap? It is a variety that I don't think I have seen before. It just looks a little odd to my eyes.

Good morning Tony,

 

Several B1s ran with the numberplate above the top hinge strap; and it does look odd. The positions varied considerably...........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please (all) respect copyright restrictions on the above images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Model tunnel mouths?

 

I've found quite a selection.

 

I've not altered the tunnel interiors at all in the images below. Observers can decide which 'work' in these pictures and those which work less so. Irrespective of any conclusions, the layouts they're on all represent high standards of modelling..............

 

Stoke Summit.

 

 

Copenhagen Fields.

 

 

Ambergate.

 

 

Calderwood.

 

 

 

 

Chee Tor.

 

 

 

 

Eli Wood (featured in the next issue of BRM).

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kingstorre.

 

 

Midhurst.

 

 

The North of England Line.

 

 

Sandy Bay.

 

On the two below, I have 'cheated' by blacking-out intrusive light. Acceptable? 

 

 

Clayton End.

 

 

Falahill.

 

Ironically, occasionally on the prototype, light 'should' be seen in a tunnel......

 

 

Askham Tunnel, just south of Retford, is the shortest on the ECML (or anywhere?).

 

60046 on an Up express in the very hot summer of 1959.

 

John Houlden used the north portal as the south-end scenic break on his Gamston Bank.........

 

 

 

As I say, ironically, it shouldn't be blacked-out. How can modellers win? 

 

 

The 'ultimate light-blocker'?

 

 

 

Woodhead, at Easter 1981, as an eastbound train enters the tunnel.

 

The late, great Pete Lander watches by the mouth (his fast Escort to the right) as Nick Rees (protected against the wet) takes a similar picture to mine............

 

 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Teague]

13 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Dear friend, Tony Teague popped round today for one of his regular visits...........

Bringing with him some incredibly-interesting models, which included........

I'll leave Tony to explain which is which and what is what; much is Mike Edge's work in one form or another.

 

First my sincere thanks to Tony, Mo and Jilly the cat for again hosting my visit - always a great pleasure!

 

I picked out these locos to visit LB on the basis that they were all a bit unusual, plus it is not often that one sees tiny shunters at this location; as Tony and followers of my thread are aware I also have a sub-project going on, alongside building my train set, which is to have at least one model of every class of loco that the SR had on their books at nationalisation -  and because of their investment in electrification they had a lot of variety including some quite ancient locos.

 

Each of those shown had been hard to source and on my 'missing list' for several years and so finally securing them felt like an achievement; there are now just 7 types left to source and I think I have 'solutions' for each of these.

 

The first departmental shunter shown, no 400S is a Fowler 4C 150hp loco and one of a class of two for the SR, in service stock form 1946 until 1957 and used at Southampton Docks and then Eastleigh Carriage Works.; the model was built by Mike Edge from his own etches and I believe it was the test build for a kit which is now in the Judith Edge range.

 

The diminutive SR ex-LSWR Drummond C14 class loco has actually been seen on here before; 10 of these were built around 1913 and this one worked at Southampton Docks until withdrawn; three survived into BR days (but not this one). Again the model was designed and built by Mike Edge as one of the test buiilds for a kit now available in the Judith Edge range.

 

 

The 3rd rail shunter as above is SR ex-LSWR departmental No.DS74, built 1899 and finally withdrawn in 1965; it served throughout as the shunter of coal wagons at the railway's power station at Durnsford Road, Wimbledon and never carried it's stock number. The model was built for me by Chris Phillips from a Judith Edge kit and despite it's size an lack of weight it seemed to be very comfortable pulling a short rake around LB.

 

Perahps the smallest of all was Ruston 48DS, SR no.DS1169 whcih formed a class of just one on the SR; it was acquired in 1948 and lasted until 1972 serving at Broad Clyst civil engineering depot and then Folkestone. Again, the model was built for me by Chris Phillips from a Judith Edge kit.

 

 

Finally, No.1031 (shown here on home territory) is an SR, ex-SECR Wainwright class F1 loco built as Stirling class F between 1883 and 1898 and rebuilt by Wainwright between 1903 and 1910; the last was withdrawn in 1951. The model is partly from a Jidenco kit which I bought on E-Bay and subsequently discovered had many missing parts! It was built, and partly scratch-built, by Mike Edge, becoming the latest to tick off another class from my 'missing list'; the model both looks and performs brilliantly, even though I have yet to add a crew, coal and headcode discs!

 

10 hours ago, Michael Edge said:

I only built three of them but I think I may have designed the other two…

 

You certainly did!

 

Tony

[Tony Teague]

Reflecting on the discussion above, concerning the various problems that all of us may encounter with our eyesight in old age, I wondered whether the simultaneous debate about OO/EM/P4 and the angle from which pictures are taken really matters at all...................😁

Most of us may not be able to discern any difference.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Tony Teague

[t-b-g]

53 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Tony,

 

Several B1s ran with the numberplate above the top hinge strap; and it does look odd. The positions varied considerably...........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please (all) respect copyright restrictions on the above images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks Tony. Most interesting. It almost gives them more of a Gresley like appearance. Not a look ET would have been going for, I am sure.

 

I can see why it is, on those doors with the hinges too close together to fit the plate but a couple of those illustrated have the wider spaced straps with room for the number plate under it. There must be a story behind why some were different.

 

 

[drmditch]

B1 Smokebox doors.

Is this not a story of Darlington North Road Works?

Anyway, are smokebox numberplates not an affectation of the LMS, GWR and suchlike railways?

 

I always find it a nuisance, having purchased an RTR model otherwise suited for my purposes, when the block of plastic with numbers on it has to be cut away while doing as little damage as possible to the door itself.

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by drmditch

[Steamport Southport]

30 minutes ago, drmditch said:

B1 Smokebox doors.

Is this not a story of Darlington North Road Works?

Anyway, are smokebox numberplates not an affectation of the LMS, GWR and suchlike railways?

 

I always find at a nuisance, having purchased an RTR model otherwise suited for my purposes, when the block of plastic with numbers on it has to be cut away while doing as little damage as possible to the door itself.

 

 

Midland Railway going back to the 19th Century and adopted by the LMS. BR also adopted them in 1948. Much better idea than having painted numbers on the buffer plank.

 

You could always buy the versions not in BR livery. I don't think any models have been made with them moulded on when they shouldn't be for decades. Even in Mainline days they were separately fitted items.

 

GWR version of the 2251 didn't have them, but the BR version did. These came out in 1977!

 

http://www.mainlinerailways.org.uk/Collett.htm

 

 

 

Jason

Edited November 30, 2023 by Steamport Southport

[drmditch]

Re: Short Tunnels (and or Bridges.)

"Askham Tunnel, just south of Retford, is the shortest on the ECML (or anywhere?)."

 

There is High Burnigill (just north of Croxdale Viaduct in County Durham).

 

According to the ex-NER Line-diagram as published by NER this structure which is 62 miles north of York is referred to as 'Burnigill Bridge'  but is marked with portals called 'Stone Tunnel' in February 1922.  These Diagrams were updated in both LNER and BR days and the structure is marked as 'Rebuilt 1955'

 

There have been significant landslips in this area recently and consequent engineering works by Durham County Council. 

When my legs are a bit stronger I will go for a winter walk and see if I can find a viewpoint looking along the line.

 

[Compound2632]

22 minutes ago, Steamport Southport said:

Midland Railway going back to the 19th Century

 

Not quite so far back - c. 1905 at the earliest, along with putting the number on the tender, North American style. Was this in fact an American practice?

 

Back in the very early days, it had been common to put the engine number on the chimney, facing forwards. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Compound2632

[Chas Levin]

16 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

As shot. Hardly convincing at all? 

 

 

More-convincing? 

 

But,

 

 

How far should one go in digital image manipulation? 

 

The jury's out.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

Good afternoon Tony, please forgive a possibly nit-picking question, but is there a way to have a gradual fade to black within the tunnel mouth? As it looks to me there, it cuts off the rear of the train a little harshly, just a short way along the side and roof of the first carriage.

[john new]

53 minutes ago, Chas Levin said:

 

Good afternoon Tony, please forgive a possibly nit-picking question, but is there a way to have a gradual fade to black within the tunnel mouth? As it looks to me there, it cuts off the rear of the train a little harshly, just a short way along the side and roof of the first carriage.

This is a bit like the backgrounds in/out of photos debate, showing the height of modelled backscenes versus extended skies etc.. Is the point of the photo about what looks best or a guide to others of how the modeller(s) did whatever it is being photographed? The top one is more useful to show the how they did it (a short bit of screening) the bottom one looks more realistic. It will vary according to where it is used and what the purpose of showing it is.

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by john new
Clarity

[drmditch]

1 hour ago, Steamport Southport said:

 

Midland Railway going back to the 19th Century and adopted by the LMS. BR also adopted them in 1948. Much better idea than having painted numbers on the buffer plank.

 

You could always buy the versions not in BR livery. I don't think any models have been made with them moulded on when they shouldn't be for decades. Even in Mainline days they were separately fitted items.

 

GWR version of the 2251 didn't have them, but the BR version did. These came out in 1977!

 

http://www.mainlinerailways.org.uk/Collett.htm

 

 

 

Jason

 

Hmm, I'm afraid I do have some RTR models dating back decades! Usually re-liveried and slightly modified. 

(It took some time for manufacturers to produce LNER designed locomotives in LNER livery; especially the smaller black ones!

It is indeed helpful when the smokebox door numberplate is absent.

I do quite like the Collet 0-6-0s, but I'm afraid they are not really relevant to County  Durham!      

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by drmditch

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, Chas Levin said:

 

Good afternoon Tony, please forgive a possibly nit-picking question, but is there a way to have a gradual fade to black within the tunnel mouth? As it looks to me there, it cuts off the rear of the train a little harshly, just a short way along the side and roof of the first carriage.

Good afternoon Chas,

 

I'm sure there is a way, but my skills at digital imagery are limited.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[APOLLO]

Short tunnel. The lining was difficult being on a curve and had to clear high / long stock. It's lined with plaster and sprayed black. Built 2001 and still OK. This is O gauge. Track is loose ballasted with bird cage grit, not one problem to date, and makes track realignment / alterations a doddle. Track is Peco.

 

 

Brit15

[Chas Levin]

22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Chas,

 

I'm sure there is a way, but my skills at digital imagery are limited.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

I don't know about that Tony - they're considerably far ahead of mine! I did say it was a bit nit-picky. I also should have said that the versions with the point of light visible at the far end of the tunnel are much more effective than those without.

We all do what works best for us: I've hidden the end of a short, non-through road tunnel on my layout with two lorries going in opposite directions, halfway into the tunnel mouth!

[Michael Edge]

This is Silkstone No2 tunnel on Wentworth Junction.

This tunnel is only 74 yards long and on a curve, I use a bin liner curtain at the far end of tunnels and this one is showing a chink of light at the far end. The S1 is banking a loaded steel train on its way up the incline towards Barnsley Junction and Manchester.

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, drmditch said:

B1 Smokebox doors.

Is this not a story of Darlington North Road Works?

Anyway, are smokebox numberplates not an affectation of the LMS, GWR and suchlike railways?

 

I always find it a nuisance, having purchased an RTR model otherwise suited for my purposes, when the block of plastic with numbers on it has to be cut away while doing as little damage as possible to the door itself.

 

Good afternoon,

 

The original B1s, having been built at Darlington, had a NE-style smokebox door - that is a relatively small diameter but with a large radius of curvature in side-elevation. Later builds adopted more of a GN-style smokebox door - that is a larger diameter but with a tighter radius in side-elevation.

 

 

Original NER-style door.

 

 

Later GN-style door (there were variations of this).

 

The two were, of course......

 

 

 

Totally interchangeable.

 

Look out for rivets or not...............

 

 

GN door with hingestraps as normal, but but with numberplate above.

 

 

GN door with hingestraps as normal, with numberplate below - the most-common manifestation.

 

GN door with hingestraps close together with number above - note incorrect '6' as well; who'd be a modeller?

 

 

Another 'oddity'.

 

Arrangements like this caused the top lamp bracket to be raised higher resulting (in the main) in a footstep being welded to the smokebox door at '5 o'clock'. But, not here (as with the other examples). I state again, who'd be a modeller?

 

Because...............

 

 

Here's one with the welded step (just visible).

 

Of course.........

 

 

If one isn't sure!

 

Please (all) respect copyright restrictions on these images. 

 

By the way, I know of no GWR locos fitted with cast front numberplates (other than those inherited by BR/WR). Cast cabside plates, yes.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry, I forgot this example.

 

GN-style door, with hinge straps close together, with numberplate just above top strap (compare this with others with the same style door). Scottish-style 'infills' to the valances. No footstep. 

 

Other points to note: why are the cabside numbers spaced so tightly together? And, the cladding band between the rear of the boiler and the front of the firebox is very prominent (on a model, this would be criticised - a cladding band too prominent? What about a comment regarding such a thing on one of Hornby's recent P2s?). 

 

 

Once the pride of Ipswich depot, the normal spacing of a B1's cabside numbering. 

 

Of course,

 

 

 

For those who cannot space out cabside numbers equally on their models............

 

Or, who have run out of BR devices for their tenders!

 

And,

 

 

For those who are worried that removing any original numbers on their models with a craft knife might scratch the surface...............

Edited November 30, 2023 by Tony Wright

[drmditch]

Many thanks for that compendious archive.

Later this winter I will pay some more attention to my B1s, most of which are still packed away.

[Keith Turbutt]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

 

For those who are worried that removing any original numbers on their models with a craft knife might scratch the surface...............

An interesting story related by the late Peter Townend in his book Top Shed, of which I have both a signed original copy and the subsequent reprint, concerned 61379 Mayflower. I am sure that anyone who has a copy or has read a copy of his book will remember the story. The occasion concerned an American Society from Boston who had chartered a train to Boston from Kings Cross. The real 61379 Mayflower had been borrowed from Immingham shed to haul the train. Unfortunately the loco was declared unfit at Top Shed having arrived with three driving axles hot. There being no time to effect a repair, and in order not to disappoint, a quick decision was made to renumber Top Shed's own 61179 to 61379 and transfer name and number plates and plaques to masquerade as Mayflower for the special charter. Apparently all went well until some time later a young trainspotter enquired, presumably to Eastern Region HQ, why he had seen two locos numbered 61379 on Top Shed that morning ! The depot, on confessing to the subterfuge, were duly admonished and told not to do it again.        

[92220]

On 17/11/2023 at 16:21, Tony Wright said:

. 

 

 

And, of course, EVENING STAR herself - from Bachmann

 

Good evening Tony,

 

Catching up on the thread from a couple of weeks ago. This photo brought back wonderful memories of a day with you at LB, all too long ago.  I would love to revisit again one day, if and when it’s ok for you, and I have a few more things to bring along now.

The Bachmann 92220 in your photo, which breezed through with 15 mainly kit-built carriages behind it, is pretty extensively modified:

 

Extra weight for improved adhesion and haulage

Loco-tender coupling as per your usual arrangement to reduce the gap 

Loco lifting rings on front frames

Correct pattern front coupling with extra link and bracket

Vacuum pipe

Remove steamheating pipe base from buffer beam

GWR pattern lamp irons

Buffer shank steps on loco and tender

Remove NEM pocket from front bogie and fabricate spring and damper

Gibson front bogie wheels

Gibson smokebox door dart

New handrails with correct pillars

Comet front steps

Cab doors (they're actually tender doors on the model and in real life....)

Tender buffer beam details

Tender coupling "goalpost"

Nameplate and commemorative plate

New injector pipework under fireman's side of cab

Driver's side under cab pipework with Comet fittings and copper wire 

Water pipes from tender to injectors 

Remove steam heating fitting and pipe from side of firebox (only fitted in preservation)

Detail copper pipes and chimney cap as copper not black or brass

return crank adjustment

 

Is it better than/as good as the new Hornby one? Almost certainly not, in many respects.  Most of what I did is covered by the exquisite detailing of the new one.  Although the under smokebox step needs to go unless you’re modelling 92220 in the last 18 months of active service.  There is also the bonus of there being at least some modelling in mine.  Another consideration is that while I am confident I can make a better looking, running and hauling Black 5 , Scot, Patriot, Jubilee or Coronation by building Comet frames than by using the rtr chassis, I definitely couldn’t guarantee making a similarly improved 9F. One reason is the complexity of 5 axles (that’s just something I haven’t yet done ) but another is the wheels available.   One day I might try. It’s not as if I have much more than Rule 1 to justify a 9F at Camden.
 

Anyway, best wishes to you, Mo, and all WW readers and contributors.

 

Iain