Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

I collected my favourite lens today, it having been cleaned and put right; moral, never leave a camera/lens in a damp environment overnight, because condensation can form on the inner elements of a compound (and very expensive) lens, leaving a film even after it's warmed up again.

 

My thanks to Skears Photographic of 203 Wellingborough Road, Northampton NN14ED for their fantastic service. If anyone out there ever needs a camera or lens fixing, that's the place to go.

 

On our return, I stuck the gleaming lens on to the front of the Nikon Df and took a few more 'non-railway' shots, including............

 

 

This view of Ian Wilson's booking hall (with Geoff West's little porter still sweeping!). 

 

 

A look towards the coal facilities, though what the LNER Dynamometer Car is doing there is anybody's guess!

 

The Wright's coal lorry is a piece of entire self-indulgence, provided by Ray Chessum.

 

 

Not only has Geoff West's wee porter been sweeping the forecourt for ages, but another has been loading this van for just as long! These vehicles in the end-loading dock never move. Neither does he! Neither do 'I' (in the distance).

 

 

Ian Wilson's stable is prominent here (Bytham had a shunting horse for a time, but I'm not modelling that). This building was the original engine house for Lord Willoughby's railway. 

 

 

Looking into the goods yard. 

 

 

And looking southwards from the coal facilities.

 

 

And a shot from a bit further south, featuring the weighbridge and office. I made the weighbridge ramp from a bit of rail (the 'bridge itself was an etch), a mate built the BR van from a whitemetal kit and Ian Wilson scratch-built the weigh office (it's the only building I haven't bedded in yet). 

 

Finally, an actual 'railway' snapshot...........

 

 

As those two Stevenson ex-MR non-gangwayed carriages disappear from view.

 

Bob Dawson's lovely bridge (which still exists in reality, though no train has passed beneath it for 65 years!), Tony Gee's marvellous Midland signal (supported on a post made by Mick Nicholson) and Geoff Taylor's (I'd forgotten him!) delightfully vernacular gangers' hut complete this scene.

 

My lovely lens no longer shows any evidence of 'fogging', and it's the one I use the most for 'layout shots' because its tiny minimum aperture means that almost everything is in focus! 

 

What the above pictures show (I hope) are the delights of modelling an actual prototype, now long-gone. These scenes show how Bytham used to look (or as near as the team can make them), not some made-up place where comparisons with an actual prototype are impossible. But, each to their own.............

 

 

 

 

Edited February 29 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Clive Mortimore]

On 27/02/2024 at 17:54, Tony Wright said:

I've spoken of the generosity of modellers, and a splendid example of this is...................

 

 

This trio of weathered tank wagons which arrived yesterday from Australia - a gift from my dear friend, Jesse Sim.

 

Thanks Jesse ever so much for these. You're getting to be a dab hand at weathering, though I'm not sure that petrol (which these tankers with red solebars usually carried) would leave such a dark deposit through spillage. 

 

I'm sure someone will know.

 

 

Hello Tony

 

I agree with you A class tanks carried "clean products" with a low flash point normally. They would have very little evidence of spillage and that would show up as dirt sticking to the said spillage. The exception being crude oil that was a "dirty product" with a low flash point so was carried in A class tank wagons covered in muck. As far as I am aware only BP transported crude form the Swanage area to a refinery some where, which I cannot remember.

 

Conversely to crude, diesel is a high flash point product but is clean. After the improvement in bottom discharge valves so that A class products didn't need to be siphoned diesel would be carried in A class tank wagons even though it was at lower risk of going bang.

[ndeluck]

Very nice to see the "human" side of LB, Tony. Thanks for the pictures of a day in the life. Your "1:1" shots toward the M&GNR exemplify you and your team's attention to detail.

 

Just earlier this month I bought myself a complete and unassembled Craftsman LNER C12 (with Alan Gibson wheels and crankpins) with the intention of dipping my toe into etched kit-building after constructing some plastic rolling stock kits. Though it's been a few weeks now (having been stalled for a couple due to getting married!) and in its current state I feel confident enough to share my progress.

The running board and chassis frames, being the first to construct, took the most egregious abuse and haphazard construction but are now sitting acceptably as close to square as I can manage (and I will need to invest in a proper chassis jig). Now that they seem adequate to my eye and measurements, the rest feels to be coming a little easier. The valances were the most frustrating- and I pose this question to anyone reading, how do you all cope with such a joint? I couldn't figure it out until I quit for an evening and next just threw in the rear buffer beam hoping the mangled brass would sit flush, gently bending and coaxing it along to the next tack. The underneath of the running board is a terrible state- it will need intensive cleaning before painting.

 

Here she sits with chassis nearly complete (constructing the brake rigging is a choice yet to be made- unsure of how to approach with the instructions making little sense to me specifically fitting the blocks to the hangers). Which brings me to another question which I have searched for but haven't gotten sufficient answers. The Alan Gibson wheels and crank pin nuts, how do you secure them? I have a bottle of Loctite 242 at the ready, but will this work for the drivers as well as the nuts? The RH rear driver slips and fouls running due to being so loose. 


 

[Jesse Sim]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Jesse,

 

Jonathan's dick? I'm afraid something has been lost in translation, or I'm to dense to understand. What am I missing?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Jonathan must be sleeping or he's shy...

 

I have a very nice photo of his dick from the Harrogate show last year. 

 

[Chuffer Davies]

1 hour ago, ndeluck said:

Very nice to see the "human" side of LB, Tony. Thanks for the pictures of a day in the life. Your "1:1" shots toward the M&GNR exemplify you and your team's attention to detail.

 

Just earlier this month I bought myself a complete and unassembled Craftsman LNER C12 (with Alan Gibson wheels and crankpins) with the intention of dipping my toe into etched kit-building after constructing some plastic rolling stock kits. Though it's been a few weeks now (having been stalled for a couple due to getting married!) and in its current state I feel confident enough to share my progress.

The running board and chassis frames, being the first to construct, took the most egregious abuse and haphazard construction but are now sitting acceptably as close to square as I can manage (and I will need to invest in a proper chassis jig). Now that they seem adequate to my eye and measurements, the rest feels to be coming a little easier. The valances were the most frustrating- and I pose this question to anyone reading, how do you all cope with such a joint? I couldn't figure it out until I quit for an evening and next just threw in the rear buffer beam hoping the mangled brass would sit flush, gently bending and coaxing it along to the next tack. The underneath of the running board is a terrible state- it will need intensive cleaning before painting.

 

Here she sits with chassis nearly complete (constructing the brake rigging is a choice yet to be made- unsure of how to approach with the instructions making little sense to me specifically fitting the blocks to the hangers). Which brings me to another question which I have searched for but haven't gotten sufficient answers. The Alan Gibson wheels and crank pin nuts, how do you secure them? I have a bottle of Loctite 242 at the ready, but will this work for the drivers as well as the nuts? The RH rear driver slips and fouls running due to being so loose. 


 

You do not normally need to secure the crank pin screws in the wheels as they are a screw fit in their holes.  If you over tighten them then they will slip but all you require is sufficient grip to stay in place when the crank pin nuts are tightened. 

 

I am concerned that you are reporting that the RH rear driver already slips, did you remove the sharp edges from the axle ends before first inserting them into the wheels?   If not there is a likelihood that the axle end has cut into the wheel hub removing a sliver of plastic as it did so thus compromising the grip of the wheel on its axle.  I would recommend you replace this wheel. 

 

I have used these wheels successfully on several models but the trick is to try to minimise the number of times you fit them to avoid over stressing/stretching the holes in the wheels.  When you are carrying out the final assembly (typically after painting the model) I recommend you use Loctite 603 to adhere the wheels on their axles.  This will pretty much eliminate any risk of their slipping under normal use.

 

Regards,

Frank

[Barry Ten]

As long as we don't mind a bit of RTR here's a somewhat improved Bachmann 93XX mogul... reworked from a GWR example. The front frames have been cut and shut to get the drop in the right place, new Comet cylinders grafted over the old, loco-tender gap reduced, crew and DCC added, and then a mild re-livery job using T-cut to remove the GWR letters from the tender, followed by BR transfers from HMRS.

 

Not sure exactly sure if any 93XX carried plain green (especially before renumbering into the 73XX series) but it's the bare minimum I felt like doing rather than a full repaint or relining job, so it'll stand until I dig out more reference material.

 

 

 

 

 

[St Enodoc]

14 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

I thought it was Bing's Bollege...

 

https://montycasinos.com/montypython/scripts/travagent.php.html

[Tony Wright]

8 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Jonathan must be sleeping or he's shy...

 

I have a very nice photo of his dick from the Harrogate show last year. 

 

Ah,

 

I see -the mist lifts!

[LNER4479]

8 hours ago, Jesse Sim said:

Jonathan must be sleeping or he's shy...

 

I have a very nice photo of his dick from the Harrogate show last year. 

 

 

35 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Ah,

 

I see -the mist lifts!

Oh lumme. Don't encourage them. It'll be kn0bs and c0cks next ...

[PJT]

8 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

22 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

I thought it was Bing's Bollege...

 

https://montycasinos.com/montypython/scripts/travagent.php.html

 

I'll have Eric Idle's voice going around in my head for the rest of the day now.

 

Pete T.

 

[dibateg]

Local residences 'set the scene' and it was my original intention to place two council semi's in the corner of the Basford North. In the event, it would have looked to cramped, so I moved the first two houses in Saxondale drive to replace the somewhat larger four dwelling building in Vernon Road. A compromise with the actual location, but I think it works.  The houses are beautifully modelled by Peter Leyland. That whole triangle with the houses lifts out, so that I can get to the window behind! More work has taken place in the area since... That pavement needs a sweep. Much of the scenic work is by Geoff Taylor and Alisdair Macdonald.

 

The view from the other side in 1964

 

Regards

Tony

[Jesse Sim]

44 minutes ago, LNER4479 said:

 

Oh lumme. Don't encourage them. It'll be kn0bs and c0cks next ...

Speaking of, I have this photo, also from Harrogate, showing the cock holding area. Sadly only the one cock in sight. 

 

Is this the reason I don’t get invited anymore? I was under the impression this sort of behaviour was encouraged. 

[jwealleans]

We wouldn't want everyone to know think that the whole layout is operated by a shower of sniggering schoolboys.

[Tony Wright]

9 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

We wouldn't want everyone to know think that the whole layout is operated by a shower of sniggering schoolboys.

Good morning Jonathan,

 

Sniggering schoolboys (with the occasional giggling schoolgirl) always make the best operators (of Stoke, Charwelton and, particularly,  Bytham). I'm the 'schoolmaster', and I'm by far the worst operator! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Buhar]

11 hours ago, ndeluck said:

and I will need to invest in a proper chassis jig

You'll struggle to find either Avonside or Hobby Holidays versions, although Phil was considering a run of his (HH) if there was sufficient interest. That was a good while ago, so I suspect interest hasn't materialised.

 

I'm not convinced the Poppy's Woodtech Locobox holds things reliably in their correct positions and it seems possible to erect frames out of square if there's any error between the pairs of coupling rods.

 

Alan

[jwealleans]

Couldn't agree more, Tony.   If you're spending your own time doing it, whatever 'it' is and you're not having a laugh and enjoying it, you need to find a new hobby.

[grob1234]

15 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

We wouldn't want everyone to know think that the whole layout is operated by a shower of sniggering schoolboys.

 

Frankly, I'd be disappointed if it wasn't operated by a shower of sniggering schoolboys!

[St Enodoc]

14 minutes ago, jwealleans said:

Couldn't agree more, Tony.   If you're spending your own time doing it, whatever 'it' is and you're not having a laugh and enjoying it, you need to find a new hobby.

At work I sometimes used to get accused of not taking things seriously. My reply was that taking things seriously didn't have to mean doing them with a long face.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

14 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

My reply was that taking things seriously didn't have to mean doing them with a long face.

Back in the days of chart recorders every eligible lab procedure write up went to the typing pool with the line 'Ensure pen is inserted correctly.'; and hope the typist would oblige. 

 

Happily my best ever didn't require such dodges. Nothing beats 'push the rabbit into the nuclear reactor'.

 

And on topic, the modelled LB locality pictures are splendid.

[cctransuk]

1 hour ago, Buhar said:

You'll struggle to find either Avonside or Hobby Holidays versions, although Phil was considering a run of his (HH) if there was sufficient interest. That was a good while ago, so I suspect interest hasn't materialised.

 

I'm not convinced the Poppy's Woodtech Locobox holds things reliably in their correct positions and it seems possible to erect frames out of square if there's any error between the pairs of coupling rods.

 

Alan

 

Surely the dimensional consistency of a pair of rods is fundamental to the satisfactory assembly of frames, regardless of the means of jigging  (or not)?

 

CJI.

[PJT]

56 minutes ago, 34theletterbetweenB&D said:

Back in the days of chart recorders every eligible lab procedure write up went to the typing pool with the line 'Ensure pen is inserted correctly.'; and hope the typist would oblige. 

 

Happily my best ever didn't require such dodges. Nothing beats 'push the rabbit into the nuclear reactor'.

 

And on topic, the modelled LB locality pictures are splendid.

 

Reminds me that 'Screw, to the end of the earth' and 'Screw, for points' got inserted in every car parts catalogue we were involved with writing.

 

Pete T.

 

[Jesse Sim]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Jonathan,

 

Sniggering schoolboys (with the occasional giggling schoolgirl) always make the best operators (of Stoke, Charwelton and, particularly,  Bytham). I'm the 'schoolmaster', and I'm by far the worst operator! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Then why does Geoff West and I always get yelled at during the running sessions? 

[t-b-g]

56 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Surely the dimensional consistency of a pair of rods is fundamental to the satisfactory assembly of frames, regardless of the means of jigging  (or not)?

 

CJI.

 

You are quite right but I think you have misunderstood the comment. The jigs that have all the axles fixed will automatically give you all the axles square across the frames. If your rods are not identical each side, they won't go on and you know that you need to alter them. With the Poppy wooden jigs, only one axle is fixed square across and the others are in long slots, which don't fix the axle position. So if your rods are not identical lengths, you can assemble a set of frames with the axles not all square. So a comment about the Poppy jigs not being quite as foolproof as ones which have all the axles fixed makes good sense to me.

 

Of course the answer is, as everybody should do, to make sure that your rods are all the same length before you even try to put them on.

 

I have never found the need to use a jig as such. Making sure that your frames and rods are identical each side is essential and done before the frames are assembled. Making up the frames with long 1/8th inch straight steel rods through a couple of axle holes seems to work well enough. I put the frames in an engineers V block with the rods resting on each side of the V, which pretty much ensures they are level and flat and using an engineers square along the steel rods tells me that they are parallel. 

[cctransuk]

2 hours ago, t-b-g said:

Of course the answer is, as everybody should do, to make sure that your rods are all the same length before you even try to put them on.

 

That is the precise point that I was making!

 

I do not regard verifying the accuracy of a set of rods as a necessary function of a frame jig; that can be done with some drill shanks. If you can't get the rod holes to line up, don't even bother to get the frame jig out of the drawer.

 

To my mind, the purpose of a frame jig is to get all of the axles perpendicular to the frames, and in the same plane. The Poppy jig does this to perfection, time after time - and it's MUCH cheaper than the more complex, metal jigs.

 

CJI.

[Tony Wright]

Chassis jigs?

 

I've probably tried them all at one time or another. 

 

I was kindly given a Hobby Holidays' jig, but only used it once. Though accurate, it just took too long to set up (not good for one of impatient mind). I handed it back to Phil Atkinson, with thanks.

 

I took an Avonside one to Missenden one year, where a 'pupil' tried it out, finding it 'too complex and expensive'. I'm sure some excellent results can be achieved using it, but, in my experience no more accurate than the following..........

 

 

A Comet chassis jig, acquired when the group of four had the business (whether it's still available in this form, I have no idea). I used it once, but disliked the fact that the bearings were not soldered in first.

 

 

Has anyone tried these jig axles? Available (or were) from Markits or London Road Models, they're quite effective. The 'pointy bits go through the rods and the 'fat' bits go through the bearings, though they're impossible to 'lock' together. 

 

 

Chassis making from the days of John Ahern. Hardly a 'jig', one just shines a light over the one eighth rods and 'reads' the shadows until they're all parallel. These sorted out this  dreadfully-complex Brassmasters' 0-8-4T chassis (well, I found it dreadful). 

 

 

The Poppy's Wood MDF jig, here being used to assemble a set of South Eastern Finecast A4 frames. 

 

I found it worked well.

 

Despite all the above............

 

 

I've now gone back to using my ancient Jamieson jig (the others were just 'punctuations' in my frame building history).

 

I must have made over 500 locos using this, and it's never let me down. It's probably the simplest, and aren't they usually the best?

 

I use it even if the frames have screw-together spacers.