Wright writes.....

[Mallard60022]

Now then chaps, I think we may be getting quite far away from just looking at what Tony has so kindly presented to us and then engaging in friendly discussion about modelling.  I'm far more happy to admire his pics, chat about things modelling and not get into that irritating situation of 'disagreement' which inevitably ends with Andy or another 'Mod' having to 'discipline'  us and I don't like discipline as he (Andy) knows.........................

To be honest, I couldn't care less if Thomson had a bald head and was a vegan and Gresley wore long-johns whilst visiting loco works. So, for my brain's sake,  can we drop that very old chestnut please and get on with thoughts about models and how to get them looking authentic which is what I so need before I get so old I can't use my hands. Cheers.

Phil @ 36E (who, with no apologies, likes any steam locomotive - even some 'foreign ones' )

[LNER4479]

Well said (quacked) that man!

 

By way of an emergency modelling transfusion I offer this picture to the lions:

 

Here is the front cover of a well known book (well, it's well known to me at least!)

 

My picture is from a while ago now and I ought to re-take it but hopefully you can see what I'm aiming at.

 

[Mallard60022]

Wow, love that track-work to the right of the green loco (sorry, I might like it but don't know what it is......); transfusion inbibed.

Quack (ouch, my belly is frozen to the path......)

[t-b-g]

I think it's also true that footplatemen often (not invariably) had a preference for their 'own' locos, and a degree of distaste for anything 'foreign', even if it was newer and better than what they already had. They could be just as biased as mere enthusiasts. In life generally there is a strong constituency that likes what it is used to and deplores change. (As anyone who has ever had to manage change will be aware.)

 

 

I agree 100%. I can understand it to some degree. If you have spent many years with particular locos, learning just how to get the best out them and developing certain driving techniques, then you have the taken away and replaced by others, perhaps of a quite different type, there was often some resistance. You are quite right, many folk just don't embrace change, whether it be for the better or not!

 

I enjoy reading the memoires of loco crews and they don't seem to have been too backwards about mentioning the shortcomings of locos, so I don't think that they had their rose tinted spectacles on as much as we enthusiasts.

 

In relation to the appearance of a particular loco at a particular date, I would think that the historian/enthusiast is the person to go to. But if you want to know how a loco performed on a train, then the footplatemen are the only people who can tell you what they were really like. They were, after all, the only people there! What else do we have to base our opinions on? Timings and coal consumption figures and not much else.

Edited January 22, 2013 by t-b-g

[t-b-g]

Wow, love that track-work to the right of the green loco (sorry, I might like it but don't know what it is......); transfusion inbibed.

Quack (ouch, my belly is frozen to the path......)

 

It is one of those aforesaid above mentioned B17s. Nice pic and certainly looks like what it is supposed to be.

[LNER4479]

Mallard60022, on 22 Jan 2013 - 10:49, said:

Wow, love that track-work to the right of the green loco (sorry, I might like it but don't know what it is......); transfusion inbibed.

Quack (ouch, my belly is frozen to the path......)

 

It is one of those aforesaid above mentioned B17s. Nice pic and certainly looks like what it is supposed to be.

 

Thanks guys

 

It's a bit of a mongrel actually. Cornard whitemetal body, sat on a Jamieson chassis towing a Mainline (ex-B1) tender, a case of using up some odds and sods which all happened to match! The day I affixed the last item of lettering and stood back to admire it, Hornby announced the r-t-r version

 

When I re-do this shot, it will be 2558 'Tracery' as per the Hepburn original picture   B17's weren't actually that common at Grantham in the 1930's so not really...ahem...prototypical(!)

Edited January 22, 2013 by LNER4479

[t-b-g]

Thanks guys

 

It's a bit of a mongrel actually. Cornard whitemetal body, sat on a Jamieseon chassis towing a Mainline (ex-B1) tender, a case of using up some odds and sods which all happened to match! The day I affixed the last item of lettering and stood back to admire it, Hornby announced the r-t-r version

 

When I re-do this shot, it will be 2558 'Tracery' as per the Hepburn original picture   B17's weren't actually that common at Grantham in the 1930's so not really...ahem...prototypical(!)

 

After some of what has been said about the B17s I have just been re-reading the relevant sections in the RCTS "bible". There is quite a lot in there about the design process and about some of the work they did. Apparently Thompson tested one against a B2 (his rebuild to a two cylinder loco) and the B17 was more powerful and economical than his rebuild, so he cut short his rebuilding program. I always thought GWR stood for Gresley Was Right!

 

I bet you get far more satisfaction from your "mongrel" than you do from a RTR loco. I hope you do anyway. Anybody who can turn a Cornard loco body into a good looking loco should savour the experience!

Edited January 23, 2013 by t-b-g

[60526]

I've read the BRM review of the new Hornby B17, we're any photos taken of the front of the GE tender? I wouldn't mind seeing the detail.

[Andy Y]

 

Just noticed a couple of comments about Graham Nicholas' B17 on Wright Writes. Here are a couple more pictures of it. It's worth mentioning that it might well be seen on Grantham in the forthcoming Annual.

 

 

[Andy Y]

I've read the BRM review of the new Hornby B17, we're any photos taken of the front of the GE tender? I wouldn't mind seeing the detail.

TW rightly suggests there should be a 'please' in there but he has duly obliged.

 

[LNER4479]

 

 

Just noticed a couple of comments about Graham Nicholas' B17 on Wright Writes. Here are a couple more pictures of it. It's worth mentioning that it might well be seen on Grantham in the forthcoming Annual.

 

Graham Nicholas B17 01.jpg

 

Graham Nicholas B17 02.jpg

 

Oh wow - thanks guys! First pic a lovely reminder of a temporary LNER incursion at Little Bytham. That's quite made my evening

[Mallard60022]

Just look at the quality of fittings and detail on that tender; wow, how far we have come from the days of the original B12.

P

[60526]

"TW rightly suggest there should be a 'please' in there but he has duly obliged."

 

To be politically correct you are wright. I'll say thank you when I see him next. But, a straight on end view would also be nice, please, not all the detail is sown in the photo. As much as this Hornby model is extremely good and I should really be buying one, I'm one of those who still likes modifying RTR locos, so this photo will help in finishing off a Dave Alexander GE tender, which is more akin to a B12 than a B17. All the best.

 

[gr.king]

Any good? May your blooms never wilt......

 

[60526]

Excellent Graeme, thank you very much. I think that TW will get that one. At least you can read through me getting my merds wixed up or at least a slip of the keyboard, 'sown in the photo'? and 'correct you are wright'?, I don't know what it is coming to. I must have been taking some notice of Mr Cameron being honest about a EU referendum and believing him. Anyhow I'm still taking the pills because I've got all the bits for your B1 to O1 conversion, but that's after the A2 to 60500 conversion, much more fun. Thanks again and see you at Nottingham.

[Mallard60022]

60625 - the dilsexia probelm i snot jsut yourse I can ass ure your. I thin kit is a case of sponding too much time laughing  yelling at siad camera on and then losing the will to live. Looking forward to seeing some pics of the A2 conversion.........

However, back to reality, Mr King's pics are really useful and I don't even need to see a B17 tender front

While I'm swimming around this pond in which such knowledgeable folk are present (especially those with a certain bent for the LNER system) can I ask please if anyone has a link to some pics/info for an LNER D7 52' CCT (bogie) or am I going to have to get yet another set of Isinglass drawings (if they have them)? The reason is that I found a Chivers Kit for this hiding in a box the other day and there ain't much info with it.

Quack.

[jwealleans]

You mean one of these?

 

 

Historic Carriage Drawings Vol 3 (the yellow one) , towards the back.

Edited October 17, 2018 by jwealleans

[Mallard60022]

Oh wow and thanks JW. I thought I'd seen this on one of your posts some years back. Brilliant!

Everyone, here is a talented modeller - he has turned this (and some bits hidden under the main etch;

into the great looking van shown above.

The etches are really quite thin too so what a job......

JW, do you mean the Tatlow Vol 3  'cos if so I can't find the pic.

OK, I'll have to try getting back into LNER mode soon.

P

Edited January 25, 2013 by Mallard60022

[Allegheny1600]

OK, I'll have to try getting back into LNER mode soon.

P

Well, this thread is certainly helping me back towards LNER!

It's only been 25+ years since I was last into it in a big way!

Cheers,

John E.

[coachmann]

Looking at that etched kit, I wouldnt fancy tackling some of those fold lines, nevertheless, I always find such vans very attractive. Sadly they are usually less than coach width and so are too narrow to take extruded coach roofs.

Edited January 25, 2013 by coachmann

[jwealleans]

Beg pardon, Phil, I meant Volume 1.  This one for the avoidance of doubt.  Please ignore the ludicrous prices quoted.

 

Coach - it's a number of years since I built it, but it can't have been too problematic as I seem to recall it went together in a couple of evenings.  The roofs are a weak point of these kits as the fold up box construction make sit impossible to roll up and solder a brass one.  The best solution I've seen (on one I bought part built) was a subroof and plastic formers with a twenty thou plastikard outer roof formed over it. 

Edited January 25, 2013 by jwealleans

[Talltim]

I may have missed it, but is there any reason Tony doesn't post himself? The quotes make it a bit confusing to me.

[Andy Y]

I may have missed it, but is there any reason Tony doesn't post himself? The quotes make it a bit confusing to me.

Although Tony's taking a keen interest in certain content on the site he has personal reasons for preferring me to post information on his behalf at present. Not everyone finds the complexities of the software easy to navigate and tackle; although Tony would claim to be a technophobe he's certainly mastered email communications. Some of that is true not just for some contributors but undoubtedly a number of the people who just enjoy reading the site (of which there are often at least as many 'guests' reading as there members at most times).

 

I try to make it clear through the quotes what is Tony's content and anything I may add; hopefully it's clearly presented as such.

[Talltim]

It is possible to work out who is saying what, but normally, when reading a thread through from scratch I ignore the quoted sections as I will already have read them in the original posts. I'm sure I'll live!

The other option is create an account for Tony and post for him, but it then wouldn't be obvious that you were doing so, so the quoting method is probably the better one.

[Fenman]

the ES 1, only Two built on a line 1 mile long. I agree it has it own look, nothing like as elegant as a Steam Loco though.

 

With my avatar you might expect me to rush to the defence of the ES1... While arguing aesthetics is always tricky, the ES1 strikes me as a surprisingly elegant design for what is an overwhelmingly functional machine, which also turned out to be perfect in the job for which it was designed.

 

They were derived from an original design by General Electric of the US (as were their cousins used on the railways of many countries) but the NER variant always looks to me to be the most elegant of the steeplecab/camelback designs.

 

As to whether they were as elegant as a steam loco I'd suggest it depends which steamer you were comparing it to: I can think of some lumpen dogs, as well as some glorious greyhounds. Vincent Raven's own Pacific never looks particularly elegant to me.

 

I keep putting ES1s into the annual wishlists but more in hope than expectation. Judith Edge is obviously the answer!

 

Paul

 

 

 

 

Edited to correct my own grammatical stupidity

Edited January 25, 2013 by Fenman