Wright writes.....

[grahame]

There you go Tony, a new set of numbers applied and the paintwork touched up. It just requires a bit of varnish wacking on and then a bit of muck on top.

 

That was quick and effective. Nice.

 

G

[Lecorbusier]

There you go Tony, a new set of numbers applied and the paintwork touched up. It just requires a bit of varnish wacking on and then a bit of muck on top.

 

The intention is to replace the Bachmann chassis, thus the Bachmann running board and splashers will be sandwiched between the Little engine chassis and whitemetal cab and boiler combo (the latter is made to screw on and off). The Little engines running board has a number of detail problems, not least of which is that it is too short, as is the Little engines chassis. The chassis will require and extension piece soldering to the frames.

 

Bachmann have got both the chassis and running board correct, however, the inclination of the cylinders and there placement are way out, as is the position of the front truck, both have been modified. The Bachmann running board has already had the middle section cutaway so that when the new chassis is fitted it will be visible between the too platforms and splashers. The little engines tender will probably be paired with the B7, with some modification, if that project comes to fruition. It may even be possible to pair the Bachmann chassis with the stunted little engines running board to produce a Q4.

Given the level of magnification the quality and subtlety of the weathering is extraordinary. thanks for sharing.

[micklner]

Andrew

 

Beautiful work, how did you do the rivets  ? Is this a Little Engines body or modified Bachmann?

Edited September 19, 2018 by micklner

[Headstock]

Indeed, there are some super examples of fine scenic with scratch/kit built rolling stock layouts.

 

But I'm not so sure that RTR, or more pertantly RTP, is not having an affect on layout building. These days I seem to see an increasing number of layouts with almost nothing but resin RTP buildings or festooned with Metcalfe card kits simply assembled and not even detailed or individualised. Some don't even colour or disguise those horrid white exposed card corners.

 

G

 

Thanks Grahame,

 

I should have clariffied that as 'much of a posative effect'.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Headstock

[Headstock]

Andrew

 

Beautiful work, how did you do the rivets  ? Is this a Little Engines body or modified Bachmann?

 

Morning Mick,

 

A quick reply as I must soon depart. it's the Little engines cab and boiler, though both have had their proportions modified. The rivets are from the archers range.

[micklner]

Morning Mick,

 

A quick reply as I must soon depart. it's the Little engines cab and boiler, though both have had their proportions modified. The rivets are from the archers range.

 

Thanks , you done well to hide the transfer backing on the Archers so well,  as I find the backing can be quite noticeable when painted on occasions.

[Headstock]

Thanks , you done well to hide the transfer backing on the Archers so well,  as I find the backing can be quite noticeable when painted on occasions.

 

I'll get back to you on that one Mick, as I seem to be doing somethings that are working in that respect.

[Atso]

What a remarkable project and locomotive, are you related to Edward Thompson?

 

Thank you Andrew. I'm really surprised that such a Heath Robinson effort works at all, let alone run that slowly! Below is the 3D printed body it was intended for.

 

 

Unfortunately, I made a mistake and ordered the wrong set of Isinglass drawings. As a result, the locomotive I've designed and printed is one of the batch the LNER built for work up north and isn't suitable for my chosen model, 5007, which worked out of Kings Cross. I'll have to get the correct drawings when funds allow but I'm hoping that somebody, who I know is interested in a 'northern' A5 might be interested in taking it off my hands and therefore providing me with the funds to order the correct drawings and purchase another print.

 

The tie in a little with your O4 posts, I accidentally removed the rivets on the frames under the smokebox (which I presume attached the cylinder block to the frames on the prototype). I used Archers rivet transfers to reinstate these using a coat of gloss varnish before and after applying the transfers (decals? Which term is correct?) before applying a light coat of primer to seal everything back in.

 

As to your question - humph! 

Edited September 19, 2018 by Atso

[grahame]

. . . .

I'd think one would be daft to attempt to model, say, those Cargo Waggons from scratch (I assume they're RTR-based?). Or any of the diesel locos shown, such is their excellence as starting points. And, in my view, herein lies the big difference between more modern RTR models and those which I choose to recreate, namely steam-outline ECML. . . .

 

Unfortunately, there's a dearth of RTR electric traction stock (that oft forgotten, but very long lived since the late 1800s, genre and still going strong) particularly in N/2mm and also of multiple units. There does seem to be a preponderance of loco centric thinking and modelling in the hobby and a fixation on either steam or diesel.

 

G

[Re6/6]

 

To finish; it looks like you've exploited the time saved by not having to make locos and stock to create that wonderful scenic work. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Tony, that's very kind of you to say so. I learned most of my scenic methods from Gordon and Maggie Gravett. I enjoy scenics a bit more than building a loco kit!

 

The Cargowaggons are from Heljan. Here's another picture, more 'old school' this time! Represented is the 'Dawlish Donkey' which actually ran along the sea wall for a season back in around 2004. The 14xx was built by Tim Maddocks (CK on here).

 

Ctsy Model Rail and Chris Nevard

 

Apropos nothing in particular, I thought that these may be of interest as something a bit more 'rural' back in the 50s.  Hope that this isn't OT.

Ctsy Andy York

 

Ctsy Andy York

[Niels]

I've never been able to put my finger on why, but I love the look of the A2/2 locos.

A2/2 were best looking UK Pacific for my eyes but I think it is the bigger than usual distance between boggie and drivers.

It suggests race,class whatever.

Just like the Belgian class 12 Atlantic:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNCB_Type_12

[Barry Ten]

 

 

Ctsy Andy York

NH4b.jpg

 

 

When you brought that little diorama with the halt to one of the Taunton meetings, John, I thought it was best bit of scenic modelling I'd ever seen,

certainly in terms of dense foliage.

 

Al

Edited September 19, 2018 by Barry Ten

[Chamby]

A2/2 were best looking UK Pacific for my eyes but I think it is the bigger than usual distance between boggie and drivers.

It suggests race,class whatever.

Just like the Belgian class 12 Atlantic:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNCB_Type_12

It is that same gap in front of the cylinders that is the problem, for me. I always visualise the extra driving wheel that was meant to be there!

 

Phil

[grahame]

It is that same gap in front of the cylinders that is the problem, for me. I always visualise the extra driving wheel that was meant to be there!

 

Yep, and the clashing gothic/nouveau styling on that Belgium bohemoth.

 

G

[Captain Kernow]

Though the bodywork on the latter RTR examples is generally all right, modern RTR steam-outline chassis leave a lot to be desired, at least in my experience. Anorexic valve gear, in many cases - Hornby's A3s, for instance - all out of proportion, lack of pulling-power and dodgy gear trains all militate against desirable performance and longevity.  

 

Whilst I believe that you can improve the appearance of current RTR steam chassis, perhaps by substituting brass outside brake pull rods on a pannier or finer guard irons etc., we are all still completely dependent on the design and quality control of the RTR producer when it comes to how well these chassis actually run.

 

I've said it before and I've not changed my mind on this - I'd be more than happy to pay more for a RTR loco, if I knew that the chassis was going to run silky smooth and give me the level of fine controllability that I require.

 

Sadly this was not the case a few years ago with a Bachmann 82XXX 2-6-2T. I weathered and detailed the body and had planned that this would be a 'quickie' additional loco to my roster when I was taking 'Engine Wood' to RailEx in Aylesbury. I had sufficient time, or so I thought, to complete the work.

 

As it turned out, the Bachmann chassis just wouldn't run smoothly or slowly enough, despite exhaustive running-in and various tweaks. In desperation I ended up modifying a Comet 76XXX chassis and putting that under the 82XXX and (after the usual blood, sweat and tears that I usually go through with an etched chassis kit) it ended up running the way I wanted it to.

 

This has now happened again. I bought one of the recent Hattons/DJM 14XX 0-4-2Ts. I think that the body on these locos is exquisite and I had intended that this would be the 'signature' loco on my new goods-only shunting layout 'Bethesda Sidings' (think 'Presteigne Goods with added Pecketts).

 

The first example I had from Hattons went back fairly quickly, as the running actually got worse, the more I ran the loco in.

 

The second one seemed to show promise but I delayed the running-in for a few months, while I got on with the layout. In the end, that started to run worse and after a particularly unsatisfactory session on the rolling road (running worse after the session than before), I decided that enough was enough and got the 'emergency' Perseverance chassis and Markits wheels out from the drawer.

 

After the disappointment with the RTR chassis, I'm now looking forward to getting the soldering iron out again and building this chassis!

 

 

 

 

 

 

With apologies to those who have already got tired of my ranting on the Hattons 14XX thread.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Captain Kernow

[PMP]

Interesting comments Tim, I’ve two Bachmann 82xxx’s and they run to my satisfaction, similar requirements to yourself. I too have played the 14xx game too with just one example and now have it running well, if you’re at S4um this weekend if I pop down I can bring it for the OO test track, it did take a bit of effort though. Whilst we’re talking RTR examples here, I’m guessing the skills Tim and I use to diagnose and problem shoot the poorer RTR items we’ve come across, have come from ‘old school’ experience, like kit chassis building.

[Barry Ten]

Other than a couple of obvious dogs which were returned to the shop and swapped for good runners, I haven't come across an obviously badly performing RTR steam loco since the two main manufacturers upped their games around 18 - 20 years ago - Bachmann with the Blue Riband range (late 90s?), and Hornby with everything since the Merchant Navies (2000 onward, I think). By which I mean that they'll run smoothly and quietly, but in fairness I'm not generally asking much of them in haulage terms, and certainly nothing like Tony's requirements.

 

What I have had is a few failures, but they're clustered around specific, well-publicised problem cases, which seem to afflict specific batches of models, rather than being systematic of a general weakness. Two of my three rebuilt Bulleid light pacifics have had split gears, and at least one of my T9s has had Mazak rot around the motor mounting. Both these faults have been well discussed on Rmweb and elsewhere. On the other hand, I've not had any equivalent failures in Bachmann steam, and (without being scientific) none of my other Hornby models, some of which date back to the early 2000s (Merchant Navy, Black 5, 8F, Duchesses, etc) seem to have any issues so far. More recently - say, last 10 - 12 years - I'm not seeing any failures in my Granges, Arthurs, M7s etc. I've also got a couple of A4s which seem to be good.

 

So I'm hoping that, rather than these models all being failure time-bombs, they'll keep on going as they have done, and the models that fail will be confined to the known problem cases. Fingers crossed.

 

Al

[Headstock]

Thanks , you done well to hide the transfer backing on the Archers so well,  as I find the backing can be quite noticeable when painted on occasions.

 

Evening Mick,

 

a couple of observations as regards Archers rivets. I cut much closer to the rivets than seems to be normal with many applications that I have seen. The primer (simoniz) that I am using, by chance is much more user friendly to the application of the rivets as it has a shine rather than being flat. In an emergency, I used a tin of Halfords primmer on the platform of an LNER toad D for my first try with Archers rivets, . The results were poor and as you described. With hese 'dusty' primers I would definitely apply a gloss varnish to the areas that I wanted to add the rivets too. In every example that I have looked at on RM web, applying the transfers to a matt primmer coat has resulted in a visible carrier film after more coats have been added over the top. I also use Revel Decalsoft, this makes the carrier film adhere more, it is grate for wrapping lettering around complicated protrusions on wagons for example. Finally, the coat that I apply the transfers too is relatively light, so that I have more freedom with the application of top coats. I hope that this is all of some help.

[micklner]

Evening Mick,

 

a couple of observations as regards Archers rivets. I cut much closer to the rivets than seems to be normal with many applications that I have seen. The primer (simoniz) that I am using, by chance is much more user friendly to the application of the rivets as it has a shine rather than being flat. In an emergency, I used a tin of Halfords primmer on the platform of an LNER toad D for my first try with Archers rivets, . The results were poor and as you described. With hese 'dusty' primers I would definitely apply a gloss varnish to the areas that I wanted to add the rivets too. In every example that I have looked at on RM web, applying the transfers to a matt primmer coat has resulted in a visible carrier film after more coats have been added over the top. I also use Revel Decalsoft, this makes the carrier film adhere more, it is grate for wrapping lettering around complicated protrusions on wagons for example. Finally, the coat that I apply the transfers too is relatively light, so that I have more freedom with the application of top coats. I hope that this is all of some help.

 

Hi Andrew,

 

The primer idea I will try, as I normally use Halfords sprays. As to cutting the problem is the backing even though its "thick" it breaks very easily !!  I use Microso,l so the Revell version is another one for the future too.

 

Many thanks

 

Mick

[PMP]

These are archers rivet transfers. The base colour is Halfords black gloss acrylic paint on a Bachmann OO body. I use Microsol and Microset decal setting solutions. Use Microsol on varying contours to get decals to soften and stretch form across awkward shapes. Once dry if there’s any ‘silvering’ use a pin to prick the silver areas and re cover with Microsol, let it air dry naturally. I’ve applied these rivets to matt surfaces using this technique with no film showing, after the subsequent application of a paint top coat. I cut the film very close to the rivet too using a scalpel.

 

Edit edited pic

Edited September 19, 2018 by PMP

[Headstock]

Other than a couple of obvious dogs which were returned to the shop and swapped for good runners, I haven't come across an obviously badly performing RTR steam loco since the two main manufacturers upped their games around 18 - 20 years ago - Bachmann with the Blue Riband range (late 90s?), and Hornby with everything since the Merchant Navies (2000 onward, I think). By which I mean that they'll run smoothly and quietly, but in fairness I'm not generally asking much of them in haulage terms, and certainly nothing like Tony's requirements.

 

What I have had is a few failures, but they're clustered around specific, well-publicised problem cases, which seem to afflict specific batches of models, rather than being systematic of a general weakness. Two of my three rebuilt Bulleid light pacifics have had split gears, and at least one of my T9s has had Mazak rot around the motor mounting. Both these faults have been well discussed on Rmweb and elsewhere. On the other hand, I've not had any equivalent failures in Bachmann steam, and (without being scientific) none of my other Hornby models, some of which date back to the early 2000s (Merchant Navy, Black 5, 8F, Duchesses, etc) seem to have any issues so far. More recently - say, last 10 - 12 years - I'm not seeing any failures in my Granges, Arthurs, M7s etc. I've also got a couple of A4s which seem to be good.

 

So I'm hoping that, rather than these models all being failure time-bombs, they'll keep on going as they have done, and the models that fail will be confined to the known problem cases. Fingers crossed.

 

Al

 

The main issue that I have encountered with even the best performing RTR chassis is too much slop. As a result there is a massive amount of throw over on curves at both the buffer and cab end of the loco, the valve gear is easily broken. The life time of the locomotive must be shortened by the extra wear as they generally wobble down the line like a jelly.

 

If you like valve gear on your locomotives, then this is esthetically the weakest point on RTR chassis. Very few have valve gear that is of the same quality of the body moulding. I have always found it odd that valve gear lags so far behind such features as backhead detail, yet it is excepted without a seconds thought. Very simple basics such as general proportions seem to be stuck back in the 1980s. Putting more emphasis on backhead detail over better valve gear seems to me a classic example of cart before horse.

[Headstock]

Hi Andrew,

 

The primer idea I will try, as I normally use Halfords sprays. As to cutting the problem is the backing even though its "thick" it breaks very easily !!  I use Microso,l so the Revell version is another one for the future too.

 

Many thanks

 

Mick

 

I think that any softener will do the job. Like any transfer, the application to a shiny surface will improve the finish one hundred percent. I agree, they do break very easily, however they do join up again without too much trouble

Edited September 19, 2018 by Headstock

[brack]

For archer's rivet decals I coat the area with Johnson's klear first, put rivets on one side of the model then gently brush another coat of klear over the rivets.

 

This was learned through experience after I did lots of very fiddly rivets, let the decals dry and then held the model to do the other side to discover my painstakingly applied rivets moving where I held the model...

 

Also I find I lose enthusiasm for applying transfers after a whole side or end.

[micklner]

These are archers rivet transfers. The base colour is Halfords black gloss acrylic paint on a Bachmann OO body. I use Microsol and Microset decal setting solutions. Use Microsol on varying contours to get decals to soften and stretch form across awkward shapes. Once dry if there’s any ‘silvering’ use a pin to prick the silver areas and re cover with Microsol, let it air dry naturally. I’ve applied these rivets to matt surfaces using this technique with no film showing, after the subsequent application of a paint top coat. I cut the film very close to the rivet too using a scalpel.

9FA1DFF0-A7A8-4B5D-8186-0747D7E7B573.jpeg

 

Edit edited pic

 

The top line of rivets show the problem well, as it appears you can still see the backing sheet through the paint.

[PMP]

The top line of rivets show the problem well, as it appears you can still see the backing sheet through the paint.

This is the undercoat and the image was taken to highlight the rivets and the film for Tom Foster a couple of years back. Once the topcoat is on, the film disappears see below

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by PMP