Wright writes.....

[westerner]

Just one last comment on loco building etc (I doubt it will be) I sometimes think that it is forgotten that those who buy RTR locos etc even if run as straight out of the box, tend to run them on layouts they have BUILT, they have laid the track, they have built the scenery, they have decided where the buildings will go (either kit built or RTP). I have said before that model railways are about more than just the locos. It is about operation and running in a railway like manner or some might argue or not. It is their choice and I for one am glad that our hobby is such a wide church.

Remember the whole layout involves modelling not just the stock.

Edited November 10, 2014 by westerner

[Pebbles]

Long may the memory of Peter Denny remain!

[johnarcher]

Just one last comment on loco building etc (I doubt it will be) I sometimes think that it is forgotten that those who buy RTR locos etc even if run as straight out of the box, tend to run them on layouts they have BUILT, they have laid the track, they have built the scenery, they have decided where the buildings will go (either kit built or RTP). I have said before that model railways are about more than just the locos. It is about operation and running in a railway like manner or some might argue or not. It is their choice and I for one am glad that our hobby is such a wide church.

Remember the whole layout involves modelling not just the stock.

As you say a  wide church. You can decide it's all about operation (with elements that may often be bought, laid or arranged rather than made), I have little interest in operation, I'm happy just to watch a model I've made run through a landscape I've made, it's the making and the overall picture that matter.

We can each prefer our own priorities within that broad church, and long may all approaches prosper. 

 

re #2985 - I agree about the width, nothing, I feel, makes a railway look so good as that sort of spacious setting. I remember Petherick convincing me of that 30 years or so ago.

Edited November 11, 2014 by johnarcher

[queensquare]

Hi Tony, you have made great progress since our visit back in August. The scenics on the road and embankment look superb and, along with the wealth of smaller details now being added such as the telegraph poles, running in boards etc, are really starting to pull the whole scene together.

Can I, however, make one plea and that is when the pub which sits opposite the station is built could it be made removable- this is a great spot for getting your nose down at track level and watching the trains roar toward the station. 

Also, can I say I'm pleased your not posting so often has not really materialised. I often wonder if I post too much myself to the detriment of my progress but actually, when I look back over my layout threads they are like a diary of progress and often I look to complete a particular project in order to post about it which rather perversely encourages me to get more done. I do try and restrict myself to my own threads and just a handful of others, my favourites being ones like this which are a narrative of progress with the odd curved ball thrown in from time to time.

 

Jerry

[landscapes]

I used to envy your length but now I envy your width.....

post-18225-0-69185200-1415565063_thumb.jpg

Hi Tony

 

That looks fantastic, what additional photo opportunities that give you.

 

Please keep the LB photos coming.

 

Best Regards

 

David

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony, you have made great progress since our visit back in August. The scenics on the road and embankment look superb and, along with the wealth of smaller details now being added such as the telegraph poles, running in boards etc, are really starting to pull the whole scene together.

Can I, however, make one plea and that is when the pub which sits opposite the station is built could it be made removable- this is a great spot for getting your nose down at track level and watching the trains roar toward the station. 

Also, can I say I'm pleased your not posting so often has not really materialised. I often wonder if I post too much myself to the detriment of my progress but actually, when I look back over my layout threads they are like a diary of progress and often I look to complete a particular project in order to post about it which rather perversely encourages me to get more done. I do try and restrict myself to my own threads and just a handful of others, my favourites being ones like this which are a narrative of progress with the odd curved ball thrown in from time to time.

 

Jerry

Thanks Jerry,

 

May I make two comments, please, in response?

 

I'd like to change the comment 'you have made great progress' to 'your group has made great progress', because what you've made mention of in the main, other than the telegraph poles and some scenic dressing, is the work of Gilbert Barnatt, Rob Davey, Richard Wilson and Ian Wilson. Though this might seem tedious, I've no wish to 'bask in the reflected light' of what others have done. 

 

And, the pub will be removable, if for no other reason than its own safety. As a commission from Bob Dawson it will be superb, and I don't want it to be wiped out by too many fat bellies!

[BlackRat]

Blast I've just realised I'm a cheque book dentist, plumber, electrician, pharmacist, tailor, barber, mechanic, carpenter, carpet fitter, builder, chef and cobbler (s)!

[Tony Wright]

Just one last comment on loco building etc (I doubt it will be) I sometimes think that it is forgotten that those who buy RTR locos etc even if run as straight out of the box, tend to run them on layouts they have BUILT, they have laid the track, they have built the scenery, they have decided where the buildings will go (either kit built or RTP). I have said before that model railways are about more than just the locos. It is about operation and running in a railway like manner or some might argue or not. It is their choice and I for one am glad that our hobby is such a wide church.

Remember the whole layout involves modelling not just the stock.

Alan,

 

Probably one of the wisest posts anyone has ever contributed to this thread. 

 

I particularly like the 'they have BUILT' comment. Something personal, a creation of their own.  

 

Perhaps you're too modest to mention your RTR modifications. Having photographed some of them on Little Bytham (despite their being geographically complete opposites), I can state with impartiality that they're some of the most convincing models (whatever their origins) I've ever seen. And they're YOUR work. 

[CUTLER2579]

What ! no room for the "Willoughby Arms" up by the Goods Shed. Sacrilege!!

[westerner]

Tony, you're too kind. But I do enjoy the weathering etc and obviously they are my work. I also enjoyed working out a timetable for Wencombe. Howevr those who do not weather and run trains to please themselves are OK by me. If they didn't buy RTR stock there would be less RTR for me to weather etc. Good luck to them.

Edited November 12, 2014 by westerner

[Tony Wright]

What ! no room for the "Willoughby Arms" up by the Goods Shed. Sacrilege!!

But the Willoughby will be there Derek, only it won't be permanently fixed-down.

 

The plan is to form a rebate in the baseboard forming the pub's 'footprint', into which it will sit (hiding any nasty shadows at the base as well). That way, if it does get knocked by a tummy, it should just be moved, not broken; especially as the plan is to have a thin sheet of Perspex in front of it. And, it'll be useful for photographic purposes to have it removable. Of course, its more impressive side (its front) faces westwards, and thus away from the immediate view. From the archival pictures we have, that has changed little since 1958 (other than the adjacent water tank having been demolished - that's to be built as well), but it would appear the back has been substantially altered during the intervening years. So, it'll be a fair bit of guesswork in that regard, but we'll have to live with it. 

Edited November 12, 2014 by Tony Wright

[dibateg]

I'm glad the pub will be included Tony, that's good news. Would I be right in guessing that other properties that currently exist in Station Road are too new to be included?

Regards

Tony

[copleyhill007]

Now there's an interesting one. Just think if Tony W's house was included, inside it could be a T gauge layout of Little Bytham!!!

 

Dave W

[Tony Wright]

In answer to a question......

 

Other than the Willoughby, apart from a pair of ex-railway semi-detached houses, a couple of bungalows, Ellis and Everard's mill and two wooden buildings, there was nothing in the way of structures in Station Road (other than the railway property). These will all be built in due course.

 

 

 

 

Yesterday, a friend came for tuition in model railway photography. He had a substantial Canon camera (a complete mystery to a Nikon man), and between us we took several pictures. He brought along some of his stock in the form of a Hornby King Arthur and some kit-built coaches. I took the three pictures above with the DF. He might post his eventually. The Royal Mail vehicles were built by Marc Models from Mike Radford's own kits and looked splendid. The other rake was built from Comet kits (I think) by Ian Willetts and painted by Larry Goddard. These were amongst the most beautiful carriages I've ever seen. Whether they were paid for by cheque or not, so what? They were a joy to behold and ran perfectly.

 

You might note in the first picture the beginnings of the post and wire fencing on the west side. More later........................

Edited November 14, 2014 by Tony Wright

[Richard_A]

This is one incredible layout and it keeps me thinking about finishing a comet chass for the airfix br mogul but thevalve gear looks all the more frightening every time i get the kit back out, the reason it gets me thinking is i have a massive weakness for the great central around the period you model and now i have more books to gaze over, dreaming up a layout based on the line the temptation is growing much stronger.

[coachmann]

I rarely get to see coaches I painted for others with glazing and seating so I am pleased to see the fully panelled Maunsells on your layout Tony. Most likely they were built from BSL aluminium kits by Lawrence Scale Models and the rake would have been built up over a period of time.

[salmonpastures]

In answer to a question......

 

Arthur 01.jpg

 

Arthur 02.jpg

 

Arthur 03.jpg

 

The other rake was built from Comet kits (I think) by Ian Willetts and painted by Larry Goddard. These were amongst the most beautiful carriages I've ever seen. Whether they were paid for by cheque or not, so what? They were a joy to behold and ran perfectly.

 

Tony,

Whilst savouring the latest pictures of yet more lovely visiting stock gracing LB I got to pondering the recurring theme of cheque-book modelling.

If it makes people happy and interested in the hobby and purchasing lots and lots then I am all for it.

It has also dawned on me that some of us are perhaps VERY fortunate to be able to do everything for themselves which if nothing else provides a pretty constant standard.

 

Don't get me wrong some bits I love doing,,, other bits I'd be more than happy to wave the cheque book at but that is not going to happen as it is not a realistic solution to the problem.

 

There are also very obvious savings being self contained within the hobby,,, that thought offered me the opportunity to approach the "budget controller" with quite a valid argument as to why an LNER green liveried D11 on special offer at a bargain £145 was not to be missed,,, and anyway just consider how much I have saved over the years by doing it all myself.

The response was pretty predictable and along the lines of "I dread to think how much you would have spent if you had to pay others to help you with your hobby, it's bad enough as it is,,, and we have the cat and dog's annual MOT to come before Xmas"

 

Ah well I suppose I could trawl through the "kit's to do" shelf and see if Marne outweighs  one of the next 40 years projects!!!! [i should be so lucky.]

Perhaps those who have fat wads would love to be able to do it all themselves,,, the same as those who have thin or pensioned wads have to be pragmatic and do most of it themselves and I also suppose the vast majority are somewhere in between.

 

The others mans Doncaster green is always greener I suppose but I bet most of us get an enormous buzz out of the hobby,,, and I know I get an enormous amount of satisfaction creating my own little world to my own standard.

And that standard has risen considerably since forums such as this became available to anyone who has a computer,,,, but I much prefer modelling to foruming.

 

SAD

[gwrrob]

 

 

Yesterday, a friend came for tuition in model railway photography. He had a substantial Canon camera (a complete mystery to a Nikon man), and between us we took several pictures. He brought along some of his stock in the form of a Hornby King Arthur and some kit-built coaches. I took the three pictures above with the DF. He might post his eventually. The Royal Mail vehicles were built by Marc Models from Mike Radford's own kits and looked splendid. The other rake was built from Comet kits (I think) by Ian Willetts and painted by Larry Goddard. These were amongst the most beautiful carriages I've ever seen. Whether they were paid for by cheque or not, so what? They were a joy to behold and ran perfectly.

 

You might note in the first picture the beginnings of the post and wire fencing on the west side. More later........................

 

 

High praise indeed Tony and I agree they look wonderful coaches.It's great news that Comet are to continue under new owners

[Tony Wright]

I rarely get to see coaches I painted for others with glazing and seating so I am pleased to see the fully panelled Maunsells on your layout Tony. Most likely they were built from BSL aluminium kits by Lawrence Scale Models and the rake would have been built up over a period of time.

Thanks Larry,

 

I'm sure the carriages post-date Derek's death by some considerable time; they definitely have your trademark signature and date (2005?) and a Willett's plate, but they could be from BSL/Phoenix kits. 

[coachmann]

Thanks Larry,

 

I'm sure the carriages post-date Derek's death by some considerable time; they definitely have your trademark signature and date (2005?) and a Willett's plate, but they could be from BSL/Phoenix kits. 

Interesting. Ian Willetts had built coaches etc for Lawrence Scale for many years and so the continuity was seamless after Derek Lawrence died and Ian set up his own company. I was distancing myself from painting & lining at the time but continued painting for Ian for a while until he was fully established. So these coaches are from that era then. Maybe the Malachite TPO's were painted here too?

[Tony Wright]

Having spent a large proportion of the last few days at the Spalding show and entertaining splendid friends, one might have thought practical work on Little Bytham would take a back seat. Not at all, because the industrious Rob Davey has been up for a few days and rather left to his own devices erecting fencing. This is mostly of the post (wooden) and wire variety. Ratio GWR-type posts were used because they most nearly matched the prototype pictures. 

 

 

I made a simple brass jig for drilling through the holes for the wires. There are indicating lines on the posts for where the wires should be glued, but that seemed a rather insecure way of fixing them. Were they stapled to the posts on the real thing, and not passed through? Certainly, the posts are not concrete (one or two still survive on site) and a few have holes in them, but most are rotted away. 

 

 

I made another simple jig for spacing the posts, and here Rob is using it to drill the holes for fixing. 

 

 

Whether or not we'll actually thread the wires through is a moot point, because at a distance they're all but invisible. On the prototype pictures this is also the case. To us they look convincing enough as this A2/3 powers northwards through the station on a Kings Cross-Newcastle express. The posts stop at this point, right at the baseboard edge. Though this is on the far side, visitors occasionally crawl through, and the posts' future safety might be an issue, especially if they subsequently become wired-up. Platform lamps are also appearing. 

 

On another thread, I've mentioned the value of constructive criticism, and I'm applying it (I hope) to this picture. The first and third carriages in this train are 'ancient' conversions of RTR Mk.1s using PC pre-printed sides. Though I've applied the door furniture, the leading BCK has no footboards and the ride height of the third car over its rear bogie is way out. Wear in the bogie's bearings is the reason for this, and they'll be replaced (and the boards will be added). Either that or both cars will be retired and replaced with Bachmann Mk.1s. In fairness, both vehicles are of some age and have run many miles, but the unforgiving photograph has highlighted their shortcomings (yet nobody commented using just the naked eye). 

 

 

This time 52A's 60002 is on the same train. On close examination, the front buffers on this modified Bachmann A4 are too low (their centres should be near the platform height). It does have the flange at the base of its tender though (see Peterborough North). Constructive criticism?

 

 

Another touch of constructive criticism could be levelled at this train as well. The leading carriage is a Mk.1 BSO, never available RTR. This is another ancient conversion of an RTR Mk.1 using Comet sides. In my rush and indolence, I neglected to add any door furniture. I don't think I've got the bodyside profile dead right, either. But, in its train, rushing by, nobody notices. Once more, the totally analytical and dispassionate 'eye' of the camera has shown up my poor modelling. 

 

I really took the picture to include the new posts at the left-hand side, alongside the new Heljan BRC&W Co. Type 2. 

 

 

There's probably less wrong in this picture, as a B12/3 follows BONGRACE's express with a Grantham-Peterborough stopper. I made this from a Coopercraft kit some years ago and it makes an interesting (if 'unfair') comparison with the PDK one I've just finished. The latter is in a different league, but it'll be interesting to have one B12 going over the top of another. 

 

61553's train is made up of kits and modified RTR. Most BR consist books of the period suggest gangwayed stock should be rostered, but pictures abound of trains using non-gangwayed vehicles. 

 

Once more, the fence posts just add that touch. 

 

 

 

I've not been completely idle, and have added to the scenic work on Station Road. The grass verges are still in need of a 'shave', but I'm reasonably happy with the effect so far, even though the control panel does obtrude. 

 

Some little time ago, there were favourable comments about the length and width of LB. I state again, without the amount of 'nothingness' and distance given by my 32' x 12', we would not have contemplated making this model, 'selective compression' or not. 

 

 

More of my scenic work around the Station Master's house. There is still much to do, but the layout is really coming together now.

 

Other than the top of the signal and telegraph pole you'd struggle to class this as 'railway modelling'. Ian Wilson's mock-up of the house gives a sense of scale, but there's still a lot of work to do on those trees.

 

My thanks to Rob Davey for all his work last week and for the gracious comments from all my guests and friends.

[Tony Wright]

 

Along with the scenic work, I've also just started the construction of some Mailcoach clear-plastic-sided carriages. Painting these is fun!

 

I'll subsequently be writing up a report in BRM. 

[St Enodoc]

Mailcoach carriages 01.jpg

 

Along with the scenic work, I've also just started the construction of some Mailcoach clear-plastic-sided carriages. Painting these is fun!

 

I'll subsequently be writing up a report in BRM. 

I'll look forward to that - I've got two Mailcoach GWR toplight full brakes waiting to be built but the painting has put me off so far. Our mutual friend Bob P in Stafford has one in chocolate and cream, and one of my modelling friends in Adelaide has another. The results are worth the effort.

[coachmann]

I like these pictures very much particularly the last three showing the road. The sense of distance is terrific and it would be neat to show the road and have a train passing on the skyline. At eye level,  I'll bet one can really bury oneself in this layout and be back in the early 1960's of ones memory.

 

The bloke on the amusing Freeview TV promo says; "What am I missing........What am I not seeing....!", and so it is thanks to your comments that my eyes were led to see there were no door handles on some of your coaches. I doubt this would have been noticed, unlike minor faults on locos.......Such is loco-centricity. 

[davidw]

Mailcoach carriages 01.jpg

 

Along with the scenic work, I've also just started the construction of some Mailcoach clear-plastic-sided carriages. Painting these is fun!

 

I'll subsequently be writing up a report in BRM. 

You mean you can actually get hold of them? I thought they stopped being manufactured?

 

Agree with Larry regarding the photo's 

Edited November 18, 2014 by davidw