Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

Hello,

       Who is that fellow by the signal box playing tennis with. It does not seem a very safe environment for such behavior. As for spelling. No matter how many times it happens I always have a problem spelling feild as field until I actually see it written. How weird is that after more than six decades?

trustytrev,

Good morning Trev' (I assume it's Trevor?),

 

He's holding the tablet-changing device to/from the single track section between Little Bytham Junction and Saxby Junction. 

 

Most of the locos running over this section had Whitaker automatic apparatus for collecting/accepting the tablet/token, attached to their tenders, but not all. Those without would have used the 'tennis racquet' device in the signalman's hand. I've yet to scratch-build the Whitaker apparatus, and install it next to the 'box. 

 

 

You can just make out the (obviously non-working) automatic exchange device on the front edge of this PDK B12/3s tender.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Two further 'exchanging' shots..................

 

 

In this view, one has to assume that the fireman is leaning out (from the driver's side) to take the token from the signalman for the single track section; there being no Whitaker equipment on this side of the line.

 

 

In this shot, neither 4F has the equipment on its tender, so the fireman of the one approaching is preparing to drop the Saxby-Bytham token into the signalman's racquet. 

 

Of course, all of this is entirely made-up. The figures, both those on the footplates and the signalmen are firmly glued in place. It just requires the 'eye of faith' to believe that they're moving. That said, those beautiful little figures do add character to these scenes. 

 

Tony Gee's wonderful signals also add character to these views. Once again, thank you all, gentlemen. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Tony Wright

[grahame]

The current brick arches on the new station also look as if they are moulded in plastic Grahame!

 

Tim

 

I've not seen the St Thomas Street (southern) side since the new station has taken shape but the new Tooley Street (northern) side certainly looks very pasticky. I didn't inspect them closely but it looks like GRP cladding - just hope it doesn't catch fire.

 

The original brickwork certainly doesn't look plastic . . . 

 

 

. . . . and that's what I'll try to model. In the pic the ramp parapet wall facing brickwork has been peeled off but other pics I have show it in place.

 

The blue plaque (above the workman) is in memory of the people killed (68) and injured (175) in WW2 (1941) when a German bomb fell on Stainer Street arch where they were sheltering. I hope that it hasn't disappeared in the Shard and station modernisation.

 

 

G

Edited January 11, 2019 by grahame

[Jesse Sim]

Thanks Jesse,

 

It would have been a fascinating (and most-amusing) experience to have taught you. After some initial sparring (from which I would have come out on top, naturally!), I think we'd have settled down to a really meaningful teacher/pupil relationship. 

 

Just as we now have a really meaningful friendship. Who could have foreseen it, three years ago? A crusty septuagenarian, stuck in his ways (and rejoicing in them), prejudiced (with justification) and deeply, deeply suspicious of anything 'modern', meets up with an Aussie in his early twenties displaying all the features this miserable old git (I resemble that remark) finds anathema in/on a bloke. Long hair, body piercings, tattoos and appalling grammatical speech!  Now we're best mates, and I count that a privilege, so thanks again.

 

Perhaps there's a lesson to be learned here, especially with regard to upsetting folk's feelings. You've risen to the challenges of my prejudices and given me what I've given you in equal measure. Something which exists in a close friendship. Good on you - mickey-taking (and giving) the way it should be. Not injurious to others' sensitivities, which seems to have happened recently. Let's hope that's the last of it. 

 

The praise for the figures should be given to the four guys who created them. 

 

I'll see what needs doing on the loco.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony.

 

 

 

I do believe you scared the sh*t out of me the first time we met, but the rest as they say is history. I never thought we’d be the mates we are now 3 years ago.

[jamie92208]

Good afternoon Tony. You have certainly stirred something up with your article in BRM, judging by some comments on a Facebook group that I see. There are though, comments from both sides of the fence. Not having read the article I can't comment but reading through, one moron, wondered if you had ever been to Little Bytham. At that point I had to say something, and did, without giving too much away.

 

Jamie

Edited January 11, 2019 by jamie92208

[grahame]

Good afternoon Tony. You have certainly stirred something up with your article in BRM, judging by some comments on a Facebook group that I see. 

 

I'm a little confused (not difficult to do) but is there something contentious in BRM as well as RM by TW?

 

G

[Tony Wright]

I'm a little confused (not difficult to do) but is there something contentious in BRM as well as RM by TW?

 

G

Is there?

 

I think Jamie means the RM.

 

I think what's interesting is that I was requested to write a thought-provoking piece (even contentious) by my friend Steve Flint, the editor.

 

I certainly don't think everyone will agree with what I wrote in the RM (I'd be astonished if that were the case), but that isn't the point of writing it. If a plausible counter-argument (or arguments) is put forward, then thoughts will have been provoked. That said, I doubt if I'll change much from believing that, in railway modelling...............

 

Making personal things is paramount.

Helping other to do so is essential.

Advice must be accurate and well thought-through.

Research is essential.

Building models must not be rushed.

'Copying' what the prototype does (even if a layout isn't based on an actual place) is also essential.

The hobby must be more than the ability to just buy RTR/RTR things and to open boxes. 

 

Which, among other things, is more or less what I said in my RM article. A personal point of view, of course.  

Edited January 11, 2019 by Tony Wright

[grahame]

 

I think what's interesting is that I was requested to write a thought-provoking piece (even contentious) by my friend Steve Flint, the editor.

 

. . . snip . . . 

 

Which, among other things, is more or less what I said in my RM article. A personal point of view, of course.  

 

I think I've tracked it down - the facebook comments are on the BRM discussion group but are about the article in RM.

 

I've not read the article but I've seen some of the comments about it. The odd thing in my view is that despite many saying that railway modelling is a large enough hobby to be all encompassing (a broad church) when someone postulates their personal approach (or is it philosophy) to railway modelling that includes accuracy, undertaking some actual modelling and trying to be realist and reflecting the real railway, they get called 'rivet counters' and 'purists' (as a kind of school playground name calling) by those that are happy with RTR and don't care about the finer points and railway prototype nuances.

 

I've no real objection to those who constantly RTR wish list, won't try some kit building and enjoy a train-set approach, but why is it they seem to be so threatened by others who enjoy the hobby in a more structured and real railway like way that they need to denounce them?

 

G

[LNERandBR]

I certainly think people should be encouraged to try doing more then just unboxing things.

 

However not everyone will have the confidence to try anything. Hopefully some of the people reading Tony's views will be encouraged to try more.

 

Sadly I expect there will be many getting on their hobby horses saying why he's wrong!

[RBAGE]

I think I've tracked it down - the facebook comments are on the BRM discussion group but are about the article in RM.

 

I've not read the article but I've seen some of the comments about it. The odd thing in my view is that despite many saying that railway modelling is a large enough hobby to be all encompassing (a broad church) when someone postulates their personal approach (or is it philosophy) to railway modelling that includes accuracy, undertaking some actual modelling and trying to be realist and reflecting the real railway, they get called 'rivet counters' and 'purists' (as a kind of school playground name calling) by those that are happy with RTR and don't care about the finer points and railway prototype nuances.

 

I've no real objection to those who constantly RTR wish list, won't try some kit building and enjoy a train-set approach, but why is it they seem to be so threatened by others who enjoy the hobby in a more structured and real railway like way that they need to denounce them?

 

G

I suppose the same could be said of those who are happy to operate RTR. They may feel threatened when they are told that the hobby "must" be more than what they are doing. Why "must" it be more?

 

Modellers will do what they are, or feel capable of. Building locomotive kits might be considered by some as an important part of the hobby but is not the whole hobby. It's kit building. Someone who can build locomotive kits to an acceptable standard may not feel that he's not up to building baseboards, laying track, scartchbuilding structures to a standard he's happy with so elicits the support of others to build his railway for him.

 

"Must" the hobby be more than getting someone else to do it for you?

 

I think we shouldn't set ourselves up to make rules about the hobby. We should just get on with it. After all, we should all be allowed to play with our toys in the way we feel happiest. 

Edited January 11, 2019 by RBAGE

[Bernard Lamb]

 

The hobby must be more than the ability to just buy RTR/RTR things and to open boxes. 

 

 

 

Going by the odd comment on one of the recent Hornby threads even opening boxes is a step too far for some folk.

(I think they call themselves collectors)

Bernard

[mattingleycustom]

Tony,

 

Your excellent article in RM this month set me thinking about my own modelling goals.

 

I like to think I am a railway modeller rather than a collector; I used to spend a lot of my time doing commission weathering work, mainly on steam locomotives and coaching stock.

However for myself I have accumulated a lot of RTR loco stock that would take an age for me to bring up the sort of standards I want (does that make me a collector by default, I wonder?). The few locos that I have renamed, or renumbered, or applied a little detailing to are my most treasured, because I now possess something that has more value to me than the original as it came out of the box.

 

Glenn

[Tom F]

I think I've tracked it down - the facebook comments are on the BRM discussion group but are about the article in RM.

 

 

It is just worth clarifying, that the facebook group in question is not connected with the magazine BRM, rather it is just a group called 'British Railway Modelling'.

 

I'lll be honest, I read the comments and wasn't surprised....in fact I sort of find it amusing that so many appear 'offended' by someone else's opinion. I picked up RM, and I thought it was an excellent article Tony.

 

Sadly, many who are upset do not seem to grasp the concept Railway and Modelling. If anything though, today has brought me to the conclusion that the hobby is not a broad church, instead I would argue that the concept of plonking a RTR loco out of its box on RTR track with no personalisation at all......is not the same hobby as mine.

 

If that brings you enjoyment, that is great! However please do not be offended if you read something that doesn't sit in your comfort zone.

[Tony Teague]

I felt that the RM article was balanced and probably thought-provoking for anyone who does not follow this thread - where your views Tony, are well known!

I can't see it threatening anyone but the most sensitive of souls, but if it did not provoke any discussion, then it would not have been worth the writing - so it sounds like it has done its job.

 

Tony

[RBAGE]

It is just worth clarifying, that the facebook group in question is not connected with the magazine BRM, rather it is just a group called 'British Railway Modelling'.

 

I'lll be honest, I read the comments and wasn't surprised....in fact I sort of find it amusing that so many appear 'offended' by someone else's opinion. I picked up RM, and I thought it was an excellent article Tony.

 

Sadly, many who are upset do not seem to grasp the concept Railway and Modelling. If anything though, today has brought me to the conclusion that the hobby is not a broad church, instead I would argue that the concept of plonking a RTR loco out of its box on RTR track with no personalisation at all......is not the same hobby as mine.

 

If that brings you enjoyment, that is great! However please do not be offended if you read something that doesn't sit in your comfort zone.

I would be interested to have an explanation of the "concept of Railway and Modelling". I haven't previously considered its concept.

I am not offended by anyone's opinion of what is and what is not railway modelling. The suggestion that the hobby "must" be more or less than anything is of no consequence. It means nothing.

 

What is even less consequential is the suggestion that having your railway built for you and then running your kit built locos on it is more of the hobby than those who are restricted to RTR operation, for whatever reason.

Edited January 11, 2019 by RBAGE

[Chamby]

Is there?

 

I think Jamie means the RM.

 

I think what's interesting is that I was requested to write a thought-provoking piece (even contentious) by my friend Steve Flint, the editor.

 

I certainly don't think everyone will agree with what I wrote in the RM (I'd be astonished if that were the case), but that isn't the point of writing it. If a plausible counter-argument (or arguments) is put forward, then thoughts will have been provoked. That said, I doubt if I'll change much from believing that, in railway modelling...............

 

Making personal things is paramount.

Helping other to do so is essential.

Advice must be accurate and well thought-through.

Research is essential.

Building models must not be rushed.

'Copying' what the prototype does (even if a layout isn't based on an actual place) is also essential.

The hobby must be more than the ability to just buy RTR/RTR things and to open boxes. 

 

Which, among other things, is more or less what I said in my RM article. A personal point of view, of course.

 

Tony, have you read the threads currently running elsewhere on this forum regarding Bachmann and Hornby’s announcements of their 2019 releases? I don’t know if you would be amused or horrified... probably a bit of both! It reveals a very different approach to this thread, with what appears to be a total dependency upon choices made by the manufacturers. The frustrations inherent in this approach to railway modelling are all too clear to see.

[Lecorbusier]

Presumably one is entitled to one's own opinion and free to express it (even be commissioned to express it  ). Equally, every listener and or reader is free to disagree and express their opinion as to why.

 

Otherwise life would be so boring 

Edited January 11, 2019 by Lecorbusier

[ScRSG]

Which edition of RM was Tony's contentious (?) article in?

[westerner]

February's.

[Headstock]

Broadchurch, Isn't that a TV series? Is it worth bothering with such an article in the magazines these days? Wouldn't it be better to put an advert in the mag for Wright writes, seeking those that make things or wish to do so to contribute here? As long as they skip a few pages to the juicy bits, I'm sure it would be of more benefit. Wright writes could even publish a monthly digital mag, a digest of the best bits of the thread, it could even have a special needs page for the grammar Police.

[dibateg]

Haven't seen the RM article, but it's amusing that people take it so personally. There are plenty of outraged comments on FB. Ah well you've stirred up the hornets nest again Tony!

 

My view: there is room for everyone, from a model with every last rivet to tinplate on the lounge carpet. They are all creative in their own way and they are all model railways...

 

Regards

Tony

[The Stationmaster]

February's RM is on my 'look for' list tomorrow - maybe I should ask Tony to sign the relevant page as I wholeheartedly agree with his summary (which means I'll no doubt do the same in respect of the full piece.

 

But here comes the time to draw a line, or rather to think about where one puts a line (assuming you want to have one at all) because r-t-r is only part of a far wider picture and something which in many respects has possibly slipped from sight.  Over the years I have seen model railways utilising largely what has basically been r-t-r locos and stock, usually detailed etc, operating on layouts which look like a real railway and in, so far as the limitations of scale allow, work like a real railway.  On the other hand i have seen beautifully handcrafted locos hauling similarly constructed rolling stock running on what might most politely be described as some sort of poor pastiche of a real railway which, if they did much more than tail chase or run in and out of a small terminus would in the real world be nigh on impossible to operate as a railway.  To me the 'problem' and it is probably reasonable to consider it that is a failure to bring things together in a way that is recognisably a miniature recreation of the real world.

 

Some years ago I was invited to judge the layouts at a show but the criteria was rather unusual because I was asked to do so on the basis of operational realism.  Now obviously that must immediately imply a good standard of modelling and use of various 'resources' in order to create 'realism', and the same of course goes for the scenery (I cheerfully accept we might all have varying interpretations and views of how those are achieved).   But when looking at operational realism it literally meant what those words said was the layout being worked like a real railway - taking into account as so often could happen at a show that various layouts might represent the practices of different countries let alone different parts of the UK but that didn't matter because the question was the same - are they correctly representing the way that sort of railway would look and be worked in the real world?  That time it was for real but it's a process I often mentally apply when looking at layouts at shows or in magazine articles. (Incidentally the two layouts which were down to the wire for my final choice were both using quite a lot of r-t-r traction and rolling stock - if you looked closely enough to see their origins).

 

 

The point of saying all this.?  Well it's not just about using r-t-r or handbuilding everything and so on but in Tony's list there are some other equally important (perhaps even more important?) points if you want to create a representation of a real railway.  Subject to the proviso of course that you actually want to model a railway instead of simply creating or collecting an assemblage of railway models.

 

PS Today (Saturday) I bought a copy of the RM although I forgot to ask Tony to sign his article while I was at St evenage (although I was rather busy for most of my time there).  Top notch article in my view and - would it be otherwise? - well written.   And my views expressed above are unchanged so the summary in this thread reflected well the tenor of the original content.

Edited January 12, 2019 by The Stationmaster

[Captain Kernow]

February's.

Excellent! I picked one up this afternoon while out shopping, almost didn't but then thought, 'why not?' I hadn't realised that Tony's article was in it, so that's a real bonus, so I think I'll go and read it now!

[Atso]

I'm looking forward to picking up a copy of RM tomorrow and seeing what all the fuss is about. I'm sure it will make for a interesting, informative and fun discussion with Tony on Sunday.

[Clearwater]

The Facebook page on Tony's article is quite amusing....