Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

16 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Evening Tony,

 

that B1 is defiantly crying out for the beautifully proportioned Bradwell dome. Lance that boil on top of the boiler.

 

P.S. I seem to think that the Bachmann smokebox door is fictitious, Mr Bradwell offers a couple of replacement as do others.

Evening Andrew,

 

I think we're into the realms now of how far one is prepared to take individual models in the quest for 'accuracy'. I agree that the dome isn't as good as the Bradwell one, so that means eight replacements. You don't like the dome on the Hornby B1, either, so that's another. What about the Jamieson B1 dome, or the Nu-Cast one? Four more needed there, then. 

 

Do the B1s share a common dome with any other loco type? O2/4s?, O4/8s, O1s?, K1s? L1s? See what I mean? How many domes does Dave Bradwell stock?

 

If this seems like hypocrisy, then so be it. I do strive for 'accuracy', but on a layout like little Bytham which has over 150 kit-built/heavily-altered locomotives, a pragmatic approach has to be taken at times. As the B1s go past, hauling anything from fast freights to humble stoppers, it's the whole ensemble I take in. I don't really notice the 'boils' sitting on the top of boilers as the trains sweep through, or stop. Perhaps I should, but there are other more pressing needs to be attended to. 

 

We all live with our compromises, not least of all 'narrow gauge' track. You accept too tight visual curves, I accept the occasional dome which could be better. I wonder which would be easier to change!

 

Anyway, your 'critical' observations are welcomed. If things aren't right, then things need to be pointed out. 

 

As for the smokebox door on the Bachmann B1. I think it more-nearly represents the earlier-style 'door. There were several different types.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

5 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Evening again Andrew,

I've never known any of my locos be defiant.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

5 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2019 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[johnarcher]

8 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

A lot of us must have been introduced to the Goons via our dads. Mine had a tape of some of the episodes which we'd get played during long car journeys, especially during holiday drives around the Lake District or North Wales. I found it pretty funny, even though it must have been 20 or 30 years old at the time. I could relate to it as belonging to the same strain of silliness that produced the Pythons and Hitch Hiker's Guide. I seem to remember a trad-jazz interlude half way through each episode?

Yes, there is I think a line from Goons to Python - the main link I reckon being the radio comedy that was my favourite in my teens (mid to late '60's) - I'm Sorry I'll Read That Again.

[Headstock]

10 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Evening Andrew,

 

I think we're into the realms now of how far one is prepared to take individual models in the quest for 'accuracy'. I agree that the dome isn't as good as the Bradwell one, so that means eight replacements. You don't like the dome on the Hornby B1, either, so that's another. What about the Jamieson B1 dome, or the Nu-Cast one? Four more needed there, then. 

 

Do the B1s share a common dome with any other loco type? O2/4s?, O4/8s, O1s?, K1s? L1s? See what I mean? How many domes does Dave Bradwell stock?

 

If this seems like hypocrisy, then so be it. I do strive for 'accuracy', but on a layout like little Bytham which has over 150 kit-built/heavily-altered locomotives, a pragmatic approach has to be taken at times. As the B1s go past, hauling anything from fast freights to humble stoppers, it's the whole ensemble I take in. I don't really notice the 'boils' sitting on the top of boilers as the trains sweep through, or stop. Perhaps I should, but there are other more pressing needs to be attended to. 

 

We all live with our compromises, not least of all 'narrow gauge' track. You accept too tight visual curves, I accept the occasional dome which could be better. I wonder which would be easier to change!

 

Anyway, your 'critical' observations are welcomed. If things aren't right, then things need to be pointed out. 

 

As for the smokebox door on the Bachmann B1. I think it more-nearly represents the earlier-style 'door. There were several different types.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Tony,

 

standardisation or stagnation? You sound like a GWR man. We couldn't possibly try something new or better, as it wouldn't be standard with what we've done before.

 

P.s. Whats wrong with defiantly?

[micklner]

7 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Evening Andrew,

 

I think we're into the realms now of how far one is prepared to take individual models in the quest for 'accuracy'. I agree that the dome isn't as good as the Bradwell one, so that means eight replacements. You don't like the dome on the Hornby B1, either, so that's another. What about the Jamieson B1 dome, or the Nu-Cast one? Four more needed there, then. 

 

Do the B1s share a common dome with any other loco type? O2/4s?, O4/8s, O1s?, K1s? L1s? See what I mean? How many domes does Dave Bradwell stock?

 

If this seems like hypocrisy, then so be it. I do strive for 'accuracy', but on a layout like little Bytham which has over 150 kit-built/heavily-altered locomotives, a pragmatic approach has to be taken at times. As the B1s go past, hauling anything from fast freights to humble stoppers, it's the whole ensemble I take in. I don't really notice the 'boils' sitting on the top of boilers as the trains sweep through, or stop. Perhaps I should, but there are other more pressing needs to be attended to. 

 

We all live with our compromises, not least of all 'narrow gauge' track. You accept too tight visual curves, I accept the occasional dome which could be better. I wonder which would be easier to change!

 

Anyway, your 'critical' observations are welcomed. If things aren't right, then things need to be pointed out. 

 

As for the smokebox door on the Bachmann B1. I think it more-nearly represents the earlier-style 'door. There were several different types.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

If I was paying out £100 + for a chassis upgrade, (in the case of the B1, I wouldn't consider the Bachmann version, the Hornby B1overall is light years ahead ) I would want to upgrade the Loco and Tender bodies as well , I wouldn't want to just do the chassis.

[Tony Wright]

3 minutes ago, Headstock said:

 

Tony,

 

standardisation or stagnation? You sound like a GWR man. We couldn't possibly try something new or better, as it wouldn't be standard with what we've done before.

 

P.s. Whats wrong with defiantly?

Andrew,

 

You really know how to hit below the belt! 

 

There's nothing wrong with defiantly (it's a good word), but I would have used definitely instead.  

[Tony Wright]

3 minutes ago, micklner said:

If I was paying out £100 + for a chassis upgrade, (in the case of the B1, I wouldn't consider the Bachmann version, the Hornby B1overall is light years ahead ) I would want to upgrade the Loco and Tender bodies as well , I wouldn't want to just do the chassis.

I think I'm in agreement in many ways, Mick,

 

But I have so many Bachmann B1/Palitoy/Replica B1 bodies on top of 'decent' chassis, that they're by far my most-numerous. What should I do? Acquire eight or more Hornby B1 bodies? I'd then have to change the domes and the chimneys, so it'll be a long job.

 

I think what's most-important is that I make the mechanisms. That way, how they run is entirely my responsibility. As you know, I have little time for RTR mechanisms because they don't suit my (specific) needs. 

 

I say again, they're layout locos, nothing more. We all have our different 'blind spots'. With you, might I say, it's still using Hornby or Bachmann bogie/pony wheels, which are really poor? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Headstock]

5 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Andrew,

 

You really know how to hit below the belt! 

 

There's nothing wrong with defiantly (it's a good word), but I would have used definitely instead.  

 

With a new dome your B1 would definitely be defiantly standing out from the mainstream, very Thompson, even H N G would aprove.

[MJI]

10 hours ago, Bucoops said:

I have to agree that "modern" comedy, I find anything but funny. Fortunately my Grandad ensured a steady supply of Goodies etc. and we still have a few 78s, one of which is the Ying Tong Song with I'm walking Backwards for Christmas. It was no shock to my family when I chose a Spike Milligan poem for school poetry day - On the Ning Nang Nong. I was definitely born in the wrong era!

 

Having said that - Blackadder, The Young Ones, Kenny Everett. Love them and they were all present through my childhood.

 

I find Not Going Out very funny and reminds me of older quality studio sit coms

[MJI]

43 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I've never known any of my locos be defiant.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

I have decided that one of mine needs to be. I reckon I can get away with 3 Castles on my Blue era railway, but I need to get them still.

[micklner]

24 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I think I'm in agreement in many ways, Mick,

 

But I have so many Bachmann B1/Palitoy/Replica B1 bodies on top of 'decent' chassis, that they're by far my most-numerous. What should I do? Acquire eight or more Hornby B1 bodies? I'd then have to change the domes and the chimneys, so it'll be a long job.

 

I think what's most-important is that I make the mechanisms. That way, how they run is entirely my responsibility. As you know, I have little time for RTR mechanisms because they don't suit my (specific) needs. 

 

I say again, they're layout locos, nothing more. We all have our different 'blind spots'. With you, might I say, it's still using Hornby or Bachmann bogie/pony wheels, which are really poor? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

      Where is it written that anybody has to change all the Locos at the same time ? Unless all eight are circulating at the same time there will be no comparisons made by anybody !!  As said before on here I hate this "layout status reasoning/description" used by some. I like to try and make mine as accurate ( I might not make as many as some people) as possible, albeit with narrow gauge track included in the build .

 

 As to Hornby Bogie wheels very simple reasons for their use, as said before

1. they run well on my not to perfect track.

2. they don't derail as do Markits I wasted £11 on.

 3/4 . I cannot match the Hornby A4 LNER Red shade, or the quality of the lining on the LNER Apple Green versions. Black locos are however are easy if I wanted to use them which I don't !! 

 

You would be extremely lucky to find one Hornby B1 body  have never seen one far sale,so far I have managed to obtain one slightly damaged Hornby B1 Tender, now with a modified/repaired  Body  and running behind my A2/1  Duke of Rothesay, far better than the old Bachmann/Replica version. 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2019 by micklner

[MJI]

OK I have been thinking on this, day accurate modelling is out, no way could I do it, for a start I never spotted one place for a whole day.

 

Month?

 

Year?

 

I cannot get my interests lower than 6 years, so my railway will be for 6 years range, covering the important for me.

 

Early spotting days and seeing PWM650 fresh from repaint (yes I am building it), an Eastern region aircon set heading to South Wales. Blue Met Camm 101s, Leander on railtours.

 

Then 50 refurb and 28th November 1981 railtours (I have 22 just because Lima made it).

 

Then my main spotting era through the early 80s. Peaks 50s 47s ect

 

Ending up with GWR150 got 34666 4575 4406 on the kitchen table, all Triang based cut and shut TSOs with Replica glazing.

 

Hence Also need Dumbleton Hall, and the above Castles.

 

Area trying to cover Gloucester Cheltenham Stroud valley area, so thinking of keeping a station open which shut between Worcester and Cheltenham.

[Tony Wright]

In answer to those who 'hate' my description of layout locos (which is actually a description first used by Iain Rice), may I offer the following four pictures, please? 

 

In view of the comments regarding various disfiguring medical conditions and suggestions of spending too much money putting a kit-built chassis underneath a 'poor' body, I offer these as a 'justification' for building layout locos.

 

 

 

 

These B1s are all from the same source and modified by me. That is, Bachmann/Replica/Mainline bodies on Comet frames with Markits wheels (LB's trackwork is good). All have been renumbered/renamed and weathered by me. Various detail additions are evident. 

 

 

This is similar, but this time it's Tony Geary's work. Tony also fitted a GN-style smokebox door. 

 

What do they show, if anything? That in a 'layout context', they're acceptable? There are four more from this source, and I honestly cannot see myself altering these now, even one at a time. 

 

 

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

In answer to those who 'hate' my description of layout locos (which is actually a description first used by Iain Rice), may I offer the following four pictures, please? 

 

In view of the comments regarding various disfiguring medical conditions and suggestions of spending too much money putting a kit-built chassis underneath a 'poor' body, I offer these as a 'justification' for building layout locos.

 

 

 

 

These B1s are all from the same source and modified by me. That is, Bachmann/Replica/Mainline bodies on Comet frames with Markits wheels (LB's trackwork is good). All have been renumbered/renamed and weathered by me. Various detail additions are evident. 

 

 

This is similar, but this time it's Tony Geary's work. Tony also fitted a GN-style smokebox door. 

 

What do they show, if anything? That in a 'layout context', they're acceptable? There are four more from this source, and I honestly cannot see myself altering these now, even one at a time. 

 

 

 

 

Tony,

 

I have to agree with Mick with regard to the cost of a chassis ....... However, I don't think that the Bach / Rep, whatever body is that awful, with a bit of work it can be made better than the Hornby one. Replace the dome, chimney and smokebox door and it is instantly propelled ahead of the Hornby body.

 

You will be hard pressed to find a B1 with the Bach / Rep smokebox door, 1022 had the rather elegant LNER standard door, with its graceful curvature and generous diameter. The closest to the Bach thing is probably the flat faced type fitted to the preserved B1 1264. However, this type was flush riveted and had a very prominent flange to the edge of the door.

 

I find it a shame that you don't have the same love for your B1's as your A2/2's, the latter get much more attention as individual locomotives. It would seem that some layout locomotives are a little more equal than others.

Edited April 27, 2019 by Headstock

[PMP]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

What do they show, if anything? That in a 'layout context', they're acceptable? There are four more from this source, and I honestly cannot see myself altering these now, even one at a time. 

 

 

I think an element being overlooked is also the consistency of both appearance and running qualities. Not being ‘up to speed’ on B1’s they look acceptable to me, I can recognise them as B1’s, but not the subtleties such as dome shape and detail variations. If the running is good too with an authentic looking, fluid movement throughout the chassis they’ll each be accepted by most modellers and observers as a good representation of the type. If however there’s a noticeable variation on finish/shape/chassis running, they’re likely to stand out, but as abnormal for whatever reason. Where I have multiples of each type I try to maintain a minimum consistent standard in appearance and running quality. Eg., if I replace a chimney on one, they all get done either simultaneously or sequentially, so there’s no odd one out. For example all my 3F Jinties have Brassmasters conversions fitted, and any un modified loco stands out like a sore thumb.

[CF MRC]

I classify my engine types as NHS & private.  The NHS ones usually have what I call a 12hr chassis, the private ones can be rather longer in the build and often incorporate gold somewhere in the body...

 

Tim

BDS

Edited April 27, 2019 by CF MRC

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Evening Andrew,

 

I think we're into the realms now of how far one is prepared to take individual models in the quest for 'accuracy'. I agree that the dome isn't as good as the Bradwell one, so that means eight replacements. You don't like the dome on the Hornby B1, either, so that's another. What about the Jamieson B1 dome, or the Nu-Cast one? Four more needed there, then. 

 

Do the B1s share a common dome with any other loco type? O2/4s?, O4/8s, O1s?, K1s? L1s? See what I mean? How many domes does Dave Bradwell stock?

 

If this seems like hypocrisy, then so be it. I do strive for 'accuracy', but on a layout like little Bytham which has over 150 kit-built/heavily-altered locomotives, a pragmatic approach has to be taken at times. As the B1s go past, hauling anything from fast freights to humble stoppers, it's the whole ensemble I take in. I don't really notice the 'boils' sitting on the top of boilers as the trains sweep through, or stop. Perhaps I should, but there are other more pressing needs to be attended to. 

 

We all live with our compromises, not least of all 'narrow gauge' track. You accept too tight visual curves, I accept the occasional dome which could be better. I wonder which would be easier to change!

 

Anyway, your 'critical' observations are welcomed. If things aren't right, then things need to be pointed out. 

 

As for the smokebox door on the Bachmann B1. I think it more-nearly represents the earlier-style 'door. There were several different types.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

We all seem to focus on our individual "things". Andrew obviously has a "thing" about domes, you have one about wheels and lamps. It woudl be hard for any of us to focus on every "thing".

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, CF MRC said:

I classify my engine types as NHS & private.  The NHS ones usually have what I call a 12hr chassis, the private ones can be rather longer in the build and often incorporate gold somewhere in the body...

 

Tim

BDS

Presumably there is a waiting list for these?

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, Headstock said:

 

 

Tony,

 

I have to agree with Mick with regard to the cost of a chassis ....... However, I don't think that the Bach / Rep, whatever body is that awful, with a bit of work it can be made better than the Hornby one. Replace the dome, chimney and smokebox door and it is instantly propelled ahead of the Hornby body.

 

You will be hard pressed to find a B1 with the Bach / Rep smokebox door, 1022 had the rather elegant LNER standard door, with its graceful curvature and generous diameter. The closest to the Bach thing is probably the flat faced type fitted to the preserved B1 1264. However, this type was flush riveted and had a very prominent flange to the edge of the door.

 

I find it a shame that you don't have the same love for your B1's as your A2/2's, the latter get much more attention as individual locomotives. It would seem that some layout locomotives are a little more equal than others.

Good morning Andrew,

 

Love of A2/2s?

 

You mean as models? 

 

I think the big modelling point with regard to the difference between Thompson's only really successful design (yes, the O1 was OK as well) and the unloved and pretty hopeless rebuilds of the P2s is that they have to be made completely. There are the Graeme King conversions of a Bachmann A2, but you're still stuck with the same (if much better than the split-chassis B1) mechanism. Thus, because everything has to be made, then (in my view) one might as well get it 'right' at source rather than accept a compromise (or two). 

 

I have made B1s as well.

 

 

Here's a Nu-Cast one running on Stoke Summit. A better dome? It's on a Comet set of frames with the original too-short eccentric rod (don't believe Roche drawings!).

 

 

It now runs on LB (apologies for the over-scale lamp). Its smokebox door is the one provided by Nu-Cast, and it's probably the rarest type, with close-together hingestraps and numberplate above the top one. It's right for Retford's 61208, though. 

 

 

This type of 'door.

 

 

This is the earlier NER-style 'door. Bachmann's would appear a cross between this and the next one?

 

 

And the most-common? Unusually, the BR device is the small one. Extremely rare on B1 tenders.

 

 

This one most-nearly looks like Hornby's B1 door.

 

Please observe copyright restrictions on the prototype images.

 

With regard to which RTR B1 is better, here is a picture of both of them, the Bachmann one at the top. This one has the much-improved chassis.

 

 

Just look at both sets of bogie wheels! Ugh! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Chamby]

I can very much understand Tony fitting Comet chassis’ to B1 RTR bodies, as layout loco’s.  Given his experience and skillset, it makes perfect sense as they will be more durable for a heavily used layout, and in many cases will run better than the RTR original.  In my case, the expense and work involved are not worth it, given the likely quality of the finished article - my skill and experience falling well short of Tony’s in this regard.

 

I have a number of RTR B1’s and they are a very mixed bag.  Like others, I generally prefer the Hornby version but have a couple that arrived with a pronounced ‘waddle’ that still need a bit of work to correct, a new set of drivers has been acquired to fix one.  The Bachmann one (which fortunately does not have the split chassis) still has the older, less refined body moulding and a very unwieldy tender connection, but some may prefer this as it has no wiring between tender and loco, as it’s original design pre-dates dcc readiness.

 

I must admit that I don't lie awake at night worrying about the dome shape of an individual locomotive compared to its siblings.  I like to be as accurate as can be reasonably achieved in my modelling, but would actually achieve much less should I become too fastidious in pursuing 100% accuracy, at my time of life.  

 

Phil

Edited April 28, 2019 by Chamby

[micklner]

Tony

 

My point is being missed I think. As I said before what is a layout loco, the answer would be from every person asked, something different. 

 

What I have noticed is that you as said above in the earlier post above, tend to centre on certain things on Locos, but then ignore/not mention or notice other faults.

 

Some examples

The Bachmann B1 the "cannonball" size Handrail Knobs as on all old Bachmann offerings , just look at the size of them in picture one above . You often comment on Hornby valve gear being oversize , if you look at some of Bachman's offerings and other companies they are just as poor, I rarely read any comments/criticisms on other companies offerings the latest Bachmann valve gear the expansion link  on the V2 is even more oversize. The Heljan O2 class the valve gear is appalling flimsy , poorly made and designed and simply wrong a one piece expansion and eccentric rod held together with one tiny rivet. Press against the valve gear near said rivet   when picking the Loco up and it falls to pieces (as mine did).

 

As you have said you wouldn't change the dome on eight B1's . I wouldn't either , but I would consider doing so on a current build once I was aware of it , it would annoy me every time I looked at that model and on this occasion the parts (see below) are available to improve the Loco's appearance.

 

The problem on upgrading any Loco and any rolling stock is 1. The costs involved  2. The time to change said parts, repaint etc , and the big no 3 are there any parts from another supplier that actually exist or will fit in place of the offending part. There is so few places to find any replacement parts for anything now days. Scratchbuilding  is beyond most people , simply due to lack of the necessary skills and/or tools.

 

Everybody has their own opinion, on how far they want to go with a model be it a r.t.r or kit. 

 

cheers

 

Mick

[drmditch]

10 hours ago, CF MRC said:

I classify my engine types as NHS & private.  The NHS ones usually have what I call a 12hr chassis, the private ones can be rather longer in the build and often incorporate gold somewhere in the body...

 

Tim

BDS

Please can I make a non-railway point here. I have recently undergone complex, difficult and successful surgery provided by the NHS. We do ourselves and the generations to come no service if by constant denigration we reduce perceptions of the NHS to the level at which it is regarded as 'second rate' or 'failing' and a target for unscrupulous and/or self-interested politicians to dismantle. Obviously, given the extent of the services provided, different people will have different experiences. For complex situations, the same consultants operate in both 'public' and 'private' sectors, the differences being the waiting times.

 

For myself, coming back from Africa very ill in 2010, the welcome I received from my GP's practice when I 'phoned from the airport ('come straight away, we'll fit you in') was deeply comforting and re-assuring. (Mind you, I always take care to be polite and to get on well with the doctors and the practice staff, this being common-sense as common courtesy.)

 

That was also the time when leaving the surgery at a busy time of day, having been travelling for 36 hours, a young 16/17 year old lady offered me her seat on the bus. This country has so much that is good. Let us work to improve the 'not-so-good', but don't let us throw away what we have.

 

I won't apologise for intruding here with my personal views. Thanks to the NHS, I am, at the age of 67, healthy, fit, sane, and (mostly) functional. I need to be because I have a large railway room and at current rates of progress I will need some years to get the railway to a satisfactory condition.

 

Now, back to topic. I have tried to take some pictures of my cattle train headed by one of my J39s - proudly displaying lamps! This loco has a re-worked Bachmann body with a Comet chassis and gearbox and big Mashima motor. Like all my locomotives thus equipped it runs very well. However, I have not yet found a way to produce the lubricator drive on the RH side which Bachmann did produce on their split-chassis.

 

Being a very mediocre modeller (at least in that I have a lot left to learn) I would be very grateful for advice from my betters!

 

Edited April 28, 2019 by drmditch
Photograph added

[cctransuk]

10 hours ago, PMP said:

 

.....all my 3F Jinties have Brassmasters conversions fitted, and any un modified loco stands out like a sore thumb.

 

 

Do they all have that particular funnel - I have to say that it looks a little 'stout' to me; (I am working on a Jinty at present).

 

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited April 28, 2019 by cctransuk

[PMP]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Do they all have that particular funnel - I have to say that it looks a little 'stout' to me; (I am working on a Jinty at present).

 

John Isherwood.

Hi John, it depends on whether the loco is fitted with a Stanier or Fowler chimney, both types available within the Brassmasters kit.

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/bachmann_jinty.htm

 

[cctransuk]

6 minutes ago, PMP said:

Hi John, it depends on whether the loco is fitted with a Stanier or Fowler chimney, both types available within the Brassmasters kit.

http://www.brassmasters.co.uk/bachmann_jinty.htm

 

 

Yes, I understand that, but both those illustrated in your photo and on the Brassmasters website look somewhat tubby, and the degree of flaring to the chimney seating is definitely overstated; this detracts from the apparent height of the chimney.

 

The Jinty's were noted for their rather tall, slim chimneys, and I cannot find any in my collection of 481 Jinty photos that match the Brassmasters renditions.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.