Wright writes.....

[PGC]

Agree about the BG on both counts.

 

On Tony's comments, I did much of my most successful kit and scratch building while abroad with very few tools and just a kitchen table. I do have some bending bars but no pillar drill or rolling bars and I certainly could not justify buying a pillar drill for what is after all a hobby. Very different for Tony of course. Like many others on here I learned my woodworking and metalworking at school and from my father. My electronics skills ceased to be useful when valves went out of fashion, though I used in my tens to knock up active mixers when one was needed for a recording session in our tape recording club (another extinct species). I hope I have passed on as many of these skills as I could to my son (and my daughter who could put together a Slaters wagon kit to a very respectable standard at the age of 12).

 

So I am a little concerned if it is felt that a comprehensive workshop is a prerequisite for serious modelling.

 

But my son was of the last generation who could tinker with the mechanical innards of cars and no-one would now knock up a mixer from discrete components.

 

That doesn't mean that kit or scratch building need die, though, but it may mean that kits have to be designed with the available skills in mind - and some of these are new skills which my generation probably doesn't have.

 

But don't despair. Look at the wargaming world where there is plenty of skill and artistry displayed by many enthusiasts. The question is how to make model railways popular with the young rather than being seen as nerdy.

 

Many years ago, before I met my current partner, I used internet dating and put model engineering as one of my hobbies. I was told by several ladies that it was "not sexy" and I replied that neither is knitting, crochet or whatever, but if that's what they want to do, I won't deride them for it.

 

If I ever got a response, it was usually a fairly terse one along the lines of "go and have some sexual intercourse". At first, I was upset, but a female friend had a serious chat (it cost me a couple of bottles of wine but was well worth it!) and I then realised that actually it was a good way of weeding out the time wasters and women I wouldn't want to meet as they were of such closed minds.

 

We know, as RMWeb members, that model railways are interesting, but I feel that how we portray that interest to the outside world in a positive light is really the question that needs to be answered.

 

Phil

[JeremyC]

Not sure what is causing the demise of kit building, but if it's happening, is there a way that something can be done to reverse the trend?

 

Last night SWMBO was watching the review of last years Sewing Bee and I happened to be in the room at the same time. The woman who won has now started a charity teaching children how to sew, and it costs them nothing to come along, they have material supplied, sewing machines etc.

 

I can't help but wonder if there's a template there that model railway clubs could modify to introduce youngsters to the joy of building their own kits etc.

 

Phil

We are always hearing about the demise of kit building, but go along to a Games Workshop shop and you'll find a huge number of younger folk purchasing their kits. So is this problem unique to model railways? One problem we have of course is that unlike Games Workshop enthusiasts railway modellers need to make a working model. That, in my opinion, is a particular problem if you want to build loco kits, but I don't think building a plastic wagon kit is anymore difficult than a GW vehicle kit. It's a pity that plastic kits of other types of rolling stock [like the old Kitmaster coaches] aren't readily available; my feeling is that it's the requirement to work in metal that is part of the problem for many people.

 

Jeremy

Edited January 29, 2015 by JeremyC

[Oldddudders]

Nick's point is right, of course, in encouraging those of us in the lower orders to achieve more.

 

Sadly, that may not be what the mainstream modelling magazine editors are seeking to do. In an era of the printed page being on the backfoot, feeding people what they actually think they want to eat, and thereby attracting the multpage box-shifter ads that pay the bills, makes this more of a dilemma than ever before, I suspect.

 

I have never purchased a copy of MRJ, but suspect it is filled with articles on kit and scratchbuilding techniques and ideas. The publishers there know their market, too.

 

EDIT - Aldi in France is advertising a pillar-drill for 80 euros, on sale from Saturday. 3-year warranty. I think I might just...

Edited January 29, 2015 by Oldddudders

[Tony Wright]

Of course it is suitable! If the practical articles in mainstream mags descend to little more than how to renumber an x or, at best, a lttle basic weathering. how will newer modellers ever discover that there is so much more to the hobby than opening boxes? Without articles about builds like your 0-8-4T, more and more will fall into believing that "no one needs kits because rtr is so good". When the rtr manufacturers start to give us scale thickness frames and inside motion (dummy will be good enough for most), maybe I'll start to believe it, but not yet.

 

As to the oft heralded "demise of kit-building", is it really inevitable? Even if supplies of new kits ever dries up, I suspect there are enough unbuilt kits out there to keep the second-hand market going for a generation or two. Similarly, kit shortages may well lead kit builders on to scratch building. After all, some build kits because their chosen prototypes are not available in rtr and others scratch build because they are not available in kits. Such folk have always been a minority, but that's no reason to exclude such work from the mags. As to 3D printing, remember that someone still has to do the design work.

 

Phil's point reminds me that there appears to be growth in many forms of craft skills, so surely they should be encouraged in railway modelling?

 

Nick

Thanks Nick,

 

I hope it's realised that my last post was intended to generate discussion, though, I state again, I don't have the answers. 

 

I still keep in close touch with kit manufacturers and they all tell me the same story. Sales are down - an inevitable consequence of RTR 'excellence'. Chatting recently with the splendid Dave Ellis of SE Finecast, the moment an RTR equivalent of his kits appears, sales of his just about cease. Yes, it could be argued that sales, say, of his USA Tank might have levelled off anyway, but with the announcement of a forthcoming one RTR there has been no sales at all. As for Markits making special wheels for it, what future there? 

 

You're quite right about about the potential number of unmade kits lurking in cupboards in dusty boxes. I speak from experience, but, with retirement, the double-figures of mine are heading for single, and I've given a few away to new builders as encouragement (I hope). 

 

It's easy (especially in my case) to be cynical about how the perception of the hobby is being 'dumbed-down', both in 'rise' of the box-opener and the increase in 'easy' projects featured in the mainstream press (though Ben Jones is very keen to include the more 'meaty' articles - the sort which were always in BRM historically). There are still some outstanding modellers out there (many of them quite young), and the ones I'm still helping personally are very keen to do things for themselves, and learn (again, I hope). It's my intention to attempt to increase my involvement with assisting modellers in their actually making things, as long as they're prepared to try. 

[Allegheny1600]

We know, as RMWeb members, that model railways are interesting, but I feel that how we portray that interest to the outside world in a positive light is really the question that needs to be answered.

 

Phil

Here, here!

Good for you, Phil - women who would only be interested in you if you were "sexy" would only have bled you dry before moving on to the next victim, mug etc!

Perceptions, I honestly think that the Media, the red tops and so forth are almost entirely to blame here as no matter what you "do" whether it be collecting antique beer mats, stamps, plane/train spotting, knitting or whatever, the only way for the "general public" in the UK to regard what you do is either be filthy rich, on TV in some capacity or a footballer of some sort or, all three!

I used to put something about my modelling interest in my CV, hoping that any closet modellers of any kind might have picked up on it but, . . . no. And yet ultimately, my (few) modelling skills helped me set up my own business!

Whilst the nation is being constantly dumbed down, we will always be fighting a losing battle trying to be seen as much more than just box-openers and "playing with toy trains".

Very jadedly yours,

John E.

[buffalo]

Nick's point is right, of course, in encouraging those of us in the lower orders to achieve more...

I hope it didn't come over like that, Ian. Yes, it was biased towards metal bashing because that's what I mostly do, but there is also much excellent practical work in plastic, card, wood, etc. on these pages that is equally worthy of exposure in the magazines

 

...Sadly, that may not be what the mainstream modelling magazine editors are seeking to do...

That is also my fear, so it's reasuring to read Tony's comment about Ben Jones.

 

As to expensive/special tools, it's interesting to note the effect that cutting machines are having on plastic and card working. I certainly wouldn't be without most of my more expensive tools but, for the purposes of magazine articles, perhaps it's worth remembering that most of us metal bashers started with no more than a pair of smooth jawed pliers and perhaps a couple of steel rulers for bending, a piece of suitable rod and a mouse mat for rolling boilers, and some lenghts of silver steel for aligning chassis. The rest is convenient luxury.

 

Nick

Edited January 29, 2015 by buffalo

[Donington Road]

 "playing with toy trains".

 

That is the statement that seems to sum it up for the majority of Joe Public and is IMO holding back the younger generation.

Go on YouTube and just look at the diverse modelling of other forms, cars, trucks, aircraft, boats, busses, farming equipment, construction equipment, etc., etc.  There are young and old of both sexes participating, but they are never perceived to be "playing".  They are classed as skillfull people who model the real thing.  Perhaps railway modelling also suffers because it is a very old hobby, it needs a fair amount of room, it is in the majority of cases in a static location and cannot be mixed easily with other peoples models, unlike the remote control gatherings of trucks and constuction equipment for example.

[PGC]

 

Here, here!

Good for you, Phil - women who would only be interested in you if you were "sexy" would only have bled you dry before moving on to the next victim, mug etc!

Perceptions, I honestly think that the Media, the red tops and so forth are almost entirely to blame here as no matter what you "do" whether it be collecting antique beer mats, stamps, plane/train spotting, knitting or whatever, the only way for the "general public" in the UK to regard what you do is either be filthy rich, on TV in some capacity or a footballer of some sort or, all three!

I used to put something about my modelling interest in my CV, hoping that any closet modellers of any kind might have picked up on it but, . . . no. And yet ultimately, my (few) modelling skills helped me set up my own business!

Whilst the nation is being constantly dumbed down, we will always be fighting a losing battle trying to be seen as much more than just box-openers and "playing with toy trains".

Very jadedly yours,

John E.

 

It is the uninitiated (one could call them ignorant, but that starts to sound deriding and stooping to their level) who don't realise that we don't just "play with toy trains".

 

I was once discussing with a long standing friend my interest in model railways. He was a teacher and had been gently teasing me about my interest but was quite astounded when I suggested there should be an O level in model railways. When I explained that building a model railway involves historic research, woodwork, art, miniature engineering etc., he began to see the sense behind my thoughts and agreed there was quite some substance to my suggestion.

 

I started a posting on this thought here.

 

Phil

[Jol Wilkinson]

That is the statement that seems to sum it up for the majority of Joe Public and is IMO holding back the younger generation.

Go on YouTube and just look at the diverse modelling of other forms, cars, trucks, aircraft, boats, busses, farming equipment, construction equipment, etc., etc.  There are young and old of both sexes participating, but they are never perceived to be "playing".  They are classed as skillfull people who model the real thing.  Perhaps railway modelling also suffers because it is a very old hobby, it needs a fair amount of room, it is in the majority of cases in a static location and cannot be mixed easily with other peoples models, unlike the remote control gatherings of trucks and constuction equipment for example.

If you read many of the topics on RMweb, somebody will invariable say something along the lines of "it's my train set",  "I like playing trains", "railway modelling should be fun" (but not interesting, fulfilling, entertaining, skilful or satisfying), etc. 

 

If we don't portray our hobby as something more than adults playing at what seems to be a child's hobby, why should anyone else?

[gr.king]

Of course model railway magazines should cover all forms of railway model MAKING.

 

I used to think that MRJ was mostly filled with articles that covered highly esoteric modelling matters that would only be addressed by exceptionally skilled modellers, but it isn't so. If Olddudders and others have never bought a copy I would urge them to get hold of three or four successive issues and have a proper look at them. It's the only magazine I still take on a regular basis. The new FRMR looks quite promising too.

Edited January 29, 2015 by gr.king

[Arthur]

 

The problem is that, to the uninitiated, model railways means playing with a train set, nothing more than what they see their 5 year old doing with that box of trains and track which the grandparents bought from Argos.

 

The appreciation of the myriad skills involved in true railway modelling is absent.

[davidw]

My experiences of kit building is limited (a few pacifics - DJH and residing coaches - comet). But I've got to say that the delight in running something that you built is difficult to measure. To say it's extremely satisfying, is an understatement. 

 

The down side is that with a full time job and other commitments, the time taken to build a loco can be a problem. When it comes to a choice of an RTR requiring a little weathering to a kit on a time and even cost basis,  the choice becomes straight forward.(unless you model  in EM/P4)

 

I would choose to tackle stuff which is unlikely to appear RTR (in a couple of instances commissioned others to build for me). But who would have believed an O4, O1, or even the O2 derivatives would be announced. A J6 is on my list as is a K2. Will they appear in the next year or so RTR?  The temptation would be to get the kit(s). But I've an a2/2 just needing painting and and A2/1 40% done, and  personally I try to complete things before moving on to something new.  

 

Conversion work which Tony did to a K3, (different tender/cab) and the work that Graeme King has done (W1, Thompson pacifics etch) seems to point the way to where the constructional side of the hobby is heading. 

 

apologies if the above is waffle.  

Edited January 29, 2015 by davidw

[Tony Wright]

I hope it didn't come over like that, Ian. Yes, it was biased towards metal bashing because that's what I mostly do, but there is also much excellent practical work in plastic, card, wood, etc. on these pages that is equally worthy of exposure in the magazines

 

That is also my fear, so it's reasuring to read Tony's comment about Ben Jones.

 

As to expensive/special tools, it's interesting to note the effect that cutting machines are having on plastic and card working. I certainly wouldn't be without most of my more expensive tools but, for the purposes of magazine articles, perhaps it's worth remembering that most of us metal bashers started with no more than a pair of smooth jawed pliers and perhaps a couple of steel rulers for bending, a piece of suitable rod and a mouse mat for rolling boilers, and some lenghts of silver steel for aligning chassis. The rest is convenient luxury.

 

Nick

Thanks again Nick,

 

Please don't think me a 'tool snob', but I honestly believe it would be incredibly difficult to build the 0-8-4T without several 'specialist' tools. 

 

The boiler is supplied as 1mm brass tube (it might be thicker), cut to the right length. There is no cut-out for the motor. The cut out was achieved by using the pillar drill as a milling machine (with a milling head), with the boiler clasped securely in an appropriate machine vice, able to be accurately moved backwards and forwards. Cutting out a segment with a piercing saw or the like I would have found impossible. Drilling holes for washout plugs and handrails was also made easier by a quality power tool and a firm machine vice.

 

The smokebox wrapper is half-etched and without my rolling bars I'm sure, going on past experience, I would have made nothing but a mess with just a length of rod and a mouse mat, especially as it has to be reverse-curved at its base.

 

My bending bars made dead-right right-angle bends a mere formality.

 

Yes, I've built locos from kits or from scratch using no more than the tools you describe, but I no longer own any of those locos. The botched-building, although part of a valuable learning curve, I could no longer tolerate as my 'skills', and tools, developed.

 

To have suggested in the article which I'm writing that this complex tank could be built with nothing more than a few hand-tools would have been disingenuous in my opinion. 

[jwealleans]

If I may beg everyone's indulgence to step back over the page, I directed readers to a thread on the LNER forum to learn about D10C Restaurant First roof layouts.

 

The thread owner has been in touch to say that although most of the build is covered in that thread, the roof arrangement is actually in a separate thread called Further D10C Restaurant Car question. The two layouts (kindly supplied by Mike Trice and please respect his copyright) are in the last post in the thread.

[corneliuslundie]

The "nerd" issue is even worse than just applying to hobbies, though. It is positively uncool in school for boys to be seen to be good at ANYTHING. How, then, is any self respecting youngster going to admit that he/she has a hobby other than one involving software (though probably not a train simulator program)?

 

The image we portray is also mentioned. As I think I mentioned above, I worry a little about the image presented by most local model railway exhibitions. I know that most of the layouts at the local show portray trains as toys. There were only two layouts that interested me and they were both away from the main hall. But many people leaving the show said unprompted how much they has d enjoyed it  (I was on the door selling tickets).

 

Tony, when you were teaching art did you have a problem that art wasn't "cool"? If so what did you do about it? Perhaps there are lessons.

 

Jonathan

[johnarcher]

The problem is that, to the uninitiated, model railways means playing with a train set, nothing more than what they see their 5 year old doing with that box of trains and track which the grandparents bought from Argos.

 

The appreciation of the myriad skills involved in true railway modelling is absent.

It is not surprising. After all one shop window of the hobby is the local exhibition, I was at one some years ago and spoke to a man (he knew nothing of the hobby, had brought his son) who basically saw what one sees at many exhibitions - most of the layouts on show (largely rtr of course) he saw as just a larger version of what his 10-year old played with. Fortunately there was one EM branch terminus where I could point out what had been made rather than bought, which maybe revised his opinion a little.

Unless  people outside the hobby see examples where those myriad skills are demonstrated they won't know they exist.

Of course anyone in the hobby can take any approach they like, but the public view of it will be shaped by what they see.

[buffalo]

...Please don't think me a 'tool snob'...

Not at all, Tony, I would use much the same tools by preference over the, to me, more tedious methods of hand cutting and drilling. Mind you, compared with your experience, I'm probably still in or very close to the 'botched-building' phase. I was a little suprised by your comment about rolling bars as I'd never used them until last week having always found a set of round bars and a mouse mat suitable for most jobs. It was only when I was faced with producing a 70' tri-arc roof that I felt the need. The mouse mat wasn't long enough and I couldn't find a suitably long commercial offering, so I made my own. That couldn't have easily been done without some of my luxury machine tools.

 

David's comment about time was an interesting reminder that we all have different priorities. I'm retired and don't have any deadlines so I can, and do, take as long as I like over making things. To me, it's an enjoyable process and I'm not particularly concerned about seeing the results running on a layout. To others, running, operating, etc. are more important. Then there are others whose work rate is such that they can do all of it.

 

Nick

Edited January 29, 2015 by buffalo

[johnarcher]

Not at all, Tony, I would use much the same tools by preference over the, to me, more tedious methods of hand cutting and drilling. Mind you, compared with your experience, I'm probably still in or very close to the 'botched-building' phase. I was a little suprised by your comment about rolling bars as I'd never used them until last week having always found a set of round bars and a mouse mat suitable for most jobs. It was only when I was faced with producing a 70' tri-arc roof that I felt the need. The mouse mat wasn't long enough and I couldn't find a suitably long commercial offering, so I made my own. That couldn't have easily been done without some of my luxury machine tools.

 

David's comment about time was an interesting reminder that we all have different priorities. I'm retired and don't have any deadlines so I can, and do, take as long as I like over making things. To me, it's an enjoyable process and I'm not particularly concerned about seeing the results running on a layout. To others, running, operating, etc. are more important. Then there are others whose work rate is such that they can do all of it.

 

Nick

Different priorities as you say. I still kit-build with pretty basic tools, for that and other reasons (eg idleness) my 'work rate' is snail-like. As, like you, I enjoy making things, I simply choose a prototype sufficiently undemanding (in terms of the amount of track, stock etc) to be able to do 'all of it' - eventually.

[Tony Wright]

The "nerd" issue is even worse than just applying to hobbies, though. It is positively uncool in school for boys to be seen to be good at ANYTHING. How, then, is any self respecting youngster going to admit that he/she has a hobby other than one involving software (though probably not a train simulator program)?

 

The image we portray is also mentioned. As I think I mentioned above, I worry a little about the image presented by most local model railway exhibitions. I know that most of the layouts at the local show portray trains as toys. There were only two layouts that interested me and they were both away from the main hall. But many people leaving the show said unprompted how much they has d enjoyed it  (I was on the door selling tickets).

 

Tony, when you were teaching art did you have a problem that art wasn't "cool"? If so what did you do about it? Perhaps there are lessons.

 

Jonathan

Teaching Art?

 

I don't recall it being uncool, though it was over 23 years ago that I last attempted the 'noble art'. 

 

I do recall the subject being the sort which the less academically-gifted might pursue, or that's what some 'academics' believed. However, with one notable exception, all my best pupils were of higher intelligence. Several of the worst are in jail or deceased (one shot by the police, another one or two murdered!).

 

I taught across the whole art/craft faculty (what happened to departments?), including wood and metalwork. With regard to the latter, I had a group of 5th/6th years building locos from scratch in OO as part of their GCSE studies. Nobody amongst their peers thought them uncool (though this was the late-'70s/early-'80s) and after spending time soldering, they'd be off to football or cricket practice, or girls! They all passed with distinction, and the external examiner complimented them on the work (they'd photographed the stages as well, because I also taught photography). He was particularly pleased how they'd used the scale drawings to interpret and make all the parts. Naturally, things like wheels, motors, gears, etc were bought, but we did turn chimneys and domes. From memory, a M&GNR 4-4-2T was built, but, being from Wolverhampton, dads 'insisted' on GWR prototypes.

 

Can you imagine any school having such an activity on the curriculum today, even if it still had a fully-equipped metalworkshop? Can you also imagine any kid today taking loco numbers from the school playing fields at break and lunchtimes, as used to happen at one of the schools I taught at, 40 years ago? Or a teacher, as I did, organise weekend trips to railway depots and works? The hired-coach was bulging! 

 

No, not only does the hobby of railway modelling not appeal to youngsters (often because of an ignorant media's interpretation), neither does an interest in real railways. I'll warrant that 90% (and more?) of current modellers follow railway modelling because they were inspired by the real thing as a kid. What future then, in another decade? 

[Judge Dread]

The "nerd" issue is even worse than just applying to hobbies, though. It is positively uncool in school for boys to be seen to be good at ANYTHING. How, then, is any self respecting youngster going to admit that he/she has a hobby other than one involving software (though probably not a train simulator program)?

 

 

 

I have tried to make this point far too many times over far too many years when the subject arose "What this club/society/organisation needs is more junior members". Each time it was shot down by the single male members whose only experience  of the "junior member" was their own. I did get the term done away-with of "junior" at my local club, just after the concept of a junior's section/group/layout went. The latter was ruled by the bully. 

Younger members just paid less and needed a sponsor if under 12 years old. You had to accept that other interests would take over, girls or school work or both. Whilst they were members you could only set the ideas in place and hope that in few years time those members would return when they could ignore any comments of nerd etc.

I dare not name a one time club member who I met when he was about 14 and now he's in his 40's and a finer modeller you will not find. His only saving grace is the acquisition of those skills had absolutely nothing to do with me!  

[Arthur]

 

(one shot by the police, another one or two murdered!).

 

 

Not during your Art lessons one hopes!

[Focalplane]

Not long ago I demonstrated my Broadway Limited Southern Pacific GS4 4-8-4 with DCC and Sound to my daughter in law, husband and their two girls.  The looks on their faces were of amazement and confusion, the latter no doubt because I had such a strange hobby.  I explained the "long long short long" whistle that is used at all grade crossings, etc. and also showed them a video of the real locomotive at a grade crossing.  That is what they all remembered later on!

 

With family I am a bit of a closet modeler, I don't talk about it much and I always put away my portable workbench when the grand children are around (partly to keep the dangerous tools away from them).  Perhaps later on I will open up and let them in to a few secrets.  Sadly my only grandson (boys really are more interested in trains than girls) lives in New Zealand, so there can be little hands on sharing with him.

[corneliuslundie]

Thanks, Tony. 

 

Back on the 0-8-4T, it will be a pretty impressive beast, though I am not sure how many layouts could justify one.

 

It does have a link with the Rhymney Railway. The LNWR had running powers over most of the system and part of the Heads of the Valleys line was joint.

 

However, I believe the Rhymney barred the 0-8-4Ts because they spread the track in sidings with their long wheelbase and I believe they were also fond of derailing. Will yours therefore be prototypical?

 

I wasn't trying to suggest that there was anything wrong with you using the tools you do, merely suggesting that for the kind of modelling I do, mainly in plastic, they are not important. As has been said above we all have different approaches - I build lots of wagons, you don't. You build lots of locos, I don't (though, prompted by you, I am collecting the various things needed for a kit built ex Cambrian 2-4-0T no 1196). And most of us, as has been said, turn our hands to all sorts of craft skills in which we are more or less competent in order to produce a complete model of a railway. I doubt if any of us have all the tools we would like for all the different things we tackle.

 

Jonathan

[Tony Wright]

Thanks, Tony. 

 

Back on the 0-8-4T, it will be a pretty impressive beast, though I am not sure how many layouts could justify one.

 

It does have a link with the Rhymney Railway. The LNWR had running powers over most of the system and part of the Heads of the Valleys line was joint.

 

However, I believe the Rhymney barred the 0-8-4Ts because they spread the track in sidings with their long wheelbase and I believe they were also fond of derailing. Will yours therefore be prototypical?

 

I wasn't trying to suggest that there was anything wrong with you using the tools you do, merely suggesting that for the kind of modelling I do, mainly in plastic, they are not important. As has been said above we all have different approaches - I build lots of wagons, you don't. You build lots of locos, I don't (though, prompted by you, I am collecting the various things needed for a kit built ex Cambrian 2-4-0T no 1196). And most of us, as has been said, turn our hands to all sorts of craft skills in which we are more or less competent in order to produce a complete model of a railway. I doubt if any of us have all the tools we would like for all the different things we tackle.

 

Jonathan

Thanks Jonathan.

 

I hope mine won't be prototypical with regard to spreading track and derailing, though there's precious little sideplay on the axles. I'll know on Saturday. 

[Barry O]

Mike Edge ran one on Cwmafon which he scratchbuilt as the layout is based on the Welsh Valleys and has LNWR influences. ( He also ran a 0-8-2T) - see post 100 on:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/78572-cwmafon/page-4

 

These are big locos but were helped by having a flangeless driving wheel to give a bit of give on corners - OK till the flangeless wheel slips off the rails ....

Edited January 29, 2015 by Barry O