Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

6 hours ago, Clem said:

Morning Tony. Did Ian also paint the wheels and motion? It's often struck me how realistic (i.e. true to how I remember them) they look on your locomotives. They seem to have the right amount of oily gleam along with the perfect shade to represent well-maintained loco motion. I presume the shade is achieved by a mix of paint ingredients?

Morning Clem,

 

No, I painted all the chassis; something I always do. Why? As you know, I try to make all the locos I make run 'perfectly'; that is smoothly, quietly, with no jerking or wobbling.

 

I paint the mainframes behind the wheels matt black, then build everything else, making sure that all those imperatives mentioned above are realised. After that, I never take the bits apart. Now, if the chassis were handed over to be painted along with the bodies, then the painter has to start 'fiddling', even part-dismantling it to do the job. I'm not saying pro' painters aren't brilliant loco-builders, but what's the best that can happen after a loco has been reassembled? It runs as well as it did before painting? It's not that I don't trust Ian or Geoff (I do, implicitly), but my locos' good running is entirely my responsibility. 

 

Where, say, LNER livery is required, the wheels go the painters first. I then get them back, fully-finished, and I then build the loco. 

 

For weathering the motion, I use a mixture of matt black, matt brown and matt grey enamels, applied with a small sable. Once applied, I put the chassis on a rolling road as the paint dries - that way it never gums up. Once dry, the whole motion is then oiled, which gives just the right amount of 'sheen'. Even the motion of heavily-weathered locos would still be oiled.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by Tony Wright
typo error

[CF MRC]

2 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

I find the whole valve gear business very confusing with lots of names which I have to look up so please excuse my ignorance and can I check that I understand your comments? The union link was loose on both sides and is held in with a tiny bolt. Is that supposed to be done up so tightly that it can’t move?

 

As for the return crank, is that the small rod which connects the main pin on the centre driver to the eccentric rod (Wikipedia call it the eccentric crank)? If so, am I right to assume that when the main coupling rod is top dead centre, the return crank should point at c. 5’o'clock as in the picture below? And on the opposite side it should point to c. 7’o’clock?

 

Thanks

 

Andy

 

Maybe this helps with nomenclature? Valve gear on a P2.

 

Tim

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, thegreenhowards said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I always know I’m going to get some homework when I post on here! In fact that’s one of the benefits for an unobservant modeller like myself. Once you point these things out it’s obvious, but frustratingly I don’t see them for myself.

 

The Cartazzi frames were easy to fix. Although you would have had a triumphant ‘told you so’ moment when one of them came off in my hand because the glue failed! It’s now soldered back on.

 

 I find the whole valve gear business very confusing with lots of names which I have to look up so please excuse my ignorance and can I check that I understand your comments? The union link was loose on both sides and is held in with a tiny bolt. Is that supposed to be done up so tightly that it can’t move?

 

As for the return crank, is that the small rod which connects the main pin on the centre driver to the eccentric rod (Wikipedia call it the eccentric crank)? If so, am I right to assume that when the main coupling rod is top dead centre, the return crank should point at c. 5’o'clock as in the picture below? And on the opposite side it should point to c. 7’o’clock?

 

Thanks

 

Andy

You're always diligent with your homework, Andy.

 

Andrew (Headstock) has answered some of your questions. 

 

As he suggests, it's best to set up each side with the cranks at bottom dead centre. Then (for inside admission locos), the return crank (eccentric crank) should lean forwards, both sides (why can't Hornby or Bachmann get this right, both sides). Though rather unscientific, I set them until they look 'right', imparting just the correct amount of motion in motion. This side of your loco appears to have it right. 

 

What Andrew calls the 'droplink' should be soldered to the crosshead (a tricky job), otherwise it rotates as has been shown. As I say, it's not a good piece of design.  

 

 

The top of the 'droplink' extends up to the slipper of the crosshead. This protrusion helps to stop the slipper from dropping out of the slidebars, thus preventing mayhem, particularly when running fast. It's thus essential it cannot rotate. 

 

Another couple of 'observations' with regard to your 60154. I know you didn't build/paint it, but the bogie is too far back. The rear of the cylinder should be covering the leading curve of the rear bogie wheel, not the other way round. 

 

Also, please note the position of the cabside worksplate. On many A1s (including 60154, and 60128)) it was not placed centrally. It was more under the second digit (on this side, the fourth on the other). It needs moving a twitch to the left. 

 

I assume the original builder didn't fit the brakes? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

In response to a request to illustrate the running sequence on LB, in place of more point rodding-making this morning I've started to take/collate pictures. Not all of these have been taken on the same day, so if there are inconsistencies in the continuity, then my apologies. 

 

The sequence was arrived at using the appropriate BR passenger and working TTs for the summer of 1958. Out of necessity, not all trains are represented and each train only runs once in the sequence. I'm still fiddling with it and attempting to 'refine' it (as recently as this morning), so here goes.........

 

 

The first move is an overnight Glasgow-Colchester working (running down the main line as far as Peterborough, not diverging at Doncaster). Though it had limited passenger accommodation, it was mainly made up of parcels vans. 

 

 

The first Down train is this Peterborough-Doncaster all-stations 'parly', which the A5 will probably take as far as Grantham. 

 

 

An early Nottingham-Kings Cross service (which, it would appear, was increased in length at Peterborough and then ran up to town as an express). In the background, another K2 (also originating in Nottingham) takes the first M&GNR train of the day eastwards, its destination Kings Lynn. 

 

The first Down express is the morning 'Talisman'. 

 

 

 

Next, is the first Up express freight of the day; Dringhouses (York) to Kings Cross Goods and Mineral.

 

 

It'll have to get a shift on (the Thompson A2/3s could run fast!) because it's followed by the Up 'West Riding'. Note the Bradford cars at the rear, and (just visible) the two sets of Gresley twins (ex-the pre-War streamliner of the same name). 

 

 

 

 

Next, the camera follows the passage of the first Down Leeds train of the day represented (there was an earlier one than 'The White Rose'). Note the Gresley catering cars in this rake.

 

 

 

'Not-so-fast' with these two. Respective Up and Down full and empty minerals. It was the practice for crews of these trains to change en route at Little Bytham, meaning that Colwick and New England crews could get back home in one shift. 

 

The point rodding recedes into the distance. Now, back to it! 

 

More sequence pictures to follow. I have loads of time. 

 

 

[Coach bogie]

Having finished the Saint and 3150, I reached up and pulled down Thin blue box, as i could not remember what was in it. It contained a M&L GWR 633 condensing tank. Luckily, I had put my research material n the box. in later life no 635 had the condensing gear removed, and a full cab added, a verson not provided for with the kit. My interest in 635 was it was sent to Westbury (out based at Frome).  I have started the kit and have cut up scrap brass left over from a David Geen coach kit, and made the full cab by using a SEF/Wills metro tank as a reference.

I need to change the bunker as well, but I can modify the casting to achieve this. One day I will build something exactly as the designer intended!

 

One for Bulwell Hall as 635 was recorded on a pick up freight to Weymouth.

 

Mike Wiltshire

[Headstock]

There is a nice bit of moving pictures of the valve gear on Tornado here.

 

 

[dibateg]

Thanks Tony - the photographed running sequence is most enjoyable and the railway looks superb, full of atmosphere.

 

Regards

Tony

[Chamby]

38 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

More sequence pictures to follow. I have loads of time. 

 

 

 

Thanks, Tony.  Just this one post begins to show the variety of stock you have on display, and the range of shots and angles gives a good impression of the layout as a whole.  Impressive, and appreciated!

 

Phil.

[Clem]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Morning Clem,

 

No, I painted all the chassis; something I always do. Why? As you know, I try to make all the locos I make run 'perfectly'; that is smoothly, quietly, with no jerking or wobbling.

 

I paint the mainframes behind the wheels matt black, then build everything else, making sure that all those imperatives mentioned above are realised. After that, I never takes the bits apart. Now, if the chassis were handed over to be painted along with the bodies, then the painter has to start 'fiddling', even part-dismantling it to do the job. I'm not saying pro' painters aren't brilliant loco-builders, but what's the best that can happen after a loco has been reassembled? It runs as well as it did before painting? It's not that I don't trust Ian or Geoff (I do, implicitly), but my locos' good running is entirely my responsibility. 

 

Where, say, LNER livery is required, the wheels go the painters first. I then get them back, fully-finished, and I then build the loco. 

 

For weathering the motion, I use a mixture of matt black, matt brown and matt grey enamels, applied with a small sable. Once applied, I put the chassis on a rolling road as the paint dries - that way it never gums up. Once dry, the whole motion is then oiled, which gives just the right amount of 'sheen'. Even the motion of heavily-weathered locos would still be oiled.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Thanks Tony. Yes you certainly have attained the perfect 'look' for the wheels/motion on your chassis. You have the colouring quite right to my eye. But it did make me smile though when I read and realised that extra little bit of something is obtained by the application of actual oil. I have oiled around the crankpins before but not the whole she-bang. Thanks, I've learnt a little bit more today.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, dibateg said:

Thanks Tony - the photographed running sequence is most enjoyable and the railway looks superb, full of atmosphere.

 

Regards

Tony

Thanks Tony,

 

Remember, several items of your rolling stock and a few of your locos grace LB. It is, after all, a team effort.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[FarrMan]

1 hour ago, Chamby said:

 

Thanks, Tony.  Just this one post begins to show the variety of stock you have on display, and the range of shots and angles gives a good impression of the layout as a whole.  Impressive, and appreciated!

 

Phil.

Tony

 

I fully agree with this. And how lovely the point rodding looks.

[ROY@34F]

17 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

My comments regarding DJH A1s might best be illustrated by a couple of pictures of ones I've made.....

 

 

Under-construction (now completed) 60157 with Cartazzi frames well clear of the rear drivers. Cab raked in (impossible without cutting a slit in the etch) and brass discs soldered on to the outside bearings of the Cartazzi truck and tender. 

 

 

From the rear, the cab rake-in is more-visible. 

 

Roller bearing discs in place, but not as effective (nor diligent in their application) as those of Andy Sparkes.

 

I have to say it's a privilege to have locos I've made painted by the likes of Ian Rathbone (who painted this one) and Geoff Haynes (who's painting 60157). 

 

 

Tony,

   May I offer a little in the way of critical observation on 60156 . The tender sides : should they not follow the rounded shape of the back of the tender and the front end as well of course . I thought it just looks more of a rather shallow angle in your photo . Or is that how it should be ?

 

Regards to you and Mo . I hope you're keeping well and clear of this awful virus .

 

Regards , Roy .

[ROY@34F]

5 hours ago, thegreenhowards said:

Thanks Tony,

 

I always know I’m going to get some homework when I post on here! In fact that’s one of the benefits for an unobservant modeller like myself. Once you point these things out it’s obvious, but frustratingly I don’t see them for myself.

 

The Cartazzi frames were easy to fix. Although you would have had a triumphant ‘told you so’ moment when one of them came off in my hand because the glue failed! It’s now soldered back on.

 

 I find the whole valve gear business very confusing with lots of names which I have to look up so please excuse my ignorance and can I check that I understand your comments? The union link was loose on both sides and is held in with a tiny bolt. Is that supposed to be done up so tightly that it can’t move?

 

As for the return crank, is that the small rod which connects the main pin on the centre driver to the eccentric rod (Wikipedia call it the eccentric crank)? If so, am I right to assume that when the main coupling rod is top dead centre, the return crank should point at c. 5’o'clock as in the picture below? And on the opposite side it should point to c. 7’o’clock?

 

Thanks

 

Andy

7 o' clock on that side Andy , 5 o'clock on 'tother side , as you look at it . The eccentric arm follows the crank pin by 1/4 of a turn + lap & lead , going forward . Somebody might correct me on this , but that's how I remember it .

 

Sorry for butting in here Tony .

 

Regards , Roy .

 

[DavGuthrie]

Hello Tony - The current situation and indeed lockdown that I am now on have led me to return to kit construction after several years absence. However - where have all the suppliers of Romford Wheels / Mashima Motors etc gone??? I used to be able to get all my requirements from the likes of Dave Cleall at Mainly Trains (now long gone of course) but I am having problems sourcing 20-spoke 6'2" Drivers in 4mm for a Comet Britannia Chassis!!!  Any help would be gratefully received. However, I can also say that I am loving it again and wonder why I ever drifted away from kit construction!! Regards - David Guthrie 

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, DavGuthrie said:

Hello Tony - The current situation and indeed lockdown that I am now on have led me to return to kit construction after several years absence. However - where have all the suppliers of Romford Wheels / Mashima Motors etc gone??? I used to be able to get all my requirements from the likes of Dave Cleall at Mainly Trains (now long gone of course) but I am having problems sourcing 20-spoke 6'2" Drivers in 4mm for a Comet Britannia Chassis!!!  Any help would be gratefully received. However, I can also say that I am loving it again and wonder why I ever drifted away from kit construction!! Regards - David Guthrie 

 

Wizard Models seems to be the principal outlet for Markits products.

 

Unfortunately, it seems that the supply of Markits items is by no means as reliable as it once was.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[DavGuthrie]

Many thanks John. I went on Markits web page the other day and the new catalogue (promised for 2 years ago) hasn't even been loaded up yet as well. I know that Wizard is now the outlet for Comet kits etc and thankfully they have left the original web page intact as a source of reference. 

About 10 years ago, as things began to recede in the kit business I acquired a number of DJH and SEF kits for the time of retirement - and that day has now come and I am pleased that I now have plenty to occupy me!!  

[juke]

On 30/03/2020 at 15:33, Tony Wright said:

Good afternoon Syd,

 

I find it interesting (if rather depressing) that you and Dave Wager have experienced running problems with high-priced RTR carriages; derailments (which I encountered), then rakes too 'stiff' to be hauled successfully.

I wonder, was the target market the display case? That said, surely such high-value items should not need modifications to get them to run well. I know things like Bachmann A1s are quite light-footed, but they were never designed to haul such heavy stock. 

You mention 'the' Deltic. Do you mean the prototype or the production ones? If it's the former, there are several shots showing it hauling carmine/cream stock (if not complete rakes). There are also shots of production Deltics with the odd CC car in a formation, but only early in their lives.

Regards,

Tony. 

Hi Tony

Several wrote, on my thread about the derailments, that they were intended as showcase models. I think that is strange given how long the display case would be for a 'correct' train.

They should certainly have been much better in use than they have proven to be though I only know of four people, including yourself, who have complained so perhaps they're right.

Your information about the prototype Deltic is great news as I have one of the first NRM models. I'll search it out and modify it. It is really good to have a use for it. Thank you!

I will have a few more notes about the running of my coaches, do you mind if I post them here for Dave? I know it's not construction.

 

Syd

[thegreenhowards]

6 hours ago, CF MRC said:

 

Maybe this helps with nomenclature? Valve gear on a P2.

 

Tim

Many thanks Tim. I think I’ll pin that to my workbench.

 

Andy

[thegreenhowards]

6 hours ago, Headstock said:

There is a nice bit of moving pictures of the valve gear on Tornado here.

 

 

Thanks Andrew, very useful. There does seem to be a tiny bit of movement in the joint where the drop link attaches to the cross head (if I’ve understood the correct parts!). Is that something which we just ignore in 4mm scale?

 

Andy

[Blandford1969]

3 hours ago, DavGuthrie said:

Many thanks John. I went on Markits web page the other day and the new catalogue (promised for 2 years ago) hasn't even been loaded up yet as well. I know that Wizard is now the outlet for Comet kits etc and thankfully they have left the original web page intact as a source of reference. 

About 10 years ago, as things began to recede in the kit business I acquired a number of DJH and SEF kits for the time of retirement - and that day has now come and I am pleased that I now have plenty to occupy me!!  

I had an email from them this week saying 

 

The only Catalogue available at present is the old 2013 (Link below)

 

Prices have changed a little bit.

We are in the process of re-writing BUT things have changed a bit…I have just Cast 72,000 Driving wheel of which there about 16 or 17 NEW types and sizes etc., and because our manufacturing system is changing, we are actually having to INVENT (quite literally) new machinery… all this takes time (& money) trying to keep up with orders emails phone orders AND Manufacturing means spare time is in short supply. Also I don’t want to put out the Catalogue with all the NEW Wheels until WE actually have some of each on the shelf.

 

We also have many new Brass Turnings.

 

Meanwhile just because you don’t see it, doesn’t mean we don’t have it…Just ask or email.

 

Latest Reverser is a Steam Reverser….Identical to the SR ‘Q’, ‘Q1’, ‘Z’ , ‘G16’ and many others…. Quite impressive all screwed together (with our 14ba Nut-Spinner – along with all out Westinghouse Pumps)  together about 9 or 14 parts.

 

 

http://www.markits.com/MARKITS_Price_Guide_2013_09.pdf

 

Which seemed very helpful and reasonable. I will certainly be placing an order very soon.

[Headstock]

21 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Thanks Andrew, very useful. There does seem to be a tiny bit of movement in the joint where the drop link attaches to the cross head (if I’ve understood the correct parts!). Is that something which we just ignore in 4mm scale?

 

Andy

 

Andy,

 

I believe there is some movement, thus a drop link. Some other railways had an arrangement cast as part of the crosshead and the LMS had a bolted on arrangement, in these cases, Crosshead arm or crosshead bracket seem to have been the appropriate terms. In 4mm scale it is almost pointless to try to reproduce the movement.

[t-b-g]

28 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Thanks Andrew, very useful. There does seem to be a tiny bit of movement in the joint where the drop link attaches to the cross head (if I’ve understood the correct parts!). Is that something which we just ignore in 4mm scale?

 

Andy

 

If you can picture a tiny crosshead working in slide bars for the piston valve, then the combination level moving forwards and backwards travels round a unequal arc, in that the pivot is near the top, so the long part at the bottom moves much further than the short bit above the piston valve. As the length on that link is fixed, the bottom of the combination lever swings round in a back and forth arc. The union link has to be able to move up and down a bit in relation to the crosshead and the bottom of the combination lever. Most model valve gear has pivots at both ends of the union link but doesn't mimic the full movement as there is usually no movement on the valve.

 

In model form, very few have a working piston valve and most are modelled in mid gear, so the piston valve would not move if it is modelled at all. The combination lever makes sure that the two sources of movement, the crosshead and the expansion link, "Combine" (hence the name) to create the right amount of movement of the piston valve, in the right direction at the right time!

 

I hope I have that about right. It was how Malcolm Crawley explained it to me many years ago. 

 

I don't know if all valve gears were like that. Some railways may have had other dodges to take account of the arc of movement but that is how it was done on proper railways like the LNER.  

Edited March 31, 2020 by t-b-g

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, ROY@34F said:

7 o' clock on that side Andy , 5 o'clock on 'tother side , as you look at it . The eccentric arm follows the crank pin by 1/4 of a turn + lap & lead , going forward . Somebody might correct me on this , but that's how I remember it .

 

Sorry for butting in here Tony .

 

Regards , Roy .

 

Butt away Roy,

 

You've actually fired A1s! 

 

I'm slightly puzzled by your description. My understanding is that the return crank leans forwards on A1s (or any LNER Pacific). That is to say, if it's the left-hand side, at bottom dead centre, the crank will be pointing towards half-past ten. On the right-hand) offside) it'll be pointing towards half-past one. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited March 31, 2020 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[Tony Wright]

4 hours ago, ROY@34F said:

Tony,

   May I offer a little in the way of critical observation on 60156 . The tender sides : should they not follow the rounded shape of the back of the tender and the front end as well of course . I thought it just looks more of a rather shallow angle in your photo . Or is that how it should be ?

 

Regards to you and Mo . I hope you're keeping well and clear of this awful virus .

 

Regards , Roy .

Quite right, Roy,

 

The tops of the tender are too 'flat'. They come pre-formed, and they're the very Devil to correct, once formed. 

 

Will that do as an excuse?

 

I love this, where folk make constructively-critical observations. Thank you.

 

I hope you, Pat and the family are keeping safe and well. We are, so far...............

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Theakerr]

On my recent DJH A2 build I figured there would be problems with the little bolt that attaches the union link to the piston rod.  I didn't fancy soldering it, bit too small, so I used the supplied nut and bolt and once I was happy with the play I applied a very small drop of superglue to the back of the nut.