Wright writes.....

[JeremyC]

And as quoted to me by our Police HQ Driving School - you shouldn't reverse out into the highway anyway. So always reverse in.

As for not being able to open hatchbacks - rubbish. What about cars with boots too, like mine? I manage ok.

 

Stewart

Reverse parking isn't practical when a member of the family [in my case my wife] uses a wheelchair.

 

Jeremy

[Focalplane]

I am sorry about this little sub thread, I hadn't expected it to gain traction, just be an example of a simple rule that, if followed, can make life simpler and, in my example, a lot safer.

 

Normal service will be resumed. . . .

[rue_d_etropal]

For any rule there are always exceptions. When disabled rear access is necessary, it would not be difficult to allocate special disabled parking spaces for this use only. I sometimes get the feeling that shops want drivers to be able to park quickly(and possibly badly) so they can get into shop a few seconds quicker, but are less concerned about the safety issues once the driver has left the shop. In fact I have encountered drivers who take longer parking front end in than it would take to park the other way around. Vehicles with high back ends(not just vans) tend to block view when driving out of parking spaces.

Back in the 90s one public utility company introduced a policy of parking back inwards. I never heard any more about it. It was at the same time one shop was trialling an electronic devise to check vehicles parked in disabled spaces. Again I did not hear anything more  about this idea.

Safety has to be the number one issue, even if it is inconvenient for a small minority.

There are times when I do park front end in, normally when I have to load or load something large and awkward such as a layout. Last weekend I did park back in  to unload, but felt it might be easier to park front in to load up at end of exhibition. I think I could have easily loaded car either way, and took extra care reversing out after the exhibition. As the surface was only grass I would not have expected any speeding exhibitors eager to get home, but it is not uncommon for us to pack vehicles loosely, and an abrupt stop even at 5mph could have resulted in load moving.

Edited April 28, 2015 by rue_d_etropal

[Andy Reichert]

I like layouts that model the era before car parking was important!

 

Andy

[Stanley Melrose]

I think I'm right Andy, when I mention that in the US of A it is normally possible to park nose first and that there will not be anything in front of one's car to prevent leaving by driving forwards as most parking is in single lanes?  Mind you, there's usually sufficient land at any parking area to permit this, i.e. everyone gets a space and there is no possibility of finding another car parked up against yours preventing forward departure.

 

That said, I once saw an American registered car visiting Nova Scotia in which the driver was attempting to parallel park on a street.  Along with many other enthralled spectators we watched this poor guy see-saw backwards and forwards as he tried to get close to the kerb.  Clearly he was not used to using reverse gear.  He got within a taxi ride distance in about 10 minutes after which we all lost interest . . .

 

Stan

[Mallard60022]

OK let's please move on from that top of the list of things to discuss on a railway thread?

As a final attempt to get it sorted, here is my guide to parking with pics to help illustrate best practice:

 

There we go.

P

[Tony Wright]

OK let's please move on from that top of the list of things to discuss on a railway thread?

As a final attempt to get it sorted, here is my guide to parking with pics to help illustrate best practice:

download (1).jpg

download.jpg

images (3).jpg

 

There we go.

P

Most amusing Phil.

 

Anyway, here's the picture of the work we did today.

 

 

Since it's your model, perhaps you'd like to comment on what we did but am I right in saying you only paid £70.00 for it? Wow - what a bargain!

 

 

 

 

As for my work, here's progress on the Brassmasters' 0-8-4T in EM. As I showed you, the bunker rails are now soldered in place - 12 x strips of .7mm wire, soldered to eight uprights - why not a simple fold-up etch for this process? It took me all of Friday morning to make the bunker rails, resorting to a piercing saw to clear the corners of excess solder. There's still some excess solder to remove.  Though an accurate kit, in my view it's unnecessarily complicated and tricky to put together. Not for the beginner of faint-hearted. 

 

 

This is much better - much easier and certainly much faster to build. It's a DJH Klondike, also in EM, being built for Paul Bason in return for his building the Willoughby Arms pub for me. This is just five hours' work so far. 

[jwealleans]

Now that's made me take notice - one of these is in the Grantham queue (but fairly well back). Is it much different to the C1, in terms of construction?

[LNER4479]

When I see poor-performing layouts, I can forgive (to some extent) operator problems because of unfamiliarity of the controls/lack of practice (though not so much on an exhibition layout), but not problems caused by poor trackwork/wiring/stock etc. 

 

What do others think on this matter, please? 

May I be permitted to return to this topic as it is a subject currently dear to my heart with Grantham only four-and-a-half months away from its full show debut?

 

I agree with much of what has been said in response to Tony's question and, in most case, would like to think that we've at least given it some thought so far as Grantham is concerned. I too have 'winced' at many a potentially great layout at an exhibition but now realise that the tables could potentially be turned!

 

I like the 5 'P's philosophy - Planning & Preparation Prevents P*ss-poor Performance. Back in 2012, when the time came to assemble the layout for the first time, I purposely obtained the (free) loan of a church hall in Luton for the weekend, hired a van and transported the whole lot 150 miles down the A50 / M1 and back for that session (at my own expense) - with the prime intent of seeing exactly how it would stand up to being rattled and banged about (as others have commented). The event at Barrow Hill last year was also purposely targeted so that we could have a further 'shakedown' (and in a pretty harsh environment at that) before committing to full show appearances.

 

Those involved with the project will know that there is now a detailed plan for the run-in to September, with work remaining prioritised accordingly. This includes operator training(!)  Any remaining dubious areas of track are being replaced as they show themselves up. Clean track and clean loco wheels is also a must and Tony has been kind enough to attend to some less well-performing members of the fleet.

 

I hope that doesn't come across as too supercilious? All I can say therefore, that if you're leaning on the barriers in the future, watching us squirm with embarrassment when all or part of the thing has 'fallen over', saying 'told you so' then all I can say in return is that it won't have been for the want of trying!

[Tony Wright]

Now that's made me take notice - one of these is in the Grantham queue (but fairly well back). Is it much different to the C1, in terms of construction?

Not much difference at all Jonathan. The method of construction appears to be exactly the same, the chassis is identical (as it should be to all intents and purposes) and all the components are beautifully-formed. Though it's in EM Gauge, there were no problems in accommodating the longer axles (I just fixed washers to restrict the greater sideplay) and I made it electrically-dead because of the intimacy between the bogie wheels and the cylinders. 

 

One for Grantham? I'll be on the phone to DJH shortly!

[Mallard60022]

Jonathan, the 9F has a lot more wheels   (sorry, I did say to TW that I'd be sensible for  a change).

Yup, that 9F came from Classifeids at around that cost as I mentioned some time back. Yesterday I had a Masterclass in how to use HMRS decals (I've not used those before) and I actually managed to do 4/5ths of the second cab side to a suitable standard.

I believe I shall use one of the excellent Pacific Models front plates, but not until I have decided whether I can dare to change that modified front of footplate/smokebox step. ('05 should not have the type shown; nor should have 92234 had it, the 'original' loco). I somehow think I might damage the loco if I attempt that little job.

In a wink of an eye T had replaced the front pony wheels with the correct spoked /size versions; little fettles got those revolving as they should.

(TW had built many of these loco's in the past and thus has knowledge that I would have struggled to obtain had I actually built the thing).

I would ask you to have a closer look at the 'lubricator linkage'.

I don't think DJH supply parts for that and have no idea if the kit instructions give advice on how it might be fabricated?

I asked Tony if he would do this for me as I have not built a loco for many years now and lo, I was shown another 'trick'; a clever little mod. Not necessary on a Bachman (or Hornby?) one of course! Thanks mate.

T also suggested replacing the plumbing under the cab. I shall look at doing that either with a set of parts or making it up out of wire and nuts as  per Iain Rice ( I think it was in his book on loco kit building?) I'll also have a good look for little pipes and fittings that I might attach just for fun.

One thing that will not happen is driving wheel replacement.  I have to tolerate the fact that the existing wheels do not have the correct number of spokes.

Finally it will be covered with a suitable matt surface. It is far too 'silk' at the moment. Experiments on another old loco body first though.

So, TW's wheel clean, confirmation that it had a neat DJH gearbox and then onto LB and I am pleased to say it ran well and hauled one of T's long van trains. 

We both want to say that the builder of this loco had done the job very well indeed; beautifully built.

The only thing I would say to anyone and is the mantra, check the prototype example you want carefully for the period you choose. 'Details' can make such a difference

I think that is about it. What a very satisfying little work session to give the Spaceship an identity and some enhancements. 

Now for the other items shown above. Both run as smoothly as a very smooth thing moves. TW will never allow any loco of his to not do that. I learnt that many years ago when I was first involved with his 'classes'.

That  tanky is a beasty but I rather like it!  As T says, a few design tweaks in the etches would make life so much easier, as they would in so many other kits of course. My brain would have failed if I had had to do that coal rail fitting

As for the 'Clondyke', I can't wait to see it romping around LB at some future date prior to delivery to the new owner. Lovely job.

A most enjoyable day and the pub ain't bad either! Thanks T & M.

Phil

 

Edit @ 15.28. What an ar*e I am, I forgot that T had shown me the miracle of 'cab glazing'. Krystal Klear (is that it?) for the forard lights and some nicely aged plastic box bits for the side windows. The box being one of those flexi ones that sometimes contains a bow tie or similar! Excellent.

Edited April 29, 2015 by Mallard60022

[Tony Wright]

May I be permitted to return to this topic as it is a subject currently dear to my heart with Grantham only four-and-a-half months away from its full show debut?

 

I agree with much of what has been said in response to Tony's question and, in most case, would like to think that we've at least given it some thought so far as Grantham is concerned. I too have 'winced' at many a potentially great layout at an exhibition but now realise that the tables could potentially be turned!

 

I like the 5 'P's philosophy - Planning & Preparation Prevents P*ss-poor Performance. Back in 2012, when the time came to assemble the layout for the first time, I purposely obtained the (free) loan of a church hall in Luton for the weekend, hired a van and transported the whole lot 150 miles down the A50 / M1 and back for that session (at my own expense) - with the prime intent of seeing exactly how it would stand up to being rattled and banged about (as others have commented). The event at Barrow Hill last year was also purposely targeted so that we could have a further 'shakedown' (and in a pretty harsh environment at that) before committing to full show appearances.

 

Those involved with the project will know that there is now a detailed plan for the run-in to September, with work remaining prioritised accordingly. This includes operator training(!)  Any remaining dubious areas of track are being replaced as they show themselves up. Clean track and clean loco wheels is also a must and Tony has been kind enough to attend to some less well-performing members of the fleet.

 

I hope that doesn't come across as too supercilious? All I can say therefore, that if you're leaning on the barriers in the future, watching us squirm with embarrassment when all or part of the thing has 'fallen over', saying 'told you so' then all I can say in return is that it won't have been for the want of trying!

Having witnessed the preparations so far on Grantham, I think the Five 'P's philosophy is being applied by all of you. 

 

It is my pleasure (and privilege) to tweak a few locos from time to time. That's very much part of the preparation and (though it's not a 'P') elimination of what could be a cause of a problem. If the locos run perfectly, then any stuttering/derailing/jerking and so on must be down to the track/electrics/operator error. One DJH Atlantic stuttered a bit at the last running session and I was able to identify that the bogie wheels on one side were touching the bogie frames, causing a short. The advice was to fix spacing washers on the axles to prevent this. That way, there's no further need to investigate the loco if there is a subsequent fault. 

 

Years ago I was part of an operating team for a largish (25' x 10') layout where the running was rubbish. The providers of the stock blamed the track-makers and the wiring installers (the same three blokes). That was until I started investigating the locos and stock (mostly kit-built). It was the antithesis of 'how to win friends', though not how to 'influence' people. I did, however, win three friends but became the 'mortal enemy' of several of the stock-providers, especially as I suggested the nearest dustbin should be a destination for it. That, by the way, is how Fordley Park became an ER layout. 

Edited April 29, 2015 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Jonathan, the 9F has a lot more wheels   (sorry, I did say to TW that I'd be sensible for  a change).

Yup, that 9F came from Classifeids at around that cost as I mentioned some time back. Yesterday I had a Masterclass in how to use HMRS decals (I've not used those before) and I actually managed to do 4/5ths of the second cab side to a suitable standard.

I believe I shall use one of the excellent Pacific Models front plates, but not until I have decided whether I can dare to change that modified front of footplate/smokebox step. ('05 should not have the type shown; nor should have 92234 had it, the 'original' loco). I somehow think I might damage the loco if I attempt that little job.

In a wink of an eye T had replaced the front pony wheels with the correct spoked /size versions; little fettles got those revolving as they should.

(TW had built many of these loco's in the past and thus has knowledge that I would have struggled to obtain had I actually built the thing).

I would ask you to have a closer look at the 'lubricator linkage'.

I don't think DJH supply parts for that and have no idea if the kit instructions give advice on how it might be fabricated?

I asked Tony if he would do this for me as I have not built a loco for many years now and lo, I was shown another 'trick'; a clever little mod. Not necessary on a Bachman (or Hornby?) one of course! Thanks mate.

T also suggested replacing the plumbing under the cab. I shall look at doing that either with a set of parts or making it up out of wire and nuts as  per Iain Rice ( I think it was in his book on loco kit building?) I'll also have a good look for little pipes and fittings that I might attach just for fun.

One thing that will not happen is driving wheel replacement.  I have to tolerate the fact that the existing wheels do not have the correct number of spokes.

Finally it will be covered with a suitable matt surface. It is far too 'silk' at the moment. Experiments on another old loco body first though.

So, TW's wheel clean, confirmation that it had a neat DJH gearbox and then onto LB and I am pleased to say it ran well and hauled one of T's long van trains. 

We both want to say that the builder of this loco had done the job very well indeed; beautifully built.

The only thing I would say to anyone and is the mantra, check the prototype example you want carefully for the period you choose. 'Details' can make such a difference

I think that is about it. What a very satisfying little work session to give the Spaceship an identity and some enhancements. 

Now for the other items shown above. Both run as smoothly as a very smooth thing moves. TW will never allow any loco of his to not do that. I learnt that many years ago when I was first involved with his 'classes'.

That  tanky is a beasty but I rather like it!  As T says, a few design tweaks in the etches would make life so much easier, as they would in so many other kits of course. My brain would have failed if I had had to do that coal rail fitting

As for the 'Clondyke', I can't wait to see it romping around LB at some future date prior to delivery to the new owner. Lovely job.

A most enjoyable day and the pub ain't bad either! Thanks T & M.

Phil

Thanks Phil, though the Klondike is in EM Gauge. No matter, tomorrow it'll have a blast on Retford.

 

One other thing - the ease of glazing on the 9F using Krystal Klear and thin Plastiglaze. 

 

Looking forward to another session.

[Mallard60022]

Thanks Phil, though the Klondike is in EM Gauge. No matter, tomorrow it'll have a blast on Retford.

 

One other thing - the ease of glazing on the 9F using Krystal Klear and thin Plastiglaze. 

 

Looking forward to another session.

Yup, I am sorry about that. Remembered whilst looking at my books with 9Fs adorning the pages. Post #4580 duly amended.

P 

[gr.king]

A Klondike for Grantham from Little Bytham works? Now that sounds an enticing prospect. It "only" needs a black finish with red lining for 1938 too, so might such a loco be ready before the big occasion in September I wonder?

 

A little bird now tells me that the first known EM gauge conversion of a Locomotion "251" has been captured alive and unharmed. Just the rest of Retford to back-date to 1910 now........

[pete55]

A Klondike for Grantham from Little Bytham works? Now that sounds an enticing prospect. It "only" needs a black finish with red lining for 1938 too, so might such a loco be ready before the big occasion in September I wonder?

 

A little bird now tells me that the first known EM gauge conversion of a Locomotion "251" has been captured alive and unharmed. Just the rest of Retford to back-date to 1910 now........

 

And they both met this afternoon....predictably, the DJH Klondike winning hands down in the haulage stakes!

[jwealleans]

A Klondike for Grantham from Little Bytham works?

Well there won't be one rolling out of the West End works for some time, so that may be your best chance.

[Tony Wright]

And they both met this afternoon....predictably, the DJH Klondike winning hands down in the haulage stakes!

Thanks Pete.

 

My compliments on the conversion of 251 to EM Gauge. I must admit, I didn't realise the Bachmann drivers were undersized when I reviewed the loco for BRM (published next month).

 

 

But she does look good, even with slightly smaller wheels. 

 

 

It's interesting to note that this part-built Klondike just romped round with the heavy ten-car 'Queen of Scots' on Retford this afternoon, though it slipped a tad on the gradient over the GC yard. In comparison, it was a trifle disappointing to watch the larger loco just polish the rails with the same load, even on the flat. Once more, the haulage ability of kit-built stuff proves itself superior to RTR locos. This one, though, does have a slight 'waddle' at speed; just like the real thing? 

An OO version for Grantham in September? Please, watch this space - I've rarely built a loco with such ease (thus far).

 

 

Unlike this, which is grossly over-complicated in my view. However, it too romped around Retford, though with a lighter load. 

 

 

Finally, a blast from the past. Yesterday four distinguished O Gaugers visited LB and had a grand old time with their 'banana sandwiches and TIZER', watching the trains go by. Gentlemen, thank you for your most generous praise. One brought this splendid piece of antiquity - a J19 representation made from a Tri-ang B12 on a re-wheeled Jinty chassis. Great stuff my friends - I look forward to a return visit.  

[LNER4479]

A Klondike for Grantham from Little Bytham works? Now that sounds an enticing prospect. It "only" needs a black finish with red lining for 1938 too, so might such a loco be ready before the big occasion in September I wonder?

 

An OO version for Grantham in September? Please, watch this space - I've rarely built a loco with such ease (thus far).

Well, that would be fantastic  Such a splendid machine would be made very welcome at the MPD and put to good use on the local services.

[gr.king]

J19 above - quite a clever re-deployment of the under nourished Triang B12 boiler and cab. Possibly spot on for boiler diameter looking at the figures for the J19/2s, B12s (excluding pt3) and the Claud rebuilds. Is it the original tender too? Bit of a compromise with the Jinty wheelbase but definitely a "cunning plan" overall. Wish I'd thought of it.......

[New Haven Neil]

Excellent 'old school' J19, I was convinced it must have been a BEC kit or something at first!  A friend from wayyyy back (Phil English - 'Southallerton' featured in RM back in the day, I was but a schoolboy and one of his operators) made a D16 from much the same components, a Triang B12 chopped down onto a L1 chassis.  The Southern type of L1 that is!

 

I have a real soft spot for conversions like this despite their obvious inaccuracy, I presume some kind of throwback memory thing from those days.  They certainly have character.

 

Edit - Phil also did the Thompson rebuild, The D or D49/4 inside cylinder loco.

Edited May 2, 2015 by New Haven Neil

[glo41f]

A small request.

 

I and I am sure a lot of others are very interested in the Retford project but sadly we do not hear too much about it. It must be one of the most ambitious layouts of present days. I wonder if it would be possible to have a few pictures of the current position on the railway.

 

By the way the J19 uses a standard B12 tender. Roger who made it was a well known bodger of such thigs in his 4mm days!

 

Regards

 

Martin Long

[stewartingram]

I have a couple of early resin bodies, that fit the Triang/Hornby J19 chassis. Add the B12 tender, and bingo - instant J19! Obviously with compromises though. I think the maker was Jaycraft, they also did a D16/3. Anyone else recall them?

 

Stewart

Edited May 2, 2015 by stewartingram

[glo41f]

“We were by the lineside fence in a good position to see the traffic on both lines. It was a warm spring day and insects buzzed on the lush embankment. The pegs for the up fast come off. What will it be? Then the up slow and under the bridge can be seen the distant outline of a slow goods. Will it pass before the up fast train? The excitement mounts as the goods looms larger in view. Suddenly a speck appears under the bridge which grows in size as we watch. Soon we are able to make out a headboard and smoke deflectors. Is it going to be an A1 in full cry? The goods gets ever closer. Will we see the “namer” on the express or will it be obscured by the WD hauled goods? The express passes a few seconds before the goods revealing the loco to be Great Northern as messed up by Mr Thompson. Derisive shouts emerge  from the party as the carriages pass in a blur and the forty odd wagons on the freight clank pass. Soon the pegs go down and all is quiet again except the insects buzzing“

 

A day spent train watching at Little Bytham!

 

Thanks for the memories Tony.

 

Martin Long

[Phil Brighton]

Hello Tony.

 

You may or may not remember we met at the York show a few weeks back and you very kindly tried to help me find a small tapered reamer. It is helpful to see your Klondyke build as I am am just getting started on the DJH C1 kit which is in many ways identical. I may not get as nice a result as the Bachmann one but building is the fun bit. Is there any chance you could let us see under the body of your C2? I have an excellent article by Graeme King in BRM that recommends swapping the way DJH suggest doing the rear wheel for a pony truck - which I can see the sense in but am a bit nervous about doing the cut out needed in the chassis!

 

Thanks

 

Phil