Wright writes.....

[Denbridge]

56 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

It's coming to that time of year where I look back over my last 12 months' modelling. 

 

Two new locos (seen first some little time ago) are ready for the paintshops.............. 

 

 

A DJH A3, to become 60046 DIAMOND JUBILEE. 

 

It tows a K's P2 tender (a survivor from an abandoned project, my having already painted it in LNER lined green), appropriate for this loco, being a streamlined non-corridor type. 

 

As usual, this loco has been thoroughly tested prior to painting. Geoff Haynes will paint her.

 

 

And the Model Loco 9F.

 

I have a BR 1F tender for this, making it more appropriate for the ER.

 

Being plain black, I'll probably paint this. 

 

A problem when shooting in this position is the image of the train curving through a right angle beyond Dave Wager's wonderful girder bridge. Perhaps a view-blocker is needed by the presence of a train on the Up slow? From 'normal' viewing angles, the tight curves at both ends of the scenic section cannot be seen, essential for 'realism'.

 

 

 

 

Something that occurred to me following my wonderful visit was a cover over the tracks beyond the backscene. By reducing the amount of light reaching the tracks the curves may be less conspicuous and a cover would be easily removable for any essential maintenance. 

[Tony Wright]

Regular readers might remember Ian Rathbone repainting an A4 I'd built.

 

I'd made SIR NIGEL GRESLEY from a South Eastern Finecast kit to run on Shap in 1967 mode, so Ian painted it in originally-preserved condition. 

 

 

Shap has since been mainly back-dated, so what to do with 4498?

 

 

Give her a run on Little Bytham?

 

I much prefer A4s in BR green, so I asked Ian to repaint her (he suggested I build another, and sell the original).

 

 

Here's the result; much more appropriate for LB. 

 

I built this model about four years ago, and here she is now on the sort of job I saw the real thing working. 

 

Out of interest, I put on a Wills A4 I'd made not far off 30 years ago now, which Ian also painted. 

 

 

I suppose it proves that my modelling hasn't improved in the last quarter century (Ian's painting hasn't needed to).

 

SILVER LINK has a scratch-built chassis. It had an original white metal lump!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Denbridge]

4 minutes ago, Denbridge said:

Something that occurred to me following my wonderful visit was a cover over the tracks beyond the backscene. By reducing the amount of light reaching the tracks the curves may be less conspicuous and a cover would be easily removable for any essential maintenance. 

Of course, those curves aren't at all noticeable during normal viewing 

[drmditch]

RMWeb appeared to remove 'Wright Writes' from my list of followed content the day before yesterday.

I became suspicious when 'WW' did not show in my 'Content I Follow' stream for two whole days.

Obviously, everybody knows that 'WW' always has several new posts every day.

 

I appreciate that the country/human race/planet is in a right mess at the moment, but to loose links to 'WW' would be a real disaster.

 

Does anyone have an idea as to how this could happen?

[great central]

22 minutes ago, drmditch said:

RMWeb appeared to remove 'Wright Writes' from my list of followed content the day before yesterday.

I became suspicious when 'WW' did not show in my 'Content I Follow' stream for two whole days.

Obviously, everybody knows that 'WW' always has several new posts every day.

 

I appreciate that the country/human race/planet is in a right mess at the moment, but to loose links to 'WW' would be a real disaster.

 

Does anyone have an idea as to how this could happen?

 

Possibly the same as happened to me with a thread a while ago.

I always view the forum on my phone, pages tend to jump around a bit when loading, especially with the 'Gold' advertising at the top of the page.

If that happens and you're either a little bit quick or not watching carefully what you're doing, the ignore topic bar can be hit accidentally and 'bang!' the thread is gone

[Jesse Sim]

8 hours ago, Jack P said:

 

I know you didn't! 

 

Just mentioning that peoples priorities can generally be a bit different.

Often starting is the hardest part!

I completely agree, when you do start a whole new world opens. 

[Jesse Sim]

11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Jesse,

 

I was never a headmaster, just a head of department.

 

The 23rd? Is that the Zoom whatnot (whatever it is?) I'm invited to? Don't forget to phone me up beforehand and take me through the procedures!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Headmaster just sounded better then Head of Department. 
 

The 23rd it is at 9pm. 
 

But don’t worry I’ll wake up earlier on my first day off of the holidays to get you all sorted!!!! 

[St Enodoc]

35 minutes ago, Jesse Sim said:

Headmaster just sounded better then Head of Department. 
 

The 23rd it is at 9pm. 
 

But don’t worry I’ll wake up earlier on my first day off of the holidays to get you all sorted!!!! 

While you've got your diary out mark Saturday 15/1/22 at 1330 in large red letters!

[LNER4479]

3 hours ago, drmditch said:

RMWeb appeared to remove 'Wright Writes' from my list of followed content the day before yesterday.

 

Does anyone have an idea as to how this could happen?

Andy has to limit the number of followers of WW ... otherwise too many people would be making things for themselves and the RTR manufacturers would go out of business

[Chamby]

11 hours ago, drmditch said:

RMWeb appeared to remove 'Wright Writes' from my list of followed content the day before yesterday.

I became suspicious when 'WW' did not show in my 'Content I Follow' stream for two whole days.

Obviously, everybody knows that 'WW' always has several new posts every day.

 

I appreciate that the country/human race/planet is in a right mess at the moment, but to loose links to 'WW' would be a real disaster.

 

Does anyone have an idea as to how this could happen?

It might be something to do with this problem, that tablet users have been experiencing for some weeks now:

 

[Tony Wright]

I note I'm mentioned in despatches in the latest issue of Railway Modeller (Comment, page 59), where it's noted that I 'set out to model one subject, and one subject only', making it almost a lifetime's work. In this I'm paired with Ian Nuttall (who's far more noble because he does most of the modelling on his S&C creation himself). I wonder whether this 'Comment' piece will cause the same stir mine did about four years ago where I suggested (among other things) to always observe the prototype, try to make things rather than just buy and always help others in their own modelling. 

 

Anyway, it set me thinking; thinking about conversations I had with the late Roy Jackson, who was also (very) single-minded in his approach to modelling. We both agreed that to model a prototype, a main line prototype (in Roy's case, a very big one in Retford), then a huge commitment was necessary in terms of time, research, resources and dedication, etc, if a project (or projects) was ever going to be completed (in Roy's case, that's up to others now). Endless hours spent in pubs, watching telly, going on holiday and all the other 'distractions' would have to be subordinate to the making of the model. Like Roy, I've been lucky to have worked with a team (though there's more of Roy in Retford than there is of me in Little Bytham). My trainset is also considerably smaller (though the trains are the same length), making it easier to have 'finished' it. 

 

So, what might be concluded from the above ramblings, with regard to modelling a prototype main line (at least 30' long in 4mm)?

To model an actual prototype location, more 'discipline' might be needed, because most of the principal decisions regarding site, structures, size, topography, etc, have already been made for you.

No mucking about deciding where and what things should go. 

Be prepared to expect to take a very large amount of time - years, even decades - before 'completion' is achieved, especially if you're a 'one man (or woman) band'.

Don't expect to achieve anything approaching 'realism' (on a large scale) if you're reliant on RTR/RTP. 

Expect to have to make a large number of things oneself (unless one has a weighty chequebook and just commissions work by others). 

Acknowledge the benefit of teamwork, but only if any team displays consistent and uniform modelling skills across the whole spectrum.

Be prepared for it to cost a fair bit (loads if your layout is all commissioned work). With regard to the last point, costs can be mitigated by spreading them over a long time period, and/or, in Little Bytham's case, by 'horse trading' different skill sets among members of the team.

Be very single-minded over 'standards'? Most of the most accurate layouts I've seen have not been that 'democratic', which rather rules out many vast club layouts where 'everyone has a go', regardless of their abilities.

Insist (to the point of zeal) on the highest running standards.

 

I'm sure there are many more 'conclusions' one can draw, and I'm also sure there are many superb layouts which don't follow the above points. 

 

Food for thought?

Edited December 18, 2021 by Tony Wright
to add something

[St Enodoc]

3 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Don't expect to achieve anything approaching 'realism' (on a large scale) if you're reliant on RTR/RTP.

I would say "authenticity" rather than "realism" in that context. Your goods trains, for example, look very realistic but I suspect that they are not 100% authentic.

[Dylan Sanderson]

13 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I note I'm mentioned in despatches in the latest issue of Railway Modeller (Comment, page 59), where it's noted that I 'set out to model one subject, and one subject only', making it almost a lifetime's work. In this I'm paired with Ian Nuttall (who's far more noble because he does most of the modelling on his S&C creation himself). I wonder whether this 'Comment' piece will cause the same stir mine did about four years ago where I suggested (among other things) to always observe the prototype, try to make things rather than just buy and always help others in their own modelling. 

 

Anyway, it set me thinking; thinking about conversations I had with the late Roy Jackson, who was also (very) single-minded in his approach to modelling. We both agreed that to model a prototype, a main line prototype (in Roy's case, a very big one in Retford), then a huge commitment was necessary in terms of time, research, resources and dedication, etc, if a project (or projects) was ever going to be completed (in Roy's case, that's up to others now). Endless hours spent in pubs, watching telly, going on holiday and all the other 'distractions' would have to be subordinate to the making of the model. Like Roy, I've been lucky to have worked with a team (though there's more of Roy in Retford than there is of me in Little Bytham). My trainset is also considerably smaller (though the trains are the same length), making it easier to have 'finished' it. 

 

So, what might be concluded from the above ramblings, with regard to modelling a prototype main line (at least 30' long in 4mm)?

To model an actual prototype location, more 'discipline' might be needed, because most of the principal decisions regarding site, structures, size, topography, etc, have already been made for you.

No mucking about deciding where and what things should go. 

Be prepared to expect to take a very large amount of time - years, even decades - before 'completion' is achieved, especially if you're a 'one man (or woman) band.

Don't expect to achieve anything approaching 'realism' (on a large scale) if you're reliant on RTR/RTP. 

Expect to have to make a large number of things oneself (unless one has a weighty chequebook and just commissions work by others). 

Acknowledge the benefit of teamwork, but only if any team displays consistent and uniform modelling skills across the whole spectrum.

Be prepared for it to cost a fair bit (loads if your layout is all commissioned work). With regard to the last point, costs can be mitigated by spreading them over a long time period, and/or, in Little Bytham's case, by 'horse trading' different skill sets among members of the team.

Be very single-minded over 'standards'? Most of the most accurate layouts I've seen have not been that 'democratic', which rather rules out many vast club layouts where 'everyone has a go', regardless of their abilities.

Insist (to the point of zeal) on the highest running standards.

 

I'm sure there are many more 'conclusions' one can draw, and I'm also sure there are many superb layouts which don't follow the above points. 

 

Food for thought?

Then there's me... slap bang in the middle!

 

My current layout, 15x2ft Scenic OO Gauge, is influenced heavily on Deerness Valley Junction. Same track plan, same buildings, and same atmosphere as well as same location, so the trains are the same. But, I'm having to 'bunch it up a bit' to get it to fit on my boards, but hopefully it will give the same impression.

 

But, with the NER buildings I've designed with work, and that gorgeous NER footbridge I bought off of you Tony, I've got to have a station! So, I'm superimposing one onto the track plan, just a small simple 2 platform station on the Consett Branch.

 

Hopefully this will allow me to enjoy the benefits from both sides of the fence... I don't have to worry about what to do with the track plan or anything, but I can enjoy the liberal freedom of deciding 'I want a station here!'

[Headstock]

15 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I would say "authenticity" rather than "realism" in that context. Your goods trains, for example, look very realistic but I suspect that they are not 100% authentic.

 

I quite agree,

 

you might say that a model of Godzilla could look very realistic but it's pure fantasy. I'm not fooled by the goods trains on LB, I would consider them to be the weakest part of the layout, though they are technically well modeled.  The railway infrastructure is probably the strongest element in my opinion. LB is however, not a Godzilla layout. 

[Tony Wright]

28 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

I would say "authenticity" rather than "realism" in that context. Your goods trains, for example, look very realistic but I suspect that they are not 100% authentic.

Good morning John,

 

I very much doubt that any train on LB is 'authentic'.

 

In the main, the passenger trains are made-up using BR's own documents, but many prototype photographs contradict these.

 

I make-up the goods trains using prototype pictures as far as I can. Some (most?) of these might be the only time that a set was made-up in that formation.

 

'Realism'? 'Authenticity'? 'Semantics'?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[St Enodoc]

56 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

'Realism'? 'Authenticity'? 'Semantics'?

I don't think so, Tony!

 

Although the lexicographers might not agree, my purely personal definitions in the context of a model are:

 

Authentic - replicating, or being a true representation of, the real thing (objective); and

Realistic - evoking, or giving an impression of, the real thing (subjective).

 

I've seen models over the years - in the flesh, in print or on screen, that are realistic without being authentic and, conversely, models that are authentic without (unfortunately) being realistic.

 

There are of course many that are neither but few - very few in my experience - that are both.

 

Having lit the blue touch paper, I shall now retire...

 

 

Edited December 17, 2021 by St Enodoc

[SD85]

1 hour ago, St Enodoc said:

I don't think so, Tony!

 

Although the lexicographers might not agree, my purely personal definitions in the context of a model are:

 

Authentic - replicating, or being a true representation of, the real thing (objective); and

Realistic - evoking, or giving an impression of, the real thing (subjective).

 

I've seen models over the years - in the flesh, in print or on screen, that are realistic without being authentic and, conversely, models that are authentic without (unfortunately) being realistic.

 

There are of course many that are neither but few - very few in my experience - that are both.

 

Having lit the blue touch paper, I shall now retire...

 

 

 

Could you explain this in a little more detail if possible? I do sort of get what you're saying though.

[FarrMan]

1 hour ago, SD85 said:

 

Could you explain this in a little more detail if possible? I do sort of get what you're saying though.

I think our exiled Cornish friend is saying that realistic means it looks right, though may not be, whereas authentic means that it is right, though may not look it.

 

Lloyd

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I don't think so, Tony!

 

Although the lexicographers might not agree, my purely personal definitions in the context of a model are:

 

Authentic - replicating, or being a true representation of, the real thing (objective); and

Realistic - evoking, or giving an impression of, the real thing (subjective).

 

I've seen models over the years - in the flesh, in print or on screen, that are realistic without being authentic and, conversely, models that are authentic without (unfortunately) being realistic.

 

There are of course many that are neither but few - very few in my experience - that are both.

 

Having lit the blue touch paper, I shall now retire...

 

 

A good distinction, John,

 

My OED lists 'authentic' as 'Reliable, trustworthy, of undisputed origin, genuine..........'

 

It lists 'real(istic)' as 'Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact, objective, genuine, rightly so called, natural, sincere................'

 

Neither of these definitions apply to anything I've ever made, that's why I put 'realism' in inverted commas in the first place. 

 

Regarding LB's goods trains' 'realism'/'authenticity'. The following might be of interest............

 

 

Seen before, but relevant still. Someone once questioned my putting of an ex-SR bogie van in a mixed freight.

 

 

A 'typical' Class C express freight? 

 

 

Another Class C, this one with what appear to be fish vans in it towards the rear. I've put a couple of insulated vans in one of my Class C freights. 

 

 

Mainly 12T vans in this Class C. 

 

Speaking of 'realism'/'authenticity' , would anyone model a boiler handrail like that?

 

 

I have a BR CCT in one of my Class C freights.

 

 

And, for those strapped for space!

 

 

A Class E. Those vans at the front probably consitute a fitted head.

 

 

A Class F. Are those ex-SR vans at the head? 

 

 

A Class H. Mainly steel minerals, but plenty of evidence of wooden-bodied wagons.

 

 

Mainly steel minerals in this Class H (it is 1963), but older ones towards the rear?

 

Another Class H.

 

 

Class E can cover such a variety. 

 

 

Was there ever an accurate consist for a pick-up freight?

 

 

Even one which picked up 'passengers'? 

 

I doubt if any of these trains ever ran in the exact formation seen above even a day later. 

 

Which gives one penty of 'modellers' licence'.

 

Please, all, respect copyright restrictions on the above images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 17, 2021 by Tony Wright
tautology

[Headstock]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

A good distinction, John,

 

My OED lists 'authentic' as 'Reliable, trustworthy, of undisputed origin, genuine..........'

 

It lists 'real(istic)' as 'Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact, objective, genuine, rightly so called, natural, sincere................'

 

Neither of these definitions apply to anything I've ever made, that's why I put 'realism' in inverted commas in the first place. 

 

Regarding LB's goods trains' 'realism'/'authenticity'. The following might be of interest............

 

 

Seen before, but relevant still. Someone once questioned my putting of an ex-SR bogie van in a mixed freight.

 

 

Good evening Tony,

 

of more relevance are the nine ex LMS vans in the photo, conveniently ignored by modelers and manufactures but easily outnumbering the SR types, except in model railway land were the reverse is the case. 

[Headstock]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

Mainly 12T vans in this Class C. 

 

 

Half of the first ten vans are ex LMS. 

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, Dylan Sanderson said:

Then there's me... slap bang in the middle!

 

My current layout, 15x2ft Scenic OO Gauge, is influenced heavily on Deerness Valley Junction. Same track plan, same buildings, and same atmosphere as well as same location, so the trains are the same. But, I'm having to 'bunch it up a bit' to get it to fit on my boards, but hopefully it will give the same impression.

 

But, with the NER buildings I've designed with work, and that gorgeous NER footbridge I bought off of you Tony, I've got to have a station! So, I'm superimposing one onto the track plan, just a small simple 2 platform station on the Consett Branch.

 

Hopefully this will allow me to enjoy the benefits from both sides of the fence... I don't have to worry about what to do with the track plan or anything, but I can enjoy the liberal freedom of deciding 'I want a station here!'

Good evening Dylan,

 

You're still going to be following prototype practice, which is the most-important thing.

 

I commend you.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Jesse Sim]

18 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

While you've got your diary out mark Saturday 15/1/22 at 1330 in large red letters!

Done and done 

[Dunsignalling]

6 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

A good distinction, John,

 

My OED lists 'authentic' as 'Reliable, trustworthy, of undisputed origin, genuine..........'

 

It lists 'real(istic)' as 'Actually existing as a thing or occurring in fact, objective, genuine, rightly so called, natural, sincere................'

 

Neither of these definitions apply to anything I've ever made, that's why I put 'realism' in inverted commas in the first place. 

 

Regarding LB's goods trains' 'realism'/'authenticity'. The following might be of interest............

 

 

Seen before, but relevant still. Someone once questioned my putting of an ex-SR bogie van in a mixed freight.

 

 

A 'typical' Class C express freight? 

 

 

Another Class C, this one with what appear to be fish vans in it towards the rear. I've put a couple of insulated vans in one of my Class C freights. 

 

 

Mainly 12T vans in this Class C. 

 

Speaking of 'realism'/'authenticity' , would anyone model a boiler handrail like that?

 

 

I have a BR CCT in one of my Class C freights.

 

 

And, for those strapped for space!

 

 

A Class E. Those vans at the front probably consitute a fitted head.

 

 

A Class F. Are those ex-SR vans at the head? 

 

 

A Class H. Mainly steel minerals, but plenty of evidence of wooden-bodied wagons.

 

 

Mainly steel minerals in this Class H (it is 1963), but older ones towards the rear?

 

Another Class H.

 

 

Class E can cover such a variety. 

 

 

Was there ever an accurate consist for a pick-up freight?

 

 

Even one which picked up 'passengers'? 

 

I doubt if any of these trains ever ran in the exact formation seen above even a day later. 

 

Which gives one penty of 'modellers' licence'.

 

Please, all, respect copyright restrictions on the above images.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(The SR van in the mixed freight looks more like the 4-w BY (formerly Van C) to me unless the shot was taken using a telephoto lens.) Ignore the foregoing.

 

All the SR vans with guards' compartments were quite jealously guarded by the Southern Region until the late fifties and they rarely escaped for long. Many were actually in fixed circuits.

 

The basic PMVs and CCTs (as in the shot behind the A3) had always got around, but the B and BY vans didn't range widely until the SR began to receive fairly numerous cascaded Stanier, Gresley and Thompson BGs rendered surplus by new Mk1 equivalents. They also got some LMS Stove R's, which were much more popular among milk train guards than the four-wheelers. 

 

John

Edited December 17, 2021 by Dunsignalling

[robertcwp]

32 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

The SR van in the mixed freight looks more like the 4-w BY (formerly Van C) to me unless the shot was taken using a telephoto lens. All the ones with guards' compartments were quite jealously guarded by the Southern Region until the late fifties and they rarely escaped for long. Many were actually in fixed circuits.

 

The basic PMVs and CCTs (as in the shot behind the A3) had always got around, but the B and BY vans didn't range widely until the SR began to receive fairly numerous cascaded Stanier, Gresley and Thompson BGs rendered surplus by new Mk1 equivalents. They also got some LMS Stove R's, which were much more popular among milk train guards than the four-wheelers. 

 

John

I have no doubt that the van behind 61170 is an SR bogie Van B as it has four sets of double doors and four long rainstrips on the roof. 

 

S236_Bristol_27-1-80 by Robert Carroll, on Flickr