Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

43 minutes ago, D-A-T said:

I think Tony missed the Harry Potter reference. 😊

Please forgive my ignorance.

 

I've never read any of the books nor seen any of the films.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Jesse Sim]

10 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Please forgive my ignorance.

 

I've never read any of the books nor seen any of the films.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Well I know what we’re doing next time I stay. 

[D-A-T]

19 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Please forgive my ignorance.

 

I've never read any of the books nor seen any of the films.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 Lord Voldemort or the Dark Lord, or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named

[polybear]

8 hours ago, D-A-T said:

 

 Lord Voldemort or the Dark Lord, or He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named

 

Or to put it into 1940's/50's comic-speak, a very bad baddie.

[jwealleans]

A bit like the Mekon, but taller.

 

And with a wand.

[Compound2632]

11 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Please forgive my ignorance.

 

I've never read any of the books nor seen any of the films.

 

Kings Cross plays a significant role, as (in the films) do a couple of other ex-LNER locations, so there is something for everyone!

Edited August 3, 2022 by Compound2632
parenthetical clarification

[Tony Wright]

1 minute ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Kings Cross plays a significant role, as do a couple of other ex-LNER locations, so there is something for everyone!

Good morning Stephen,

 

Many thanks.

 

Please excuse my apparent lack of enthusiasm for 'fantasy fiction', but Kings Cross has played many far more significant roles to me than the starting point of 'Hogwart's Express' - have I got the spelling right? I only know about it from photographing a Hornby train pack. 

 

I'm afraid there's nothing in Harry Potter for me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Compound2632]

6 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Stephen,

 

Many thanks.

 

Please excuse my apparent lack of enthusiasm for 'fantasy fiction', but Kings Cross has played many far more significant roles to me than the starting point of 'Hogwart's Express' - have I got the spelling right? I only know about it from photographing a Hornby train pack. 

 

I'm afraid there's nothing in Harry Potter for me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Chacun à son goût. The only other significant literary reference to Kings Cross that comes to mind is in E.M. Forster's Howards End. Both there and in Rowling, it stands for infinity, or something like it.

[MarkC]

15 hours ago, Mike 84C said:

Check out KMCE on Irish Railway Modeler site. he has built one and has posted picture of the finished build. If you pm,ed him he would probably answer any problems you brought up. He is a very helpful sort of guy.

 Hope this helps 

   Regards Mick

Hi Mick.

 

I'll do just that. Thank you. *wanders off to look for links* EDIT - found it 👍

 

I believe, though, that I'm not the only modeller who has concerns about these new developments in the hobby. I'm sure that things will develop, particularly with regard to materials, and probably quite quickly.  Indeed, Tony himself has raised the subject. New techniques & technology  - interesting times.

 

Mark

Edited August 3, 2022 by MarkC
To add something

[Allegheny1600]

22 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I'm afraid there's nothing in Harry Potter for me.

Of all the many things about this thread that I love - this is a standout for me!

 I was working in an office environment when Harry Potter fever was rampant throughout the country and the way everyone else chatted about it all, left me quite cold such that I have never even looked at it all.

Wrt assembling RTR model railways, I think that it curious that it’s mostly women who seem to do it. Watch any of the various videos available online, especially from the likes of Rapido or Roco and it seems that no matter where in the world these tasks are undertaken, women assemble, men design and or manage.

An inadvertently sexist business we are in?

Cheers,

 John 

[APOLLO]

The film 39 Steps featured Kings Cross

 

https://the.hitchcock.zone/wiki/King's_Cross_Station,_London

 

 

 

 

And of course the Forth Bridge

 

 

1000 frames to view of this superb film in the link above.

 

Anyway, Kings Cross as I knew it at first visit ---- 27 March 1970, a long time ago.

 

 

Brit15

[Compound2632]

Just now, Allegheny1600 said:

Wrt assembling RTR model railways, I think that it curious that it’s mostly women who seem to do it. Watch any of the various videos available online, especially from the likes of Rapido or Roco and it seems that no matter where in the world these tasks are undertaken, women assemble, men design and or manage.

An inadvertently sexist business we are in?

 

Low pay and fine motor skills. 

 

In the early years of the last century, one of the Glasgow shipbuilding and engineering firms moved into motor car manufacture. The factory was run by the daughter of the firm's owner and employed only women, such fiddly fancy work being (a) what they were deemed to be good at (cf needlework) and (b) beneath the dignity of the menfolk.

[Mark C]

47 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good morning Stephen,

 

Many thanks.

 

Please excuse my apparent lack of enthusiasm for 'fantasy fiction', but Kings Cross has played many far more significant roles to me than the starting point of 'Hogwart's Express' - have I got the spelling right? I only know about it from photographing a Hornby train pack. 

 

I'm afraid there's nothing in Harry Potter for me.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

There are scenes in the beginning of Get Carter that ooze early 70s ECML nostalgia - definitely worth a look.

 

Regards

Mark

 

[Allegheny1600]

12 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Low pay and fine motor skills. 

 

In the early years of the last century, one of the Glasgow shipbuilding and engineering firms moved into motor car manufacture. The factory was run by the daughter of the firm's owner and employed only women, such fiddly fancy work being (a) what they were deemed to be good at (cf needlework) and (b) beneath the dignity of the menfolk.

Yes, but . . . .

 

When I was a youngster, my parents and I made friends with a chap called Bernard who said that he had been a manager at Swindon GWR works through the war years. Although there were many women and girls employed there to replace the men recruited for the war, he said that he was surprised that “their delicate little hands” (his words!) were actually quite heavy handed and not very good at “feeling” how tight to tighten things up, for example.

Of course, it may be a poor example, being that these were people who were having to be dropped into a task without being assessed for their suitability or proper training or whatever but it’s always stuck with me.

 

Just a thought to counterpoint the “typical” expectation of feminine abilities!

[thegreenhowards]

Coming back to the subject of 3D printing, this 7mm LNER J69 was printed by a friend at the club and I built it.

Being a 3D printing addict, everything was printed including the handrails. I took one look at them and thought, they’ll never stand up to a clumsy oaf like me. So I replaced the handrails with brass when I built it. However I decided to trust his coal rails rails round the bunker. Inevitably they broke on the first serious club running session with the loco! I’ve replaced them with bits of scrap etch and made sure they’re well secured them in place with bits of coal glued both to the rails and the rest of the coal. 
 

His example is still immaculate with all it’s printed parts. But it doesn’t get used because even the couplings are printed!

 

Andy

 

 

[Tony Wright]

39 minutes ago, thegreenhowards said:

Coming back to the subject of 3D printing, this 7mm LNER J69 was printed by a friend at the club and I built it.

Being a 3D printing addict, everything was printed including the handrails. I took one look at them and thought, they’ll never stand up to a clumsy oaf like me. So I replaced the handrails with brass when I built it. However I decided to trust his coal rails rails round the bunker. Inevitably they broke on the first serious club running session with the loco! I’ve replaced them with bits of scrap etch and made sure they’re well secured them in place with bits of coal glued both to the rails and the rest of the coal. 
 

His example is still immaculate with all it’s printed parts. But it doesn’t get used because even the couplings are printed!

 

Andy

 

 

It looks jolly good Andy,

 

Thanks for posting. 

 

I think I've decided that 3D-printed items are not for me. Accepting my being a 'clumsy oaf' (just like you), I can't stand things which break far too easily when being worked. 

 

I think I have a prejudice for 'plastics' in general. I get heartily sick of bits dropping off new RTR models when I come to photograph them - pipes, steps, couplings - you name it. These are bits factory-added. And, don't get me going on bits the customer has to fit - parts with pips on which won't fit into holes because those parts have been painted and are, thus, too fat. Then the paint flakes off. Then, with those bits fitted, they break off again because the model no longer fits into its (ridiculous) plastic packaging. 

 

I think I exist in a 'time warp' (of my choosing). I still have loads of metal kits to build (locos and stock), have plenty of flux and solder, lots of associated necessities - motors/gearboxes/wheels/axles/crankpins/etc. I'll probably have a go at the 'new' technologies (when requested to review such items) and write articles (when asked to) on improving older RTR models (I'm doing one right now), but the 'plastic' world can pass me by as far as I care. 

 

Barry Norman seems interested in a further piece on my modelling philosophy for the MRJ. Despite my having written a few articles for that most-prestigious publication, it hasn't gone under! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Willie Whizz]

15 hours ago, gr.king said:

IF it is the case (and I don't say that it is so) that those in a factory assembling RTR models each have only a limited range of tasks to perform repeatedly, thus tending to become very adept at those particular functions, how can their skill levels be compared with those of a highly self-reliant modeller who has to (or who chooses to) deal with everything that needs doing, no matter what it might be? Can a highly honed narrow range of skills be said to better, or poorer, than a wide range of less perfectly honed skills?

 

If you are the so-called "average modeller" with a modestly-sized layout, working alone, the chances are that your layout will require some particular element of work done just once; and the need to use that skill - and even that piece of equipment - again will not recur for several years, if ever.  Quite possibly the same for building a particular locomotive or piece of rolling stock.  In those circumstances it is hardly surprising the skill level of the 'generalist' does not match either the RTR assembly specialist, or the professional or semi-professional model maker, in either depth or breadth.  And he/she will not undertake that task sufficiently often to acquire real proficiency by sheer  experience.

 

For example, when the detailed scenic work on my own layout starts to take proper shape, I see myself having to pay out a relatively  substantial sum for some form of 'static grass applicator'.  After a few hours of use it will be put to one side and probably never be used again.  I do hope the result will be worth it ...

[richard i]

1 hour ago, Willie Whizz said:

For example, when the detailed scenic work on my own layout starts to take proper shape, I see myself having to pay out a relatively  substantial sum for some form of 'static grass applicator'.  After a few hours of use it will be put to one side and probably never be used again.  I do hope the result will be worth it ...

Borrow it.

Our club has looked at getting these sort of items which we can share around. We have not progressed with the idea, but what we do do is share our own equipment when we come across jobs that need a specific tool and someone already has the tool. 
thus saving everyone buying the item to use once. It works very well.

richard 

[westernviscount]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Barry Norman seems interested in a further piece on my modelling philosophy for the MRJ. Despite my having written a few articles for that most-prestigious publication, it hasn't gone under! 

I will certainly look forward to this. 

 

I enjoy reading about other folks' hobbying philosophies, to a greater extent than reading about their methods (although this is still of interest). 

[Willie Whizz]

3 hours ago, richard i said:

Borrow it.

Our club has looked at getting these sort of items which we can share around. We have not progressed with the idea, but what we do do is share our own equipment when we come across jobs that need a specific tool and someone already has the tool. 
thus saving everyone buying the item to use once. It works very well.

richard 

 

My family and I collaborate on that basis with garden tools, so I don't doubt that it 'works very well' - provided of course you are in a club or have the inclination to join one that happens conveniently to exist nearby; or have a friend who also happens to be a railway modeller and chances to own the exact thing you need.

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, westernviscount said:

I will certainly look forward to this. 

 

I enjoy reading about other folks' hobbying philosophies, to a greater extent than reading about their methods (although this is still of interest). 

I'll send Barry the article, along with a completely new set of pictures.

 

Little Bytham has featured in all the mainstream magazine (apart from Model Rail), and some years ago (in an incomplete state) in the MRJ.

 

I'm conscious of over-exposure (though the MRJ probably has a different readership profile to the others), so any article won't be along the lines of 'Baseboards were built from 2 by one and chipboard (not that they were), with track ballasted in the usual way (not that it was)'. No, more of, as I say, a philosophical approach, not a 'how it was done'. More along the lines of why? Motivation, commitment (over a long period of time), researching primary resources - studying timetables, plans, photographs and so on. 

 

It might never be published, but I'll provide it, anyway. We'll see.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

Edited August 3, 2022 by Tony Wright
typo error

[Tony Wright]

Speaking of working in plastic.............

 

 

As part of my ongoing personal commitment to Retford's progress, I'm building a Comet chassis in EM Gauge to go underneath this old Hornby B17 body, provided by Sandra Orpen. It's a bit 'rough' (the body), and there's one splasher front missing. 

 

The original chassis (push-along) and tender-drive will probably be chucked away (or sold; it's up to Sandra). 

 

Retford certainly needs B17s. An original one (it would seem) which came with the layout can't pull the boat train - despite some sort of 'snot' being smeared on its drivers. There's also an EM-ed current Hornby B17, but I don't think that pulls much, either.

 

Fortunately, this one does................

 

 

 

I built this from a Crownline kit, originally on OO frames for Little Bytham. I still have these, but built a new set in EM so that CLUMBER could take the boat train (far more appropriate on Retford than on LB). Geoff Haynes painted/weathered her.

 

Packed with lead, I'm sure the new B17 will pull anything requested. However, I'm not sure it's the way to go for a further Retford B17. Time will tell.

 

 

[robertcwp]

47 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Speaking of working in plastic.............

 

 

As part of my ongoing personal commitment to Retford's progress, I'm building a Comet chassis in EM Gauge to go underneath this old Hornby B17 body, provided by Sandra Orpen. It's a bit 'rough' (the body), and there's one splasher front missing. 

 

The original chassis (push-along) and tender-drive will probably be chucked away (or sold; it's up to Sandra). 

 

Retford certainly needs B17s. An original one (it would seem) which came with the layout can't pull the boat train - despite some sort of 'snot' being smeared on its drivers. There's also an EM-ed current Hornby B17, but I don't think that pulls much, either.

 

Fortunately, this one does................

 

 

 

I built this from a Crownline kit, originally on OO frames for Little Bytham. I still have these, but built a new set in EM so that CLUMBER could take the boat train (far more appropriate on Retford than on LB). Geoff Haynes painted/weathered her.

 

Packed with lead, I'm sure the new B17 will pull anything requested. However, I'm not sure it's the way to go for a further Retford B17. Time will tell.

 

 

The re-gauged Hornby B17 can just about manage the down boat train as the gradient in that direction out of the fiddleyard is less severe than in the up direction. This was achieved after taking the weights out of the carriages (this was done in Clumber's train too) and cleaning the track. However, more power would be welcome so the new B17 will be very useful. All the stock in both sets is now RTR.

[Tony Wright]

Further to my latest EM B17, may I make a request, please? 

 

Does anyone have an early Hornby B17 - tender-drive, made in England - loco and tender body (Group Standard) in lined BR green, please? I'll gladly pay a reasonable price. I'm not bothered with the loco chassis or tender-drive. 

 

I recall at some shows there's a trader selling all sorts of loco/tender bodies (I think he used to go to the Woking Show), but I don't know if he stocked the B17s. 

 

Please PM me if you can help. Thanks in anticipation. 

[Chas Levin]

On 02/08/2022 at 19:52, gr.king said:

IF it is the case (and I don't say that it is so) that those in a factory assembling RTR models each have only a limited range of tasks to perform repeatedly, thus tending to become very adept at those particular functions, how can their skill levels be compared with those of a highly self-reliant modeller who has to (or who chooses to) deal with everything that needs doing, no matter what it might be? Can a highly honed narrow range of skills be said to better, or poorer, than a wide range of less perfectly honed skills?

One thought that occurs Graeme is that constantly learning and developing a wide range of skills is far more enjoyable than repeating the same small set of operations and I'm sure it encourages better mental development and problem solving ability. While a job's a job, I think we're very lucky to have the variety we do; I'd no more care to be a 'clever cabbage' than @Bernard Lamb's colleague...