Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

At the location on the Tyne Dock to Consett line that the layout is based at, the gradient ensured that nothing stormed through

 

John

Thanks John,

 

Though I acknowledge your much greater knowledge of the area, I once watched a video of the Tyne Dock-Consett workings up to Annfield Plain and, though it might not have been on the actual steepest gradient, the 9F on the front of the train (not those hoppers) was really moving. 'Storming', I thought was a fair description. I admit, though, I never saw the trains in real life, though 9Fs storming up Gamston Bank is still fresh in the memory.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

[Tony Wright]

I mentioned Britannias earlier and at the moment I have three on Little Bytham.

 

Most probably, this is too many. Pictures of the class appear at both Grantham and Peterborough, though the latter location probably has them on trains to/from Grimsby.

 

 

This one is a DJH kit, part-built by Bob Alderman and finished by me. Ian Rathbone painted it. If nothing else, this shot shows how much progress has taken place on the layout since 2012. 

 

 

I saw 70054 on a Down fast goods at Retford in the summer of 1959, so this is my excuse for running her. This loco started off as a Hornby tender-drive Brit. I gave the tender drive away and made a Comet chassis for it. It featured in BRM some years ago. It was a picture such as this which caused a bit of a 'storm' a couple of years ago, where I commented that I wouldn't try and fit an ECML depiction into less than 30'. The point is (was) that I wouldn't, because of too many compromises. Others can (and will) please themselves. 

 

 

The third of my Brits in the form of the warrior queen. I saw her on the boat train at Kiveton Park many, many moons ago (after the 7MTs had taken over the North Country Continental from the B17s). This is a more recent loco drive Hornby model. Other than disposing of the nasty bogie wheels, altering the drawbar, adding a bit of detail, renumbering/renaming and weathering (courtesy of my elder son, Tom), this model is as-supplied. I've yet to replace the chimney. 

 

What the fourth one will be, I don't know. I'll probably sell it when it's completed.

 

Other than the Stanier Moguls, the Brits were the only 'large' class of locos where i 'copped' every one. With the others - Semis, Prinnies, Scots, Jubs, Pats, etc, one always eluded me. I was never on the ECML for a long enough period to see all the big classes, especially those from north of the border.  

Edited March 1, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Axlebox]

Thanks John,

 

Though I acknowledge your much greater knowledge of the area, I once watched a video of the Tyne Dock-Consett workings up to Annfield Plain and, though it might not have been on the actual steepest gradient, the 9F on the front of the train (not those hoppers) was really moving. 'Storming', I thought was a fair description. I admit, though, I never saw the trains in real life, though 9Fs storming up Gamston Bank is still fresh in the memory.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Evening Tony

Pleased you enjoyed Blackgill...and I can vouch its as much fun to operate as it is to watch from the front.(having done both!)  The layout is basically a passing loop on a single line (although you can't see this from the front) and trains are run to a timetable which usually ensures 2 trains pass each other in the middle...but not always...so from time to time trains are held at signals until the train coming the other way clears the section (the signals are partly interlocked).  When we get the chance though we'll storm up the bank and clatter down the hill...the down side to this is the paying public only get a fleeting view of Eddie's work...just like the real thing I suppose.

Cheers

Duncan

[Porcy Mane]

At the location on the Tyne Dock to Consett line that the layout is based at, the gradient ensured that nothing stormed through

 Dunno about that John.

 

Apparently the pyrotechnics of the 9F's exhaust going up the bank could be equalled by that of the sparks coming off the brake blocks on the way down the bank. Especially over the 1 in 35 section with a crew wanting to get home for a pint.

 Wasn't it 37072 that was repaired with split headcode boxes at one end and centre headcode at the other as a direct result of damage received following an excessive speed collision with a crewless and runaway 31102 coming down the banks well after the line had been officially closed?

 

and I can vouch its as much fun to operate as it is to watch from the front.

 

...unless I'm driving when it all pretty much becomes heart in the mouth stuff.

 

P

[Guest Brighton_JunctionLNER]

Post 9131 the Banjo Dome  is fitted in the  top photo , I never looked at the box .

 

1 a fir.jpg

yes that was my question, why is it a) on the locomotive b) why is it in the single image but not on the packaged one....

 

 

 

 

 

does anyone have any information about this locomotive? 

would i be able to run it in my period of 1937-39?

[Mark C]

Aii that is true they did, they also did a conversion kit to make a high running plate stanier 5mt which is basically similar but, as crownline har gone the way of the dodo theyre no longer available. I did think about pdk who do a lot of the former crownline kits but no joy.

 

Gary

I'm fairly certain that the origins of a secondhand (when I bought it) high running plate Caprotti Black 5 were a Crownline conversion and an early Hornby base model. Here's one of the photos I used when I sold it on eBay at the end of last year - I wish I had an used conversion kit to do it myself...no worries, as soon as I find one then someone will release it as a RTR model no doubt...

 

Mark

[johndon]

 Dunno about that John.

 

Apparently the pyrotechnics of the 9F's exhaust going up the bank could be equalled by that of the sparks coming off the brake blocks on the way down the bank. Especially over the 1 in 35 section with a crew wanting to get home for a pint.

 Wasn't it 37072 that was repaired with split headcode boxes at one end and centre headcode at the other as a direct result of damage received following an excessive speed collision with a crewless and runaway 31102 coming down the banks well after the line had been officially closed?

 

 

...unless I'm driving when it all pretty much becomes heart in the mouth stuff.

 

P

 

 

I guess coming down the hill there was a fair chance of some storming

 

The 31 ran all the way from Pelton to Tyne Yard and was, as I understand it, deliberately diverted on to the track that the 37 was parked on in an effort to stop it.  It did have 5 or 6 heavy wagons behind it to lend a hand as well, I've got the accident report somewhere...  The 31 also ended up wit odd ends, the repaired end looking more like a skinhead 31.

 

Sounds like all ran well at the weekend or did you spend all our time under the layout?

 

John

Edited March 1, 2016 by johndon

[APOLLO]

You can never have too many Brits Tony, (unless you have 56 of 'em !!!).

 

Nice model of Boadicea. My first Brit model was a Tri-ang TT gauge "Boadicea" my parents bought me back in 1963. Still have her and she still runs (and smokes !!).

 

For Brit lovers some shots of the real things thundering through Wigan back around 1966/7 are on my photo thread below.

 

Brit15

Edited March 1, 2016 by APOLLO

[Porcy Mane]

Sounds like all ran well at the weekend or did you spend all our time under the layout?

 

Not bad running. Unusually for the team we were all in in bed before 2:00 am on all three nights with non of our more usual all night stop outs, so no quick sleeps under the layout required. The gaffer did suggest a camp bed for under the layout during the next exhibition but I think that will be for his exclusive use. He's getting on a bit.

We also found time for a bit of trainspotting on Friday night in Glasgow Central. Finding this bit of tin on the rear of the up Caley Sleeper. Nice rippled sides into the bargain.

 

p

Edited March 1, 2016 by Porcy Mane

[vitalspark]

Tony it was a pleasure to have one of your excellent locos guesting on Alloa over the weekend..a Scottish one too!

 

Thanks also for the praise and the award..(Davy Franks says the cheque is in the post).

 

Another great show and by the sound of it everyone seemed to enjoy it.

 

 

Dave.

Edited March 1, 2016 by vitalspark

[kingfisher24]

DSCF1006-2.jpgI'm fairly certain that the origins of a secondhand (when I bought it) high running plate Caprotti Black 5 were a Crownline conversion and an early Hornby base model. Here's one of the photos I used when I sold it on eBay at the end of last year - I wish I had an used conversion kit to do it myself...no worries, as soon as I find one then someone will release it as a RTR model no doubt...Mark

Mark

 

It is indeed a shame that the conversion kits are no longer available(and when they do come up they go for silly money) at my club tonight i managed to find a decent book with plenty of close up shots of both sides of the caprotti fitted standards. Also a railway modeller from september 1989 which has a good drawn and described article on the loco's.

 

With all this and what i have already i think i have figured out most of it. Now to actually do it. I will try and post a new thread on how i do the conversion to possibly be of help to others who may be interested.

 

Next in line after this (or perhaps before as it will be easier) is a Hornby gresley buffet in br maroon. After having some advice from tony on sunday i will alter this to try and create a more accurate coach. Having said that i am not going to alter the tumblehome. I know the shape is wrong but if i alter one coach it will mean having to eventually alter all of them, so i will live with the tumblehome shape and just alter the sides.

 

Gary

[Andy R]

Tony- I am not a regular contributor to this thread on the RMweb, rather posting comment mainly on the layout section, but I thought I would respond to your very modest (ie: your continued modesty as to your own significant contribution to the discussion about what makes model railways interesting, accuracy, modelling quality and the like).

 

From where I sit, about as far south as you can get from the UK in New Zealand, I follow and enjoy the discussion your thread generates and the variety of comment, photos, little digs, humour, understatements, overstatements and everything in-between, your understated wisdom in most responses, because I (and there will be many others) cannot be in the UK to see and enjoy the layouts, models, press launches, commentary etc... that you guys enjoy first-hand as you live there. Your photos for example of the layouts that capture your imagination and give you enjoyment also give us colonials much enjoyment and inspiration: a) because your photos are so good, and b) because you tend to focus in on the 'good' layout modelling; I for one learn a lot from the photos and the comments that go with them.

 

So, I hope you continue to provide the commentary, photos, opinion, knowledge and humour that makes up your important contribution to striving for excellence in our wonderful hobby, so that people at the bottom of the earth can stay connected and learn from it. That's my perspective on it anyway...

 

regards, Andy R

First, my thanks to all those who've kept this thread extremely busy in my absence. Who needs my contributions, anyway? 

 

Continuing with anyway, might I catch up on a few things, please?

 

Banjo domes; thanks to all those who've commented (Hi Jessie!) - only fitted to the final batch of A3s, WINDSOR LAD to BROWN JACK, and then (probably) only until their first boiler change. I've never seen it recorded, but a metal-basher at Doncaster must have seen how much easier it was to make the 'streamlined' dome cover - the sort fitted to the V2s, the A2/1s, the A2/2s, the A1/1 and the Peppercorn Pacifics when new (and subsequently to the A2/3s). Beware both the RCTS green series (2A), and Peter Coster because they both get into a hopeless muddle with the descriptions of A3s boilers/domes! The banjo dome has caused more controversy that any other appendage on top of a steam loco's boiler in my view, though what was underneath (a perforated steam collector) was the same whatever the shape of the elongated dome (apart from those Peppercorn A1s fitted with a round-dome boiler, which had a streamlined cover). Wills must have liked it so much to have included it in its A3 and A2 kits. FLYING SCOTSMAN was even shown on the box lid of the former, even though the loco NEVER sported one. Millholme followed suit with its A2/2 and A2/3 kits, but so much was wrong with the rest of the kits that nobody noticed the dreaded banjo dome. Tri-ang, too (and Trix) happily fitted the banjo dome to all their various A3s, none of which ever carried it in real life. Trix also put it on its A2, but since the also supplied a corridor tender (and a way-out-of-loading-gauge chassis), nobody commented. Look through various spare parts suppliers - the banjo dome is (was) king (Micklner has all mine). The culprits, with regard to the wrong fitting of the banjo dome? Mr Roche and Mr Beattie in my view. 

 

Rebuilt Gresley Buffet Cars; Many thanks to Bill Bedford for the information. 

 

Tenders behind K4s; I bow to those more knowledgeable, though I fitted the small GS tender to my scratch-built one (as preserved), unfortunately now rather smashed up - brass locos don't take kindly to being dropped on a hard floor (not by me). 

 

Other prototypes than my main interest; why not - the more the merrier. 

 

Glossy models looking like the real thing? 

 

FS 05.jpg

 

Would this look right on a model, especially if it were made of aluminium foil? 

 

My reason for being absent from this thread was my attendance at the Glasgow Show over the weekend. Yes, I know there are things like i-phones, tablets and other mysterious devices. The thing is, I don't own anything like that. I have a decade-old mobile phone, I don't know its number and I never use it. 

 

What a wonderful show! There is none more friendly in the realm; the organisation is exemplary, with no yellow-vested fascists - just bods who only want to help. Thank you all. It's classed as a 'family show', and, as such, has among its exhibits some 'lemons' (or that's how Steve Flint describes them). Lemons or not, these all-action roundy-roundies with everything from road accidents to waterfalls, and drumlins through which a tunnel has been dug (even though all around the terrain is flat), Golden Gate lookalikes carrying no more than a lane (which very shortly crosses the railway again via a level-crossing) and right-angle bends modelled on a roller-coaster are very popular with kids. 

 

However, the 'top-end' for 'scale' modellers (why did Steve look at me when he said that, for I'm most definitely not?) was more than adequately catered for. 

 

BlackGill 05.jpg

 

BlackGill 06.jpg

 

My personal favourite was Blackgill in P4, by Eddie Ford. What an atmospheric rendition of goods workings in the NE, brilliantly captured. Being P4, I naturally inspected the running with great interest. It was almost perfect (just a couple of wagon derailments when being propelled). It was, however, very slow (realistic?) and I would have loved to have seen those 9Fs storming through. A future challenge? Another P4 layout had a few derailments (because of my presence?), though it is getting on. Again, though speedy locos were present in the background, none ran fast. It was, however, beautifully presented. 

 

In fairness, derailments were not confined to the most accurate gauges. An HO creation seemed to suffer frequent derailments (because of the high-speed?). There were a few more instances of the hand of God being needed, but the general standard of running was very good (especially on the lemons, and the Hornby-Dublo and Tri-ang systems). The running was also very good on the layout from the Aberdeen Club (thanks for your comments, Gavin). What an eager bunch these chaps are (because so few of them are old gits like me?). I reckon this bunch will go places before long (though, whoever you are, lose that ridiculous hat!). They took on board all my observations and criticisms (with wonderfully good grace), and smugly (with justification) asked me to return to find the right locos on the right trains, and those trains being made up in a much more realistic fashion. Look out for their layout as it progresses - it'll be worth seeing. I was a clot for not taking any pictures.

 

One of my duties was to pick the winning layout of the Scottish Association Cup. Blackgill is not an associate, but it still would have been a damn close-run thing between it and my choice, Alloa. Built by members of the Scottish Region Study Group in OO, what a superb depiction Alloa is.

 

Alloa 01.jpg

 

Alloa 02.jpg

 

The group let my A2 run on Alloa (despite this, it still won!) - thank you kindly. I found myself in a dilemma at times, with regard to my judging. Should knowing them well (and being friends), preclude a group from winning? Especially, as my second and third choices were built by guys I know well? 

 

Purgatory Peak 02.jpg

 

Purgatory Peak 04.jpg

 

Another layout which took my eye (though I know nothing of the prototype) was Purgatory Peak, a North American logging line from the Macclesfield MRG. This was DCC which worked perfectly!

 

Britannia 01.jpg

 

Speaking of DCC (or at least in part). Do any other modellers find the plug-in connection between the loco and tender of DCC-compatible RTR locos an absolute fag? At £99.99 for a Hornby Britannia from Locomotion, I couldn't resist. It won't stay the same for long (EARL HAIG), but will be a guinea pig for a chapter in a book I'm writing for Crowood Press. On separating the loco from tender, one of the leads came out of the plug. So, stuff this nonsense. Off with the top, snip the snake's nest of wires off, and just take the two wires to the motor direct (naturally, I soldered them on the wrong way round to begin with). I have decent track, so don't need tender pick-ups anyway. How much easier is this? No wires dragging, and the loco runs independent of its tender. No DCC, so no complication. You DCC guys must be happy with the way these things are configured at source, or do you get others to fix things up for you? I'd be surprised if you did.

 

For my part, I manned (my wife womanned) a loco/carriage-building stand in the main (when I was not off being critical, judging or just plain wind-bagging). My most grateful thanks to all those who came up for a chat. I certainly leaned a lot.

 

Finally, my most grateful thanks to all those who put together the Glasgow Show and for inviting me. Six years ago, I let the Association down by not attending. That won't happen again.  

 

 

 

First, my thanks to all those who've kept this thread extremely busy in my absence. Who needs my contributions, anyway? 

 

Continuing with anyway, might I catch up on a few things, please?

 

Banjo domes; thanks to all those who've commented (Hi Jessie!) - only fitted to the final batch of A3s, WINDSOR LAD to BROWN JACK, and then (probably) only until their first boiler change. I've never seen it recorded, but a metal-basher at Doncaster must have seen how much easier it was to make the 'streamlined' dome cover - the sort fitted to the V2s, the A2/1s, the A2/2s, the A1/1 and the Peppercorn Pacifics when new (and subsequently to the A2/3s). Beware both the RCTS green series (2A), and Peter Coster because they both get into a hopeless muddle with the descriptions of A3s boilers/domes! The banjo dome has caused more controversy that any other appendage on top of a steam loco's boiler in my view, though what was underneath (a perforated steam collector) was the same whatever the shape of the elongated dome (apart from those Peppercorn A1s fitted with a round-dome boiler, which had a streamlined cover). Wills must have liked it so much to have included it in its A3 and A2 kits. FLYING SCOTSMAN was even shown on the box lid of the former, even though the loco NEVER sported one. Millholme followed suit with its A2/2 and A2/3 kits, but so much was wrong with the rest of the kits that nobody noticed the dreaded banjo dome. Tri-ang, too (and Trix) happily fitted the banjo dome to all their various A3s, none of which ever carried it in real life. Trix also put it on its A2, but since the also supplied a corridor tender (and a way-out-of-loading-gauge chassis), nobody commented. Look through various spare parts suppliers - the banjo dome is (was) king (Micklner has all mine). The culprits, with regard to the wrong fitting of the banjo dome? Mr Roche and Mr Beattie in my view. 

 

Rebuilt Gresley Buffet Cars; Many thanks to Bill Bedford for the information. 

 

Tenders behind K4s; I bow to those more knowledgeable, though I fitted the small GS tender to my scratch-built one (as preserved), unfortunately now rather smashed up - brass locos don't take kindly to being dropped on a hard floor (not by me). 

 

Other prototypes than my main interest; why not - the more the merrier. 

 

Glossy models looking like the real thing? 

 

FS 05.jpg

 

Would this look right on a model, especially if it were made of aluminium foil? 

 

My reason for being absent from this thread was my attendance at the Glasgow Show over the weekend. Yes, I know there are things like i-phones, tablets and other mysterious devices. The thing is, I don't own anything like that. I have a decade-old mobile phone, I don't know its number and I never use it. 

 

What a wonderful show! There is none more friendly in the realm; the organisation is exemplary, with no yellow-vested fascists - just bods who only want to help. Thank you all. It's classed as a 'family show', and, as such, has among its exhibits some 'lemons' (or that's how Steve Flint describes them). Lemons or not, these all-action roundy-roundies with everything from road accidents to waterfalls, and drumlins through which a tunnel has been dug (even though all around the terrain is flat), Golden Gate lookalikes carrying no more than a lane (which very shortly crosses the railway again via a level-crossing) and right-angle bends modelled on a roller-coaster are very popular with kids. 

 

However, the 'top-end' for 'scale' modellers (why did Steve look at me when he said that, for I'm most definitely not?) was more than adequately catered for. 

 

BlackGill 05.jpg

 

BlackGill 06.jpg

 

My personal favourite was Blackgill in P4, by Eddie Ford. What an atmospheric rendition of goods workings in the NE, brilliantly captured. Being P4, I naturally inspected the running with great interest. It was almost perfect (just a couple of wagon derailments when being propelled). It was, however, very slow (realistic?) and I would have loved to have seen those 9Fs storming through. A future challenge? Another P4 layout had a few derailments (because of my presence?), though it is getting on. Again, though speedy locos were present in the background, none ran fast. It was, however, beautifully presented. 

 

In fairness, derailments were not confined to the most accurate gauges. An HO creation seemed to suffer frequent derailments (because of the high-speed?). There were a few more instances of the hand of God being needed, but the general standard of running was very good (especially on the lemons, and the Hornby-Dublo and Tri-ang systems). The running was also very good on the layout from the Aberdeen Club (thanks for your comments, Gavin). What an eager bunch these chaps are (because so few of them are old gits like me?). I reckon this bunch will go places before long (though, whoever you are, lose that ridiculous hat!). They took on board all my observations and criticisms (with wonderfully good grace), and smugly (with justification) asked me to return to find the right locos on the right trains, and those trains being made up in a much more realistic fashion. Look out for their layout as it progresses - it'll be worth seeing. I was a clot for not taking any pictures.

 

One of my duties was to pick the winning layout of the Scottish Association Cup. Blackgill is not an associate, but it still would have been a damn close-run thing between it and my choice, Alloa. Built by members of the Scottish Region Study Group in OO, what a superb depiction Alloa is.

 

Alloa 01.jpg

 

Alloa 02.jpg

 

The group let my A2 run on Alloa (despite this, it still won!) - thank you kindly. I found myself in a dilemma at times, with regard to my judging. Should knowing them well (and being friends), preclude a group from winning? Especially, as my second and third choices were built by guys I know well? 

 

Purgatory Peak 02.jpg

 

Purgatory Peak 04.jpg

 

Another layout which took my eye (though I know nothing of the prototype) was Purgatory Peak, a North American logging line from the Macclesfield MRG. This was DCC which worked perfectly!

 

Britannia 01.jpg

 

Speaking of DCC (or at least in part). Do any other modellers find the plug-in connection between the loco and tender of DCC-compatible RTR locos an absolute fag? At £99.99 for a Hornby Britannia from Locomotion, I couldn't resist. It won't stay the same for long (EARL HAIG), but will be a guinea pig for a chapter in a book I'm writing for Crowood Press. On separating the loco from tender, one of the leads came out of the plug. So, stuff this nonsense. Off with the top, snip the snake's nest of wires off, and just take the two wires to the motor direct (naturally, I soldered them on the wrong way round to begin with). I have decent track, so don't need tender pick-ups anyway. How much easier is this? No wires dragging, and the loco runs independent of its tender. No DCC, so no complication. You DCC guys must be happy with the way these things are configured at source, or do you get others to fix things up for you? I'd be surprised if you did.

 

For my part, I manned (my wife womanned) a loco/carriage-building stand in the main (when I was not off being critical, judging or just plain wind-bagging). My most grateful thanks to all those who came up for a chat. I certainly leaned a lot.

 

Finally, my most grateful thanks to all those who put together the Glasgow Show and for inviting me. Six years ago, I let the Association down by not attending. That won't happen again.  

 

[Tony Wright]

yes that was my question, why is it a) on the locomotive B) why is it in the single image but not on the packaged one....

 

 

 

 

 

does anyone have any information about this locomotive? 

would i be able to run it in my period of 1937-39?

Dear Jesse,

 

If the model of FIRDAUSSI is the one actually to be produced (there appears to be some confusion), then by being one of the last batch of A3s, it's correct in having a banjo dome AS BUILT. The RCTS tells us that it was 1943 (nine years into her life) before she got a round-dome boiler, so I think it's safe to assume that she'll be right (as supplied), at least up to the beginning of the War. Certainly, no banjo dome on an A3 survived the hostilities - by then, the streamlined type had replaced them.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited March 3, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

There's an interesting parallel thread with regard to the differences between RTR and kits (particularly in costs and quality), especially now that RTR has improved so much. Looking through it, much of what's being posted has appeared on this thread before (though I don't imply that this is exclusive). 

 

All I'd add is that there has been a fundamental change in the last few years with regard to mainstream RTR being used, particularly on exhibition layouts. At the splendid Glasgow Show last weekend, I was asked to judge the Association layouts. Naturally, being me, I went for the ones where most of the stock (out of necessity to be fair) had been kit-built - Scottish locos are thin in numbers from the RTR guys. One layout which sported a large loco depot lost any marks from me when I was walking round officiating because there was one loco (not the only one) in a prominent position which had just been taken out of its box and plonked on the layout. Whether this is an example of democracy at work (where club members can run what they like), I don't know. However, though the loco was an excellent product at source, surely an effort could have been made to remove the nasty front coupling, rename/renumber it, add real coal and a crew and weather it. 

 

Significantly, there was only trader selling 4mm loco kits (Comet). In the past at major shows there would have been an abundance of manufacturers selling loco kits, plus all the necessary bits and pieces to complete - just the sort of stand I'd look out for. If the cause and effect of improved RTR is the demise of kit manufacturers at shows then that's not a change for the better in my view. Unless, you're interest is in supporting the box shifters. 

[johnarcher]

Hello Tony, just agreed your post above. I have of course got involved in that other thread, saying basically what has been said here before.

I can't resist it, partly as I can never quite get my head around the idea, often expressed, that one would only make something, reluctantly, if it can't be bought RTR. If I didn't like making things for its own sake I wouldn't be involved in a modelling hobby in the first place.

[Focalplane]

Tony

 

I have already "agreed" with the above post, but if may add my own take on the subject?

 

Last year I made the decision to switch to 7mm for reasons which were primarily based on my ability to see and handle components that are that much bigger.  Now I am well and truly committed to 7mm I see there are other advantages.  Kit building in 7mm is still the major force driving the market.  Yes, there are RTR models available, either of museum quality or from a couple of "box shifters", but the vast majority of models are made from kits, including locos, wagons, coaches, buildings and even track.  I have found the camaraderie at 7mm meetings, stands and at least one club (Hillingdon Railway Modellers at an "open day") to be excellent.  The search for parts has been a bit of an uphill struggle and some suppliers are hard to find (no web site, etc.) but once found all have been most helpful.

 

The conclusion I derive from these observations is that there is likely to be a delay in seeing the box shifters dominate the 7mm market.  This hopefully means that the kit makers will continue to thrive (and not all of them are into their senior years).  For those who have large investments in 4mm scale this is no solution, of course.

 

Edit to add link to latest kit-building status

 

Paul

Edited March 2, 2016 by Focalplane

[Jol Wilkinson]

There's an interesting parallel thread with regard to the differences between RTR and kits (particularly in costs and quality), especially now that RTR has improved so much. Looking through it, much of what's being posted has appeared on this thread before (though I don't imply that this is exclusive). 

 

All I'd add is that there has been a fundamental change in the last few years with regard to mainstream RTR being used, particularly on exhibition layouts. At the splendid Glasgow Show last weekend, I was asked to judge the Association layouts. Naturally, being me, I went for the ones where most of the stock (out of necessity to be fair) had been kit-built - Scottish locos are thin in numbers from the RTR guys. One layout which sported a large loco depot lost any marks from me when I was walking round officiating because there was one loco (not the only one) in a prominent position which had just been taken out of its box and plonked on the layout. Whether this is an example of democracy at work (where club members can run what they like), I don't know. However, though the loco was an excellent product at source, surely an effort could have been made to remove the nasty front coupling, rename/renumber it, add real coal and a crew and weather it. 

 

Significantly, there was only trader selling 4mm loco kits (Comet). In the past at major shows there would have been an abundance of manufacturers selling loco kits, plus all the necessary bits and pieces to complete - just the sort of stand I'd look out for. If the cause and effect of improved RTR is the demise of kit manufacturers at shows then that's not a change for the better in my view. Unless, you're interest is in supporting the box shifters. 

Tony,

 

I think that part of what you experienced is the polarisation of shows into specialist and general. Visit one of the 4mm Society exhibitions, Railwells, SHDMC Portsmouth, York or Railex (there may be others I haven't attended) and you will find no shortage of the kits and bits suppliers. However, it isn't worth their time or money attending those shows where only a small percentage of the visitors are likely to be interested in/aware of their products. So it becomes a chicken and egg situation.

 

That polarisation is also evident in the modelling public, in today's "quick and easy" society. The improved accuracy and quality of RTR products has drawn people away from making models. As a result we see layouts where the model is defined by what is readily available, rather than by a vision of creating a model of particular place and period that is a little different. We see well modelled locations with inappropriate stock which destroys the illusion. It may be that some people don't notice, but when you see a well produced model that architecturally and visually defines a location but has a BR Ivatt 2-6-2T, a GWR Pannier Tank and an LMS Jinty, it just ruins the overall effect.

 

The same shows I mentioned will feature layouts which have been created to achieve the owner's vision based upon a particular location or a period featuring a specific railway, be the LBSC in the Edwardian period, or somewhere in the North East during BR steam days. Some stock may be available RTR  but to get a realistic balance, you have to resort to kit building or modifying RTR. For some people time or money may preclude that, but those that take up the challenge can create something a little extra special.

 

Jol

[johnarcher]

Tony,

 

I think that part of what you experienced is the polarisation of shows into specialist and general. Visit one of the 4mm Society exhibitions, Railwells, SHDMC Portsmouth, York or Railex (there may be others I haven't attended) and you will find no shortage of the kits and bits suppliers. However, it isn't worth their time or money attending those shows where only a small percentage of the visitors are likely to be interested in/aware of their products. So it becomes a chicken and egg situation.

 

That polarisation is also evident in the modelling public, in today's "quick and easy" society. The improved accuracy and quality of RTR products has drawn people away from making models. As a result we see layouts where the model is defined by what is readily available, rather than by a vision of creating a model of particular place and period that is a little different. We see well modelled locations with inappropriate stock which destroys the illusion. It may be that some people don't notice, but when you see a well produced model that architecturally and visually defines a location but has a BR Ivatt 2-6-2T, a GWR Pannier Tank and an LMS Jinty, it just ruins the overall effect.

 

The same shows I mentioned will feature layouts which have been created to achieve the owner's vision based upon a particular location or a period featuring a specific railway, be the LBSC in the Edwardian period, or somewhere in the North East during BR steam days. Some stock may be available RTR  but to get a realistic balance, you have to resort to kit building or modifying RTR. For some people time or money may preclude that, but those that take up the challenge can create something a little extra special.

 

Jol

I agree with all that, I think, apart from one word (which I suspect was not quite meant like that).

Why 'resort to kit building' as though it were a disagreeable necessity, to be avoided if possible?

[Jol Wilkinson]

I agree with all that, I think, apart from one word (which I suspect was not quite meant like that).

Why 'resort to kit building' as though it were a disagreeable necessity, to be avoided if possible?

John,

 

I think I said "resort" as I believe that is how many modellers think of it.

 

Perhaps I should have said "take up", although for me "get satisfaction from" is the right phrase.

 

Jol

[Tony Wright]

Tony

 

I have already "agreed" with the above post, but if may add my own take on the subject?

 

Last year I made the decision to switch to 7mm for reasons which were primarily based on my ability to see and handle components that are that much bigger.  Now I am well and truly committed to 7mm I see there are other advantages.  Kit building in 7mm is still the major force driving the market.  Yes, there are RTR models available, either of museum quality or from a couple of "box shifters", but the vast majority of models are made from kits, including locos, wagons, coaches, buildings and even track.  I have found the camaraderie at 7mm meetings, stands and at least one club (Hillingdon Railway Modellers at an "open day") to be excellent.  The search for parts has been a bit of an uphill struggle and some suppliers are hard to find (no web site, etc.) but once found all have been most helpful.

 

The conclusion I derive from these observations is that there is likely to be a delay in seeing the box shifters dominate the 7mm market.  This hopefully means that the kit makers will continue to thrive (and not all of them are into their senior years).  For those who have large investments in 4mm scale this is no solution, of course.

 

Edit to add link to latest kit-building status

 

Paul

Many thanks as always, Paul.

 

Today, Ben Jones dropped of (among other things) a Heljan FALCON, in 7mm RTR, for me to take product shots of for BRM. I think the retail price is close to £700.00 (please, anyone, correct me if I'm wrong), though it can be obtained cheaper. As an example of RTR excellence, from initial inspection, I'd say it's up there with the best. Yet, discounted it's near just £600.00. How could any kit maker compete? Even in 4mm, I couldn't. This seems to be the way 7mm is going - steam-outline, too. 

 

Mention has been made of the personal pleasure in making kits, rather than it just being of necessity if there is no RTR equivalent. Even if there is an RTR equivalent (which might be half the price, complete), so what? I'd personally much sooner make it.

 

At the recent Biggleswade show, I bought a made-up Nu-Cast V2, built years ago by a friend. Normally, I'd not buy locos made by others, but, at £45.00 it was a steal! It had been generally well-made (though lacking in detail) with an old-fashioned Romford Bulldog providing its means of going. A part strip-down, a modern motor/gearbox installed, brakes added, the cab glazed and details added, what a little star she is. Compared with Bachmann's new-chassis V2 it's in a different class, haulage-wise. That's why I'd advocate folk building loco kits - they're so much more powerful. It's also so much more personal; with regard to the guy who originally built it (who's coming over soon to run the railway) and to me because I've altered it to suit me (and I flogged the original motor!). 

 

I've said this (too?) many times, no matter how good the RTR stuff is these days, the personal pleasure in having made something for oneself trumps it every time in my book. People bleat about not being able to build kits for themselves (or even modify RTR). That's a fact. If so buy RTR and/or pay someone else to modify it for you and build kits. But, please, don't tell me (not you telling me) that the pleasure is the same as with those who do things for themselves. The difference is between a possession and a personal creation, even if the latter might not be quite as good. 

 

All the above said, and revealing my hypocrisy yet again, since I 'need' over a 100 Mk.1 carriages for LB, surely I'd be mad not to use what Bachmann or Hornby has to offer. If nothing else, they free up the time for me to build those diagrams not available RTR.  

[glo41f]

Back to the 309's and a quote " Others rushed to have a seat in an ex first class compartment of the Walton sets, no taste."  Sir I always went for this and,even if I say so myself, have exquisite taste! In a similar vein, the 16.50 from L'pool Street which at that time, ran right through to Lowestoft had two down rated firsts in the make up of the set and again those of us in the know made a beeline for these coaches. 

 

I was not aware that the 309s had anything but "standard" mark 1 sides. Drat! as that puts my ideas of trying to make a two car set rather a non starter. By the way Bob, your 2mm set looks good. How do you get on for the Overhead in 2mm?

 

Good stuff on here as ever.

 

Martin Long

[Guest Brighton_JunctionLNER]

Dear Jessie,

 

If the model of FIRDAUSSI is the one actually to be produced (there appears to be some confusion), then by being one of the last batch of A3s, it's correct in having a banjo dome AS BUILT. The RCTS tells us that it was 1943 (nine years into her life) before she got a round-dome boiler, so I think it's safe to assume that she'll be right (as supplied), at least up to the beginning of the War. Certainly, no banjo dome survived the hostilities - by the, the streamlined type had replaced them.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

ahhhhhhhhhh thankyou kind sir, that makes much more sense. 

 

ill post some photos of the layout up next week, as i have my friend from my modelling shop (the owners son) coming to help me start of with point motors. hopefully this time next week there will be trains running again

 

-jesse 

[Focalplane]

Many thanks as always, Paul.

 

Today, Ben Jones dropped of (among other things) a Heljan FALCON, in 7mm RTR, for me to take product shots of for BRM. I think the retail price is close to £700.00 (please, anyone, correct me if I'm wrong), though it can be obtained cheaper. As an example of RTR excellence, from initial inspection, I'd say it's up there with the best. Yet, discounted it's near just £600.00. How could any kit maker compete? Even in 4mm, I couldn't. This seems to be the way 7mm is going - steam-outline, too. 

Tony

 

The discount price you refer to is £550, reduced from £699.  It's still a lot of money but will give gratification to its owners, I am sure.  For the same reduced sum a 7mm etched brass/nickel silver kit plus motor, gearbox and wheel set can be purchased.  But the kit will take many hours to turn into a finished product with no likely added value come a time to resell.  As always, the argument centers around how important the building of a unique model is to the owner.  I would argue that for many (myself included) the opportunity to create a unique model wins the argument hands down.  That being said, the time it takes to build a kit based model does spread out an annual budget to be more manageable, thereby defeating one of the criticisms of 7mm scale modelling - "it's too expensive".

 

Paul

[Clive Mortimore]

Back to the 309's and a quote " Others rushed to have a seat in an ex first class compartment of the Walton sets, no taste."  Sir I always went for this and,even if I say so myself, have exquisite taste! In a similar vein, the 16.50 from L'pool Street which at that time, ran right through to Lowestoft had two down rated firsts in the make up of the set and again those of us in the know made a beeline for these coaches. 

 

I was not aware that the 309s had anything but "standard" mark 1 sides. Drat! as that puts my ideas of trying to make a two car set rather a non starter. By the way Bob, your 2mm set looks good. How do you get on for the Overhead in 2mm?

 

Good stuff on here as ever.

 

Martin Long

Hi Martin

 

Please read my post again. Sorry I seem to have mislead you, the AM9s were based on Mk1 coaches. It was the Swindon DMUs that were not. It was unit 616 that had the Swindon DMU buffet car after its own was written off in an accident.

 

Andi Dell (Dagworth on here) made a very nice 309 from Bachmann Mk1 coaches. He did a thread on the old RMweb regarding the conversion  but I have just looked at the thread and the images have all gone. Send him a PM, I am sure he will forward photos of his unit.

[Izzy]

Back to the 309's and a quote " Others rushed to have a seat in an ex first class compartment of the Walton sets, no taste."  Sir I always went for this and,even if I say so myself, have exquisite taste! In a similar vein, the 16.50 from L'pool Street which at that time, ran right through to Lowestoft had two down rated firsts in the make up of the set and again those of us in the know made a beeline for these coaches. 

 

I was not aware that the 309s had anything but "standard" mark 1 sides. Drat! as that puts my ideas of trying to make a two car set rather a non starter. By the way Bob, your 2mm set looks good. How do you get on for the Overhead in 2mm?

 

Good stuff on here as ever.

 

Martin Long

Hi Martin,

 

OHLE is available from several sources for 2mm/N, Dapol, N Brass, etc. The big problem is it doesn't match the GE area type, so it might be another little challenge! A 2-car set in 7mm wouldn't be toooo bad to make from scratch would it? And it would look good gliding around the NEEGOG test track.

 

regards,

 

Izzy (Bob)