Wright writes.....

[billbedford]

Not meant to be a criticism, but I suspect if you brought out kits of Class 175 DMUs (for example) instead of pre-grouping stock, the profile of customers would be slightly different.

 

 

I'm not so sure. The context of the conversation was whether there were enough younger people willing to to learn the physical skills necessary to build kits to make producing kits viable in ten years time.

[Clearwater]

I'm not so sure. I recently been asked just many of my new coach kits were bought by people younger than 60, and I had to rely, not many at all.

I have browsed your website but am yet to place an order not least as my interests don't extent to GNR coaches yet. However, I did like the way they looked to go together. In terms of demographics, I am just over 40... Once I've built the few things I've got, I'm sure I'll place an order with you!

 

David

[Headstock]

Andrew,

 

It might well be that the motion support bracket is too low for an O2/3 (to accommodate the O2/1s and O2/2s when they're made?). It could also be that the valve gear is a bit 'wonky'. What you see was a virtual wreck when I got it. Whoever had taken it out of its packaging had picked it up by the valve gear, resulting in an impression of metal spaghetti. My straightening out of it might not be entirely successful. The blanking plate in the tender had been taken out and forced in the wrong way round, virtually wrecking any chance of DCC function, and the wires connecting across the drawbar were damaged. I was, thus, given it, to see what I might make of it. What you see is the result, warts 'n all. As I said, I made a spare GN tender I had, and turned the loco into an O2/2. Agreed, it isn't right, but it's a 'layout loco', nothing more. Yesterday, with two further friends present, I set it off on 45 wagons and a van, whilst we installed some further ground signal mechanisms. Over an hour later, it was still purring round. Could any of us see the faults you (correctly) describe? Of course not, especially given the ages of our eyes! The two guys used to fire O2/2s, and they thought it looked fine. They did not, of course, scrutinise it with the same degree of vigour as my camera.  

 

Hi Tony,

 

thanks for the reply. I only have a handful of RTR locomotives, all modified or waiting modification in some form of other. As a result, the closest I get to the majority of them are the photos on threads like yours. I do tend to look at them as mini modelling projects for 'improvement' rather then the rather amusing collectors items as featured on one recent thread. I am curious to know whether the valve gear came as supplied and would require tweaking by the owner, the pictures at post 10070 would seem to confirm this. I have done some RTR conversions that I think have worked out okay, very much layout locomotives as you would say, but hopefully appropriate to a time and place if not totally appropriate to the nature of this thread.

[Craigw]

Up to 1939 you could have done the whole lot by tram (allowing for a walk across the bridge at Spit Junction from the Manly to the N.Sydney system - and the intention had always been to rebuild the bridge and link up)

 

Not that the ferry wouldn't have been faster

 

N.Syd-towards-Bridge.jpg

 

Sydney K class car (the one which Loftus didn't preserve) on what was once the start of the bridge across the main road onto the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Between 1932 and 1958 this took two tramlines  across the Bridge into two spare underground platforms at Wynyard , beneath the city centre.

 

Taken during the commemorations of the 50th opening of the Bridge, 1982

 

Ravenser, that is 1296 which is the one that Loftus preserved. She is in the pre 1933 fawn and olive livery.  Currently out of service as she needs major frame work. In later years Loftus also acquired 1295 which had been privately preserved and sat in a back yard. As a result of this she was in very poor condition and was stored along with some other stock in the old shed at the top of Royal National Park. Unfortunately, security at the old site was non existent and the place was well known with the local village idiots. Suffice to say that several months ago the inevitable happened and the shed was burnt down in an Arson attack. This leaves 1296 and the two that were converted to scrubbers as the only K class to survive. 

 

Craig W

 

Edit:  Ravenser, this is one you may not have seen. J 675. Withdrawn in the late 1930s, she survived as a much loved shed and was give to the museum when the owner died. Now fully restored and operational. photographed in 2014.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Craigw

[Brian Kirby]

On the subject of modelling contemporary railways (I hate that term "modern image", which sounds superficial), how can they be boring? Today, there are more trains running, carrying record numbers of passengers, and once again the railways are expanding to meet demand, after years of nationalized decline, and lack of investment. Travelling down by train to see Tony on Tuesday, there was plenty of interest to see, in fact it went past too quickly, often obscured by one of the frequent trains in the opposite direction. I remember the old GN out of King's Cross in the early 1970s, half as many expresses, dwindling freight, brutal track rationalization, and one off-peak local train per hour, to either Welwyn Garden City or Hertford North, in a noisy vibrating Craven DMU (the ex-Lea Valley hydraulics were smoother). On Tuesday I saw the impressive new Hitchin flyover for the first time, plus the enlarged Peterborough station, LNER semaphores in New England yard, the Mallard 126 speed sign, whilst at Stoke Summit we had a severe slack, due to emergency repairs (signal failure or broken rail?), which enabled me to have a good look at the new LED main line signals, north of the tunnel. People used to moan about how boring and featureless, was the ride between Sandy and Peterborough, well now you can watch the wind turbines!

    Coming back, I was dropped off at Grantham station, where I just missed a London train at 20:40, the next one would be 21:54, so I went into town, and had a beer in the excellent Tollemache pub. I returned to the station a good twenty minutes early, just as a southbound container train came hammering through (60-70mph), then a northbound Hull Trains DMU arrived, plus local trains arrived and departed from the bays. Following the Hull train, another container train shook the place to pieces going north (75mph?), this long train was only halfway through, when a southbound steel train came racing through (60 mph?), towards the sanctuary of the four-track section, and getting out of the way of the following express. The noise was unbelieveable, you couldn't hear yourself speak, and it was actually a bit scary, who says today's railways aren't exciting?

     On the modelling side, I can see the complaint about passenger trains being so similar, the local trains being so short, and the freight trains being so enormous, but there's a lot more to it, than just the trains.

                                                                       Cheers, Brian. 

[Focalplane]

On the subject of modelling contemporary railways (I hate that term "modern image", which sounds superficial), how can they be boring? Today, there are more trains running, carrying record numbers of passengers, and once again the railways are expanding to meet demand, after years of nationalized decline, and lack of investment. Travelling down by train to see Tony on Tuesday, there was plenty of interest to see, in fact it went past too quickly, often obscured by one of the frequent trains in the opposite direction. I remember the old GN out of King's Cross in the early 1970s, half as many expresses, dwindling freight, brutal track rationalization, and one off-peak local train per hour, to either Welwyn Garden City or Hertford North, in a noisy vibrating Craven DMU (the ex-Lea Valley hydraulics were smoother). On Tuesday I saw the impressive new Hitchin flyover for the first time, plus the enlarged Peterborough station, LNER semaphores in New England yard, the Mallard 126 speed sign, whilst at Stoke Summit we had a severe slack, due to emergency repairs (signal failure or broken rail?), which enabled me to have a good look at the new LED main line signals, north of the tunnel. People used to moan about how boring and featureless, was the ride between Sandy and Peterborough, well now you can watch the wind turbines!

    Coming back, I was dropped off at Grantham station, where I just missed a London train at 20:40, the next one would be 21:54, so I went into town, and had a beer in the excellent Tollemache pub. I returned to the station a good twenty minutes early, just as a southbound container train came hammering through (60-70mph), then a northbound Hull Trains DMU arrived, plus local trains arrived and departed from the bays. Following the Hull train, another container train shook the place to pieces going north (75mph?), this long train was only halfway through, when a southbound steel train came racing through (60 mph?), towards the sanctuary of the four-track section, and getting out of the way of the following express. The noise was unbelieveable, you couldn't hear yourself speak, and it was actually a bit scary, who says today's railways aren't exciting?

     On the modelling side, I can see the complaint about passenger trains being so similar, the local trains being so short, and the freight trains being so enormous, but there's a lot more to it, than just the trains.

                                                                       Cheers, Brian. 

 

If I may add to Brian's post with observations from southern France.  The main line between Narbonne and Nîmes, which passes through Béziers and Montpellier, is a double track "grande ligne" with a maximum speed limit of, I believe, 160kph, though there are restrictions in several places and grade crossings that are often the scene of accidents and delays.  The line is not fenced in many places.  Over the past ten years I have seen a huge variety of trains, photos of which are posted on this thread.  I have even recorded a couple of Class 66 "Sheds".

 

Perhaps because the line is truly international it does carry a wide range of trains, including freight, high speed TGVs, express and local passenger and not forgetting permanent way trains.  As Brian notes, freight trains run at fast speeds here as well and a container or tanker train rumbling through Béziers while waiting for the first TGV of the day (4:20 a.m.) to Paris is deafening at that hour.

 

The variety extends to Spanish trains (once Talgos, now AVE train sets), German trains (autotrain service to Narbonne) and even a quasi British freight service linking Ford Spain with Dagenham and using Transfesa dual gauge flats.

 

But I am not going to model it; I don't have the time.  And here's why:

 

 

Edit to add the right photo:

 

Edited May 21, 2016 by Focalplane

[Brian Kirby]

I should have added, with regard to the downward appeal of kits, I think many modellers have been scared off, through their experience of some badly designed kit in the past, with poor instructions, perhaps they missed out on the better ones? Construction from scratch or kit of some of the ultra-modern passenger stock seen today, would be a challenge for even the best modellers in the country, with their flush-glazing, and often very complicated liveries, so RTR wins, although freight is a good area for kit-building. There aren't many modellers who buy a kit, merely for the constructional challenge, modellers tend to buy what they require for their layout, so if no decent RTR equivalent is on the market, buy whatever kit is available, no matter how good or bad, it is. When I started modelling in the 1970s, most people were re-creating the Big Four steam period, us BR modellers were the new breed, so it's no surprise that the current favourite modelling period has moved on again since then. 

   There's always been a great deal of snobbery around kit construction, in clubs (and fora) up and down the country, you'll hear sweeping statements like "well I threw half the kit away", or "of course I never read the instructions", or "i've been building my kits this way since 1955", all very off-putting for the novice. Another problem is people are afraid to show their efforts, for fear of being jumped on by over-critical friends or club members. The novice kit-builder should not be dictated to, but gently coaxed and encouraged, besides it's always best to learn by your own mistakes. In the great scheme of things, people who build brass kits tend to look down on whitemetal modellers, or anyone who uses glue. EM modellers tend to look down on OO modellers, and P4/S4 modellers tend to look down on both. About 15 years ago, I built a SE Finecast LNER K3, and gave it a compensated chassis, then a P4 modeller asked why did I bother doing that to the chassis? (bit snooty) I replied "well to improve adhesion and power pick-up, it works the same in all gauges" 

    Building loco or coach kits is not the be-all-and-end-all, it is not an absolute requirement when there is a perfectly decent RTR equivalent, besides not having to struggle with a kit, leaves more time for layout construction, RTR mods and scenery making, plus developing new skills like track building and electronics. Live and let live.

                                                                          Cheers, Brian. 

[Mallard60022]

I've started building kit vans and wagons (4mm) as the RTR ones, although sometimes very much neater models in many respects, are getting really expensive. I think I paid about £12.00 for a Cambrian SR Brake Van for example. That's about half the RTR cost. yup, I've got to build it and paint it but that's actually quite good fun (and I like the smell of the adhesive). Quite a lot of Parksides from the 'store in the loft' are seeing the light of day at last.

Should be building the layout of course.............................................

Phil

[46256]

Just back from the SVR diesel gala......great mix of locos current and preserved...deltics class 52 and 50 ...68 ..66 got named after the railway at the event......and of course my favourite the class 46...Kidderminster new diesel depot is ...like visiting Finsbury Park...and Tinsley ..and most recently ..use twnty odd years ago laira.......love steam but hearing the Sulzers followed by the napiers...wow...didn't I take t for granted back in the day

[Nelson Jackson]

I'm not so sure. I recently been asked just many of my new coach kits were bought by people younger than 60, and I had to rely, not many at all.

There are a number of us (under 20 years old) who are really interested in your kits but unfortunately they are just too expensive, so please don't think there's not a market for the younger generation, there is. We just need some time to save up haha.

[bluebottle]

I've started building kit vans and wagons (4mm) as the RTR ones, although sometimes very much neater models in many respects, are getting really expensive. I think I paid about £12.00 for a Cambrian SR Brake Van for example. That's about half the RTR cost. yup, I've got to build it and paint it but that's actually quite good fun (and I like the smell of the adhesive). Quite a lot of Parksides from the 'store in the loft' are seeing the light of day at last.

Should be building the layout of course.............................................

Phil

 

Bit worrying to read about your liking for sniffing glue, Phil. Hope you aren't going to end up like Sue Townsend's "Adrian Mole" with his model aeroplane, having to go to A & E with a brake van stuck to your nose!

[Focalplane]

I think kit designers and sellers get a bad rap a lot of the time.  Given the profit margin cannot be all that high, the cost of going to the nth degree on creating perfect instructions may not be viable.  I have found the simplest and best way forward is to develop a positive relationship with the people involved.  In Gauge O this is probably easier but I have had excellent (4mm) responses from Comet and DJH in the past and have found the people who exhibit both 4mm and 7mm at shows to be very helpful.  Strike up a dialog rather than complain - it works a lot better.

 

Just today I had a good email chat with David Andrews with the result that he offered to mail a part to me in case I didn't have one in my spares box (I did have).  Likewise it is possible to request and download instructions from several kit makers (both Connoisseur and Modern Outline Kits have done this for me prior to effecting a purchase).  I wish they would all do this but some either won't or perhaps can't.  Tony has given some excellent advice regarding many available kits, noting his apparent favourites along the way, one of whom won't sell any separate parts, one of whom is very happy to do so.  It takes all sorts.

[asmay2002]

60007 28 11 09 01.jpg

 

By 2009, what is there left of interest to model?

 

Tony, this photo and comment left a bit of a wry smile on my face.  To me this is just "Stoke Summit" with wires...

[St Enodoc]

About 15 years ago, I built a SE Finecast LNER K3, and gave it a compensated chassis, then a P4 modeller asked why did I bother doing that to the chassis? (bit snooty) I replied "well to improve adhesion and power pick-up, it works the same in all gauges".

I had a comparable experience, when a P4 modeller of my acquaintance asked me why I used transition curves in 00.

[Tony Wright]

I'm not so sure. The context of the conversation was whether there were enough younger people willing to to learn the physical skills necessary to build kits to make producing kits viable in ten years time.

I agree Bill,

 

Having now just started on building the kits you gave me, such is the excellence of the design, the perfect fit of the parts and the simplicity of construction that anyone who couldn't build them should really consider what they're in the hobby for, be it either/or a collector or commissioner.

 

Historically, modellers like me have, on too many occasions, made representations of locos/wagons/carriages/etc IN SPITE of the kits we were using. On one occasion, I think all I used were some nuts and bolts, and the kit's box!

 

If a 'younger' generation was presented with high-quality resin carriage kits of 'more modern' prototypes, perhaps they might be encouraged to carry on the hobby. What might be meant by 'more modern' is a moot point. Going through my collection of Deltic pictures for the book I'm compiling, I came across one showing an Up express passing through Huntingdon. In a siding was (what appeared to be) a Gresley carriage of some kind, on turnbuckle underframing (so, pre-1931?), painted blue. Ah, thought I - an excuse for using pre-Nationionalisation (or even pre-Grouping) rolling stock on a 'modern image' layout. Except, the picture was taken over 40 years ago!

 

To pick up another point, though there are some outstanding diesel/electric era modellers, most of what they produce is historic in the sense of a lot of it appears in a 'traditional' railway scene. Going back to my previous paragraph, though Huntingdon Station had either been rebuilt or was being rebuilt, in other places the ECML still had semaphores and traditional GNR signal boxes. What also got me thinking was that if I went back 40 years from my Deltic picture just mentioned, the Silver Jubilee was just being built.     

[Tony Wright]

Tony, this photo and comment left a bit of a wry smile on my face.  To me this is just "Stoke Summit" with wires...

Andy,

 

I have a wry smile on my face as I write this.

 

If it's just Stoke without wires, where is the signal box, where are the points, where are the signals, where are the telegraph poles and where are the neatly-tended cuttings/embankments. Not only that, would you believe that 60007 was the only A4 I saw at LB (or Stoke Summit) on that day? In fact, believe it or not, it was the only steam loco, too. Yes, it's the real thing, but in model form would that scene be 'just Stoke Summit with wires'?  Assuming you could get near enough to Stoke Summit to make a comparison, that is.  

Edited May 22, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

I should have added, with regard to the downward appeal of kits, I think many modellers have been scared off, through their experience of some badly designed kit in the past, with poor instructions, perhaps they missed out on the better ones? Construction from scratch or kit of some of the ultra-modern passenger stock seen today, would be a challenge for even the best modellers in the country, with their flush-glazing, and often very complicated liveries, so RTR wins, although freight is a good area for kit-building. There aren't many modellers who buy a kit, merely for the constructional challenge, modellers tend to buy what they require for their layout, so if no decent RTR equivalent is on the market, buy whatever kit is available, no matter how good or bad, it is. When I started modelling in the 1970s, most people were re-creating the Big Four steam period, us BR modellers were the new breed, so it's no surprise that the current favourite modelling period has moved on again since then. 

   There's always been a great deal of snobbery around kit construction, in clubs (and fora) up and down the country, you'll hear sweeping statements like "well I threw half the kit away", or "of course I never read the instructions", or "i've been building my kits this way since 1955", all very off-putting for the novice. Another problem is people are afraid to show their efforts, for fear of being jumped on by over-critical friends or club members. The novice kit-builder should not be dictated to, but gently coaxed and encouraged, besides it's always best to learn by your own mistakes. In the great scheme of things, people who build brass kits tend to look down on whitemetal modellers, or anyone who uses glue. EM modellers tend to look down on OO modellers, and P4/S4 modellers tend to look down on both. About 15 years ago, I built a SE Finecast LNER K3, and gave it a compensated chassis, then a P4 modeller asked why did I bother doing that to the chassis? (bit snooty) I replied "well to improve adhesion and power pick-up, it works the same in all gauges" 

    Building loco or coach kits is not the be-all-and-end-all, it is not an absolute requirement when there is a perfectly decent RTR equivalent, besides not having to struggle with a kit, leaves more time for layout construction, RTR mods and scenery making, plus developing new skills like track building and electronics. Live and let live.

                                                                          Cheers, Brian. 

Brian,

 

Sound thinking as always. 

 

However, if all I showed you on Littler Bytham on Tuesday was RTR, would you have been as interested? Everything (apart from those Heljan 2-8-0s) I/we drove, I'd made. Was that snobbery? 

[St Enodoc]

Ah, thought I - an excuse for using pre-Nationionalisation (or even pre-Grouping) rolling stock on a 'modern image' layout. Except, the picture was taken over 40 years ago!

The term "Modern Image" was coined by CJF in 1964 - 52 years ago!

[Jol Wilkinson]

There's always been a great deal of snobbery around kit construction, in clubs (and fora) up and down the country, you'll hear sweeping statements like "well I threw half the kit away", or "of course I never read the instructions", or "i've been building my kits this way since 1955", all very off-putting for the novice. Another problem is people are afraid to show their efforts, for fear of being jumped on by over-critical friends or club members. The novice kit-builder should not be dictated to, but gently coaxed and encouraged, besides it's always best to learn by your own mistakes. In the great scheme of things, people who build brass kits tend to look down on whitemetal modellers, or anyone who uses glue. EM modellers tend to look down on OO modellers, and P4/S4 modellers tend to look down on both. About 15 years ago, I built a SE Finecast LNER K3, and gave it a compensated chassis, then a P4 modeller asked why did I bother doing that to the chassis? (bit snooty) I replied "well to improve adhesion and power pick-up, it works the same in all gauges" 

    Building loco or coach kits is not the be-all-and-end-all, it is not an absolute requirement when there is a perfectly decent RTR equivalent, besides not having to struggle with a kit, leaves more time for layout construction, RTR mods and scenery making, plus developing new skills like track building and electronics. Live and let live.

                                                                          Cheers, Brian. 

I agree with your comment's about the snobbery shown by some (usually the most outspoken) kit builders. However, your comment regarding kit building versus RTR overlooks the satisfaction that comes from building a kit and overcoming the challenges that some kit present.

 

If you are a layout "repeat offender" and that takes precedence of building your own locos, stock, buildings, signals, etc. then RTR clearly provides what you want. Some of us however (and I suspect TW is one) are happy to build and develop one layout over a long period of time, taking enjoyment from building as much as we can and creating something that is special to us.

 

I had a comparable experience, when a P4 modeller of my acquaintance asked me why I used transition curves in 00.

 

Possibly because the P4 modellers had been told/read - on more than one occasion - that OO doesn't need such complexities as compensation, springing, transition curves, etc.

 

As for P4 modellers looking down on OO or EM modellers, that isn't true in many cases but the same old song is trotted out whenever the opportunity arises.

 

And has anyone considered the "snobbery" exhibited by the OO modeller - "why bother to go the effort to build anything, I can buy it without going to that trouble and effort".

 

Edited for poor grammar!

Edited May 22, 2016 by LNWRmodeller

[St Enodoc]

Possibly because the P4 modellers had been told/read - on more than one occasion - that OO doesn't need such complexities as compensation, springing, transition curves, etc.

 

As for P4 modellers looking down on OO or EM modellers, that isn't true in  many cases but the same old song is trotted out whenever the opportunity arises.

 

And has anyone considered the "snobbery" exhibited by the OO modeller - "why bother to go the effort to build anything, I can buy it without going to that trouble and effort".

Neither P4 nor 00 (nor for that matter any other small-scale model railways) NEED transition curves as the lateral forces generated by our models re infinitesimal - which is just as well when we expect them to go round model curves.

 

I use transition curves because they look "right", whatever that means.

 

As for your last comment, I buy what I can so that I can use my time making the things I can't buy.

[t-b-g]

Every once in a while, terms like snobbery and elitism appear in discussions on here.

 

We each have the absolute right to follow the hobby in whatever way we choose. It would be lovely if we could be allowed to get on with building our models without people throwing such words around.

 

You only have to go to something like EXPO EM or Scaleforum and you will quickly find that the finer scale folk are friendly, welcoming, encouraging and very happy to pass on whatever tips and experience they can to those who are perhaps newcomers and haven't tried things before.

 

In 40 years of modelling, I have never seen the sort of behaviour described above. Experienced modellers pulling newcomers to shreds for daring to have a go at building something. There are a few (maybe more!) idiots in the hobby and perhaps people who have experienced such things have been unlucky to encounter such people.

 

A kit or scratchbuilt loco simply has to represent a greater achievement on the part of the modeller than opening a box. The finished loco may not be as finely detailed as the latest Hornby/Bachmann etc. and it may not be as accurate. But in terms of the achievement of the modeller, there is no comparison.

 

If those who just buy and run RTR don't see that, then it is they that have the problem in their attitude, not the poor sods sweating away trying to put a kit together with a soldering iron.

 

And if anybody thinks that the satisfaction of putting the latest RTR model on a layout and saying "I bought that and put a new number on it" comes close to "There wasn't a kit so I got a drawing and built it from scratch" then they need to think again. I have done both.

 

There are lots of people who can build better locos than I can. Mine are not as good as many RTR locos. But does it make me elitist and a snob because I enjoy doing such things?

 

edited for spelling

Edited May 22, 2016 by t-b-g

[Tony Wright]

I agree with your comment's about the snobbery shown by some (usually the most outspoken) kit builders. However, your comment regarding kit building versus RTR overlooks the satisfaction that comes from building a kit and overcoming the challenges that some kit present.

 

If you are a layout "repeat offender" and that takes precedence of building your own locos, stock, buildings, signals, etc. then RTR clearly provides what you want. Some of us however (and I suspect TW is one) are happy to build and develop one layout over a long period of time, taking enjoyment from building as much as we can and creating something that is special to us.

 

 

Possibly because the P4 modellers had been told/read - on more than one occasion - that OO doesn't need such complexities as compensation, springing, transition curves, etc.

 

As for P4 modellers looking down on OO or EM modellers, that isn't true in many cases but the same old song is trotted out whenever the opportunity arises.

 

And has anyone considered the "snobbery" exhibited by the OO modeller - "why bother to go the effort to build anything, I can buy it without going to that trouble and effort".

 

Edited for poor grammar!

Jol,

 

I agree that there has been, at times, a certain snobbery with regard to kit-building, though I also have to agree with Tony Gee's post above with reference to how much help will be given by demonstrators, and not just at the 'scale' shows. I also admit, that I've been quite outspoken at times, particularly about some kits. 

 

When I was beginning in making my own things (model railway-wise), I was told (at the club I'd joined) that only scratch-built/kit-built stuff was allowed over the hand-made pointwork of the OO Gauge club layout; certainly not the modified 'rubbish' which I'd brought  - a Jubilee, made from a hacked-about Tri-ang Princess, for instance. This didn't discourage me at all; indeed, quite the opposite, and I resolved to use Romford wheels in future, becoming, instantly, a 'scale modeller'. I have (and this is in print) never looked forward since. 

 

The word 'need' keeps cropping up with regard to what's required on a model. I've mentioned this before, but when Stoke Summit was started (20 years ago), what we needed to give a fair representation of all the locos/stock required was just unobtainable RTR. RTR was either not available, inaccurate or ran like rubbish. So, although there was a great deal of pleasure derived by the six (later seven) of us who made it all, it was literally out of necessity. It did mean, there was a certain 'exclusivity' in that, in that the group was chosen because of its ability to make things. Someone once said how lucky I was to have such a group around me. I agreed to some extent, but the ability to make things, instead of just being able to throw money at a project, was paramount. I've carried on that attitude with the (largely the same) group which built Little Bytham. Does that smack of snobbery, I wonder? 

Edited May 22, 2016 by Tony Wright

[APOLLO]

Transition curves and super elevation. I first saw this on the North London group's Heckmondwike model railway. They described how it was done in the Railway Modeller, basically a strip of 1/8" cork laid under the outer edge of the curve. It seemed simple, I tried it and it worked very well. I couldn't understand the complex "spiral" mathematics concerning transition curves so I used "rack of the eye", this worked also !!. This was on one of my early OO layouts built back in 1975 based on Garsdale. I still have the home made stockaded turntable - it's on my present loft layout.

 

As to kits, I don't make many these days (lazy RTR runner). I do however have three O gauge Walthers American "saloon chair cars" and a "baggage car" awaiting construction. These are pretty basic, but build into a nice model. The sides are punched aluminium (or is that aluminum ??!!) windows cut out and fully embossed rivets, Included are cast ends & diaphragms (corridor connectors). The roof is difficult, its a length of basswood clerestory section, and it has to be cut to length then the ends filed & shaped down to the complex curve. I built two years ago and did a decent job - hoping I still have that skill !!.

 

I'm up  to my eyeballs in colourlight  signal wiring at the moment on my O gauge layout- not pretty but it works. I hate wiring, it's the bending and mauling about under the boards, gets no easier as you get on a bit.

 

Brit15

[St Enodoc]

Every once in a while, terms like snobbery and elitism appear in discussions on here.

 

We each have the absolute right to follow the hobby in whatever way we choose. It would be lovely if we could be allowed to get on with building our models without people throwing such words around.

 

You only have to go to something like EXPO EM or Scaleforum and you will quickly find that the finer scale folk are friendly, welcoming, encouraging and very happy to pass on whatever tips and experience they can to those who are perhaps newcomers and haven't tried things before.

 

In 40 years of modelling, I have never seen the sort of behaviour described above. Experienced modellers pulling newcomers to shreds for daring to have a go at building something. There are a few (maybe more!) idiots in the hobby and perhaps people who have experienced such things have been unlucky to encounter such people.

 

A kit or scratchbuilt loco simply has to represent a greater achievement on the part of the modeller than opening a box. The finished loco may not be as finely detailed as the latest Hornby/Bachmann etc. and it may not be as accurate. But in terms of the achievement of the modeller, there is no comparison.

 

If those who just buy and run RTR don't see that, then it is they that have the problem in their attitude, not the poor sods sweating away trying to put a kit together with a soldering iron.

 

And if anybody thinks that the satisfaction of putting the latest RTR model on a layout and saying "I bought that and put a new number on it" comes close to "There wasn't a kit so I got a drawing and built it from scratch" then they need to think again. I have done both.

 

There are lots of people who can build better locos than I can. Mine are not as good as many RTR locos. But does it make me elitist and a snob because I enjoy doing such things?

 

edited for spelling

Tony, for the avoidance of doubt, I was for several years a member of the Scalefour Society and I have been (and still am) a member of the S Scale MRS for over thirty years. I have never modelled to either set of standards, but I joined because a) they provide a good deal of useful information that is relevant to all scales and gauges and b) they are, as you say, a fine bunch of people.

 

I think it's also important not to get too focused on locos and to a lesser extent rolling stock. "Railway modelling" is not synonymous with 'loco modelling". Although I have never (yet?) scratchbuilt a loco, I have scratchbuilt a few wagons and built dozens of kits (many wagons, some coaches and a handful of locos). On the other hand, many of the buildings and structures on my recent layouts have been scratchbuilt, I build my own points and like most other people I build my own baseboards, do my own wiring and make my own scenery.

[billbedford]

The term "Modern Image" was coined by CJF in 1964 - 52 years ago!

 

 

...and I know of at least one unfinished layout that has green DMUs, but was described at 'Modern Image' when it was started.