Wright writes.....

[Mallard60022]

Hi Tony

 

There is always one

 

Anyhow Mr Drake

 

Wot do U want with Blue Peter? Shouldn't you be asking Mr Wright if he has a push-pull fitted Ivatt class 2 tank for your Axminster layout?

Blue Peter was used on a special that stalled, going west, on Honiton incline in 1966. It was knackered and the coal was also rubbish.

Thus, to represent the spectacle of a ER Pacific doing its thing through SJ, I could do with one and Tony may have one hidden in a box; he knows I am a cheeky ###.

Ducky. 

[Mallard60022]

I'm sorry but I must respectfully disagree.

 

 

(Tony's photo)

Blimey, I didn't know that existed; Quintuplet dining set? Bl##dy beautiful Jonno.

Phil

[jwealleans]

 

 

I didn't know that existed

 

You were looking at it at Nottingham!

[Clive Mortimore]

Blue Peter was used on a special that stalled, going west, on Honiton incline in 1966. It was knackered and the coal was also rubbish.

Thus, to represent the spectacle of a ER Pacific doing its thing through SJ, I could do with one and Tony may have one hidden in a box; he knows I am a cheeky ###.

Ducky. 

So you need an early Bachmann model that had no pulling power.....................just like me when I was young man trying my hardest in the local disco.

[Mallard60022]

You were looking at it at Nottingham!

I might have looked as if I was looking at it at Nottingham, however appearances can be deceptive as I was actually half asleep at the time during one of my 'weird sessions'. I really can't remember that at all (sadly). I do remember the Silver set and an A4 I was allowed to send on shed and 'accidentally' buying two Bulleid Pacifics that Tony happened to have in his bag and that is it. 

I must try harder.

Phil

[Tony Wright]

A RTR list would be handy......

As asked by Phil, unfortunately I don't have 60532; actually I do, but I built it from a kit, so it's not for sale I'm afraid.

 

A list, as requested.

 

Hornby A3s and A4s. Some have been renumbered/renamed; all have the loco-to-tender coupling shortened, all have etched plates, replacement bogie wheels, lamps, a crew and real coal in the tender. All have been weathered by me or Ian Rathbone. 

60049, double chimney, German blinkers, GNR tender.

60067, double chimney, high-sided tender.

60070, double chimney, high-sided tender.

60111, single chimney, high-sided tender. 

 

60017, double chimney.

60032, double chimney. 

 

Bachmann A1s. Again, loco-to-tender shortened, extra detail added, etched plates, replacement bogie wheels, crew, lamps, real coal, etc. 

60138, etched deflectors, weathered by Ian Rathbone.

60144, weathered by Tim Shackleton. 

 

Looking at the current RRP, I'm asking £175.00 each for the Pacifics. Hattons appear to be selling Hornby A3s at under £100.00 (list, over £150.00). 

 

Several have appeared in the model press. 

 

I also have some smaller RTR locos for sale, including.

Bachmann B1 (latest chassis) 61070, renumbered, replacement bogie wheels, weathered, drawbar shortened, crew, lamps, real coal, etc. 

Bachmann K3 61880, renumbered, replacement pony wheels, weathered, front steps added, drawbar shortened, crew, lamps, etc. This has appeared in BRM.

Hornby K1 62019, renumbered, weathered, crew, lamps, etc. This has appeared in BRM.

 

I'm asking £140 each for the above. 

 

If the moderators feel that this thread is not the place to advertise items for sale, then they'll intervene. I might add that 10% of sales will go to Cancer Research. 

 

Anyone interested, please PM me. You might get an invitation to LB to see them run if you buy them. 

 

Though all the above are very nice models, as I mentioned earlier, they never get run. All the trains on LB are hauled by the locos I've made; a personal preference. 

[Mallard60022]

Thanks Tony. I actually have a suitable RTR locomotive with all the required detail differences and it can be renumbered.  However, for one rather 'Pantomime' appearance I maybe will just not bother and sell it on (Happy Knight..... but it is out on loan at the moment). However I do have a part finished Bronzino (DJH)  so I could get a grip sometime with that and add the multi valve reg and fittings + anything else required to produce  Blue Peter.

Lovely batch of stuff for sale though; some lucky new owners for those I'm sure. Good luck and nice touch for the 10%; thoughtful.

All the best

Phil

[Tony Wright]

Thanks Tony. I actually have a suitable RTR locomotive with all the required detail differences and it can be renumbered.  However, for one rather 'Pantomime' appearance I maybe will just not bother and sell it on (Happy Knight..... but it is out on loan at the moment). However I do have a part finished Bronzino (DJH)  so I could get a grip sometime with that and add the multi valve reg and fittings + anything else required to produce  Blue Peter.

Lovely batch of stuff for sale though; some lucky new owners for those I'm sure. Good luck and nice touch for the 10%; thoughtful.

All the best

Phil

Good morning Phil,

 

Crownline used to do all the bits and pieces necessary for making the visible multi-valve regulator equipment on the A2s. I'm sure PDK still does, but whether they sell them separately, I don't know. Don't forget as well that BLUE PETER's tender has spoked wheels. 

 

BLUE PETER rather let herself down on the Southern, but I'm told the coal was rubbish. A similar problem afflicted KINGFISHER when she ran on an SR rail tour. A good friend fired it and he said the fire was in a right mess. No doubt 'partisans' will claim only their own locos were any good, but MORETHOE ran out of puff on a rail tour 'up t'north' as well. 

[Mallard60022]

Good morning Phil,

 

Crownline used to do all the bits and pieces necessary for making the visible multi-valve regulator equipment on the A2s. I'm sure PDK still does, but whether they sell them separately, I don't know. Don't forget as well that BLUE PETER's tender has spoked wheels. 

 

BLUE PETER rather let herself down on the Southern, but I'm told the coal was rubbish. A similar problem afflicted KINGFISHER when she ran on an SR rail tour. A good friend fired it and he said the fire was in a right mess. No doubt 'partisans' will claim only their own locos were any good, but MORETHOE ran out of puff on a rail tour 'up t'north' as well. 

Thanks Tony. I shall see if I can find the kit. I might have sold it and forgotten.

Yes, I've got a couple of A4s lined up for tours including Kingfisher (I shall borrow that on occasion if I'm lucky). The other is a Feb '63 Mallard run west.

The 'problems' with coal quality still exist and the 'inexperience' of footplate staff on some turns on Bulleid Pacifics can still cause problems. However I have been on some runs as passenger when the crew(s) have done a magnificent job with an ailing loco and totally awful fuel.

I have wondered for quite some time how drivers and crew know the 'little quirks' of some boilers/fires to keep them clean and working efficiently on main line duties. It must be awful for the support team seeing something being done in not quite the right way and and maybe they can't say anything? I don't know  how it works on main line workings so should probably not discuss it. The chap that works on the Mid Hants and often does main line support could put us right I am sure (damned if I can remember his name).

Probably the same back then when a SR Driver would have probably given the ER loco the same regulator and cut off treatment as a Bulleid? Fascinating stuff and, of course, those that actually were there doing it are virtually gone very sadly. 

[The Stationmaster]

Slightly OT (sorry) but here is an example of how things can be misconstrued or incorrectly presented - look at the words about 'The First Stirrings of GW150' and 4930 climbing Sapperton Bank and it really is so wide of the mark as to be near nonsense.  I not only did the ops planning for much of GW150 but was also on the footplate on that part of that particular run so the reality is as follows -

 

1. It was not a 'try out' for the Gloucester - Swindon workings as they were already planned and the load was based on standard GWR loads for that route with that class of engine, I know because I decided that is what it would be.

 

2. It is true that the regulator was only open on the first valve for most of the time (but not all) but that was entirely down to the Driver who could only - with great difficulty - be persuaded by the Traction Inspector to work the engine on full regulator for a brief period.  The Driver made it very clear that when he had worked that way back in the days of steam - as a Fireman - that is how his Driver had worked the engine up the bank and if it was good enough for his former mate then it was good enough for him (he added that it had been when working ballast trains!).  The Driver found it difficult to understand the idea that we were also there to provide 'a bit of a show' but he could hardly be blamed for that as it was his first ever involvement with 'circus steam working'.

 

If the regulator had been wide open in the long tunnel it would probably have brought down even more bricks than it actually did   - not that such an event was anticipated.

 

Incidentally my avatar shows me on a later (not GW150) Gloucester - Swindon working passing Coates on 'Clun Castle'.  As anyone who took advantage of the later regular steam services on that section in 1985 can testify there was some 'very spirited' running and the difference was down to the enginemen and Inspectors involved - apart from some engines putting in amazing performances (such as 7029 beating the HST point-to-point times climbing Sapperton Bank).  As Phil has very correctly observed the experience of the enginemen and their familiarity with different engines can affect performance, and far more than 'poor coal' can also have an impact.

 

http://www.steamsoundsarchive.com/10/10_1.html

[MJI]

Slightly OT (sorry) but here is an example of how things can be misconstrued or incorrectly presented - look at the words about 'The First Stirrings of GW150' and 4930 climbing Sapperton Bank and it really is so wide of the mark as to be near nonsense.  I not only did the ops planning for much of GW150 but was also on the footplate on that part of that particular run so the reality is as follows -

 

1. It was not a 'try out' for the Gloucester - Swindon workings as they were already planned and the load was based on standard GWR loads for that route with that class of engine, I know because I decided that is what it would be.

 

2. It is true that the regulator was only open on the first valve for most of the time (but not all) but that was entirely down to the Driver who could only - with great difficulty - be persuaded by the Traction Inspector to work the engine on full regulator for a brief period.  The Driver made it very clear that when he had worked that way back in the days of steam - as a Fireman - that is how his Driver had worked the engine up the bank and if it was good enough for his former mate then it was good enough for him (he added that it had been when working ballast trains!).  The Driver found it difficult to understand the idea that we were also there to provide 'a bit of a show' but he could hardly be blamed for that as it was his first ever involvement with 'circus steam working'.

 

If the regulator had been wide open in the long tunnel it would probably have brought down even more bricks than it actually did   - not that such an event was anticipated.

 

Incidentally my avatar shows me on a later (not GW150) Gloucester - Swindon working passing Coates on 'Clun Castle'.  As anyone who took advantage of the later regular steam services on that section in 1985 can testify there was some 'very spirited' running and the difference was down to the enginemen and Inspectors involved - apart from some engines putting in amazing performances (such as 7029 beating the HST point-to-point times climbing Sapperton Bank).  As Phil has very correctly observed the experience of the enginemen and their familiarity with different engines can affect performance, and far more than 'poor coal' can also have an impact.

 

http://www.steamsoundsarchive.com/10/10_1.html

 

 

1985

 

7029 and 75069

 

The Castle was rather quick compared to the 4MT

 

I also cabbed it at Horton Road and they moved it while I was in the cab.

 

I also remember riding on a DMU towards Swindon (possibly a 120) seeing the rev counter in the red and the speedo nearing 90

[Tony Wright]

Pleased to report that it looks like all the modified RTR locos I listed have now been sold. If nothing else it means a cheque of around £200.00 for Cancer Research. 

 

As I rummage through boxes, there could well be more. I'll keep folk posted. 

 

Many thanks. 

 

A good friend came round today for some loco-building tuition, to collect some models and partake in the running of trains. We agreed, it was much more interesting to drive the locos I'd made rather than the modified RTR ones, no matter how good they were. This is a personal thing, and I thoroughly encourage modellers to have a go at modifying RTR locos for themselves - the results, as have been shown on this thread on many occasions, can really be splendid and represent a very high standard.

 

Please keep on posting images of what you've done. 

Edited August 4, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Barry Ten]

 

 

Please keep on posting images of what you've done. 

 

Here are the two most recent projects on my workbench, both with an Edwardian theme:

 

 

 

The 4-wheel brake third is the Ratio kit mounted on an etched chassis from Mainly Trains, which includes compensation. It's probably not needed on my 00 layout (especially as I tend to use Bachmann wheels) but quite fun to say I've finally built a vehicle with compensation. I can't take any credit for the Mallard clerestory, which was bought as seen, but I do take a lot of pleasure from owning a superbly made and painted kit such as this, and it's an incentive to try to approach the same standards in my own efforts. To that end, I've acquired the equivalent kit for the brake clerestory, and I look forward to trying to do it justice.

 

I've also made a start on this Dragon Models kit for a Rhymney Railways 6 ton brake van (apologies for the fuzzy photo), only two of which prototypes were made, eventually passing into GWR ownership:

 

 

This has posed some interesting challenges, but I hope it's also also pushed my skills a bit and I think it will come out well enough when finished. I doubt I'll ever build a smaller vehicle in 4mm - it really is tiny!

 

Alastair (Barry Ten)

[thegreenhowards]

Tony and other experts,

 

I've been doing some research on the 1924 and 1928 triplets with regard to recessed doors. The best information I could find is in the Campling Historic Carriage Drawings book (p46-48). This states that the earlier sets had the recessed doors. This is confirmed by a picture of number 16493 from a 1928 set (p46) which clearly doesn't have a recessed door. There are pictures of a complete 1924 and 1928 set, and while it's more difficult to make out on these photos, I have managed to convince myself that the 1924 doors were recessed, while the 1928 set doors were not.

 

So my understanding is that both sets were built to more or less the same basic body width. Harris in 'LNER Standard Gresley coaches' shows 8'11.25" for the 1924 sets and 9'0" for the 1928 sets. However the door handles sticking out would have caused the 1924 sets to exceed the then prevailing loading gauge limit of 9'0", hence they were recessed. By 1928, the loading gauge had changed to allow 9'3" maximum width, so the doors didn't have to be recessed.

 

On this basis, my Kirk kit (which is not recessed) would be best suited to a 1928 set. Does this sound plausible, or have I misunderstood things completely?!

 

Regards

 

Andy

[richard i]

Here are the two most recent projects on my workbench, both with an Edwardian theme:

 

gwr4wheel6.jpg

 

gwr4wheel7.jpg

 

The 4-wheel brake third is the Ratio kit mounted on an etched chassis from Mainly Trains, which includes compensation. It's probably not needed on my 00 layout (especially as I tend to use Bachmann wheels) but quite fun to say I've finally built a vehicle with compensation. I can't take any credit for the Mallard clerestory, which was bought as seen, but I do take a lot of pleasure from owning a superbly made and painted kit such as this, and it's an incentive to try to approach the same standards in my own efforts. To that end, I've acquired the equivalent kit for the brake clerestory, and I look forward to trying to do it justice.

 

I've also made a start on this Dragon Models kit for a Rhymney Railways 6 ton brake van (apologies for the fuzzy photo), only two of which prototypes were made, eventually passing into GWR ownership:

 

rhymney2.jpg

 

This has posed some interesting challenges, but I hope it's also also pushed my skills a bit and I think it will come out well enough when finished. I doubt I'll ever build a smaller vehicle in 4mm - it really is tiny!

 

Alastair (Barry Ten)

Try building a gunpowder van, certainly the GCR one makes a standard 5 plank wagon look like a bohemeth.

Richard

[Tony Wright]

Tony and other experts,

 

I've been doing some research on the 1924 and 1928 triplets with regard to recessed doors. The best information I could find is in the Campling Historic Carriage Drawings book (p46-48). This states that the earlier sets had the recessed doors. This is confirmed by a picture of number 16493 from a 1928 set (p46) which clearly doesn't have a recessed door. There are pictures of a complete 1924 and 1928 set, and while it's more difficult to make out on these photos, I have managed to convince myself that the 1924 doors were recessed, while the 1928 set doors were not.

 

So my understanding is that both sets were built to more or less the same basic body width. Harris in 'LNER Standard Gresley coaches' shows 8'11.25" for the 1924 sets and 9'0" for the 1928 sets. However the door handles sticking out would have caused the 1924 sets to exceed the then prevailing loading gauge limit of 9'0", hence they were recessed. By 1928, the loading gauge had changed to allow 9'3" maximum width, so the doors didn't have to be recessed.

 

On this basis, my Kirk kit (which is not recessed) would be best suited to a 1928 set. Does this sound plausible, or have I misunderstood things completely?!

 

Regards

 

Andy

Andy,

 

I think you've got it just about dead right; that makes my Comet build's numbers spot on. Many thanks. 

 

When I built it, I can't believe I'd have got the wrong sets. The problem is, when I build something I get out all the relevant material (drawings, books, documents, etc) and then hope I get things as right as possible. After that, stuff is not always replaced in its correct folder or set of drawers (lack of diligence). I try and remember what went into a build, the facts established and so on but all too easily forget. This is why I'm always a bit twitchy about observers using any of my models as 'accurate' sources. As I said, I do my best but there are bound to be mistakes. Problems also arise when (especially) models of older locos/vehicles are built. For instance, the K2 I finished recently has the front numberplate in the wrong position on the smokebox door. It was one of very few where the horizontal crossrail and the numberplate were transposed. This happened with other ex-LNER classes, and the reasons for it are lost in the mists of time. 

 

As another example, recently, I've been writing some captions with regard to the ex-LNER streamlined stock, as used post-War. The thorny problem of the extra doors crops up time after time. Harris gets muddled with this, as do other experts and it certainly puzzles me, The Silver Jubilee triplet catering set never got extra doors, but the catering twins from the Coronation/West Riding did it would seem, but only one, and on which side of which car? The extra door on the BTO/TO was on the opposite side to the extra doors in the FOs (which were to the left-hand inner end). I've seen professionally-built models of these streamliners where there are no extra doors where there should be and some where there are too many (on opposite sides of the same car). Were all the surviving cars fitted with extra doors? 

 

It makes me ponder what we are really making models for. In my case, it's to 'relive' some of those wonderful, youthful, carefree days when I saw the prototypes of what I make models of. However, though I saw the ex-Coronation twins in the Talisman, I have no recollection of seeing extra doors, nor those in the West Riding cars. So, though it's important to me to get things as right as possible, the things I build for myself are 'representations', no more. Sketch-book impressions of a once wonderful railway scene. The important thing, as always, is that we actually build/modify our models ourselves in the main. Right or wrong, it's our work. 

[coachmann]

..........It makes me ponder what we are really making models for. In my case, it's to 'relive' some of those wonderful, youthful, carefree days when I saw the prototypes of what I make models of. However, though I saw the ex-Coronation twins in the Talisman, I have no recollection of seeing extra doors, nor those in the West Riding cars. So, though it's important to me to get things as right as possible, the things I build for myself are 'representations', no more. Sketch-book impressions of a once wonderful railway scene. The important thing, as always, is that we actually build/modify our models ourselves in the main. Right or wrong, it's our work. 

Speaking as another who grew up in the steam-era, I saw much but absorbed little except for livery; maybe it was the artist in me. For example I never once noticed if the top feed on a Stanier 5MT 4-6-0 was behind the chimney, in front of the dome or non-existent.... It was just another Black Five! Short or long fireboxes on Jubilees was a similar case, yet I was in my later twenties when steam expired on BR. We learn more through building and painting models.

Edited August 5, 2016 by coachmann

[MikeTrice]

The GA's confirm that the 1924 triplet outer vehicles had recessed doors on the outer ends only, whereas the 1928 did not feature recessed doors. The Kitchen cars where not recessed.

 

Edited August 5, 2016 by MikeTrice

[Barry Ten]

Try building a gunpowder van, certainly the GCR one makes a standard 5 plank wagon look like a bohemeth.

Richard

 

These are as close as I'll get, alas - Ratio Iron Minks converted using the Shirescenes etches:

 

[thegreenhowards]

Andy,

 

I think you've got it just about dead right; that makes my Comet build's numbers spot on. Many thanks. 

 

When I built it, I can't believe I'd have got the wrong sets. The problem is, when I build something I get out all the relevant material (drawings, books, documents, etc) and then hope I get things as right as possible. After that, stuff is not always replaced in its correct folder or set of drawers (lack of diligence). I try and remember what went into a build, the facts established and so on but all too easily forget. This is why I'm always a bit twitchy about observers using any of my models as 'accurate' sources. As I said, I do my best but there are bound to be mistakes. Problems also arise when (especially) models of older locos/vehicles are built. For instance, the K2 I finished recently has the front numberplate in the wrong position on the smokebox door. It was one of very few where the horizontal crossrail and the numberplate were transposed. This happened with other ex-LNER classes, and the reasons for it are lost in the mists of time. 

 

As another example, recently, I've been writing some captions with regard to the ex-LNER streamlined stock, as used post-War. The thorny problem of the extra doors crops up time after time. Harris gets muddled with this, as do other experts and it certainly puzzles me, The Silver Jubilee triplet catering set never got extra doors, but the catering twins from the Coronation/West Riding did it would seem, but only one, and on which side of which car? The extra door on the BTO/TO was on the opposite side to the extra doors in the FOs (which were to the left-hand inner end). I've seen professionally-built models of these streamliners where there are no extra doors where there should be and some where there are too many (on opposite sides of the same car). Were all the surviving cars fitted with extra doors? 

 

It makes me ponder what we are really making models for. In my case, it's to 'relive' some of those wonderful, youthful, carefree days when I saw the prototypes of what I make models of. However, though I saw the ex-Coronation twins in the Talisman, I have no recollection of seeing extra doors, nor those in the West Riding cars. So, though it's important to me to get things as right as possible, the things I build for myself are 'representations', no more. Sketch-book impressions of a once wonderful railway scene. The important thing, as always, is that we actually build/modify our models ourselves in the main. Right or wrong, it's our work.

 

Thanks Tony (and Mike for confirming). I agree with your comments about what we build models for. For me, the research is part of the fun, but the end game is having a model which can look impressive running in a scale length train. The exact details don't really matter. So I try to get it right when I'm building something, and enjoy that part, but if I find out that somethings wrong once I've finished, then I'm unlikely to bother to fix it later. Similarly if something's a disproportionate amount of work, and unlikely to be noticed, I may 'blind eye' it.

 

Now, as I'm free to build the 1928 triplet, I think I'll have a go at one of the Louis XIV sets. Harris says these were green in first and blue in third originally. Does anyone know if that was still the case by the 1950s?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Willie Whizz]

On the subject of LNER/ER restaurant cars, lately I've been trying without success so far to uncover an illustration or drawing of what the electrical charging points installed at certain stations to recharge these vehicles actually looked like, and a description of how they were operated.  By this I mean the 'fixed' outlet by the trackside, whether on a station platform, in a carriage shed, by a siding, or however else they were arranged; as opposed to the gubbins on the carriages themselves.  They do seem to be a bit like the Scarlet Pimpernel - "demned elusive" - and I wonder whether anyone on here can enlighten me, please?

 

On the subject of making things for oneself, this week I made two baseboards.   "Big deal", you might say ... but for well over 20 years the 'Wheel of Opportunity' has never had all three necessary elements - enough time, enough space, and enough money - in alignment for me at once; so (a couple of false starts aside) all I've been able to do is intermittent armchair modelling in anticipation of having a worthwhile layout to run the stuff on 'one of these days'.  But it finally looks like I'm about to start getting somewhere, so (famous last words permitting ...) I'm actually pretty pleased with the achievement! 

[robertcwp]

 

 

As another example, recently, I've been writing some captions with regard to the ex-LNER streamlined stock, as used post-War. The thorny problem of the extra doors crops up time after time. Harris gets muddled with this, as do other experts and it certainly puzzles me, The Silver Jubilee triplet catering set never got extra doors, but the catering twins from the Coronation/West Riding did it would seem, but only one, and on which side of which car? The extra door on the BTO/TO was on the opposite side to the extra doors in the FOs (which were to the left-hand inner end). I've seen professionally-built models of these streamliners where there are no extra doors where there should be and some where there are too many (on opposite sides of the same car). Were all the surviving cars fitted with extra doors? 

 

It makes me ponder what we are really making models for. In my case, it's to 'relive' some of those wonderful, youthful, carefree days when I saw the prototypes of what I make models of. However, though I saw the ex-Coronation twins in the Talisman, I have no recollection of seeing extra doors, nor those in the West Riding cars. So, though it's important to me to get things as right as possible, the things I build for myself are 'representations', no more. Sketch-book impressions of a once wonderful railway scene. The important thing, as always, is that we actually build/modify our models ourselves in the main. Right or wrong, it's our work. 

This might help with the doors: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32711444/Articles/LNER_Streamlined_Stock_post-war_29-11-14.pdf

[Jon4470]

 

On the subject of making things for oneself, this week I made two baseboards.   "Big deal", you might say ... but for well over 20 years the 'Wheel of Opportunity' has never had all three necessary elements - enough time, enough space, and enough money - in alignment for me at once; so (a couple of false starts aside) all I've been able to do is intermittent armchair modelling in anticipation of having a worthwhile layout to run the stuff on 'one of these days'.  But it finally looks like I'm about to start getting somewhere, so (famous last words permitting ...) I'm actually pretty pleased with the achievement!

 

I sympathise - I find myself in a similar position - particularly never enough time or space to do "the layout". Recently I've made the time to get on with building loco kits and I've really enjoyed it - very satisfying. I was getting ready to start cutting wood and actually building a layout but, just as I was ready to start, I now find myself with a leg in a pot for 2 months - so now can't even get in the modelling room! Now I'm reduced to Armchair modelling again!

 

I find the posts on threads like this are really helpful - at least I get to see great quality models even if I can't participate for a while.

[96701]

Off topic again (sorry), but I thought some of you guys on this thread might like to see this (unless it has already been posted before)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=380&v=t_6ZOIe_nX0

[Jon4470]

Currently I'm thinking through the things I need to really get going with the layout.

I have track plans, know where the signal should go (I think), I have reference books and I've also walked the line. So far so good.

Then I start to think about what will run on the layout. I'm fairly sure what locomotives I need - and anyway, as these are my main interest, I'll have far too many anyway! But what about carriages? Photos in the main seem to be front 3/4 so don't always help.

 

So a plea for advice. How do I work out what trains ran in 1938 and what the composition was?

 

Sorry if this sounds really basic but I'm getting confused by timetables, working timetables etc

Thanks

Jon