Wright writes.....

[Brian Kirby]

Hang on, what's nasty about a Class 126 DMU, even when 'nasty' is in inverted commas? The problem was lack of flexibility in the couplings, Tony never noticed that all the Hornby bogies (including the motor bogies) had been re-wheeled with Bachmann disc wheels, so back-to-back (checked with vernier) was not a problem, and after all, it was an impromptu test run. I apologized immediately for the behaviour of one of my four DMUs, the reply on the day, after initial tetchiness (again), was that it had been easily fixed, perhaps there was further damage? As for 'nasty' Inter-City units, when was the last time that Tony had seen these modelled, particularly when Tony didn't seem to even know what that were, and didn't seem that interested? Tony has supposedly been championing kit-building and scratchbuilding amongst modellers, now my twelve scratchbuilt vehicles are 'nasty' (Don't worry i'm very thick-skinned). This last point is rather odd, when one considers that said units ran side-by-side with LNER pacifics, for ten years, between Edinburgh and Glasgow. Maybe it was the foreign Swindon pedigree?

                                                    Cheers, Brian. 

[Brian Kirby]

Changing subject, awhile ago I posted on this thread, about the potential of re-introducing CKD (Complete Knock Down) kits from existing RTR models, be it locos, coaches or wagons. Don't worry, i'm not campaigning again, after being jumped-on last time by the negative brigade, with the usual quotes like "It will never happen". Now there's a strange twist, the BBC have commissioned further episodes of James May's re-construction series, amongst which is the planned construction of a Flying Scotsman train set from every individual component (CKD?). No indication yet, as to the vintage of said set, be it early Tri-ang/Hornby, Hornby tender-drive, or current loco-drive spec.? I know the standard reply from the pseudo-intellectuals is "That I don't watch much/any television", but does this mean that the good people of the BBC have more foresight than the cognoscenti on RMweb? I wonder how many members of Joe Public will encouraged to get interested and "have a go", after watching the programme? The manufacturers might be watching?

                                                                 Cheers, Brian. 

[Clive Mortimore]

Hang on, what's nasty about a Class 126 DMU, even when 'nasty' is in inverted commas? The problem was lack of flexibility in the couplings, Tony never noticed that all the Hornby bogies (including the motor bogies) had been re-wheeled with Bachmann disc wheels, so back-to-back (checked with vernier) was not a problem, and after all, it was an impromptu test run. I apologized immediately for the behaviour of one of my four DMUs, the reply on the day, after initial tetchiness (again), was that it had been easily fixed, perhaps there was further damage? As for 'nasty' Inter-City units, when was the last time that Tony had seen these modelled, particularly when Tony didn't seem to even know what that were, and didn't seem that interested? Tony has supposedly been championing kit-building and scratchbuilding amongst modellers, now my twelve scratchbuilt vehicles are 'nasty' (Don't worry i'm very thick-skinned). This last point is rather odd, when one considers that said units ran side-by-side with LNER pacifics, for ten years, between Edinburgh and Glasgow. Maybe it was the foreign Swindon pedigree?

                                                    Cheers, Brian. 

Hi Brian

 

One must remember that many of our fellow modellers were (as I was) brought up on captions like below.

 

Ex LMS Class 2P number 40602 arrives with 12:05pm  train from Leeds. It was introduced in 193x, It first shed was 14B. It worked all over the ex Midland lines finally sheded at 55A where it was withdrawn form in 196x. And a DMU about to depart somewhere.

 

Please no post about 40602's history cos I made it up.

[billbedford]

Now there's a strange twist, the BBC have commissioned further episodes of James May's re-construction series, amongst which is the planned construction of a Flying Scotsman train set from every individual component (CKD?). No indication yet, as to the vintage of said set, be it early Tri-ang/Hornby, Hornby tender-drive, or current loco-drive spec.? 

 

 

More likely to be the Hatchette 7mm Scotsman....

[Headstock]

Hi Brian

 

One must remember that many of our fellow modellers were (as I was) brought up on captions like below.

 

002a.jpg

Ex LMS Class 2P number 40602 arrives with 12:05pm  train from Leeds. It was introduced in 193x, It first shed was 14B. It worked all over the ex Midland lines finally sheded at 55A where it was withdrawn form in 196x. And a DMU about to depart somewhere.

 

Please no post about 40602's history cos I made it up.

 

You would be lucky if the caption said anything about the actual trains.

[jrg1]

Clive mentioning CKD kits had me thinking that this could be the way to go with first generation DMUs.  Although looking different, body lengths were standardised, underfames were fairly common, and door and window layouts were similar-look at the cut and shut articles producing vastly different classes.  The manufacturer makes a set of components, and we choose what we want for a certain DMU-ends, sides, floor pan, underframe and bogies.  David Geen is doing this for various GWR Siphon upgrades using Airfix/Mainline/Lima vehicles as a basis.  I realise that the likes of Silver Fox and Craftsman produce DMU kits and conversions, but I am looking at ease of build primarily.

[grob1234]

Changing subject, awhile ago I posted on this thread, about the potential of re-introducing CKD (Complete Knock Down) kits from existing RTR models, be it locos, coaches or wagons. Don't worry, i'm not campaigning again, after being jumped-on last time by the negative brigade, with the usual quotes like "It will never happen". Now there's a strange twist, the BBC have commissioned further episodes of James May's re-construction series, amongst which is the planned construction of a Flying Scotsman train set from every individual component (CKD?). No indication yet, as to the vintage of said set, be it early Tri-ang/Hornby, Hornby tender-drive, or current loco-drive spec.? I know the standard reply from the pseudo-intellectuals is "That I don't watch much/any television", but does this mean that the good people of the BBC have more foresight than the cognoscenti on RMweb? I wonder how many members of Joe Public will encouraged to get interested and "have a go", after watching the programme? The manufacturers might be watching?

                                                                 Cheers, Brian.

 

Brian,

 

I'd not come across the term CKD before, at least I haven't fully comprehended it if I had heard it. A quick Google search, and Wikipedia tells me the answer! It seems like a great idea. Ok, so a complete kit probably wouldn't suit all builders of locomotives, but it would certainly satisfy quite a large market - people who enjoy trains (publicity surrounding flying Scotsman shows there are plenty who enjoy trains) and are interested in building them, and who aren't really fussed about the (minor) inaccuracies that may be present. All they want is a train that they can say they made, that works, and looks like the real thing. Judging by the standard of RTR, I'd suggest that any such venture would actually offer a very accurate model.

 

Although many of us may which to make very very accurate model locomotives, we must not overlook arguably the most important aspect of the hobby - that of the average modeller. The person who gets fun from running trains on a lay out with little regard for accuracy - just running trains for the fun of it. To be honest I have the utmost respect from those who can simply enjoy playing trains, it is after all the main reason why we do this, is it not?! In my opinion this 'mass' market is the most important part of the hobby. It is from this mass market that a few will further their interest and become interested in making brass loco kits or making signals or whatever else it may be. Programmes such as those by James May give our hobby a massive amount of free advertising, and I really hope as a result a few more folks venture into the hobby.

 

As for the idea of CDK, I feel there is certainly scope within the Hornby or Bachmann ranges to accommodate a more specific kit aimed at someone who wants to build things. The question is, how to get the manufacturers to support it?

[Jon Fitness]

If you purchase an R/C 'plane or helicopter, chances are that will come as CKD for you to build up yourself.

As you can buy just about every spare part for Heljan O gauge locos, maybe that would be a good starting point and a similar concept too. Having said that though, I bet if you did buy all the bits to assemble one it would probably be triple the cost!

 

Jon F

Edited September 15, 2016 by Jon Fitness

[Tony Wright]

Hang on, what's nasty about a Class 126 DMU, even when 'nasty' is in inverted commas? The problem was lack of flexibility in the couplings, Tony never noticed that all the Hornby bogies (including the motor bogies) had been re-wheeled with Bachmann disc wheels, so back-to-back (checked with vernier) was not a problem, and after all, it was an impromptu test run. I apologized immediately for the behaviour of one of my four DMUs, the reply on the day, after initial tetchiness (again), was that it had been easily fixed, perhaps there was further damage? As for 'nasty' Inter-City units, when was the last time that Tony had seen these modelled, particularly when Tony didn't seem to even know what that were, and didn't seem that interested? Tony has supposedly been championing kit-building and scratchbuilding amongst modellers, now my twelve scratchbuilt vehicles are 'nasty' (Don't worry i'm very thick-skinned). This last point is rather odd, when one considers that said units ran side-by-side with LNER pacifics, for ten years, between Edinburgh and Glasgow. Maybe it was the foreign Swindon pedigree?

                                                    Cheers, Brian. 

Brian,

 

One of the greatest delights is being able to run the stock of visitors; stock brought by the likes of your good self. After my initial 'tetchiness' (do you expect rejoicing?), further investigation a few days later revealed a bit more damage than first observed. At least one can say Roy's little signals are superbly accurate; if a real one were hit by a derailed vehicle at some speed, I doubt it would survive. 

 

Please forgive my ignorance of Swindon-built Inter City DMUs; you're quite right, I hadn't much of an idea what they were (as I have little idea what other DMUs are). Please also forgive my ignorance of nuclear physics, quantum theory, obscure philosophers, facebook, twitter, social media and trillions of other subjects I know absolutely nothing about. Did you notice, by the way, that one of my A1s and one of my A2s each has a Thompson Dia. 117 boiler? No? Yet you and Paul drove both, and commented not at all about the relative positions and shapes of their domes. 

 

Of course I'll champion kit/scratch-building and it will be my delight to run anything else you bring along in future (I'm just as thick-skinned). Accidental and definitely non-intentional damage is the smallest price to pay for running such interestingly-different stock. Stock you've made/modified, all on your own. That has to be acknowledged and praised, but it's still 'nasty' if it derails. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited September 15, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

Speaking of making things, a couple more pictures of Grantham from last weekend at Woking. 

 

 

Though RTR-based, this pair of Hornby Pacifics are definitely not just 'out of the box'. Neither is the shed in the distance.

 

 

Neither is this V2, which (I think) is a Graeme King piece of magic. And, not a bus on the bridge - just what looks to be a big gun!.

 

More on the Grantham thread. 

 

When Eric Kidd was here a week or two ago, he suggested I take some overall views of progress thus far. I did, and here they are. 

 

 

 

Definitely nothing here is 'just out of the box'; even the RTR wagons and RTP vehicles have been altered and weathered. If nothing else it shows what a team of self-reliant guys can 'achieve'. My most grateful thanks to them all. The footprint for the cottages is in place and I've been indulging in some 'gardening'.

 

The LB sign was made by a guy at the Loughborough Show, the weekend before last. It's very effective.  

Edited September 15, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

When Mr. Duck was here on Monday, he suggested I take pictures of the cassette system I've made and installed. 

 

 

Though the 'yard is quite extensive (and full!), I still have enough stock to make up a few more trains. So, what about a cassette or two? The lead off road 1 is visible (someone commented it was installed for 'nasty' visitors!) I'll leave that to the imagination.

 

 

This trio of pieces of wood supports the other end of the cassette.

 

The next pictures show the cassettes in use.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Materials are 70mm x 12mm timber and 32mm x 32mm aluminium angle. Friction holds the cassettes in position, ensuring alignment and no power is fed through. Foam blocks prevent stock gaining freedom. With the blocks removed, stock is merely hand-shunted into position in the yard or back on to the cassettes. After use, the cassettes are stored under the layout (for the picture, I've pulled them out). Though I dislike handling locos (I'll purchase a Peco loco-lift), the motive power is put on/taken off off the cassettes. 

 

I painted the sides of the layout green just to give me a background when taking pictures from the other side. 

 

I claim no originality for this idea. The cassettes are around 4' 6" long, so they have to be handled carefully. It's just a system which utilises any extra space I have. 

 

And, I still have to remove those roof ribs on a couple of Bachmann Mk. 1s.

Edited September 15, 2016 by Tony Wright

[Enterprisingwestern]

Brian,

 

One of the greatest delights is being able to run the stock of visitors; stock brought by the likes of your good self. After my initial 'tetchiness' (do you expect rejoicing?), further investigation a few days later revealed a bit more damage than first observed. At least one can say Roy's little signals are superbly accurate; if a real one were hit by a derailed vehicle at some speed, I doubt it would survive. 

 

Please forgive my ignorance of Swindon-built Inter City DMUs; you're quite right, I hadn't much of an idea what they were (as I have little idea what other DMUs are). Please also forgive my ignorance of nuclear physics, quantum theory, obscure philosophers, facebook, twitter, social media and trillions of other subjects I know absolutely nothing about. Did you notice, by the way, that one of my A1s and one of my A2s each has a Thompson Dia. 117 boiler? No? Yet you and Paul drove both, and commented not at all about the relative positions and shapes of their domes. 

 

Of course I'll champion kit/scratch-building and it will be my delight to run anything else you bring along in future (I'm just as thick-skinned). Accidental and definitely non-intentional damage is the smallest price to pay for running such interestingly-different stock. Stock you've made/modified, all on your own. That has to be acknowledged and praised, but it's still 'nasty' if it derails. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Of course it's only "nasty" 00 gauge as well

 

Mike.

 

Tin hat, coat, gone.

[Tony Wright]

Of course it's only "nasty" 00 gauge as well

 

Mike.

 

Tin hat, coat, gone.

Of course it is, and I wish it were EM (though that would limit visiting stock). I've said before, I wish I'd gone EM over 40 years ago when I had the opportunity, but I foolishly declined. Thus, I'm stuck with OO, just as the majority of mainstream modellers are. 

[Enterprisingwestern]

Of course it is, and I wish it were EM (though that would limit visiting stock). I've said before, I wish I'd gone EM over 40 years ago when I had the opportunity, but I foolishly declined. Thus, I'm stuck with OO, just as the majority of mainstream modellers are. 

 

I fully understand Tony, hence the joker.

I'm not one of those who considers anything 00 "nasty", Dewsbury Midland, Troutons, your good self and many others are fine layouts irrespective of gauge.

 

Mike.

[gr.king]

Interesting "buffers" for the cassette system. I can understand the use of foam for kindness to the rolling stock, but will the plain foam blocks be sufficiently firmly retained in the intended places without something else to give definite mechanical registration?

 

Even if the points are set correctly, given that they are facing ones then that cassette access spur looks a lot less worrying with a stop block in it than it would do if left open during a running session.

[Mallard60022]

Interesting "buffers" for the cassette system. I can understand the use of foam for kindness to the rolling stock, but will the plain foam blocks be sufficiently firmly retained in the intended places without something else to give definite mechanical registration?

 

Even if the points are set correctly, given that they are facing ones then that cassette access spur looks a lot less worrying with a stop block in it than it would do if left open during a running session.

When I saw this cassette bridge on my visit to LB I was really impressed as it is fitted to the 'outside' of the layout and not actually on the layout boards as other cassettes I have seen and I actually have on my EM plank.

Being but a simple bloke I don't think I would have envisaged this sort of very simple bridge spur idea and there are places on my new layout build where I could employ this.  So I am grateful to Tony for showing this as I suggested because I think others might have a 'light bulb moment' when they see this method.

Slightly off subject the demo of this bridge and it's present stock, when I first arrived in the layout room, got us chatting about 'unusual and interesting trains' as opposed to the daily procession of expresses and freights. In recent times I have found the research of such trains to be extremely interesting. 

What I hadn't mentioned to Tony was that the manouvering of the cassettes is good, aerobic movement, an excellent exercise for core stability of the upper body and good for hand/eye coordination activity that may no longer be available in the form of playing Cricket.   

Phil

Edited September 16, 2016 by Mallard60022

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

, but it's still 'nasty' if it derails. 

 

 

Perhaps 'naughty' would have been a less pejorative term, and everyone could have retired for a gentlemanly shandy afterwards with no hard feelings on either side.

 

I think we can all get along with the idea of a naughty DMU.

 

Incidentally, my Doctoral supervisor goes bananas over the use of, as she calls them, 'scare marks' to imply irony or to falsely defuse the strength of a word.

 

PS, I give it about an hour before Dr Quackinton Mallard esq of 3 The Railway Cuttings, Seat On, Devon, picks up on the term 'gentlemanly shandy' 

[teaky]

Interesting "buffers" for the cassette system. I can understand the use of foam for kindness to the rolling stock, but will the plain foam blocks be sufficiently firmly retained in the intended places without something else to give definite mechanical registration?

 

Even if the points are set correctly, given that they are facing ones then that cassette access spur looks a lot less worrying with a stop block in it than it would do if left open during a running session.

I think you're worrying unnecessarily there Graeme.  When does Tony ever set the points wrongly? 

Edited September 15, 2016 by teaky

[gr.king]

Never, obviously....

[jwealleans]

Surely a man of Tony's calibre will have interlocked the point so the road can't be energised while the point is into the cassette road?

[Clive Mortimore]

Clive mentioning CKD kits had me thinking that this could be the way to go with first generation DMUs.  Although looking different, body lengths were standardised, underfames were fairly common, and door and window layouts were similar-look at the cut and shut articles producing vastly different classes.  The manufacturer makes a set of components, and we choose what we want for a certain DMU-ends, sides, floor pan, underframe and bogies.  David Geen is doing this for various GWR Siphon upgrades using Airfix/Mainline/Lima vehicles as a basis.  I realise that the likes of Silver Fox and Craftsman produce DMU kits and conversions, but I am looking at ease of build primarily.

Hi jrg1

 

Ummm, DMUs are vastly different from one type to another. Derby railway works made 8 types of diesel railcars, Class 108, 107, 116, 115 127 and the 2 designs of lightweights. Now let us take the classes 108 and 107s, both were mounted on 57 ft long underframes, and had the standard Derby cab. That is where things stop being the same, the 108 had a continuous curve side, like a Mk1 coach, the 107 had a body profile that matched that of the LMS coaches built at Derby. The 108 side windows were low down, like an LMS coach thus even with the continuous curved side lost that MK1 look. The 107 had high windows like on a Mk1 with its LMS body profile. That is without going in to detail differences like guards door positions etc.

 

Bachmann make a wonderful class 108, they palmed it off as a 107 in Glasgow PTE livery. That would be like (keeping a Derby theme) making a model of a Belpaire rebuilt Johnson class 378 4-4-0 and painting number 999 on its tender. Both locomotive classes look very similar but are vastly different when one looks close.

[Focalplane]

Ah, the Deeley 999! Was it Gem that produced a white metal kit? I built one in the late 1960s while camping near the Settle and Carlisle, its main hunting ground many many years before. Classed 4P it was probably as good as the more famous Compound but not as glamorous.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Focalplane

[Mallard60022]

Surely a man of Tony's calibre will have interlocked the point so the road can't be energised while the point is into the cassette road?

Much more simple than that, he has created a worm hole so that anything that accidentally runs onto that spur just disappears and is never seen again. He did say he was getting rid of his RTR loco's. (It is a dead end, literally and only a really, really forgetful driver would send something to its' doom down that route).  

PS, I give it about an hour before Dr Quackinton Mallard esq of 3 The Railway Cuttings, Seat On, Devon, picks up on the term 'gentlemanly shandy' 

Well, make it about 21 hours as I am really alert at the moment! On another class of thread I may have mentioned the above but not on here as this thread is high octane seriousness and I wouldn't want to upset the regulars who never, ever descend to Duckhausen level.

Good morning,

Phil 

[jrg1]

Hi jrg1

 

Ummm, DMUs are vastly different from one type to another. Derby railway works made 8 types of diesel railcars, Class 108, 107, 116, 115 127 and the 2 designs of lightweights. Now let us take the classes 108 and 107s, both were mounted on 57 ft long underframes, and had the standard Derby cab. That is where things stop being the same, the 108 had a continuous curve side, like a Mk1 coach, the 107 had a body profile that matched that of the LMS coaches built at Derby. The 108 side windows were low down, like an LMS coach thus even with the continuous curved side lost that MK1 look. The 107 had high windows like on a Mk1 with its LMS body profile. That is without going in to detail differences like guards door positions etc.

 

Bachmann make a wonderful class 108, they palmed it off as a 107 in Glasgow PTE livery. That would be like (keeping a Derby theme) making a model of a Belpaire rebuilt Johnson class 378 4-4-0 and painting number 999 on its tender. Both locomotive classes look very similar but are vastly different when one looks close.

Thanks Clive-my knowledge of DMUs has increased somewhat.  What combinations do you think would be possible?

[glo41f]

Tony

 

Those pictures of the layout from above show just how far it has developed since my visit. It is really looking superb now and a great credit to all involved. Just the track to weather a bit now!  The cassette idea is also good but the cassettes still have to be stored and manhandled. There is never enough storage space for the many trains who daily pass through LB. I was struck with the commercial offering of an automated stacking system which uses height to hold the trains in their modules. (Barrie Walls built one he called the multi storey train park.)  Vertical stacking applied across LB fiddle yards would generate space for a further 2 hours worth of trains!

 

Your wistfulness regarding EM is understandable but your trackwork is such that I would not be dismissive about staying with 16.5. If used with decent track 00 standards work as proved by your Frank Dyer and others. It is the ghastly commercial track systems which let the realism down and to this day I do not understand why modellers are happy to put up with such unrealistic trackwork.

 

Sometimes I rather regret changing to 7mm given the way the trade has improved so much now. What a system I could have in my garage where I could have 4 feet radius curves and all the trimmings!  I have to say the feelings of regret do not last long though. My ideal 4mm layout would be on the lines of the one described in the 1979 MRC album called South for Moonshine. Though crude by today's standards it had masses of operational interest and could be operated by one person or a group. The idea could easily be adapted to suit any regional interest.

 

Martin Long