Wright writes.....

[gr.king]

At present, resin casting can provide better surface finishes and lower cost that 3D printing, so it strikes me as preferable once one is past the "master part" or "master model" stage. It has the further advantage that it can be done with minimal cost equipment, at home. Those advantages probably create a "sting in the tail" in some situations of course, encouraging one (me anyway) to try to produce parts in resin that might be better made by other methods, or so some would say.

[Tony Wright]

I had hoped to post the following pictures and comments by last Sunday, but the sun has shone, presenting ideal opportunities to take out the 'rag-top'.

 

So here's Mallard60022's A1 complete. As already mentioned, Phil did most of the bodywork and I finished it off, making the chassis for good measure, though he'd already erected the frames. My original intention was to finish off the loco as 60121 SILURIAN, because the tender frames has been erected with spoked wheels. This DJH kit dates from the Banbury days and was probably one of the first ones, where old-fashioned Jackson/Romford wheels were supplied. Etched discs were (still are) provided for those who wished to alter the original 'stamped-through' spoked wheels. Today, proper disc tender wheels (to suit the majority of A1s) are readily available, as are proper bogie and pony wheels. The kit also had original-style Romford drivers with two too many spokes. I substituted Markits RP25 drivers with the right number of spokes. It also had an open-frame motor. This, and the old-fashioned drivers might well be appearing on ebay.

 

Why did I decide not to make her into 60121? Because Phil had started to fit the electric lighting gear and what was done was securely soldered on - rather neatly, too. SILURIAN lost her electric lighting by the mid-'50s. Which to choose, then? I decided (heresy, I know) to forget about the spoked tender wheels (they are hard to see from normal viewing angles) and go 'all the way' and make a roller-bearing example. Since I usually make models of what I saw, I had two to choose from; 60155 BORDERER or 60157 GREAT EASTERN. If either of these had spoked tender wheels, so much the better but also so what? Peter Coster's definitive Irwell book on the A1s clearly shows 60157 as having lost her electric lighting by 1953, so 60155 it was to be. That said, in Yeadon's Register on the class there's a picture of 60157 being towed for scrap, where she appears to have had it re-fitted. Has anyone noted anything like that before? Was any other A1 the re-recipient of electric lighting. Just as an aside, though Willie's knowledge of locos is unimpeachable, his knowledge of Brunel's ships is pretty 'rusty'. It was the GREAT BRITAIN, not the GREAT EASTERN which languished in the Falklands.

 

How does one represent a roller-bearing A1? Only one lubricator and a round-fronted keep on the Cartazzi and tender axleboxes. In choosing which lubricator to retain (both were securely soldered in place), I became aware that the sandbox fillers had been soldered in the wrong place (look at the previous picture). How Phil had got these wrong I don't know, but they were easily unsoldered and re-fixed in the right place. Apart from the rear one on the offside which had the electric lighting conduit securely soldered through it. Visions of melting major parts were apparent as it refused to budge, so I left it. The three quarter rear view shows this, and I'll have to live with it. The representation of the round keeps was easily achieved by soldering on Romford brass washers, plugging the hole at the same time. 

 

Phil had also run the AWS conduit down the nearside footplate valance, from the deflectors to underneath the cab. The very earliest examples of this apparatus in use had this configuration, but the style finally adopted by BR had the conduit appearing from behind the front section of valance, not running along it. So, off came Phil's carefully soldered-on bit of wire, to be replaced by 15Amp fusewire. This was lucky, because in removing the original (slightly wiggly) wire, part of the footplate lip was damaged and the new (straight) conduit is read by the eye as the footplate edge. By the way, it was the forward lubricator which was retained. 

 

And so, the conclusion. Normally, I heartily dislike taking on other folk's work to remedy/complete. Much is glued together - anathema in the extreme if it's brass, nickel silver, copper or white-metal - and the bits just fall apart in handling. Where it's soldered, it's often rough but, if bits are in the wrong place they can be un-soldered much more easily than things can be un-glued. As mentioned, some un-soldering was necessary (including the tender bulkhead detail, which Phil had soldered on too low) in this A1 but most of what was done was done well - well enough for my satisfaction in finishing it off. As to it's future, I'll probably buy it off Phil since he wasn't intending to keep it anyway. That said (I hope), it's more saleable now it's complete so we might split the eventual booty (this is not an advertisement, by the way!).

 

 

Here's the chassis complete, with Comet gearbox and fat Mashima motor - plenty of smooth power indeed. Normally, I drive off the centre axle in a six-coupled mechanism (it's mechanically better-balanced) but this 'box was sweeter in reverse. It wasn't un-sweet in forwards, but just a twitch noisier. The cure? Turn it round. I always solder scrap brass to cover the ends of the shaft for the intermediate gear, rather than tighten up the grubscrew. That way, the gearwheel always finds its natural centre and the shaft is held in place, and you don't get the whirr, whirr, whirr sound, so annoying when everything is visually sweet. The latest Markits LNER bogie wheels are a huge improvement on what's been available before. 

 

 

My apologies for the 'rough' look of the finished thing, since it's yet to be thoroughly washed. When I received this model it was pristine and clean, so any staining is down to my liberal use of flux. Prior to any washing and subsequent painting, I always give finished locos the most thorough of tests. If adjustments are needed, then the whole thing has to be handled again and again; so it has to be washed again. I still have yet to acquire an AWS battery box. I hope you can see how well Phil has made the loco, with just about everything straight and true as it should be. Sprung buffers (Markits in this case) are something I always substitute for cast-metal lumps - for their appearance more than their function.

 

 

The too-far-forward position of the rear sandbox filler is evident here, as are the round keeps. Still, without being told, most won't be aware of the former.

 

Since I go on and on about folk making things for themselves, I hope this A1 is a good example of that philosophy. Its performance far out-shines a Bachmann equivalent and, when painted properly (not by me) it should look superior, with sheet metal represented by sheet brass. I can't deny that were someone to buy a complete DJH kit for an A1 today it would be more expensive than a Bachmann equivalent, and it has to be made and painted. But, 'anyone' can own a Bachmann A1 (and they're good) as long as they can pay for it. This loco is a one-off, it's unique, it's the product of a modeller determined to make a good job. That I've finished it is merely out of convenience. Well done that duck! 

Edited May 23, 2014 by Tony Wright

[landscapes]

Hi Tony

 

A work of art, I sometime think it's a shame to paint them, I think the combination of brass and white metal looks very good.

 

Regards

 

David

[S.A.C Martin]

Then only advantage to buying an RTR Bachmann A1 (if you model the 1950s/60s, there is no point in buying Hornby's Tornado unless you are prepared to make a large number of modifications to the cab and other fittings) is the price and numeracy that the price allows. The Bachmann A1 requires some extra weight and even then won't pull anywhere near the train length and weight a kit built A1 will. I remember back in 2008, accompanying a renowned GCR modeller to Retford and watching some of the Retford kit built A1s pull some astonishingly weighty and lengthy trains. 

 

But what is clear to me as an inherent advantage to the kit built model over the RTR is the excellent chimney. Bachmann's split cap chimney ruins, in my view, the front end of an otherwise excellent RTR model and is the first thing I change when I buy an A1, with one of Graeme King's excellent resin creations. 

 

 

The second change being, as can be seen on the loco in the background, the smokebox door which is one of my own resin casts. This particular A1 model started out in life as 60163 Tornado and was changed to become 60136.

 

 

However, to my dismay, I discover that I have to make a further change to the tender lining, which was different Darlington to Doncaster apple green variants in addition to the rivets on the cab and tender sides.

 

I'm in awe of the kit build above. The overall bulk, face and detail of the Peppercorn A1 is spot on, whilst it could be argued the white metal details are not as fine as the plastic mouldings of the RTR, I sincerely doubt it could be argued that the brass sections and the chassis are not works of art in themselves.

 

My apologies for throwing a few bits of my own work into the fray Tony. Not to your standard but hopefully a talking point for the relative merits of kits to RTR. I do fancy taking up the challenge of a DJH A1 one day. I still have your BRM article on building Tornado in my scrapbook to remind me of a level to aim for.

[coachmann]

Personally I don't think that chimney quite captures the look of the original "rimless" chimney. Apart from the rim being a trifle overdone, the curve at the base is too sharp and the chimney too tall. Boiler fittings are never the easiest to get right and if it is just the angle of the shot, then you can come round and jump on one of my coaches...

Edited May 20, 2014 by coachmann

[Mallard60022]

Wow Tony. That looks really superb and I am so grateful that you decided that it was worth some effort.

My lack of 'knowledge' of the real thing did not help of course and I was mostly going by the instructions and some book photo's but, of course, I should have chosen a suitable loco and not just ploughed on into the 'generic' abyss! There lies a 'lesson' for the inexperienced.

I'm more than happy for this to get a life on Little Bytham or whatever. I'm sure TW and myself will be able to come to some arrangement and I certainly do not need it now having moved a very long way west in my 'planning'. 

I think, if I might say this, that this demonstrates that a good DJH kit can be turned into a very good loco by an 'inexperienced builder' as long as they really look into the detail and history of the machine.

However, as Tony has said, there is the Bachman A1, so it isn't necessary to build an A1, but the above surely demonstrates what the 'inexperienced builder' will be able to produce once more experience is gained and as stated it is unique and I really like that philosophy.

If Tony's fabulous finishing off has inspired anyone to 'go and do one' that's great. 

Tony you are far too modest. That is a classic build and I'm really sorry about the sandbox!

Quack

[Tony Wright]

Personally I don't think that chimney quite captures the look of the original "rimless" chimney. Apart from the rim being a trifle overdone, the curve at the base is too sharp and the chimney too tall. Boiler fittings are never the easiest to get right and if it is just the angle of the shot, then you can come round and jump on one of my coaches...

Larry,

          I assume you're talking about Simon's chimneys, rather than the DJH one. The bottom picture on page 112 of Mr. Coster's book has much the same angle as my middle A1 picture, and I think the DJH one is spot on.

 

By the way, I agree with you about the resin chimneys, though they are superior to the original Bachmann ones. I much prefer cast metal double chimneys, anyway, but they have to be drilled - a real fag! 

[S.A.C Martin]

Personally I don't think that chimney quite captures the look of the original "rimless" chimney. Apart from the rim being a trifle overdone, the curve at the base is too sharp and the chimney too tall. Boiler fittings are never the easiest to get right and if it is just the angle of the shot, then you can come round and jump on one of my coaches...

 

It's an interesting one because I tried filing down a few of Graeme's chimneys and the rim illusion was lost. I then weathered one of the apple green A1s and the effect was better. The difficulty with the rimless chimney is that on the A1s it was noticeably beaded, and however you choose to do it, the beading needs to be present to be "accurate". That said, I agree that the rim looks a little heavy; however Graeme's chimneys are, in his defence, improved copies of previous cast metal types and for me do the job better than the original moulded Bachmann affair by a long way.

[62613]

On Tuesday a most enjoyable time was spent in the company of Great Northern and Mallard60022 (do I have to use these names?), the said Gilbert Barnatt and Phil Ramsay. Train after train was run and Mr Barnatt's expertise was to the fore in identifying the consists of the various trains. My most grateful thanks and the most appropriate locos are now rostered to the most appropriate trains.

 

Phil brought along a box of boxes of goodies of things he'd started making, including a DJH A1, A2s, a Millholme A2/3 (silver crosses at the ready!) and a J15. Was I interested? The A1 caught my eye, so I kept it for the time being. It was very well made, but, though the frames were erected, no mechanism/wheels/etc were installed. So, yesterday afternoon, out with the iron, find a set of wheels, make a Comet gearbox, attach a Mashima fat can and away she goes. It runs perfectly and should be finished very quickly. Usually, when I'm asked to 'finish off' someone's work, it's fraught with troubles. Not so here - the cab roof is now on, a short sorted out on the tender, a tweak on the tender frames made, a drawbar made up and just some detail to compete, and the fiddly bits of the motion to attach. At the risk of sounding patronising, well-done my friend. 

 

It's nice to get back to making something I know something about.

 

60121.jpg

Wow! An inside-cylinder A1!

[Tony Wright]

Then only advantage to buying an RTR Bachmann A1 (if you model the 1950s/60s, there is no point in buying Hornby's Tornado unless you are prepared to make a large number of modifications to the cab and other fittings) is the price and numeracy that the price allows. The Bachmann A1 requires some extra weight and even then won't pull anywhere near the train length and weight a kit built A1 will. I remember back in 2008, accompanying a renowned GCR modeller to Retford and watching some of the Retford kit built A1s pull some astonishingly weighty and lengthy trains. 

 

But what is clear to me as an inherent advantage to the kit built model over the RTR is the excellent chimney. Bachmann's split cap chimney ruins, in my view, the front end of an otherwise excellent RTR model and is the first thing I change when I buy an A1, with one of Graeme King's excellent resin creations. 

 

CIMG5251_1.png

 

The second change being, as can be seen on the loco in the background, the smokebox door which is one of my own resin casts. This particular A1 model started out in life as 60163 Tornado and was changed to become 60136.

 

CIMG5293_1.png

 

However, to my dismay, I discover that I have to make a further change to the tender lining, which was different Darlington to Doncaster apple green variants in addition to the rivets on the cab and tender sides.

 

I'm in awe of the kit build above. The overall bulk, face and detail of the Peppercorn A1 is spot on, whilst it could be argued the white metal details are not as fine as the plastic mouldings of the RTR, I sincerely doubt it could be argued that the brass sections and the chassis are not works of art in themselves.

 

My apologies for throwing a few bits of my own work into the fray Tony. Not to your standard but hopefully a talking point for the relative merits of kits to RTR. I do fancy taking up the challenge of a DJH A1 one day. I still have your BRM article on building Tornado in my scrapbook to remind me of a level to aim for.

Never apologise for 'throwing a few bits' of your own work in Simon. It's your work, and that's the most important thing - you did it , you're doing it and you're going to be doing more. If it's RTR improvements then it's part of a learning curve, but wait till you begin making loco kits yourself (if you haven't already done so), then you'll get the real 'buzz' about seeing an engine you've made bowling along. I commend you, and the likes of several others on this thread, for having a go, so well done.

 

My apparent ambivalence towards Bachmann A1s is rooted in their inability to pull equivalent A1 loads - 14 heavy bogies and more. They can be weighted, and that improves the adhesion, but they never really 'fly' like a DJH one. Years ago, when the first ones came out, I was taken to task by Bachmann because I wrote a review where I questioned the haulage capacity and the strength of the motor. I stuck ABERDONIAN on an eleven-coach, kit-built, rake on Stoke and it refused to start the train. Not only that, after several seconds of slipping the motor appeared to 'give up the ghost', until it cooled down. It was a tiny motor, quite unsuitable, in my opinion, for such a big engine and it had got very hot indeed. Too hot! 'Just because you've got a big model railway, doesn't mean everyone has as well' was the response. The rest, as they say, is history and every original Bachmann A1 was recalled to have a decent motor installed. One friend's A1 had the firebox collapse because the motor over-heated so much. Whether I was 'to blame' for the complete recall I doubt it - I'm not that important. 

 

Further 'dislikes' of them include the horrid bogie wheels, the wrong 'lean' to the return crank on one side (the opposite to Hornby) and the too low footplate below the cab which doesn't line up with the sole plate on the tender. The tender wheels also have too large flanges (they clout C&L chairs) and, because of the necessity to negotiate tight radii at source, they have a tendency to 'waddle' on straight track (just like the prototypes). All the above said, they can be made presentable - look at those on Peterborough North - but, in my view, they're not in the same league as a DJH one. But, they're egalitarian and it does allow the non-builder to own A1s. 

[Horsetan]

....Whether I was 'to blame' for the complete recall I doubt it - I'm not that important....

Notoriety works both ways.

 

"The only thing worse than being talked about....is not being talked about." (Oscar Wilde)

[Barry O]

Well Tony

 

now you have finished it i had better start on mine - bought for beans on flea bay...

 

Problem then will be what to run it on??

Baz

[Tony Wright]

A final thought from me on A1s (for the time being).

 

I've honestly forgotten how many DJH A1s I've made for myself and customers down the years - it's well into the 20s! Last year a friend told me that one I'd made (I always sign my work) came up for auction somewhere with a reserve of a £1,000. Is this right? Did it sell? I haven't a clue which one it was but does anyone know about this? It could be a wind-up, of course.

[Tony Wright]

Well Tony

 

now you have finished it i had better start on mine - bought for beans on flea bay...

 

Problem then will be what to run it on??

 

Baz

Of course you saw it flying round, semi-nude last week.

 

Finish it, and we'll run it on LB next time you visit. 

[gr.king]

That A1 looks lovely. I always like the two-tone all metal finish of the unpainted DJH kits when so tidily built. For comparison, I offer this which I've just put this together from my usual combination of odds and ends. The picture, taken with a compact rather than a "serious" digital camera, and only in the available light in our kitchen, obviously doesn't bring out the best in the subject, but then it's not nearly so photogenic as that DJH A1 anyway!

 

Oddly enough, this re-build has generated a spare AWS battery box, as the photo to which I was instructed to work showed a loco with no AWS. I've also meddled with that deviant return crank so that it leans the (w)right way.

Edited May 20, 2014 by gr.king

[coachmann]

I am convinced, not for the first time(!), that the first manufacturer to produce a RTR Thompson Pacific (A2/3 hopefully) will find so much money flying into its coffers that it will have to open up a second production line to keep up with demand......

[Tony Wright]

I am convinced, not for the first time(!), that the first manufacturer to produce a RTR Thompson Pacific (A2/3 hopefully) will find so much money flying into its coffers that it will have to open up a second production line to keep up with demand......

Larry,

          I'm afraid you're going to have to wait a bit of a long time, if my experience is anything to go by.

 

Though I hold no privileged position (nor should I), over the last few years I've 'assisted' the RTR chaps in a modest way in the development of new models with a leaning towards the east. These include lending O1 models to Hornby, O2 models to Heljan and a few models to Bachmann, as well as providing notes, photographs and drawings. Earlier this year I visited Bachmann's HQ, carrying several models of Thompson coaches and one of Graeme King's inventive and remarkably effective A2/3 conversions from the Bachmann A2. Since I'm partly privy to Bachmann's future plans, I cannot (and will not) say what the immediate future holds with regard to locomotives but I can say what's very unlikely to appear, and that's a Thompson Pacific from the firm. Despite already making the boiler, firebox, coupled wheelbase, bogie, cylinders and the complete tender (in the A2), the 'modification' costs are too high, especially in the current climate. Also, despite the apparent interest in Thompson's Pacifics on this and other threads, amongst enthusiasts in general (prototype and model) his big locos are derided. Yes, I make models of them because that's what I saw - they were very much part of the ECML scene of my boyhood/adolescence/early manhood - but as knowledge has complemented enthusiasm down the years, the shortcomings of them renders them less popular. Read Peter Townend's latest book from Irwell to give you an idea what many professional railwaymen thought of them. Just think, we've had a new A1 built and a new P2 is in the pipeline. How long will anyone have to live before a group decides to build a new Thompson Pacific? I'm not saying that a prototype loco has to have been very (or even partly) successful to make a successful model. Look at Heljan's myriad diesels. They don't even have to be built in numbers either - again Heljan's one-off prototypes spring to mind. 

 

I discussed the A2/3 during my visit, showing drawings, photographs and Graeme's model. There was also Graeme's kit of parts which I'd taken to Bachmann last summer. With 15 in the class to choose from, one might have thought it was a possibility. But, none could be produced in LNER livery without making another pattern for the boiler to incorporate a round dome (which is why all the A1 and A2 models from Barwell have a streamlined dome-only). 500 (and 511 initially) would have needed a new boiler, anyway. So, a choice of 15 (excepting 60500 until representative of the early-'60s because she (he) retained the four segment boiler up to then), all in BR green-only with a (possible) choice of chimney and BR totem/crest. It didn't stack up as far as the firm was concerned. Yes, I know there were only 15 A2s, but the commonality with the A1 model is much more and there is the greater choice of livery. 

 

As for the A2/2s and A2/1s, no chance. With regard to the former, at any time in their history only two of the six were ever alike (on occasions all were different) so the multi-tooling needed there was definitely out. Since DJH declined to do an A2/1 after successfully producing the A2/2 and A2/3 kits, I think we can see where that might go. I know Crownline/PDK and Nu-Cast did (still do?) kits, but no RTR manufacturer is ever going to touch the four 'orphans of the storm'. 

 

As for Hornby doing an A2/3, I don't know. Five years ago it was mentioned in conversation with Simon Kohler and we agreed that the majority of the names were splendid, but apart from his seeing one or two of my models it went no further.

 

So, in my opinion, an RTR Thompson Pacific is so far down the line as to not even be on the horizon. In my helping Heljan it's not even been mentioned, either. One then for the kit-makers and the modifiers to still have as their own. Personally (and selfishly) I'm glad because DJH will still have sales, as will PDK. And, where would we be without the 'genius' of Graeme King? Yes, 'I'm all right Jack' - I've got my three kit-built A2/3s and the picture Graeme's recently posted shows (I hope) the results of our horse-trading over the last couple of years. 

 

Having 'lit the blue touch paper' yet again, I await responses.

[gr.king]

Lunatic "genius", if any genius at all, surely?

 

I must make sure this morning that I still have the relationships between the bogie, front frames, cylinders and steps "within tolerances" on that loco, now that they're all fitted, as I'm sure it would be preferable if it went round corners.......

[Horsetan]

Lunatic "genius", if any genius at all, surely?......

I'd have been happy with just "lunatic"....

[gr.king]

That sounds more comfortable.

[Oldddudders]

I'd have been happy with just "lunatic"....

If the cap fits.....

[Tony Wright]

Just to prove (and I know no still picture can do this) that Mr Duck's A1 is up to the job, here she is romping through Little Bytham on the eleven-car 'Yorkshire Pullman' (a heavy mixture of Hornby/Comet/Trice/Keen modifications). Top speed's about 90 (Comet's comparative gearbox has a higher ratio than DJH's equivalent), but she just toys with these. Yes, a weighted Bachmann A1 will do the same, but it won't start so securely nor run so steadily. 

 

 

And yes, just to placate the pedants - what's a Tyneside-based A1 doing on the 'Yorkshire Pullman'? 

Edited May 21, 2014 by Tony Wright

[Mallard60022]

Yummy.

I declare the loco to be a 'Twuck' production, with thanks to DJH and others for parts.

Quackers.

[coachmann]

I am grateful Tony for your full response to my levity re a RTR Thompson Pacific. At least we know where we are and the A2/3 will slip quietly to the back of my mind now. I have been following your account of the Peppercorn A1, and this in turn has sown a seed concerning a Bachmann model. I used to visit Leeds to see these beautifully balanced designs and so, using the modellers licence card, there is no reason why one could not have been trialled over Standedge in early BR days on Newcastle-Liverpool workings. The idea is definitely growing on me fuelled by your photos.... 

Edited May 21, 2014 by coachmann

[Mallard60022]

Just as an 'aside', I've just realised that the 'real' 60163 has spoked tender wheels. Presumably they are easier to source from Markits than the disc type.

P