Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

Nice pictures and Locos, Rolling stock, however what are they like without the digitiser effects. I have said before elsewhere I prefer "normal" or a mixture of pictures personally .

 

 

Like this.......... The only 'digitiser' effect is the putting in of a real sky to replace the clutter of my shed in the background. In the past, I would have stretched a sky fabric across the background because no editor would have accepted (and thus paid for) such a picture as the one above. All the other effects are the digital equivalent of darkroom printing - sharpening, which equates to closing down the iris in the enlarger's lens (not exactly the same, I admit), the lifting of shadows under footplates and slight lightening of the background (dodging), and the taking out of too bright highlights (burning-in). As an ex-professional photographer, surely I should strive to produce the very best results, whatever the media. Nothing, and I repeat this, has been altered in any of the models. If things aren't quite as they should be, then they're seen as they are. I hate digital smoke - it adds nothing and even detracts from the excellence of any images. 

 

Would folk really be happier if I, or anyone else, just posted pictures like the one above? I'm sorry (not really) but I'm afraid my pictures won't be to your taste in the future, as they aren't right now, at least some of them. That said, thanks for the praise of the stock.

 

 

And now a picture where nothing has been altered (other than cloning the colour of my walls to go behind the embankment). Tom Foster left this with me yesterday and asked me to look at it. It was DCC, and, though it should have run in some manner on DC, it didn't. His ultimate intention is (was) to repaint it in LNER guise to suit his putative Thirsk project. It was made and painted by Paul Hill of PDK for Tom and weathered by the owner. 

 

Visually, it was modelling of the highest quality all round. I looked at it, and some of the pick-ups were not making proper contact. Not only that, the chip was fixed (with a load of insulation tape) to the top of the motor in such a manner as to press down on it causing a bit of binding as contact must have been made with the inside of the firebox. I only discovered this after a real struggle to get the chassis out from under the body. Do you see now part of my thinking of DCC as anathema, especially in kit-built metal locos? So, out with the nasty chip, wire the thing properly, adjust the pick-ups, tweak the motor/gearbox, oil everything as necessary and then test. What a beautiful runner ensued - no stuttering, no binding and almost no noise. Paul's work was first-rate and Tom's weathering right out of the top-drawer. What a shame it would be to lose that beautiful finish. So, I succumbed. I'll horse trade with Tom by building him another B16/1 from the same source, and it won't be DCC - good! Thus, I'll keep this one - see his motives in leaving it? 

 

Although not daily visitors south of Doncaster, B16s of all three types could be seen on occasions south of Grantham, even going as far as the 'Cross. I saw two at Retford in my spotting days, one heading south and one going north on respective freights. So, I assume the destination/starting-point was at least New England.

 

The only thing I'll alter is to fit correct, NE-style 12-spoke bogie wheels. I'll also write up my building of the PDK kit for BRM. 

[lee74clarke]

Good Evening Tony,

 

Thanks to the guys for the vehicle layout of the Newton Chambers car carriers. I have a feeling I have read the details about the 4+2 arrangements, but couldn't find it again. I was sure I had seen some SP models of them on Bytham, but maybe I was thinking back to Stoke when it was set-up in the village hall? That was a great weekend by the way.

I would like to see Graeme's A2/3 some time. Please let me know when convenient, would really like to see it running.

Lastly, comments on the latest photo's. Well, I couldn't comment on the photography, my photographs are definately lacking some skill. Good God, I seem to end up with better results from a mobile phone!

I think Bytham looks fantastic. As I have said before, I may be somewhat biased by the location, and it may not be down to the last mil, but it looks spot on.

From a real life point of view, whenever I look north from the Marsh bridge, it seems amazing to think what was there 50 odd years ago. I am too young to remember, by quite a few years, but always loved hearing tales from family and family friends about the railway tales around the village. One of them being when my Grandad lived in the staion yard in one of the cottages, and my mum remembers the chimney catching fire and an avalanche of burning soot ending up on the hearth. Well, I bet my Gran was most impressed!

All of the pictures and models look fantastic, skills I will never get close to. That takes us full circle to my questions about the car carriers. I have butchered an old Triang mk 1 full brake, into a sort of Newton Chambers type vehicle. I know, too long, and not correct profile, but for someone like me (i.e. not very accurate!), it's not too bad. Scalpel all raised detail from coach sides and roof, plasticard sides and well area, some loading doors again from plasticard, and it's something like.

Found some transfers on the internet that would resemble the code boxes, lining, wording, etc. Well, not sure if i'll do much more with it, but it got me thinking about the complete train formation. Hell of a lot cheaper than brass kits as well.

 

Hope to see you soon

 

Lee

[micklner]

To my eyes in the "Normal" picture the Locos actually look sharper . As said before by me a simple cropping of the roof  and top of the curtains would easily remove 75% of the clutter.

 

B16 now that is gorgeous . A big agree re DCC too from me.

[The Stationmaster]

Oooh, things are looking up - a B16, lovely engines (that were far preferred to B1s by many enginemen who knew both types).

[Tony Wright]

To my eyes in the "Normal" picture the Locos actually look sharper . As said before by me a simple cropping of the roof  and top of the curtains would easily remove 75% of the clutter.

 

B16 now that is gorgeous . A big agree re DCC too from me.

Mick,

         The degree of sharpening is really very little. On the screen I'm using now (not my photographic monitor), I agree inasmuch as I cannot tell much difference. However, were the respective images in printed format, you would notice. And, you're still left with 25% of clutter......... 

[gr.king]

 Have seen various bits on forums, but I suspect Graeme has a lot more skill & patience than I do!

 

 

I meant to add a sort of reply to this yesterday, but I got sidetracked. If I have any skill Lee it has only developed over the years as a result of persistence. Some of my earliest attempts to make models produced laughable results, and until recent years patience was certainly not part of my skill-set! Maybe age has made a difference on that score, possibly coupled with one of life's hard lessons, learned rather unwillingly.

 

I agree with Tony's basic philosophy. Learn by having a go, preferably on something fairly simple and inexpensive first, although if you cannot stop yourself from trying to build that more ambitious model that you really want, even abject failure can teach you something. Don't misinterpret the message though, failure is not a sure sign that you should never try again, it is more likely to mean that you just need to go back to an easier level for a while and build up experience, but don't admit defeat!

[micklner]

Mick,

         The degree of sharpening is really very little. On the screen I'm using now (not my photographic monitor), I agree inasmuch as I cannot tell much difference. However, were the respective images in printed format, you would notice. And, you're still left with 25% of clutter......... 

I agree re sharpening. Yes 25% clutter, but personally I want to see what is actually there not manipulated or hidden.That way you know the models are real and really good or not.

In your case 100% real and superb as usual, well done !!.

[Guest 2750]

I'll horse trade with Tom by building him another B16/1 from the same source, and it won't be DCC - good! Thus, I'll keep this one - see his motives in leaving it? 

 

I can't thank you enough for that Tony. I know there is a touch of jest in there regarding leaving the B16 in his care. I had originally taken it down, for Tony to show me how you remove the DCC decoder and return to analogue. I happily put my hands up and say I have tried DCC and do not like it at all, Thirsk will be 100% analogue. I'm glad the DCC decoder hadn't done any lasting damage (I should add it wasn't added by Paul Hill) and I'm really pleased she runs as well as she looks.

 

I will post some photos of the K3s current condition later today.

[Tony Wright]

I meant to add a sort of reply to this yesterday, but I got sidetracked. If I have any skill Lee it has only developed over the years as a result of persistence. Some of my earliest attempts to make models produced laughable results, and until recent years patience was certainly not part of my skill-set! Maybe age has made a difference on that score, possibly coupled with one of life's hard lessons, learned rather unwillingly.

 

I agree with Tony's basic philosophy. Learn by having a go, preferably on something fairly simple and inexpensive first, although if you cannot stop yourself from trying to build that more ambitious model that you really want, even abject failure can teach you something. Don't misinterpret the message though, failure is not a sure sign that you should never try again, it is more likely to mean that you just need to go back to an easier level for a while and build up experience, but don't admit defeat!

Though this seems to be mutual sycophancy, the real craft in railway modelling must be the personal making of things - and Graeme is a shining example of that. He's still mad, some of his creations make me gasp at the ingenuity and creativity, but he's made things. He's also made a lot of folk happy by enabling them to make/modify things as a result of his endeavours. Good on you, I say.

 

There will be folk who, no matter how hard they try and how well they're shown things, will still be unable to succeed. They should not be denied the pleasures of the hobby - of course not - but their pleasure will be more along the lines of buying RTR or RTP stuff and, either doing their best with it or asking others to do things for them. 'Ownership' in the legal sense with regard to their models I seem to recall one modelling guru say many years ago. I admit a certain hypocrisy on my part with regard to my 'doing' things by stating that I used to farm out the painting of my models I built professionally to Ian Rathbone or Steve Barnfield. Ian also painted many of mine. But, unless folk have a go and are prepared to 'fail' from time to time, they will never ever experience that greatest of model railway pleasures by being able to say 'I made that'. If I, or the many other more creative posters on this thread can motivate folk to be able to say that then thank goodness for the interweb!

[mullie]

I've read this topic for some time without posting and would describe myself as a very average modeller. However, I have evolved and improved as I now build track, modify RTR stock, build wagon kits and before the end of the year will make a first attempt at probably a Comet chassis to improve the running of one of my RTR locos, most likely a Bachmann J72 that I have bashed to look like an ex GE J65. It's not perfect by any means but it is a significant improvement on anything I could have built 5 or 10 years ago and the fact that I'm contemplating building a brass chassis is a big step. I returned to the hobby around 18 years ago and despite very limited time and budget I've steadily improved and got braver as the years go by. My latest layout is an  improvement on the last and yes I've made mistakes but I've had a go and had fun. I am most definitely not a rivet counter!

 

Making mistakes is part of life and is not a problem so long as we learn from them and try not to repeat them. I think as has been said before it is a case of having a go, research sites such as this as someone's probably already done what you are trying to do and enjoy the experience after all it is just a hobby.

[Guest 2750]

Here is the K3's current condition.

 

 

 

All hand rails and running plate steps have been added, and I've just fitted the balance weights.

It looks like I'm going to need to paint the cab before I fit the roof, as I wont be able to get the cab off/on once the roof is fitted (due to how the back head holds everything together).

 

I shall fit the break blocks later this week.

Edited May 27, 2014 by 2750

[Tony Wright]

Here is the K3's current condition.

 

10405589_10152129684752984_369921948175257383_n.jpg

 

10289874_10152129684842984_1193945840932847436_n.jpg

 

All hand rails and running plate steps have been added, and I've just fitted the balance weights.

It looks like I'm going to need to paint the cab before I fit the roof, as I wont be able to get the cab off/on once the roof is fitted (due to how the back head holds everything together).

 

I shall fit the break blocks later this week.

 

Tom,

 

        Very neat work in fitting the handrails, so full marks for that. Free from excess solder, straight and parallel; just as they should be. A model pupil's work indeed.

 

Take a close look before you fit the cab roof - from the picture it still looks as if it slopes down to the rear a little. A tiny bit more might need taking off the top of the spectacle plate, though not much. It could be that it's not been placed entirely properly. If it does actually slope back, just as a tip, first check that the cab is vertical (using an engineer's small square), making sure that the loco (on its chassis) is on a true horizontal surface - use a spirit level if necessary. Then get a pair of identical Lego bricks (or combinations of bricks) or blocks of wood identical in size which are just above the height of the cab eaves. Then get a foot-long steel rule and some Blu-Tak and fix it in place, on its edge, resting on the two blocks, rather like a girder. Then place these three elements in front of the loco and 'read' the cab eaves against the base of the rule. You can do it the other way by having lower blocks and reading against the top of the rule because the principle is the same. If you haven't got Blu-Tak, use an 'L' shape combination of Lego bricks and just rest the rule against these. If you haven't got Lego, 'make' some children of your own and wait a few years, or raid the boxes of the children of friends. The beauty of the Lego bricks is their absolute consistency. 

 

Check as well that the weeny footplate steps, actually rest on the footplate. The one shown appears to be a bit high. Don't forget to fit the cinder guards, either. I believe they're on the cab fret. Holes, or witness marks, are present between the cabside windows.

 

I'd also consider replacing the vacuum ejector pipe with brass rod. For one, the plastic is a bit wobbly and, two, from memory, it appears to be a bit short. 

 

There's also a little gap between the base of the footplate and the die-block/radius rod/expansion link supporting bracket which, I admit, is down to me. It could be as a result of altering the relative positions of the elements by fitting right-sized drivers and a new set of frames. Since the slidebars and motion appear to be in the right place, I'd add a little piece of suitably-sized Plastikard to fill the gap.

 

Other than that, splendid progress and I await with anticipation its completion. In pedagogue mode, I can say you're certain to pass the final exam.

 

And, I hope you mean you've yet to fit the BRAKE blocks. What are 'break' blocks?  

 

Here endeth the lesson...........

[gr.king]

Great Northern Railway brake blocks I guess - they used the legend "Break Van" on their brake/break vans until quite a late date......

[Guest 2750]

Just looking at it by eye, the cab sides seem to be pretty straight, and I think it is the cab roof which is slopping. Will look closer as you suggest later in the week. The steps are an oddity in that they are in the holes marked in the etch, yet appear to be a touch high.

[lee74clarke]

Thanks for that Graeme, wise words and as you say, just get on with it. I think patience levels are taken to all new highs with having a 2 year old in the house! As great as that is, time of course is at a massive shortage.

The skill thing I guess can come with practise, although as Tony says in a later post, some people may never quite get it.

I am looking forward to seeing yours/Tony's A2 to A2/3 conversion, and have viewed the details on various forums with interest. I have a couple of kit built A2/2's and four A2/3's (to be fair, purchased when I had more free cash and different prorities), but would like a bash at one of your conversions.

Can I PM you for more details, prices, etc? As I say, I get the idea but don't know masses about your concept. I suspect with the interest generated, you may have a fair waiting list?

If you have chance to send me any details, that would be greatly appreciated.

 

Kind Regards,

Lee

[gr.king]

Feel free to get in touch Lee. Model making time will certainly be at a premium with a two year old competing for attention. Make sure you enjoy the two year old, you only get one chance to get relationships with kids right or to foul up. Model making can be tackled later.....

[Tony Wright]

Just looking at it by eye, the cab sides seem to be pretty straight, and I think it is the cab roof which is slopping. Will look closer as you suggest later in the week. The steps are an oddity in that they are in the holes marked in the etch, yet appear to be a touch high.

I think you're right that the cab itself is vertical, and it might be that the roof is sloping backwards because it's not quite positioned properly - only held in place by gravity, so to speak.

 

Once a chump, always a chump - that's me. Why didn't I remember to tell you to open out the holes in the lower cabside to accommodate those small footplate steps? On the two SE Finecast kit-built K3s I had to do it, and on the Bachmann conversion described in BRM. You see now why I abandoned teaching! Might I suggest you remove the steps by carefully re-introducing the iron, then open out those holes with a broach and finally reposition the steps, holding them in place against the footplate whilst doing so? There's no fear of their being soldered to the footplate - mazak won't take solder. 

 

Other than that, carry on my friend. The finished loco will be a testament to your conviction to learn and to do things for yourself. If crusty old gits like me can't pass on a little accumulated experience and 'wisdom' (thank you for using that word with reference to me), then the hobby will be the poorer, for, without new 'creative' blood it will wither and die. Buying masses of RTR stuff is one thing (and it does generates cash into the hobby), but (as I keep going on about) without a stable base of 'doers' and a healthy market to supply them, then where is the hobby going to go? A pertinent question I believe, especially with rising RTR prices and a stumbling supply of the same. 

[chrisf]

For those who may not have spotted it already, the latest of Tony's Urchin Tales appears in the latest issue of BRILL.  This one recounts some of his adventures at Crewe.  It is an entertaining read.

 

Now back to the finer points of K3s ...

 

Chris

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

The hobby will survive even if RTR supply near disappears for a while. A lot of folks have been very enthused by the last decade of RTR, and they will carry on getting their 'fix' somehow.

Great Northern Railway brake blocks I guess - they used the legend "Break Van" on their brake/break vans until quite a late date......

Yup, it took most of C19th to settle on 'brake' as opposed to 'break' as the accepted spelling.

[Guest 2750]

I think you're right that the cab itself is vertical, and it might be that the roof is sloping backwards because it's not quite positioned properly - only held in place by gravity, so to speak.

 

Once a chump, always a chump - that's me. Why didn't I remember to tell you to open out the holes in the lower cabside to accommodate those small footplate steps? On the two SE Finecast kit-built K3s I had to do it, and on the Bachmann conversion described in BRM. You see now why I abandoned teaching! Might I suggest you remove the steps by carefully re-introducing the iron, then open out those holes with a broach and finally reposition the steps, holding them in place against the footplate whilst doing so? There's no fear of their being soldered to the footplate - mazak won't take solder. 

 

Other than that, carry on my friend. The finished loco will be a testament to your conviction to learn and to do things for yourself. If crusty old gits like me can't pass on a little accumulated experience and 'wisdom' (thank you for using that word with reference to me), then the hobby will be the poorer, for, without new 'creative' blood it will wither and die. Buying masses of RTR stuff is one thing (and it does generates cash into the hobby), but (as I keep going on about) without a stable base of 'doers' and a healthy market to supply them, then where is the hobby going to go? A pertinent question I believe, especially with rising RTR prices and a stumbling supply of the same. 

 

Chump? I thought it was I that was the chump!

 

I will have admit to something......I had glued the steps on....thinking in my stupid wisdom it would be easier.  The glue hadn't stuck very well so the steps came off very easy and I cleaned up the mess with the burnishing brush. This time, following the master's wisdom, I tinned the cab and then soldered with low melt solder the steps from the inside. I think deep down Tony must have known in my tomfoolery in suggesting I do them again!

 

Cinder Guards added (I've lost one sadly and had to use another off the other etch, as it had launched itself into oblivion!

 

 

[45609]

Cinder Guards added (I've lost one sadly and had to use another off the other etch, as it had launched itself into oblivion!

 

Are those guards off the SEF etch or from another source?  Perhaps a leading question but with good motives.  I have wondered about doing a specific etch of cinder guards because I only put one pair on the Gilbert/King detail etch fret.  In hindsight I should have put more on.

 

Cheers....Morgan

[Guest 2750]

Are those guards off the SEF etch or from another source?  Perhaps a leading question but with good motives.  I have wondered about doing a specific etch of cinder guards because I only put one pair on the Gilbert/King detail etch fret.  In hindsight I should have put more on.

 

Cheers....Morgan

 

Yes Morgan, they are off the SEF etch. A useful addition if you intend to do a set.

[Tony Wright]

Chump? I thought it was I that was the chump!

 

I will have admit to something......I had glued the steps on....thinking in my stupid wisdom it would be easier.  The glue hadn't stuck very well so the steps came off very easy and I cleaned up the mess with the burnishing brush. This time, following the master's wisdom, I tinned the cab and then soldered with low melt solder the steps from the inside. I think deep down Tony must have known in my tomfoolery in suggesting I do them again!

 

Cinder Guards added (I've lost one sadly and had to use another off the other etch, as it had launched itself into oblivion!

 

IMG_6325.jpg

 

IMG_6327.jpg

No, being a chump takes years of practice to achieve.

 

Well done, it's looking very good. I await further pictures showing progress.....

 

Anyway, another day, another project. In an attempt at shifting depression, I've been through my piles of dusty boxes containing kits and bits, some of which have not seen the light of day since the last century. My intention is to build the things, starting with the following (pictured below). The kit dates from the '60s and I'll be making it over the next few weeks. Obviously, it's no longer available but its like can be found in even more yellowing boxes on the more obscure stands at shows..............

 

[micklner]

Bristol Models V2,  well I've got one and I think it had a Yellow Label on the box  a very long time ago!!

 

Best wishes Tony

[Tony Wright]

Bristol Models V2,  well I've got one and I think it had a Yellow Label on the box  a very long time ago!!

 

Best wishes Tony

Right class, wrong manufacturer..........

 

Best wishes Mick.