Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony

 

No I am not saying other P4 layouts do not have good baseboards, fine track laying, well maintained stock and team that is disciplined. I am saying the combination of these factors help Mostyn perform well at exhibitions. There are many layouts of all scales and gauges that do not have the same high level of these attributes and the operators and public wonder why they do not run as well.

 

As for diesels not having unpowered pony trucks to push or have trailing behind, how about Peaks and English Electric type 4s?

 

Not all diesel based layouts run well, I know of one diesel layout where the running tonight was appalling. Can I work out why all of a sudden a DMC of my 4 car BRCW unit (converted Hornby 110)  is derailing as it goes over a single slip in one direction? Back to backs OK, one bogie was a bit stiff to rotate, a few strokes with a file in hole in the underframe and nice and lose. Still derails, both propelled and hauled. I first changed the wheels, then the bogies and in the end a spare underframe was dug out of my DMU bits box. Even with a new underframe, bogies and wheels it derailed. The other DMC does not, neither does the TS with the same design of bogie and underframe. I ran the train with a Calder Valley DMC, no problem. But when I tried with a DMC off my 3 car BRCW set, plonk into the ballast it went on the same spot, it hasn't done that before. No other units or coaches jump off there. No obvious track problem. 

Thanks Clive,

 

I thought of Peaks and EE Type 4s as I wrote my post, and the three Bulleid SR diesels as well. It's just that I don't think their outer wheels qualify as pony trucks in the same way as on a steam-outline loco. I know on the available models, they have a pivot point (which the prototypes don't have?) which allows the outer wheels to negotiate tighter curves. 

 

Despite your apparent problems, will you still not accept my 'argument' that it's easier to get diesel/electric-outline locos to run 'perfectly' than it is to get steam-outline ones to run, particularly multi-wheeled examples and those with complex outside gear, especially if the diesel/electric-outline locos are re-gauged in comparison with re-gauged steam-outline locos? 

 

I admit, I've never built a complete diesel-outline loco. I've modified some into different prototypes (Lion/Falcon/DP2, etc) and re-wheeled numerous examples, and it's my experience that's it's much easier to get good running (irrespective of the gauge) from a diesel-outline loco than it is in comparison with getting 'perfect' running from, say, an A1, A2, A3 or A4 (and others). 

 

On the other hand, I imagine it's much more difficult to build a diesel/electric-outline body than it is to build a steam-outline one. When I build a steam-outline loco body, all I put together are tubes, cones and cuboids. 

[Tony Wright]

Blimey Tony, you need to give your GPO Pole a bit of a feed, its very thin! And also very American in looks, certainly nothing like a GPO Pole...

 

Somewhere in the Exchange (yes I have a Strowger exchange at home) I have the GPO Engineering Instructions for Pole routes, which gives all sort of details about poles and how they should be fitted out.....

 

Andy G

Looking at the picture, I think you're right, Andy. That pole does look a bit anorexic. 

 

I made the ones nearer to the edge of the boards from brass rod and Dan Pinnock's cast rails/insulators, all soldered together. That way, they don't snap off if caught, as do Ratio plastic ones. 

 

Still, if things like telegraph poles are 'criticised' on LB (not that they shouldn't be) but precious little else, then I (we) must be getting most things right.

 

I once made the mistake of being 'critical' on this thread, and received a mass of protest from some. If there's anything which pleases me about our collective work, it's that it should be critically-examined and commented upon, especially where things aren't right.

 

So, my thanks for your constructive criticisms.   

[Mike 84C]

Good Morning Tony,

   Just a thank you for inviting me to your home and taking the time to show how to put an etched chassis together. I also splashed out on the Poppies loco builders box and whoope! the wheels go round and in parallel!  Your explanations and guidance was the spur to sail the uncharted, for me, waters of etched loco construction.

    Regards Mick

[jrg1]

 I don't wish to hijack Tony's thread but here's one more.

 

Drumboe 01.jpg

 

There's more on my web site - see link below

Will do-they look JLTRT!

[johndon]

 

In fact, I think they have their place. The kids love them as has been said and in this specific example the chap had built up a collection from all over the world, mixed and matched components to create new vehicles and ended up with what we'd probably term a 'rabbit warren' with things happening and moving all over the place and which took twice as long to set up as our more conventional layout. We invited him to our show, but the setup time made it impractical.

 

It's not railway modelling as we perceive it, but it is a creative inventive pastime and shouldn't be sneered at (although I don't for a moment think that was Clive's intention).

 

 

 

I've been to a few shows where, for the same reason, the Thomas the Tank Engine layout has won...

 

John

[Clive Mortimore]

Thanks Clive,

 

I thought of Peaks and EE Type 4s as I wrote my post, and the three Bulleid SR diesels as well. It's just that I don't think their outer wheels qualify as pony trucks in the same way as on a steam-outline loco. I know on the available models, they have a pivot point (which the prototypes don't have?) which allows the outer wheels to negotiate tighter curves. 

 

Despite your apparent problems, will you still not accept my 'argument' that it's easier to get diesel/electric-outline locos to run 'perfectly' than it is to get steam-outline ones to run, particularly multi-wheeled examples and those with complex outside gear, especially if the diesel/electric-outline locos are re-gauged in comparison with re-gauged steam-outline locos? 

 

I admit, I've never built a complete diesel-outline loco. I've modified some into different prototypes (Lion/Falcon/DP2, etc) and re-wheeled numerous examples, and it's my experience that's it's much easier to get good running (irrespective of the gauge) from a diesel-outline loco than it is in comparison with getting 'perfect' running from, say, an A1, A2, A3 or A4 (and others). 

 

On the other hand, I imagine it's much more difficult to build a diesel/electric-outline body than it is to build a steam-outline one. When I build a steam-outline loco body, all I put together are tubes, cones and cuboids. 

Hello Tony

 

Mainline diesels are easier to get to run well, and far easier to re-gauge. Shunters can be a little more like steam locos.

My first scratchbuilt shunter. Photos by Richard Hall.

 

As for building diesel locos, they are only boxes on wheels.

[Tony Wright]

I've been to a few shows where, for the same reason, the Thomas the Tank Engine layout has won...

 

John

John,

 

Having, as mentioned already, been in the position of judge and judging organiser at shows, the public vote does not always coincide with the enthusiasts' vote. 

 

Years ago, at one show I attended with WMRC, the 'best in show' went to one of those 'rabbit warren' layouts. A train went into a tunnel but, instead of reappearing where one might have expected it to (on the other side of the hill?), it obviously spiralled up or down to re-emerge in a wholly unexpected spot. I personally thought it was awful; it was unlike any prototype I've ever seen and the running (being OO9) wasn't perfect either. Having spent collective hours researching and building an actual prototype and even more hours in building the correct locos and trains, one was tempted to ask 'Why bother?' That said, I can't imagine many modellers of prototypes voting for such a layout, and, whenever I saw it it was surrounded by squealing and finger-pointing children and their parents. Clearly, they voted for it. 

 

Anyway, how many 'serious' modellers vote for a 'best' layout at a show? Very few, perhaps? 

 

To be fair, surely most 'general' shows should have a layout which appeals to children/families. It's very easy (especially for the likes of me) to look down in snootiness at such creations. At the Glasgow Show last year (where I also acted as a judge), across the aisle from us was one of those vast creations where everything was happening at once. The list might include a church with a wedding or a funeral (or both!!!!!) taking place, tiny lanes crossing the lines by a series of (hugely expensive) girder bridges, a road scene with a car crash having taken place or a building on fire, hazard lights flashing everywhere, a field with a foxhunt going over it (or even a crashed aeroplane in it), a windmill whirling round, a waterfall in action, an aircraft runway right in the middle (with one of those girder bridges at its end!!!), every figure in action pose (even fights), houses surrounded by railways with no means of access, myriad trains representing no specific region/time period and everything happening a supersonic speed. Anyone like to add to my list? I didn't even consider it in my potential winning list. Yet, on the Sunday (which is the traditional family day for visiting), you couldn't get near it - the barriers were packed with spectators. My winning layout only had a few watching it at the same time.  

 

Speaking of winning layouts, congratulations to Liverpool Lime Street for winning the best in year in the latest BRM. I was amazed to see Little Bytham mentioned in dispatches, especially as it hasn't featured in BRM for several years. I didn't even know it was entered. May I thank those who voted for it, please? 

[Tony Wright]

Good Morning Tony,

   Just a thank you for inviting me to your home and taking the time to show how to put an etched chassis together. I also splashed out on the Poppies loco builders box and whoope! the wheels go round and in parallel!  Your explanations and guidance was the spur to sail the uncharted, for me, waters of etched loco construction.

    Regards Mick

Mick,

 

I've tried to register a thanks, but I'm told I already have (even though I haven't). 

 

I'm glad you've found the Poppy's jig useful.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[westerner]

Re: Burntisland and mooring lines.

I agree with the posts above concerning ships with nothing to secure them to the quayside.

 

However, to do the job properly with fore and aft springs, headropes, breastropes etc etc, not to mention fenders, each rope would have to be set up individually around cleats and bollards.. Since (presumably) each ship has to be unpacked and packed up individually this would surely be very time consuming and also quite tricky. Presumably tweezers would be required. There might also be a risk of damage to the ship, especially those square-rigged with yards across. I think it is also difficult to get a scale dimension 'rope' to curve convincingly.

 

After all, on 4mm model railways there are a lot of things that get left out!

 

(Excuse me, I'll get back to my working inside Joy valve gear now!)

You could have a look at my thread, I've managed it. To make it easy to take on off (not that I have to) is to have a loop at the quayside end, preferably a bowline in that way you just un loop at the quay end. I used whipping twine, which tends to have a built in curve. Railway Modeller suggested copper wire used for the windings on motors to get a nice curve. I painted mine and stroked them ito make sure the curve stay where its should be.

 

You are right though I know there are things missing on my layout, but it is not and exhibition layout, so only I know.

[richard i]

John,

 

Having, as mentioned already, been in the position of judge and judging organiser at shows, the public vote does not always coincide with the enthusiasts' vote. 

 

Years ago, at one show I attended with WMRC, the 'best in show' went to one of those 'rabbit warren' layouts. A train went into a tunnel but, instead of reappearing where one might have expected it to (on the other side of the hill?), it obviously spiralled up or down to re-emerge in a wholly unexpected spot. I personally thought it was awful; it was unlike any prototype I've ever seen and the running (being OO9) wasn't perfect either. Having spent collective hours researching and building an actual prototype and even more hours in building the correct locos and trains, one was tempted to ask 'Why bother?' That said, I can't imagine many modellers of prototypes voting for such a layout, and, whenever I saw it it was surrounded by squealing and finger-pointing children and their parents. Clearly, they voted for it. 

 

Anyway, how many 'serious' modellers vote for a 'best' layout at a show? Very few, perhaps? 

 

To be fair, surely most 'general' shows should have a layout which appeals to children/families. It's very easy (especially for the likes of me) to look down in snootiness at such creations. At the Glasgow Show last year (where I also acted as a judge), across the aisle from us was one of those vast creations where everything was happening at once. The list might include a church with a wedding or a funeral (or both!!!!!) taking place, tiny lanes crossing the lines by a series of (hugely expensive) girder bridges, a road scene with a car crash having taken place or a building on fire, hazard lights flashing everywhere, a field with a foxhunt going over it (or even a crashed aeroplane in it), a windmill whirling round, a waterfall in action, an aircraft runway right in the middle (with one of those girder bridges at its end!!!), every figure in action pose (even fights), houses surrounded by railways with no means of access, myriad trains representing no specific region/time period and everything happening a supersonic speed. Anyone like to add to my list? I didn't even consider it in my potential winning list. Yet, on the Sunday (which is the traditional family day for visiting), you couldn't get near it - the barriers were packed with spectators. My winning layout only had a few watching it at the same time.  

 

Speaking of winning layouts, congratulations to Liverpool Lime Street for winning the best in year in the latest BRM. I was amazed to see Little Bytham mentioned in dispatches, especially as it hasn't featured in BRM for several years. I didn't even know it was entered. May I thank those who voted for it, please?

it will also be the first introduction for some young ones into the hobby and thus sustaining it. In the same way that under 5s footbal might look silly and is definately not the premier league but it is the hook of the kids into the hobby/ sport.

[Clearwater]

it will also be the first introduction for some young ones into the hobby and thus sustaining it. In the same way that under 5s footbal might look silly and is definately not the premier league but it is the hook of the kids into the hobby/ sport.

Whenever I ask my five year old at a show what his favourite layout was, he'll invariably say the Lego one or a quirky one like the Saturn moon one at CMRA in January. However, when I ask a few weeks later, he's often changed his mind to a larger, more prototypical layout.

 

David

[johndon]

 

 

Anyway, how many 'serious' modellers vote for a 'best' layout at a show? Very few, perhaps? 

 

 

 

 

I'd agree, I hardly ever, Scalefour North and Scaleforum being the exception, vote for the best layout.  

 

John

[peach james]

I was helping a friend at one show where the public voted for the best layout. Most exhibitors were not happy with the winning result.

The Lego layout won. :locomotive:

 

OK, so I am quite involved in Lego trains...

 

 

While it fails under almost _all_ of Tony's choices for scale models, it does work reliably- the derailment was one of 2 over the weekend, and in this case was the fault of the "oversized load"- the other was me doing something silly.  No signals- I have built one, and perhaps should think about making more.  I have done lego interlocking before, so that part is possible.  (SSI is easy, you use mindstorms).  

 

The big station is based on Bristol Temple Meads, and is red because when it was built, you couldn't get Tan in quantity.  (now you can, but given that it has >3700 1x2 lego bricks in it, I'm a little reluctant to change it)

 

Now, is it scale?  Not at all.  Is it fun?  Yes, it is.

 

James

[Michael Edge]

Thanks Clive,

 

I thought of Peaks and EE Type 4s as I wrote my post, and the three Bulleid SR diesels as well. It's just that I don't think their outer wheels qualify as pony trucks in the same way as on a steam-outline loco. I know on the available models, they have a pivot point (which the prototypes don't have?) which allows the outer wheels to negotiate tighter curves. 

 

Despite your apparent problems, will you still not accept my 'argument' that it's easier to get diesel/electric-outline locos to run 'perfectly' than it is to get steam-outline ones to run, particularly multi-wheeled examples and those with complex outside gear, especially if the diesel/electric-outline locos are re-gauged in comparison with re-gauged steam-outline locos? 

 

I admit, I've never built a complete diesel-outline loco. I've modified some into different prototypes (Lion/Falcon/DP2, etc) and re-wheeled numerous examples, and it's my experience that's it's much easier to get good running (irrespective of the gauge) from a diesel-outline loco than it is in comparison with getting 'perfect' running from, say, an A1, A2, A3 or A4 (and others). 

 

On the other hand, I imagine it's much more difficult to build a diesel/electric-outline body than it is to build a steam-outline one. When I build a steam-outline loco body, all I put together are tubes, cones and cuboids. 

 

They are pony trucks and they do have a pivot point but it's not a physical one since it would coincide with the traction motor on the next axle. The pony truck is fitted on swing links attached to the buffer beam, the covers for the pivots are the prominent cylindrical objects on the buffer beam face. I did once have a drawing of the geometry of this arrangement, if I ever find it again I'll build one with it. 

[uax6]

Looking at the picture, I think you're right, Andy. That pole does look a bit anorexic. 

 

I made the ones nearer to the edge of the boards from brass rod and Dan Pinnock's cast rails/insulators, all soldered together. That way, they don't snap off if caught, as do Ratio plastic ones. 

 

Still, if things like telegraph poles are 'criticised' on LB (not that they shouldn't be) but precious little else, then I (we) must be getting most things right.

 

I once made the mistake of being 'critical' on this thread, and received a mass of protest from some. If there's anything which pleases me about our collective work, it's that it should be critically-examined and commented upon, especially where things aren't right.

 

So, my thanks for your constructive criticisms.   

 

Tony, I've put some EI's up in this thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/120484-telegraph-poles/

 

Andy G

[Tony Wright]

They are pony trucks and they do have a pivot point but it's not a physical one since it would coincide with the traction motor on the next axle. The pony truck is fitted on swing links attached to the buffer beam, the covers for the pivots are the prominent cylindrical objects on the buffer beam face. I did once have a drawing of the geometry of this arrangement, if I ever find it again I'll build one with it. 

Thanks Mike,

 

On the 1-Co-Co-1s, the leading axles protrude through the frames. I assume they had inside bearings, because, from memory, the stub ends of those leading axles rotate but are not supported by the outside frames. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony, I've put some EI's up in this thread: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/120484-telegraph-poles/

 

Andy G

Thanks Andy,

 

Having driven down Station Road this morning, I looked out for any surviving telegraph poles. A couple are really thin. I'll take some pictures. 

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony

 

Mainline diesels are easier to get to run well, and far easier to re-gauge. Shunters can be a little more like steam locos.

lms.jpg

jack.jpg

My first scratchbuilt shunter. Photos by Richard Hall.

 

As for building diesel locos, they are only boxes on wheels.

Boxes they might be, Clive, but they're not easy to build, especially from scratch. 

 

My elder son built a Judith Edge kit for a little 0-6-0 diesel shunter in EM about a decade ago. He made a very good job of it, helped considerably by the excellence of the kit. With one (tiny) exception (where the top of the radiator met the front of the bonnet) the fit of the parts was superb. I don't think I'd have made as good a job - I'll take some pictures. 

 

Products such as those from Judith Edge show how far the diesel-outline kits have come, and they're the equal of any of the best of the steam-outline kits I've put together. 

 

Having admitted that I've never built a diesel-outline kit (other than an Airfix Drewry 0-6-0 at the dawn of time), perhaps I was put off by two (unbuilt) ones I had in my possession once; a Q Kits Bulleid 1-Co-Co-1 and an MTK kit for the same. Anyone who made a success of building any of those manufacturers' kits is a far better modeller than I'll ever be, even in my wildest dreams!

 

edited to clarify a point.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Tony Wright

[uax6]

Thanks Andy,

 

Having driven down Station Road this morning, I looked out for any surviving telegraph poles. A couple are really thin. I'll take some pictures. 

 

Yes they are. They are 'light' poles which are used these days for DP poles (distribution point), and will at most have a ring fitted at the top. To have arms, most would be 'medium' ones. Have a look for an older pole with a head fitted with a ring and a load of insulators, and you will see the difference in the thickness. In fact I was walking in Ely the other day, and noticed one of the latter type heads, that STILL had a feed to a house on a pair of open wires......

 

Andy G

[Clive Mortimore]

Boxes they might be, Clive, but they're not easy to build, especially from scratch. 

 

My elder son built a Judith Edge kit for a little 0-6-0 diesel shunter in EM about a decade ago. He made a very good job of it, helped considerably by the excellence of the kit. With one (tiny) exception (the bonnet) the fit of the parts was superb. I don't think I'd have made as good a job - I'll take some pictures. 

 

Products such as those from Judith Edge show how far the diesel-outline kits have come, and they're the equal of any of the best of the steam-outline kits I've put together. 

 

Having admitted that I've never built a diesel-outline kit (other than an Airfix Drewry 0-6-0 at the dawn of time), perhaps I was put off by two (unbuilt) ones I had in my possession once; a Q Kits Bulleid 1-Co-Co-1 and an MTK kit for the same. Anyone who made a success of building any of those manufacturers' kits is a far better modeller than I'll ever be, even in my wildest dreams!

Hello Tony

 

I did build a MTK Bulleid 1Co-Co1. Scrapped the chassis before starting, and used a Mainline Peak chassis. It was a brass body, quite a heavy gauge so there was much screaming as I burnt my fingers trying to solder it. I won, but the victory was short lived. I ran it on to Pig Lane, wallop it went as it bashed into the fuel point canopy. None of my other locos did this. It stood nearly 5mm higher than the loading gauge. The 5mm was in the pre-shaped body. How do you take 5mm out of a loco body?

 

Out came the plastic card, bish-bash and I had a new body. All that remained of the MTK kit was the buffer beams and the little thingies that hang off the bottom of the body between the bogies.

 

I have a couple of Judith Edge kits waiting for a suitable time to build them and a Modern Outline Brush Type 4. I have built a few diesel loco kits, I do find kits sometimes harder than scratchbuilding.

[St Enodoc]

Thanks Mike,

 

On the 1-Co-Co-1s, the leading axles protrude through the frames. I assume they had inside bearings, because, from memory, the stub ends of those leading axles rotate but are not supported by the outside frames. 

They do - in the form of tubular cannon boxes between the wheels.

[jrg1]

Boxes they might be, Clive, but they're not easy to build, especially from scratch. 

 

My elder son built a Judith Edge kit for a little 0-6-0 diesel shunter in EM about a decade ago. He made a very good job of it, helped considerably by the excellence of the kit. With one (tiny) exception (the bonnet) the fit of the parts was superb. I don't think I'd have made as good a job - I'll take some pictures. 

 

Products such as those from Judith Edge show how far the diesel-outline kits have come, and they're the equal of any of the best of the steam-outline kits I've put together. 

 

Having admitted that I've never built a diesel-outline kit (other than an Airfix Drewry 0-6-0 at the dawn of time), perhaps I was put off by two (unbuilt) ones I had in my possession once; a Q Kits Bulleid 1-Co-Co-1 and an MTK kit for the same. Anyone who made a success of building any of those manufacturers' kits is a far better modeller than I'll ever be, even in my wildest dreams!

I had a Q Kits WR Gas Turbine-scrapped the ridiculous chassis, and used a Hornby class 47.  Radically rebuilt the not-quite-set resin sides-the grille detail was atrocious-added extra detail, and after many hours of work it was still awful-every cab window was a different size for starters.  Passed on, and rebuilt again using a class 45 chassis, and chopped up to model E2001.  

[Tony Wright]

Hello Tony

 

I did build a MTK Bulleid 1Co-Co1. Scrapped the chassis before starting, and used a Mainline Peak chassis. It was a brass body, quite a heavy gauge so there was much screaming as I burnt my fingers trying to solder it. I won, but the victory was short lived. I ran it on to Pig Lane, wallop it went as it bashed into the fuel point canopy. None of my other locos did this. It stood nearly 5mm higher than the loading gauge. The 5mm was in the pre-shaped body. How do you take 5mm out of a loco body?

 

Out came the plastic card, bish-bash and I had a new body. All that remained of the MTK kit was the buffer beams and the little thingies that hang off the bottom of the body between the bogies.

392.JPG

 

I have a couple of Judith Edge kits waiting for a suitable time to build them and a Modern Outline Brush Type 4. I have built a few diesel loco kits, I do find kits sometimes harder than scratchbuilding.

Thanks Clive,

 

I tried to post 'like' but I was unable to do so. 

 

This business of some diesel loco kits being too high, I once took a picture of the WR Brown-Boverie (is that the right spelling?) gas turbine thingy (obviously not a diesel) built from either a Q Kits or an MTK example, and that towered over the loading gauge. The layout owners must have raised any overbridges to accommodate it. 

[Headstock]

No apologies needed, Andrew.

 

I know (how did I put 'no' in an earlier post?!!!) you regularly post on this thread, so my thanks for what you put, particularly how you help others. 

 

There are two new items representing on-going work on LB in the rolling stock department. The white metal 'van' is actually a cattle wagon, and it's a white metal kit. It came from John Houlden's 'scrap' box as he disposed of Gamston Bank and I have no idea of its provenance or what type of of cattle wagon it represents. I'll take a close-up picture and ask what it is. 

 

The triplet catering set is representative of the 1938 Flying Scotsman ones, but with a standing bar added to the RFO bit, for service in the Northumbrian. Most of it was built by John Houlden as part of our horse-trading. I built the bogies and made it run. I've yet to fix any door furniture, then paint, line, letter, number and glaze it as well as making the interiors. It's made mainly from Rupert Brown's etches, with Comet and MJT bits and pieces. John has done a lovely job. 

 

Out of interest, some years ago (when I had a little more money - and also a little less sense), I was approached by a manufacturer of very highly-priced RTR locos and rolling stock (made in the Far East) and asked if I'd be interested in an ex-'38 FS catering triplet, in BR maroon. I said 'yes' and was supposed to take delivery of it at one Warley Show. Having been assured that 'The greatest care has been taken with regard to accuracy', I think the proprietor was a bit taken aback when I said 'No thank you'. There was no standing bar (one bay was taken by the bar and a window blanked off on the real thing in BR days), the ends were painted maroon, the internal signage was LNER and the trussing came straight out from the solebars, not from behind it. 

 

Horse-trading with John was much more sensible, and accurate! 

 

Good morning Tony,

 

Andy is making a rather good job of his 'Aberdonian', with some rather clever combinations of parts to get what he wants. In addition, his research is most informative, I doubt that he needs a lot of help from me. I have to admire anybody that takes on a full rake of a prototypical train formation, it can require a great deal of ingenuity and staying power. He certainly has the jump on the manufacturers of the triplet Restaurant car you mention above. Although such things are very much a minority sport, (a strange thing to say in the context of railway modelling?) I was pondering what was the most popular train that has been built for model railways over the years? The late fifties 'Elizabethan' would be a good candidate, I may have seen five or six in two gauges, they are probably the only five or six in existence. The 'Aberdonian' being built by Andy is probably unique.

[Tony Wright]

Good morning Tony,

 

Andy is making a rather good job of his 'Aberdonian', with some rather clever combinations of parts to get what he wants. In addition, his research is most informative, I doubt that he needs a lot of help from me. I have to admire anybody that takes on a full rake of a prototypical train formation, it can require a great deal of ingenuity and staying power. He certainly has the jump on the manufacturers of the triplet Restaurant car you mention above. Although such things are very much a minority sport, (a strange thing to say in the context of railway modelling?) I was pondering what was the most popular train that has been built for model railways over the years? The late fifties 'Elizabethan' would be a good candidate, I may have seen five or six in two gauges, they are probably the only five or six in existence. The 'Aberdonian' being built by Andy is probably unique.

Good morning Andrew,

 

I think the Elizabethan gets it. 

 

There's the first set (which, as far as I know) I built for Stoke Summit (now on LB), the set Roy Jackson built for Retford, the two sets John Houlden built, one for Gilbert Barnatt's Peterborough North and the other for his own Gamston Bank, the set built by Martin Lloyd and Norman Venus for Biggleswade, a set owned by a mate of mine (builder unknown) and  another set built for Stoke now in the hands of another owner. These are the ones I know of, and all originated from Southern Pride parts (the then-owners of Comet said there'd never be a market!). Does anyone know of any more?