Wright writes.....

[Enterprisingwestern]

One thing which I didn't mention about the Glasgow Show was the trade. 

 

I can understand that taking a stand at the event must be very expensive, but (as far as I could see) there wasn't any trader selling the sort of stuff which would really interest the likes of me. Having been told by a friend that there was a stand selling 'bits and pieces', I was able to buy some wagon wheels and screw-link couplings in 4mm. However, I could see nobody selling metal loco, wagon or carriage kits, driving wheels, motors, gearboxes or any of the stuff essential to the kit-builder like me. Of course, in the main, I acquire what I need by post or at the 'scale' shows, but is that to be the trend for the future I wonder? A major show (second biggest in the realm), where there is nobody selling produce for the metal kit-builder? It could well be (I'm speculating) that, not only is it prohibitively-expensive for a more 'specialist' trader to take a pitch at a big show, but, even if he/she did, the visitors aren't, in the main, likely to be interested in his/her products. Is this an even greater indicator of the way the hobby is going? Great excitement with regard to what's coming ready-made, backed up by umpteen 'box-shifters', but a continuing decline in folk actually making/modifying things. One of the largest stands (and wonderfully-well-presented) was TMC, with a vast range of customised RTR locomotives (professionally-done). We thus have a service now for folk who won't even contemplate altering RTR items for themselves. I'm not being critical of TMC here; the firm has identified a market and is servicing it - very well, but it's certainly not personal model-making as far as I'm concerned. Folk bleat that they can't do things themselves, and, even if they did, they'd mess it up. So what? Buy something cheap, second-hand and practise on that. 

 

There were some plastic kits for sale, which is something I suppose. However, as mentioned earlier, most of the layouts were RTR-reliant, which is of no great interest to me (even though my winner was in that category). I suppose there were some innovations on display, but even in O Gauge the RTR market was dominant with Rails and Hattons displaying some (very good) 7mm RTR. 

 

Finally, on the theme of non-doers, perhaps I should take up professional model-making again. I lost count of the number of times I was asked, mainly by late middle-aged gents, 'How much?' as they pointed to the Thompson Pacifics I had on display.  

 

The primary reason for the relative lack of specialist traders at the show boils basically down to one word, cost.

Most traders have a not inconsiderable distance to travel to even get to the show, in some cases adding an additional travelling day onto the beginning and end of the 3 already taken up by the exhibition, fuel, 4 days accomodation and a not inconsiderable stand rental makes the exhibition an expensive week away for a small trader.

 

Mike.

[Clive Mortimore]

The primary reason for the relative lack of specialist traders at the show boils basically down to one word, cost.

Most traders have a not inconsiderable distance to travel to even get to the show, in some cases adding an additional travelling day onto the beginning and end of the 3 already taken up by the exhibition, fuel, 4 days accomodation and a not inconsiderable stand rental makes the exhibition an expensive week away for a small trader.

 

Mike.

Hi Mike

 

Your mate Brian was there with his wonderful diesel bits and bobs. So there was a small trader there. There did seem to be a lot of people selling model buildings, card, lazer cut etc. or was that my perception?

[Clive Mortimore]

One of the layouts that impressed me and always does was Pete Johnson's Canada Street. The variety of BR wagons on it are amazing. Pete's kit and scratchbuilt locos are also excellent.

 

I think one of the problems with diesel and electric modelling is that model diesel locomotives are now so well made that there is very little modelling that could be done on them. This does induce a similarity with many layouts. 

[Clearwater]

I can see the argument that for kit based traders that attending a show may not be worthwhile particularly if they have a good website and sell effectively through that channel. Unless I wanted to ask a specific question, why would I buy from Wizard at a show when I can have the exact same item delivered pretty much by return of post? I'd wager his sales at the larger shows merely cannabilise his online sales at come at a degree of expense to him. However, it wouldn't surprise me that at a show like Scaleforum or Railex where there are a larger number of the smaller manufacturers some of whom have less well developed websites, that those shows also attract those people who don't shop on the internet and hence his own trade is better.

 

David

[Lecorbusier]

 

Speaking to the other judges, it was the continuous operation on this layout which influenced their decision. Perhaps too many layouts (and this is not unique to Glasgow) didn't have enough running on them, or, enough reliable running. I would have loved to have considered a quite-beautiful Southern branch in P4 for a prize (which featured block instruments), but every time I looked at it (at least three different times on the Friday) the running was either too jerky or there were derailments and trains dividing. Not good. That said, in discussion with Mike Ainsworth (lovely bloke) of the Scalefour Society, we had an outbreak of 'agreement'! Can you believe that? 

Tony,

 

I know we don't see eye to eye on this, but might I make a couple of comments on Cadhay (the Southern branch). I fully concur that the poor running you observed is disappointing (as much I suspect for the operators as the punters) and must be sorted.

 

However, I do know a little background to the layout. The layout was shown as a layout in progress at Scaleforum a while ago and is the work of a first time modeller in P4. It is also the work of one person. It is I believe the first time that it has been shown as a completed model. I also understand that the expertise of the modeller in question has in the past lain with scenic modelling and that the track laying component is a first foray - the same with conversion/building of stock to P4. As such I think there is an ongoing process of refinement and trouble shooting to go through. I know that you feel this should all be resolved before any public attendance, but I still hold to the view that such gremlins in P4 often only manifest once a layout joins the circuit (due to changes in environment and impact of travel) and only considerable experience in the exhibiting of P4 layouts can short cut this process .... from my observations trouble free reliable running is rarely achieved by newcomers to P4 on the first or second showing of the work, .... but after this things tend to get ironed out. (unforgivable of course if they don't)

 

Frustrating perhaps, but for me if it leads in the end to a reliable P4 layout where the modelling and prototypical authenticity is of a high standard, then in the end it is worth it - particularly if it also results in another P4 skilled and experienced modeller.

 

I hope to build my own P4 layout and am determined that it will be reliable and gremlin free .... however whether I have the courage to exhibit it only time will tell, as I would be petrified that gremlins I don't know exist (primarily through inexperience) will manifest as soon as I get things set up at a venue.

 

Sometimes I think people regard P4 modellers as if they should be supermen ... many I have met are just normal modellers who simply want to have a bash at P4 because they like the look and the discipline ... no better or worse than many other modellers. After all this is a hobby for enjoyment and only in rare instances a profession.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Lecorbusier

[Andy Hayter]

Is there a case for some of the larger shows having an artisan trading section?  An area where small stands allow small producers to air their wares to the wider public.  Warley seemed to have something a bit like this but I have to say I was largely disappointed with the range present there.  Such an area would have to have significantly reduced stand rents to make the effort of attending worthwhile for what are often one-man bands.

 

A few of the bigger French shows operate in this way and they are used to showcase new and planned production - a mini Nuremburg for the small producer if you like and these new releases are widely published in the French model press, so the exposure to the public is doubled.

[Northmoor]

I seem to have got my geography wrong when I built my depot layouts, they are on some imaginary loop off the electrified GE lines. I wondered why they stopped getting invites, wrong part of the railway world. Edit, scratchbuilding a four road ER glasshouse shed, ER sand hopper, ER fuel tanks, ER fuel points and getting the track plan right is only minimal modelling (and research).

 

Some of the Diesel and Electric layouts at the weekend were wonderful. One of the best was a depot layout Aberdeen Kirkhill. 

 

As for layouts with the OLE as I said above they may think about doing a bit more research. I did have a quick chat with Steve Flint about writing something about OLE for the Toddler, I hope if I do so it will help those who wish to model OLE. 

I have said before Clive, perhaps a little tongue-in-cheek, that your layouts may actually be partly to blame for this diesel depot layout cliche, because - while yours were well-modelled, innovative and based on thorough research - they made it look easy to copy.  Many layouts are based on other's ideas, rather than based on a prototype, even in general.  Let's be honest, I spent about ten years of idle moments sketching layouts which were remarkably similar to Ian Futers' Lochside..... The trend was also driven to an extent by the Lima diesel range, where you could have 20 variants of Class 47s without even renumbering any yourself.

 

I've not seen Aberdeen Kirkhill in the flesh, but in magazines it looks excellent and one I will look our for at exhibitions.

[Northmoor]

Folk bleat that they can't do things themselves, and, even if they did, they'd mess it up. So what? Buy something cheap, second-hand and practise on that. 

 

Tony, if only I could say HEAR HEAR loud enough.

[RThompson]

Hi Tony,

 

Whilst I don't do many shows, this year will be virtually be zero attendance for the first time since RT Models was on the exhibition circuit from 2010, shows vary for kit/detailing demand so to speak.

 

I've been attending most of the 4mm scale specialist shows as that's where we tend to fit in best and compliment each other, even if we may not make much money we still support them.

 

Unfortunately the larger shows can prove too costly to attend especially once you add the cost of diesel, hotel, food etc

 

As you say Tony, maybe a sign of the times of kits? Certainly not dead is kit building but not as common as it used to be and all the articles I used to love reading about kit (including your articles) and scratch building is not very often these days and unfortunately is the main reason for me not buying magazines very often as well as lack of scale drawings as this would give me the inspiration to scratch build something, even if a kit might be available.

 

Warley has been a good show for me now we have the small suppliers forum but this year I've had to stop attending, didn't help where I nearly fell asleep on the stand on the Saturday as I went and drove a emergency rail replacement bus service the night before when I should have been setting up. Thankfully I only had to walk across the road to the hotel and ordered room service.

 

The below photo will mean my Saturday's will now be taken up driving the RMC on weddings mostly (with some Sentinel steam locos in view).

 

I am being booked at some railway events with the RMC, even suggested having the stand on board! Mobile model shop!

 

 

Edited February 27, 2018 by RThompson

[polybear]

Is there a case for some of the larger shows having an artisan trading section?  An area where small stands allow small producers to air their wares to the wider public.  Warley seemed to have something a bit like this but I have to say I was largely disappointed with the range present there.  Such an area would have to have significantly reduced stand rents to make the effort of attending worthwhile for what are often one-man bands.

 

 

 

I believe that the Ally Pally show has such a section in the smaller hall (the "Specialist Traders" village).  However, the costs of being a trader at A.P. are significant, even without Transport, Fuel, Hotel, Food, Wages etc. And apparently they'll charge a trader for everything.  Want a chair sir? That'll be extra, as will power.  S.E Finescale have now dropped out of A.P. as it just isn't worth doing due to the costs involved.  Dave sells a lot of kits, but after taking expenses into account it becomes a box shifting exercise for a lot of work.  Strangely, Pheonix Precision Paints couldn't get a stand in the Village cos' "they're not a specialist trader....."

[Bernard Lamb]

Tony,

 

I know we don't see eye to eye on this, but might I make a couple of comments on Cadhay (the Southern branch). I fully concur that the poor running you observed is disappointing (as much I suspect for the operators as the punters) and must be sorted.

 

However, I do know a little background to the layout. The layout was shown as a layout in progress at Scaleforum a while ago and is the work of a first time modeller in P4. It is also the work of one person. It is I believe the first time that it has been shown as a completed model. I also understand that the expertise of the modeller in question has in the past lain with scenic modelling and that the track laying component is a first foray - the same with conversion/building of stock to P4. As such I think there is an ongoing process of refinement and trouble shooting to go through. I know that you feel this should all be resolved before any public attendance, but I still hold to the view that such gremlins in P4 often only manifest once a layout joins the circuit (due to changes in environment and impact of travel) and only considerable experience in the exhibiting of P4 layouts can short cut this process .... from my observations trouble free reliable running is rarely achieved by newcomers to P4 on the first or second showing of the work, .... but after this things tend to get ironed out. (unforgivable of course if they don't)

 

Frustrating perhaps, but for me if it leads in the end to a reliable P4 layout where the modelling and prototypical authenticity is of a high standard, then in the end it is worth it - particularly if it also results in another P4 skilled and experienced modeller.

 

I hope to build my own P4 layout and am determined that it will be reliable and gremlin free .... however whether I have the courage to exhibit it only time will tell, as I would be petrified that gremlins I don't know exist (primarily through inexperience) will manifest as soon as I get things set up at a venue.

 

Sometimes I think people regard P4 modellers as if they should be supermen ... many I have met are just normal modellers who simply want to have a bash at P4 because they like the look and the discipline ... no better or worse than many other modellers. After all this is a hobby for enjoyment and only in rare instances a profession.

Starting with the last paragraph. It was certain P4 modellers who long ago seemed to regard themselves as superior beings. Most of them are long gone but the image remained.

There is one P4 layout that I have never seen run at all well and that is Burntisland. It looks superb but to me should not be allowed out until the running is much more reliable. Either get the track and electrics to function or only use tested and checked stock would be a good starting point. I can accept part finished layouts at society shows, in fact I seem to remember Burntisland was at the 18.83 competition show and at that point I found it interesting, but for the paying public all layouts should represent the cutting edge of the hobby. That seems to me to be a fairly sensible approach. Non modellers I know who just happen to visit the local show seem to also make such comments about the running qualities. Basically if the running is not better than that achieved with modern RTR stock then those items of stock are not up to exhibition standard and should be left at home. There is I accept a place for historic layouts before I get shot at. But there should be an explanation about what they represent if the running is not up to standard. 

Bernard

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

I know we don't see eye to eye on this, but might I make a couple of comments on Cadhay (the Southern branch). I fully concur that the poor running you observed is disappointing (as much I suspect for the operators as the punters) and must be sorted.

 

However, I do know a little background to the layout. The layout was shown as a layout in progress at Scaleforum a while ago and is the work of a first time modeller in P4. It is also the work of one person. It is I believe the first time that it has been shown as a completed model. I also understand that the expertise of the modeller in question has in the past lain with scenic modelling and that the track laying component is a first foray - the same with conversion/building of stock to P4. As such I think there is an ongoing process of refinement and trouble shooting to go through. I know that you feel this should all be resolved before any public attendance, but I still hold to the view that such gremlins in P4 often only manifest once a layout joins the circuit (due to changes in environment and impact of travel) and only considerable experience in the exhibiting of P4 layouts can short cut this process .... from my observations trouble free reliable running is rarely achieved by newcomers to P4 on the first or second showing of the work, .... but after this things tend to get ironed out. (unforgivable of course if they don't)

 

Frustrating perhaps, but for me if it leads in the end to a reliable P4 layout where the modelling and prototypical authenticity is of a high standard, then in the end it is worth it - particularly if it also results in another P4 skilled and experienced modeller.

 

I hope to build my own P4 layout and am determined that it will be reliable and gremlin free .... however whether I have the courage to exhibit it only time will tell, as I would be petrified that gremlins I don't know exist (primarily through inexperience) will manifest as soon as I get things set up at a venue.

 

Sometimes I think people regard P4 modellers as if they should be supermen ... many I have met are just normal modellers who simply want to have a bash at P4 because they like the look and the discipline ... no better or worse than many other modellers. After all this is a hobby for enjoyment and only in rare instances a profession.

Tim,

 

I'm puzzled why you think we don't see eye to eye........................

 

As this thread seems to be cyclic, the P4/S4 'discussion' keeps on coming up. I must state again, I am not anti-P4; I am anti-poor running. Poor running is not the exclusive 'property' of P4 - at the Glasgow Show there was an O Gauge layout (quite nicely done) where some of the operators didn't seem to have a clue what they were doing (precluding the layout from my 'winning' list), resulting in F1 starts and jerky performance. However, too many P4 layouts I've seen display running 'qualities' which I would not tolerate under any circumstances. 

 

The layout you mention is visually exquisite (though still under construction) and, having seen it for the first time on the Thursday night, I was immediately taken with it. My 'judging' procedure is to walk round on evening before the show opens and in the morning before the show starts, just looking at the layouts (taking no notice of the running, if it's taking place). I then tick-off (entirely subjectively) those I think have a chance of winning. Cadhay received a (big) tick. I then look next about two hours into the show, 'forgiving' poor running at this point. I then look again (as much as other duties will allow), every couple of hours or so, before making my decision, either as the show's first day closes, or early on the second day. If poor running (derailments, jerky motion, non-working signals, trains dividing, operators befuddled, etc) is still apparent, then that layout (in my opinion) has no chance of winning. Taken to extremes, of course, if 'good running' were the sole reason for choosing the 'best', then Hornby O Gauge or Dublo would win every time, but, I hope, you get my point.  

 

On every occasion I observed the beautiful Southern branch, the running (when it occurred) was poor - with most of my dislikes apparent. I assume a semaphore had ceased to work, because a green flag was being waved to allow passage of trains (which I thought was rather a good idea). However, even when 'given the flag' a passenger train promptly derailed and divided, resulting in one fiddle yard operator having to wrestle with the thing under full public gaze. All this, on a single track branch. I've been involved in the exhibiting of two and four track main line layouts (mainly in OO, but some in EM) where such poor running would not have been tolerated under any circumstances. 

 

I'm not sure whether those who model in P4 are regarded as 'supermen'. I agree that we're in a hobby (in the main) for enjoyment, though how anyone can enjoy dreadful running is beyond me, whatever their chosen scale/gauge. What I would say (and I've had this view published in the S4 Journal) is that anyone who models successfully in P4/S4 (is there a difference?) must have a far greater degree of mechanical modelling skills to achieve success than those of us who don't have such gifts (why do you think I'll never model in P4?). If those who try modelling in the finest gauge don't have those skills (or acquire them) then, in my view, they're deluding themselves and, by displaying poor running at shows, doing P4 a grave disservice. 

 

Where those requisite skills are apparent, the results are incredibly good, both in the appearance and the running of a layout in P4. This is no better illustrated than on the late Tony Miles' Adavoyle. 

 

 

 

This would be (in my opinion) in anybody's top ten of layouts of all time. Tony, of course, was very highly-skilled.

 

Another P4 layout which I've had the privilege of photographing is St. Merryn. This, too, looks beautiful and works perfectly; again, because its creators are all very highly-skilled modellers 

 

 

 

 

I state again, poor running is not exclusive to P4, and I've lost count of the number of OO layouts I've seen at shows where the running is diabolical. That said, shouldn't we (as the viewing public) expect better running on P4 systems than on crude OO ones? After all, haven't we been told for years that the nearer one get to the prototype dimensions, the more accurate (including running?) your model will be? 

 

I know my own modelling limitations, and those include a recognition that I don't have those essential (higher) skills to be able to model in P4. That lack of skills would mean I'd have to tolerate poor(er) running, and that is never going to happen. On LB, some 50 complete train movements take place in the hour and a half of an operating session. These movements include anything from the passage of a light engine, the propelling of 40+ wagons or the screaming passage of a 14-car express through the station. If there is a running problem (and there are some) it's always my (operating) fault, not the railway. 

 

To return to my choice of the winner at Glasgow, it was the excellent running on Allanbridge which finally influenced my decision...............

 

 

I overcame my 'prejudices' as to the fact that it's DCC, that this loco must be one of the ugliest ever made and 'adorned' in one of the most bizarre liveries ever applied to anything, because the overall modelling was good and the running was perfect.  

 

Finally, and just to show how fickle the 'winning' of awards in this hobby are, though I'm absolutely delighted to have won the 'modeller of the year award' on here (and my most grateful thanks to all those who voted for me), just look at some of the images posted on here of other modellers' work and see how much more worthy their achievements are of recognition. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited February 27, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Lecorbusier]

Tim,

 

I'm puzzled why you think we don't see eye to eye........................

 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Thanks for such a comprehensive response Tony ... much appreciated.

 

On the eye to eye comment I should have perhaps been more specific, it was solely related to the subject of running .... it is my view that with P4, unless you are an experienced and old hand on the show circuit and really know what you are about, there are going to be more teething problems as far as running is concerned than with 00 for example. I also think that these will only manifest once the rigours of travel and differing environments come in to play. I therefore would expect an element of poor running on Cadhay given the provenance and myself will be tolerant for the first few showings. Where this puts the paying public I am unsure, but as I say if it leads to refinement and a good show layout then I am all for it. I would hope that the other merits might help with this.

 

As an observation P4 does seem to have done itself a disservice in the past which is a shame as from my perspective the vast majority I have met who model in P4 (as well as in other gauges) have been very inclusive.

 

Tim

Edited February 27, 2018 by Lecorbusier

[Black Marlin]

Congratulations on your award, Tony; had I known about it before seeing you again at Glasgow I would have congratulated you in person! It is very well earned, I think; quite apart from the exquisite modelling, your work as a teacher (and you thought you'd retired!) of model-making skills and techniques is surely what elevates you to the position of modeller of the year.

It was great to see you and Mo again; hopefully it won't be another year before we reconnect! In the meantime, I have some actual modelling to do - a bridge to scratchbuild. May I post a picture or two once it's completed, if only to prove that I do, from time to time, have legitimate reasons for thinking myself a railway modeller?

Regards,
Gavin

 

 

edited to remove a clumsy and ungrammatical repetition

Edited February 27, 2018 by Black Marlin

[t-b-g]

Several pages ago (they fly by!) I said I would post some more photos of what has been on the workbench when I got chance to take photos.

 

Once again, the camera on the tablet has been used but here are two locos, one fully finished and one nearly so, just needing minor finishing off jobs, like balance weights, coal etc.

 

 

 

 

 

Both are in EM, the saddle tank is a London Road kit and the "Flatiron" is from SE Finecast. Both had faults. Some I have corrected and some I decided were too much work for a small improvement. I couldn't recommend either for a novice but they can both end up looking like they are supposed to with a bit of work.

Edited February 27, 2018 by t-b-g

[MJI]

So why did Tony win the award?

 

Let's see.

 

1) Makes many locomotives and carriages himself.

2) Does not disparage anyone elses attempts.

3) Encourages everyone to have a go.

4) Helps beginners get going.

 

No wonder he won.

[davefrk]

So why did Tony win the award?

 

Let's see.

 

1) Makes many locomotives and carriages himself.

2) Does not disparage anyone elses attempts.

3) Encourages everyone to have a go.

4) Helps beginners get going.

 

No wonder he won.

 

Yes, tell that to that guy in Spain.....  (a few pages back). The one who nobody's ever heard of.

 

Congrats Tony.

 

Dave Franks.

Edited February 27, 2018 by davefrk

[Tony Wright]

Congratulations on your award, Tony; had I known about it before seeing you again at Glasgow I would have congratulated you in person! It is very well earned, I think; quite apart from the exquisite modelling, your work as a teacher (and you thought you'd retired!) of model-making skills and techniques is surely what elevates you to the position of modeller of the year.

 

It was great to see you and Mo again; hopefully it won't be another year before we reconnect! In the meantime, I have some actual modelling to do - a bridge to scratchbuild. May I post a picture or two once it's completed, if only to prove that I do, from time to time, have legitimate reasons for thinking myself a railway modeller?

 

Regards,

Gavin

 

 

edited to remove a clumsy and ungrammatical repetition

Gavin,

 

It's not necessary for you to ask whether you may post a picture of your work on this thread, though, given your natural good manners, I'm not surprised you asked. Of course, please do; the more the merrier. 

 

It was great to see you again at the Glasgow Show. Our mutually-absurd senses of humour always guarantees many a chuckle, especially when those other two Irish chaps were around. I'm glad Simon Kohler will fix your 'Arthur', though why you didn't spot the muck on your D49's wheels, I don't know, but many thanks for your generous donation to CR. 

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

I've not long ago heard from Dave Ellis of SE Finecast that he's just about to release the J6 kit. This is the old Nu-Cast model, with many refinements (including new body moulds), especially with regard to the chassis. 

 

 

 

This is the Nu-Cast example I completed/painted years ago (it was started by Ian Wilson even longer ago). 

 

The class always seems to score highly on 'wish-lists' for RTR locos, but it doesn't seem to be on any RTR manufacturers' radar right now. So, build this kit if you want one! 

 

Dave can be contacted on 01342 824711 (if he's at the factory, given the weather), the address being Glenn House, Hartfield Road, Forest Row, E. Sussex RH18 5DZ. Googling SE Finecast should bring up a website. 

 

I'll be conducting a build-review as soon as I get one. 

 

I should add that I have no connection with the firm (other than as a very-satisfied customer).  

Edited February 27, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Denbridge]

I've not long ago heard from Dave Ellis of SE Finecast that he's just about to release the J6 kit. This is the old Nu-Cast model, with many refinements (including new body moulds), especially with regard to the chassis. 

 

J6.jpg

 

J6 on local.jpg

 

This is the Nu-Cast example I completed/painted years ago (it was started by Ian Wilson even longer ago). 

 

The class always seems to score highly on 'wish-lists' for RTR locos, but it doesn't seem to be on any RTR manufacturers' radar right now. So, build this kit if you want one! 

 

Dave can be contacted on 01342 824711 (if he's at the factory, given the weather), the address being Glenn House, Hartfield Road, Forest Row, E. Sussex RH18 5DZ. Googling SE Finecast should bring up a website. 

 

I'll be conducting a build-review as soon as I get one. 

 

I should add that I have no connection with the firm (other than as a very-satisfied customer).  

I'm extremely happy that SE Finecast/Branch lines have taken on the Nu-cast range. I built many of their kits over the years and, though clearly dated, I invariably found them a good starting point to a reasonable model. Judging by the pictures of the released and updated 2021 pannier tank they look set to be significantly improved. I'm heading over to see Dave once the weather improves to buy a pannier .

Edited February 27, 2018 by Denbridge

[Hollar]

One thing which I didn't mention about the Glasgow Show was the trade. 

 

I can understand that taking a stand at the event must be very expensive, but (as far as I could see) there wasn't any trader selling the sort of stuff which would really interest the likes of me. Having been told by a friend that there was a stand selling 'bits and pieces', I was able to buy some wagon wheels and screw-link couplings in 4mm. However, I could see nobody selling metal loco, wagon or carriage kits, driving wheels, motors, gearboxes or any of the stuff essential to the kit-builder like me. Of course, in the main, I acquire what I need by post or at the 'scale' shows, but is that to be the trend for the future I wonder? A major show (second biggest in the realm), where there is nobody selling produce for the metal kit-builder? It could well be (I'm speculating) that, not only is it prohibitively-expensive for a more 'specialist' trader to take a pitch at a big show, but, even if he/she did, the visitors aren't, in the main, likely to be interested in his/her products. Is this an even greater indicator of the way the hobby is going? Great excitement with regard to what's coming ready-made, backed up by umpteen 'box-shifters', but a continuing decline in folk actually making/modifying things. One of the largest stands (and wonderfully-well-presented) was TMC, with a vast range of customised RTR locomotives (professionally-done). We thus have a service now for folk who won't even contemplate altering RTR items for themselves. I'm not being critical of TMC here; the firm has identified a market and is servicing it - very well, but it's certainly not personal model-making as far as I'm concerned. Folk bleat that they can't do things themselves, and, even if they did, they'd mess it up. So what? Buy something cheap, second-hand and practise on that. 

 

There were some plastic kits for sale, which is something I suppose. However, as mentioned earlier, most of the layouts were RTR-reliant, which is of no great interest to me (even though my winner was in that category). I suppose there were some innovations on display, but even in O Gauge the RTR market was dominant with Rails and Hattons displaying some (very good) 7mm RTR. 

 

Finally, on the theme of non-doers, perhaps I should take up professional model-making again. I lost count of the number of times I was asked, mainly by late middle-aged gents, 'How much?' as they pointed to the Thompson Pacifics I had on display.  

For someone who can knock out good, working chassis the only problem would be preventing Public Order Act offences in the queue.  For me, I love painting, can put together a decent, complex body, but it's a major achievement if my chassis can drag itself down the test track unaided.

 

Tone

[glo41f]

Good to see Mr Gee's latest efforts on Buckingham. Am I the only one who finds those Midland Flatirons most ungainly locos?  I am afraid I can never really take to them but you could certainly get a lot of weight in a model one given the huge side tanks. I bet they were pretty rough riding too at any speed.

 

I have to say too that the J6 is a nice looking loco. I made a Nu cast one a while back (when I had the foolish ambition to build the EC main line in a quite small garage!). I found it went together well and ran well despite the white metal underframe. These were all jig drilled to ensure the axles were parallel by the kits designer (Gerry Brown)  but of course they could be bent by hamfisted builders. They could be found on the M&GN as well as the main line so perhaps the LB specimen might end up there complete with tablet catcher on the tender!

 

Hope everyone not badly affected by the snow etc.

 

Martin Long

[t-b-g]

The two locos are not destined for Buckingham, which was simply a lovely backdrop for the photos. As far as possible, only original Buckingham locos and stock run on the layout. The Midland loco is, indeed, just plain ugly. It is not for me but is being built to replace one a friend had nicked at a show a while ago.

 

One of my very early encounters with loco kits was the Nu-cast J6. It was a class my dad knew well and for Christmas, probably when I was aged around 15 or 16, I was thrilled to find one under the tree with my name on it. I disappeared upstairs to my desk and started it straight away and apart from meals, the rest of the family had seen the last of me. By Boxing day early evening, it was built, painted and weathered. I still have it, now converted to EM and altered into LNER livery. It has been stored away for quite a few years now but I must bring her out and see if she still goes, with her ECM motor glued to the whitemetal chassis block. Even I can't bring myself to call them frames!

 

Happy memories!

Edited February 27, 2018 by t-b-g

[Tony Wright]

Good to see Mr Gee's latest efforts on Buckingham. Am I the only one who finds those Midland Flatirons most ungainly locos?  I am afraid I can never really take to them but you could certainly get a lot of weight in a model one given the huge side tanks. I bet they were pretty rough riding too at any speed.

 

I have to say too that the J6 is a nice looking loco. I made a Nu cast one a while back (when I had the foolish ambition to build the EC main line in a quite small garage!). I found it went together well and ran well despite the white metal underframe. These were all jig drilled to ensure the axles were parallel by the kits designer (Gerry Brown)  but of course they could be bent by hamfisted builders. They could be found on the M&GN as well as the main line so perhaps the LB specimen might end up there complete with tablet catcher on the tender!

 

Hope everyone not badly affected by the snow etc.

 

Martin Long

Martin,

 

With the tender supplied, the only J6 which could be made up 'accurately' from the original Nu-Cast kit was 64190, the one I produced (see Yeadon's Register on the class). 

 

I don't know whether different tender options will be supplied by SE Finecast (I gave Dave notes), but it depends on how pedantic one wishes to be. The fact that a kit for a 4mm J6 has been reintroduced is a real bonus to us builders. There is, of course, the London Road Models' example (which is superb and is available in both Ivatt and Gresley manifestations, along with a choice of tenders). I don't know (and won't know until I receive one, I imagine) if both types of J6 will be available from SEF, but for those who struggle to make etched-brass kits (where metal forming is required from the flat etch), then a cast metal alternative is a good idea. 

 

 

Here's a 'portrait' shot of the old Nu-Cast J6 I showed earlier. I based it on the picture in Yeadon. 

 

 

A comparative shot of the Nu-Cast J6 and the LRM one (the nearer), showing the differences between the 521 Series (nearer) and 536 Series (further). 

 

 

For those who can't (or won't) build kits, and who can't afford for others to make them, then there is the Graeme King resin J6 (which only needs a bit of 'constructional' work). Graeme provides a chassis, but I scratch-built one in brass for this. 

 

 

You mention a J6 on the M&GNR. Well, I actually have one on that, in the form of this prehistoric WSM example (on a scratch-built set of frames). 

 

As for the weather; Mo and I were due to be at the Preston Show this coming weekend. I received an e-mail today from the organisers stating it's been cancelled, because of the predicted bad weather. 

Edited February 28, 2018 by Tony Wright

[jrg1]

Martin,

 

With the tender supplied, the only J6 which could be made up 'accurately' from the original Nu-Cast kit was 64190, the one I produced (see Yeadon's Register on the class). 

 

I don't know whether different tender options will be supplied by SE Finecast (I gave Dave notes), but it depends on how pedantic one wishes to be. The fact that a kit for a 4mm J6 has been reintroduced is a real bonus to us builders. There is, of course, the London Road Models' example (which is superb and is available in both Ivatt and Gresley manifestations, along with a choice of tenders). I don't know (and won't know until I receive one, I imagine) if both types of J6 will be available from SEF, but for those who struggle to make etched-brass kits (where metal forming is required from the flat etch), then a cast metal alternative is a good idea. 

 

64190 J6.jpg

 

Here's a 'portrait' shot of the old Nu-Cast J6 I showed earlier. I based it on the picture in Yeadon. 

 

J6 16 on layout.jpg

 

A comparative shot of the Nu-Cast J6 and the LRM one (the nearer), showing the differences between the 521 Series (nearer) and 536 Series (further). 

 

King J6 08 BR.jpg

 

For those who can't (or won't) build kits, and who can't afford for others to make them, then there is the Graeme King resin J6 (which only needs a bit of 'constructional' work. Graeme provides a chassis, but I scratch-built one in brass for this. 

 

J6.jpg

 

You mention a J6 on the M&GNR. Well, I actually have one on that, in the form of this prehistoric WSM example (on a scratch-built set of frames). 

 

As for the weather; Mo and I were due to be at the Preston Show this coming weekend. I received an e-mail today from the organisers stating it's been cancelled, because of the predicted bad weather.The GNR 

The GNR Society produce a publication dealing with all GNR tenders-a really useful reference work for GN modellers.