Wright writes.....

[cctransuk]

Praise where it's due, John. I'm quite aware of your position on taking on additional transfer work. I don't know where the internal HMRS debate is - I'm afraid I rather tuned out when it was dominating the online forum - but my fundamental point was that the technology is available and you (among others) have shown how it should be used.

 

Unless someone tells me differently, all the indications are that the HMRS transfers are produced by traditional screen-printing. If the transfers are no longer of a satisfactory quality, it's almost certainly down to the current state of the master artwork, and / or the ability of the current screen-printers to use it accurately.

 

If it is desired to continue with screen-printed transfers, either the artwork needs redrawing, or a competant screen-printer needs to be found who can produce acceptable products.

 

There are newer technologies out there - and the ALPS system is definitely NOT one to consider - and I am not the the person to advise; Railtec seem to be the market leaders in such matters.

 

My ALPS printing system can produce incredible transfers within certain, very clearly defined, criteria - which suit BR steam / early diesel liveries. It cannot reproduce the modern vinyl liveries, with their subtle shade gradations, but it MIGHT be able to reproduce much of the Big Four markings - I simply don't know, because I haven't tried.

 

What is certain is that there are much better options to screen-printing for anyone looking to re-launch an existing, fairly broad range of transfer products, or to introduce an entirely new range. I have always been up-front about the limitations of what I can and can't do, and I always redirect enquiries for products outside my sphere of interest to those producers whom I feel can best fulfil the enquirier's requirements.

 

Regards,

John isherwood.

https://www.cctrans.org.uk/

[coronach]

When I was a nipper in York, I would accompany my Dad to operate a gauge 0 garden railway that was built by Doug Hutchinson, a professional railway man. He owned a fleet of scratchbuilt locos and operated his railway to a rule book and a timetable. The Friday night sessions were populated by his railway colleagues, using real block instruments and telephones between the house and the garden shed ( Two terminus stations occupied his back room, accessed from the garden through a hole in the wall (yes he was married !). Doug must be in his 90s now.

 

Whilst the 'scenery' was rudimentary, it was probably as close to a real operational railway as one could get without joining BR. One of my work colleagues grew up operating Crewechester, which was a training ground for future railwaymen. I wonder whether model railways (or any other facet of a hobby) provides youngsters with such a grounding today ? Train-sim anyone......

Edited April 18, 2018 by coronach

[railtec-models]

I believe John is correct re the process used by HMRS, or at least that's my understanding of what they used to use if it's not still the case. Print registration is of course critical at such small scale. They were looking at waterslide some years ago after issues with a US supplier, I believe. I know because I had one of their team sat on my couch when Railtec were being considered as one of the possible ways forward, though that was eons before Railtec migrated to the latest tech. (It never progressed any further and I have no idea how or even if things moved forward in terms of their production).

I'm sure John would be perfectly capable of producing a decent LNER range - as would Railtec - but as John points out - unless a (good) graphic designer can produce artwork that is ready to print, it can be a hugely time consuming process. Even then, there can still be a fair amount of testing to take place as printers are often far from logical machines: what may look good in artwork may not look good in the print, so you have to get creative and try all manner of unintuitive tricks to get a satisfactory result. It's far from a case of find a few pictures on the web, copy and paste into a graphics program and hit print. Add into the mix scouring high and low for suitable images, achieving the correct colours, dimensions (incl getting people to agree on them), likely proportions required on the sheet and then trying to please as many folks as possible in as few sheets as possible - it can be an utter minefield. Often a rewarding one, but you get the picture. Sometimes it can take literally weeks of solid man-hours or longer to get a single pack to market.

The Railtec LNER (and Big Four for that matter) range is extremely limited at present, but that's only because of the sheer mind-boggling volume of requests that continue to come in for other topics. I'm sure in time it will expand massively. Re the point on gradients/fading, it might be more relevant at 7mm and up (maybe 4mm too?) but that wouldn't be a problem, when the time comes:

 

 

Edited April 18, 2018 by railtec-models

[Jack P]

"If the transfers are no longer of a satisfactory quality"

 

 I hate to use my own work as an example, but it seems that all the sheets of Bulleid HMRS transfers are let down in one area, and that is the small 'SOUTHERN' for use on the coach sides, if you look at the lettering here, the outline is extremely faint, and it just looks blurry. No other transfers on the sheet seem to suffer from this. It's a shame, because i'm not aware of anyone else that produces this specific transfer in this size.

 

Edited April 19, 2018 by Jack P

[chrisf]

If only I had known yesterday of the controversy surrounding HMRS transfers.  I had lunch with Brian Webb, HMRS transfers supremo, but if I had said anything to him it mght have spoiled his birthday.  In fairness I get the impression thst he is ony too well aware that all is not well in that area.

 

Chris 

[MikeTrice]

The lack of correct LNER coach transfers is one of my pet frustrations. If someone would seriously consider producing transfers, I could with a small bit of arm twisting, provide artwork.

[Bucoops]

Ugh, now I'm back into modelling the LNER and I find out I may not be able to put transfers on. Typical!

 

Although I think there's plenty of time being that still not got anything finished...

[Tony Wright]

I think you have captured Little Bytham in a way that is 'spot on'. Fr me, the important thing is to capture the atmosphere of the railway. This means starting with consideration of the available space and what will look right. I have a 17' square loft space, which has enabled me to model the essence of the Waverleyroute using a folded figure of eight, giving a circuit run of about 70ft. Compression has been necessary: Very few layouts have the space to model a distant signal (let alone two stations !), which is typically 900 yards from the signal box, often much further away. Notwithstanding the compromises, I feel that I have a layout that I can operate as a railway, where the trains have a purpose and travel through a landscape.

 

My previous layout was a representation of Alston, in a 14' x 8' garage space. Again, huge compromises but I wouldn't have attempted a main line.

Thank you CORONACH - a most appropriate Waverley name.

 

Do you mind posting pictures of your layout on here, please? I'd be most interested in seeing it. It sounds to be an ideal solution for a 'restricted' space, and Waverley route expresses tended to be shorter than some I'm modelling. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Clive Mortimore]

Hello Tony

 

I think I have found a solution to your TUBE transfer problem. Mr Isherwood's sheet  BL123 is for pre nationalisation Tubes.

Edited April 19, 2018 by Clive Mortimore

[Tony Wright]

Whilst I have a good run it is not long enough (is it ever?), so I follow the 1:3 ratio, as a maximum and usually follow 1:4; i.e. one train should not exceed more than 1/3 or in my case 1/4 of the available track/scenic section.  This results in 9 Mk1 coach and 10 Gresley coach trains and about 35 wagon trains.   At one time I did try a 10 Mk1 coach train and it was (to me at least) amazing how much that extra coach denigrated the entire picture.   With respect I would suggest that this rule is a good one to follow when designing your layout.

Good morning Theakerr,

 

That is a excellent formula to apply to train lengths. 

 

Unless one modelled something 'absurd'; by that I mean, say, a section of open railway separated by two bridges not very far apart - a bit of Lime Street cutting for instance (not the whole lot, which has been produced so wonderfully in EM) - where no more than two or three carriages could be seen, then the notion of no train being longer than one third of the scenic section is very sound. Otherwise they look too long.

 

Little Bytham's visible main line scenic section is around 27', which means (applying the formula) that trains (including locos) should be no more than nine feet long. However, since that length is almost dead scale, I feel (in typical hypocritical fashion) that I can model scale-length trains. 

 

 

Trains like The Elizabethan, which is around 10' complete (as a rule of thumb, a Mk.1/Thompson carriage is just under a foot long, as is the loco). It still has a bit to go to be off-scene, and there's plenty of space behind it.

 

 

Or The Queen of Scots, which is much the same length. The goods train in the foreground is 40-wagons long. (This picture was taken before the semis were installed).

 

 

This 'extra' is 14-cars long (which rather breaks the rule, though some cars are ex-GE 'shorties), but there's still plenty of space fore and aft of it. 

 

I say again, to try and model a prototype section of the ECML in less than 30' is something I'd never consider, because either the trains would look too long or they'd have to be shortened. I also say again, that I'm lucky to have the available space to model those scale-length trains, and I respect those who compromise more and apply more selective compression. It just wouldn't suit me, especially where compression (in fiddle yards, say) results in compromised running. 

 

Another aspect where not enough space would have compromised LB's appearance too much is the non-railway areas, because, even though it's not an important station, its immediate environs sprawl. Not to have Station Road, the adjacent (though small) fields and all the non-railway buildings wouldn't have 'worked' in my view. 

 

However, it is a broad church and 'each to their own'. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited April 19, 2018 by Tony Wright

[great central]

Can I suggest a good prototype for a reasonably small layout?

Carrington a short distance north of Nottingham Victoria sits in a cutting (well the cutting is kinda still there just filled in, the tunnel mouths having been walled over) between two tunnels. A ramp down from the road, signalbox, platform level buildings depending on period and a footbridge or not in later years.

From memory it was about 6 coaches long maybe, not at home so no access to books or information. Most trains were a lot longer in BR days

[Woodcock29]

Back to the subject of transfers, I can say that I have had great difficulty at times in recent years with HMRS. Both in the sense that some old transfers (some even PC in origin) I've either accumulated over time or that I have acquired from deceased estates have given up there ability to stick (both Pressfix and Methfix) and also new HMRS sheets purchased in the last few years. In the case of the new sheets I've found both difficulty in releasing lettering and sometimes in getting it to stick. I've even had lettering come off very quickly and not stick!

 

Methfix has always been my preferred option as I find it far easier to line these up than Pressfix which I can't see so well. I've made up new batches of meths/water at times so that is not the issue. At times I've had to resort to the old method of applying transfers using varnish - which I expect some of you will remember back in the 1950s/60s I think when my father was buying transfers.

 

I've never found it necessary to apply HMRS to gloss surfaces as recommended for water slide transfers but maybe I'll need to try that? In the past I've found they have always stuck well to satin finished surfaces. Through the 1980s - 90s I built a lot of goods rolling stock and locos with virtually no issues in the lettering stage except where I didn't line something up!

 

One question to ponder is whether the painted surfaces are part of the issue. I have noted the questions raised in recent times over the use of Humbrol paints which are either extremely thick or won't dry. Matt black (33) being one in question although I've not really had any major issues but don't generally use matt black, mostly I use a mix of satin black (85) and brown (186). I don't tend to use a lot of Railmatch or Precision because of the difficulty in obtaining such in Australia. Mind you I now have more of a supply of those paints given I visited the UK last year!

 

Andrew

 

.

[Chamby]

Re: layout size, I think Tony’s use of the word ‘sprawl’ is the important point. When modelling a station in open countryside, the wider environment plays a big part in getting the overall ambiance of the place right. I think this is less so in inner city environments, where the visual horizon is much closer due to the presence of tall structures. In a city terminus, particularly with an overall roof, your field of view is often limited to just a portion of the station itself, so the surrounding environment has no bearing at all on the ambiance, at least visually.

 

Ironically then, it can be possible to capture the full ambiance of a larger station in model form within a smaller space than a more rural location such as LB. Of course the trick of foreshortening the horizon with scenic trickery is as old as the hobby itself. But this is easier to do in an urban location, than out in the sticks. As well as Liverpool Lime Street approach, the lovely model of Sydney Gardens in Bath comes to mind as an excellent example of this. But of course the downside of these locations is that trains burst upon the scene 5hen suddenly disappear. For the feeling of trains approaching, passing then disappearing off into the distance, you have to have considerably more length, and the more you have, the better the effect.

[railtec-models]

The lack of correct LNER coach transfers is one of my pet frustrations. If someone would seriously consider producing transfers, I could with a small bit of arm twisting, provide artwork.

 

I'm not wishing to tread on John's (CCT) toes - and if John's ALPS route was preferred then I genuinely wouldn't be offended - but depending on the quality of what you may be able to provide, it may be worth at least volunteering something if you're open to that. My personal preference would be anything vector based, so an AI, EPS or SVG file, and don't worry about drawing a carrier film layer (I'd do that anyway). The key is to remember that vector artwork is very different to an image. So long as it was obvious where the white should be, and obviously a suitable/logical collection of elements on a proposed "sheet" or "sheets", correctly sized, as close a colour match as you can manage - then it may be a significant leg up. One thing I've learned over the years is that large sheets tend to attract a lot of waste and subsequent dissatisfaction (how many times have I heard, "I had to buy 6 sheets from [manufacturer] just to complete a small rake of coaches"), so my recommendation would be to make sheets small,  specific and relevant such that there is as little waste as possible. It may be worth PMing either myself or John (if he is keen and I wouldn't wish to speak on his behalf) with anything you might be able to offer, whilst it may be worth asking various folk what they would find useful on a series of sheets - either on a separate thread or this one if appropriate.

Edited April 19, 2018 by railtec-models

[coronach]

Thank you CORONACH - a most appropriate Waverley name.

 

Do you mind posting pictures of your layout on here, please? I'd be most interested in seeing it. It sounds to be an ideal solution for a 'restricted' space, and Waverley route expresses tended to be shorter than some I'm modelling. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

Tony, my layout is on RM Web 'Whinburgh and Slitrigg'..

 

Regards etc....

[coronach]

Thank you CORONACH - a most appropriate Waverley name.

 

Do you mind posting pictures of your layout on here, please? I'd be most interested in seeing it. It sounds to be an ideal solution for a 'restricted' space, and Waverley route expresses tended to be shorter than some I'm modelling. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

Tony, my layout is on RM Web 'Whinburgh and Slitrigg'..

 

Regards etc....

Thank you CORONACH - a most appropriate Waverley name.

 

Do you mind posting pictures of your layout on here, please? I'd be most interested in seeing it. It sounds to be an ideal solution for a 'restricted' space, and Waverley route expresses tended to be shorter than some I'm modelling. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

[cctransuk]

I'm not wishing to tread on John's (CCT) toes - and if John's ALPS route was preferred then I genuinely wouldn't be offended - but depending on the quality of what you may be able to provide, it may be worth at least volunteering something if you're open to that. My personal preference would be anything vector based, so an AI, EPS or SVG file, and don't worry about drawing a carrier film layer (I'd do that anyway). The key is to remember that vector artwork is very different to an image. So long as it was obvious where the white should be, and obviously a suitable/logical collection of elements on a proposed "sheet" or "sheets", correctly sized, as close a colour match as you can manage - then it may be a significant leg up. One thing I've learned over the years is that large sheets tend to attract a lot of waste and subsequent dissatisfaction (how many times have I heard, "I had to buy 6 sheets from [manufacturer] just to complete a small rake of coaches"), so my recommendation would be to make sheets small,  specific and relevant such that there is as little waste as possible. It may be worth PMing either myself or John (if he is keen and I wouldn't wish to speak on his behalf) with anything you might be able to offer, whilst it may be worth asking various folk what they would find useful on a series of sheets - either on a separate thread or this one if appropriate.

 

I have no pressing desire to become involved with pre-Nationalisation transfers - if Railtec can oblige, great!

 

All I would say is that my sheets of numbering, etc. specifically designed as complete numbers for particular RTR and kit ranges are very popular, and you may wish to follow that format.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood,

Cambridge Custom Transfers.

[cctransuk]

Hello Tony

 

I think I have found a solution to your TUBE transfer problem. Mr Isherwood's sheet  BL123 is for pre nationalisation Tubes.

 

Be aware that this sheet is for pre-Nationalisation TUBE wagons in BR livery.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Willie Whizz]

Can I suggest a good prototype for a reasonably small layout?

Carrington a short distance north of Nottingham Victoria sits in a cutting (well the cutting is kinda still there just filled in, the tunnel mouths having been walled over) between two tunnels. A ramp down from the road, signalbox, platform level buildings depending on period and a footbridge or not in later years.

From memory it was about 6 coaches long maybe, not at home so no access to books or information. Most trains were a lot longer in BR days

 

Been there, walked (with permission) through the long tunnel down to the Victoria Centre before the Carrington end was filled and sealed, which was quite an experience ... especially finding a Tesco trolley half-way along ...

 

But Carrington as a model?  Unless you cut away one side entirely, you could only do it justice by viewing it from a 'helicopter' angle, surely?  And other than "watching the trains go by", not a lot by way of 'operating potential' (Unless one were to model the signal box being burned down!).

[Tom F]

Evening Tony

K1 and B1 have had a touch of Satin Black on the bogie/pony wheels, front bogie/pony and coal space. I’ll bring them along on Saturday. The K1 needs numbering and I’ve yet to add the rivets to the B1 smokebox.

 

 

Edited April 19, 2018 by 9793

[Clive Mortimore]

Be aware that this sheet is for pre-Nationalisation TUBE wagons in BR livery.

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Hi John

 

These are what Tony's wagons need, they are ex LMS tubes, the old Ian Kirk/Colin Ashby kit, in BR days to go with his layout. 

[great central]

Been there, walked (with permission) through the long tunnel down to the Victoria Centre before the Carrington end was filled and sealed, which was quite an experience ... especially finding a Tesco trolley half-way along ...

 

But Carrington as a model? Unless you cut away one side entirely, you could only do it justice by viewing it from a 'helicopter' angle, surely? And other than "watching the trains go by", not a lot by way of 'operating potential' (Unless one were to model the signal box being burned down!).

Precisely my thoughts, a watching the trains type layout. You could of course omit the front part of the cutting and set the baseboard on the high side so you are looking into the layout with the opposite side of the cutting forming the backscene.

Ultimately to give sufficient variety of trains the storage sidings would need to be considerably bigger than the scenic part.

Spent quite some time there as a kid, only a bike ride over the hill from New Basford and the gulleys alongside the tunnel mouths provided entertainment as slides between trains.

Signalman never bothered us but we kept well clear of the line and an eye on the signals gave us warning of approaching trains.

Walked both the tunnels several times after closure having previously walked through the tunnel between Sherwood station and St Ann's before the ends were filled over.

Edited April 20, 2018 by great central

[Tony Wright]

The generosity of the human spirit never ceases to amaze me.

 

Yesterday, three volunteers from the GCR visited LB for the first time. It was also the first time I requested a visitors' donation to Cancer Research UK (coins). As they left, they donated their 'coins' in the form of three ten pound notes! 

 

Steve, David and Jeremy, my most grateful thanks. 

 

At this rate, the £1,000 target will be met well before the end of the year. 

[Tony Wright]

Tony, my layout is on RM Web 'Whinburgh and Slitrigg'..

 

Regards etc....WP_20180219_19_39_00_Pro.jpg

Thanks Coronach,

 

How wonderfully-weathered. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

I've been doing some more thinking on the 'length of train/length of layout' situation and I'm even more firmly convinced with regard to my stance on not contemplating building a prototype main line location in less than 30'.

 

I spent this morning observing (model) trains from the MR/M&GNR embankment to the east of the girder bridge over the main line.

 

 

With camera at the ready, I was lucky enough to capture two full-length trains passing; an A4 on a 12-car Down Newcastle and a 'Britannia' on an Up fitted freight consisting of over 40 wagons. Squeezed into less than 30', these trains would have appeared too long, but there's space for them to go in to and there'll be space behind them. 

 

 

 

Later on, a 45-wagon express freight headed north. Again, there is sufficient space for this type of scale-length train not to appear too long. 

 

 

I carried on this evening, capturing the northbound 'Tees-Tyne Pullman'. This is (prototypically) only eight-cars long, so could be accommodated in a shorter length, but most expresses of the period were longer. 

 

 

The evening concluded with the passage of the Up 'Afternoon Talisman', again only eight-cars long. 

 

On examining these trains, I'm conscious of the odd vehicle being out of kilter with the rest, either riding at a different height or leaning. It's only the camera which really 'sees' this; the human eye either dismisses it or doesn't notice. I know it's claimed that lenses can give aberrations, but, in my experience of using high-quality cameras, if something is 'bent', it's not the camera - the thing itself is bent! 

 

And, in case someone posts about an A4 with electric warning flashes being anomalous for LB's 1958 period, I agree. As I agree that Mk.1 Pullman cars are equally anomalous. And, those FOs in the 'Talisman' should have an extra door (they were built long before anyone really knew). 

 

I hope you'll agree, though, that Ellen Sparkes' lovely little gardens really do make the scenes. 

 

 

In contrast to the overall scenes, I thought I'd have a go at a few cameos, where 'space' doesn't matter so much. It's something I rarely do, but they seem to have worked. 

 

More in next post.