Jump to content

thegreenhowards

Members
  • Posts

    2,736
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by thegreenhowards

  1. As expected my wallet went home lighter after today’s trip - I was responsible for one of these. Tudor Minstrel will be making its entrance on Gresley Junction soon.
  2. Thanks for your hospitality Tony. A great day with the normal erudite conversion mixed with banter and a lot of trains run - most enjoyable. I was in control of the A1/1 when it self destructed and was worried it was my fault for some ‘Duddingtonesque’ driving, so was rather relieved to find that Tony blamed the Gibson wheels - I suggested he fitted some Hornby ones instead but that didn’t go down well! My trains didn’t behave very well with the Hunt magnetic couplings parting from time to time - often in the most inaccessible of locations. This is despite a thorough test at home before they were packed up. Apparently Tony has a special eye which causes other people’s trains to misbehave! As for the trains photographed, the first is the ‘Car Sleeper Limited’. The first Motorrail service in the UK starting in 1955 and running between KX and Perth. It later had bogie CCTs and then the Newton Chambers car carriers in the early ‘60s. The coaches include 3 Kirk Sleeper thirds - the couchette type with four bunks per compartment. The second is the Heart of Midlothian in its original ‘Festival of Britain’ guise. One of several all Mark 1 demonstration trains introduced in 1951. This loads to 14 vehicles including an original kitchen car (Comet) and RTO (Southern Pride). The rest is RTR. It shows what an ordinary Hornby A4 can haul. Andy
  3. Thanks for that video. That’s exactly why I want mine low…at least while I’m learning!
  4. Thanks Fred, I’m 57 and relatively agile for my age, so I think I can cope with it being low for the time being. I have to build up slowly while SWBMO gets used to the idea of a garden railway which means it’s going to be fully portable for the time being and stored in the garage. Therefore I don’t really want the hassle of getting legs out each time. I was also worried about trains falling off the boards from a height. If you have a high level garden railway what do you do about that? (Apart from not having any derailments which would be nice…but in the real world!). Regards Andy
  5. I'm another one who never met Gordon but felt I knew him. I enjoyed his thread and he often popped up with helpful / encouraging comments on my threads. He will be sorely missed. RIP Gordon. Andy
  6. Hi, Having started in O gauge during lockdown 2 by building a club layout, I’ve really got the bug for the scale. Once the club rooms reopened the club layout has been moved to its permanent home and I have nowhere to test my stock at home. So I decided to build something in the garden. SWMBO is not keen, so I’ve agreed to make it portable and just set it up for running sessions. The idea will be a triangular layout round two sides of the lawn with a third arm back across the middle. I have chanced upon some planks of softwood which are used for pipe delivery crates and measure 10’6” x 8”x20mm as shown hanging above my MGB. So not wanting to look a gift horse in the mouth, I’ve decided to use them to make sections of baseboard 9’x8” ideal for a double track in O gauge. I also intend to build the curves from the same material by joining together lots of segments. I applied wood preserver over the weekend and so far I’ve built four 9ft boards as shown in my garage under construction this morning. I set them out in the lawn this afternoon and loosely laid some track on top to test the concept. It all seems to work OK, although will need a lot more care with levels when I lay the track properly to get a smooth ride. I intend to join the boards using dowels and adjustable sprung toggles from Amazon which I found excellent on our club O gauge. (https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B07RHD9CMN/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1). The boards will rest on loose bits of wood arranged to minimise gradients. Does this all sound like a credible plan? Or am I setting myself up for a disaster down the line? Thanks in advance for any feedback from those more experienced. Andy
  7. My other recently completed project is this Ian Kirk 0 gauge Gresley BTK. I’ve almost certainly forgotten something critical, so feel free to point it out! Andy
  8. Thanks for showing us. I thought it might have gone in the too difficult box, but good to see you’re getting stuck in.
  9. I’d also love a D2, but I was saving that for the passenger list.
  10. And they’ve finished the ends in teak livery instead of black which I don’t think was ever correct?
  11. Thanks Jonathan, that’s reassuring. I’m not familiar with that photo. Can you say which book it’s in?
  12. My vote is 2,3,6,10, 12. A buck jumper would be useful as they worked the yards on the GNML south of PN. I love J6s and although I have a kit built one a second would be welcome. The J20s did transfers goods at the south end of the GNML, so I could justify one of them. Any of the B16s would be nice but I’d prefer a /3 as I think they worked south more often in the 1950s. I also have a kit to build for a B16/1. A P1 would be an extravagance and I don’t see the connection to PN given they were all withdrawn in the 1940s, but they were so sexy that I’d have to have one if they were produced. J52s and J17s are worthy contenders but I have already built BEC kit versions, plus a Hornby/ Bachmann Pannier mash up for the J52 as per ‘31A’. I don’t think J19s, J39s or O4s worked south of PN to my area of interest (around Hatfield). As for 13, I would love one of the other GNR 0-6-0s, especially a J1. But that would come behind a J6 in the RTR queue. Andy
  13. My votes for this one are: 2,3,6,10 Brian, They seem to have worked interchangeably with the B17s so I think they would have worked in from East Anglia. Probably not on the mainline from KX though. Plenty worked from Cambridge to KX, so I would be in for one when that poll comes. Andy
  14. The sun came out this morning which allowed me to photograph my latest (almost) complete projects. Here is my 0 gauge GNR liveried ride C12. Sunlight and the close ups are a bit cruel on the paint finish, but I’m rather pleased with the way she’s come out. You may ask why she’s in GNR livery. Well, I was going to paint her black but club member Rob ( @woko ) told me that she had to be green as black was boring. We’re taking a wide time period on our club 0 gauge layout to include late pre grouping and big 4. I did wonder what I could produce for her to pull in GNR days, but Rob’s a 3D printing whizz and offered to knock off some GNR six wheelers. So I went with GNR livery on that basis - no pressure Rob! And what a pretty livery! She will get Dingham couplings when I run off another batch and needs a rear vac hose because the white metal one has broken too many times - that will come when I can get to a show because I’m too mean to pay postage! Andy
  15. Thanks Jon, All 5 figure numbers sadly. And most seem to use ‘fat’ numbers. Not many ‘1’s or ‘7’s which might be easier to squeeze up! There’s a good post here which gives the set numbering. I’d gone for set 80 for no particular reason other than it had to be later than set 77 to suit the kit and I wanted an earlier build to increase my possible time period. Andy
  16. I agree with everything which D-A-T has said. I follow eBay auctions for LNER kit built locos always on the look out for a bargain. I’ve never paid more than £120 and generally it’s between £50 and £100. I.e. around the price of second hand RTR, a little more if it’s well built and rather less if it looks shoddy or is a non runner. I tend to assume that everything will need some work both cosmetically and to get it to run well. Even locos sold as ‘good runner’ quite often fall apart quickly or refuse to go round curves. The fact that you have tested all these on a real layout should make a difference but I suspect only a modest one as most people who buy kit locos to use would be capable of getting them to run. If not they’re in for an expensive mistake! The big exception is stuff for which no decent RTR equivalent is available. The two most expensive 00 locos I’ve ever bought were both from you - V2 The Green Howard and Duke of Rothesay. A2/1s still go for good money on eBay as there is no RTR equivalent, but probably a bit less than before as Hornby’s other Thompson Pacifics have soaked up some of the potential demand. The V2 I wouldn’t have bought now with the new Bachmann version imminent, but it’s given c.5 years of excellent service and is still my best V2, so I’m not complaining! I’m afraid that the price that it would cost to build is rather irrelevant as I can’t imagine that anyone would commission locos with an RTR equivalent now. The commissioning market has, I presume, moved to more esoteric designs not available RTR. The potential market for most of these is someone who enjoys collecting and/ or using metal kits rather than someone who ‘needs’ a particular loco for their layout. That’s a rather smaller pond to fish in and there is plenty of supply for the potential purchasers to nibble on. Sorry if I've reinforced the bad news from others and good luck with the sales. Andy
  17. I see what you mean Mike. Not much I can realistically do about that! I'm sure some people would tell me to scrape the beading off and re-apply it in the right position....but life's too short! I've just had a look at my 4mm version and it does have the same feature. But I finished that in BR maroon so smaller transfers anyway and it wasn't a problem. I did consider 4mm transfers for this but they'd be a lot smaller. Maybe I'll try one side to see what it looks like.
  18. I’ve made some progress with the Kirk O gauge quad art sides but have run into a problem. Here is the state of play. The problem I’m having is with the coach numbering transfers as you can see on the three sides below. The compartments were so tight on the quad arts that the space for the numbers is very tight and I’m struggling to get the transfers to fit. I’ve just about squeezed them in but they look very cramped. I’ve been using Fox transfers which have worked well on the other coaches I’ve built but they’re too big for this one. The choices I have are to keep on cramming them in or to find some smaller transfers. I could use Fox’s loco bufferbeam transfers as left below which are slightly smaller but less ‘florid’ than the coach transfers (right). Any suggestions gratefully received. Andy
  19. Oh dear…I can see me having an expensive trip to see you on Wednesday!
  20. Fair enough Andrew. I can certainly agree that you couldn’t model the ECML on LSGC!
  21. I agree that it’s not worth compromising the fiddle yard entry/ exit. Smooth running is more important the prototype fidelity (to me at least).
  22. Jessie, Can’t you go for option 3 with a very gentle curve and using Peco Bullhead points given the ‘red leader’ treatment. I appreciate bending expensive new points might be scary but given the cost of everything else you’re doing/ ripping up, I’d have thought that getting it right would be worth it in the long run. Andy
  23. Good evening Andrew, I don’t accept your premise that it is not possible to model the ECML accurately. When I run my full sequence on Gresley Jn, I run all the services which would have been seen at Hatfield between midday and midnight on a typical weekday. I model a fairly wide time period from 1948 to 1962 (an idea I borrowed from LSGC) with each train accurately formed based on the CWN for a particular year in that timeframe. There are the best part of 200 trains in the sequence split between express passenger, suburban and goods in roughly equal proportions. All the passenger trains are formed up according to the CWN with occasional coach substitutions generally in line with what I’ve seen in photos. There is a good deal of variety in the passenger trains with a good mix of ex LNER stock as well as the inevitable mark 1s. Obviously I couldn’t buy or store all of that stock, so much is reused in different trains, sometimes multiple times in the sequence. The goods stock is less accurate - I run all the trains in my 1950s WTT and a few others I know of from photos, but the formation of each is sometimes rather too much like guesswork although I’m trying to improve them all the time. I admit that this would be impractical on an exhibition layout. I take several months to run through my sequence, a few trains at a time, most of them formed up from cassettes and boxes of loose stock. It takes time but I find it absorbing. As for LSGC, I have always found it an inspirational layout. It would be a great shame if it never comes out again and even more so if your modelling is not given an exhibition airing. I understand the logistical challenge but for a layout of LSGC’s quality, I’m sure help would be available from outside your club if you asked. I appreciate that helpers would need ‘vetting’ and training but it maybe worth thinking about. Regards Andy
  24. Dreadful news. Everything’s crossed for you Gordon.
  25. I received my latest kit from Andy at Isinglass yesterday. This is a D.183 GNR 58’ BCL. I’ve been nagging Andy to produce this kit for some time as he produced a similiar GNR 58 footer but this one is the one which worked most out of KX in the pre Mark 1 era. It arrived on Tuesday looking like this. I spent a couple of hours sanding it on Tuesday evening and glued the sides and ends together. This was problematic as my superglue gel didn’t want to hold it, so I left it overnight and strengthened it yesterday with epoxy. Then I added the roof with epoxy and dropped the Hornby bogies into the clip on underframe. So I now have a rolling chassis. What a delightfully simple kit! It will take a lot of finishing as I have to source most of the underframe/ buffers etc. And those couplings will need replacing! I intend it to form part of one of my pre mark 1 outer suburban rakes - either the teak 1948 version which is usually hauled by an Atlantic or the crimson 1952 version. Does anyone care to offer an opinion on whether these vehicles would have been in teak or coach brown in 1948? Finally, the Isinglass drawing references a photo in Locomotives Illustrated 67 (page 21). I have this mag somewhere but can’t put my hands on it. If anyone has a copy available could I ask whether the photo is worth a major search of my mag stash? Andy
×
×
  • Create New...