Wright writes.....

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Scottish kits

I read that as kilts...

[St Enodoc]

10 hours ago, uax6 said:

so totally lost in the kitchen.

I'm quite sure that Mo prefers it that way.

[60027Merlin]

More kit building, it seems to never end.

 

43 years separate these two from Nu-Cast, one from 1979 and then 2021/22.

 

 

 

[Chas Levin]

23 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I read that as kilts...

Oh - you mean unpowered, with nothing underneath?

[Iain.d]

It seems a little quiet around here at the moment, so I thought I'd take the liberty of filling the silence!

 

A week or two back I showed the start on a couple of Slater’s MR cattle wagons that I bought from the marketplace on RMWeb; I can’t remember who the seller was, or if they read this thread, sorry.

 

I’ve done one in MR grey, circa 1921, for a small S&D based project I have in mind. It’s quite clean – there is a picture of this wagon on the internet in immaculate condition, probably newly in service. At some point, I will weather this one a bit and add some limewash streaks. The other is done in LMS bauxite and representing the early 1950s with a bit more weathering and generally more tired looking. Both have Gibson sprung buffers and Roxey screw couplings.

 

Wagons seem to be my thing at the moment and doing the last few builds caused me to dig through some long unopened boxes of stock I made (and packed away) in the early 1990s. They’re all Parkside Dundas, bought from Harburn Hobbies in Edinburgh; my recollection was that they were poorly made, but to be honest, I don't think they are that bad! But I thought over the next few months I'll see if I can pick them off one or two at a time and refurbish and improve them. All the box vans are different types and I’ll go back a few pages on this thread and see if I can work out what I have from those discussions.

 

 

And in the bottom of the box there were two part built LMS 3 plank opens and a complete one. I’ll probably do one LMS fitted, one LMS unfitted and a BR build fitted and 'load' one with a container and another with the proverbial piece of farm machinery!

 

 

And I’ve also made inroads into preparing a Comet Coaches Stove R and a BR Mk 1 Restaurant Unclassified for building, so plenty to keep me occupied for a while.

 

Kind regards,

 

Iain

Edited April 1, 2022 by Iain.d
Capital letter missing. Reload Photos

[Barry Ten]

In the same spirit, here's a bit more progress on my Princess

 

 

Rummaging through my sets of castings, I found some nice Crownline parts for the pipework behind the rear truck. I think they came from one of those bargain bins at model shows, always worth a look. They were marked as being for Duchesses but they looked very similar to the stuff on Princesses so I gladly made use of them, adjusting them slightly to allow enough clearance for the rear wheels to swing. On my curves, they have to be able to swing out from beneath the frame extensions so the axlebox castings are filed well back as well. I don't think it shows when everything's painted black, though. Front steps were made up from plastic sheet, replacing an earlier set which were damaged when I tried to relocate them. I still have to make some balance weights as there were none on the etch. Then it's just some minor detailing and cosmetic work to be done, including some relining here and there. I have some etched plates waiting for when the loco's finished.

 

Princesses don't really fit into my usual GWR/SR/S&DJR modelling themes but I've always felt they were magnificent, so no excuses needed for giving them (and Duchesses) the occasional running turn.

 

Al

Edited February 13, 2022 by Barry Ten
gramma

[john new]

With the recent concentration on wagons I am thinking of adding a timber plank load to enhance an r-t-r 13T wooden bodied open. I believe the Oxford one to be a general wagon not a minerals wagon. I have looked at p26 of the loading guide at http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/Booklet_BR20426_Issue.pdf so can see how to rope it.

 

What I can’t find anywhere on line is a guide to what a standard length of timber would be likely to be when going from sawmill to builders depot. Were there standard widths, thicknesses and lengths? 

Edited February 14, 2022 by john new

[Jeepy]

10 hours ago, john new said:

With the recent concentration on wagons I am thinking of adding a timber plank load to enhance an r-t-r 13 wooden bodied open. I believe the Oxford one to be a general wagon not a minerals wagon. I have looked at p26 of the loading guide at http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/Booklet_BR20426_Issue.pdf so can see how to rope it.

 

What I can’t find anywhere on line is a guide to what a standard length of timber would be likely to be when going from sawmill to builders depot. Were there standard widths, thicknesses and lengths? 

Hello John, 

 

I don't know if this helps but may give a rough idea! When I've purchased timber from my local timber merchants for building decking for the garden etc the longest whole lengths of any size of timber they could supply seemed to be 5.3 Metres, wether that was for the framework or the deck boards. 

I always tried to have the least amount of joins possible! 

That's going by today's standards of course and I'm guessing in the period you're modelling it would have been Feet and Inches, i expect it also depends on the type of tree it was 'hewn' from at the saw mill and the longest straight lengths they could get from the trunk, just some thoughts that's all! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

[Tony Wright]

What a fantastic time we had at Doncaster over the weekend!

 

May I thank all those with whom I spoke and many, many thanks to those who bought models I had for sale on behalf of a bereaved family or charity (everything went!)? I managed to fix a few things (though one chap who brought a DCC diesel along for me to look at must have thought me rather rude when I refused to even do that!); thanks to those who donated generously because of my getting things going again, and for those who just donated to CRUK. Mo and I have yet to tot everything up, but it's a fair bit.

 

I managed to take some more shots of Grantham for BRM. 

 

These are from an earlier occasion.............

 

 

 

 

Obviously, any pictures from the weekend will be embargoed until BRM publishes the forthcoming articles.

 

However, I won't be submitting the picture below, because I have a much better one of the same scene.

 

 

I actually built the V2 (from a Jamieson kit) which Geoff Haynes painted so well. It's now one of the Grantham team's property.

 

I hardly had chance to look around (but, thank goodness for someone selling metal loco kits - South Eastern Finecast). 

 

One layout I'd taken pictures of previously was Little Salkeld.

 

 

 

A beautiful example of what N Gauge track could (and should) look like.

 

Finally, may I please thank the BRM exhibitions' team for putting on such a great event at Doncaster? A brave decision, given the circumstances, but it certainly paid off.

 

Shows are back! 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by Tony Wright
to clarify a point

[john new]

7 hours ago, Jeepy said:

Hello John, 

 

I don't know if this helps but may give a rough idea! When I've purchased timber from my local timber merchants for building decking for the garden etc the longest whole lengths of any size of timber they could supply seemed to be 5.3 Metres, wether that was for the framework or the deck boards. 

I always tried to have the least amount of joins possible! 

That's going by today's standards of course and I'm guessing in the period you're modelling it would have been Feet and Inches, i expect it also depends on the type of tree it was 'hewn' from at the saw mill and the longest straight lengths they could get from the trunk, just some thoughts that's all! 

 

Best wishes, 

 

Jim. 

Thanks, the local stores all seem to advertise 2.4m (just under 8ft in old money) but that wouldn’t overhang a wagon so obviously at least some of it used to be shipped longer. I will cut a few coffee stirrers to 64mm (16ft equiv) and see how they look. I have also just remembered a couple of people I know worked in management at Hull & Goole docks before retirement, they may remember what length Baltic timber loads came in at.

 

Update: Finding out  fair bit today for a follow up post. One of those, seems a simple question until you sift the answers!
 

Edited February 14, 2022 by john new

[St Enodoc]

49 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

One layout I'd taken pictures of previously was Little Salkeld.

A lovely layout spoiled by the signal box nameboard. Sorry, such things just jump out at me.

[LNER4479]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

What a fantastic time we had at Doncaster over the weekend!

 

I managed to take some more shots of Grantham for BRM. 

 

Obviously, any pictures from the weekend will be embargoed until BRM publishes the forthcoming articles.

 

However, I won't be submitting the picture below, because I have a much better one of the same scene.

 

Finally, may I please thank the BRM exhibitions' team for putting on such a great event at Doncaster? A brave decision, given the circumstances, but it certainly paid off.

 

Shows are back! 

 

Thanks Tony - great to see yourself and Mo at the show and to have yourself take another comprehensive set of photos. The ones you show above make for an interesting reflection on what has been achieved since those were taken (hence the new batch)

Photo 1 - train arrived in station. Canopies now fully glazed and - more importantly - weathered. They would never be that clean in normal service! In the background, the 'old' shed building now has its inside (non-public facing) elevation detailed (as opposed to plain plywood!)

Photo 2 - 1888 demo train at South end. Both signals now have their ladders added and also weathered. The loco now carries authentic GNR style headlamps (so I'm reliably informed)

Photo 3 - Shed scene. At last(!) the long-standing mock up of the 'new' shed building has been replaced with a proper version, completed just in time for the show (never mind midnight oil, was 2am on Thursday morning when the smoke vents were stuck on)

Photo 4 - The new picture at North box. Shows the point rodding and general toning down lovely but - aarghh! - why is the new ground signal on the 'off' position?!! It's interlocked with the down main signal so as they can't be 'off' together (signalling nonsense) so not sure what's gone on there? Meanwhile, telegraph poles have sprouted - and you can see the weathered canopy fronts in the background.

 

So you can perhaps see (Tony) why the need for the new set of pictures. Thanks for all your efforts over the two sessions.

(photo as posted by OliverBytham on the Grantham thread)

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by LNER4479

[drmditch]

9 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Photo 4 - The new picture at North box. Shows the point rodding and general toning down lovely but - aarghh! - why is the new ground signal on the 'off' position?!! It's interlocked with the down main signal so as they can't be 'off' together (signalling nonsense) so not sure what's gone on there? Meanwhile, telegraph poles have sprouted - and you can see the weathered canopy fronts in the background.

 

So that's where (one of them?) was!

I nearly got near enough to see that one when someone (literally) pushed me away - and I wasn't even wearing my backpack!

Also glad to see that 3667A  doesn't look too bad!

Edited February 14, 2022 by drmditch
Spelling

[4069]

3 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

A lovely layout spoiled by the signal box nameboard. Sorry, such things just jump out at me.

Glad it's not just me that notices things like that.

[Tony Wright]

6 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

A lovely layout spoiled by the signal box nameboard. Sorry, such things just jump out at me.

I think the wrong font jumps out at most, John,

 

It did to me when I took the picture (and, I mentioned it). However, I take pictures of what's there, and it's there for all to see.

 

The overall modelling is superb, but we all have 'blind spots'.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[Tony Wright]

7 hours ago, LNER4479 said:

Thanks Tony - great to see yourself and Mo at the show and to have yourself take another comprehensive set of photos. The ones you show above make for an interesting reflection on what has been achieved since those were taken (hence the new batch)

Photo 1 - train arrived in station. Canopies now fully glazed and - more importantly - weathered. They would never be that clean in normal service! In the background, the 'old' shed building now has its inside (non-public facing) elevation detailed (as opposed to plain plywood!)

Photo 2 - 1888 demo train at South end. Both signals now have their ladders added and also weathered. The loco now carries authentic GNR style headlamps (so I'm reliably informed)

Photo 3 - Shed scene. At last(!) the long-standing mock up of the 'new' shed building has been replaced with a proper version, completed just in time for the show (never mind midnight oil, was 2am on Thursday morning when the smoke vents were stuck on)

Photo 4 - The new picture at North box. Shows the point rodding and general toning down lovely but - aarghh! - why is the new ground signal on the 'off' position?!! It's interlocked with the down main signal so as they can't be 'off' together (signalling nonsense) so not sure what's gone on there? Meanwhile, telegraph poles have sprouted - and you can see the weathered canopy fronts in the background.

 

So you can perhaps see (Tony) why the need for the new set of pictures. Thanks for all your efforts over the two sessions.

(photo as posted by OliverBytham on the Grantham thread)

 

Good evening Graham,

 

'The new picture at North box. Shows the point rodding and general toning down lovely but - aarghh! - why is the new ground signal on the 'off' position?!! It's interlocked with the down main signal so as they can't be 'off' together (signalling nonsense) so not sure what's gone on there? Meanwhile, telegraph poles have sprouted - and you can see the weathered canopy fronts in the background.'

 

Problem solved?

 

 

But is this ethical? 

 

You can't see the errant ground signal in this shot below, of course.......

 

 

On occasions, folk have expressed a preference for seeing 'everything' in a model railway shot - what's in the background as well as the layout. 

 

This would look awful published as it is. I think there might be a few hours' work in Photoshop ahead. Don't worry, it won't appear finished on here, though, I hope, it does in BRM.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[johndon]

@Tony Wright Back on 22 December, you posted a photo of the new Hornby W1 (the same post where you had a couple of photos of the rather lovely McLaren you'd had a ride in).  Do you mind if I take a copy of that photo and annotate it to highlight something (which I'll post on this thread) I've noticed with the smoke deflectors?

 

John

 

[Jesse Sim]

26 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening Graham,

 

'The new picture at North box. Shows the point rodding and general toning down lovely but - aarghh! - why is the new ground signal on the 'off' position?!! It's interlocked with the down main signal so as they can't be 'off' together (signalling nonsense) so not sure what's gone on there? Meanwhile, telegraph poles have sprouted - and you can see the weathered canopy fronts in the background.'

 

Problem solved?

 

 

But is this ethical? 

 

You can't see the errant ground signal in this shot below, of course.......

 

 

On occasions, folk have expressed a preference for seeing 'everything' in a model railway shot - what's in the background as well as the layout. 

 

This would look awful published as it is. I think there might be a few hours' work in Photoshop ahead. Don't worry, it won't appear finished on here, though, I hope, it does in BRM.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

The Wagon Meister won’t like that photo when he see’s that conflat wagon! 

Edited February 14, 2022 by Jesse Sim

[Tony Wright]

6 minutes ago, johndon said:

@Tony Wright Back on 22 December, you posted a photo of the new Hornby W1 (the same post where you had a couple of photos of the rather lovely McLaren you'd had a ride in).  Do you mind if I take a copy of that photo and annotate it to highlight something (which I'll post on this thread) I've noticed with the smoke deflectors?

 

John

 

Please, John, be my guest..........

[LNER4479]

31 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Problem solved?

 

But is this ethical? 

 

 

 

Excellent!!

 

Now, can you just adjust the lower loop of the front coupling so that it's hanging down correctly (dammit - forgot to check that one at the time), straighten out the cylinder drain pipes and ...?

 

(Hat, coat, gone)

 

[johndon]

Thanks to Tony for allowing me to use his photo to illustrate this point.

 

As has been talked about may times on this thread, we all have our different 'triggers' when it come to models whether than be missing lamps, incorrect wheelbases, missing brakes etc. there are many things that some will put up with and, for others, a model is spoilt by it.

 

The W1 has some rather large ejector pin marks from the moulding process on the inside of the smoke deflectors as highlighted in the image below:

 

 

I've not seen these mentioned anywhere else before but, for me at least, they do mar the overall finish of the loco.  This one may be because as well as railway modelling I also build plastic kits of warships and armour where these things are seen, and have to be dealt with, all the time but I can't recall ever seeing them on a model locomotive.  Of course, on a kit, you deal with them before painting but on the W1, you'd ruin the paint finish.

 

Looking at the photos of the new Hornby 9F in the latest Hornby Magazine, the smoke deflectors on that have two very noticeable ejector pin marks on each deflector.

 

I'm willing to be that most with think that this is being extremely picky but, for me at least, they jar more than the missing flanges...

 

John

 

[Tony Wright]

On 12/02/2022 at 17:01, 60027Merlin said:

More kit building, it seems to never end.

 

43 years separate these two from Nu-Cast, one from 1979 and then 2021/22.

 

 

 

Lovely models Eric,

 

Thanks for showing us.

 

I think 45 years separate these two K2 models of mine........

 

 

An original Nu-Cast K2, but on a brass, scratch-built chassis. 

 

 

Still seeing regular service on the M&GN bit of Bytham.

 

All my painting (I didn't know top pro painters back then). 

 

 

And the latest Nu-Cast Partners one; reviewed last year in BRM, Geoff Haynes painted this.

 

As he did this one..........

 

 

Four/five years ago, Ian Wilson handed over this original Nu-Cast K2 he'd started. Fortunately, it was glued together, so came apart with ease. I rebuilt it to what you see here.

 

 

It's used from time to time on Bytham.

 

I think I prefer the crisp 'look' of the London Road K2 (despite the rods not matching the frames; just a bit of work needed). 

 

 

I made this and Ian Rathbone painted it.

 

 

It's a regular runner on LB.

 

Prior to any K2 kits, it was down to scratch-building, of course.

 

 

As seen here; the work of Ray Lightfoot, now in Geoff West's possession (Geoff weathered it). 

 

Do K2s score highly on wish-lists, I wonder? They're certainly attractive 2-6-0s, and had very long lives.

 

As you've illustrated, there were the Scottish ones as well.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by Tony Wright
typo error

[FarrMan]

On 13/02/2022 at 22:20, john new said:

With the recent concentration on wagons I am thinking of adding a timber plank load to enhance an r-t-r 13T wooden bodied open. I believe the Oxford one to be a general wagon not a minerals wagon. I have looked at p26 of the loading guide at http://www.barrowmoremrg.co.uk/BRBDocuments/Booklet_BR20426_Issue.pdf so can see how to rope it.

 

What I can’t find anywhere on line is a guide to what a standard length of timber would be likely to be when going from sawmill to builders depot. Were there standard widths, thicknesses and lengths? 

Timber these days come in standard lengths with 300mm increments. I presume in pre-decimal days, that would be foot increments, starting at 6', maximum length normally available 16', though you may get specials longer. You should be able to get standard cross section sizes from the trada website, www.trada.co.uk, but I can't access it just now. Most of these are just imperial sizes rounded (usually down) to metric.

 

Lloyd

Edited February 15, 2022 by FarrMan
mistyping

[MarkC]

14 minutes ago, FarrMan said:

Timber these days come in standard lengths with 300mm increments. I presume in pre-decimal days, that would be foot increments, starting at 6', maximum length normally available 16', though you may get specials longer. You should be able to get standard cross section sizes from the trada website, www.trada.co.uk, but I can't access it just now. Most of these are just imperial sizes rounded (usually down) to metric.

 

Lloyd

Many years ago - in 1979, to be exact - I went along to my then local timber yard with a cutting list for timber & chipboard to build some baseboards. I said that I wanted some 2 x 1 planed timber and... I was stopped at this point by the assistant. who told my, very seriously, that timber was now metric, and so I would get 50 x 25...

 

OK, I said, no problem. I'll need some 50 x 25... I was stopped again, in mid flow, as it were. The next line, I will never forget - OK, how many feet length?

 

I didn't know whether to laugh, cry, or look for a suitably solid object to beat my head against...

[TrevorP1]

2 minutes ago, MarkC said:

Many years ago - in 1979, to be exact - I went along to my then local timber yard with a cutting list for timber & chipboard to build some baseboards. I said that I wanted some 2 x 1 planed timber and... I was stopped at this point by the assistant. who told my, very seriously, that timber was now metric, and so I would get 50 x 25...

 

OK, I said, no problem. I'll need some 50 x 25... I was stopped again, in mid flow, as it were. The next line, I will never forget - OK, how many feet length?

 

I didn't know whether to laugh, cry, or look for a suitably solid object to beat my head against...

 

Yes, I remember those days!