Wright writes.....

[jwealleans]

Apologies for a slight thread diversion, but, Brian, you'll find this very debate in the Peterborough North thread, several months back.  I think Gilbert settled on weathered lamps with handles removed and it has made a difference.

[ROY@34F]

Re.the A4 discussion , and the flat cylinder side covers . I improved my Hornby engines by filing the rivets flat and rounding the bottom edge more , and then making some overlays out of  5 thou. brass sheet , punching rivets on , and of course curving the bottom considerably more than the original . Sticking them on with superglue . Being very thin , the brass springs off if you remove the top . On re-fitting , you just have to prise them out a bit to clip back on . I can't post a picture , as I'm nowhere near clever enough ! but I think it's quite an improvement .

Nobody's mentioned Martin Finney's A4 . I personally think it is very good , indeed I bought one many years ago , just before Hornby brought out their excellent new version ! so I've never got it built yet...maybe never will , though I would still like to . His version looks good in the wrap-around cylinder area , and I asked him once at an exhibition how the top lifts off . He explained that the cab end is lifted up first , such that it will then slide forward at the cyl. end . So it does'nt exactly lift off at the front , rather slides off forward . Rather ingenious I thought .

Thanks for your , as ever , interesting scribblings , Tony .

Roy.

[coachmann]

An interesting string of A4 pictures Tony. Thanks for taking the trouble.  When I mentioned the cylinder curvature I had thought the body could be split above the cylinders, and so it was interesting to see it had already been done by Crownline and Bachmann. Sliding the body forward off the chassis aka Finney was also a good idea.

Edited December 5, 2013 by coachmann

[Buhar]

I can hardly differentiate between them, I'm not even sure those differences Tony describes would warrant a sub-class on the LNER. I think the superb paint jobs help in that regard.

 

This notion of layout models interests me,but I think it might depend on the size of the thing. Whizzing past on the ECML creates a different feel from a more intimate setting. And then the whole thing depends on balance, a Finney high detail would look incongruous alongside Hornby MkIs (or should that be the other way round).

[Tony Wright]

An interesting string of A4 pictures Tony. Thanks for taking the trouble.  When I mentioned the cylinder curvature I had thought the body could be split above the cylinders, and so it was interesting to see it had already been done by Crownline and Bachmann. Sliding the body forward off the chassis aka Finney was also a good idea.

 

Larry, thanks for your thanks. It's only the Bachmann A4 with my chassis which splits above the cylinders. The Bachmann A4 with its original chassis splits by keeping its cylinder sides, and doesn't have the bases turned-in enough, as I hope the following picture of 60034 before its originally chassis disintegrated shows. Crownline only referred to the tender.  

 

 

 

 

The Finney A4 was mentioned - the Rolls Royce of 4mm A4s? However, since I've never seen one running on a layout, I've never been able to photograph one. However, its equal must have been the Pro-Scale product, though it took a lot of building and bad language to complete. Here's one of Haymarket's finest in full cry. Mick Peabody of Wolves MRC started it and I finished it off, with Ian Rathbone completing the painting. The cylinder sides are attached to the body but because they're so springy (thin brass, like the whole loco/tender body), they can be rounded at the bottom and the frames jiggled in.

 

In answer to another query, this loco is fitted with filed-down Smith's headlamps complete with wire-added handles. Worth it? They're the Devil to keep upright, though!

 

 

In a layout setting, the Hornby A4 (with a few mods) looks quite at home.

 

 

 

 

Most of my A4s are Wills/SE Finecast - they pre-date Hornby and Bachmann by quite some time. Though, as already mentioned, they're a bit lumpy by the best's standards, with a pro' paint job they look the part, especially as 'layout' locos where their haulage capacity is prodigious. And, because the body comes off above the cylinders, their bottoms are rounded. In the shot of 60030, the lamps have been weathered. I have to say, despite their being (a bit) overscale, loco lamps (and tail lamps) are a must for any working model railway. In fairness as well, like lots of things, they stand out more prominently in pictures, especially bright white.  

 

 

Finally, an honorary A4, the W1. I built this from the SE Finecast product and IR painted it. Though the cylinder sides do turn in at the bottom, I have to say (other than the painting), a more accurate job can be made from a Hornby/Graeme King meld.

 

All these pictures show the locos working on Stoke Summit from Wolverhampton MRC, now retired (having done over 70 shows) from the circuit.

 

I hope I've answered the queries and questions.

[Guest 2750]

A wonderful collection of photographs and modelling Tony.

I do think the Hornby A4 is a stunning bit of locomotive and seems to capture that front end look spot on. Was this tooled before laser scanning?

 

I currently have a Garter Blue Kingfisher with 1928 Corridor Tender. Shortly she is to become sister Haymarket locomotive, Merlin.

Edited December 6, 2013 by 2750

[Nimbus]

60024 Pro-Scale.jpg

 

The Finney A4 was mentioned - the Rolls Royce of 4mm A4s? However, since I've never seen one running on a layout, I've never been able to photograph one. However, its equal must have been the Pro-Scale product, though it took a lot of building and bad language to complete. Here's one of Haymarket's finest in full cry. Mick Peabody of Wolves MRC started it and I finished it off, with Ian Rathbone completing the painting. The cylinder sides are attached to the body but because they're so springy (thin brass, like the whole loco/tender body), they can be rounded at the bottom and the frames jiggled in.

 

Here's a shot of Chris Pendlenton's 'Kingfisher', as found adorning Martin Finney's web catalogue:

 

http://website.lineone.net/~cbwesson/4mm%20A4%20Pendlenton.jpg

 

Martin did tell me he was allowed to erect a gantry over a preserved A4 and measure offsets, to capture the true shape. I can't fault it!

 

The Nim.

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

By 'eck Nim, that Finney A4 is a stunner and no mistake.  The Many A4s of Mr Wright (now that's a book I'd pay to read) are good but that's sublime.  

[Tony Wright]

By 'eck Nim, that Finney A4 is a stunner and no mistake.  The Many A4s of Mr Wright (now that's a book I'd pay to read) are good but that's sublime.  

 

It's good; very, very good, and in an entirely different league to anything I've ever nailed together. However, do check the livery details. Along with 60019, 60024 was unusual in having its firebox cladding band lined (the result of an 'unofficial' patch-painting very late in its life). Thus, to have this feature, it should be fitted with electric warning flashes, and, probably, a non-streamlined corridor tender. Though it's impossible to tell from the model, by then it was no longer shedded at Haymarket. Also, please note the cabside detail. Either the numbers are too low or the worksplate is too high up for there's nowhere near enough space between the two. It's probably as a result of the top horizontal lining band being a bit too low. Though the model is way beyond my capabilities, I don't think the painting is in Mr Rathbone's class.

 

Now, I await the photographic evidence to prove my observations wrong.

 

Many thanks for the interest.  

[micklner]

Tony

        Hadnt noticed it before you mentioned it.

       To me the Cab Windows look too deep, look at the depth from the top of the cutout to the handrail,  hence this causes the problems with numbers and lining being pushed together.

        Did you see my comments on previous page re the Golden Age A4?.

[coachmann]

 I don't think the painting is in Mr Rathbone's class. 

The lining looks raised and has the characteristics of transfer lining with perfect corners. I appreciate more the Hornby A4 now after looking at all those models. Some of those A4's do not have waisted  'cladding' below the boiler centre line.

[Guest 2750]

And with some delicate weathering, can really enhance the Hornby model in my opinion, (hope you don't mind me posting it Tony).

 

 

 

Hornby got the A4 very right personally, and it's just annoying the recent  Commonwealth of Australia has oversized cab numbers and odd nameplate font. Doesn't really matter though, as it just means I have an excuse to personalise my model.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2013 by 2750

[Tony Wright]

By 'eck Nim, that Finney A4 is a stunner and no mistake.  The Many A4s of Mr Wright (now that's a book I'd pay to read) are good but that's sublime.  

Sorry to be a further pedant, but 60024's corridor tender should have the flange at the base of the soleplate (which previously carried the stainless steel strip) for the period depicted (actually, always). This resulted in an apparently greater depth to the tender sides (though it was really below the soleplate), meaning you couldn't see the ends of the triangular supports. See LNER Pacifics in Colour by Derek Penney, pages 22 and 23. Under a powerful glass it's just possible to tell that the firebox is lined (but I have the eyes of a pensioner!), but both pictures show the loco with less than a year to live. Either way, the electric warning flashes are present and (on the offside at least), the worksplates have been removed. By 1966, the nearside one had gone as well. It looks to me that the Finney A4 represents, with the firebox cladding band lined, 1965/'66, but without the warning flashes and with the worksplates - a bit anomalous, but still a beautiful piece of building. 

 

Having written this, I'm more and more aware of how geekish I've become. Perhaps it's all those hours of study under the Irwell whip, poring over hundreds of pictures of LNER Pacifics, trying to decide date and location. Frequently, some of the evidence is contradictory (particularly scribbled comments on the backs of prints) but you just have to do what you can.  

 

And, please, post as many A4 pictures as you like. 

 

My thanks to all those who've responded. 

[Dr Gerbil-Fritters]

wouldn't it be nice if we could salute the anonymous designers and Chinese engineers who gave us Hornby's A3 and A4.... difficult beasts to get right, and we have two super models at affordable prices.  

 

I'd  like a few, but I think Tom has cornered the ebay market....

Edited December 6, 2013 by Dr Gerbil-Fritters

[micklner]

Hornby renamed etc to Dominion of Canada with added flange to bottom of the Tender Soleplate carrying the Chrome lining.

 

[Tony Wright]

I prefer the look of the Hornby version.  Perhaps the valve gear on Dwight could be gently persuaded to go a bit lower? they can easily get bent same on A3's where they can leave a pronounced gap between the valve gear and the footplate.

 

The Golden Age version for the price  has a very spindly looking Ashpan lever and the Oil Lubricator drive looks most odd does it work ? it looks like it has been damaged and repaired ? Would the Cylinder Draincocks been still bent ?

Lastly Cabside wind defectors slightly  bizarre shape?

 

 

Nice models.

Sorry Mick - missed this before.

 

Yes, the lubricator drive on the GA A4 works (in a model sense), though it does look a bit bent. The loco's also (just about) in reverse gear; compare this with the ones I've built. So, unless you're blind to such things and have a really healthy bank balance, I'd buy Hornby A4s, and push the end of the slidebars down a bit.

[Tony Wright]

Just out of further interest (I hope) and in correspondence with a friend, it would appear that three A4s latterly had their firebox cladding bands lined - 60019, 60024 and 60034. All three received latter day repairs (from late '64 onwards) at Darlington, so perhaps the lined firebox bands were done there. However, 60009 was shopped at Darlington at the same time and had a plain band, and the A4s latterly shopped in Scotland at Cowlairs or Inverurie also had plain firebox bands. In every case, electric warning flashes were present. Towards the end, 60019's parabolic lining was also different, plunging into the footplate rather than running along its top. 

 

Is any of this important?

[Mallard60022]

Lovely discussion. I had to go to Retford this afternoon just to check that Bittern was the right shape; it was and bl**dy damn good it looked too, having already achieved 90mph between York and Donny. In discussion with 'staff' it was due to pass Mr Wright's at about 90 as well; hope you 'spotted' it Tony?

Phil

[Tony Wright]

Lovely discussion. I had to go to Retford this afternoon just to check that Bittern was the right shape; it was and bl**dy damn good it looked too, having already achieved 90mph between York and Donny. In discussion with 'staff' it was due to pass Mr Wright's at about 90 as well; hope you 'spotted' it Tony?

Phil

 

Near 90 I'd say, just in the gloamin', silhouetted against the western sky. And all from the comfort of one of the back bedrooms. 

[gwrrob]

Sorry to hijack this thread Tony but I'm interested in your fixed raked coaches and the connections between them.I know you use a soldered wire hook and a bar but how do you fix them to plastic bogies where you can't use a soldering iron.Is there a glue strong enough for a layout use rake being pulled.I have a rake of the old Airfix/Mainline siphons and want to get the gangways nearly touching if possible.

[Nimbus]

Near 90 I'd say, just in the gloamin', silhouetted against the western sky. And all from the comfort of one of the back bedrooms. 

 

Anyone know what happened between Connington and Hitchin?

It was RT at Connington, then the scheduled 30 minutes to Hitchin turned into 67

 

The Nim.

[brossard]

Sorry to hijack this thread Tony but I'm interested in your fixed raked coaches and the connections between them.I know you use a soldered wire hook and a bar but how do you fix them to plastic bogies where you can't use a soldering iron.Is there a glue strong enough for a layout use rake being pulled.I have a rake of the old Airfix/Mainline siphons and want to get the gangways nearly touching if possible.

 

Rob, Tony shows how to do this in Right Track 4,  http://www.model-railway-dvd.co.uk/right_track4.php

 

I was very inspired and have modified my coach rakes with these couplings.  I still use Kadees at the brake ends for coupling to locos.  I have some articles about how I did this but I don't want to tread on toes.

 

John

[Tony Wright]

Sorry to hijack this thread Tony but I'm interested in your fixed raked coaches and the connections between them.I know you use a soldered wire hook and a bar but how do you fix them to plastic bogies where you can't use a soldering iron.Is there a glue strong enough for a layout use rake being pulled.I have a rake of the old Airfix/Mainline siphons and want to get the gangways nearly touching if possible.

Robin,

           I'm always slightly puzzled when people apologise for 'hijacking' a thread. In my case there really is no need, for, if I can help anyone with 'my' ideas, it's my privilege.

 

I claim nothing original, and most of my modelling life I've spent plagiarising other folk's ideas, adapting them and altering them to suit. This is true for my style of carriage coupling. Even though, as far as I know, it's unique, the principle comes from a couple of sources. The first was a rigid, lost-wax assembly where the screw coupling and dual pipes were made as one piece. The idea was that it was fixed underneath one carriage on a pivot and the adjacent carriage 'coupled' up by having a hole in its floor to take a peg at the other end of the assembly. The position of the hole from the headstock was dependent on the curves of the layout on which the carriage was to run. Who manufactured it, I don't know. Iain Rice made up similar thing with a 'paddle' of some sort to engage behind the headstock of the next carriage.

 

A screw coupling is fine for less-enlightened real railways' methods of coupling carriages but gangwayed LNER carriages, Pullmans and gangwayed BR Mk.1s all used buckeye couplings. So, to represent these one could use Kadees (is that how you spell it?), but these don't have a representation of the vacuum brake/steam heating pipes - just a curved bit on each knuckle hanging down for uncoupling purposes. Though expensive, they seem to work well but in the middle of the bufferbeam of a BR steam/diesel/electric loco/steam loco's tender, they just look awful (apart from on a corridor tender behind an A4). However, the system does allow semi-automatic coupling/uncoupling, but for other than those vehicles already mentioned, Kadees are incorrect for steam age British practice. On a layout where carriage stock does not need to be split (Stoke Summit; Charwelton) buckeyes are not necessary, apart from as 'dummy' hanging-down items on the rear vehicle of a train.

 

In principle, I dislike all forms of proprietary couplings, especially tension-locks. Why? For one, even the most discreet look ghastly and two, on carriages (in the main), they're attached to the bogies. In my experience this is not good practice for two reasons. One; does any real carriage pull another via its bogies? Two; if a train 'snatches' in any way there's a tendency for the bogie-mounted couplings to lift the bogie, thus causing derailments. I know some more recent RTR carriages pull each other by an extending system using a collar around the bogie pivot. Bachmann gives you a sort of twin pipe coupling to fix in the NEM pockets in substitution of tension-locks but you have to have a whole train upside down to couple it all up. Hornby's are better in this respect (the sort supplied with their LMR carriages) but they don't always couple up properly, especially on a curve. I've also had both systems come apart in use, so don't use them. 

 

So, I make my own. I've described it before (probably on this thread) but I've included a couple of further pictures in explanation. Its 100% reliable, costs pence to make, works by pulling off (or just behind) the headstocks and looks 'reasonably' realistic as trains sweep by. All you need is some PCB copper strip, 30 AMP fusewire and some .45mm nickel silver or brass wire, superglue and soldering equipment. The 'hook' needs to be set dependent on your layout's curves and each carriage merely piggy-backs on to the one in front. Obviously, no separation of vehicles can take place (other than by hand) but for fixed rakes, for my use, it's perfect. As for coupling to the loco, I use a discreet goalpost underneath the loco tender's bufferbeam, bent up to buffer height but include a scale shackle as well for coupling to other types of stock.

 

 

 

 

In the February 2014 issue of BRM I describe fully (once more, but there are always new readers) how I make these couplings in a piece explaining how I 'improve' Hornby's latest Mk.1s.

 

Sorry for the protracted length of this reply, but I hope it all makes sense, and, please, hijack away!   

[Tony Wright]

Rob, Tony shows how to do this in Right Track 4,  http://www.model-railway-dvd.co.uk/right_track4.php

 

I was very inspired and have modified my coach rakes with these couplings.  I still use Kadees at the brake ends for coupling to locos.  I have some articles about how I did this but I don't want to tread on toes.

 

John

John,

         Please, tread away....................

[brossard]

Thanks Tony.

 

This discusses corridors and couplings, a couple of particular bugbears for me:

 

  http://preview.tinyurl.com/k4m6z68
 

Oh and yes I know you can get black paper but when the muse struck, I didn't have any.  I didn't do the vacuum pipes at this time.  Later on I did do them and here's the result: 

 

 

This shows a Bachmann GUV, x LMS BG, TPO, Mk 1 BG and Hornby x LMS BSK.  Note the Kadees at the ends.

 

In my case I got the copper wire from an artist's supplies shop.  The only drawback is that is coated and must be scraped before soldering.

 

 

Side view which really shows how effective this simple idea is.

 

These couplings really do work although I did have to do some adjusting to ensure that the hook length was optimum.  The method helps with propelling as well.  For corridors, the coaches push each other on the gangways, not the bogies.  For non-corridors I added an extra wire on the loop for the hook to push against - this prevents buffer lock.

 

Apologies for the hijack Tony, I hope you are heartened that some folk do take heed of your advice.

 

John

Edited May 6, 2020 by brossard