t-b-g

Mixing different wheel profiles on the same track is one of those areas where what should work and what does work are two quite different things. On The late Peter Denny's Buckingham (which is 4mm scale EM gauge although it doesn't have an narrow gauge element) has wheels varying from old 1950s Triang plastic ones opened up to EM by being glued further apart on metal axles, Stewart Reidpath brass wheels with enormous flanges and other historical monstrosities through to modern Alan Gibson wheels on some of the later wagons. As a fairly experienced modeller, I personally would not expect that mix to work. But it does. Superbly. OK there is the odd bump at a crossing here or there, which is usually down to poor alignment through the crossing nose and which can usually be got rid of by adjusting the track. If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes, I wouldn't have believed that it was possible to run that variety of wheels on the same layout without it being a disaster..

It is one of those things that has to be down to the personal choice of the individual, whether or not they feel that putting heavy duty bogies on when appropriate is worth the effort. The error is around 25% of the depth of the main bogie side frame. That 25% is only about 1mm on the model. A few years ago, RTR models were produced with totally wrong bogies, with BR bogies appearing under LMS vehicles etc. I like to think that we have moved on from those days but perhaps this is one area where modellers can have some personal input and make their RTR model a little bit better than it was when it came out of the box.

Out of interest, would you say that Leicester South ever gets operated between exhibitions apart from for testing and operator training? Or is it more of an exhibition layout, designed to have a good amount of "action" for viewers?

To me, the interesting part of the operation would be bringing the train into the platform, detaching the loco and drawing it forward, having the van attached by the pilot and then either re-attaching the train loco or possibly replacing it with a different one. Leicester Central was one of the few places that does tick most of the boxes for me as a prototype location but even then it would need to be as long as Little Bytham plus a bit more to get some curves round, 6ft wide and yet has virtually no goods facilities at the station. I did start designing an EM layout a few years ago but it was too ambitious in terms of space and scope. It would only ever have been operated at exhibitions and now that I have a layout that is great fun to operate set up at home, I prefer to work on that rather than layouts that will only ever work maybe a dozen times.

I know that a number of people have the recreation of a real location as a cornerstone of their hobby but I have never felt that way. Most of my layouts have had to be built in a restricted space and the number of real places that could be properly represented in that space, without severe compromise and with enough operational interest to make it seem a worthwhile project and which cover prototypes that would interest me is nil. The only one that has been reasonably close to a real place was "Tickhill & Wadworth" but I found the restrictions on what ran there in real life meant that it could never keep me interested as a layout for operation at home. A couple of days at a show two or three times a year was enough. Even that had visible tight curves and restrictions on train lengths that many would not be happy with. So I take real buildings and scenes and create a "might have been" or suchlike to fit the available space, giving thought to possible train moves and operation in the design of the track plan, which should be done with regard for prototype practice. I have had the pleasure of operating a great many layouts over the years and all the ones that I have found interesting to operate, with enough variety in locos, stock and types of movements taking place, have all been based on fictitious locations. To me, good and interesting operation is not about whether a particular carriage was in that actual train formation with that actual loco on a particular day. It is more a case of what platform does it come in on? Does it terminate or go through? Is the pilot loco in position to remove the van from the rear? Is the track to the turntable free and is there another loco available ready to take the train out again? Having said that, I would never suggest for one moment that everybody should feel the same way as me or that other types of layout and operation are not satisfying to others.

Regarding building locos from plastic I have tried it myself quite a few years ago and although it worked and looked reasonable, it didn't quite have the finesse of a metal loco as the materials used had to be thicker than scale to have any strength at all. On some parts, this doesn't matter but when it comes to cab side sheets and footsteps, it was enough to bother me. There is one plastic loco running on Buckingham as Peter Denny built a 4-4-2T to try the new material out. The loco has to be 50 plus years old and is as structurally sound as the day it was built but I really don't want to find out the hard way that the material has gone brittle, like other old plasticard models I have seen. Some of the older plastic carriages only need a touch and thinner parts like window pillars snap. On Buckingham, the date is set at 1907 and as far as I know, everything that runs on the layout is in a condition that it could have been in at that date. For my own modelling, I have a bit of a less restrictive view. I like the early GCR carriage livery of brown & cream but I also like some of the later locos, such as "Valour", which were built long after the livery changed to teak/brown. I am quite happy to use Tony Ws notion that as long as the railway infrastructure hasn't altered drastically (although things like road vehicles and civilian fashions may give things away) then as long as a loco is hauling appropriate carriages and doesn't appear on the layout at the same time as another train that could not have existed alongside it, then I will live with it! I just need to build them all now. Tony G

Well, they are going to have trouble putting together a "highlights" DVD to sell, even if they have the footage from the entire tournament. Is it just me being a grumpy old git or was the whole thing the worst advert for football ever? Mind you, it was a bit off asking all those millionaires to give up their summer holidays by asking them to train and play a few more matches. I reckon they responded accordingly as most of them looked as if they would rather be elsewhere.

I think I should probably point out that Tony Wright's stories are first hand, things he saw with his own eyes. Mine have had to be told to me by others. Unlike Tony W, I wasn't there to see them for myself. You are quite right though. It is tales like those that make me want to recreate the scene in 4mm scale by making models of the vehicles involved, rather than just waiting to see what scenes I can recreate using whatever Bachmann/Hornby etc. choose to supply.

One that could appear on your layout Tony is the one I built for Retford. It was an ex MSLR 4 wheeler (as now preserved by the VCT on the KWVR) and it used to work between the S & T facilities at Retford and Peterborough. It used to be attached to passenger trains as it often carried fragile items and they didn't want it being shunted roughly on a goods service. I don't seem to be able to find a photo of it lettered but here is a snap of it finished apart from transfers. I found some suitable ones in the Modelmaster range. Tony G

According to Dow Volume 3 the Baldwin would have had 100 tons available for adhesion on the driving axles and a Tractive Effort of just over 56,000lbs. A later Robinson design also shown in the book was heavier and more powerful. There were several very ambitious schemes, more than a fair share involving Sam fay and the GCR, that just turned out to be impractical given the facilities available. If the locos had been built and the 100 bogie wagon trains become reality, they would have been impossible to handle with the facilities available at the time. Rather like the 100 wagon (traditional 4 wheelers) worked by the P1 class on the ECML, they were a good idea but rather ahead of their time. 100 years later the railways are just about able to cope with such trains but back then, it was just too much. The bogie coal wagons were put into traffic branded for loco coal from the outset, so I am not sure that they were initially intended for coal exports. maybe the plan was to use them once the facilities were upgraded but that is conjecture on my part. But they were fitted and even the wildest idea of a 2-10-2 blasting along at 50 or 60 mph with 100 bogie wagons is quite something.

Fair enough. In my memory, I have a recollection of reading something about Robinson proposals which included the 2-10-2 and a banker and in my head the two merged into one. I have seen Graeme's loco and wagons in the flesh and they are really very well done and fascinating models. Some of the bogie coal wagons had a very long life, having been sold on to the coal industry and some were in use at Markham Main Colliery (called Markham Main but actually at Armthorpe near Doncaster) right through the 70s and possibly the 80s. The colliery closed in 1992 and although I didn't go there and see them myself after the early 80s, there is a possibility that these GCR wagons were in use there right up until closure. Perhaps some expert can confirm? If I had known what they were (a friend told me long after the pit had gone) I would have had my camera out!

It was a Baldwin design 2-10-2 that Robinson of the GCR had a look at as a possible banker for a certain hill that ended up eventually with the LNER U1. Robinson had visited the USA and had picked up a few ideas. I have seen a weight diagram type drawing somewhere but I can't recall just where. Tony

Is it a trick of the light or a reflection thing or are the cab side, splashers and cylinders really a different colour green compared with the rest of the loco?

I can't say that I am a huge fan of Chris Evans but I would say echo the comment above that he does seem to have a knack of making things happen and on his radio show (which I don't listen to for more than half an hour two or three times a week) I have got to the stage where I can enjoy him in that quantity. I really don't think that anybody can last as long as he has in this type of business (plus he seems to have done OK financially - if a bit up and down over the years) without having some talent or ability. The problem is that it is pretty much impossible for anybody in the entertainment industry to be liked and have their talent appreciated by everybody. There are some performers/presenters that are possibly less polarising than others but the ones who don't polarise opinions tend to be the most bland and boring ones. If you don't like Chris Evans, it is quite possible to avoid him by turning over when he comes on, whether it be the telly or the radio. My prediction is that whoever takes over as the lead presenter, there will be pages of posts on here complaining about it.

It says something about their priorities when the BBC website gives far greater prominence to the host of a TV show stepping down than it does to a certain politician doing the same, which could, arguably, be slightly more of a significant event in the big scheme of things.

There is no rule or regulation that I am aware of that prevents a private individual putting on a model railway exhibition as a means of earning themselves some money. It is no more or less of an acceptable way to earn a living as many others. What I do think is that if an exhibition is being arranged on this basis, then the organisers should be honest and up front about it. They shouldn't pretend that they are representing some model railway club that may not exist. Many modellers are very happy to give up a large chunk of their time to help fund a model railway club or a preservation society. I have said it before on other threads but in my view, the exhibition diary is now about as full as it needs to be. There are not enough layouts and traders to fill more exhibition halls and keep things at a reasonable quality level. My beef about shows being run by individuals or, for that matter businesses, is that modellers are expected to become, in effect, unpaid employees of that person/organisation for the weekend plus preparation and travelling time. We basically give up our time to help an individual or a business to line their pockets. I don't mind doing it to help a non profit organisation like a club or a society but I feel more and more uncomfortable about doing it to boost the profits/income of an individual or a business. As a visitor I will only ever attend a certain number of shows each year and a good many people I know are the same, so adding new shows to the diary means that we would choose between going to the old one or the new one but not both. So I am not sure that each new show that appears increases or improves the hobby. I reckon it just dilutes it and takes money away from the true "club" shows. I do take a balanced view on such things and have reconciled that for things like the Warners shows, at least they are run in conjunction with various model railway clubs who do benefit but I am not their biggest fan. Every week I get several clothes collection bags delivered, each one purporting to represent a charity. Each and every one is a business pretending to be a charity when you read the small print, donating a fraction of what they earn. I do hope that same sort of thing isn't coming into the world of model railways.

I decided before the match that Iceland should probably come onto the pitch wearing yellow strip so they actually looked like banana skins. Have been bored witless by the insipid performances in the previous games I decided to spend the evening in the shed doing some modelling and listening to the radio with a view to dashing in to watch a replay if anything good happened. What a great result. The main parts of one complex bracket signal nearly finished with hardly an interruption. The commentary on the radio was priceless, with everybody getting more and more wound up as the game went on. Well played Iceland. You froze us out! At least it is only a game of football and nothing important.

I agree entirely. I was just responding to a comment asking why would you want a pony truck by saying that some railways did want one. The LNWR went the other way and rebuilt some 2-8-0 locos as 0-8-0 types. The Q6 was indeed a design that was entirely suited to the job it was built for and their long life with very little alteration after many years of hard slogging work has to be proof of that.

You seem to be taking the "If I build something Hornby/Bachmann etc. will bring a RTR one out" to a new level. I dare them.......

The GCR did it with the development of the Q4 into the O4 and that seemed to do OK (I have used the LNER classes as most people won't know the GCR ones).

Realising and accepting that our hobby is one undertaken mainly by those of a certain age is not a matter for doom and gloom. Any attempts at anything sporty would probably kill us. The days when we tried to look fashionable and cool and we thought we had a chance with women (or men for those of other persuasions) are behind us and most of the people in the hobby are probably retired and have more leisure time. Being grumpy and old, having a hobby like model railways is ideal. It is to be celebrated. We can whinge about the latest models, DCC, layout heights or the state of modern railways and nobody expects anything else from us. We can follow our hobby sitting down at a bench or layout, with lots of cups of tea and chocolate biscuits and the rest of the world looks on us with pity and an "old men trying to be children" attitude but in the main, they leave us to get on with what we are doing as it "keeps us out of trouble" and is better than "going down the pub drinking". So no doom and gloom from me! Just a bunch of mostly good "mature" (in age if not in behaviour and attitude) people enjoying a great hobby. I say keep the youngsters out. The little beggars might spoil it!

I will need to live to at least 150 to finish all my unbuilt kits and half done scratchbuild projects so I hope you are right! It is good to see you posting again. Tony

I only suggested it as I am just under 60!

A couple of friends of mine collect Hornby Dublo 3 rail, alongside their main model railway activities. The number of people leaving the ranks of 3 rail collectors is certainly not being matched by the number starting collections and so as each time a collection comes onto the market, there are fewer people wanting to snap them up and prices are generally falling. When you look around any model railway exhibition, especially the more specialist ones like EXPO EM or Scaleforum, the average age of people there seems to creep up as the same people go every year and they keep getting older. Even the average age of the traders is on the up as there are not many youngsters in that group either. The Gauge O Guild shows or model engineering shows seem to me to have the highest age groups of all. How many youngsters are learning how to use machine tools to build their own working engines? I bet the number is tiny. A number of shows have stopped having "concessions" for those over a certain age as almost nobody would pay the full entrance fee. Perhaps they should start giving "concessions" to the under 60s! In many ways, the gradual increase in the average age of those following the hobby doesn't really matter very much as long as we accept that in the future, demand for what we may pass on to others will be limited. As long as we enjoy ourselves and continue to gain satisfaction and personal pleasure from what we do, for as long as we can, then that is probably as much as we can ask for. Tony G

I have found that allowing Modelmasters transfers to have a while to set properly, usually overnight, I can remove the residual glue/backing film by getting a small brush with a tiny amount of enamel paint thinners and very gently working the brush around the film. It seems to melt the film which rolls up into a sort of ball of jelly that can be picked away with tweezers. I have only done it a couple of times, when building things for others, as they don't do much for GCR liveries. I suggest experimenting first as I would hate anybody to wreck a good lettering job on a finished model but the finished result is that the letter/number pigment stays and there there is absolutely no sign of any film or backing remaining and they just look like real numbers/letters applied to paint.