t-b-g

Not sure if it exactly the same loco as there were lots of subtle variations but a Hudswell Clark can appear in GCR or LNER livery too. No 278 (GCR Class 4) went on to become an LNER J61 and wasn't withdrawn until 1931. It was an ex contractors loco taken over by the GCR after its work on a dock building contract had been completed. Just the thing for "Sutton Dock" Superb choice of prototype and I reckon these will fly off the shelves! Tony

Vincent didn't have that and is most appreciative once again. Another piece of the jigsaw falls into place! Many thanks. Tony

I would just like to say that the response to the initial enquiry has been quite astonishing! Photos and drawings that will allow Vincent to do a "proper" job on the EMU sets (he is building 4 x 3 car sets) have very kindly been shared by various good people and he is now beavering away turning and milling many brackets, tanks and other gubbins. He is making extra underframe detail parts in the hope that they may become useful as masters for casting parts for others to use, possibly as an "add on" detailing pack for the London Road etches. These things tend to take a while to sort out but I will post on here and keep folk updated if and when progress has been made. Thanks again to everybody who has contributed. It just goes to show how much information is out there and how good something like RMWeb can be at finding such information and getting it to where it is needed! Tony

The thing that jumps out at me in those side by side shots is just how good OO track can look when it is done properly. Even looking straight along it, which is where most people say they can detect that OO "look". If the brightness was adjusted (as the model photo is a bit too light compared to the real thing) they would be tricky to tell apart. If a few more OO layouts looked as good as that, I can imagine some P4 and EM modellers thinking "I'll have some of that!". Tony

I have been involved in many layout projects over the years, including a couple mentioned on this thread. Every single one has been a joint effort and I can honestly say that my modelling output working "solo" pales into insignificance compared to my output working with others. Every layout has been either mine (that others have helped me with) or "theirs" (that I have helped "them" with) and just having somebody else around to bounce ideas off and to mutually assist each other when things don't go right is a way of working that really suits me. Other people seem to enjoy their hobby perfectly well just working away on their projects by themselves, with little or no input from (or sometimes even interaction with) others. As long as the scope and ambition of a project is within what they can accomplish then I can see the attraction of the self satisfaction of being able to say "I did that" and I have often thought about building a layout all by myself, just to see if I can actually do it. I know that I have the technical ability but I have doubts about whether I have the mindset to see such a layout through to completion. But time spent working with friends is always a much bigger incentive to getting on with things and so far, the solo effort hasn't happened and maybe never will. Tony

There is at least one P4 main line ECML layout that runs with Pacifics hauling lengthy trains. It is being built by Mike Wakefield and is based on Grantham. There is a photo of several long freights working "permissive block" in a recent MRJ. I have seen a Pacific going round at a scale 90mph with (from memory) 12 carriages. It hasn't really appeared much in the press yet and it is still very much work in progress but when I saw it several years ago, the main circuits were laid and operational. So it is possible. I don't think that Mike would say that it has and it has been easy and it has required a great deal of effort and dedication but it can be done. Tony

Although the Belpaire fireboxes were fitted to the 0-8-0s during LMS days, a few locos were put into traffic with the new boilers but still carrying LNWR livery, at least they were plain black with LNWR numberplates. So we did one for Narrow Road, which is set in 1923/24 and it looks really nice.

Vincent has asked me to pass on his most appreciative thanks to those who have been so helpful in coming up with all the information he was looking for in a very short time! He has been gathering information on Oerlikon sets for many years and pretty much all the gaps he still had have now been filled in the last 24 hours, thanks to the power of RMWeb. Once he gets a bit further with the construction, I will see if I can persuade him to provide me with some photos to post so you can see what the information has gone to help produce. Knowing Vincent, they will be rather nice! One thing we have spoken about is to see if copies of the drawings that have come to light might possibly be sent to John Redrup as it was a lack of information that stopped him doing more than just the body shells. I don't think that the market for Oerlikon sets will ever be huge but it might be worth twisting his arm up his back to do a "finishing" set of parts as an add on to the body etches. Tony

I have spoken with Vincent today and he is highly impressed and most appreciative. Many years ago he took a drawing along to a little workshop in Bolton and had a chap cut some to the correct profile for him from a type of timber we think is called Idigbo. The bloke with the workshop (long since closed) recommended it as something that wouldn't twist or warp and many years later it hasn't. The idea came from a David Jenkinson book on building carriages. So the roof was sorted a long time ago but sadly not in a way that will be easy for others to re-create. Tony

Hello Stan, PM sent, Many thanks for the kind offer. Tony

Superb! I am pretty sure that Vincent is in the HMRS so he will be sure to be in touch with them. It does actually back up what he was musing over, that the bogie centres are not the same on all the vehicles. Vincent is adapting Hornby 2 BIL bogies, which are pretty close apart from needing new shoe pick ups. The rest of the underframe was going to be adapted from the Hornby one but he has decided to scratchbuild now. The "glorious detail" is exactly what he wants! I will ask him what he is doing about the roof as there are now a couple of interested parties. Many thanks, Tony

Many thanks Nigel, much appreciated. It looks as if the bogie centres on all three vehicles are the same, which is what we needed to know. Tony

I know that a number of good folk on RMWeb have been building or contemplating building some of these from the London Road etches. These are pretty much body parts only, so the underframes etc. need to be sourced. Vincent Worthington is currently working on some for Camden Bank but has a query on the bogie centres as the etches have holes for the bogie centres but they don't match the centres of the motor car preserved at York. What we don't know is if the bogie centres of all three vehicles were the same or if the motor car has different centres to the other two vehicles (in which case the etched holes might be correct). Vincent has drawings of the motor car as preserved but not of the centre or driving trailer cars. Is there anybody out here able to help, either pointing us at some drawings or confirming the bogie centres? I should just say that Vincent is plotting a visit to the NRM and the "Search Engine" in the near future, so he will be checking there. Many thanks in anticipation. Tony

Far be it from me to interfere in the activities of such esteemed modellers but........ I had the same problem with microswitches creating a "springback" on mechanical rodding so I turned then round 90 degrees. It the switches are the variety with a lever, all you need is a slight attachment to a bit of rodding in the form of a triangle/wedge that pushes the lever sideways rather than forwards. Even non lever versions can be worked in the same way but the adjustment is easier with a lever. The switch is then mounted alongside the rodding rather than off the end of it. It actually helps the mechanism as it introduces a little bit more friction as the spring action of the switch is sideways against the rodding. It is not easy to explain in words but I hope that makes sense. I may be able to sort out a photo if you would like one. I know you are a clever bunch so I am surprised you didn't think of it! Best wishes and good luck with the lovely layout, Tony

If you want to model a real place and you have a space smaller than that required to build the model dead to scale you have a few options. These include selective compression, a change of scale or not building it at all. No layout will ever please everybody all the time. My favourite layout is pure fiction and the longest train is 5 carriages long, which is about as far removed from Tony's ideal layout as it is possible to get! At least it is "Eastern" in as much as it is GCR. I have known Tony Wright for many years now and he is not one to pull his punches sometimes. He has his own views on what makes a good layout and he expresses them in his own way. I am pretty sure that the last thing he would want to do is to cause any upset to those who decide to do their modelling in their own way. If I had the space that Little Bytham occupies, the last thing that I would model would be what is really a wayside station on a main line. 95% of the trains would just pass through and while it is a spectacle, there is not a lot for somebody who likes more intricate operating. I would have a railway system, with several stations, capable of being operated in a railway like fashion with a number of operators sending trains to and from each other. I don't think Little Bytham would hold my interest for very long as an operator. I can operate Buckingham for many hours on end. Even if I am by myself I can spend a few hours working through the intricate and interesting timetable and we have regular running sessions twice a week with two or three people, that are totally absorbing and about as much fun as I have had with model railways. The real Peterborough was a centre of considerable railway activity and for somebody who really enjoys railway operation (as opposed to running trains on a roundy-roundy) a truncated Peterborough with a few compromises would be much more interesting to operate than a (nearly) scale Little Bytham. Having said that, I have been fortunate to visit Little Bytham a couple of times and have really enjoyed both times very much indeed and I would defend to the hilt Tony's right to build whatever layout he wishes. In a nutshell, both layouts are designed to do what the builders want from them and there is nobody who can say that one is somehow more right than the other. They represent different and equally valid approaches to the hobby. Having a personal opinion as to which approach somebody prefers is all well and good but that is all it can be, a personal opinion. Tony

Stop writing things like that. They send me giddy....... What a train that would make!

Is a C4 too far off topic on an Atlantic thread?

It was a nice touch, three folk with such similar interests meeting up like that! It shows the good that can come from RMWeb! Tony

Of course the main problem with this is that the RTR makers might as well give up and go home after it comes out cos anything else will be an anticlimax.....

I thought that the "Collectors club" GCR liveried "Pom-pom" held that particular crown but I am rapidly coming round to your way of thinking. If that is just a sample, I just can't see how the final production one could possibly be any better! I am finding it difficult to appreciate that we are looking at a mass produced OO gauge RTR model, not a top quality hand crafted museum quality O gauge model. Full marks to all involved. Tony

I would just like to say how good it was to meet up at the weekend and to say that the N5 and the J4 look even better in the flesh than they do in photos. As I said to you, they are not like the work of a novice at all and I can think of some highly experienced modellers who would be delighted if they could turn out work of that quality. They are cetainly miles ahead of my first two kit builds. If you compare your N5 to the rather tatty, under detailed 36 year old one on Church Warsop, you will see what I mean. That was my first complete kit (body and frames - body only ones done before that). I look forward to following your progress with the stock and the layout, Best wishes, Tony

We will be running a GNR loco or several on Church Warsop at EXPO EM North. A couple of Stirling locos plus a J6 and a C12. That is in addition to a collection of GCR types. The J6 was built from the test etch of the Norton/London Road kit by the designer, the late Malcolm Crawley. Lovely to see some GN and GC modelling! Tony

Very interesting! I had wondered about doing something similar with one end of Leicester Central but I think your idea is even better. Is it just me or does it just look more railwaylike than many of the pure model plans put forward? Tony

My Grandad used to have a bit of an involvement with these locos back in the 1920s/1930s. He worked at Warsop Main colliery and they used to hire a loco from the LMS for shunting the colliery sidings. There were two regular locos, both Midland 1Fs from Mansfield shed, that worked for a week and then were swapped on a Sunday. He did tell me the two numbers once upon a time but that was 30 plus years ago and I can't recall them now. What was interesting is that they were both half cab locos and the people driving them at the colliery didn't like them, so the workshops at the colliery made up a rear half cab, that would be put on a loco when it arrived and be swapped to the other one at the weekend. I often wonder if any photos exist of these two half cabs, running with their unofficial full cab conversion. The model looks like a cracker and I may just have to have one for sentimental reasons, making it my 3rd RTR model in a year, which is more than in the last 10 years put together. We really have never had it so good! Tony

My version has some goods facilites. Whether it is any good or not is not for me to say. I have two passenger platforms and have created a fish/parcels dock and a centre holding road on Mansfield Market Place. (Photo at an early stage is included in Post 27 of the thread) The long term plan is to connect two layouts together, so that goods trains have to come in to the terminus (arriving at the centre road) to be reversed on to the other station, which has goods facilities. Until then, the centre road is used to receive fish/van/parcels/newspaper trains which are shunted to the dock by the pilot. Then when it is time for them to go again, a train is made up in the centre road for departure. When not in use for goods, the centre road is used for holding a passenger set of ECS, keeping the two platforms clear. I have lost two platform faces but I have increased the number of potential types of operation. Tony