Clem

Hi Matthew, It's nice to see another of Colwick's locos, and a very nice model too, albeit later than my rendition of 68629 (see below) which came to Colwick in late 1955. Mine was a Connoisseur kit and very enjoyable to make. Tony's version of your choice of engine is presumably when it was at Grantham, where I think it was for some time in the late 1950s. It always brings back memories of passing London Road Low Level Goods in the late 1950s on a DMU trainspotting expedition to Lincoln or more likely, Newark. It was just as difficult (if not more so) to get the numbers if you were on the high level, on a train to Grantham. There'd always be at least a couple of Colwick's shunting tanks there. Usually, a J69 and a J50. But sometimes 2 J69s, sometimes all J50s. They were always situated behind a wagon so you couldn't get the numbers but 68927, on the left, was one of Colwick's - at Annesley during my layout era. Of course, by the time I was travelling, the J52s at Colwick had pretty well gone. While I'm posting, the Bachmann conversion of the WD is now finished but the DJH still awaits weathering... I'm just working on a Dave Bradwell J39 chassis at the moment. Having done one for EM before and struggled with it to get the frames narrow enough, I found that this time, being aware of the pitfalls/likely problems later, has made it a much better prospect. Having said that, my previous EM effort runs perfectly OK now. It did require a fair amount of work after finishing to make sure there was sufficient clearances between chassis frames and wheels. I must emphasise that he designs kits with P4 in mind and for that gauge, they are lovely kits and really work very well indeed. Dave Bradwell does think of everything when designing his kits, but they can be very fiddly in places. He does a WD.... yikes!

Thanks for the info, Andrew. I have a couple of neo for Iwata cheap Chinese copies, I believe. Easy to take apart for cleaning but the cup is fixed above the nozzle and this can hinder alignment with the eye. Otherwise, they're pretty reasonable for general use but not so good on very fine work. I was thinking of getting the HP SB plus specifically for finer work - (actually, although it comes with an 0.2mm nozzle, there is an option for 0.3 instead). However I think the quality of your finishing probably suggests maybe it's more about the skill factor. Also, I have got a cheap compressor. That may also be replaced, now. I read somewhere that for finer work you have to work at a reduced the pressure. Cheers, Clem

Evening Andrew. I've still got a few 3-H kits to do of these. (I have completed a few also including a rarity - a 9 ft wb fitted van. The problem you get is these kits is quality of the plastic mouldings which were of their time. The brakes and brake levers are particularly brittle. I love your paint finishes. Such excellent subtle shade variations. I'm thinking of getting a new airbrush - possibly an Iwata HP SB plus. I note it has 0.2mm nozzle. Any thoughts?

Hi Ray, Yes, that proves the point. It looks so much better. You made a very good and realistic model there, Ray. WD in typical condition. By 1960, a lot had the modified firebox but in the period I'm modelling (1954-5), they were still fairly thin on the ground.The problem is, there is no record which boilers/fireboxes were modified and when. As regards the moulded piping, I will make the effort on the next one but, at least for the time being, I'll live with this one. On the right side of the loco, many had a series (4) of small oil feed pipes from the cab just below the front spectacle. That'll be another detail I'd like to tackle. But you really need to make the holes in the cab front before you fold it up.

Sorry Andrew, I meant/should have said West, specifically on the GN Derby/Pinxton line. I know they were regular on the GC and came down the Leen Valley line and GC main line to Annesley. I personally never saw one South of Annesley on the GC though. Having said that, I only lived in sight of the GC line from January 1960 onwards. I presume Frank Stratford was talking 1950s and the O2s were on freight from.... Doncaster or York? I know there are plenty of pictures of O2s on Annesley. I have a slight interest in this as when my brother passed away in 2014, his kits came to me including a Nucast O2/2. So I'm looking for an excuse to build and run it, although it would be down the list a bit.

Yes, the Tiny's as referred to by the GC men were indeed the 0-8-0s but I believe it was the O4s that were referred to as Tiny's by Colwick's ex-GN and LNE men. Certainly when I used to speak at length with Alf Henshaw, who worked in control at Nottingham Victoria and later East Leake during the war, he always referred to O4s as Tiny's. I once brought this subject up with him but he said, certainly withing the locality, it was O4s. It was probably a GN thing. You know, 'all GC freight engines look alike', never mind the front pony! As regards the Hush hush, I could do a representation on here but you wouldn't hear it. You're correct 90000 was at Annesley - for the summer of 1947. But from October 1947 to February 1959 it was at Colwick. Finally, I thought long and hard about cutting off the moulded piping on the DJH WD but chickened out in the end. However, I have got another DJH WD to do and I *will* cut it off on that. You're absolutely right that it's not a great representation of the real thing.

How about this. It's a recording from Kimberley signal box taken by Alf Henshaw. The date is 10th July 1964 and WD 90392 clanks by. The recording is taken from when the levers are pulled. There are kids playing near the level crossing and although you need a little patience, sure enough you here the WD clank by on a train of empties at about 1:35. Worth listening through the full 2:35 just for the atmosphere. 08 Kimberley_19640710_008_90392.mp3

Evening Roy. Yes it's interesting to compare the WDs with the tinies. Generally, I believe tinies were often preferred by Colwick men to WDs on the iron ore trains to Stanton in spite of the extra power of the austerity. But to their credit, the WDs did put in an incredible amount of work all over the country in those post war years and, being a fairly large cog in 1950s motive power, an absolute must for a layout representing an ex-GN coal carrying line. It's funny, but from the point of view of an enthusiast as opposed to someone on the business end, I have quite a liking for them. Having said that, I still prefer a tiny! Obviously Grantham had the O2s, which for some reason never seemed to travel west of Colwick. Did you work on them, Roy?

... more like dang dang dang .... (fades) ... roughly a musical 3rd or 4th between the dang and the . Jeez what a conversation... I hope I'm not going senile! It's no good. I've tried 3 or 4 edits but the auto spell check just won't do the WD sound. (there should be a '' after every 'dang' but it just cuts it out. OK it must be a prohibited word - try 'bang bong bang bong bang bong' but with a 'd' in front of 'ang' and 'ong' instead of a 'b'.

Good morning Tony. Looking at your photos of Little Bytham now leaves me quite sad. I've seen the destruction of railway heritage so many times before but it still grieves me for each new episode of wanton destruction. It's almost as if today's railway needs to forever prove it is modern and has no soul. Anyway, at least your layout of Little Bytham documents the line in its last years of steam glory. Whilst I'm writing this little post, may I ask what is probably a very dumb question. What glue do you use to fix your loco crew in place? I'm really rubbish at the basics! Finally, the last couple of months been a period of 'Austerity' for me, but luckily it's drawing to an end and I can turn my efforts elsewhere: Colwick's long time resident 'top of the class' WD 90000. (DJH). Sister Bachmann 90499 is behind on a coal train fully weathered. 90000's turn for weathering next. Bachmann WD converted to EM using Gibson wheels - this took me a couple of days work as compared to the DJH one taking a couple of months. You can imagine which I found most satisfying (although very challenging at times). This one is down to become 90215. Still some detailing required, including the re-attaching of the brakes which had to be removed for EM as they seriously fouled the re-gauged wheels. You can get away with the brakes where they are for many EM conversions.

Morning Andrew. I'm sure you've divulged this before, but can you remind me what you use for primer. I have been using bog standard Halfords grey acrylic for locos but not always 100% to my satisfaction. I'd be very interested in using something better if readily available and as Mike mentioned above, your paintwork is exemplary. Thanks in advance. Clem

That's true. But I'm probably more gullible than Gulliver!

Evening Tony. I've been enjoying your photographic jaunts around Little Bytham. The eye level (scale eye) shots really bring out the realism of the railway and paint your Locos and stock in a most convincing way. I particularly like the M&GN shots from the road. One of the regrets of my layout is that it is a 'flat earth' layout as you call it. However, one angle I've found quite interesting is using the i-phone camera. It allows the shot to be taken about a scale foot above the ground and gives quite and interesting perspective. The big drawback is the lack of depth of field and anything other than a side-on loses focus half way down the loco. But my i-phone is very old and the cameras have improved much since mine. I believe the latest ones allow you to adjust the aperture and presumably allows a much greater depth of field. Anyway, here are one or two shots of the new austerity which is virtually constructionally complete now.

Good Afternoon Chammy. From 1960 to 1966 I lived on Wilford Lane with about half a mile from the GC with a long clear panorama of the line from Trent Bridge all the way South to the Coronation Hotel, just off Wilford Lane. I spent many an evening after school waiting for the fish trains at the bridge on Wilford Lane - first a K3 on the Hull about 6-50pm and then a Brit on the Grimsby at 7-30pm. Over that period I watched the endless stream of 9Fs, V2s, B1s, L1s, K3s, B16s and eventually Brits, Scots and black 5s etc both from the upstairs windows of our house or by the line side at Wilford Lane or Coronation Avenue. I saw 'Cheltenham' on the 12-15 from the house in 1962 after Annesley borrowed it for a week or so, plus many other memories. Very sad watching the line's decline but those first couple of years of that period were magic!

Hi Grahame, ha ha ha! Not a chance! I struggle with stairs greater than 2 floors high, particularly if they are open. I'm staying on the ground in my workshop.

Yes I see what you mean. The rebates in your kit are well pronounced. Thanks Jonathan. Thanks for showing your experience with the earlier Isinglass kits. Sorry - this seems to have got posted before I finished it. What I was going to say was that the Gresley BTK really doesn't pass muster, but yes the pigeon van is much better. This helps to put things in context. I may spend a little time on this D246 but I'm not going to invest too much in it. I'd love one of the etched brass side kit manufacturers (MJT, Bill Bedford or Comet) to produce a D246 that would be my preferred solution.

Yes I see what you mean. The rebates in your kit are well pronounced. Thanks Jonathan.

Morning Jonathan, Yes of course I don't strictly flush glaze Gresley teaks, it's just that I put the glazing in from the front and it does sit a little way back but closer to flush compared to placing glazing the back, if that makes any sense - see D210 below. In my Isinglass kit, there doesn't seem to be a rebate of any useable nature at the back of the windows. (see below). I wonder if he's improved the kits since I received this, some time ago. Can I also ask what glue you used to put the kit together with? Cheers, Clem.

Good morning Andrew. Thanks for asking me that question as I've just got the Isinglass 3-D kit out again. I think I'll have a go at it next but I'll only use the sides and possibly the ends. To be honest, I'm not entirely sure how to approach it - what glue to use and the big question as mentioned in my previous post, how to glaze it. With Kirk coaches, I have a method, which though tedious, works very well with a reasonably good result. I suppose I may have to use a similar method using one of the glazing glues to try to achieve a similar result. The Kirk kits have a tapered lead in to the windows which allows a push fit, reinforced by the smallest smidgen of solvent (not enough to cause fogging). I don't see myself using the kit's roof which comes in two sections (I'll use an MJT one) and for the under frame/bogies I may either a) use a Hornby donor or b) use an MJT floor with ABS bogies. The sides do need quite a bit of cleaning up, particularly some of the windows. To be honest, if etched sides were available, I'd have built a couple already such is the prevalence of this diagram on the Grantham-Nottingham-Derby line. Anyway, here's a photo of the parts, if it helps.

Good evening Tony. I'm very much with you on elegance of the A5s and just wish one had been preserved. The A5/2s were not the only ones with round buffers at the front: 69809 entering Grantham. Note the Diagram 246 Brake third next to the engine and the Thompson Lavatory Comp behind. I've got an isinglass 3-D kit for one of the D246s but I just can't see how I can get the glazing looking OK so I'll be looking to cut and shut a couple of Kirks where I'll be able to flush glaze it, more realistically. So many blooming projects to do! Thinking of this is the nearest I get to feeling pressure in lockdown! :-) I quite like the A7s which I believe were a 3 cylinder freight engine. Oh, and like you I have a fear of heights. It's dogged me all my life and even cost me a day's train-spotting at Crewe in January 1959, But that's another story.

Good afternoon Tony, It's pictures of models like these that provide the almost irresistible urge to drop everything 4mm and move up to 7. Luckily, common sense prevails and my head tells me it's too late in the day (metaphorically) and in any case, I would never have enough room, even if I had enough time left. These pictures really bring out the detail and feeling of sheer size of the real thing, though. Fantastic models and great finishing/weathering. If I were 25 years younger, I'd be very tempted to make the jump! The white metal A5s you were referring too were Nucast. Here's an example of mine, 69807. It was one of the first white metal kits I built (it shows!), but I'm still very fond of it as it brings back memories of when they were common on the Nottingham-Derby and Pinxton trains in the late 50s. It now runs on scratch built chassis.

Hi Andy, a compensated chassis, with horn blocks set up from the coupling rods, would allow acceptable running in a chassis out of square (although you wouldn't want it). However, to achieve a square chassis you need to use something like a set of Comet jigs ( I think they are still available) which you can get at Wizard models. For the setting up of horn blocks, I mainly use an old set of perseverance coupling rod jigs for Gibson/Ultrascale wheels and I've got another set of pointy ones that will set them up for Markits wheels.

Hi Tony. Thanks, but one correction: it's not compensated, it's sprung. But I agree, it's very much each to their own. As I've said before, we've all got our own methods. It's what works for you. I tend to use compensation more on 6-coupled. On 8-coupled I've used springing. I think the key to good running whether rigid or compensated/sprung is setting up the chassis with a jig using the coupling rods to ensure accuracy. That, and making sure the axles run freely in their bearings and coupling rods not overnight - or the opposite, over sloppy, particularly fore and aft. It takes quite a long time from being fairly inexperienced in building locos to then learn and develop and finally focus on your own individual approach and, of course, you learn the biggest lessons by your mistakes. I'm still very much at the learning stage. (...and enjoying it... with one or two moments otherwise ;-) )

I entirely agree, Andy. In the time it's taken me to get about 95% complete with my DJH WD, Tony has produced 4 superb creations. But my (feeble) excuse is that mine is sprung on a scratch built chassis for EM and it's the first time I've attempted a DJH WD. It has been challenging at times but hopefully the next one will be a bit easier, now I know what to look out for. The clearances are tight but OK. Just the injectors and associated pipe work (and new injector covers - the DJH ones are quite under scale), sandboxes, front lamp brackets and front vac pipe to add before painting. Tony, I know you don't like compensated or sprung chassis but my track work/pointwork is nothing like as good as yours and I find a sprung or compensated chassis mitigates this.

Thank you, Tony. That never occurred to me.... And what a brilliant way to answer a question! With superb illustrations which couldn't be more clear. Right, I'll give that a go. I've made one or two bloopers on the kit so far but I suppose you only make progress by learning from mistakes. Anyway, best wishes to you and Mo. Clem.