Clem

I've been wondering about this virus and whether it's likely to affect the upcoming shows - York, ExpoEM, Scalefour etc. Has anyone heard anything?

No, but it certainly conveys the meaning in an effective way!

With real ironstone as the loads! Geoff told me that he came across this great lump of the stuff in Northamptonshire ironstone territory and has used it for all his ironstone loads. That's the reason the loads look so authentic! I've yet to find any but I have looked and am still looking! The second wagon is interesting. It's a wooden hopper and you can just see the sides slightly bowing in at the bottom. As you go backwards in time towards 1948 and before, these were far more common in the make up of the ore trains on the Derby Friargate line Stanton trains, so my brother used to tell me.

Very kind comments Andrew, especially coming from someone as highly skilled as yourself. It's a shame they've picked the 14T BR hopper as, I think, that one is already covered by Dave Bradwell's kit. (See photo). In any case, it certainly looks like I'm in for the long haul where the LMS hoppers (both the 8'6" version and the 7'9" version) are concerned. However it would be worth looking into the possibility of working with someone who could cast it and possibly produce a kit.

Geoff's in a different league, Tony!

I wasn't meaning to demean the new show in any way. I went last year and it was good. It's just that I remember what the Nottingham show once was like. You literally couldn't move for the numbers attending. Such a shame to have lost that. But at least it's still going. Is it still at Clifton, this year?

That's spot on, Andrew. Up until about 1958 the iron ore trains on the Stanton run were all hoppers. Within about a year they had become all tipplers. I think the hoppers may have lasted longer in South Wales and on the ex-GW lines south of Birmingham. They are a bit of nightmare to scratch build. The first thing you've got to get right is the angles of the hopper. Ability in 3-D trigonometry is a must. :-) ... then there's the rivets. On the Bachmann cut'n'shuts it's the fiddly hopper bottom door opening gear that's the awkward part. For both these types the under frame is very open. It'd be lovely to have a kit for the LMS hoppers a few of which survive at the Rutland Railway museum. It would certainly save me a lot of time. I've got a few of them to build.

I had hoped to go on Sunday (Chris had the car on Saturday), but the weather convinced me otherwise. I did think about the financial consequences weather wise particularly after what happened at Nottingham a couple or so years back which seemed to be a final straw for that show, at least on that scale. So I am pleased that Doncaster survived the weather without too much effect. I was interested particularly as there were 4 EM layouts on show. Nice to see such a high percentage for a bit of a change (personal opinion). I must admit I'm still struggling on the modelling front at the moment, just making an attempt to increase my iron ore hopper rake by a couple, but regrettably without much enthusiasm. On the right, another cut and shut Bachmann Charles Roberts type (still much detailing left) and on the left the beginnings of an LMS 8'6 high steel hopper. I had been hoping Doncaster would give me a bit of inspiration, but I suppose you can't legislate for the weather.

I think I suffer from that in reverse. I'm happy to tackle most things wheeled but seem to find any distraction going to avoid doing scenic work. And most people seem to find that the easiest.

I started doing some modelling today for the first time in quite a while. My sister got seriously ill towards the end of November and sadly passed away on January 12th. Being her next of kin, I've tried to be with her as much as possible through her illness, taking it in turns with my partner Chris and my youngest daughter Sophie to sit with her as she progressively got weaker. It has been very difficult at times but they have been fantastically supportive and it's been a real team effort. So now we're in process of trying to tie her life up neatly, whilst organising and preparing for the funeral. It does feel like walking through treacle at times, whether sitting on the end of a phone trying to talk to the right people for all the everyday dealings in my sister's life, trawling through her address book looking to contact all her friends to tell them the sad news or simply trying to get the funeral right for her. During this time, there has been some spare time between visits, but my concentration has been so shot to pieces it's been impossible to do anything tangible. However, I've had some real relief, some nice moments looking at this thread and all the great modelling and the discussions. I know most on here will know exactly what we are experiencing through your own experiences. But I feel I owe a vote of thanks to all for relieving my stress for a while - albeit unwittingly - with your ever interesting contributions. Thanks Clem

Ah but.... Torque is cheap but Power is corrupting....

Simply beautiful!

Hi Craig. You're correct it didn't but personally, I don't mind people putting their point of view across absolutely including yours. You and everyone else affected have my total empathy and best wishes. Clem

To be fair Craig, I asked the question about the safety and welfare of a number of people on here and people have answered that question. I think the political content that people have posted is part of their answer to my question. These are folk who I and I'm sure others on here would support in the crisis that has unfolded. I can certainly put up with their viewpoint on this topic. It most certainly won't take over this thread. The very nature of the thread dictates otherwise. But I for one, want to know that everyone is OK, not in danger and I find their take on a situation, which potentially could be harmful to them worthwhile to be heard by us. I'd consider all on here friends via our common interest (albeit those in Oz long distant friends) and friendship always overcomes politics. But I value their views and I am very relieved that everyone who has posted is for the moment safe.

With increasing concern, I've been watching the events in Australia unfold over the last few weeks. Can I inquire of our Australian friends on here, is everyone OK and safe from these terrible fires?

Yes it looks like they have amalgamated the two chimneys. Some of the earlier class members retained the tall chimney but it was parallel and not tapering and stepped like the one on the model. But then I'm very picky about about chimney accuracy.

Merry Christmas Jesse. No... we do most of that.... but not necessarily in the same order.. (Except I'm a veggie, too)

Hi Tony, I hope you're keeping well. Funny you should say this. Springing locomotives using this method would be my preferred way of chassis building in 4mm too but there doesn't seem to be the same items available in this scale. (Not strictly true - I have recently bought some Alan Gibson brass horn blocks which, I think, will modify to accept springs and adjuster screws). However, Maygib used to produce these in plastic, complete with screws and springs and I still have a stock of them. * Tony Wright, please close your ears for the next bit, if you don't want to be horrified. * What I have done in the past is to build a set of frames (brass) and glue (thixofix) a thin layer of plasticard on the inside surfaces with a number of pins through both layers to give a bit of belt and braces confidence. Using coupling rod jigs I then weld the plastic horn blocks to the inner plastic skin using Butatone. A couple of chassis were done like this over 30 years ago (in P4) and are still going strong. So far I've only done two EM locomotives using this method. For my next loco project, I will try out the Alan Gibson brass ones and I'll let you know the results. Obviously if brass versions of the old Maygib hornblck system were readily available, it'd be a no-brainer for me. Merry Christmas to you and a Happy New Year!

Hi Tony. I think it's a complicated topic. People choose what standards/gauge they use according to their final aims for a model. To address your first question, I always wanted a layout that could emulate a busy main line with the opportunity to shunt/back wagons into sidings. I built firstly in OO but was definitely 'wowed' by the look of P4 so, towards the end of the 1980s, in the loft of my first house in Ipswich I started a scaled down version of Awsworth Junction in P4. I certainly managed to get a number of locos working well pulling trains over the track work without derailments but no matter how I tried, I couldn't back a coal train across a single slip and into sidings without wagons derailing. I did work at it for some time, but without ever solving the problem. However, about the year 2000 I saw a layout by Andy Cooper (Spotland, I think) and loved how it came close to that P4 look which had initially attracted me to P4 but, with deeper flanges, offered an operational solution. I realised that there may be a good compromise to be made which could give me both better running but on that wider gauge. I tested it out and haven't looked back or changed my mind. Yes P4 still has the edge for looks but, for a larger layout, I think EM is the best solution. Now, I have to say most of the locomotives I use on my layout are inside cylinder or have inside valve gear. But I have successfully converted RTR chassis including a WD, B1, K3 and L1s, and built chassis for a K2 and B1. The valve gear clearance problem often leads to an awful lot of fiddling about, but so far I have managed to solve all problems without taking any major drastic action. But for instance, the Little Engines O4/8 required completely new slide bars to give enough clearance. On the subject of flexible versus rigid, I have two locos with rigid chassis. A J39/1 and the O4/8. They aren't my best runners although the O4/8 has been improved greatly with additional tender pick-ups. I find flexible chassis are more forgiving - they can actually run well even if slightly out of square. But - the key thing is - they are adjustable. For me, often the time consuming element of chassis building is the decision making of whether to go compensated or sprung and the following design to bring it to fruition. But that's another topic. I think the only reasonable conclusion from this discussion is to say 'each to their own' and if people find a method that suits them, by all means stick to it. You are a professional loco builder and so have very different factors coming in to play and I can see why, for sheer consistency, the rigid method works best for you and what is apparent is just how sweet your locomotives run. Finally, my trains prototypically don't need to run fast - certainly not over scale speed of 50mph, but they do need to be able to haul prototypical loads round curves that are tight for OO and probably too tight for EM (governed by width of layout room).

I have modelled in OO, P4 and EM in that order. I have tried to take the best things out of each from my experience. A flexible (compensated or sprung) chassis is always preferable for me because although it takes a little longer, you can rest in the knowledge that all wheels are picking up - important for me as a jack of all trades and master of none as my track work isn't always the best. The biggest problem I have in EM is with clearances and it is usually that that takes the extra time. Incidentally, it's often as difficult in EM as it is in P4 due to the wider wheel standards.

Looking at recent posts listing people's modelling achievements this years has prompted me to look back and to my surprise see just how much I have got done, in spite of feeling frustrated at my seeming lack of pace. The year started off by completing the London Road Models J5 65498 (although it still lacks coal and crew) and proceeded on to putting in a new junction from the hidden sidings to improve the operation of the layout. In hand with that were 2 new control panels including electronics for signalling and a small lever frame. A side extension was added to the visible layout giving room for a new siding in the goods yard. Three working signals installed on the layout (two of which also built this year - the third was built last year). Following on from the layout board and track improvements I added a substantial number of vans and wagons from kits and detailed some container wagons. A number of RTR Gresleys and Thompsons have been repainted and weathered. The down platform has been cut to shape prior to fitting (due to be done as soon as I can). A Bachmann O4 has been converted into EM as an O4/7 and a signal box based on Breadsall's signal box has been built from scratch with a wing and a prayer. Unfortunately at the moment we have a serious illness in the family and modelling has had to take very much a back seat but I'm hoping once we fully get on top of the situation some time will be found to proceed. Happy Christmas and a Happy New Year to all! Clem

Thanks guys that's brilliant. It doesn't matter whether it's nickel silver or brass as it will be painted. As you can see I've fixed the step board on already. The supports will be fashioned from the strip into triangular brackets - 6 or 7 in total and superglued in place.Well, that's the plan anyhow. Plan B, the drinks can.

Hi Tony, That lot would take me about 10 years! I have a health situation in the family which is limiting my modelling time at the moment but I'm still getting one or two bits done. A question for anyone: does anyone make brass strip narrower than 1mm? I'm looking for 0.7mm x 0.3mm strip. Does anyone make that? (To make supports for the outside step boards of the signal box). I realise that I could simply either use the 1mm strip (but doesn't look right) or put it length ways in a small vice and draw file it. But if available anywhere it would be far simpler. Thanks in advance. Clem

Hi Chris. Not railways but check out Jerry Reed's version (1977) on YouTube. You will not be disappointed. Phew! this thread moves faster than the City of New Orleans!

Page 1621... 61621 Hatfield House was the only Sandringham or B17 thatI saw - at Lincoln 1957. I've always found the B17s a fascinating class. Always to us young trainspotters they were a bit glamorous, a bit mysterious as they rarely ventured outside of East Anglia and by the time I was old enough to venture into East Anglia, they had long gone. In reality, I suppose they never really lived up to their potential, otherwise they would have lasted at least as long as the K3s. I understand they could be rough riders and apart from the ones with the Thompson boilers a bit weak for their size.