rowanj

That option would work too, I have, in the meantime, resoldered the buffer beam, soldered in the buffers and soldered the" croosbar" coupling, made up from 45swg wire, as suggested many moons ago by Tony Wright. It all seems solid. Next stage is to assemble the gearbox/motor to see what needs to be done to the etched cab floor. I'm hoping to be able to fit a backhead, though I don't have an NER one. However, even with the cab doors open, I think something which gives the effect will suffice for this conversion. John

I will have a go at some inside motion, Mike, but it wont look a patch on your effort - very impressive. I wasnt going to start on the bunker yet, but found I needed to to check the fit of the body/chassis. Unlike the J72, the rear buffer beam on the J71 was a single plate, rather than the thicker sandwich of the J72 (and the J71 front). As there was nothing left to glue the etch to, after I'd cut away the back bunker, nor was there the remnants of the very short platform behind the bunker back, I soldered the buffer beam to a piece of scrap etch which was then glued with epoxy . The glue join seems OK but the solder joint is failing. So, rather ahead of time, I'll solder in the buffers and the bar for the coupling and hope I don't have to go back to it. The second photo shows the body posed on the chassis, and I hope one can see already that it is distinctively different from the J72 , Since taking the picture, I have tweaked the rear brake - pictures are cruel but certainly point up errors which my eyes don't always spot in the flesh. Edit - I'll take a better photo of the rear buffer tomoorow in better light - I hadnt realised how poor it was - apologies.,

I had the great pleasure of watching " Pelaw" last weekend at Newcastle. It looked superb and ran virtually faultlessly. However, like most shows these days, the Pelaw lads would have struggled to get any parts for future loco building, with the honourable exception of High-level Models. I couldn't even find a box of Milliput..

Mike - if you have a picture of the Highlevel inside motion, I may have a go at some sort of representation. The chassis looks very bare under the boiler as things stand. John

I suppose there are a few reasons for kit-building locos. 1. There is no RTR equivalent, nor likely to be in the foreseeable future. 2, If there is an RTR, build the kit if it is superior re fidelity to the prototype/detailing.etc 3. It keeps alive an important sub-set of suppliers and modellers in an RTR dominated hobby. 4.No space for a layout but wanting to "engage" in the hobby. 5.Loco building develops a range of ancillary skills for use elsewhere., 6. It's good fun, unless you take it all too seriously. Doubtless there are other reasons. Back to that wretched DJH A8 chassis... John

My main interest these days is kitbuilding NER locos, so I declare an interest. But NuCast J26/27, if you can get them, are pretty rough and ready, unless SEF do a serious update. I have just collected the last Dave Alexander J26/27, and Dave Bradwell's kits, excellent though they are, are not for a beginner. LRM kits are excellent, in my opinion, but, once again, are going to be daunting for first time builders .ArthurK kits, likewise. How often do we read of folk starting a kit, messing it up, and never going back to it? How many of us, realistically, can produce a job which will, without fail, run as well as an RTR out of the box? How many will spend the time, money and effort to get the detail right for the particular loco in the class they are kit-building? I know- quite a few, but small in the context of the overall 2018 model railway population.

The Mainly Trains chassis went together with no problems, and is illustrated here as an example of an easy introduction to etched chassis building, though it still needs detailing - brakes, sandpipes etc. I use a Poppy Jig, but actually, this chassis was so well designed it could, with care, have been done without any jigs I started a thread on the "Modifying RTR "forum just to show progress, as other builds tend to be amongst threads of various other loco and wagon constructions, or have been lost in time given the age of the kit - now almost 14 years, http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/139208-mainline-j72-to-j71/

I think the K1/1 cab was based on the B1, and is shorter than the K1. The slidebars are also quite different. It's not a simple conversion, and rather than carve up a K1, I'd be inclined to start with a B1 body.

Hi Jon. These are 18mm W&T , I need to check but don't think I have any Romfords, and cant get away with Slaters. I'm probably going to use a Mitsumi motor in Highlevel Compact+ gearbox with a 45/1 ratio. This will really be an inexpensive build. However, for anyone looking for something more elaborate, the MT chassis is designed to be built compensated, and has EM spacers on the fret. I have used the W&T wheels before, and found them satisfactory, though they are, of course, "universal", They are designed to fit Romford axles, and are tapped for Romforf crankpins. Because they have plastic centres, they are all insulated, and you need to get in and out quickly when fitting crankpin washers. Scalelink are very quick to deliver, but, like a lot of similar businesses, the owner is about to retire. John

I'm well into the "destructive phase" now, I took Daddyman's advice and removed the rear buffer beam, leaving only a small lip to attach the etch replacement, which I may actually finish off soldering to the chassis. The breathers on the J72 tank tops were not fitted to J71's, and if they had cab doors, I've yet to see a picture of them closed. I damaged the coal rails when shortening the bunker, and I'm not convinced I can repair them invisibly, so am on a so far fruitless search for an etched version. The chassis went together easily - all the slots were accurate, and , although I always use a Poppys Jig for chassis assembly, I think you would need to work hard to make a mess of this one. Incidentally, for anyone modelling NER/LNER locos, David (Daddyman)'s posts are well worth following, as are Mike Meggison (Mikemeg)'s. John

I,ll dig out and photograph the 2 conversions I did of the K1/1 and K4. In both cases, I used the Bachmann K3 chassis. The wheelbase is incorrect, but the wheels themselves are under scale for the K3 so look OK under the 1 and 4. It's a while since I did them,but both were normal cut and shut and join up jobs,with plenty of plastic padding. At the time the K1 wasn't available, but I wouldn't want to have a go at converting the single slide bar...though I'm sure it's been done.I also converted the tender to the shorter LNER GS. Pics to follow if there is interest. John

68278 is my preferred choice, as it was a late survivor and spent most of the 50,s on Tyneside. Of course, sods law means there is no photo in Yeadon, so other than knowing it got GS buffers, I can't identify boiler fittings or brake gear issues. If I can't track a photo down, I'll think again about a suitable prototype.

Daddyman Thanks - the J72 looks nice. The Mainline/Bachmann body is adequate as a starting point, but needs a lot of work. Interestingly, the MT instructions say nothing about the need to shorten the bunker.The footplate needs "thinning" - I wont go as far as replacing it - but the rear buffer beam is much too thick - only the front buffer beam got the "sandwich", I have started to thin it down - I need to get it as thin as possible before attaching the MT etch. The rear of the bunker sits JUST ahead of the buffer beam.

My layout could really use a J71, which were common sights along the "big brother" J72's on Tyneside shunting and trip works. No doubt many folks used the Mainly Trains conversion kit when it came out in 2005, and lamented its' passing. I recently caught up with the fact that Wizard Models had acquired the range, so ordered a kit, along with the J72 detailing pack. This latter is a bit of a misnomer, as it is essentially "only" an etched chassis kit with an etched cab interior. Cheap J72 bodies are reasonably easy to obtain - mine was the cheapest at the time. Ideally, I would have bought a black one as I model BR-period . Their are a few major and quite a few minor differences between the J71 and J72. The chassis overall wheelbase is the same, but the wheel spacing is slightly different. more importantly, the J71 wheels at 4'8" are 6" larger than the J72. The MT chassis' accurately reflect the wheel spacings of the 2 classes. On the body, the J71 has larger splashers in order to accommodate the bigger wheels. New splashers are on the etch. In addition, the J71 bunker is 6" shorter than the J72 as modelled by Bachmann. The first 20 J72's also had the shorter bunker, and If this works, I'll probably get another body to produce a short-bunker J72 on the MT J72 chassis. The cab is empty on the body, so a floor and brake standard is included in the kit. I will try to find a backhead and see what else may be fitted in the cab as the job progresses. Also included is a balsa plug for the boiler bottom, a set of Alan Gibson LNER tapered buffers and a smokebox dart,. The photos show the body with the bunker cropped, buffers and coupling removed, and splashers cut away. A perusal of Yeadon will identify what else needs to be removed before construction/re-construction commences. John

"Spearmint" heads back to Edinburgh with my wholly un-prototypical LMS rake, which is out for a trial spin now the track is fully laid bar a couple of fiddle yard sidings, 60100 is nothing more than a re-numbered Hornby, which has lost its RH cylinder cock- not an unusual occurrence for me. LMS rakes were common at Newcastle, but less so north to Edinburgh, There are, however, pictures of them, usually on specials, excursions or reliefs of some kind. My 5 coach rake is predominantly Comet sides on Airfix donors. The J50 is only on test before going into works, I actually intended to sell it, but discovered it had a missing buffer and handrail on the tank side. It was still regarded as surplus , until I discovered Darlington had 5 of them in the late 50's, Quite why, or what did did with them, given its' plethora of J71,72,77 and 94.s, is a mystery. Though I doubt if they got to Tyneside, it's an excuse to repair the body, weather it, and represent the GN interloper.

Mike ( and Arthur if he reads this) knows that I have nothing but admiration for Arthur's kits, which are both state of the art and can be assembled by amateurs like me. I also use High-level gearboxes almost exclusively these days. So it's obvious that a better model will be made using these parts than from a 40 year old body and 13 y.o chassis kit. Like Mike, I can't have too many shunters, and the only problem with Arthur's kit,and this is NOT a complaint, is availability. Because they are produced in small batches,I have been on the J71 list for a year now, and will still not make the Top 10 for the current run. That's just the way it is. So for now,its the Mainly Trains option, and in time,I'll have 2 J71's. There will be sufficient detail differences to make it worthwhile, and in the meantime I'll do some old style modelling, carving up plastic bodies. John

I'm no expert on the locos of other Companies, but I am here to tell you that the detail differences between NER locos of the SAME class, never mind similar classes like J71 and J72's are sent to try us modellers, I suppose there were 2 locos which were alike, but tracking them down is another story.... It all adds to the fun

The J71 Conversion kit and the J72 Improvement kit arrived today from Wizard - really fast delivery. Magic, perhaps? Both are Iain Rice products, and are essentially chassis kits. The instructions are comprehensive, and construction seems traditional. The J71 etch includes the new splashers, buffer beams an etch to produce a cab interior, and a balsa plug for the Bachmann boiler bottom. Alan Gibson NER taper buffers are included in the J71 kit, but not in the J72 . In this kit, the "upgrades" are restricted to the chassis etch, which includes the aforementioned cab and buffer beams. The small difference in wheelbase between the 2 locos is reflected in the chassis etch, but, strangely, the instructions make no reference to the shorter bunker on the J71 and early J72 locos. The J72 chassis has the larger cut-outs between the driving wheels referred to in Arthur's post, so the short-bunker J72 is really more appropriate to the kit. I'll post few photos when I get round to a build, but at the moment, an A8 awaits... John

Thanks for the posts. I assume, Jonathan, that you shortened the bunker on the J72 body, in which case it looks a very tidy job. This and the wheel sizes/splashers are the obvious visual differences between the J71 and the later build J72 as modelled by Bachmann , as I understand it. But I plan to go as far as possible in detailing my J71 and J72 models, as per your and Mikemeg's examples. I imagine a PM to Arthur Kimber will be in order once I identify which parts are required, Thanks again John

Thanks, Jonathan. I've tried the search but no luck so far. I'll keep trying. There is a fantastic photo of J71 68273 from Dec 1956 at Blaydon MPD in Steam Memories Vol13 by Booklaw Publications. John

I have just caught up with the fact that the Mainly Trains range is now available on the Wizard Models site. I've ordered the J71 conversion etch, and the J72 detailing etch with a view to converting the Bachmann J72 to a J71, while I wait for ArthurK to produce a new batch of his excellent kit. I'm sure many modellers have done this conversion before, but I cant find a description. Yeadon is ordered, I've bookmarked Mikemegs J71 build, and I have the Hoole book, but I'd appreciate any pointers to the conversion which I should know. I suppose the other obvious conversion is to a short-bunker J72, just in time for the Bachmann release.... Thanks in advance John

Testing and scenic work continues. Haymarket used its' single chimner A2's extensively on Top Link duties to Newcastle in the early-mid50's but they latterly became fairly rare birds, presumably as a consequence of the double chimnet programme on their A3 and A4's. However Trimbush has been entrusted to the down Queen of Scots today. The loco is a GBL body on a Hornby Brit chassis - not one for the purists. It is to be hoped that the J77 got a move on with the Gresley Kitchen.Dining set, en-route to Heaton. North Eastern Kits loco. The spotters will be in ecstasy to see the O2/2. What on earth is it doing here? York have pinched it and sent it North to pick up vans from the Rowntree Factory at Fawdon, and it runs light having been serviced at Heaton. NuCast kit. Actually, I just wanted to run it, but this is my excuse.

The J27 has deposited its' hoppers in the sidings , where a 3 - coach Kitchen/Restaurant Car set ( etch sides on Hornby donors) await transfer to Heaton.. Aren't photos cruel? The ballast work on the sidings in real life was much coarser than on the adjacent main lines, but not as crude as they appear in the photo. Remedial work awaits. The J25 heading North on the cattle wagons is the excellent London Road Model kit, and it will be heading for Morpeth then onwards along the Wansbeck (Wannie) Line towards Bellingham.

As a break from ballasting, I caught up on the thread and saw the discussion on adhesion, which left me baffled, and more comments on use or misuse of grammar. I amused myself by noting that Tony, in an effort at politeness and manners, often couches his comments as questions, often prefaced with "Please may I..." He really isn't asking permission, so his question is either rhetorical, in which case a "?" at the end is correct, or, as I suspect, is actually formal, in which case he should end with a full stop. How boring is that? Back to the ballast...

Photos of Gateshead A4s in 58 seem almost nonexistent. There is a nice Keith Pirt pic of 60016 at York in May 59. The loco looks work stained but far from filthy. I don't have a Yeadon to see when it went for a repair, but if it was after summer 58, I think you can assume it was pretty grimy in your period. The problem with 52A A4s in the late 50,s is that they were pretty rare beasts south of Newcastle, at least in daylight hours. Most turns were handled by A1s, even those ostensibly shown on the WTT as A4 duty.Apparently this was at the direction of the DMPS.