Tony Wright

Mick, Is the BOOKLAW example the one with the ski-jump front footplate? I haven't scrutinised the Hornby A4s, but, it would seem from your observations, that their tenders are too tall too. In the picture of SILVER LINK, the tender looked to be at the right height. Though the Hornby LNER Pacifics might have 'superb detail', I'm not sure I'd class a tender height discrepancy of (over?) 2mm as 'a very minor problem'. As I've mentioned, I wasn't really aware of it (so, it might be 'minor'), but since I don't use Hornby's LNER Pacifics, I hadn't really looked. Though they do have some excellent points, Hornby's poor bogie wheels, poor valve gear and now the over-height tenders rather militate against them in my view. That, and because they're too light-footed for my needs. However, in fairness, nowhere is it claimed that an RTR Pacific will pull 14/15 kit-built brass/white metal bogies. I also have to say, I've been surprised at the number of 'dud' Hornby locos I've had for my loco-doctoring at shows. These are not old Tri-ang/Hornby ones either (they're a doddle to fix) but new models such as A3s, A4s, Britannias and SR Pacifics to name but a few. Motors failing or gears chattering/splitting seem to be the cause. Trying to be fair, this is not just confined to Hornby, though modern Bachmann locos aren't that common in my 'surgeries, apart from the need to adjust pick-ups. The old, split chassis ones are frequent visitors, however. And, please, don't ask about Beattie well tanks! Does anyone know how to get inside these? Regards, Tony.

I don't really have an opinion, Graeme (in this case, at least). As I mentioned, I was in blissful ignorance of the too-tall tender fact before Andrew pointed it out. It would seem it is an issue, if the following pictures are anything to go by.............. I don't know if any of these Gratham A1s/A3s below are yours, but the tenders do appear to ride a bit high, though by differing amounts. The too-high tender problem is not confined to just Hornby's A1s and A3s............ Bachmann's Peppercorn Pacifics suffer too. Though not, it would seem, Hornby's A4s. If I needed convincing any more (not that I need to) that my 'chosen path' of making my own A3s (and 99% of Bytham's other locos) is right for me, this sort of thing confirms it. I'm not deriding RTR locos by this observation, but if my tenders don't ride at the right height, I only have myself to blame.

This morning's job has seen the completion of the SE Finecast A3. It'll be very much a layout loco, and has already whirled 14 kit-built bogies round LB with no fuss. I haven't done any washing/cleaning as yet (best left to the painter, Geoff Haynes), but yet again, it looks like I've made a relief model of the Moon! My naked eye tells me that my soldered joints are neat and tidy, that the number of blobs have been kept to a minimum, and the surfaces are super-smooth. Then, I take a picture, like this, and my eye tells lies! Who was it who said 'a coat of paint hides a multitude of sins'? I hope he/she was right. I must admit, I was unaware of Andrew's (Headstock) observation that the Hornby A3 tender rides too high. Then, I looked again at this picture. It is, by at least 2mm. Look how the lining at the base of the tender is so much higher than that at the base of the cab. When I modified/altered/renumbered/renamed/weathered this example, I was blissfully unaware (and lacking in perception) of the discrepancy. Not only that, it does tower over the cab roof and the adjacent carriage. Yes, the big Gresley tenders were tall, but not this tall. I hope the chap I sold it to is still happy. Its replacement, in the form of another SE Finecast A3, awaits.

It's a pity there's only one 'agree' button, Phil, This morning, the chap came round for whom I'm building two A2/2s. I showed him the completed one (before painting), putting it through its paces and displaying what it could do. Though he's built locos (and continues to do so), he admits that a full-blown Pacific, complete with all the twiddly bits, is a bit beyond him. It would seem that ill-health precludes him from completing some of the procedures - flux fumes, solvent and paint fumes, and so on. However, he's keen to get started with building baseboards (wearing a mask I suppose), laying track, doing the wiring, building the scenery and structures and what have you. He's going to build a (simple) section of the ECML down Stoke Bank. Why? Because that's where he used to trainspot as a boy, including at Little Bytham. He doesn't have the space I have, so it'll just be a four-track section through this delightful Lincolnshire limestone country. A 'watch the trains go by' layout, all built by himself. 'Inspirational' is what he wrote in my visitors' book. I hope so. I'll help him all I can.

Thanks Andrew, I agree about the Hornby valve gear in particular. It really is very poor in both 'thickness' and proportion. Those eight-wheeled tenders were very tall, however, whatever the type.

Construction of the new SE Finecast A3 continues apace............ Just a few more bits to do on the bodywork, then the motion. It's being made to replace this modified Horny A3, which I sold some little time ago (I assume the new owner is happy?). Though I'm under no illusions that the one I'm building will be better, that's not the point as far as I'm concerned. Apart from my detailing/renumbering/renaming/weathering this Hornby model, that's it. I can claim little more than (past) ownership, which I'm slightly 'twitchy' about. A personal thing, of course. What has been proved (proven?) is that the one I'm making will pull a considerable amount more.

Just a quick thank you to all who've shown their work in the last few days. It's this sort of self-reliance and personal modelling which appeals to me more than anything else. Nobody need ask if they may show their work on here - quite the contrary. I go away for a day (to an LNER Society meeting) and the thread just fizzes. Wonderful! Regards to all posters, Tony.

Thanks Tony, I think the on-going P.Way work is confined to the Up slow line. The photographer's notes regarding the passage of LADAS that day include 'travelling very fast!'. That, if nothing else, is what Little Bytham is all about.

Friend Geoff Haynes dropped by today for further photography for his forthcoming book on painting. This is a Mitchell Castle in P4, built and painted by Geoff. And a Brassmasters Princess Royal, also his work. Since, I hope, this thread is all about showing personal modelling, I'm sure these'll be of interest.

Many thanks for your comments, This shot was taken from Marsh Bridge at Little Bytham in the summer of 1962, some three years after the station closed (though the site of the platforms is clear). The ballast looks really clean, with just a few areas of staining around points. Note that the Up slow has concrete sleepers. My ballast isn't anywhere as light as this, but it might appear too bright in model form if copied from this. I don't know. One thing is clear. There's no rampant Mother Nature!

Thanks Phil, It's not just way out west, either. Believe it or not there are sidings between the two signals! March East, last year.

The plan is to do a further video of LB at some point in the summer. That'll be in its current period. A few more things need completing; for instance, point rodding (when I can get around to it) and the M&GNR signals (which Tony Gee is working on at the moment). There are also several new locos and items of rolling stock which are currently being painted, which will feature. In August, it's also planned to do an LNER-period DVD, where the Grantham chaps are going to bring along their trains. Graham Nicholas is even building two somersault signals, because, in 1938, they were still extant. They'll just 'plug-in' in place (temporarily) of the existing ones. Though I'll be part of the filming process (and will introduce the DVDs), I don't have the faintest idea how to import and process the footage. Tom Foster and Jesse Sim will see to that. Thanks in anticipation, chaps. When complete, the programmes will be posted on here and on Youtube. They'll not be made for commercial gain.

This is excellent work Andy, My thanks for posting. I agree about the panel lines being prominent on the Tourist Buffet Car. I know at least one was rebuilt with a complete flush-sided appearance. I'm not entirely sure how prominent any panel lines should be. On the one I've just built, I've left them off (not a kit from the same source) because it looks more like prototype pictures to me. However, I could be wrong. May I ask, what is the origin of the BR crest on the Brit's tender, please? It looks to be too big to me. There should be more 'green' above and below it in my perception. All the above said, I think what should be acknowledged is that this is all your own work. There is nothing more important than this. You can say with pride 'I made these'. You can say it with justification as well. Regards, Tony.

Thanks for all your hard work, Tom, I'm glad we ran the trains slower than our perception might tell us. I don't know if it's a phenomenon of videoing stuff, but trains usually appear to be travelling far too fast. What it also shows is the 'dynamics' of running trains on a model railway, even one with well-built and well-laid track. I think the odd lurch is inevitable, and (perhaps?) the odd 'nodding' vehicle. Generally, I think the dynamics worked fine. What's most important was that every loco was in command of its job (no RTR on view as far as I could see), there was no stuttering, no jerking, no trains dividing and no derailments. Thanks once again, Regards, Tony.

The ballast has been weathered in parts, though there is more to be done. Where locos stop in the station and a section ahead where they start has been stained, to suggest ash, coal, dirty water and oily dribbles. I agree, there is more to be done. That said, LB's track gang won the 'prize length' one year, which was awarded to the track workers who'd produced the best section of track. I was told that an inspector had a very long pole, which he would run along the ballast shoulder to check it was dead straight. No weeds were allowed to grow, no ballast was allowed on top of the sleepers and the ballast was kept as clean as possible. Observe the scene today. Though the trackwork itself has probably never been better, weeds grow in the ten foots and adjacent to the (outside) slows. Bits of ballast are all over the sleepers and it's not uniform. On a visit to a secondary line recently, I couldn't believe what I saw. Sidings had disappeared under grass, tall weeds were being brushed aside every time a train went past and the ballast (though of good quality) was scattered all over the place (where the weeds didn't disguise it). I was reminded of looking at film of 'Colonial', Third World railways.

Returning to the theme of how much RTR stuff appears on layouts these days, yesterday it was my delight to photograph the Preston club's Euxton (pronounced 'Exton') Junction in OO, for the RM. It's up-to date, and uses mostly RTR stock, though it's been personalised (in the main) by its owners. I took this picture when the layout was at the Wigan Show last year. It's already been used in posters and adverts. I believe the snowploughs are built from kits, and the two Class 66s have been detailed/weathered. In no way could these be described as 'just-out-of-the-box', and are meritorious. I know nobody who could build a 66 (Clive?) to the same standard of this pair. As part of the sequence, a steam-special or two runs.............. Including TORNADO. I took this picture, showed it to the chaps, and we all rejected it. The owner wasn't present (which was a pity), but I'm sure he'll understand. Whether it's made by Bachmann or Hornby is irrelevant. None of the separate fittings has been fitted; no front coupling (though the tension-lock, thankfully, has gone), no air brake pipes, no front steps (common) and the cylinder drain cock operating rod is floating freely about (not that there any cylinder drain cocks for it to operate). Not only that, the carriages are entirely-unaltered Bachmann Mk.1s, and as for weathering (even just a hint), forget it. Yet, I believe, this has run like this at shows (not any more!). I do find this hard to believe. Look at the attention to detail in the catenary and the natural weathering of the whole scene. Clearly, observation has taken place here, but not with regard to the loco and its train. Yet, scenes like this appear in the press all the time, and not just in OO. Towards the end of the second decade of this 'new' century, shouldn't we expect more? What a pity, had some 'personal' modelling been applied to the loco and its train, I think this would have made a good shot. It isn't worth my processing this image. Gentlemen of the Preston Club; my thanks for your forbearance and help yesterday, and for your understanding. The pictures (some still to be processed) have worked fine and, I hope, I've done your fine layout justice.

Good evening Tom, As I mentioned to you, I bought the gapped PCB board from C&L, some little time ago. Dave Ellis of SE Finecast supplies pieces of it in his kits. A full-sized piece is in the foreground. I find it easier to use than big strips of copper-clad. For a live chassis (as above), I arrange it so that the gaps are across the main axis. It makes soldering the pick-ups easier, because there's less of a risk of disturbing them when attaching the motor wire. For a dead chassis, the pads are just turned through 90 degrees. I think I told you that the holes make it more secure, the adhesive creeping into them. Regards, Tony.

Altering any RTR model potentially devalues their resale value; especially in the eyes of the collectors. Some won't even take them out of their boxes - believe me, how am I to photograph them? Yet, firms make a living out of detailing/weathering locos and stock. I recall David Jenkinson telling me that he'd never have his (particularly) locos weathered, because he felt they'd be difficult to resell. Ironically, most of his pristine (and very, very beautiful) locos sold for well-under what many thought they should make after his death. As for me; nothing I have, even locos professionally-painted, is un-weathered. I agree, it would be absurd to obliterate the fine lining and perfect finish achieved by Mr Rathbone and Mr Haynes under a layer of muck, but all have a degree of weathering. As for whether weathering potentially devalues what I've got, I don't give a fig. I want my creations to be as 'realistic' as possible. When I'm gone, I won't care and I'm under no illusions that my 'collection' will have a high-value at my demise. My intention is to live for many more years (I'm grumpy enough!) and by the time the Grim Reaper calls, the numbers of folk interested in buying anything I leave should have dwindled (due to their own mortality) to just a few. I don't make things because they will have a (high?) residual value. I make them for my use (though I still build the odd loco on commission), to suit my needs, and what they're worth isn't really an issue, other than for insurance purposes. I think one can see values dropping already, especially in the 'collectors' market. Hornby-Dublo peaked a while back, and vintage O Gauge doesn't seem to be increasing in price. Even beautifully-built items struggle to cover even their components' price. Regards, Tony.

Lovely work, Dennis, Thanks for posting. It's thundering here now! Regards, Tony.

Good morning Rob, Do you think I'm being too strident? Of course, we all had to start somewhere, but 'starting' only happens once. After that we (should) use our eyes and develop our skills. Above all else (at least to me), railway modelling is a personal, creative pastime. I agree, it has many facets (including collecting, though how that can be described as 'creative', I'm not sure, other than in creating a collection), but making/modifying/altering/improving/personalising items is surely central to the 'craft' of creating a model railway. Isn't it? It's now over 60 Christmases ago, that, by the end of the holidays, I'd been chastised by my mother for 'ruining' the Tri-ang loco I'd received as a present. I'd altered it, carved-off handrails, changed its identity, weathered it, put coal in the tender and fitted a crew. As a 12 year old! My mother might even have used the expression 'Whooah'! To me, the hobby right now is being 'swamped' with RTR and RTP. Can you imagine the model railway press from 60 years ago featuring, time after time, RTR products bulging from the front covers? No, with few exceptions, the featured models had been made, by someone, by themselves, for themselves, and not in some far-away factory. That those models might be far worse than those produced RTR these days is irrelevant to me. I agree that the situation could be polarising, especially regarding exhibitions. I do tire of seeing the same old/same new out-of-the-box products on display at shows, particularly in 2mm and 4mm (though 7mm is rapidly catching up). Very often, these aren't altered (resulting in the absurdity of two identical Bachmann Scottish Directors sitting on a loco depot at one show where I was a judge. Did the layout win? I'll give you one guess!), not even to the extent of having the 'nasty' front couplings removed. The more specialist shows, though they might have much-modified RTR locos/stock running on the layouts there, do cater for those of a more 'modelling' mind. At one (more general) show recently, just about all the mainstream 4mm layouts were populated with RTR locos/stock. This debate will run and run, I'm sure. My position (Whooagh!) is well-known, but, in my defence, I don't keep my railway modelling secret. I've been a tutor at umpteen MIssendens and Hobby Holidays, operated layouts all over the country, given countless demonstrations at shows, presented hundreds of talks/after dinner speeches for societies, written (too?) many articles and books on the subject, had one-to-one teaching sessions here with many pupils and I've had the privilege of showing LB to many visitors. At all of these, folks want to learn how to do things, for themselves, especially beginners/the inexperienced. They don't want to learn how to acquire cash, how to write cheques/present credit cards, how to open boxes, how to put things on the track, how to commission work or be entirely RTR/RTP-reliant. That 'we've never had it so good' cannot be denied. However, at what cost to the hobby (in its creative form), I wonder? At the risk of sounding a bit of a hypocrite, a fair bit of the rolling stock on LB is RTR-based. That said, everything has been altered/improved/detailed/weathered before its allowed to run. Yes, I have 'opened a box' (and chucked the box away immediately afterwards!), but what's on the layout doesn't look like how it came out of its box. I think that's my gripe, really. By all means 'exploit' what the RTR chaps have to offer, but, please, don't just leave it as it is, especially if it's going to appear at shows or in the press. Even those who are just starting should be able to tackle some basic improvements/alterations. Regards, Tony.

If Bob acquired it from Terry Robinson, then it is.

Very rare on the class in BR days. Most had the GNR-style door.

Thanks for posting the above Tom, I'm sure it'll be of great interest to readers. With regard to the A1 on the QoS, did we get some moving footage of her on Saturday? I think my favourite subject you've weathered is the B16/2. I have to declare an interest because I painted it. Mike Edge did a very nice job in capturing the look of the class, using the PDK kit as a basis. When I see 'beautifully'-natural weathering like this, I can't believe how folk can just leave their locos and stock as-bought. Since no B16 is available RTR (as yet?), then we must confine ourselves to kit or scratch-building. Surely, then, it's just a case of observing pictures of the prototypes and copying those? I firmly believe that weathering is within the reach of any railway modeller. They might not reach your standard, but, for realism, it's worth having a go. One can practise on old models (that's what my son, Tom, did), thus developing the necessary skills. It's the quickest way of obtaining 'realism' in my opinion. Regards, Tony.

Great stuff Trevor, Thanks for posting. I built a County once - from a Jamieson kit, with a fair bit of added detail. I sold it to a mate from Stafford, though where it is now, I have no idea. Regards, Tony.

As I've mentioned before, as part of our 'horse-trading', Tom Foster has weathered locos for me in return for my helping him in his loco-building. I'm very lucky to have one of the current 'masters of the craft' weathering items for me. I've shown pictures of his work on here before. However, having a spare hour this morning, I thought I'd take some new pictures of locos he's weathered for me. It's a principal principle of mine that when anything is featured on Little Bytham, due credit is given to the person who's done it (at all times). After Geoff Brewin (Comet's previous proprietor) died, I acquired a Pro-Scale A1 he'd near-completed. I finished it off and painted it. I then handed it to Tom to weather. It 'is what it is', and close inspection will reveal a few 'warts' on this loco. However, it's a treasured possession, a tangible memory of a friend, and Tom's weathering has just made it very natural. Two more Foster-weathered locos which have featured before. The B1 is modified Hornby, and I built the K1 from a DMR kit and painted it. Again, don't both look very natural? Layout locos indeed! These are both modified Bachmann locos. Though both see very little use (their haulage power, though adequate for plastic rolling stock is limited when confronted with weighty, kit-built vehicles), the subtle weathering has made them much more realistic. Especially when compared to how they appear straight from the box (though this is a different Bachmann A2, but the finish is the same as supplied). Long before the lad was born, I built and painted this ECJM's L1. Tom's weathering has brought it to life. Of course, kit-building an L1 is now longer necessary, and (I have to admit) this Hornby product is exceptional at source. However, it's far too pristine. Its finish is unrealistic. And, just to prove that I'm not entirely dependent on others, this is what I turned the loco above in to. Everything on Little Bytham is weathered, not just the locos and stock. Everything in the big wide world gets weathered. Finally, the 'wobbly' stock in some of the pictures is wobbly. The camera just proves it!