Tony Wright

In preparation for Mr Barnatt's 'tutorial' later this week, some more examples of the Comet/Trice/Kemilway overlays on butchered Gresleys....... These are a pair of Mike Trice sides as supplied, ready to by made-up and grafted on to another Hornby Sleeper to make a BG. The Trice Open Third/Second, Dia. 127 is now finished, complete with interior. Lining is Modelmaster's (I always put it right at the top of the panels rather than exactly where it should be on the central beading because of the difficulty in making any transfer lining lie dead flat on raised detail). The underframe has been weathered. Some of these cars were used as Restaurant Cars and branded thus, though the Pantry Third/Second was preferred. I hope my choice of number is right! I've painted the Kemilway Dia. 298 TK, like the SO using Halfords Burgundy Red acrylic car spray. It will be completed by tomorrow. Some of these cars were built for the 'Flying Scotsman' of 1938, so had pressure-ventilation, but a further batch was built later in 1938 with (I assume) standard ventilation. I hope this represents one of those.

Just as a follow up to PC Gresleys, the train to the left disappearing has a PC Gresley brake. The train alongside is composed of Hornby Gresley stock. The K3 on the right hauls the five-car set of PC Gresleys mentioned in an earlier post. It looks like the roof on the leading brake has sagged a bit, but, on a layout, as here on Grantham, they pass not-too-close muster. In BR carmine/cream the effect is not so good. Neither is my overall modelling either. The ends on this PC brake are a bit wonky where they meet the roof and I should have made a better effort to get the Tourist Twins to line up. Still, the Bachmann Scottish 'Director' looks the part.

Thanks Lee, I'm glad to see my workbench is still a model for good organisation, efficiency and cleanliness! Still, things get built.

Bernard, Many years ago Colin Allbright of Bachmann acquired a fair bit of stuff from Peter Chatham when the latter sold up and retired. It included the lithograph printing equipment for producing the sides (Colin was producing his Ultima coach kits at the time), but whether the vacuum-forming tools were in the deal I don't know. I don't think any more PC Gresleys (or any others) were subsequently produced. A pity really, because the teak finish was especially effective at a few feet away, but in BR carmine/cream the effect was less so because of the lack of surface relief. I gave a rake of five PC teaks to Graham Nicholas for operation on Grantham and they fit in very well. The roofs look right, too.

Larry, I didn't narrow the underframes, but still managed to break the turnbuckle trussing on one side. I don't think it's being ham-fisted, it's just so delicate. And, yes, early-'30s for the introduction of the angle trussing.

Phil, The donors so far have been Hornby Gresleys in carmine and cream, though there might be some maroon ones to come. The coach done today started life as a Sleeping Car, which Gilbert obtained for a tenner (I think) off ebay. He's also acquired some from friends. As to the costs, I really don't know, though I suppose if I wreck one I should enquire.

Diagrams, diagrams? I really haven't a clue! Gilbert brings the donors and the replacement sides (he knows the diagrams) and away we go. I do the bits where there is no 'delete' function - slashing away the Hornby sides with a circular saw, then 'knifing' and filing back to just below the cornice, tack-soldering the etched overlays, tack-soldering droplights and so on. He then completes the solder seam, cleans up, finishes off the droplights, glues one side on (though he'll eventually do both) and puts a new cantrail on from microstrip. He also modifies the interiors. I arrange how to fix the new body to the chassis, and away he goes - another coach to the good. One a week 'til we've done them. In return, he'll be doing some 'gardening' on my trainset.

More busy days...... Progress on the Jamieson V2 has been reasonable. These really are classic kits - no tabs, no slots, no surface detail, no witness marks for handrail pillars or what have you. Just several pieces of nickel silver and brass, mostly formed to a basic shape where necessary but some further shaping being needed. For some reason I had a spare set of etched cabsides from a Crownline kit, I think. How or why I obtained these has long been expunged from my memory. Still, they fit and it saves the pain of adding window beading. And today, another session with Mr Barnatt, assisting him to make another of the umpteen more conversions of Hornby Gresleys he needs for Peterborough North. This time it's a Comet sides Four-Compartment Brake Third, fitted to a Hornby Sleeper. The four battery boxes were cut off, but the roof detail is still to be altered.

My pleasure Lee, It looks like I'm becoming a bit of a loco doctor these days. I'm pleased that all the 'fiddling' I did on the ones you brought succeeded, and, indeed, to reduce the step widths on the (original) W1, make new pick-ups for the V4 and snip some bits off as well (why do builders have to leave 'prototypical' clearances around bogie/pony cut-outs when the locos have to negotiate much tighter than prototype curves?), and sort out the C1, resulted in classes running never before seen on my trainset. I hope you can make the pictures work. As for loco-doctoring, a most enjoyable day was spent yesterday 'fixing' some kit-built Thompson Pacifics on Peterborough North. Well, it ended up enjoyable, but I chased an A2/2's problems for what seemed hours - change the pick-ups, give more clearance to the bogie stretcher, enlarge the curves in the front frames above the bogie wheels and make a new drawbar. Phew! The final cure - the thinnest film of Araldite, applied to those frames, warmed by a hair dryer to make the expoxy more fluid as it cured. Then, a lick of matt black. Result, no more stuttering, no more binding, no more short circuits. Next patient, please!

Thanks David, How the World turns............... The picture of 60509 WAVERLEY off PDK's website posted by you and Mick is of the one I built many years ago when Dave King had just started PDK, having sold Crownline. I built it for a review in BRM. It might even be a Crownline one - the memory fades.......... Ian Rathbone beautifully painted her in early-BR guise, and I took the picture as well. A proper picture, on film, with a wacking great camera with movements - no mucking around with puny digital cameras - that negative could be enlarged to the size of wall in a big room! Clearly, I fitted no extra roof ventilators and that tender looks to be the right height. I can't recall altering it, but the faculties crumble as the years progress. A sold it to a guy who was chuffed to bits - it raced round his large layout hauling a full-length train. I hope he's still chuffed, because the locos I built on commission are guaranteed for the rest of my life.

The A2/1s did not have the extra ventilators over the crew's seats, at least not according to the Isinglass drawing. I cannot see any in the pictures I've scrutinised, either. With regard to the relative heights of the cab and tender apexes, when first equipped with eight-wheeled tenders (and 60507 inherited its from the blown-up A4) the height at the rear of the cab was 12' 10 and three sixteenths" (the height at the front was 13' 1" because of the ventilator) and the height at the front of the tender 12' 8 and seven eighths". By BR days this had been reduced to 12' 1". So, looking at the beautifully-finished model of 60509, I'd say the tender front is too low, but not by a huge amount. As for the painting of the tender top turn-over and the piece on the cab between the eaves and the horizontal rainstrip, might I offer the following photographic 'evidence', please? Granted, these locos are in preserved condition (apart from 60163 which is yet to be preserved) and are indicative of the condition they were in when I took the pictures. That said, particularly with regard to 60007's condition, I asked about the black-painting above the beading when I saw her at Pickering and was told that that was the BR official painting spec'.

This issue has popped up on several occasions as to whether the turned-in bit (is that the right description?) at the top of the LNER eight-wheeled tenders should be black, blue, or green. It's dependent on the tender-style, of course to some extent, but I've come to some (admittedly subjective) conclusions on this. The GNR coal rail tenders were always black at the top. The 1928 corridor tenders in LNER days were black at the top above the beading in LNER green and 'usually' black above the beading in blue. Peter Townend's colour softback on the A4s published by Ian Allan tends to confirm this. However, in preservation in LNER blue SIR NIGEL GRESLEY had the top bit blue, and some earlier B&W pictures tend to suggest the same, but only a few. In BR green, the top bits were most commonly painted black. Again, consult the little book. The new-type non-corridor tenders were black above the beading in LNER green and most commonly black in BR days. Derek Penney's hardback colour book from Ian Allan tends to support this conclusion. The 1935 streamlined corridor tenders were always the body colour right up to the top (unless some were ever painted in LNER green?) in LNER blue or BR green. The 1937 streamlined non-corridor tenders were black at the top in LNER green and the main body colour in LNER blue and BR green. The later Pacific tenders (riveted or flush) were black at the top in LNER green but main body colour in BR days. I don't specifically mention BR blue or the experimental colours but the same principles tend to apply. Am I right?

Good morning David, According to the Isinglass drawing, the tender sides above the sole plate on the A2/1 (eight-wheeled tender) should be just a twitch under 30mm tall in 4mm scale - just a bit under 7' 6". This is to the tender side top - not the apex at the front, coal division plate or rear. I haven't measured the several PDK (ex-Crownline) tenders of this type I've built but I hadn't noticed a discrepancy previously. In previous recent posts I've shown a Crownline A2/2 and A2/3, so I'll scrutinise those again. With regard to the discrepancy between the footplate/sole plate heights of the Bachmann A1s and A2s, below is an A2 model as supplied by Bachmann. The apparent difference in height is exacerbated by the presence of the lining on the footplate valance. The following pictures come from the article you mentioned. Here are the washers glued underneath the cab. I also always replace the Bachmann drawgear. It's either too long or too short, and is an absolute fag to couple/uncouple. With the washers in place, the two elements are much nearer in height. It's not an absolute fix because there is a slight gap now between the footplate and the frames (invisible from 'layout-viewing' distances) and the two still don't absolutely line up. From this low view, can you make out the gap? Here she is completed. Note the colour difference between the top of the tender and the sides. This is because Bachmann originally painted the BR green tender tops in LNER-style - black. All the other 'twiddly' additional pipes are in place, as are the replacement bogie wheels. John Houlden kindly air-brush weathered the loco for me, which took out the green discrepancy. In the end, because of a single-chimey A2's unlikely presence on Little Bytham, I gave it to Graeme King (who rebuilt it in his inimitable style for it to become another A2/3 - or was it an A2/2?). Anyway, 60537 in this guise no longer exists, but I have the pictures. From this angle the two elements appear to match exactly in height. And, I should have removed the AWS battery box! Finally, and thanks for asking - how well-mannered in these times - you do not need my permission to post any picture on this thread. It is not my property, I don't have any priorities or privileges over anyone else and I didn't even set it up. I couldn't, being computer illiterate - Andy did.

David, Sorry to be pedantic, but WAVERLEY is an A2/1, not an A2/3. Smaller boiler, smaller firebox and full 'V'-fronted cab are the main differences. Also boiler handrails are a bit higher, resulting in their position on the large deflector plates being different. The vacuum ejector pipe is lower as well. With regard to the relationships between locos and tenders, for best visual appearance it's good if the footplate on the loco lines up with the sole plate on the tender. There are many examples where this doesn't happen. It could be that the tender is empty, or full, or there are new springs on either vehicle. Sometimes the eye is tricked because the footplate valance has no equivalent on the tender, so the loco looks a bit lower. This is especially true of A4s (apart from those towing tenders with the residual backing strip for the erstwhile stainless steel strip). With regard to the Bachmann A1 and A2 models this is definitely the case, with the loco footplate under the cab being appreciably lower than the sole plate on the tender. I raise the back end up of the loco by using washers. I hope all this helps..........

Many thanks Graeme.... All the above is entirely relevant, but I think your point about the 'standard' result is the most important. In case you are alarmed with what's been posted by some others, I'm completely delighted with what you've produced for me in the form of the A2/3 conversion to make SUN STREAM. On the layout, she's entirely natural and fits in perfectly. It's a tribute to your skill and ingenuity, so many thanks again. Tony.

Just as an aside to my various Thompson Pacific ramblings, here's something new on Little Bytham. This is a splendid model by Heljan and depicts the loco brand new on its way to Kings Cross to 'fail'. It needs slight weathering to its frames, but it's very smart. There were a few issues - bits came off (including the fuel tank) when I took it from its box and every axle had to be (easily) altered to give the correct back-to-back. It runs beautifully, which is a bit unlike the prototype. To be entirely accurate (as far as my memory goes), I should take out the motor and buy enough to have the rest of the class. Then stick them all in a line, dead, on a model of a remote siding at 30A.

With regard to my preference for the DJH version, I think it's the relative ease with which they go together. Generally, the quality of the castings and etchings are excellent, too. When complete, they also have a 'mass', which enables them to pull prodigious loads. The lubricators are too small, though they're the right size for an A2/2, so the firm's compromised there. All the above said about the DJH version, it still has to be made and painted, and it's the most expensive. For those on a more limited budget or are not too confident about full kit-building, the Bachmann/Graeme King path has many merits. The mechanism works well and most of the painting is already done. And, as a layout loco?

I have indeed Larry. Here's mine, built by me and painted by Ian Rathbone. It's the third DJH A2/2 ever built, after I built the proving model for DJH themselves and the review model for BRM. The A2/2 in your picture is also built from a DJH kit (what's wrong with the tender, by the way?) and beautifully painted (if I may say so) in ex-works condition. But, it illustrates some points about this small class which might be of interest. As supplied, the DJH kit most-easily builds into 60505 and 60506, after they received replacement boilers. These two have the streamlined non-corridor tender supplied. The A1-type boiler provided in the kit would also suit 60501 and 60502 (after they lost their original shortened P2 boilers), but the tender isn't right (they had the new-style, high-sided non-corridor tenders with beading and a turn-in at the front - 60501's being, uniquely, welded). Also, their cabs turned-in at the rear and had beading. 60503 and 60504 cannot be easily made from the DJH kit because, although the tender is right, these locos retained their original shortened boiler and full 'V'-fronted cab, plus a shorter central footplate section. So, by the time depicted by our respective WOLVES OF BADENOCH, what can one say? Firstly, 60506 never had the main handrails cut short of the smokebox front. They always were turned-in and clipped to the outer ring. 60505 had the shortened handrails with the later boiler, but she also had a Thompson boiler by this time with the dome one ring further forward. She also had an extended plate between the sandbox fillers, and the front numberplate and cross rail transposed. Secondly, 60506 was unique in retaining the rimmed chimney to the end (60505, almost). Does the model you painted have a lipped chimney? Earlier, 60506 also had the transposed numberplate and cross rail. It also had very-close-together sandbox fillers. With regard to the others, 60501 had the shortened handrails, a pronounced wiggle in its vacuum ejector pipe and spoked tender wheels. 60502 had the handrails round the front, a straight ejector pipe and disc wheels. 60503 and 60504 were the most twin-like, though MONS MEG had a plate between the sandbox fillers, but only on the RH side. Talk about the Devil in the detail! I mention all the above, not to criticise the A2/2 you painted, but to illustrate how easily 'mistakes' can be made. Throughout the whole lives of these Thompson rebuilds, at any one time only two were really similar in detail, so the pitfalls are manifold. Anyway, at least the one you painted has an AWS battery box. Why didn't I put one on mine?

Mick, I think the smoke deflectors on Graeme's need to be curved a bit more at the top. It shows up more after they've been weathered. As for the superheater header covers - I think it's a lot more than just those which put the DJH version way ahead in my opinion. But, thanks for calling them all beauties........

Thanks Roy........it was Humbrol 104. I wonder if any tins of it still remain? A2/3s a-plenty it would seem. Once the weathering paint had dried on 60515, I thought I'd try a little photographic experiment. All my locos are 'layout' locos, whether scratch-built, kit-built or modified proprietary. That is to say (I hope) their home is not the glass cabinet but running on a selection of layouts. Indeed, over the years they've been seen on Fordley Park, Leighford, Stoke Summit, Charwelton, Little Bytham and running as guests on Biggleswade and one or two of them (with their EM frames underneath) on Retford. Thus, they're not made to be scrutinised at the closest of quarters but to look right at what a friend used to describe as 'stand-off' scale, or the rule of three feet. Yes, with an Ian Rathbone or Steve Barnfield professional paint job they are made better (well, much better than with my painting) but they must run - run as the prototypes used to, hauling scale-length trains at speed, or move smoothly at walking pace. They must not stutter, jerk, display too much 'electrical' noise, they must go round 2' 6" radius curves without binding or shorting and they must not derail. Otherwise, what's the point in my building them? Would that the same could be said about some 'professionally'-built locos which have passed through my hands. Nicely painted they might be, but they don't 'go'. So, with 60515 complete (apart from the fitting of the plates and just a few more dribbles to apply), how would she look on the layout? More importantly, how would she look in comparison with my other A2/3s? Since the Cliffe-Uddingston(e?) cement block train ascending Stoke bank seems to have been the apotheosis of the work of the class, I thought I'd set it up and take some pictures. Here's EDWARD THOMPSON herself (himself), probably the most typical on this working of the three A2/3s I possess. Built from a Crownline kit with a SE Finecast A2 cast boiler (for weight and because I'm not a fan of resin), it represents the loco with fewer cladding bands than the rest (apart from AIRBORNE until her first boiler change), which it kept 'til the early-'60s. The cabsides have been altered to allow for the correctly proportioned lining panel (by moving the horizontal handrail up), and Ian Rathbone painted it. HYCILLA is built from an A2/3 kit (the second one made after I'd built the first for DJH) and, being a Tyneside-based loco probably never worked this train. It, too, has a Dia.117 Thompson boiler (note the round dome), but the cladding bands are in the more conventional position. Once more, Ian Rathbone painted it. And here's SUN STREAM (or will be) on the same train (again, since it was a New England duty unlikely as the loco). As is obvious, this has a different pedigree. For one, I didn't make it - Graeme King did. And, two, Ian Rathbone didn't paint it - I patch-painted it, part-lined and numbered it and applied the weathering. It's also not a kit-build, but modified from a Bachmann A2. Might I suggest others make a comparison and offer an opinion, please? Though I concede the obvious difference in painting standards (though 60515 is deliberately more heavily-weathered), how does she stack up as a layout loco in comparison? It's nice she has a Peppercorn Dia.118 boiler with a streamlined dome in comparison. One thing an outsider cannot reach a judgement on is the relative performances. Though SUN STREAM is fast and smooth, in a way she's more prototypical in her running than my pair of kit-built ones, meaning she's very light on her feet in comparison. The two kit-built ones will march away with 15 bogies with ease (brass kit-built cars). 60515 just polishes the rails! That said, she handles the 30-wagon cement block train very happily. Oh, and yes, the lamps could do with weathering down!

Impatient as usual, I decided to weather the Graeme king A2/3 before the nameplates arrive. This is not a problem, for all I'll do is add a bit more after they're fixed on. Source material from one of Keith Pirt's books is an invaluable piece of reference. It's Steam Colour Portfolio Eastern & North Eastern Region. Interestingly, the same picture also appears in the same photographer's book on Grantham, but the colour reproduction in the latter volume is far inferior in my perception. Also interestingly are the somewhat derogatory comments about the A2/3s in both captions. For further observations on ET, please look at the fascinating thread started by Simon Martin. Most enlightening! As usual, my weathering is all dry-brush, using a mix of matt enamel paints - matt black, various russet browns, several greys and a touch of white (though the last-mentioned has yet to be dribbled on the model at washout plugs and around the wiggly pipes). Almost without exception, York's locos were dirty unless fresh from shops. Both pictures of SUN STREAM in Peter Coster's 'Book Of' the various A1 and A2 Pacifics show the loco in grubby guise, with just a touch of sheen reflecting off various parts, something I've tried to replicate. The dry-brushing produces some random effects, including streaks in the vertical plain, suggesting rain's effect. Since I don't use an airbrush, I cannot comment, apart from some effects I've seen can be too uniform or even splattery. Proprietary weathering can seem like that at times, especially when it looks like just dirty thinners have been squirted at the nether regions. When completely dry, I might rub some thinners on using a cotton bud to pick up a reflection off the top of the boiler, and dribble those streaks of white. The chassis has been weathered in the same manner. I might add that my powerful lights bring out far more than natural (not direct sunlight) or room lighting, especially where brush marks are evident. They almost disappear under ordinary lighting. Something I've neglected to fit is the bracket in front of the rear nearside driver for the (by now redundant) BTH speedo. I'll post some pictures when she's completed. Many thanks for the comments about the HMRS transfers. Looking closely, the transfers I used on 60515 were actually old PC ones, so their gum is still effective. But, if the latest ones are not much use, it'll be down to waterslide transfers, even if a halo can be left.

Work has continued on Graeme King's A2/3 conversion............. Six coats of sable-applied Railmatch BR/GWR mix of green were needed to cover the resin. I haven't much used this paint but its covering powers are very limited from this experience. There are six times the possibility of bits of muck contaminating the surface. Has anyone else come across this with Railmatch? The paint itself is very easy to apply and dries to a pleasing semi-matt finish, but two coats of the old Humbrol equivalent (was it 104 or 114?) would have seen complete opacity. My last tin of that marvellous paint turned to solid many years ago. Is there a current equivalent out there? I know Graeme mentioned one which nearly matched Hornby's BR green. Does one equate to Bachmann's? Just two coats of Humbrol No. 85 black were needed. You'll note a visible difference between the two finishes. This has more to do with surface texture than colour/tone. In fact, it looks more different under my lights, and heavy weathering (which this York-based loco will finally receive) will disguise the subterfuge. The cab is lined with Modelmaster's BR orange/black/orange, which is a good match with Bachmann's. The cabside numbers are from the HMRS 'Pressfix' range, but are old stock. I initially used a new sheet, but the numbers were much too thick. Has anyone else come across this more recently? I don't know what to do, because all the numbers/letters appear to be the same and I'm running low on 6s and zeros. Yes, I know inverted 9s make a 6 but when some recent models have been numbered 60009, 60039, 63670, 63980 and 67394, you can see how those essential ER digits are gobbled up. Does anyone want umpteen sheets with 4s on in exchange? The cab has been glazed with thin, clear plastic and Krystal Klear. The former is difficult to do because of the thickness of the window reveals (why did I give my spare DJH A2/3 cabs away?), but painting those reveals matt black disguises them. A start has been made on weathering the chassis. It awaits 247 Developments' nameplates, and the cabside plates are from the same source. The front numberplate (with incorrect 6) is from Ian Wilson's Pacific range. A glance at Colin Walker's Trails Through Peterborough will reveal 60515 in (I think) the middle of 1958, where she still has the high numberplate of the incorrect style. My mouldering 1957 Combined Volume also has a picture of her in that guise, with the scribbled hand of a none-too-bright eleven year old proclaiming to have seen it at Retford. At her next overhaul, the plate fixing was lowered to the top hingestrap and the correct font cast. The 50A plate is from Charlie Petty's range When the nameplates are fitted, it'll be out with the muck!

Barry, Never say never - why don't I learn to qualify my statements? Yes, of course with hefty tools it could be done. What I meant was that, in the past, where I've erected a set of (say) Comet frames slightly askew, just twisting in the hands puts them right. Not with a set of Jamieson frames, though...........

Michael, You're quite right, though if they're not erected squarely, there's no chance of their being twisted straight. They also are indestructible (if such an adjective can be applied to a a set of model frames) and, most importantly, when the body is fixed on it's that which deflects (if need be), not the chassis. I've seen too many examples where the opposite occurs.

By some diabolical piece of computer function, the following pictures have also appeared on the Gilbert Barnatt's Peterborough North thread. I give in! Further progress to report on the Jamieson V2. Frames erected, square and true and pick-up pads installed. These were superglued to the base of the frames then re-enforced from the top with epoxy. Comet gearbox installed with flat Mashima motor. As usual, it ran better backwards than forwards - hence its turned-round position on the rear coupled axle. Though mechanically not as balanced as driving of the centre axle, this does have the advantage of subsequently needing less taking out from the bottom of the boiler. Since I'll be using Nu-Cast valve gear (in stock since the '70s!), I employed the same firm's rods off the fret. They matched perfectly and are visually superior to Jamieson's lengths of bullhead rail with holes drilled in it. Since the Jamieson pony truck is just a brass stamping (though I'm sure I've used a cast one in the past), and since it's the second decade of the 21st Century, I decided to use a Comet replacement. Brakes on (sorry for the pun) - spare etchings from the hundreds of odd frets I've got - and pony trucks installed. At this stage I always begin building the body next.