NCB

At this point there was one of those accidents with which us modellers are familiar. I dropped the firebox front on the floor, and it proved difficult to see. In standing up to get a better view I trod on it, which resulted in the rods becoming somewhat bent. However, with small pliers and a lot of patience I managed to restore it to more or less its original shape. Before adding the firebox wrapper, I soldered the final former to the rods just in front of where the rear of the firebox would be. It was then fairly easy to attach the wrapper, using that former and the firebox front. A few dabs of solder run between formers and wrapper on the underside, and the firebox was complete. Here it is: Not perfect, but near enough. I shoved it in position on the body to see how it looks: The next stage is to add the boiler. A problem; my calculations seem to have gone slightly astray. The intention was to wrap a boiler wrapper around a piece of K&S thin walled brass tubing, and attach the lot to the firebox front. However, it turns out the result would be almost the same diameter as the firebox, and it needs to be smaller. I found that the tubing itself would be the right diameter for the boiler, so I'll use just that and discard the wrapper, at the expense of losing the nicely etched boiler bands. I haven't any of the right diameter tube in stock anyway, so I'll have to order some. Nigel

I've had a fair amount printed in finest detail plastic. For the models in question I think it's fine. Here's a couple of Cambrian 2-plank wagons, body, buffer shanks and axlebox/springs from Coast Line Models, on my own etched chasses: I've had a Cambrian Albion 2-4-0 in the same material and it's good enough. Don't think I'd use it on a coach. I'm sure materials and cost will improve. Nigel

I'm with you on this one. Any new 3mm RTR needs to be to modern standards. And it's a great scale for that; to me fine scale 3mm looks so much better than N fine scale. Obviously it will have a price to match. Nigel

Time to get going again! The final main phase of the body, namely the smokebox/boiler/firebox, is going to be very fiddly, and I've rather been ducking out of it. Coward! Here we go, starting with the firebox. The firebox front is formed from a number of layers of etched formers; the front of these will need to be filed into a curve to represent the brass band between firebox and boiler. The rear two are of slightly reduced diameter and provide something to solder the firebox wrapper onto. Three 0.6mm n/s rods going through the formers keep them in alignment. To start with, I took the front former and placed it onto a flat bit of MDF, then used a drilling stand to drill to 0.6mm holes into the MDF using the former as a template. As each hole is drilled I used short bits of 0.6mm rod to align hole in former with the drilled hole. Once done, I replaced the short bite of rod with longer rods, which will eventually extend beyond the firebox wrapper into locating holes in the cab front. You can see the firebox wrapper on the left, also more of the formers; two are the same size as the first one, the third, one of two, slightly smaller, will lie underneath the smokebox wrapper. These formers have been pre-tinned, by the way. Next stage is to feed each former onto the rods after sloshing flux on the one underneath and bonding them together using a hot iron and more flux. Here's the final product: I used a fine-tipped iron; I wished I'd used a broader one for more heat as in one place things haven't stuck. However, it's easily rectified. I did a test fit of it in the engine body to check it was OK: In the next session I managed to curve the smokebox wrapper into the right sort of curve, first by feeding it through rollers then by pressing it with fingers round smaller and smaller diameter brass tube. I also started filing a radius on the front of the former sandwich. So far my nerves have held up, but it is fiddly, not helped by my dodgy right hand. I'm thinking of coating the formers with a bit more solder to hid the layers, but it may not be necessary. Also, I need an extra former on the front to locate the boiler. The thought strikes me that the firebox front could actually be made by 3D printing in say brass, but that's one for the future. Nigel

If we're talking about the GWR, I'd rather go for a bit of brute strength, like an ex-Rhymney Class R 0-6-2T, typical of South Wales right up to the mid 1950s. Or for something a bit more exotic, a Cambrian Jones goods 0-6-0, which also lasted until the mid 1950s.

There is still a healthy Triang TT based contingent in that TT-3 ecosystem. RTR may be second-hand but it still exists and quite a proportion of the 3mm Society members, plus quite a few non-members, are into it. Triang stuff lasts!

British HO has never been a goer and I suspect the same is true of British 1:120. TT3 has the advantage that there's an existing ecosystem, quite a large one really if you're prepared to build stuff yourself. Don't get me wrong. I have a couple of the Corgi 1:120 static models and think they're superb. British 120 could work but only if a manufacturer was prepared to invest a lot to create that ecosystem. The revival of O Gauge RTR happened because the manufacturers in question were selling into an existing ecosystem. With TT3, if a manufacturer was prepared to invest into producing even a few coaches/locos it could give things a big kick-start. But I think they need to aim for attracting new users and not just 3mm Society members.

I too am unexcited about a mineral wagon. There are plenty of kits available, they're easy to build and not that exciting. I'd go for something more distinctive and less easy to build well, but fairly common, namely a tank wagon. Say a petrol wagon from around 1938/39. Looks good, plenty of livery options, ran in multiples, and one of the more challenging things to do well from a kit. Or a 6-wheel milk tanker. There is a recent Society kit, but having had a look at it I am unenthusiastic about trying it.

You're right, coaches are a weak point. Even for kits. The Society used to do a plastic B set kit which was OK if not great, and very useful. It was good for providing a 57' shell onto which to stick Worsley etched coach sides; here's my GWR toplight so built: I've built the odd Worsley kit but they do take quite a lot of time. Thought of etching my own but haven't got around to it yet. I think in 3mm it's possible to get some accurate highly detailed rolling stock, and I'd really like to see what Rapido could do.

What is the cab-side wire? Not come across that before.

You may well be right. I'm only just getting into Mk.1 coaches (After my usual period, but I have some Kitmasters and was wondering about 3D printing interiors for them). But essentially, something which offers a brake bit plus the two classes, whatever the precise arrangement.

But they are examples of people getting together to finance things. Rapido have come up with a proposal for the 3mm Society to investigate. I think it's worthwhile seeing what the Society and its members make of it. I think the proposal itself is excellent; let's see how the sums add up.

The people Rapido sell models to in 00 seem to be happy enough with a small girder hanging off the ends of their stock. What's the difference?

An advantage of the Mk. 1 coach is the standardisation. If you're going to produce 1 type then you might as well allow for producing others. Producing more types would be only a moderate increase in costs and you're likely to sell more of them. A brake-third and a composite would be an excellent start.

Triang's problem was that virtually all selling was done through model shops; mail order was almost unknown. And the shops weren't keen on selling 2 ranges when they could sell just one. The market today is totally different. People have ready access to anything made.

Think you're wrong about the Mk. 1 coach. At the moment the only RTR coaches are old Triang, which are of variable quality and very crude by modern standards. A top quality Mk.1 would enable modellers to upgrade their stock in a moment and I think would sell in droves; people would buy rakes of them. The problem with the class 101 is that it wouldn't sell anything like as many, and can only be used on its own. Coaches can be used with a wide range of locomotives.

There have been successful crowd-funded projects within the 3mm Society. One example was the fine scale chairs, and fine scale track bases in 14.2mm and 13.5mm gauges. Quite a lot of kit projects were done by an individual or individuals doing the planning and then asking for enough orders to make the project viable; the Malcolm Mitchell kits in 3mm were an example and very nice they were too. Here's a Manor: and a Metro: The Society recently reached agreement with Martin Finney on producing some of his kits in the scale. They are produced on a batch basis so as soon as orders reach a certain number another batch is produced.

There's some nonsense being talked here about TT-3 versus 1:120. There is a very good reason why TT-3 uses (underscale) 12mm track. British steam prototypes often had very restricted clearances outside the wheels, re splashers, outside valve-gear, and other things. The only way a scale solution is possible is by using things like dead scale thickness wheels. Good luck with that one. I model in 3mm/ft using the scale track gauge of 14.2mm; I manage it by using the reasonably thin 3mm Society fine scale wheels and by cheating, such as drifting cylinders outwards, likewise splashers where necessary. Better to my mind that manufacturers stick to accurate bodies and use 12mm track to accommodate them. Some more realities. TT-3 isn't a "new scale". It's been around for over 60 years and while Triang got out early other manufacturers like GEM kept up support. The 3mm Society has a healthy and active membership and there have been numerous Society projects supporting that membership. For example it has one of the best ranges of quality plastic wagon kits of any scale, it offers a wide range of wheels for locos, wagons and coaches, and there's likewise a wide range of kits for locos, wagons and coaches. And it attracts new members. It's halfway between OO and N, offering something different to either. The current advances in things like 3D printing and laser cutting are a boon; many outfits are now prepared to produce 3mm versions of things they've done for other scales. The attractions of the Rapido idea, to me, is that building good coaches is time consuming, so providing a common prototype gives existing 3mm modellers a helping hand, and it also makes the scale more accessible to those wanting to give it a go. I'm pretty sure a Mk.1 coach would be successful. And if that's successful, then somebody might start looking at an RTR loco or two, which would really make a big difference to new entrants.

An RTR Mk.1 coach would be a good start. Most people could find a reason to run them; I say them because if somebody bought 1 they'd buy several. Also, it should be possible to design it so that different mk.1 coaches could fairly easily be produced. There is a need in the scale for RTR or similar coaches; there are plenty of kits but they are time consuming to build. To expand the market away from current 3mm Society members an RTR locomotive would be a good idea. In my view you only need 1 type to enable people to start thinking of simple layout projects to get started with. It could be almost anything widely available in the 1950s or later. I'd favour a pannier tank but I'm biased! I'd look at anything. I think a loco plus mk.1 coaches could really get things going, both outside and inside the 3mm Society. Don't worry about wagons; there's a huge range of quality easy to build kits available. Go for 12mm gauge and make sure things run on Peco track. Me, I do 14.2mm finescale, but if the stuff was available I'd certainly try a 12mm project. 3mm is a great scale, more compact than 00, but with modelling advantages over N; it just needs the right push to move forwards. Re the comment higher up about 00/EM/P4 type factions, there aren't any. People do Triang, and 12mm and 14.2mm gauges,but they all get along fine. Nigel

https://www.binnsroad.co.uk/railways/reidpath/index.html Partnership between the Reidpaths and Harold Hudson, dissolved 1924.

I tried the "bedding" track, designed and possibly made by Kato, to see if it would work with Triang TT. Only problem was that the Triang loco wheel flanges can bottom out on the (non-powered) frog so the loco can stall. It's possible that deepening it slightly with say a cutting disc might remove the problem. If so it would be OK for anyone happy with sectional track.

How did you find the resin casting? I have the kit but haven't seriously looked at it. The resin casting on the 2251 was excellent, but I thought the one on the 8750 pannier was poor, to the point I replaced it with modified tank castings and bunker from the ex GEM 57XX kit; with the weight of the castings plus extra led stuffed in the tanks and bunker it pulls like a dream! Nigel

Back in the 1950s, I remember my father making up some building kits for my brother's HD railway. They were balsa wood (I think) with building paper overlays to stick on. Windows were printed on acetate. Made not bad models. Think we had a station, goods shed and signal box. Any idea what they were?

I've a couple of Cambrian Sharps on the go. A scratch built Seaham 2-4-0T as rebuilt: And a Sparkshot Albion 2-4-0: Not sure I can get enough weight into the Albionto make a decent runner; the motor takes up most of the space. Nigel

I suspect the easiest thing to do if you're not satisfied with the model you've bought is to part exchange it for one which does satisfy you. Nigel