Manxman1831

On balance, if the British battlecruisers had been as accurate with their fire as they had been as rapid, they might have been able to compensate for the duff shells. However, the practise of keeping the LIVE bags of powder and shells in the passageways and leaving the doors open made certain that any hits were always going to be catastrophic, when they did start landing in the most inappropriate places. Of the ships sunk at Jutland on our side, only HMS Invincible's destruction was attributed to a direct hit on the magazine of A-turret, and that flashed over into the midships magazines. Both Indefatigable and Queen Mary losses were attributed to hits near to the passageways containing the waiting live ammunition. Beatty's flagship was nearly lost as a result of a hit on Q-turret, where the fire burned slowly enough down to the magazine and passageways that the ordered flooding of the space was enough to save the ship. After Jutland, and possibly as a result of his near-demise, Beatty made sure that the passageway regulations were adhered to more rigorously.

Okay, this is my step-by-step set of instructions for the conversion of a RailRoad Flying Scotsman into the proposed Peppercorn 4-8-2, based in part from Mr King's own builds. In terms of experience rating, I would rate this as a 3/4 star in terms of difficulty, if only because of how I jump around from picture to picture. Prior experience of kitbashing locomotives is required, as is the assumption that you know how to alter Hornby wheelsets to suit your needs. My original notes have been misplaced, so I'm making this up as I go from the pictures. 1. The starting point - not for the faint of heart - set up the two chassis blocks in a vice with the axleways alongside but staggered. Cut carefully through the metal with a junior hacksaw, and tidy up the faces. 2. What you should have after the cuts are made are parts to make up the chassis as shown. The larger crankpins on the driven wheelset need to be moved onto the next set along, and vice-versa. 3. The body - suitable cuts made with a razor saw will deprive the footplate of most of the boiler and smokebox. I used the existing smokebox in another build, but yours could be reused with suitable thinning of the plastic. The footplate was extended using plasticard strip, and test-fitted to the chassis for length. 4. New boiler was made using artists watercolour paper, wrapped over the firebox at one end and stuck to the strip on the footplate. 5. Two extra splashers are required for the footplate, and these were made to both bridge the gap and acts as supports for further pieces of footplate material. 6. New smokebox. Mine was made using a leftover part of the original boiler (turned upside-down and the top filled with balsa before sculpting). This was then stuck to a balsa plug sat in the open-end of the boiler. 7. The distinctive deflectors were made as a single piece, wrapped over the smokebox and plug. I was fortunate that the boiler paper matched the plasticard in thickness. They do not need to be fitted all of the way around the boiler plug as access holes are required in the original design. A box of plasticard was also added to the front-end to simulate the third-cylinder location. 8. What you should have at this stage. Double chimney is made from plastic tubing, suitably shaped. 9. The tender was not left alone. The coal load was carved out, whilst the rear plate was removed to be angled slightly. The plastic behaved well with gluing, and topsheets could be added minutes after the rear plate was relocated. 10. Holes were cut into the topsheets to provide access to the tender filler and coal spaces. A mixture of disc-cutter, small craft-knife and emery boards were used to open out the spaces. A further sheet was put inside the tender coal space to hide the former tender-drive mechanism. 11. Nearly done. These two shots show the livery as I intended to provide at the time. All lining done using the HMRS LNER loco lining and LNER Gold numbering sheets.

I tried to write up a build sequence for my 4-8-2 some years ago. It started life as a replacement body, but developed from there. Anyways, I tried to remember the order of assembly after a period of six months to go in as part of a magazine article (never done), and as expected got myself totally lost even after referring to my pictures. Picture Manager has done something weird with the ordering.

It might have been that 002 was in a worse state than 001 at the time? Or it might have been that with it being seen as the Nazi steam record holder it was deemed inappropriate to keep it? But that wouldn't explain why the Olympics engine was kept...

Decided to try and attempt to replicate the train that claimed the World Speed Record for Steam for the Germans in 1936. I have a reasonably good German book 'Schnellverkehrs des Reichsbahnzeit' which went into the various aspects of high-speed travel of the time, including a quote from one of the gents who was there on the train - but it was abridged. In my excitement at finally getting somewhere with a record-breaking train, I did not notice that one of the passages was missing key words that would change the translation and meaning of the relevant bit about the carriages behind the big 05 002. My book claimed that the regular test train (made of a dynamometer car and three/four of the newest long-distance, high-speed carriages) had been swapped out for one of the three-section diesel-electric railcars, and it was this combination that managed the 124.5mph on 11 May 1936. Turns out this was WRONG. The regular test-train on this particular day was made up of the dynamometer and three carriages, and the loco crew got the bit between their teeth IN RESPONSE to one of the railcars pushing 125mph!!! Details and appropriate coaches are now being sought out.

A small entry regarding my build of 46202 'Princess Anne'. She is as finished as I am capable of doing. Enjoy the pictures of her alongside my fathers 6202. Pictures taken on the model railway at the Taylor Street end of the Birkenhead Heritage Tramway.

Hi folks, just a quick question related in part to my most recent builds, but who amongst you would happen to know which vehicles formed the test train behind Mallard and the Dynamometer Car when she made her dash past Little Bytham? I'm attempting to put together a representation of the train in 00 (as an aside to forming a complete set of Coronation coaches to be pulled by Dominion of Canada), and am struggling to find a proper list of the coaches. Many thanks in advance, Brian

Just a few shots covering my conversion of a Hornby RailRoad Flying Scotsman into 2558 Tracery as she ran on the Great Central mainline between Manchester and London. Questions and comments are welcome.

Well, after not much convincing by SWMBO, my first r-t-r purchase of the year came down to either Rapidos Stirling Single, or Hornbys Channel Packet - £240 against £180 (advertised) - I have plugged for a pre-order of Bulleids prototype pacific. I will post photos and performance details as and when it turns up and can get it on the trainset to run.

My list of models to be completed, or possibly started, during 2017:- Blackpool 'Marton Box' tramcar. Blackpool 'Dreadnought' tramcar. Blackpool 'Marton Vambac' tramcar. Bulleid 'Leader' locomotive (as completed with cycling lion and centralised side number). Gresley 'Coronation' articulated coaches (pre-war to go with Dynamometer Car, and post-war to form part of Great Central train as per BRM article).

Hi fella's, and lasses if we have any among the membership, I have a question regarding Humbrol black paint. I have three NEW tinlets (14ml) of the gloss, satin and matt. Both of the gloss and satin blacks seem to take about a week to cure, while the matt only takes a few hours - same sized areas and first coats - but on applying a second coat, all three only take a few hours to harden. Would anyone know, scientifically, as to why this is happening?

I know I have cut most of what Mr Wright has posted, but I want to concentrate on the last two points he makes. Is there a market? Unfortunately, YES, there is. Individuals, or groups, will always be envious of other peoples possessions, and will try to acquire them by any means, either legally or illegally. It is a matter of trust, that we as exhibitors display our wares and not have it lifted by light fingers. Having been at a model trams show where two unique models went for a walk, while the exhibitor was attending to another layout opposite, I will NEVER leave my own stock unattended. I have also been offered ludicrous sums of money for my own items - a chap at my first ever show as an exhibitor offered £5 for a pair of trams I'd got on display, as he probably thought I was just a kid and would have taken the money regardless. I was there with my brother, and needed to take a break - was informed upon returning that the chap had come back and was disappointed that the layout was being watched by my brother. Should the perpetrator be named and shamed if caught? YES, but only passed on to the shows organisers and venue staff to look out for the individual in question, as they would hopefully take a measured response to the person turning up, rather than the potential lynch mob that could ensue if everyone was made aware of them.

A small aside - for those of you following my Princess Anne build/bash. Today saw me trying the painted-up model around my parents trainset and making a few alterations to the delightful Hornby tender chassis. Delightful in the sarcastic sense - between the clips for holding the wheelsets, the moulded brakes and the retaining plate, poor new Princess Anne was carting around the equivalent of five old Triang coaches with the amount of rolling resistance being generated. A ten minute session with my dad looking at the chassis, and myself looking at if the body was causing any interference, we had a better tender. Back to the trainset, and a quick run showed a definite improvement on an 8-coach train (6 Bachmann Bulleids, Bachmann Mk 1 restaurant car and a Comet Tavern car). Ever the comedian, my dad decided to see what effect putting a kit-built tender would have. A lap with the Hornby tender was coming in at 15.42 seconds. A lap with a whitemetal GCR standard tender was 15.12 seconds. Before alterations the Hornby tender was leading to a laptime of 16.93 seconds. A bit of a difference. A bigger challenge was set by substituting the Bulleid set for a set of Comet LMS coaches. These are MUCH heavier, but freer running. Started off with a 6-coach test (5 bogies plus a 12-wheeler), and the laptime was again 15.12 seconds. At this stage, I decided to oil the rubbing surfaces on the tender, whilst another 2 Comet coaches were added. Laptime now at 15.32 seconds, with a bit of slip at start-off. I asked for another coach to be added out of sheer devilment. Now Princess Anne was starting to struggle at start-off, but laptime only went up to 15.96 seconds. Bear in mind that these times are the worst that the loco managed during running at 80% controller setting. Comparison runs were made with a Hornby loco-drive Patriot (renumbered and renamed to be Isle of Man 5511) and a kitbuilt large Claughton. Isle of Man ran around with a laptime of 14.53 seconds (a scale 100mph on the trainset), while the portescap-powered Claughton went around in 16.14 seconds. My point? How many others of us have been disappointed with the performance of loco-drive engines, and wondered if the tender was to blame?

When people ask where I recommend starting when it comes to modelling trams or trains, I always wind up telling them to start with an Airfix Spitfire kit. They are relatively cheap, go together quite easily (depending on the age of the kit/moulds) and can be modified within limits to whatever look you want to finish with. The same general principles/skills you learn when putting together such an easy kit can be transferred across to more complex models, like a Mosquito or Lightning (P-38), or a Swordfish. From there, the next step could be to move onto a simple tram/loco kit - the old Knightwing Sentinel or KeilKraft West Ham tram - for something that will move. I'd go so far as to say, DON'T go for a wagon or coach kit until you are confident that you can set the wheelsets up to run flat/level - something like the old CooperCraft kits would be ideal, but can still be built wrong if you charge into it (I did with my first wagon kit, a 5-plank coal wagon). On the carriage front, we have the Dapol semi-kits to assist with our learning curve, both in terms of building, but also detailing, coaches. The former Airfix/Kitmaster range as sold by Dapol can still produce passable examples of the locos they were based on - indeed motorising them has never been easier with chassis being readily available on certain internet auction sites, or through spares suppliers, and Branchlines still produce their motorising and detailing kits for the Railbus, Drewry 04, BR Mogul and City of Truro for those that wish to try their hand at building the chassis as well. To my mind, this approach, although rather convoluted, would provide a better basis for tackling some of the more complex kits out there, than outright informing the would-be modeller that their choice of model is completely wrong for them. Image below shows the two extremes - engine is a quick and easy kit with an off-the-shelf motor unit, while the coaches are a quite old and complex kit.

Just a small update. Construction is virtually done, with main painting well on the way. Only detail work and lining to add and it will be ready to run on the GCRlayout at Ruddington on a Saturday excursion train.

Willie Whizz, My own experience comes from when I was building my Reid-MacLeod model. I could find very little on it in all of the usual books and internet search sites - I could find only four pictures at the time and no descriptions of the livery. The British Pathe news reel of it at Hyde Park works came to light as I was finishing off the detailing, which was useful. The livery, based on the B&W photo on the cover of 'Model Engineer' in 1961, was deemed to be close to LMS coach livery. So on that basis, she was painted maroon in readiness to receive the appropriate lining. About four months later, a business trip my father took to Glasgow chanced an encounter with a knowledgeable lady whose father also happened to be the works photographer at Hyde Park. He had extensive notes for each picture he took, and the R-M stood out. The end result of that conversation was that I learned that the locomotive was painted in Great Northern Railway livery, with an eye to sales from that railway, and this is how she also appeared in 1923/24 at Wembley. Needless to say, after this event, pictures started appearing all over the place, both for the R-M and its predecessor the Reid-Ramsay - so much so that I built a model of that, which is the right colour - but I shan't be repainting the red one. At some stage, I may build a replacement/companion.

I try, in all walks of my life, to provide constructive criticism to those around me. Not all of the time, mind you, that would get very tiring, very quickly. I have made models of some outlandish prototypes, and plan on making more in the future, and know how awkward it can be for evidence about details to appear after I've made the decision to go down another route. This sounds like gibberish, but is really a response to Tony's final comment above. Perhaps the top two comments I've heard over the past five years have been "What's that?!" and "Why did you make one of those?!" Suitable answers also include "Because I could". In my stud of locos, I have the GCR 1914 Baldwin 2-10-2 design, Peppercorn's February 1946 4-8-2 design, Hughes' 1913 L&YR 2-10-0 design, as well as the two North British Loco Works turbine eperiments - the 1909 Ramsay and 1923 MacLeod. I have 'normal' machines, too, just for fun - Gresley A1 Tracery (as she operated on the GC with streamlined tender), a Holden designed LNER J70, a Fowler 'Patriot' Isle of Man, and a soon-to-be-completed rebuilt 'Turbomotive' Princess Anne. My dream collection would see this lot joined by the Paget 2-6-2, Bulleid's Leader, Robinson's 9P Valour and possibly Bulleid's first 'Merchant Navy' Channel Packet in original condition. I don't claim to 'Know it all', indeed I often prefer to be wrong about something/someone, and have them show me how they can improve whatever it is they have been criticised for. I have also tried to encourage younger modellers to produce their own models/layouts, just to show them that they can do what they thought they were incapable of.

Today marked a step forwards, and two steps back, with Princess Anne. Took her down to Ruddington to test run during a quiet spell. It ran reasonably well, dragging its tender. So off came the wheels; on went some oil; it ran better. Gave it a loaded set of ironstone wagons (15). Not happy at all at this. Took her back to my parents to test on a set of Comet LMS coaches (4, then 5). Results as expected. I need to ballast up the loco to the same amount of weight as my dad's LMS 6225, and my own LMS 5511. You learn something new everyday; or in this case, confirm what I already suspected to be the case.

Going to get around to building the rebuilt LMS Turbomotive to sit alongside my Patriot and Reid turbine locomotives on the roster. Going down the usual route, Hornby Duchess chassis, Princess and Duchess bodies, and standard tender to be altered. Timeline - as long as it takes between real life and other projects. Update 29/07/2016 Made a start on Princess Anne. Very simple really - Hornby Princess plus Kitmaster Duchess (surprising had a Princess tender in the kit).

Built using plasticard.

Close, but slightly wrong. The original design was for a loco capable of pulling trains of the then-new 40-ton wagons from the South Yorkshire coalfields to the then-new port of Immingham. According to the George Dow book that features the appropriate drawings for both the Baldwin and Gorton designs, the American version was going to be capable of pulling 100 wagons (remember these are 40-ton not 10-ton), and would have required the opening out of Conisborough tunnel to accommodate the 13ft 6in height, and then onto the Doncaster avoiding line. Graeme King has built an Anglicised version, and also some of the wagons.