Jump to content
 

MoonMonkey

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    162

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Blog Entries posted by MoonMonkey

  1. MoonMonkey

    Halloween fun for the layout

    By MoonMonkey,


    Halloween fun
    Halloween, anyone?  My lad saw these Noch figures and I ended up buying them... excellent fun for today!...
     
    Down on the up platform, the local monks gather to commence their Halloween protection activities, and then a vampire hunter joined them... 

     
     
    Then Dracula turned up on the down platform...

     
     
    It all got a bit feisty...

     
     
    Then the vampires decided to head into town on the lash, ignoring the COVID-19 restrictions and the glaring sunlight! 

     
     
     
  2. MoonMonkey

    Bridge clearance in rural goods yard

    By MoonMonkey,


    Ideas, help and advice
    Hello all, it's been a while as I haven't much to ask or mention.  Now I'm making a little progress, I would be grateful though for some advice on bridge clearances in goods yards.  I have a small rural goods yard alongside a mainline.  I'm wondering about using the smaller arch to run a siding through.  This is to give the illusion of a bigger yard with more on the other side of the bridge (the model bridge being a scenic break, as the layout ends here, so no actual model track extension).  I know that there were occurances of yards extending beyond a bridge from google images, layouts in mags etc.  I  also found on this website the 'official' cleances for stations, running lines, etc.  
    However, the clearances of the small arch are tight.  I therefore wonder if its worth just lumping it with short sidings, or having the line go through the arch.  Because its to create an illusion of space and reality, if the clearances for rolling stock are ridiculously small and unrealistic, then there seems little point in doing it.  Any thoughts would be gratefully received, and may be of use to others as well.   
    I attach some photos of the 2 options, using an SR van as a visual guide.  
     



  3. MoonMonkey
    I love Modelu figures - he says boldly, based on one small batch of them!  Truly brilliant (in my humble and beginner opinion).  As such, I want to do them justice with the paint job.  I got nice results using Humbrol paints for the first batch I got, these were ok in terms of my paint job. 
     
    Specifically regarding the skin... I used Humbrol flesh colour but adjusted with white or light grey or leather brown for variation.  I don't often go around staring at people intently, so it was my best judgement as to whether the flesh colour was ok... but I think it was fine.  I did notice that for the boy of the Tony and Tommy pairing, it looked like a splodge of paint across his face.  I think this was probably a combination of the very fine contouring of the face, and me using too thick paint.  I did it on a hot day so I think the paint was probably drying on the palatte before I got it onto the face, and I hadn't adjusted by adding water to make it more of a wash.  But the other figures seemed fine, as per the night time shots on my profile page. 
     
    I then treated myself to a Lifecolor flesh paint set. If nothing else, it gave me confidence that I was using sensible flesh tones.  I used plenty of water to thin them down.  I couldn't get the Lifecolor thinner as there seems to be a shortage of this product.  I applied one thinned coat for the base coat. All of them now have this.   I then started to build up layers (thinking washed and dry brushing) and that's where I started to run into problems.  The boy in the cap seemed fine, although he does seem to be wearing some rather goth-like eye makeup.  The chap in the chinos and blazer seems ok.  But the guy in the grey demob suit with the suitcase... oh my word!!  If I need a back story for him... well he is an unfortunate warrior who got bad facial burns in battle.  Either that or he is the layout's Freddy Kruger.  So why the difference?  How can the blazer guy look fine, and Freddy looks a nightmare?  Well, it may be a function of using water rather then Lifecolor thinner, but it seemed ok for other figures I've got around to.  So I think it's possibly a case of too many layers, applied too soon before the previous layer dried, and possibly using paint on a palate that had started to dry up and therefore go a bit gooey.  
     
    If you are going to use this paint/figure combo... please do bear in mind that the paint seems to need thinning, and don't allow yourself to use paints which have started to congeal on the palette, and do let the layers dry before applying more.  I may be talking guff, or be wrong in my estimation of my error, but these points must surely be worth considering for the newbies among us,  
     
    Photos attached for illustration... not necessarily complete yet, and other figures have barely been started apart from undercoat. 
    Also, these guys look fine from 3' away... the camera is cruel in picking up detail.  But ideally, I'd love to produce something that can fool the eye even in close-up shots.  
    If anyone has any further insight before I embark on facial painting for the other figures, please do pipe up... these products deserve a decent paint job, and if you can help a beginner, that would be great! 
     



  4. MoonMonkey
    I'd be grateful for thoughts about the 'more appropriate' choice of carriages for 1945 GWR Wiltshire mainline but with local traffic too.... 
    I like the older Hornby Collet shirt button carriages - such as Hornby R4759 or R4760, because these seem more prototypical with connecting corridors and insignia.  But I'm wary of the lack of the 'joined up' connectors with massive gaps between them which might look too much like 'model train'.  I did see there are ways to make/buy those bellowed connectors though.  
    As an alternative, I'm also wondering about the current Hornby range of 57' bow ended nine compartment ones, such as R4875A or R4874.  These don't have the connecting gangways, so removes my concerns above.  BUT these are all marked as Chester or Birmingham Division.  It's 1945 so I could claim they've been relocated at short notice to plug a gap or something.  I could even remove the 'B'ham/Chester Division writing at the ends to make the regional glitch less obvious.  
    In time, I'll probably get some other types of carriage to 'mix up the rake'.  I'd like to get Traintech lighting into them and passengers, and weather them a bit too.  
    But I need somewhere to start.  Any thoughts???
  5. MoonMonkey
    Hi all, following kind advice from Mick Bonwick about oil showing through powder weathering, I had a look at this.  I thought my findings might be useful if you have the same problem, or you are going to start weathering a loco with powders.  These are not meant to be definitive instructions or a recipe success, just my thoughts about what I did and what I discovered, and what I'd do next time. If you cock it up yourself, using any of this material or anything else, then (in the nicest possible way) don't blame me.  
     
    How the problem manifested itself... 
    I applied powders to the loco, sealing with coats of Humbrol matt acrylic varnish as I went.  As per what I'd read about online if using the powders method.  
    I thought it looked ok, but then overnight (not sure how long the problem took) I ended up with a tidemark.  This spread through the weathering, as per pics shown by the red lines.  
     
     
     
     
     
     



×
×
  • Create New...