PMP

.

My J50 (r3325) sits dead square on the regulation glass test. Regarding RTR/aftermarket chassis mix it can be an expensive way to do it now, and was in the past as well. I did a 56xx from a mainline body with perseverance chassis, portescap and ultrascales back in the mid 90's. The same components today would still make a costly model. As noted recently uk RTR mechanisms are pretty good these days, and chassis details have improved too. Conversions using replacement wheels on a RTR chassis are probably cheaper pro rata than they used to be, as you can often use the RTR chassis. Detailing components though are becoming more specialised and difficult to source, but the finescale shows are often good hunting grounds for those bits.

The bit highlighted in red really resonates for me. t-b-g was kind enough to offer me an opportunity to see and operate Buckingham. Like t-b-g I've been involved with a good few projects over the years, and they've all been a model of a location rather than a system. Operating Buckingham in an evening opened up my imagination and has significantly changed how I'm thinking going forwards. I'm fortunate in having a potentially large space to accommodate a layout, which prior to the above evening would have been a 'location'. I have now changed the thinking to produce a 'railway' closely based on the Severn and Wye and Forest of Dean branches. It will consist of a pastiche of locations from across the FoD, with recognisable track layout and structures and operating practices from the railways of the area. A slight adjustment of history will allow a few more passenger trains, the era being 1955-63. A good element of the stock is based on modified RTR locomotive and rolling stock a mix of RTR and kit built. Without RTR it would be a very different project, there not being available a good quality kit for large pannier, the four above are all modified RTR, nothing remains standard out of the box for long. So in similar style to US thinking I'm using an accurate base RTR model/s, and modifying them to specific locomotives for my era and geographical location. This saves me time, gets me a good unique result, allowing time for development of the layout and other items of stock. I've already tried a US style card/waybill system which is proving quite challenging, most 16T minerals looking pretty similar! What has been interesting is researching how the lines operated and thinking how that can be built into how the model will run to reflect what would have been seen by a lineside viewer. But the real catalyst for this was a 50+ year old layout which by todays standards is quite crude, but very very engaging to operate. The trains have a 'reason' to be moving rather than just passing by and that seems to add something. My proposed design will still have a full circuit capability though, because I still like sitting back on occasion and just watching the trains.

Tony et al, apologies for the delay in responding 'life' getting in the way for a while!, and thank you Tony regarding 'flow' and inputs of the thread. Regarding US vs UK 'quality' from earlier periods perhaps Arthur and certainly myself have recalled that in the past that particular debate on various fora has on occasion got un-constructively passionate, if that occurred that would do a great dis-service to this thread. Having had a few days giving a bit of thought to the matter my time lines may have got a bit skewed. It is probably fair to say that the US RTR diesel mechanisms in the 70's through to the mid/late 80's were definitely better overall than our UK versions. By the 90's my recollection having sold plenty of the Lima/Hornby/Mainline varieties at MRM is that UK mechanisms were getting better, I had some really nice running Lima 'pancake' driver 26/7/73's and 31's in particular. The US steam outline in mainstream RTR was and to a degree, (diesel stock being ahead in quality/fidelity) still is quite poor in fidelity and running. It is definitely improving but I think it fair to say the contemporary UK RTR steam types are still overall better than the equivalent US types. I was lucky in that the US brass outline stock we had though the shop was at the top end of quality, eg PFM (Pacific Fast Mail) being a stocked manufacturer which was particularly good. They were expensive being around the £150 mark at the time, todays equivalent price being £500-700. Again I tested them before despatch, and can't recall a single failure. Our test was limited to a run on a few lengths of straight Peco Streamline, so I never got to see them stretch their legs, but one customer in particular was always very positive about their performance, and he had a standing order almost for one of each new type received. There were/are other brass manufacturers out there and it seems there were very different running qualities from some manufacturers. I was likely very fortunate to be only dealing with the top end of the quality spectrum. I too recall reading of Tony Koesters 'tuning' of his US brass steam fleet, its worth noting that he also fine tuned the running of his stock at the same time, replacement wheelsets for example to overcome some of the RTR stock deficiencies, important when running long trains and climbing/descending/turning. Some of his layouts gradients were also adjusted to assist reliable operation so very much a reasoned and consistent approach to getting reliable and realistic operation.

Probably best we do for Tony's threads sake. On your original point I suppose the definition of 'decent' obviously means different things to the pair of us. To me modifying the body/livery an US diesel of the era and a Lima Western to improve the fidelity of them are very similar tasks. Thinking retrospectively some of the US chassis did have far better running than ours. However at MRM whenever we sold a locomotive Brass/Kit/RTR of any outline or manufacturer, (in the shop or mail order) we always ran them first. I must have had thousands literally through my hands there, run on an H&M Clipper or Duette and there were very few failures, they all ran well on the whole. The worst/most frequent examples I can recall were the Mainline Warships, 04's and Std4's, then possibly Airfix with the 14xx's and Dean Goods/4F.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the RTR matters, I was modelling US stuff in the late 70's 80's and the reason why I could get detail parts from MRM where I worked and Victors up the road was because the US models were inaccurate, hence we had stocks of fans/winter hatches/sunblinds/lift rings/bells/horns etc etc from Details West, Detail Associates,Overland and others. Feel free not to take my word for it, however, the introduction in Modelling and Detailing Diesels Vol 1 (1991), ISBN 0-9612692-4-3 does confirm my experience of the same era. I know of UK modellers who went over to the US side, and I've met more than a few whom didn't realise they were buying a different kind of wrong product! I too like you have done my UK apprenticeship, with Crownline/Puffers/Craftsman/Adpak/ABS et al for UK prototypes. The acurate track and gauge argument is I'd suggest null and void for UK 4mm scale RTR. We are where we are without going through the HO vs OO history debate, and that's not going to change. OO will always look 'wrong', but it can be made to look very good, masking its deficiencies. (N.B. I model in OO and EM) The US and Europe had the bread land butter side up as far as the track story goes. Basement style empires are not as widespread (according to a couple of Canadian shopkeepers I know), as it sometimes appears, but interestingly when you speak to and read of those large layout builders accounts, they often use the cheaper, 'railroad' type products where they have large numbers of rolling stock to utilise. They then detail the basic models with aftermarket products where a noticeable difference can be made effectively in cost/time like etched roof walkways, stirrup steps. It making more economic sense to buy several older Athearn Kits and superdetail them, for the price of a new high spec freight car. I certainly agree that the US mainstream publishing media have made a far better job of covering operating issues than the UK equivalent has, and partly integrated that into the model railroading mindset. I can think of more US writers and planners than I can UK equivalents. For me the best UK pieces were Frank Dyers in MRJ, and going back a bit further some of the writings of Jenkins and Essery. The LMS Study Group seemed to get a handle early on, and write engagingly on these subjects as have a number of authors in GWRJ. I was fortunate to listen to Bert Collins and some of his associates too whilst working at Kings Cross, who had first hand knowledge of operations on the Eastern. Such a pity those sources are now gone. edit 4 spellin

Very true, whilst there will always be occasional errors in books they are still a hugely valuable resource. For my particular interests the Forest of Dean, there is no alternative to the books that are out there and finding images at swapmeets and exhibitions or digging through museum and personal archives. Trying to find quality 'data' on line for the Forest of Dean railway operations is a lost cause, there is pretty much nothing. What has been particularly rewarding is that people who know the area and remember what it was like have complimented me on how well I caught the area and its railway/trains. The information I have used has been gleaned largely from books and being able to speak to people who photographed and visited the area. A key element though is simple observation, and pretty much copying what I see, simples!

The statement that the US has long had decent RTR models and track means they have more time for other things is wholly incorrect. Like the UK RTR market they have had tiers of quality, from custom built, to L/E Brass and a complete cross section of quality and accuracy in the off the shelf RTR products. Its relatively recently that the manufacturers like Athearn have gone for detail specific models correct to road number, prior to that it would have been this an GP35 we can do it (and did) in any number of railroad company liveries that had GP35s regardless if it were that variant or not. One of the reasons Rapido came into being if I recall was that Jason wanted accurate Canadian prototypes, not re liveried US versions. The same was true of freight cars, there's any number of incorrect liveries for the freight car the scheme was applied to. Kaydee were one of the companies that got into correct livery+detail, when this happened the prices were higher (same for locomotives), than the corresponding versions applied to any moulding. There's a reason for the plethora of detailing and decal companies in the US market, that's largely because the products were incorrect, or too basic. As for passenger cars it has been a virtual desert until the past ten years or so, where we are now seeing correct prototype liveries on correct vehicles, prior to that is was worse than the freight car products. Track in the US again has been widely available and of good quality, with Shinohara for example providing Code 100 and 75, as reliable/robust and visually good track meeting US prototype appearance since the 1970's. Also the likes of Peco have been in the market, Bachmann/Walthers providing track suitable for US modellers. The statement, 'they've had it better over there' is very often trotted out, but is no where near that simple, in many ways the OO here market has mirrored the US in terms of its recent development, particularly now with accurate to prototype locomotives and rolling stock. Regarding operations and the US interest in timetable operations, there's a simple reason, that being the way the US largely operated, timetable and train order, and is completely different to UK operations. For a US modeller wanting to replicate their system, or operate their trains in a reasonably realistic way they need a basic understanding of the operating rules and protocols, just as 'we' need to have a good idea of how block signalling works for example. Lets not forget too there are an even greater number of modellers both sides of the pond who don't care, they just operate the railway as they see fit!

Russ, they are on a par with the Bachmann Jinty, (I've got three of them). Not as good as the B/M panniers or 08. My J50 is a smooth and quiet runner, no cogging,quartering or pick up problems but not as controllable as the 57xx/08, or my current RTR running bench mark the J15.

More pictures here https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2015/12/28/r3325-Hornby-j50-review/

Perhaps. For me the Hawkins image doesn't do it for me, things like the minerals being too 'sterile/uniform' with lack of weathering, almost like trying to be almost photographic, but not quite making it. This Monet however does, it has life in abundance for me, vibrancy, passion and atmosphere all immediately transferring to me as the viewer. The Hawkins picture, (good as it is), for me, fails to capture that emotion and connection to the subject matter

By kind permission of Richard Foster at Model Rail Magazine and David Haarhaus at Bachmann UK, I will have one of the engineering prototypes running on 'Shelfie' https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2015/11/27/warley-and-the-dock-tanks/ at the Manchester show this weekend. http://mmrs.co.uk/exhibition/

The EP's are anticipated to be working examples running on 'Shelfie' seen in MR214, which will be on the Model Rail stand.

One of the suggestions that I give to people who ask me what to start on in the etched kit field is always something simple, but with a bit of a challenge. Pretty much every kit has small details to fit, cab fittings or lamp irons, those types of things. Making screw couplings for example is a good starter for ten, https://albionyard.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/fifteen-minute-heroes/you get a finished 'model' at the end of the exercise, they only take a few minutes to build and form, and they are a real confidence boost. Best of all they are cheap and you can throw them away if you fail with the first few. Other things like platform trolleys/benches scenic details are all suitable test pieces too. The Craftsman 02 kit is a worthwhile starter, with a few caveats. They are difficult to get hold of at the moment, and some of the recommended components such as the motor and gears can sometimes be no longer available. In that instance the 'finescale' expo shows are invaluable as often you can get contemporary replacements for the original parts. The pic above is an 02 (WIP) with a High Level gearbox substituted. This means a certain amount of modification to the kit components too, and the Iain Rice etched loco kit and chassis construction books are superb sources of help form someone who like TW and a few others, has been there and got the T shirt a few times over.

Thank you Tony, The 9F was done from an image as I recall, it was a good ten years plus since I did it as even then I was working primarilyfrom photos. Frustratingly having had a quick look through some of the favourites in my library, I can't find the pic. I do have a extensive analogue library, the benefit of getting trade discount in MRM all those years ago. The mix of early emblem and flashes would have been the things that made it the subject matter, i.e. unusual. Having said that there is always the possibility I didn't look close enough at the tender emblem, and got it wrong. Working from pictures doesn't always save you. Recently completing a Pannier I thought the number was very very familiar. It was of course one I'd done a year or so previously and was already sitting 'on shed' staring me in the face. Hmm, but the reference was the same book with a similar 3-5 year time span, for the images. A quick double check showed both models were correct, the engine having undergone modification and before/after shots included in the book. So I renumbered the first example to same area/era and details correct to model, from another image in the same book. Ho hum ...

Thanks Tony and Brian K for the kind comments. I worked at MRM Kings Cross with Brian, and as he's subsequently added there were a number of manufacturers whose products were in tamper proof boxes, which did make them challenging to sell on occasion and once opened they obviously looked opened as Brian has expanded on. Hence my small degree of sympathy with the erstwhile shop employee. I didn't realise they had a shop at Banbury, but can recall the changeover as some boxes had Banbury on them the others, newer stock, had Consett, but yes very strange that as the manufacturer they didn't have a better customer service over the counter. A quick look at an 1990 RM shows DJH A1/2's Brits etc as around the £80 mark from West Coast Kit Centre, so £70-£75 would be around the right price for earlier in the 80's. When we had a customer on the hook for such a purchase we gave them the respect and customer care you would expect when buying a premium product. There is a thread about the shop for anyone so interested here http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/65524-kings-cross-model-shop/ Returning to Brass briefly the Panniers were Samhongsa with Fulgarex motors and under the brand name RTR Brass. The figure of a run of 200 for the 97xx's is a number that has stuck in my mind for a long while, it may not be correct. The small praires I do know were a production batch of 350. Interesting unlike Larry I can't recall any blank bufferbeams, those we had were all supplied with buffer mounting holes ready Eames used to do turned nickel silver and brass LMS parallel shank loco buffers and GWR Taper shank buffers which were recommended/sold to the purchasers of these brass locos. They came from the extensive range of quality fittings available from Eames at the time. Bert Collins was there while Brian and I worked there, he in fact was one of those who really helped me with 'looking' at things, him also being of an artistic nature and an excellent water color painter too. Pretty much all of the shop staff had a specialist interest of one sort or another and the experience that we could draw on was invaluable. The shop also was a stockist of the major railway publishers too, so if a customer had a query, a quick look in the 'library' would most times answer the question, (if we couldn't), and a sale often followed, sometimes enhanced with a book sale for the reference material. Tony, you're right regarding RTR/RTP, the hobby has changed significantly over the past 30 years, some good, some bad. I use far more RTR than I did in the 80's. A good amount of the components we lament not being in shops are still available, which is why I find Scaleforum/Railex/Larkrail and similar shows invaluable, they have become the 'shop' that MRM etc once were. Those that don't bother looking at those shows because they perceive are too 'finescale' orientated rather than mainstream are missing out on some of the best products available if you want to make or modify something. Without the guidance and help of those people that make the widgets and grommets etc, across the scales, and work out new ways to use them, the hobby would be years behind where it is now. Finally if I may a cheeky little 9F more appropriate for LB than a pannier, Bachmann, weathered (acrylic/enamel/pastels), electrification flashes, Gibson pony wheels and Modelu crew. The little things can make the biggest difference. rgds

I do have a degree of sympathy for the shop assistant here, (but not much). The DJH kits in the early 80's were around the £80 mark including the wheels IIRC. Thus around £250 in today's money. When the Model Loco 9F came out they were the glass £100 ceiling breaker! Some of them DJH had a wrap round label which covered the entire end and onto the base of the box. Possibly to prevent wheels being removed. We did open boxes but usually we had a good feel for the customer before doing so,there were of course some box kickers out there,This meant that if previously opened it was obvious, and therefore a harder sale if a punter knew the box had been opened. If spending £80 then, you'd expect a pristine box and contents. Often at MRM the buyers replaced the wheels anyway with Maygib or Gibson, and we swapped the Romfords doing a PX into shop stock. Re Brass we used to sell it at MRM too and there were a few gems that came out. This was one of them a Samhongsa 97xx, I've only ever see a handful of them and I think it was a production run of 200, they come up very rarely and I recently grabbed this one at auction for a song after a tip off from Adrian Swain. Weathering is one of those things that is very much a personal taste, at MRM the retail side of weathered items in the 80's was restricted to those that had been done by modellers. As a rule a weathered model unless done to exceptional standard was a very hard sell, when spending a lot of money the punters definitely went for ex-works, that's where the value was. I used to do some for customers but not as an official service, nothing to focus the mind more than the potential of ruining a customers pride and joy. I always worked from an image/s of the type of stock being worked on. Here's one from earlier in this year, a Bachmann 64xx weathered with enamels, acrylics, MIG pigments and artists pastels.

You missed the key point in Igors argument he said If something like the D600 was absolutely fundamental to a major new project, Reading it properly makes all the difference to understanding his point.

Filmed at Model Rail Live we're on telly! There may be some exclusive 'literally' shots of the Hornby 72XX moving, as it was on the trainset at the time. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/62391-steamontvcom/

Black please!

And a 56XX please mister!

Gorgeous!