Dad-1

I love wagons, to me a good freight train rolling by is king amongst model railway running. Yet so many wagons are incomplete, inaccurate and this seems to be accepted without question. Should any locomotive not come out perfect for it's claimed type there are screams from a thousand modellers. I recall the comments of the body being too wide, wrong shape roof line, you name it I've read about it ... BUT wagons ?? I'll start with the Dapol Iron Ore Hopper. Not a bad looking model yet somehow they have given an incorrect loading weight of 12 tons. In fact these started at 22 tons and later were upgraded to 24 tons. That is bad enough, but on checking the running number I find that they have used one that was on a 21 ton coal hopper, a very different wagon !! Again staying with Dapol I've recently purchased 10 x 21 ton coal hoppers, mine came as sets of 5 at a very good price and I've started weathering them. I wondered exactly what diagram they were meant to represent as I know the hand brake lever sat very high on the early diagrams and these wagons couldn't represent them as the brake was low at solebar level. Of the 5 different running numbers I find that one was from a production run of 50 at Shildon, the remaining 4 from Birmingham, but these production runs were of diagram 146 which had very different strengthening ribs down the flanks, it being a full boxed in section. In addition the diagrem 146 referred to welded production. The Dapol wagon has thin reinforcing in line with diagram 143, but of course the diagram 143 needed the high brake lever and were of riveted construction as per the model All 21 ton should have fine wire grab rails and operating rods, but I can forgive them being missing on the basis of cost. All Dapol had to do to make these accurate enough would be to use the right running numbers, a slight modification on certain side panels and high brake lever .......... Strange, but I never read of wagon inaccuracies ............. what others do we know of ?????? My 10 nearly weathered ..... Dad-1

I have this thing about wagons, I don't think there's a locomotive here I wouldn't swap for a clutch of good wagons. But wagons have/had a tough old life and the 'as bought' condition tends to turn me off any layout, they just spoil the effect. I think it strange so many modellers spend a fortune on re-naming and re-numbering locomotives yet put up with basic factory finish stock. Not all thank heavens and we do see some superb weathering. My latest play is some Dapol 21 ton coal hoppers, I'm a little frustrated by certain inaccuracies within the models and regret that life is too short to modify beyond their as bought state, other than weathering and adding an improved load. At least this can be done indoors where I can work close to a radiator all warm and comfy. These were bought a two 5 wagon sets with different running numbers. I am worried about removing the riveted in weight for those that will remain empty, something not planned by Dapol. If they prove too light I'll add a little length of lead between the two hopper discharge chutes. Flash has also highlighted the plastic body locating clips that I'll have to paint either very dark grey, or black !! I'd like 15 empty & 15 loaded, but fear life is too short and perhaps pocket not quite deep enough !! Dad-1

Hi Russ, It'll have to be a half, you're driving ! Put some Ore in yesterday so here's a close up of the Bachmann wagon where the weld marks that attach to the solebar are so very obvious - Dapol are clipped on so no marks in this area at all. Dad-1

Well again months roll by and I've not done too much. Just a little weathering to 4 Ore Hoppers, trying to decide which was best, Dapol, or Bachmann. From my own point of view I find the Dapol version better because there are less plastic moulding marks. Having said that Dapol have an incorrect wagon number and although 22 or 24 ton they marked theirs 12 ton !! Once weathered a swipe of rusty paint over part of the number and weight hides the mistake. With the Bachmann even a splash of paint won't cover the plastic weld marks. Just starting another layout with some friends, so I may get into posting again before 2012 begins !!! Dad-1

Been a 1/72 scale aircraft modeller since the 1970's. As any aviation enthusiast growing up through the 50's I always had a soft spot for the 'V' bombers If I find out how to post a picture here I'll add one ........ Geoff T.

After I'd completed my diorama Carsons Quay I thought I'd get back to my small roundy-roundy layout, but stupidly I said I'd build a suitable Thomas layout by the Silverfox DCC clubs exhibition tomorrow. We wanted something cheap, simple, easy to transport, you know all the impossible combinations !! I insisted that it had to be fully scenic, with little direct 'Thomas' influence so it could look good with anything running on it. The design was for a fully folding double oval with small operating desks at each front corner allowing children to be allowed to drive. My first innovation was for all power links between the two sides to be carried through the 4 hinges that held the two parts together. Track to be in a slight well to prevent any train from crashing to the floor regardless of too fast a running (remember children driving) or being knocked. A lake on one side to allow a hill on the opposite half to mesh together when closed up. It seems to have worked quite well and by using a removable two part road the joining hinges and central woodwork is hidden. First a picture of it in the folded away state with road bridge resting on top and hill beside. This is compact enough to carry inside the rear foot well and back seat of a Daewoo Matiz !! Here is an overall view from the hill side. From first buying the wood to those final pictures was 3 Months, during which I also had a holiday in the Netherlands as well as a couple visits to two of my sons. I notice those last photos were taken just before the road bridge had railings and a little grass edging added. NOW perhaps I'll get back to my layout ........... Geoff T.

Well although I've not been posting it dosen't mean I've not been working on anything. I started a small diorama in January that was finished by the Spring Equinox. The idea was similar to Andy Y's 2011 competition in as much it was in limited space. In the end I settled on 9.1/2 inches wide by 15 inches long and made to represent a corner of a small town quay. By trying to be non-specific it allowed me to 'set the stage' with anything I fancied. These small dioramas allow experimenting and if they work out O.K make ideal photo plinths. Thought I'd add a couple of pictures - One from early BR days when there was still some fishing going on. The second from the '70's when holiday makers were the main visitors. Perhaps be back before too long. Geoff T.

Winters more or less ended and I can at last spend a few hours in the garage without freezing ! Mind you , can't show what I'm doing there because it's still too early in the building stages for these hallowed walls !! What I've enjoyed doing this winter is another diorama. What I like about these is the short span from start to finish. The ability to be creative with modelling ideas at minimal cost and little difficulty in finding somewhere to keep them. So here is an almost finished 'Carsons Quay' just 15" x 9.5" with the backboard about 14" high. Representing the end of a small harbour quay which was once used for fish docks, but now in the early 1960's finding other uses for workshops. Chose the name Clark in rememberance of the great Jim & Roger. The full 'on cost' of making this has been around £7 ....... good value for money ! Geoff T.

A websearcher friend pointed me to this ..... Just fantastic, the whole layout with line-side rodding, everything looking right with suitable weathering. To me it's a shame that your passion is the 'posh' end because I Iove small work-a-day locos and truly appreciate the Pug and coal wagon tender. I tried doing that but mine looks like a poor Hong Kong toy (1950's speak) in comparison. Sir, you are both an engineer and 3D artist. Geoff T.

Thank you Gentlemen, Some very interesting reading, although the "scale 4" chassis thesis is rather deep. I'm almost certain to go for this and when I do I may well give you a blow by blow story of how I get on !! My running tends to be quite slow with probably never more than 30 mph scale type speed, frequently below 20 mph. Having non-compensated 0-4-0 chasis running at speeds down to 1 mph, even over points I feel I could get one of these to work with 4 fixed drivers and suitably sprung trailing set ...... I suppose only time will tell. Can it be more difficult that setting up a pre-loaded crownwheel & pinion in my old rally car, building a gearbox at the side of the road, or rebuilding my engines ? All a long time ago though ..... Now where's my cheque book .... Geoff T.

Hi benachie and Kenton' My fear is of making a strong reliable chassis that's square, level, and runs freely - after that the actual performance on the track must be one of careful weighting and balancing. I don't have any idea where the motor & gearbox as reccommended fits (M1224D motor), but any 'spare' space at the smoke box or boiler front can have a lead ingot made to fit. If I get one It will be made to '00' gauge standards and DCC fitted. My Dean sidings kit was on the Hornby 0-4-0 chassis - it took more time to ballast and balance that than making the rest of the kit - however it can now run at a scale 4-5 mph while pulling 25 wagons, starting without wheel slip and crossing dead frog points without stalling....... I have a good stock of lead !! I just don't want a £100 lemon sitting in a 'spares' box, or something that can't be used !! Geoff T.

I fancy a 4 mm Caledonian 439 loco and as far as I'm aware there is just one option, the DJH kit. I've read a few comments in various places that some of their kits are good, others very difficult to build in to a fine running model. For me quality of running is one of the most important things, hence my reluctance to buy without trying to obtain some feedback. To compound my fears I've only ever worked on one loco kit, a resin Dean Sidings Killin Pug where a RTR chassis is used. I have no specific metal working tools, just a few files, std power drill, and junior hacksaw, not even a vice !! I have modelled in plastic for around 40 years, so have pin vice, fine drills, soldering irons, abrasive papers 80-1000, scalpels, tweezers and such. So what could be considered the minimum tools to make a sucess from one of these kits ? I suppose my fear falls around the bending and cutting of metal that may be required. I didn't get along with bending etched brass parts for use in plastic aircraft models !! Geoff T.

Oh dear, I'm on here as I can't continue with my conversion build - modelling's better than computers !! The story is thus :- I bought a Killin Pug conversion kit from Dean Sidings, the build up went easy to start with, but if you've ever used a Hornby 0-4-0 then you'll understand their running tends to be doubtful ! So much time & effort went into sorting the chassis. Now I want to continue I can't find the cab floor and firebox ....... looked most places, even moved furniture 'just in case' ..... I can't have looked everywhere, or I should have found it ? It would have taken less time to have kept everything tidy rather than searching the house, garage, shed, car, wardrobe, aircraft model kit boxes ?????? Looks like I'll have to come back later to fix the photo ? Geoff T.

True James, Mad as a brush !! From what I gather very few railway modellers give their locos pet names ........ I just have two that seemed to need names. Both my little 06 shunters. Marilyn came first, so the thinking went thus :- Blue diesels .....blue movies ??? A true Scots heritage, I seem to recall only one 06 got to England (Tyneside?) Now they take some real hard work to make run well, a bit like climbing a mountain, Ahh Monroes, Scotlands mountain peaks of over 3,000 feet. MMmmm ..... oh yes that fits well. She has a sexy wiggle as she moves along Insists on frequent attention, when watched will show off, if ignored will be moody and stop. To me she just had to be Marilyn. Then I got a green one ...... Duncan, seemed a good Scots sounding name ..... As you can see I can't take railway modelling too seriously, if it ever stops being fun I'll do something else !! Geoff T.

Having recently had a couple of holidays, bad back and general lack of energy I've not done any real work on St.Oval for several weeks. Tonight I went to the garage and just fancied running something ........ but what ? few laps with a Baccy 56XX, no didn't feel right, Vitrains 37's phew only just make the 1st radius curves. So I got out Marilyn my favourite loco ...... forget 9F's, Collett Goods, 37's, 47's, 33's, single wheelers, I'm in love with Marilyn !! Hope it didn't freeze while loading (I often have that problem) But you must admit she packs a punch, some may like it hot, but Marilyn can do it all !! Mad Modeller Geoff T.

More done - the sides propped in place ......... will the rest be easy ? Geoff T

It seemed unfair not to at least show where the fourth bridge will be. So here is the current rough cut styrene with a Lotus Cortina Mk.1 just missing the removal lorry - there will just be room for them to pass, but think I'll have to leave paint scrapes on the bridge wall when made !! Geoff T.

The St.Oval fights back - or why didn't I think first !! St.Oval has 4 bridges, the tightly curved viadict ..... or is it a bridge with 3 spans, 2 over the stream, one for road the other the branch line, then a much higher road over bridge. These are never as easy as first thought. First the Viaduct has not been a problem yet although putting the 3 arch linings in on a curved structure will no doubt cause me some difficulties. skinning with plastic card will be easy enough when I find which one I want to use. The stream culvert would have been easy enough if I hadn't glued the MDF structure in place before adding the plastic skinning and in particular the key and arch stones. I found it impossible to work upside down on the inside arch, although the outer one was easy. In the end I stood the layout board on it's side, sitting on a bench, while I worked on my knees ..... went much easier than expected. The outer face and wing walls were easy, looking better for an initial rough coat of paint. After that I made certain the road bridge that'll sit alongside the railway was put together before being stuck in place. I can't even begin the final road over bridge until I've fixed the cutting sides and the road leading to the bridge - it's the only way I'll get things to line up. As it is the hill will be nigh on 1 : 4, although that's not uncommon in Cornwall. Still a long way to go, particularly when my back is giving so much trouble. I think doing the Edinburgh Tatoo by coach was the agravating factor for my back. Geoff T.

Been out shopping, don't you love Saturdays with the wife ! On return I decided to show one of my silly videos where I had a class 03 & 04 double heading a mixed goods. This also allows one to see the simple layout. Geoff T.

Hi cromptonnut, End of the line was only 3 weeks work, but I was experimenting with ideas to use later. This oval hits the now boring Cornish china clay theme - an imaginary line down the east bank of the Fowey River. The aim was/is to have a good scenic layout with part of a cornish village and creek on a 6' x 3' base that I could carry myself in the back of the car. The entire track is set at 3.5" high to allow the landscape to roll from sea level to the road over bridge within the 6'. For it to be useable at an exhibition I have a passing loop behind the back screen where after one train travelling with full wagons to the quay will be exchanged for another going the other direction with empties. Then the occasional 14XX with an autocoach. I have named it St.Oval, because it was going to be set track and an oval !! I'm also experimenting with small speakers that I hope to have in the pub and chapel with suitable sounds eminating from the buildings. I have yet to see if I can record CDs with enough channel seperation. This more or less shows the scenic side track layout. Yes it is going to be heavy, but I've checked that I can get in the Matiz - will be carried one above the other !! Geoff T.

Well, with the programming track "End of the line" finished I'm back working on my simple oval. Everyone should have a roundy, roundy, or how do you run a new locomotive in ??? It was started early this year, but having nowhere large enough to work on under cover it was dependant on good weather. Then a halt while my old garage was demolished and the new one put up as well as playing around with what I'll now refer to as "End of the line". Now up in the garage and live, seemingly not having suffered in my sons shed under a couple of bicycles. My new work being the bridge masonary, while doing that I had Marilyn the blue 06 pulling a few wagons around at under a scale 2 mph - across 3 insulfrog points without stalling. Rather than try a layout thread I thought from time to time I'd show in this 'blog' bit what I've been doing. Geoff T.

Yes I'm working towards having a 'go' ! Here is the very small tree aramature - not happy about the binding tape and I've probably got far too many fine branches. I also have some dried sedum heads and a colleague at MKMRS is starting some to show me how he makes his. They always look a bit cedar'ish and I'm still not fully convinced. The trouble is I want some real height trees - 12 - 14" high and the bigger they get the more they loose the real tree look ? At least the lollypops were short enough to not get in the way as it is a programming track and will/should have frequent loco's going over the trees heads ! Having repaired them once if they do get damaged I should be able to fix them. Still so much to learn !! Geoff T.

Hi Cromptonnut, In a word, Yes, I agree with you - I did paint three of the trunks to hide the brown glossy plastic finish, also trimmed the round 'root' base into a limited number of individual roots. They're also what I call lollypop trees, being far too short and with far too dense a foliage. While I wanted high quality I also aimed at low cost and a pack of 4 old Heki trees came free ...... they were from my son's mother-in-law who had them come into a charity shop she works at. They're not the best looking trees, had to replace some flock that was falling off the nylon bristles, they now smell like a ladies hirdressers. I have as yet to make a copper wire armature tree - one of my complete 'blocks', just chicken to progress beyond the small armature I've sitting behind me right now ! The actual direct cost was only £5.50, all the other things were 'in stock' although I will admit that to buy it all would certainly have been Much more. Timber was £4.10, buffer £1.28, Matches £0.12. This was good use of spare materials purchased for use on other projects. So all in all a fun months play for less than a couple of pints ! Geoff T.

Any more progress on the build ? I've looked at 00 kits and always chickened out - part cost, part doubting my skills, part because I don't have much in the way of engineering tools, not even a fixed vice ! I want to absorb as much as I can from other people's builds ........ I fancy a Highland 4-6-0 heavy goods and can't ever see the RTR market making one. Geoff T.