Wright writes.....

[Headstock]

Hi Tony,

 

I just had to comment on your exciting new project, you continue to be an inspiration, long may it continue. I must admit the early fifties idea (though probably not practical because of the amount of stock involved) sounds very cool.

[Jol Wilkinson]

Tom,

 

Since I look such a t*t in the TVR and find my ancient limbs less and less able to get in and out of the thing, it's probably time to pass it on to my sons. I'll thus have the garage to work in (which is larger than 'standard', new-home size). Though the whole layout might not be able to be fitted in in one piece, with the door open (and good weather), I can extend outside. 

 

That's the plan, anyway. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

Tony,

 

is the TVR a convertible?

 

I bought a '73 MGB roadster in 2015. I considered other older boy's toys but went for a soft top as it is easier to get in and out.

 

 

Jol

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

is the TVR a convertible?

 

I bought a '73 MGB roadster in 2015. I considered other older boy's toys but went for a soft top as it is easier to get in and out.

 

 

Jol

It is Jol,

 

The model is a Chimaera 500. It's just so low (even with the lid off) that I struggle to get in and out. It's lower than an MGB Roadster; it's also a lot more dangerous! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony,

 

I just had to comment on your exciting new project, you continue to be an inspiration, long may it continue. I must admit the early fifties idea (though probably not practical because of the amount of stock involved) sounds very cool.

Andrew,

 

It's very kind of you to consider me to be 'an inspiration', but I think you're being too kind. This is no false modesty, I assure you. 

 

When I think of those I consider to have been inspirational to me, I'm nowhere near in the same class. The class containing the likes of Frank Dyer, Bert Collins, John Edgson (all, sadly, now deceased), Geoff Kent and Roy Jackson, among others. All true makers of things, in many cases from scratch. At a time (or so it would seem from recent correspondence) when fewer people are actually making things and more and more are becoming RTR-dependent, who'll be considered inspirational in the future? 

[micklner]

Mick,

 

I'm not sure if anyone is beating themselves up with regard to using (or not using) RTR items. However, if you don't know why folk prefer to make their own things, then, please, follow your path of exploiting what the RTR manufacturers provide, detailing, altering and improving it - which you do commendably well. It is your choice but it is not mine. It is also your right, and I have no wish to deny you that.

 

It seems pointless to try and justify my position, but may I make a few observations, please?

 

To imply (as you do in a later post) that no professional painter can match current RTR finishes is a bit of an insult if I may be so bold. Accepting that Ian Rathbone, and more lately, Geoff Haynes, have painted many of my locos (I've painted many as well, but nowhere near to the same standard), one of the reasons why I'm selling my self-modified RTR locos is because the lining isn't anywhere near in the same class, particularly the boiler bands on BR green. Yes, with weathering it can be made more realistic, but the way over-scale boiler band lining still 'shouts out', rather like a backward wasp. It's also the same with LNER lining, where the likes of Larry Goddard and Ian Rathbone get a much finer result than that obtainable with a proprietary finish or transfer lining, however well-applied. I've photographed examples, and the difference shows.  

 

As for RTR plastic models being superior to a conjunction of white metal and etched brass components, may I cite a DJH A1 in comparison with a Bachmann one? Are you telling me that a loco with etched brass cabsides, etched brass deflectors and an etched brass tender body looks 'inferior' to one with all those bits made (out of necessity) in thicker plastic? If so, I beg to differ. 

 

I have great admiration for those who personally improve their RTR items (as you do, and as have many others on this thread) but, in my view, particularly with many mainstream RTR layouts at shows and in the press there is a level of 'sameness' appearing, even down to the extent of two identical locos being on the same layout; the reason was that two different club members had bought the same item and wished to run them (democracy rules). Neither had been altered at all. Is this an illustration of the way the hobby is going? If so, count me out.

 

In fairness, it would be tantamount to lunacy on my part to have made all the Mk.1s I need on LB. Instead, I've made the appropriate types Bachmann doesn't do, mostly BSOs. Every Bachmann (or Hornby) one has been modified by the removal of the roof ribs, new couplings fitted and weathering added, but they're really just modified RTR. And, they suit and look the part. 

 

Finally, and this has been alluded to by many, I enjoy making my own locos and rolling stock, much more than I enjoy modifying RTR. This, I agree, is a personal point of view, and I'm not suggesting it is a better way to do things than the alternatives. All I'd say is that any loco (or carriage) I make is (ex-painting in some cases) entirely down (or up) to me. How it performs is down to me, how it's put together is down to me, how it's finished (apart from painting in several cases) is down to me and I'm not restricted by the compromises necessary in any RTR loco (though mine have different compromises). I'm also not restricted by what the RTR chaps provide (though I no longer scratch-build) and, I believe, any models which have been made are much more personal creations. 'My' way is certainly not better, superior, elitist nor cost-effective. It's just that I enjoy it more. As you do, your way.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

Some excellent points as usual  Tony i will expand some of my the points I have made.

 

I was simply saying that Model railways as all types of modelling are a personal choice, and thank god that it is. We are very lucky that there is the scope to do your own thing.

 

Profesional painters comment wasn't intended as a insult and I apologise if it reads so. I was talking about the Hornby B1's as an example of lining . To my eyes the Tender ,Cab and Footplate lining is excellent.The same applies to the LNER L1 effort. Sorry no one could line the Tender frames and Footplate lining in Red any better IMHO. I should have expanded and said as usual the Boiler Bands are simply wrong ,Hornby and Bachmann always make the Black area far too narrow. I do not like Bachmann's efforts on their LNER Locos , they are amateurish at best , they miss complete lines of lining e.g on the A2 there should be a lining at the base of the Tank sides, white lines are too wide. The Red lines are about a scale 3 inches wide or more . They looke even worse on a Black loco such as the D11. Why they cant manage the fineness of Hornby's  I have no idea.

 

I have a DJH A2/3 and did have their A2 , the A1 is not my period. I simply personally prefer the r.t.r version of the A2 . The DJH A2/3 caused me no end of problems with the front Frames being far to high, no idea why but I had to deepen the ones on mine, perhaps I did something wrong in the build of mine. Etched edges to kits are a obvious improvement but luckily most are painted Black and aren't that noticeable, it is not that hard if people wish to thin the edge of the plastic. Yet again another model compromise.

 

r.t.r on layouts ? Their choice as to what they run , if they work ok no problem to me, a tad ridiculous to run two versions of the same loco however !!

 

Modified Coaches why not , how much time and effort do people save by doing modifications and in these hard time s save a lot of money too.

 

As to the last paragraph fill your boots Tony and enjoy every minute , I do !!! 

 

cheers

 

Mick

[micklner]

Hi Mick,

 

sounds like you got a bum rap on your Nucast tender. I'm not saying that the Hornby tender isn't better it clearly is, just pointing out that in forty years it's not a massive improvement in thickness. At over three inches it's not that far off armour plate if you're a Battlecruiser anyway lol. I recommend the Bradwell kit it will keep you entertained for ages and with enough spare sides and, or coping plates to doll up a small army of RTR tenders.

 

Recently I did up a Bachmann RTR Atlantic for a friend, new numbers, coal etc. It also got a new saddle and front frames, that supplied by the manufacturer being pretty hopeless. I've presently received one of the green B1's. This time, my friend has done all the work himself including drawing up and having his own transfers produced. The loco is now E1299, I'm rather proud of his achievement.

 

Regarding the Hornby full brake, it's basically too fat. They haven't sorted out the tumblehome, just given it a rather bulbous sticky out one to accommodate the same over wide floor pan of the gangway passenger carriages. The real things were rather slim being the same proportions as the recessed brake compartment on passenger stock. The underframe has the same problems as the other gangway stock and it rides on the wrong bogies, being the 8' 6" light type rather than the 8' heavies.

 

I've greatly enjoyed seeing your superb conversions, lining and paint jobs. I just can't get excited about line up's of RTR locomotives in the same way. It would be a sad day if you were to stop producing them just because a RTR equivalent became available.

 

The Bradwell Tender sounds a very good idea re sides usage for the future.  Good info re the Full Brake I will freely admit I haven't measured the two I have !!.

 

As to replacing kitbuild with r.t.r that would only happen if it beat my efforts by a long way !.  One example is the new Hornby Q6 , compared to my old Nucast version and it is sadly wanting in every department. However its going nowhere as its at least 30 years old , as are my builds Nucast J21 and J27. I recently built a Bradwell J27 simply light years ahead of the Nucast version.

 

I can see Hornby if they have any sense offering all or some of the J21,J27 and G5 variants before long. If they do I doubt if any of mine will be going anywhere!

 

By coincidence, I am backdating a Hornby Apple Green NB build  B1 to a LNER named Darlington version at the moment.

 

cheers

 

Mick

Edited August 26, 2016 by micklner

[Focalplane]

Thanks Bill,

 

What a good idea about shifting things. 

 

You're quite right about friends wishing to contribute to a new project; several have already said they'll do things for it. I am, as I've said many times, immensely privileged in that regard. 

 

Your point about transportation is well-made. I'm 70 in October, so I've just renewed my driver's licence. From October, I won't be able to hire a van over a certain size (or any van?), so the layout will have to be accommodated in estate cars (we have one already). The TVR is definitely out (though with the roof off, the sky's the limit with regard to carrying bits of wood), but that'll be going to our sons, anyway.

 

I'll cross the transportation bridge when I come to it.

 

Tony

 

The age 70 limit for driving vans is unnecessarily vague. But you can still drive a transit size van after 70 if you could drive it before you reached that age. The local van rental company near Stratford on Avon assured me this is correct and as if to prove it, the van rental includes their insurance, albeit with a hefty standard deductible.

 

My last significant van journey was across France's Massif Central n February 2010, with a fully loaded 3.5 ton van. The temperature plunged to -17°C at Lozère. After that experience I seriously doubt if Legge Lane will ever make it to the UK!

[Headstock]

The Bradwell Tender sounds a very good idea re sides usage for the future.  Good info re the Full Brake I will freely admit I haven't measured the two I have !!.

 

As to replacing kitbuild with r.t.r that would only happen if it beat my efforts by a long way !.  One example is the new Hornby Q6 , compared to my old Nucast version and it is sadly wanting in every department. However its going nowhere as its at least 30 years old , as are my builds Nucast J21 and J27. I recently built a Bradwell J27 simply light years ahead of the Nucast version.

 

I can see Hornby if they have any sense offering all or some of the J21,J27 and G5 variants before long. If they do I doubt if any of mine will be going anywhere!

 

By coincidence, I am backdating a Hornby Apple Green NB build  B1 to a LNER named Darlington version at the moment.

 

cheers

 

Mick

 

Hi Mick,

 

I would love to see some photographs of your work.

[Focalplane]

Given that 70 is now considered to be the start of the "new Middle Age" it seems to me that us oldies should be buying sports cars, not selling them on. My choice is a Peugeot 308 metal top convertible. The metal top is a good idea as it is more secure than a rag top, particularly here in France. My wife recently acquired an Audi convertible, the envy of our entire family it seems. It is her first non-sensible car and she loves it. Isn't that what we should be doing in our retirement years? The American bumper sticker, usually pasted onto the rear of a Winnebago, comes to mind. "We are spnding our children's inheritance". However, i understand such a concept in the UK is definitely non-PC.

[micklner]

Hi Mick,

 

I would love to see some photographs of your work.

 

All on my thread listed below.

[Headstock]

All on my thread listed below.

 

You've done the replacement handrails on the brake van thing, you sneak. It looks really good. I don't now if you exhibit at all but it is a shame if you don't. Your stuff is so much better than the majority of stuff you see at exhibitions these days, it would certainly justify the entrance fee on its own.

[t-b-g]

All the restrictions on what you can and can't drive after passing the age of 70 are listed in fairly easy to understand lists on the DVLA website.

 

All the classes of vehicle and the limits of size etc. are there and you can just look at the classes listed on your card and easily work out if you can drive a certain size of van.

 

It is based on the weight of the vehicle rather than size. A long wheelbase transit just about takes you over the limit but a short wheelbase one is under the limit. The tipping point is 4,000kg.

 

I had to hire a van recently and wanted somebody over 70 named as a second driver so I checked it out. It was quite surprising to me (and horrifying to other road users!) just what I am allowed to drive on my average everyday licence.

[bbishop]

Thanks Tony (G),  I didn't know chapter and verse but knew that some vans were permitted beyond 70.  However the issue can be that some companies won't hire any vans to the over 70s or charge a crippling insurance premium.

 

Tony (W), knowing your "style", I reckon you would want a fairly high backscene to frame the picture, together with a lighting rig.  Doing a bit of mental arithmetic, you will really struggle to get a 25' x 10' oval into two estate cars.  (I transport a 22' x 2'8" layout in two Yetis, but it is a tight squeeze).

 

Bill

[Tony Wright]

Thanks Tony (G),  I didn't know chapter and verse but knew that some vans were permitted beyond 70.  However the issue can be that some companies won't hire any vans to the over 70s or charge a crippling insurance premium.

 

Tony (W), knowing your "style", I reckon you would want a fairly high backscene to frame the picture, together with a lighting rig.  Doing a bit of mental arithmetic, you will really struggle to get a 25' x 10' oval into two estate cars.  (I transport a 22' x 2'8" layout in two Yetis, but it is a tight squeeze).

 

Bill

Thanks Bill,

 

I'll get some younger operators to hire a van. 

 

Seriously, though the over-70 restrictions are a bit vague, there's no doubt that there is a problem for those into their eighth decade who wish to hire vans of any size. Our Stoke/Charwelton driver passed the age some little time ago and was unable, therefore, to hire the necessary Luton or LWB Transit. Not that it mattered, since the growing ages of those who used to take them out rendered the lugging-around of numerous boards getting beyond them. A not uncommon occurrence these days it would seem. Anyway, both layouts have now been sold. 

[St Enodoc]

It is Jol,

 

The model is a Chimaera 500. It's just so low (even with the lid off) that I struggle to get in and out. It's lower than an MGB Roadster; it's also a lot more dangerous! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Photos please!

[Jol Wilkinson]

Thanks Bill,

 

I'll get some younger operators to hire a van. 

 

Seriously, though the over-70 restrictions are a bit vague, there's no doubt that there is a problem for those into their eighth decade who wish to hire vans of any size. Our Stoke/Charwelton driver passed the age some little time ago and was unable, therefore, to hire the necessary Luton or LWB Transit. Not that it mattered, since the growing ages of those who used to take them out rendered the lugging-around of numerous boards getting beyond them. A not uncommon occurrence these days it would seem. Anyway, both layouts have now been sold.

 

 

Despite having passsed the 70 milepost earlier this year, my local Ford Rental dealer is still willing to provide a Transit for transporting London Road.

 

I have to provide the usual information and they check with their insurers that they are willing to provide coverage.

 

Ironically, the fully comp. classic car insurance for my '73 MGB includes coverage for driving other vehicles. It seems that they believe if you have got to old age with a clean license and a long NCB then you are reasonably competent.

 

Jol

[dibateg]

Going back a little, you might remember we had a discussion regarding the colour of engineers vehicles in the '60s. I came across this photo by Keith Pirt, taken at Brookmans park in 1961. I've taken an extract from it. It shows a maroon vehicle as part of what appears to be an engineers train. Yellow lettering at the left hand end of the coach would imply the branding to that effect. I wonder how common that was. I still have not found the picture of my maroon 6 wheeler, but there again, I'm not actually looking for it! It will turn up eventually..

 

Lugging big layouts around:- I'd had enough of that 10 years ago, then Heyside came along...

 

Regards

Tony

[Black Marlin]

Hi Tony

I think you do yourself a disservice by shying away from the 'inspirational' label (in post #11200). Reading this thread, among other things, has convinced me that I really do need to branch out a bit more from the 'open the box and play with the contents' mindset in which I have been so comfortable for so long. As with all things, it seems to me to be an evolutionary process. I started with a train set; various pieces of rolling stock were added as gifts by relatives on subsequent Christmases and birthdays; and I saved up pocket money to buy things I liked myself. Then the first major transformation: working out what pieces of stock went accurately with what engines. Then the second: learning that good-quality kits of a type no more difficult than the average Airfix Spitfire were available from Parkside and others. (No more difficult to build, I should add; they're slightly more difficult to complete because they require you to source transfers separately).

 

From building plastic kits you get the confidence to start modifying RTR, which is where I am now. In fact, fellow thread-devotees, I emailed Tony a couple of days ago to find out about renumbering the Hornby all-steel K-type Pullman cars (I bought the necessary coaches this morning from those fine Liverpudlians, as it happens) because - and again this is that evolutionary imperative at work - I'm no longer willing to have a train that is accurate in terms of its formation let down by the fact that cars #72, #73 & #79 appear twice in the space of eight carriages. Tony kindly replied with some helpful advice, which has given me the confidence to go out and try things.

Whether this counts as 'proper modelling' I don't know. Because I view these things as being part of a spectrum, with 'getting a trainset' on one end and something like 'scratchbuilding a Jersey Lily for Retford' at the other, I'm not sure where 'proper modelling' begins (my suspicion is that differences in individual interpretation here are what fuels the ongoing debate). I have started upgrading my locomotive stud in a serious and systematic way by adding crews, lamps and, most recently, real coal - to me this is modelling, whereas to others, I'm sure, it's no more than basic titivation. (I'm particularly proud, incidentally, of having 'overfilled' the tender of a Bachmann J39, so that the coal has tumbled down and around the water filler cap. It's something I've seen in photographs but it's not something you get on an out-of-the-box RTR model, and while I'm aware that it's a small thing to be proud of it does at least suggest to me that my powers of 'modelling observation' seem to be moving in the right direction!)

 

Where next in terms of modelling development? Probably whitemetal kits, and from unpowered to powered - something like an 0-6-0 with no external valve gear to worry about putting together. For me the ultimate aim is still working in brass, but it will be years before I'm confident enough in my techniques to do so - the cost of the kits is still a serious disincentive to amateurism. To spend £300 to end up with a locomotive that you can't use, when you could get a superb RTR equivalent for less than half the price, would be a source of genuine and continuing annoyance. Watching someone like Tony being so entirely comfortable working in that medium is inspirational, whether he confesses it or not, and it's why I find this thread so continually helpful.

Incidentally, I was sitting next to SWMBO when I was emailing Tony the other night. "Who are you talking to?" she asked.

"Tony Wright," I replied. "I wanted some advice on how to renumber coaches."

"You're always doing train stuff on that computer. You should invent an app for contacting these people," she suggested.

Having mulled it over, I wonder if she's perhaps on to something with that idea. I've even come up with a name for it: "Looking to meet like-minded model railway enthusiasts? Get chatting by downloading our new app... Tender!"

Regards,
Gavin

[grob1234]

Swipe, swipe, swipe....

[Willie Whizz]

Given that 70 is now considered to be the start of the "new Middle Age" it seems to me that us oldies should be buying sports cars, not selling them on. My choice is a Peugeot 308 metal top convertible. The metal top is a good idea as it is more secure than a rag top, particularly here in France. My wife recently acquired an Audi convertible, the envy of our entire family it seems. It is her first non-sensible car and she loves it. Isn't that what we should be doing in our retirement years? The American bumper sticker, usually pasted onto the rear of a Winnebago, comes to mind. "We are spnding our children's inheritance". However, i understand such a concept in the UK is definitely non-PC.

 

When I try telling my (grown-up) children I'm thinking of spending their inheritance, their rejoinder is immediate:  "Just be nice to us, Dad - remember, we're the ones who will get to choose your Care Home!"

[John Isherwood]

 "Just be nice to us, Dad - remember, we're the ones who will get to choose your Care Home!"

 

Not whilst I am compos mentis !!!!!!!!!!

 

........... and when I'm not, I won't care.

 

With many of us now living to a ripe old age, if my offspring, (with not inconsiderable help from the Bank of Mum & Dad), are not financially secure by the time that I peg it, (hopefully not for a while yet), they really shouldn't be relying on my hard-earned to keep them comfortable in their own dotage !

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Porcy Mane]

Going back a little, you might remember we had a discussion regarding the colour of engineers vehicles in the '60s. I came across this photo by Keith Pirt, taken at Brookmans park in 1961. I've taken an extract from it. It shows a maroon vehicle as part of what appears to be an engineers train. Yellow lettering at the left hand end of the coach would imply the branding to that effect. I wonder how common that was. I still have not found the picture of my maroon 6 wheeler, but there again, I'm not actually looking for it! It will turn up eventually..

There is a few maroon engineers coaches in the 1961 colour film linked to in this post:

 

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/113195-something-for-everbody/&do=findComment&comment=2375795

 

It includes a six wheeler but I don't for a minute think it will be yours?

 

P

[richard i]

This thread is for displaying things that have been built. Here is a steam tractor built as a load for my lomac. Not exciting in its self, but it was built from a scale link white metal kit by my son who did the soldering, I would clean up the joints, he painted the base colour and I did the brass painting. He is six. his twin brother wants to build a compound. I mentioned he could get one r-t-r and he said he wanted to build it. Now I just need to find a compound kit for him to work on.

Modeling future

Richard

[geoff west]

Thanks Bill,

 

I'll get some younger operators to hire a van. 

 

Seriously, though the over-70 restrictions are a bit vague, there's no doubt that there is a problem for those into their eighth decade who wish to hire vans of any size. Our Stoke/Charwelton driver passed the age some little time ago and was unable, therefore, to hire the necessary Luton or LWB Transit. Not that it mattered, since the growing ages of those who used to take them out rendered the lugging-around of numerous boards getting beyond them. A not uncommon occurrence these days it would seem. Anyway, both layouts have now been sold. 

Hi Tony.

 

You do have a good friend with a very large van who would be very willing to help.

 

[Tony Wright]

Hi Tony.

 

You do have a good friend with a very large van who would be very willing to help.

Thanks Geoff,

 

Of course I thought of you, but I would not automatically presume. It's very kind of you, though.