Wright writes.....

[Jol Wilkinson]

Tony,

 

excellent work as ever.

 

Yes, some skills - or perhaps a better word -  techniques, can be more difficult to learn. Sometimes different approaches are easier. All my models are airbrushed using cellulose paint. I was able, many years ago, to get some LNWR carriage paints formulated using PPP colours as a guide. Later I got some more by matching paint sample chips at a local car paint supplier. As Guru Rathbone says in his book and video, cellulose dries quickly and therefore dust inclusion is minimised. Any "inclusions" in the paint are usually because I haven't brushed off the dust sufficiently before turning on the compressor! I use a fairly old single action Badger 200 and a "Gloss" cellulose thinner. I use to use Comet etch primer (very good but no longer available) but now use PPP.

 

Cellulose dries gloss, hence better for taking transfers, while enamels used for lining can be removed to correct c*ck ups (very common) using white spirit or ciggy lighter fluid. I think the greatest difficulties I have come about through lack of practise. . I always need to refer back to Ian Rahbone's Painting and Lining book to remind myself what I should be doing before I start. However, I am  pleasantry surprised when I get the hang of it again

 

Apologies if any of this is stuff you already know. 

 

Jol

[Headstock]

What's the cliche, Jol? 'Singing from the same hymn sheet'? 

 

That said, I don't know whether every modelling skill can be acquired - at least to the highest standard. May I cite painting and lining, please? Though I've read the books, been sitting next to the top painters, even done part of a DVD with one, am taking the pictures for a book for one and have practised the necessary techniques, I know I'm never going to reach the 'professional' standards I insist upon, even though I'd like to. 

 

Is it a question of temperament, luck or my not paying enough attention? Why, for instance, will I spray a test piece of metal and the finish is superlative, yet, the moment the very same paint from the very same source is applied to the model, every speck in the vicinity just homes in? And why will, what's supposed to be satin paint, dry anything but blotchy, assuming it ever dries at all, even though I've stirred and stirred the pot? 

 

I'm convinced that mastering the highest standard of painting is the province of the very few. I know many professional builders, but a much smaller number of professional painters. With one or two exceptions, these painters are getting rather old. 

 

It might well be that the modelling community as a whole is happy to become 'de-skilled', or not skilled at all, because the former suggests that it was once skilled. Perhaps it was (more), but those who actually make things have always been in a minority. It looks like it's an even smaller (in number) minority now, and your point about services being offered for simple modifications/superdetailing/weathering/chip-fitting and so on suggest a ready (and growing?) market for these. 

 

Returning to painting, may I offer the following as examples of my work, please? I also built all these.

 

Trains 26 Silver Jubilee catering triplet.jpg

 

Because of the all-clear sides on this Mailcoach ex-Silver Jubilee triplet set it had to be brush-painted (so many coats). Thus, the finish isn't that achieved by spraying. The lining is some older Kemco transfers I had, which are too coarse. In fairness (to the lining and myself), it does stand out a bit more in the pictures than on the layout. Whether a professional painter would take a job like this on (with all that masking!), I don't know, but the set is no more than a trio of 'layout coaches'.

 

Trains 19 Comet catering triplet.jpg

 

Where metal is concerned, I paint the cars using Halfords car acrylics. On this Comet catering triplet, the lining was some Woodhead transfers (which stick forever). Though less-coarse, and a bit crisper than the Kemco, it's still too wide. The big problem with lining Gresleys in BR maroon (other than with some cars running on the Scottish Region, which had the lining lower), is that it should be on the beading, not below it. No matter how sticky a transfer might be, it will always lift somewhere off the beading - there is never enough 'land' for it to stick to.

 

M&GNR RU 22.jpg

 

Model Master's lining is finer still, though still too wide. Again, the lining on this M&GNR-section catering car should be on the beading. 

 

Gresley 4 Compt Brake Third 02.jpg

 

The finest transfer lining (and, thus, the most accurate) is produced by both Replica and Cambridge Custom Transfers. I can't remember which side is which on this Hornby/Trice conversion, but they're both equally good. Again, it should be on the beading, not below it. 

 

The reason I show all these is that tomorrow I collect another Gresley Triplet set, which Geoff Haynes has painted/lined for me. Having seen the initial tests, the difference is incredible. Because he uses a bow pen, he's been able to line both the top and bottom edges of the beading in yellow, with the centre black - just as it should be. 

 

I'll take some pictures tomorrow.  

 

Though I've tried a bow pen, my results are always blobby - brilliant on primed/painted test pieces, but just ragged when I get near the model. Even though I've tried, I know I'll never master it. 

 

All the underframes/bogies on the above were brush-painted using enamels in a variety of matt colours. 

 

Tony,

 

given the amount of painting that you do I have never understood why you don't posses an airbrush? It seems to me that you are automatically excepting a lesser finish. Rattle cans are OK but the finish is coarser and they blow so much air around that I'm not surprised that bits end up on the paint job. In addition a good airbrush will pay for itself very quickly, all those rattle cans must cost a fortune.

 

With regard to the Mailcoach kits, I hand painted the the window frames and sliding vents, allowing a slight feathering onto the bodysides. This made masking a doddle, I then airbrushed the rest of the livery on. Having said all that, I don't think your painting is bad by any means. I don't particularly like the effect of the transfers, if I did maroon carriages I would have to have the lining on the beading, a case of discovering the best methodology of doing it. I know it is your preferred method to solder all your door furniture on before painting, I find it a pain and impossible with teak to get the finish I want. Again, I have a method that insures that door and grab handles are firmly attached after the painting is finished. Incidentally, I may be wrong about this on maroon carriages but I don't think that the door handles and grab handles should be body colour.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Headstock

[APOLLO]

Scaling things down is extremely difficult, especially ripples, creases and dents (on even brand new locos). Building my first Crownline original Bulleid many years ago, I was dismayed when the flimsy (prototypical?) etched cladding buckled as I soldered it to the substantial sub-structure. Until I realised it looked rather realistic.  

 

I was re-reading a pile of old BRM mags the just yesterday. Tony's interesting article on building "An un-rebuilt "West Country" class pacific" is a detailed and well illustrated 6 page essay. (May 1995 issue). BRM back then seemed to have a locomotive / stock building article in nearly every issue, not all by Tony though.

 

Tony states that back then he was only building ex LNER locos, but this West Country was for his self, built out personal interest - a fine "excuse" I agree !!!  One paragraph reads (Tony's words) "Why is it that the tolerance level of fingers to soldering heat is a fraction shorter than the cooling period necessary for the solder to solidify ?"

 

Even "back then" there were many fine layouts. In another issue is a photo by Tony of a detailed Lima Brush type 4 on the superb Stoke Layout. Lima - much derided today but back then they were more than adequate for lots of folks. I seem to remember Lima Deltics on this layout also. (Sacriledge - mentioning Lima in Tony's thread !!).

 

Yes, the BRM mag was a superb mag back then, I'm glad I kept all my old issues (from more or less when it launched).

 

Anyway, Tony, bet you have NOT got one of these !!!

 

 

Brit15

[St Enodoc]

What's the cliche, Jol? 'Singing from the same hymn sheet'? 

 

That said, I don't know whether every modelling skill can be acquired - at least to the highest standard. May I cite painting and lining, please? Though I've read the books, been sitting next to the top painters, even done part of a DVD with one, am taking the pictures for a book for one and have practised the necessary techniques, I know I'm never going to reach the 'professional' standards I insist upon, even though I'd like to. 

 

Is it a question of temperament, luck or my not paying enough attention? Why, for instance, will I spray a test piece of metal and the finish is superlative, yet, the moment the very same paint from the very same source is applied to the model, every speck in the vicinity just homes in? And why will, what's supposed to be satin paint, dry anything but blotchy, assuming it ever dries at all, even though I've stirred and stirred the pot? 

 

I'm convinced that mastering the highest standard of painting is the province of the very few. I know many professional builders, but a much smaller number of professional painters. With one or two exceptions, these painters are getting rather old. 

 

It might well be that the modelling community as a whole is happy to become 'de-skilled', or not skilled at all, because the former suggests that it was once skilled. Perhaps it was (more), but those who actually make things have always been in a minority. It looks like it's an even smaller (in number) minority now, and your point about services being offered for simple modifications/superdetailing/weathering/chip-fitting and so on suggest a ready (and growing?) market for these. 

 

Returning to painting, may I offer the following as examples of my work, please? I also built all these.

 

Trains 26 Silver Jubilee catering triplet.jpg

 

Because of the all-clear sides on this Mailcoach ex-Silver Jubilee triplet set it had to be brush-painted (so many coats). Thus, the finish isn't that achieved by spraying. The lining is some older Kemco transfers I had, which are too coarse. In fairness (to the lining and myself), it does stand out a bit more in the pictures than on the layout. Whether a professional painter would take a job like this on (with all that masking!), I don't know, but the set is no more than a trio of 'layout coaches'.

 

Trains 19 Comet catering triplet.jpg

 

Where metal is concerned, I paint the cars using Halfords car acrylics. On this Comet catering triplet, the lining was some Woodhead transfers (which stick forever). Though less-coarse, and a bit crisper than the Kemco, it's still too wide. The big problem with lining Gresleys in BR maroon (other than with some cars running on the Scottish Region, which had the lining lower), is that it should be on the beading, not below it. No matter how sticky a transfer might be, it will always lift somewhere off the beading - there is never enough 'land' for it to stick to.

 

M&GNR RU 22.jpg

 

Model Master's lining is finer still, though still too wide. Again, the lining on this M&GNR-section catering car should be on the beading. 

 

Gresley 4 Compt Brake Third 02.jpg

 

The finest transfer lining (and, thus, the most accurate) is produced by both Replica and Cambridge Custom Transfers. I can't remember which side is which on this Hornby/Trice conversion, but they're both equally good. Again, it should be on the beading, not below it. 

 

The reason I show all these is that tomorrow I collect another Gresley Triplet set, which Geoff Haynes has painted/lined for me. Having seen the initial tests, the difference is incredible. Because he uses a bow pen, he's been able to line both the top and bottom edges of the beading in yellow, with the centre black - just as it should be. 

 

I'll take some pictures tomorrow.  

 

Though I've tried a bow pen, my results are always blobby - brilliant on primed/painted test pieces, but just ragged when I get near the model. Even though I've tried, I know I'll never master it. 

 

All the underframes/bogies on the above were brush-painted using enamels in a variety of matt colours. 

Ah, Woodhead transfers - sadly missed.

[St Enodoc]

Alan,

 

I regret that my posting has caused you some annoyance. What I wanted to convey is my difficulty in understanding those modellers who, having overcome the difficulty in mastering carpentry and have built their own baseboards, created a scenic background from a variety of materials, made buildings from card, plastic. etc and/or kits then seem to feel that it is beyond them to assemble a wagon kit, etc. and look only at the contents of the catalogues and websites of the RTR manufacturers and retailers. Taking those products and modifying them, weathering, adding detail, etc. to create you want, as you do, is laudable and beyond what many people do or a willing to try. Is the increase in DCC chip fitting services, weathering services, etc. an indication that the modelling community is becoming de-skilled and happy to be so? There will be some like Tony who barter their specialist skills or others like Roy Jackson and John Holden who gather a team together  with particular "expertise" because their projects are too large to complete alone.

 

I assist the owner of London Road Models at a number of shows each year. Like Tony, I meet a significant number of show visitors who say, while looking at the models on the display, "I couldn't build that", "I can't solder," etc. We try to understand why they believe that and persuade them they could, if they tried it, meet with success and get satisfaction from creating their own, unique piece of work. 

 

Over the years I have been fortunate to meet many fine modellers. Without exception they all regard what they do as quite ordinary, want to do better and are willing to share their knowledge and experience with others. I think that's why I won't accept the use of the "can't" word or the belief that building a model loco, wagon, coach, signal, etc. is too difficult. I am a great believer that modelling skills can be acquired and that if you really want to do something, you can.

 

Jol

As I have mentioned before on this topic, in the context of my layout project as a whole I make a lot of things myself but I also use a lot of ready-made things (not just locos and other rolling stock) where they are appropriate, simply because of the time that I can save. Like many of us on this thread, I have more years behind me than ahead of me, so if I want to achieve my objective of a large fully operational main line layout I can't afford the luxury of, for example, spending time building a dozen or so DJH Halls rather than buying and customising the same number of Bachmann ones.

 

I can and have built loco kits in teh past and will do so again for those types that are not yet available ready to run, but I won't do so for its own sake.

[John Isherwood]

Ah, Woodhead transfers - sadly missed.

 

Indeed, an excellent product - but it was the demise of that range that prompted me to investigate the possibilities of printing something of equal accuracy and quality.

 

Then I discovered Alps printers; just in time before they disappeared from the market. I mentioned my discovery in a letter to MRJ; was asked to print some custom transfers by a reader; and thus was born Cambridge Custom Transfers.

 

I soon found that the bespoke transfer service was financially unsustainable, but the main range of transfer sheets has continued to expand over the years.

 

So, out of the ashes of Woodhead came CCT !

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

Edited November 21, 2017 by cctransuk

[Headstock]

 

M&GNR RU 22.jpg

 

Model Master's lining is finer still, though still too wide. Again, the lining on this M&GNR-section catering car should be on the beading. 

 

Gresley 4 Compt Brake Third 02.jpg

 

 

 

Tony,

 

I've had a look through some colour photographs of the ex GE catering cars in maroon livery, the lining is defiantly below the beading, so you have it right. Rather amusingly SC 670 E (a Cafeteria Car conversion) has the lining band lower down on the corridor side than on the kitchen side. I forgot to mention, I rather like the look of your 4 compartment brake third, with regard to the beading how about painting it black, cutting the transfer down the middle and placing it either side of the painted area.

[Anglian]

Or you could put the yellow line with the bow-pen where you wanted it to be and then add just the black line as a decal. The black will cover better over the yellow opposed to vice versa and you've only the one decal to apply not two. This method should enable you to get fine lining since you would be able to choose the thickness of the black line you apply.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Anglian

[John Isherwood]

Or you could put the yellow line with the bow-pen where you wanted it to be and then add just the black line as a decal. The black will cover better over the yellow opposed to vice versa and you've only the one decal to apply not two. This method should enable you to get fine lining since you would be able to choose the thickness of the black line you apply.

 

..... or you could just use Sheet BL28 from https://www.cctrans.org.uk/products.htm .

 

This is printed from dead-scale files and CAN be applied to the beading - all you need is a transfer settling liquid such as Microscale Microsol; see https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/MSSOL .

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

[Headstock]

Or you could put the yellow line with the bow-pen where you wanted it to be and then add just the black line as a decal. The black will cover better over the yellow opposed to vice versa and you've only the one decal to apply not two. This method should enable you to get fine lining since you would be able to choose the thickness of the black line you apply.

 

I was under the impression from the post above that Tony wasn't up to speed with a bow-pen.

Edited November 21, 2017 by Headstock

[glo41f]

I have to say that I wholeheartedly agree with a comment made earlier in this thread that the "old" BRMs were so much better than today's productions. Although the paper and perhaps the illustrations were not as fine as the processes involved have improved so much, but I always learnt something from those old magazines and still do. The contents were balanced  and there was always a couple of constructional articles to get the inspirational juices going. I do not feel that any of the current crop of monthly offerings come anywhere near those of yore. When I infrequently attend exhibitions, I always look out for the old mags and invariably take a few back usually for a small donation to the hosting club. Once in the chair with a suitable beverage, I am transported back to the days when the monthly offerings were eagerly anticipated. Sadly no longer the case. I have kept a few of my favourites which are re read from time to time (especially those with articles about my layout!).

 

Happy days

 

Martin Long

[46256]

In respect of skills, it is one thing to have them, or aquire them through whatever means.....what has been frustrating for me., has been the opposite. I had been given a bowpen by my wife's grandad. I decided to become proficient in its use, and indeed through persistence and practice achieved reasonable results, both in lining locomotives and carriages.

Time moved on and other modelling needs had to be learnt such as constructing baseboards, electrics, and scratch building various buildings found at my favoured location.

This coincided with the explosion of RTR types....meaning that my kit building and therefore painting requirements dwindled. The result of this ,I became less able to produce the quality of lining achieved in what has now become my golden era in that activity.

 

I now rely on the excellent transfers but with regret of what I could have achieved ....

Edited November 22, 2017 by 46256

[Headstock]

So far I've only done teak carriages with the bow-pen, its comparatively simple compared to a locomotive because its basically square boxes on a pre etched template. I'm determined to have a go at LNWR style livery on a locomotive when one that requires it comes up, nothing ventured nothing gained as they say.

[Tony Wright]

Thanks for all the comments on painting/lining. I think I'll stick with equine bartering. 

 

Now for something completely different. 

 

 

Friend Richard Irven (who posts on here) is over from the 'States for a few days. He brought with him the bits for a future project; scratch-building a Sacre 2-4-0T! He asked me to show him how to scratch-build the chassis for him, so I did. The results (so far - he'll do the rest) are shown above. 

 

I admire his style. He's deliberately chosen more obscure things to build because he's a bit fed up of current RTR-dominance and wishes to do something completely different. How refreshing. 

 

For my part, it was like a personal history lesson for me today. I last scratch-built a chassis over 30 years ago, so it was back to basics for me, out with the stock metal, engineer's blue (now felt-tip pen), rule, scriber, spring dividers, tinsnips, saws, files, etc, and the trusty pillar-drill whirred again. The rods are made from filed-down bullhead rail, with bosses from etched sheets, every dimension being taken from the drawing. 

 

What chances of this ever becoming available RTR, or even a kit? None! Good! 

Edited November 21, 2017 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

I was re-reading a pile of old BRM mags the just yesterday. Tony's interesting article on building "An un-rebuilt "West Country" class pacific" is a detailed and well illustrated 6 page essay. (May 1995 issue). BRM back then seemed to have a locomotive / stock building article in nearly every issue, not all by Tony though.

 

Tony states that back then he was only building ex LNER locos, but this West Country was for his self, built out personal interest - a fine "excuse" I agree !!!  One paragraph reads (Tony's words) "Why is it that the tolerance level of fingers to soldering heat is a fraction shorter than the cooling period necessary for the solder to solidify ?"

 

Even "back then" there were many fine layouts. In another issue is a photo by Tony of a detailed Lima Brush type 4 on the superb Stoke Layout. Lima - much derided today but back then they were more than adequate for lots of folks. I seem to remember Lima Deltics on this layout also. (Sacriledge - mentioning Lima in Tony's thread !!).

 

Yes, the BRM mag was a superb mag back then, I'm glad I kept all my old issues (from more or less when it launched).

 

Anyway, Tony, bet you have NOT got one of these !!!

 

 

Brit15

Of course I haven't got such a T shirt.

 

I would, as a pedant, gladly have one if the grammar were correct - namely 'You're holding it wrongly'. 

[46256]

Good evening Tony...equine battering....whatever did those poor animals do to deserve that....of course bartering might be a different thing altogether. I hope to see you this Sunday at Warley.

I note Messers King and Welleans will also be demonstrating. I hope all have you have retained your usual helpfulness and good humour by the second day. I will try not to test it too much!

 

Best wishes Brian

Edited November 22, 2017 by 46256

[stewartingram]

Equine battering - is this horsemeat from your local chippie?

 

Stewart

[Tony Wright]

Equine battering - is this horsemeat from your local chippie?

 

Stewart

Doh!

 

Since corrected.

[Jesse Sim]

Good morning Jesse,

 

You're asking me about fitting a decoder? 

 

Might I suggest asking if Hornby does spare tenders? Or if Hornby suppliers do? 

 

My understanding of the Hornby B17 is that (like most current RTR tender locos), the loco and tender are attached by a drawbar, with a plug & socket to take the wires between the pick-ups, motor and decoder. It's dead easy to sever the plug and socket, and 'hot wire' the motor directly to the chassis pick-ups (I do this all the time with any RTR locos I might still acquire), but then you have to find space inside the loco body for a decoder. Not easy. 

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Morning,

 

 

I have the Hornby B17, but I wish to convert it to a B17/4, with a 4,200 gallon group standard tender. My question to you is, if I get a kit for a 4,200 GS tender, build it and paint it, to be attached to the B17, how and where would I place the decoder? As the decoder is in the Hornby Tender. 

 

Perhaps would it be easier to use a tender from another loco, like a B1, or a hunt class? Some one surely has one lying around that I could purchase. 

 

Although, kit building a tender and altering the Hornby product that way does sound a lot more interesting. 

 

 

Jesse

Edited November 21, 2017 by Jesse Sim

[davidw]

Morning,

 

I don't think i explained it right, I was still half asleep when typed that.

 

I have the Hornby B17, but I wish to convert it to a B17/4, with a 4,200 gallon group standard tender. My question to you is, if I get a kit for a 4,200 GS tender, build it and paint it, to be attached to the B17, how and where would I place the decoder? As the decoder is in the Hornby Tender.

 

Jesse

 

Hope that made sense, that time.

 

There's very little room in the loco. It would be better to get hold of a Hornby tender. But Hornby don't supply such spares- unfortunately. You could try swapping tenders with someone would mutually want a swap? Try here or keep an eye on ebay. No easy solution tbh.

[Buhar]

Morning,

 

 

I have the Hornby B17, but I wish to convert it to a B17/4, with a 4,200 gallon group standard tender. My question to you is, if I get a kit for a 4,200 GS tender, build it and paint it, to be attached to the B17, how and where would I place the decoder? As the decoder is in the Hornby Tender. 

 

Perhaps would it be easier to use a tender from another loco, like a B1, or a hunt class? Some one surely has one lying around that I could purchase. 

 

Although, kit building a tender and altering the Hornby product that way does sound a lot more interesting. 

 

 

Jesse

 

Could you not simply put it in the kit tender?  I don't know how it might be mounted at the moment, but cutting out the holder or buying a suitable wired plate if the decoder is plug-in and then the micro plug as described above.

[Anglian]

I was under the impression from the post above that Tony wasn't up to speed with a bow-pen.

 

 

I was encouraging him to have another try… 

[Headstock]

I was encouraging him to have another try… 

 

Good on you. However, I suspect he would clog the tip up with solder.

[jwealleans]

Morning,

 

 

I have the Hornby B17, but I wish to convert it to a B17/4, with a 4,200 gallon group standard tender. My question to you is, if I get a kit for a 4,200 GS tender, build it and paint it, to be attached to the B17, how and where would I place the decoder? As the decoder is in the Hornby Tender. 

 

Perhaps would it be easier to use a tender from another loco, like a B1, or a hunt class? Some one surely has one lying around that I could purchase. 

 

Although, kit building a tender and altering the Hornby product that way does sound a lot more interesting. 

 

 

Jesse

 

Jesse,

 

I'd suspect your problems would start before you got to the decoder.  It's the deceptively simple phrase 'build and paint'.  Build, yes, no bother (although I'd try to get hold of a Bachmann GS tender to save myself the time if it were me). 

 

'Paint'.  First you have to match the Hornby colour - can be done as Graeme has shown, but not necessarily straightforward if you can't get hold of all the different paints we can in the UK.  Then line it to the same standard as the loco (we're in full LNER green here).  Or if that doesn't work, you repaint the loco to match the tender, then you have to line that back to the same standard as before you started.... I couldn't. 

 

You might find that a tender swap gets you the same plug/socket setup as the loco already has, in which case, happy days as they say.  If not there are plenty of options for fitting your own plug in connection.  I'd worry more about the external finish of the whole thing.

[Barry O]

Jesse

You can fit the decoder in a kit tender. You will need 4 wires to get power and motor drive across between the two. With a bit of fiddling you can re-use the Hornby tender coupling system again then you need two wires. For connections like this I use simple dil socket strips.

 

Biggest problem is, as JW has said is painting and lining the new tender.

 

Perhaps a pre painted tender body and a comet tender chassis kit?

 

Baz