Wright writes.....

[Tony Wright]

Now,

 

How about opening a real can of worms!?

 

 

This is the (one) Bachmann long bogie bolster wagon I've got running on LB (weathered by Rob Davey). Headstock reckons it's not much good, but what else is wrong?

 

 

This is a shorter Hornby one (again weathered by Rob). What's wrong with this?

 

 

I don't have many Bachmann tank wagons (and I concede they might be out of period), but here's a pair. Again, what's wrong with these, which I weathered?

 

 

This is a Hornby tank wagon, again weathered by me. Any comments?

 

I ask the above questions, not in an act of cynicism, but because I'm genuinely ignorant of any faults with my wagons.

 

If so many are wrong, then there's a great deal of building needed on my part. 

 

And, just to think, those guys who won the Channel 5 competition were crowned 'The best Railway Modellers in the Country'. What are we all doing wrong?

 

Seriously, it's because of the vast fund of knowledge accessible on this site that errors and inaccuracies can be identified and attended to. I don't mind in the least, anyone shooting the above things to pieces. That way I learn (though the thought of building hundreds of plastic wagons as replacements is a bit daunting).

 

Edited to include the following:

 

though not a cop-out (or I hope not), all my wagons definitely come into the 'layout' category. By that, I mean I can happily live with the odd omission of underframe detail.  

Edited December 21, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Clive Mortimore]

Now,

 

How about opening a real can of worms!?

 

Bachmann bogie bolster wagon.jpg

 

This is the (one) Bachmann long bogie bolster wagon I've got running on LB (weathered by Rob Davey). Headstock reckons it's not much good, but what else is wrong?

 

Hornby bogie bolster wagon.jpg

 

This is a shorter Hornby one (again weathered by Rob). What's wrong with this?

 

Bachmann tank wagons.jpg

 

I don't have many Bachmann tank wagons (and I concede they might be out of period), but here's a pair. Again, what's wrong with these, which I weathered?

 

Hornby tank wagon.jpg

 

This is a Hornby tank wagon, again weathered by me. Any comments?

 

I ask the above questions, not in an act of cynicism, but because I'm genuinely ignorant of any faults with my wagons.

 

If so many are wrong, then there's a great deal of building needed on my part. 

 

And, just to think, those guys who won the Channel 5 competition were crowned 'The best Railway Modellers in the Country'. What are we all doing wrong?

 

Seriously, it's because of the vast fund of knowledge accessible on this site that errors and inaccuracies can be identified and attended to. I don't mind in the least, anyone shooting the above things to pieces. That way I learn (though the thought of building hundreds of plastic wagons as replacements is a bit daunting).

 

Edited to include the following:

 

though not a cop-out (or I hope not), all my wagons definitely come into the 'layout' category. By that, I mean I can happily live with the odd omission of underframe detail.  

Hello Tony

 

The biggest problem with RTR tank wagons is the lack of the holding straps being fastened to the solbar. They stop just above it. That is a problem where the RTR manufacturers use the same chassis for all wagons.

 

I do like modelling a tank wagon now and then.

[Enterprisingwestern]

The Bachmann BBC is not a bad wagon basically, if it is to be left as is there are a few bits and bobs missing, primarily around the underframe region and some, (maybe one only, and definitely not many), DC brake version lasted well into BR days in engineering dep't use, one at least was used at Kings Cross in the later rebuilding.

It's other advantage is that it is dimensionally correct, allowing for thickness of plastic etc, and lends itself to conversion into quite a variety of wagons, yet again see the Rumney Models website for the possibilities.

 

Mike.

[APOLLO]

Nice weathering there Tony and I see nothing wrong with your wagons.

 

Weathering is a bit of a dilemma for me - as I posted in an earlier thread some North American Railroad freight cars are very colourful. Back in the mid 60's (around the time I model) not all freight cars need weathering. Just watch this freight roll past from 2min 25 secs - hardly a dirty car, some immaculate and (thankfully) no graffiti !! This vid gives me the reason not to weather everything. There even is a clean "State of Maine" boxcar in the consist (that's train to us Limeys !!).

 

The low winter sun shows the shine on some cars - so don't matt finish them all either.

 

 

Brit15

Edited December 21, 2018 by APOLLO

[Headstock]

Now,

 

How about opening a real can of worms!?

 

Bachmann bogie bolster wagon.jpg

 

This is the (one) Bachmann long bogie bolster wagon I've got running on LB (weathered by Rob Davey). Headstock reckons it's not much good, but what else is wrong?

 

 

Tony,

 

I din't say that the basic model was 'not much good', I said that it is a GWR Macaw B, not a BR bogie bolster C as it is lettered. However as a Macaw B it is missing half its brake gear. A simple matter of deciding which wagon it is supposed to be.

 

http://website.rumneymodels.co.uk/bogie-steel-wagon-kits

 

A genuine Ronuk tank wagon

 

http://www.fluidr.com/photos/31890193@N08/10272155856

Edited December 21, 2018 by Headstock

[Tony Wright]

Tony,

 

I din't say that the basic model was 'not much good', I said that it is a GWR Macaw B, not a BR bogie bolster C as it is lettered. However as a Macaw B it is missing half its brake gear. A simple matter of deciding which wagon it is supposed to be.

 

http://website.rumneymodels.co.uk/bogie-steel-wagon-kits

 

A genuine Ronuk tank wagon

 

http://www.fluidr.com/photos/31890193@N08/10272155856

Thanks Andrew,

 

I don't think 'spurious' is much of a compliment. OED - 'Not genuine, not being what it pretends to be................ 'Not much good'?

 

I can see a fair number of ex-LB wagons coming up for sale in the future.......................................... To not-too-discerning purchasers? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Tony Wright

[Tom F]

Tony,

 

I din't say that the basic model was 'not much good', I said that it is a GWR Macaw B, not a BR bogie bolster C as it is lettered. However as a Macaw B it is missing half its brake gear. A simple matter of deciding which wagon it is supposed to be.

 

http://website.rumneymodels.co.uk/bogie-steel-wagon-kits

 

 

 

 

Good evening Andrew.

 

So what would be required to make the Bachmann Bogie Bolster C correct? I've had a look at the Rumney Models link, but I'm unsure at what I'm looking at is making it into a Bogie Bolster C or a Macaw B.

 

As I'm modelling a line which used a few of these with loads to aide the construction of Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station, I'd ideally like to make mine a little more correct.

[Theakerr]

In a conversation with my Father, who was a Station Master on BR ER and later heavily involved with the implementation of TOPS on the ER, if a bogie bolster had a 'slidable load', girders, beams or rods for example, it had to have a single or double bolster waggon at each end to accommodate possible load movement.  This practice did not differentiate train position, but if there were multiple bogie bolsters, provided they were in a string, they only needed a bolster wagon at the front and back of the string.  I cannot say if this was practice or rules but I can vouch from memory that it was the case on stuff coming out of Scunthorpe heading south through Grimsby.  Note thought that the memory is getting a bit old now.

[31A]

Hers's a Bachmann Bogie Bolster I fiddled about with a few years ago:

 

 

As it has a "B" prefixed number (denoting a BR built / designed wagon), I fitted Cambrian BR Plate frame bogies (no holes in the sides), and replaced the GW type Dean Churchward brake levers with conventional ones, towards the ends of the wagons.  I don't think there's too much wrong with it, but happy to be corrected!

 

[Headstock]

Good evening Andrew.

 

So what would be required to make the Bachmann Bogie Bolster C correct? I've had a look at the Rumney Models link, but I'm unsure at what I'm looking at is making it into a Bogie Bolster C or a Macaw B.

 

As I'm modelling a line which used a few of these with loads to aide the construction of Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station, I'd ideally like to make mine a little more correct.

Evening Tom;

 

first up here is an image of a GWR van with Dean Churchward brake gear. The brake handle is the white object that looks like a lollipop to the right han end.

http://www.gwr813.org/images/93045.jpg

 

Here is the Bachmann bogie bolster, a GWR Macaw B in a spurious LMS livery. The Dean churchward brake leaver is just to the right of the M in LMS and to the left of the right hand queen post.

https://images-nitrosell-com.akamaized.net/product_images/11/2621/large-33-857B.jpg

 

What it is lacking is the rest of the brake gear. There are two forlorn looking V hangers looking for something to do.

 

Edied to correct, the brake leaver is to the right of the M in LMS

 

The Romney kit, C.05b provides all the detail required for two GWR Macaw B bogie bolsters fitted with Dean Churchward brake gear. Kit C.O5a requires the cutting away of the Dean Churchward brake handle from the Bachmann model and its replacement with BR RCH style brake gear and the handles located towards the outer ends for the BR bolster C. Kit C.05 is the same as C.05a but also replaces the plastic trussing with proper angle iron. All kits provide extra details and enough parts for two wagons.

 

All you need to decide is if you want the GWR Macaw B or the BR bolster C. For your own layout you could mix and match both types to create more wagon variations.

Edited December 21, 2018 by Headstock

[petrovich]

Hers's a Bachmann Bogie Bolster I fiddled about with a few years ago:

 

Bogie Bolster C.jpg

 

As it has a "B" prefixed number (denoting a BR built / designed wagon), I fitted Cambrian BR Plate frame bogies (no holes in the sides), and replaced the GW type Dean Churchward brake levers with conventional ones, towards the ends of the wagons.  I don't think there's too much wrong with it, but happy to be corrected!

I really like the quality of that scene from your layout.

[grahame]

Another bogie bolster, well a couple of BDAs, built from NGS kits (so N/2mm):

 

 

G

 

 

[Headstock]

Good evening Andrew.

 

So what would be required to make the Bachmann Bogie Bolster C correct? I've had a look at the Rumney Models link, but I'm unsure at what I'm looking at is making it into a Bogie Bolster C or a Macaw B.

 

As I'm modelling a line which used a few of these with loads to aide the construction of Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station, I'd ideally like to make mine a little more correct.

 

Evening Tom,

 

I was trying to find a good picture of the BR bolster C, this one will have to do. You can see that you will also need to remove the V hangers between the queen posts. You can see the offset new brake leavers and associated V hangers close to the bogies. New BR style plate bogies (without the holes as in the GW version) would make a nice variation. I think there was also a couple of variations in the bolster type. Best to check with individual pictures.

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/mr/waterorton/mrwo1774.jpg

[John Isherwood]

Can this be the new renaissance?

 

Is wagonology finally coming in out of the cold?

 

Can we look forward to layouts at exhibitions where specific-period, superbly crafted layouts; with exquisite locos and coaches; do NOT have a random selection of RTR wagons, covering most of the history of British railways, bunged together to represent the freight operations?

 

... or is this just a flash-in-the-pan, and will most of the great and good in the hobby revert to their primary interests, and cast Nelson's blind eye in the direction of their freight stock?

 

We can but hope !!

 

After all, the RTR producers take their cue from us modellers - if we continue to accept dubious models in dubious liveries, why should they bother to produce accurate models?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

PS. It seems that at least one of the newcomer manufacturers has got the message - CEMFLOs anyone?

Edited December 21, 2018 by cctransuk

[Clive Mortimore]

Good evening Andrew.

 

So what would be required to make the Bachmann Bogie Bolster C correct? I've had a look at the Rumney Models link, but I'm unsure at what I'm looking at is making it into a Bogie Bolster C or a Macaw B.

 

As I'm modelling a line which used a few of these with loads to aide the construction of Trawsfynydd Nuclear Power Station, I'd ideally like to make mine a little more correct.

Hi Tom

 

My first port of call for wagons is Paul Bartlett's site.

 

He has a collections of BR built Bogie Bolster C and GWR Macaw B.

[The Stationmaster]

In a conversation with my Father, who was a Station Master on BR ER and later heavily involved with the implementation of TOPS on the ER, if a bogie bolster had a 'slidable load', girders, beams or rods for example, it had to have a single or double bolster waggon at each end to accommodate possible load movement.  This practice did not differentiate train position, but if there were multiple bogie bolsters, provided they were in a string, they only needed a bolster wagon at the front and back of the string.  I cannot say if this was practice or rules but I can vouch from memory that it was the case on stuff coming out of Scunthorpe heading south through Grimsby.  Note thought that the memory is getting a bit old now.

 

Standard loading instruction as in the relevant green booklet (and later transferred into the Working Manual for Rail Staff - WMRS) and previously in a fairly similar instruction in the General Appendix.  Loading instructions for wagons definitely moved about over the years but they weren't alone in that of course, plenty of other changes to trap the unwary.

[t-b-g]

Can this be the new renaissance?

 

Is wagonology finally coming in out of the cold?

 

Can we look forward to layouts at exhibitions where specific-period, superbly crafted layouts; with exquisite locos and coaches; do NOT have a random selection of RTR wagons, covering most of the history of British railways, bunged together to represent the freight operations?

 

... or is this just a flash-in-the-pan, and will most the great and good in the hobby revert to their primary interests, and cast Nelson's blind eye in the direction of their freight stock?

 

We can but hope !!

 

After all, the RTR producers take their cue from us modellers - if we continue to accept dubious models in dubious liveries, why should they bother to produce accurate models?

 

Regards,

John Isherwood.

 

PS. It seems that at least one of the newcomer manufacturers has got the message - CEMFLOs anyone?

 

I have exhibited a number of layouts, admittedly smaller ones, where every single item of motive power, carriage and freight stock was either kitbuilt (the vast majority) or scratchbuilt, with no RTR at all.

 

I can't recall any instances of anybody ever noticing.

 

It is something I look out for at shows and see very occasionally, usually when somebody has modelled a really obscure prototype. 

[Tom F]

Evening Tom,

 

I was trying to find a good picture of the BR bolster C, this one will have to do. You can see that you will also need to remove the V hangers between the queen posts. You can see the offset new brake leavers and associated V hangers close to the bogies. New BR style plate bogies (without the holes as in the GW version) would make a nice variation. I think there was also a couple of variations in the bolster type. Best to check with individual pictures.

 

https://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lms/mr/waterorton/mrwo1774.jpg

 

 

Much appreciated Andrew! Thank you, and what a cracking photo!

 

I have a Bachmann BBC that's been on the workbench for about 3 years (other than 3 links and weathering of the planking, nothing else has been done to it). I'll have a look and see what I'll convert it to. Under BR, did they just classify the previous Macaw B as a Bogie Bolster C?

 

Do you know of anyone that produces the BR style plate bogies?

Edited December 21, 2018 by 9793

[31A]

Hi Tom, see my post above!

[Tom F]

Hi Tom, see my post above!

 

Cheers Steve! Now I know what I'm looking for, that does make a difference!

Edited December 21, 2018 by 9793

[Headstock]

Much appreciated Andrew! Thank you, and what a cracking photo!

 

I have a Bachmann BBC that's been on the workbench for about 3 years (other than 3 links and weathering of the planking, nothing else has been done to it). I'll have a look and see what I'll convert it to. Under BR, did they just classify the previous Macaw B as a Bogie Bolster C?

 

Do you know of anyone that produces the BR style plate bogies?

 

Cambrian models do the BR plate bogie. Yes, the Macaw B would be a bolster C, I think they were 30 tons, the D type being 42 tons etc. It seems to be the same or similar to the LNER telegraph code.

[Tom F]

Hi Tom, see my post above!

 

 

Steve, did you salvage the Brake Lever off another kit? I've had a quick look at the Rumney Kit, it looks very good but goes further than I'd like to go personally.

[31A]

I think I just used ‘generic’ ones from some wagon detailing parts Tom, quite possibly from the Mainly Trains detailing etch. I think I shortened ordinary wagon brake levers and drilled new holes in the ends for the cross shafts. V hangers were likewise generic - from D&S Models I think but I’m sure others are available.

[St Enodoc]

I can see a fair number of ex-LB wagons coming up for sale in the future.......................................... To not-too-discerning purchasers?

Count me in!

[Woodcock29]

Unlike a number of you I reckon I have spent more time building appropriate wagons for my layout than carriages. Mind you I'm now addressing the carriage situation at least in the short term for the branch passenger services. (I won't mention locos as I need a second large layout to accommodate those!)

 

I have storage loops that can hold 26 trains on my layout  -16 LNER and 10 LMS. Amongst the 16 LNER trains are 3 express passenger services comprising Gresley teak stock (mostly Kirk, the Hornby coaches in one of these trains will be replaced with RDEB ex GN stock when I find time to build them) and 1 Pullman service made up of Hornby Steel body K types. Plus I have 3-4 local branch passenger services that don't need to be held in these storage loops. The LNER goods trains comprise 4 coal (2 up loaded and 2 down empties), up fish, up fruit, up general through goods, up pick-up goods, down parcels, down horseboxes, down ballast, down through goods. So out of 16 trains only 4 are passenger!

 

On the LMS I have two express passenger (one up, one down), one cross country passenger comprising GWR stock (definitely not correct for my area - but then Rule One applies), one local passenger, one empty coal (will probably get loaded eventually), 2 through goods, one pick-up goods, one tank train and a perishables train (two parts - milk and meat - also probably not correct - should be one or the other). 

 

Whilst on the subject of wagons I have a vast number of kit built wagons in these trains. However, I do also have a large number of Bachmann PO wagons, in liveries appropriate to my area and I know that most of these are probably not the correct type of wagon but once weathered and mixed in with a large number of kit built PO wagons they look fine to me. Mostly I've changed numbers where there are more than one of the same company which actually is quite frequent on my layout - work in progress. There is also the train of tank wagons, mostly Bachmann, which admittedly are a mix of companies (probably not correct) that runs on the LMS section of the layout with appropriate barrier wagons. 

 

The balance of the big four companies is not correct as I have way too many LNER wagons and no where near enough LMS types but slowly that's changing. That of course creates another problem - what to do with the LNER wagons I need to remove if I'm to include more from the other Big Four companies. At least I'll need to remove some to be used on an exhibition layout I'll be providing the stock for rather than building the unmade kits I have for that layout as I probably won't have the time for that. Then there is the dilemma that I have very few GWR wagons - something else I need to address.

 

My copy of Tatlow's first LNER wagon book is my most used book!

 

Lastly I'm in the process of writing a review of the new Hornby Toad brake vans for our BRMA Journal - I've not seen any mention of the fact that the Toad B is actually the narrow plank contractor built version so is not the same as the Parkside kit - well done Hornby!

 

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all readers.

 

Andrew