Wright writes.....

[landscapes]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Good evening David,

 

Out of interest, a couple more of your ex-Haymarket locos...............

 

 

Hornby A3 SPION KOP.

 

 

And Hornby A4 SILVER FOX. Both detailed/altered/weathered by you? If so, my compliments. 

 

They were brought round this afternoon by Ollie Kew (Oliver Bytham on here), and he bought them off you. 

 

He also brought along............

 

 

This Craftsman C12, bought off eBay as a non-runner. He's made it run very well, and I've given him replacement bogie and pony wheels.

 

 

Some time ago, I sold some bashed-about models from Elaine's Trains (the result of an RTA which, thankfully, she has recovered from). 

 

Ollie bought this damaged Jamieson V2, patched it up and made it run again. 

 

I think it's splendid when models such as this are 'resurrected' and given a new lease of life. Well done to him.

 

It's towing a PC catering triplet from the same collection, which he's also repaired.

 

 

Finally, he showed me this Parkside LNER horse box he's recently built (for which I've given him transfers to complete).

 

Thanks for bringing these, Ollie; and thanks for your contribution to CRUK. 

 

 

Hi Tony

 

Yes I do remember selling those two locomotives to Ollie, I’m not sure if he purchased some other locos as well.

 

On both locomotives I changed the identity and weathered them as well.

 

They do look good on your wonderful layout.

 

Thank you for your kind compliments.

 

Best Regards

 

David

 

 

[gwrrob]

33 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Robin,

 

What colour are the meshes in that photo, please?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

Steel , as in the photo shewn by Mike earlier.

[jwealleans]

12 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I'll check to see if I can find photos which show the car in use in 1948

 

Morning Tony,

 

Steve Banks has a page on the Dyno Car with photographs from different eras.  I'd say they were always body colour, but you can evaluate for yourself.

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, jwealleans said:

 

Morning Tony,

 

Steve Banks has a page on the Dyno Car with photographs from different eras.  I'd say they were always body colour, but you can evaluate for yourself.

Morning Jonathan,

 

I think the evidence is conclusive - out with the paintbrush, then!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Jol Wilkinson]

17 hours ago, mullie said:

GW Models and it also acts a quartering jig. I've got one but haven't got round to using it yet.

 

Advertises in the MRJ.

 

Martyn

 

I have used mine on on all my loco builds since I bought it. I also modified  both parts by gluing a piece of plasticard to each wheel contact face. This is the thickness of the protrusion of the hub on AG and Sharman wheels and has a keyhole cut out to clear the wheel centre and crankpin boss. When the wheels are pushed on, both the centre boss and tyre are in contact with the press to give uniform pressure round the wheel.

Edited December 29, 2023 by Jol Wilkinson
typo

[St Enodoc]

On 27/12/2023 at 21:19, St Enodoc said:

Thanks Tony, that's very kind. The livery is out of period for me, of course, but I know of at least one GWR modeller over here who would be delighted to give it a good home.

Tony, having thought more about this and seen other comments on @gwrrob's ANTB topic, please don't worry about sending this van to the Antipodes. I'm sure you can find it a home nearer to home, so to speak.

 

Thanks.

[PMP]

38 minutes ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

I have used mine on on all my loco builds since I bought it. I also modified  both parts by gluing a piece of plasticard to each wheel contact face. This is the thickness of the protrusion of the hub on AG and Sharman wheels and has a keyhole cut out to clear the wheel centre and crankpin boss. When the wheels are pushed on, both the centre boss and tyre are in contact with the press to give uniform pressure round the wheel.

Any chance of a picture of it please Jol?

[Jesse Sim]

On 27/12/2023 at 18:55, Tony Wright said:

Good morning John,

 

It's the very last item from the collection of the late Vic Halliwell (his widow and son were overwhelmed by how much Mo and I managed to make selling his models). Strangely, considering the bulk of the models, it was built in OO, not EM (I've probably mentioned this before, but when dozens of Vic's EM wagons failed to sell, I re-gauged them to OO and fitted tension-lock couplings in place of the three-links; then they flew! Which rather says something of the state of our hobby to me, especially as I got more for them afterwards!). 

 

Since I'll certainly not break the 'imaginary' van up, when Jesse comes over again next year, I'll give it to him and then he can give it to you on his return (there's no charge). It's got to be 50 years old at least, and it's nice to think of it going to a good home. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Be happy too. 
 

I won’t charge you either John 😘😘 

[Tony Wright]

3 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Tony, having thought more about this and seen other comments on @gwrrob's ANTB topic, please don't worry about sending this van to the Antipodes. I'm sure you can find it a home nearer to home, so to speak.

 

Thanks.

Thanks John,

 

Will do.............

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[MJI]

3 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

I have used mine on on all my loco builds since I bought it. I also modified  both parts by gluing a piece of plasticard to each wheel contact face. This is the thickness of the protrusion of the hub on AG and Sharman wheels and has a keyhole cut out to clear the wheel centre and crankpin boss. When the wheels are pushed on, both the centre boss and tyre are in contact with the press to give uniform pressure round the wheel.

I am quite enjoying kit building, as to wheels i seem to end up using Gibson.

 

Will be redoing PWM 650 chassis after, now i have the poppy jig.

 

Seems odd but i prefer stuff i have modified or built these days.

 

Very mindful.

[Tony Wright]

Where would I be without RMweb?

 

In blissful ignorance, I fixed those etched brass window guards to Rapido's Dynamometer Car; assuming that brass would have been used on the prototype. Not the case - it's a steel mesh and frame, painted the solebar colour!

 

So..........

 

 

I mixed up a colour using matt black, matt brown and matt red enamels to as near as I could, then carefully (very-carefully) sable-brushed on the paint. However, over a thousand Watts of studio lighting has revealed it's not an exact match.

 

However, a further however................

 

 

has revealed that under more-subtle lighting, the colour match is much closer.

 

 

At both ends - not a perfect match, I admit, but much better than the shiny brass guards. 

 

 

I also took the trouble to weather the solebars and headstocks.

 

Perhaps I should weather the roof as well.............. 

 

Thanks to all who provided the evidence; making this a more-accurate model. Which begs the question - is it now devalued from its 'mint boxed' status? Certainly, no collector would touch it currently, but I'm not one of those. 

[Tony Wright]

And so, on to August at Little Bytham................

 

 

 

Heljan's Newton Chambers Car Carriers were assessed.

 

 

 

As were two of Hornby's latest P2s. 

 

Dear friend, Ray Chessum, donated some SR kits to be sold for CRUK......

 

 

These flew out!

 

 

But not this Jidenco pair. 

 

Anyone interested? If so, please make me an offer by PM. 

 

I acquired some GWR models from the estate of a deceased modeller, 50% of any sales going to CRUK. Including...........

 

 

Some scratch-built GWR clerestories.

 

 

And a scratch-built Hall and some vans.

 

All these sold immediately!

 

 

I built an old Nu-Cast K2, described as 'Ugh!' in part by one observer. 

 

 

But I soldiered on and painted it. 

 

 

And finally Geoff Haynes weathered it for me (it's the same loco seen earlier hauling the Dynamometer Car). And, yes, its identity and ownership are just about legible. 

 

I took some more shots of Bytham's J6s.............

 

 

 

This one was a visitor, which I fixed for Gilbert Barnatt. 

 

 

 

Always a popular prototype, and frequently requested (it would seem) in RTR wish-list polls. I'm 'All Right Jack' I suppose. I just build 'em! 

 

September tomorrow..................

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MikeTrice]

57 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

 

I also took the trouble to weather the solebars and headstocks.

 

Perhaps I should weather the roof as well.............. 

 

 

At the time of the Exchange Trials it was heavily weathered, almost black: https://www.pressreader.com/uk/steam-days/20201211/281543703520681

[Barry Ten]

I've been working on a B17.

 

 

The tender seemed to be missing from the kit.

[John Isherwood]

41 minutes ago, MikeTrice said:

At the time of the Exchange Trials it was heavily weathered, almost black: https://www.pressreader.com/uk/steam-days/20201211/281543703520681

 

Not according to the photo shown in the link - weathered, but by no means black.

 

CJI.

[stewartingram]

A question about the Anglo-Scottish Car Carrier formation if I may?

You show it with the car transporters on the rear of the train, but where is the guard? I would have thought the guards would be close to the rear - was it 12 axles allowed behind him?

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Not according to the photo shown in the link - weathered, but by no means black.

 

CJI.

I agree John,

 

I think a light weathering on the body sides and a bit more on the roof, and the model won't be too far off.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

12 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

A question about the Anglo-Scottish Car Carrier formation if I may?

You show it with the car transporters on the rear of the train, but where is the guard? I would have thought the guards would be close to the rear - was it 12 axles allowed behind him?

Good evening Stewart,

 

The formation shown in my pictures left Holloway Dock in that configuration heading north (with the guard in the first carriage of the train). Presumably, as long as there was a gangwayed brake van in the consist, it didn't matter where in the train it was. To have had it at the rear on the Down service would have hindered (made impossible) the loading of the cars.

 

On the Up journey he'd be in the very last carriage, of course. On approaching Holloway Dock, after the train was stationary, the loco would be removed and run out of the way. A shunting loco would then propel the rake (with the car carriers at the front) into the end-on loading dock. What the arrangements were at Edinburgh or Perth, I don't know. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[stewartingram]

That is more or less what I suspected happened (though Guard at the front of that long train is a surprise). I always throught that there was a rule stipulating the number of vehicles (axles) behind the guard. Maybe I'm thinking of freight workings, where the ECML had "swingers" added behind the brake van?

On a similar note, what about overnight TPO workings? I  don't have a prototype in mind, more of a model 'might have been' (to suit my layout, maybe even a 'Rule 1' which I know you don't like, sorry).

I'm having a short TPO/passenger train, 4 coaches. Possibly split somewhere on the journey, with this portion continuing to my terminus, & a return working during the day.

Formation:- Full brake (with Guard compartment), 2x TPO vehicles, and a BCK. Return with the Guard in the BCK at the rear. But are the 2 Guards vehicles absolutely necessary? I know it is a Rule 1 scenario, not real, but I am trying to think prototype here.

[mullie]

2 hours ago, Barry Ten said:

I've been working on a B17.

 

 

The tender seemed to be missing from the kit.

They were shedded in East Anglia too, played their part in a temporary revival on certain lines. U.S. bases are still part of the economy.

 

Martyn

[John Isherwood]

8 minutes ago, stewartingram said:

That is more or less what I suspected happened (though Guard at the front of that long train is a surprise). I always throught that there was a rule stipulating the number of vehicles (axles) behind the guard. Maybe I'm thinking of freight workings, where the ECML had "swingers" added behind the brake van?

On a similar note, what about overnight TPO workings? I  don't have a prototype in mind, more of a model 'might have been' (to suit my layout, maybe even a 'Rule 1' which I know you don't like, sorry).

I'm having a short TPO/passenger train, 4 coaches. Possibly split somewhere on the journey, with this portion continuing to my terminus, & a return working during the day.

Formation:- Full brake (with Guard compartment), 2x TPO vehicles, and a BCK. Return with the Guard in the BCK at the rear. But are the 2 Guards vehicles absolutely necessary? I know it is a Rule 1 scenario, not real, but I am trying to think prototype here.

 

Assuming that the TPO vehicles were of the traditional offset corridor type, the guard would not have access to them.

 

Thus, your proposed formation would leave the guard isolated in his van if he used the full brake, with no access to the passenger-carrying vehicles.

 

If the guard used the BCK in both directions, the full brake could be replaced with a GUV, if needed for railway parcels traffic.

 

CJI.

Edited December 29, 2023 by cctransuk

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, stewartingram said:

That is more or less what I suspected happened (though Guard at the front of that long train is a surprise). I always throught that there was a rule stipulating the number of vehicles (axles) behind the guard. Maybe I'm thinking of freight workings, where the ECML had "swingers" added behind the brake van?

On a similar note, what about overnight TPO workings? I  don't have a prototype in mind, more of a model 'might have been' (to suit my layout, maybe even a 'Rule 1' which I know you don't like, sorry).

I'm having a short TPO/passenger train, 4 coaches. Possibly split somewhere on the journey, with this portion continuing to my terminus, & a return working during the day.

Formation:- Full brake (with Guard compartment), 2x TPO vehicles, and a BCK. Return with the Guard in the BCK at the rear. But are the 2 Guards vehicles absolutely necessary? I know it is a Rule 1 scenario, not real, but I am trying to think prototype here.

Good evening Stewart,

 

You 'know' I don't like Rule 1? 

 

Yet, I apply it all the time on my trainset. For example, ER steam locos with overhead warning flashes applied (not fitted until 1961), the prototype Deltic running through Little Bytham (not until early-1959), even worse production Deltics running through (not until 1961), some A3s with German blinkers (not until 1961), Grantham-shedded B12/3s passing through (not after 1956), a Barnum in a service train (not after 1955) and Mk.1 Pullman cars in the 'Tees-Tyne Pullman' (not until 1960/'61). There are dozens of other anomalies. But, isn't Little Bytham supposed to represent the summer of 1958?

 

As for the MR/M&GNR bit - anything between 1938 and early-1959! 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[ScRSG]

1 hour ago, cctransuk said:

 

Assuming that the TPO vehicles were of the traditional offset corridor type, the guard would not have access to them.

 

Thus, your proposed formation would leave the guard isolated in his van if he used the full brake, with no access to the passenger-carrying vehicles.

 

If the guard used the BCK in both directions, the full brake could be replaced with a GUV, if needed for railway parcels traffic.

 

CJI.

Not too sure about the offset corridor connections not having a guard's compartment - the attached two photos, one prototype, one model show the last TPO vehicle to have guards duckets and these were definitely branded as Royal Mail, I do agree that this vehicle has been difficult to identify as to origin or Diagram.

Chas

[John Isherwood]

7 minutes ago, ScRSG said:

Not too sure about the offset corridor connections not having a guard's compartment - the attached two photos, one prototype, one model show the last TPO vehicle to have guards duckets and these were definitely branded as Royal Mail, I do agree that this vehicle has been difficult to identify as to origin or Diagram.

Chas

 

The point being, though, that in a combined TPO / passenger train with offset gangways on the TPOs, the guard would have to travel in a guard's compartment within the passenger portion if the train.

 

CJI.

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, stewartingram said:

I always thought that there was a rule stipulating the number of vehicles (axles) behind the guard.

There was. I'll try to find it...