Wright writes.....

[Ollie K]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

 

 

One other point: the valve gear has been improved, particularly the motion support bracket.  

Tony, to your eyes is the valve gear over-blackened? Interesting to compare it to the kit-built cavalcade below - the new Heljan’s rods look the same colour as the wheels, instead of the ‘steely sheen’ of the other LB O2s.

 

I vaguely remember reading somewhere when the decorated samples arrived that the factory had mixed up painting the bright axle ends, and the rods themselves.

 

Easily rectified I suppose.

[t-b-g]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I've added the extra handrail to the rear of the new Heljan O2/4's tender..............

 

 

 

The running is exceptional (as you'll see once the video is edited).

 

I've been in correspondence with Heljan this morning and have been informed..............

 

'Just a couple of additional points and clarifications that are worth including

This new run includes a third cab type - the original GN 13ft 4in tall cab on GNR and LNER O2/1s. 

Probably worth mentioning that we’ve done both original and Thompson 100A boilers as not everyone will be aware of the differences between the various O2 parts. 

These models do feature a new part for the low running plate, as well as 2x boilers, 2x smokebox doors, 2x smokebox designs, tall and composite loading gauge chimneys for O2/1 and all others respectively and, finally, 3x tender options - GNR, GS stepped side and GS flush side'

 

One other point: the valve gear has been improved, particularly the motion support bracket.  

 

 

 

I don't know if it is an optical illusion but it looks for all the world to me as though the cab is leaning backwards. The edge of the cab roof and the handrail along the boiler just don't look as if they are parallel with each other.

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

13 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I don't know if it is an optical illusion but it looks for all the world to me as though the cab is leaning backwards. The edge of the cab roof and the handrail along the boiler just don't look as if they are parallel with each other.

The photo gives to me the impression that the cab was fitted poorly and isnt fully attached at the front. maybe some closer up ones can reveal the truth?

[t-b-g]

27 minutes ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

The photo gives to me the impression that the cab was fitted poorly and isnt fully attached at the front. maybe some closer up ones can reveal the truth?

 

We should careful when mentioning such things. We may end up being accused of expecting too much from manufacturers.

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, richard i said:

Was the small TW thinking as he crossed off the locos in his ABC, “ I am going to have to model that one, and that one, and that one……..that is going to take a while, just from today’s spotting.”
If you had lived and spotted on a one engine in steam branch line, you might have has less haste to build as an adult. How things could have turned out differently, but for holiday time at Retford.

richard

Good afternoon Richard,

 

I cannot claim as a skooboy 'spotter that I had the foresight to resolve one day to build models of the locomotives I saw at Retford (or any other location on the ECML). In fact, I cannot remember 'copping' any of the O2s I now have as models. None sticks in my mind; the evidence is their (less-than-neat, but plentiful) underlining in my various Ian Allan abcs; but where (exactly) and when, who knows? Certainly not me now. At Kiveton Park or Worksop? At Retford itself, usually going east/west? On either of the two sheds coded 36E? Or at Doncaster, and points in between? 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

1 hour ago, t-b-g said:

 

I don't know if it is an optical illusion but it looks for all the world to me as though the cab is leaning backwards. The edge of the cab roof and the handrail along the boiler just don't look as if they are parallel with each other.

It's not an optical illusion Tony,

 

It is (or was) leaning backwards. The cab is a separate fitting and in fiddling with the loco, I'd pushed it backwards. It's straight, now.

 

Actually, leaning-back cabs (or just leaning cabs) are not uncommon on steam-outline locos......

 

 

Though not as pronounced as on the model, just 'read' the relative positions of the handrails on the cab and tender.

 

 

I think this cab just leans.

 

And, even on a prestige loco.

 

Try extending the top horizontal lining on the cab with that on the tender to the same vanishing point; or that of the cab eaves with the top of the tender.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 27 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

I can find no better picture of a leaning-back cab than this....................

 

 

And this is a day or two off Donny Plant! 

 

Were Hornby or Bachmann to replicate this, well!

 

 

[Tony Wright]

2 hours ago, Ollie K said:

Tony, to your eyes is the valve gear over-blackened? Interesting to compare it to the kit-built cavalcade below - the new Heljan’s rods look the same colour as the wheels, instead of the ‘steely sheen’ of the other LB O2s.

 

I vaguely remember reading somewhere when the decorated samples arrived that the factory had mixed up painting the bright axle ends, and the rods themselves.

 

Easily rectified I suppose.

I think you're right Ollie,

 

But it'll weathered brown/grey in due course.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[D.Platt]

23 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Has anyone tried to get a Heljan O2 apart? 

 

 

I certainly did with the first ones, but this new one was a bit tight! 

Hi Tony

Looking at the photos of this new 02 the split line on the boiler seems to jump out at me  , is it as obvious just looking at the model in front of you ?

Dennis

[Dunsignalling]

23 hours ago, MJI said:

Not sure but I had to pay 360 for acceptable quality. Even the 180 ones were not much better than a flat bed scanner.

Unless you shot on Kodachrome, or Velvia, the weakest link will usually be the original film.

 

I've been scanning old 35mm negs using a modestly priced Kodak scanner. My usual film once I got decent cameras in the seventies was Fuji 400 and the scans are generally good enough to make A4 prints from.

Edited August 27 by Dunsignalling

[john new]

On 24/08/2024 at 14:07, John Isherwood said:

 

....... only if you are one of the tiny minority of potential purchasers who KNOW - OR CARE - that the boiler band should line up with the rivets!

 

John Isherwood.

Whilst generally agreeing with your sentiment (as in many cases I will be amongst the don’t know it is wrong/accept it group) I think it is fair that those who do mention (criticise) mistakes that make no difference to price but are from sloppy modelmaking do. The mentioned line of rivets is in this context valid as presumably putting it in the correct place would not have incurred a cost just a process of getting the CAD drawings correct.

 

I proof read a Journal for the current Editor as part of a team and we don't always spot every error until the final printed version arrives and it is too late so I do appreciate though that mistakes slip through.

[t-b-g]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

I can find no better picture of a leaning-back cab than this....................

 

 

And this is a day or two off Donny Plant! 

 

Were Hornby or Bachmann to replicate this, well!

 

 

 

I am sure we had a session discussing incorporating things like a bent footplate and wonky handrails into our models and the general consensus was that it was a bad idea as it would just like poor modelling.

[Tony Wright]

33 minutes ago, t-b-g said:

 

I am sure we had a session discussing incorporating things like a bent footplate and wonky handrails into our models and the general consensus was that it was a bad idea as it would just like poor modelling.

I agree Tony,

 

One other thing about the A4 image is that it shows how difficult it would be to make the lubricator drive to scale; without it flying to bits at speed.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Kier Hardy]

As I've mentioned previously, I read this WW thread on RMweb because occasionally there's some interesting topics discussed by modellers for modellers. If you like green steamy things then you're in luck - my preference is to fast-scroll through most of the images until I see something more engaging to me. That's not to say it isn't of interest to others, and long may the content continue. The popularity of this thread speaks for itself, and on most visits to the forum it may be the only one I click on.

 

However, one thing that I do find irritating is the constant views expressed by Tony in relation to what makes a model railway, or if you prefer, a model of a railway. We all have our preferences (it would be a boring world if we didn't), but to keep mentioning every couple of pages or so that a train set based on a fictional scene (such as your Pendons, ***** / insert name) are inferior to train sets based on a particular prototype. That's almost like saying television dramas are not proper programs, but documentaries are. These opinions are valuable on forums, but when it's thrust down your throat as often as it is, there are many that find it tiresome.

 

Observation of the real railway mixed with a pinch of imagination can produce something that's believable and entertaining, based on historical facts and backed up by professionals in the railway industry, to ensure prototype practice, track formations and signalling is portrayed correctly. Equally others may be just as happy with their table top circle of track, shiny plastic models and signals in the wrong place. I watched a video recently that featured a 40 year old Hornby Class 47 that had been repainted from green into blue livery, leaving in place the heavily moulded horizontal guide lines along the bodyside. To me, the thing that was most satisfying was his enjoyment of doing something for himself, despite his naivety. 

 

I spend many hours every week helping other modellers with practical support, advice and constructive criticism, helping to make the hobby satisfying and enjoyable for the most, so you can imagine how infuriating it can be to see certain 'well respected' modellers carrying on with their own projects with little regard to the observation of finer detail (do fence wires, particularly barbed really get threaded through the holes in the posts?). I get immense pleasure from building and playing with my layout based on a fictional location, so good luck to those who model historical clones from the real world without being too opinionated.

 

The following pictures were taken at Hornsey Broadway, Wibdenshaw & Shenston Road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 27 by Kier Hardy
Spacing between images

[4630]

I had to look really closely at the image of the class 74 (E6107) to convince myself that you hadn't slipped in a photo from the ‘real’ railway.

 

I’ve always enjoyed your various layouts @Kier Hardy.

 

For me they always catch the real essence of the area where they’re set, even if they’re fictional locations.

 

From the architecture surrounding the railway through to the locomotives, multiple units and rolling stock.  They’re believable and that’s what’s important to me.

[Keith Turbutt]

3 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

I can find no better picture of a leaning-back cab than this....................

 

 

And this is a day or two off Donny Plant! 

 

Were Hornby or Bachmann to replicate this, well!

 

 

If the cab alone was leaning back wouldn't there be a gap between the cab and firebox wrapper?

Could it be that the whole body is leaning back and the springs require adjustment?

Are there any further photos of this loco subsequent to this photo and is the cab still leaning back.

[t-b-g]

58 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

I agree Tony,

 

One other thing about the A4 image is that it shows how difficult it would be to make the lubricator drive to scale; without it flying to bits at speed.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

It also illustrates what I was saying about the linkage on the new model being grossly overscale. On the prototype, the lubricator linkage is something you have to look for to see it at all. On the model it is roughly the same size as the return crank and the expansion link.

 

It also shows that the return crank on the lubricator drive is shorter and the rod should be at a quite different angle of slope compared to the valve gear, unlike the Hornby version.

 

As I said, there are facts and opinions. It is a fact that the linkage is overscale and poorly proportioned. It is an opinion as to whether that is acceptable and better than either a much more fragile linkage, perhaps home made, a cosmetic fixed linkage or none at all.

[John Isherwood]

1 minute ago, Keith Turbutt said:

If the cab alone was leaning back wouldn't there be a gap between the cab and firebox wrapper?

Could it be that the whole body is leaning back and the springs require adjustment?

Are there any further photos of this loco subsequent to this photo and is the cab still leaning back.

 

I have to say that, to my eyes, I can see

 nothing whatsoever out-of-kilter with the loco.

 

John Isherwood.

[1471SirFrederickBanbury]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Unless you shot on Kodachrome, or Velvia, the weakest link will usually be the original film.

 

I've been scanning old 35mm negs using a modestly priced Kodak scanner. My usual film once I got decent cameras in the seventies was Fuji 400 and the scans are generally good enough to make A4 prints from.

I do know that with many older films (when they were actually shot on 35mm film), long and short alike, they still hold up when scanned well, and that the minimum recommended resolution for scanning is 4k.  Kodachrome (especially the early versions and Kodachrome 2), Provia, and Velvia will hold up well against even the best digital cameras, though scanning Kodachrome well is rather difficult.  I'd take Kodachrome 2, early Kodachrome, or Fuji Provia over modern digital any day, as they truly are that good.  Later Kodachrome variants are still good, but not as good as Provia, which is extremely good at reproducing natural colours, and second only to older film stocks that are sadly no longer available, making Provia a very good choice for anyone still shooting film.

[NHY 581]

Not sure if this has been mentioned  on here. This is the latest incarnation of the Flying Scotsman, as produced by Hornby. 

 

R3991SS BR, A3 Class, 'Flying Scotsman' With Steam Generator, Diecast Footplate & Flickering Firebox. 

 

I stumbled across this whilst exploring the various noises it could make earlier today. 

 

So, a first from Hornby. Factory fitted pipes and drums. Perhaps we'll hear Mallard moving off accompanied by Danny Kaye's " The Ugly Duckling" or Seagull progressing to "I do like to be beside the seaside"  in future. 

 

F 18 if you've not found it yet........

 

Rob

Edited August 27 by NHY 581
Hornby references added

[Brinkly]

2 minutes ago, NHY 581 said:

Not sure if this has been mentioned  on here. This is the latest incarnation of the Flying Scotsman, by Hornby

 

I stumbled across this whilst exploring the various noises it could make earlier today. 

 

 

So, a first from Hornby. Factory fitted pipes and drums. Perhaps we'll hear Mallard moving off accompanied by Danny Kaye's " The Ugly Duckling" or Seagull progressing to "I do like to be beside the seaside"  in future. 

 

CV 18 if you've not found it yet........

 

Rob

 

 

 

Has Hornby nothing to offer me but these Amazons… 

[queensquare]

2 hours ago, Kier Hardy said:

As I've mentioned previously, I read this WW thread on RMweb because occasionally there's some interesting topics discussed by modellers for modellers. If you like green steamy things then you're in luck - my preference is to fast-scroll through most of the images until I see something more engaging to me. That's not to say it isn't of interest to others, and long may the content continue. The popularity of this thread speaks for itself, and on most visits to the forum it may be the only one I click on.

 

However, one thing that I do find irritating is the constant views expressed by Tony in relation to what makes a model railway, or if you prefer, a model of a railway. We all have our preferences (it would be a boring world if we didn't), but to keep mentioning every couple of pages or so that a train set based on a fictional scene (such as your Pendons, ***** / insert name) are inferior to train sets based on a particular prototype. That's almost like saying television dramas are not proper programs, but documentaries are. These opinions are valuable on forums, but when it's thrust down your throat as often as it is, there are many that find it tiresome.

 

Observation of the real railway mixed with a pinch of imagination can produce something that's believable and entertaining, based on historical facts and backed up by professionals in the railway industry, to ensure prototype practice, track formations and signalling is portrayed correctly. Equally others may be just as happy with their table top circle of track, shiny plastic models and signals in the wrong place. I watched a video recently that featured a 40 year old Hornby Class 47 that had been repainted from green into blue livery, leaving in place the heavily moulded horizontal guide lines along the bodyside. To me, the thing that was most satisfying was his enjoyment of doing something for himself, despite his naivety. 

 

I spend many hours every week helping other modellers with practical support, advice and constructive criticism, helping to make the hobby satisfying and enjoyable for the most, so you can imagine how infuriating it can be to see certain 'well respected' modellers carrying on with their own projects with little regard to the observation of finer detail (do fence wires, particularly barbed really get threaded through the holes in the posts?). I get immense pleasure from building and playing with my layout based on a fictional location, so good luck to those who model historical clones from the real world without being too opinionated.

 

The following pictures were taken at Hornsey Broadway, Wibdenshaw & Shenston Road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brilliant post, images are superb and I fully agree with the comments.

Jerry

[Keith Turbutt]

3 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Unless you shot on Kodachrome, or Velvia, the weakest link will usually be the original film.

 

I used Kodachrome II, which had a very low ASA, from August 1965 and scanned my slides a couple of years ago. The transparencies were stored in good boxes and there had been no deterioration in quality. The simple scanner enabled 6 slides to be scanned in one pass.

 

A couple of examples are attached. Unfortunately a number of my photos were under exposed due to using a light meter which gave me the ambient light. It took a while for me to realise that I needed to go down a couple of stops to adjust for the light off the subject! I once attended a talk from the man from Colourail and it was amazing what he could achieve with under exposed photos. Sadly I dont have those skills.

 

Fiirst we have 60009 leaving Stirling in August 1965 on an up Aberdeen - Glasgow 3hr service which was the primary reason for going to Scotland.

 

Then, on the same visit  we went to Bathgate to see the last remaining J36s. The story behind the photo is that we went with a shed permit and got talking to the friendly shed staff. The only J36s on shed were inside the dark shed but when we explained the purpose of our visit the offer was very kindly made to pull them out to allow us to photograph them. The weather was very dull and as explained above my photo was under exposed so I didn't do it justice after such a kind offer. 

Ah well, at least it prompts happy memories of our visit. I think I my have shown some other photos of this trip in earlier posts.

The problem does not arise now with digital photography on my mobile phone camera !

Edited August 27 by Keith Turbutt

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, 1471SirFrederickBanbury said:

I do know that with many older films (when they were actually shot on 35mm film), long and short alike, they still hold up when scanned well, and that the minimum recommended resolution for scanning is 4k.  Kodachrome (especially the early versions and Kodachrome 2), Provia, and Velvia will hold up well against even the best digital cameras, though scanning Kodachrome well is rather difficult.  I'd take Kodachrome 2, early Kodachrome, or Fuji Provia over modern digital any day, as they truly are that good.  Later Kodachrome variants are still good, but not as good as Provia, which is extremely good at reproducing natural colours, and second only to older film stocks that are sadly no longer available, making Provia a very good choice for anyone still shooting film.

My point exactly. Far too many of us back in the day fell for the free film offers from labs offering cut-price processing. 

 

Most of that material was rubbish and has faded away almost to nothing by now.

 

Kodachrome was immune, because (iirc) you could only get it process-paid so it always went to Kodak or a Kodak-approved lab.

 

I stuck to print film and used Fuji or Kodak almost exclusively for colour and Ilford FP4 for B&W. Everything I've dragged out of my files for scanning so far has been pristine.

 

John

Edited August 27 by Dunsignalling

[Dunsignalling]

32 minutes ago, Keith Turbutt said:

 

I used Kodachrome II, which had a very low ASA, from August 1965 and scanned my slides a couple of years ago. The transparencies were stored in good boxes and there had been no deterioration in quality. The simple scanner enabled 6 slides to be scanned in one pass.

 

A couple of examples are attached. Unfortunately a number of my photos were under exposed due to using a light meter which gave me the ambient light. It took a while for me to realise that I needed to go down a couple of stops to adjust for the light off the subject! I once attended a talk from the man from Colourail and it was amazing what he could achieve with under exposed photos. Sadly I dont have those skills.

 

Fiirst we have 60009 leaving Stirling in August 1965 on an up Aberdeen - Glasgow 3hr service which was the primary reason for going to Scotland.

 

Then, on the same visit  we went to Bathgate to see the last remaining J36s. The story behind the photo is that we went with a shed permit and got talking to the friendly shed staff. The only J36s on shed were inside the dark shed but when we explained the purpose of our visit the offer was very kindly made to pull them out to allow us to photograph them. The weather was very dull and as explained above my photo was under exposed so I didn't do it justice after such a kind offer. 

Ah well, at least it prompts happy memories of our visit. I think I my have shown some other photos of this trip in earlier posts.

The problem does not arise now with digital photography on my mobile phone camera !

Once scanned into the laptop, you can lighten them up quite easily.

 

No need for Photoshop,  the basic software that comes in most packages is surprisingly good.