Wright writes.....

[45568]

About 18 months ago I had a flurry of activity building Thompson A2/3 variants using the Hornby models as a basis, repainting totally to achieve a better green colour. For some reason, the last of the batch had the loco and tender bodies painted, (by brush, using 40+ year-old Humbrol 104)! but then left unlined in a sealed box to avoid dust. 

With a day or two of warmer weather I set about finishing this one off and here she is!

 

 

I do like the rimless chimney on these!

Allocated to Haymarket, therefore very rare bird South of the border, she was nevertheless underlined in my Combine. I can only assume that I saw her on a trip to Doncaster Works in 1961, which Six Bells Junction confirms as 16/07/1961 behind preserved Compound 1000. I was ten! 

That should be enough A2/3s for now!

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

[Jol Wilkinson]

11 hours ago, Keith Turbutt said:

Talking of Brighton locomotives, I went to the Bluebell yesterday to see and ride behind the new build Brighton Atlantic, Beachy Head .They've made a wonderful job of it and was made possible after the discovery of a GN Atlantic boiler, virtually identical  to the LBSC Atlantic boiler which had been in use as a stationary boiler at a wood yard a few miles from where I live.No exposure problems with my phone camera!

 

Isn't that LNWR livery delightful.

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, 45568 said:

About 18 months ago I had a flurry of activity building Thompson A2/3 variants using the Hornby models as a basis, repainting totally to achieve a better green colour. For some reason, the last of the batch had the loco and tender bodies painted, (by brush, using 40+ year-old Humbrol 104)! but then left unlined in a sealed box to avoid dust. 

With a day or two of warmer weather I set about finishing this one off and here she is!

 

 

I do like the rimless chimney on these!

Allocated to Haymarket, therefore very rare bird South of the border, she was nevertheless underlined in my Combine. I can only assume that I saw her on a trip to Doncaster Works in 1961, which Six Bells Junction confirms as 16/07/1961 behind preserved Compound 1000. I was ten! 

That should be enough A2/3s for now!

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

Good morning Peter,

 

A2/3s are always popular as models.

 

You've made an excellent job of HONEYWAY (the only one based in Scotland); painting it 'proper' BR green has really made a difference (I wonder how Hornby got it so wrong). 

 

 

I altered a Hornby A2/3 for a Scottish mate, and though I didn't repaint it, Geoff Haynes varnished it which brought the green nearer to what it should be. One final job was to paint the area on the cab roof above the eaves, black. 

 

HONEYWAY always had a rimmed chimney (as did 60514), and several others retained them until quite late, including...........

 

 

HYCILLA, built by me from a DJH kit and painted by Ian Rathbone. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Tony Wright]

Some little time ago, I commented on my not liking Bachmann's O4/1 because of its solid footplate.

 

 

Of course, it's not visible from this angle.

 

 

But from here...............

 

Clearly, the entire footplate is a separate piece, and what puzzles me is why Bachmann hasn't done all the variations possible by creating (just) new boilers/cabs - O4/5, O4/7, O4/8, etc.

 

I think this O4/5 conversion is the work of Graeme King..............

 

 

 

Running on Grantham. 

 

 

[Tony Teague]

11 hours ago, PupCam said:

 

Now that's a fascinating fact!

Depressing isn't it.     The ability of phone cameras these days is astonishing.   Very nice photographs of an excellent new locomotive.

 

 

Don't worry, you'll soon be able to answer phone calls using your camera.............🙄

[rowanj]

11 hours ago, 45568 said:

About 18 months ago I had a flurry of activity building Thompson A2/3 variants using the Hornby models as a basis, repainting totally to achieve a better green colour. For some reason, the last of the batch had the loco and tender bodies painted, (by brush, using 40+ year-old Humbrol 104)! but then left unlined in a sealed box to avoid dust. 

With a day or two of warmer weather I set about finishing this one off and here she is!

 

 

I do like the rimless chimney on these!

Allocated to Haymarket, therefore very rare bird South of the border, she was nevertheless underlined in my Combine. I can only assume that I saw her on a trip to Doncaster Works in 1961, which Six Bells Junction confirms as 16/07/1961 behind preserved Compound 1000. I was ten! 

That should be enough A2/3s for now!

Cheers from Oz,

Peter C.

That is a big improvement on the Hornby Green. Honeyway was a reasonably familiar sight South of the Border, unless you believe the Land of the Scots should be extended to Tyneside... Its' familiarity to us spotters, though decried at the time, was why I built her as my first DJH kit long before the Hornby model

 

Edited September 2 by rowanj

[MikeParkin65]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Clearly, the entire footplate is a separate piece, and what puzzles me is why Bachmann hasn't done all the variations possible by creating (just) new boilers/cabs - O4/5, O4/7, O4/8, etc.

Morning Tony - I suspect the explanation is that Bachmann dont see the potential for the tooling costs to be repaid. The 04 doesnt seem to have been a quick seller, I dont know how many Bachmann manufactured but they regularly appeared in sales and go relatively cheaply on Ebay etc. 

[gingerangles]

43 minutes ago, MikeParkin65 said:

Morning Tony - I suspect the explanation is that Bachmann dont see the potential for the tooling costs to be repaid. The 04 doesnt seem to have been a quick seller, I dont know how many Bachmann manufactured but they regularly appeared in sales and go relatively cheaply on Ebay etc. 

 

Odd really as it must be one of the most numerously produced locos in actuality?  I guess being a freight workhorse and an acquired taste looks wise they aren't overly desirable as a model?  I own 2 however and will be adding 1 or 2 more to the fleet I think - the area of my layout was absolutely throng with em!

The others of course being the Q4's which I dont think there is a model version of 😒 The Hornby Q6 is the closest I can get.

[gingerangles]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

What an absolutely fantastic scene 😍

Love it!

[Keith Turbutt]

2 hours ago, Jol Wilkinson said:

 

Isn't that LNWR livery delightful.

Yes, Jol and not only the loco livery. The LNWR observation coach brought up the rear of the train. It also carried the LNWR coat of arms. Apparently the coach was used by the LNWR on the Betws-y-Coed branch.

 

 

 

Edited September 2 by Keith Turbutt
Removed duplicated photo

[Keith Turbutt]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

 

what puzzles me is why Bachmann hasn't done all the variations possible by creating (just) new boilers/cabs - O4/5, O4/7, O4/8, etc.

 

 

 

They will now as I have just acquired through eBay a Little Engines unbuilt O4/8!

 

Bill Bedford advertises replacement resin bodies for the O4/5 and 04/7 which are shown as out of stock. They may be available made to order as it mentions "delivery available in less than 12 weeks".

Perhaps if Bill reads this he could comment?

 

He used to advertise an O4/8 as "under development". When I enquired he said he was still trying to finalise cab details. I would have thought it was a fair bet that it was the same as the Thompson O1 as they both share the same cab and boiler. It is nolonger mentioned on his website.

[Clive Mortimore]

1 hour ago, Keith Turbutt said:

Yes, Jol and not only the loco livery. The LNWR observation coach brought up the rear of the train. It also carried the LNWR coat of arms. Apparently the coach was used by the LNWR on the Betws-y-Coed branch.

 

 

 

When the kids were young we use to go to the Bluebell and book seats on the observation coach when they were running their Xmas specials. This was pre the line going all the way to East Grinstead. The trains were going part the way, so I would get off at Horsted Keynes and nip into the secondhand book carriage to buy the Xmas present my wife was going to give me and get back on the train when it was returning to Sheffield Park. Every time I re-boarded the train there was a fat bloke with a big white beard dressed in a red suit chatting up Mrs M.

 

Not only that he was in my seat. 😠

[Keith Turbutt]

On 01/09/2024 at 15:59, bbishop said:

 

Wikipedia states that all Ks had reduced boiler fittings.  We know, of course, to take such a statement with a pinch of salt. 

 

I have undertaken an on-line search and my impression is that all Ks had reduced fittings.  There were at least two domes and maybe two chimneys as well.  The SR took 4" off the chimney.

 

Not only two domes but two domes(?) on one boiler.

My ABCs show that I saw half a dozen K class but that was at a time when I was just collecting numbers without being too aware of different locomotive types or keeping  better records.

I did manage to photograph one, 32343, and that was at Kings scrapyard, Norwich in November  1964. It's a poor photo but does "appear" to show the two domes with possibly the shorter chimney. However as Tony has posted further on it is only the dome cover which has been removed and rested on the boiler ahead of the dome!

 

Also present, amongst a few others, was 60065,Knight of Thistle, and I include a photo of that for Tony's benefit. And speaking of domes have another look at the A3 and Tony's comment further on.

Edited September 2 by Keith Turbutt
mentioned A3 dome and corrected comment re k class dome(s)

[65179]

3 hours ago, gingerangles said:

 

Odd really as it must be one of the most numerously produced locos in actuality?  I guess being a freight workhorse and an acquired taste looks wise they aren't overly desirable as a model?  I own 2 however and will be adding 1 or 2 more to the fleet I think - the area of my layout was absolutely throng with em!

The others of course being the Q4's which I dont think there is a model version of 😒 The Hornby Q6 is the closest I can get.

 

There is the Judith Edge kit for the Q4: 

Regards,

Simon

Edited September 2 by 65179
To add link

[Tony Wright]

58 minutes ago, Keith Turbutt said:

Not only two domes but two domes(?) on one boiler.

My ABCs show that I saw half a dozen K class but that was at a time when I was just collecting numbers without being too aware of different locomotive types or keeping  better records.

I did manage to photograph one, 32343, and that was at Kings scrapyard, Norwich in November  1964. It's a poor photo but does appear to show the two domes with possibly the shorter chimney.

Also present, amongst a few others, was 60065,Knight of Thistle, and I include a photo of that for Tony's benefit.

Thanks Keith,

 

The Ks were built with two domes, but I think your picture shows one, with the cover removed and plonked further forward.

 

Interestingly, the A3 has a 94HP boiler (erroneously called 94A by the RCTS) with a round dome. 

 

I wonder how many times in service an A3 was smokebox-to-smokebox with a Q1?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

[Keith Turbutt]

2 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Keith,

 

The Ks were built with two domes, but I think your picture shows one, with the cover removed and plonked further forward.

 

Interestingly, the A3 has a 94HP boiler (erroneously called 94A by the RCTS) with a round dome. 

 

I wonder how many times in service an A3 was smokebox-to-smokebox with a Q1?

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

Hi Tony,

Yes, you are right! Before I posted I looked on Rail online and 32343 with a late emblem only had one dome. I did think it was a bit odd ! Just shows how easy it is to get caught out. I will edit my posting.

Thanks

[Nick Holliday]

2 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Keith,

 

The Ks were built with two domes, but I think your picture shows one, with the cover removed and plonked further forward.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

The first 8 K’s were built with just a single dome. The first change was the introduction of the top feed on a manhole, between the dome and the chimney, which appeared initially on 345 & 346 when built at the end of 1918. The manhole top feed was subsequently fitted to 7 of the first batches. The 1920 batch of 7 locos featured the double dome, and one of the earlier ones, 339, was also fitted.

Bradley RCTS book is rather more reliable than Wikipedia on this complex subject, but the cut down cabs were all dealt with between 1930 and 1939, although the early conversions did not get the reduced boiler fittings at first. Various changes were made during the thirties as they went through the works, which, combined with livery and numbering changes, makes this era even more complicated.

[Tony Wright]

11 hours ago, Nick Holliday said:

The first 8 K’s were built with just a single dome. The first change was the introduction of the top feed on a manhole, between the dome and the chimney, which appeared initially on 345 & 346 when built at the end of 1918. The manhole top feed was subsequently fitted to 7 of the first batches. The 1920 batch of 7 locos featured the double dome, and one of the earlier ones, 339, was also fitted.

Bradley RCTS book is rather more reliable than Wikipedia on this complex subject, but the cut down cabs were all dealt with between 1930 and 1939, although the early conversions did not get the reduced boiler fittings at first. Various changes were made during the thirties as they went through the works, which, combined with livery and numbering changes, makes this era even more complicated.

Thanks Nick,

 

A foolish statement to begin with on my part. 

 

I've got Bradley's books, so should have checked. 

 

The height of the chimney has got me more and more puzzled. Two were supplied in the Nu-Cast kit - a tall one (original?) and a shorter one (later?). The problem with the shorter one is it's far too squat. 

 

What I've decided to do is go on the frontispiece of Profile of the Southern Moguls, which shows two BR Ks , and plate 21 which shows another. All appear to have tall chimneys , though the dome on the loco in plate 21 is lower than the other two. All the other BR pictures show Ks with tall chimneys - certainly taller in scale than the model's short one. There is a variety of domes.

 

Anyway,

 

 

It's now complete. 

 

Geoff Haynes will paint it (in BR lined black), and I'll discuss with him whether things should be changed. 

 

I've now decided NOT to touch any loco started by another (unless it's to help distressed families). The frames had been already erected, as was the High-Level motor/gearbox. I'd just put all the motion together, checked it for free-movement and oiled it, then, as is always the case with the locos I build, drove it hard! A nasty grinding noise occurred! On investigation, the intermediate layshaft had come out of its bearing on one side. What a fag and fiddle (and another word beginning with 'f') to get it back in place. I then soldered brass 'cheeks' to the outside of the gearbox frame, preventing any sideways movement. Does anyone know if this process is recommended/necessary? I just can't be bothered making gearboxes now. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

Edited September 3 by Tony Wright
missing 'e'

[John Isherwood]

40 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Nick,

 

A foolish statement to begin with on my part. 

 

I've got Bradley's books, so should have checked. 

 

The height of the chimney has got me more and more puzzled. Two were supplied in the Nu-Cast kit - a tall one (original?) and a shorter one (later?). The problem with the shorter one is it's far too squat. 

 

What I've decided to do is go on the frontispiece of Profile of the Southern Moguls, which shows two BR Ks , and plate 21 which shows another. All appear to have tall chimneys , though the dome on the loco in plate 21 is lower than the other two. All the other BR pictures show Ks with tall chimneys - certainly taller in scale than the model's short one. There is a variety of domes.

 

Anyway,

 

 

It's now complete. 

 

Geoff Haynes will paint it (in BR lined black), and I'll discuss with him whether things should be changed. 

 

I've now decided NOT to touch any loco started by another (unless it's to help distressed families). The frames had been already erected, as was the High-Level motor/gearbox. I'd just put all the motion together, checked it for free-movement and oiled it, then, as is always the case with the locos I build, drove it hard! A nasty grinding noise occurred! On investigation, the intermediate layshaft had come out of its bearing on one side. What a fag and fiddle (and another word beginning with 'f') to get it back in place. I then soldered brass 'cheeks' to the outside of the gearbox frame, preventing any sideways movement. Does anyone know if this process is recommended/ncessary? I just can't be bothered making gearboxes now. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

Tony,

 

The problem that you encountered with the loose layshaft was almost certainly due to over-enthusiastic opening-out of the etched holes in the gearbox sideframes. Your solution is an easy fix.

 

Personally, I find that H-L gearbox assembly is a small price to pay for keeping the space below the boiler free of unprototypical machinery.

 

I know, however, that you can overlook the latter in favour of fitting an off-the-shelf, assembled gearbox; albeit one that is less than suitable (visually) for the prototype.

 

John Isherwood.

Edited September 2 by John Isherwood

[Bucoops]

1 hour ago, Tony Wright said:

Thanks Nick,

 

A foolish statement to begin with on my part. 

 

I've got Bradley's books, so should have checked. 

 

The height of the chimney has got me more and more puzzled. Two were supplied in the Nu-Cast kit - a tall one (original?) and a shorter one (later?). The problem with the shorter one is it's far too squat. 

 

What I've decided to do is go on the frontispiece of Profile of the Southern Moguls, which shows two BR Ks , and plate 21 which shows another. All appear to have tall chimneys , though the dome on the loco in plate 21 is lower than the other two. All the other BR pictures show Ks with tall chimneys - certainly taller in scale than the model's short one. There is a variety of domes.

 

Anyway,

 

 

It's now complete. 

 

Geoff Haynes will paint it (in BR lined black), and I'll discuss with him whether things should be changed. 

 

I've now decided NOT to touch any loco started by another (unless it's to help distressed families). The frames had been already erected, as was the High-Level motor/gearbox. I'd just put all the motion together, checked it for free-movement and oiled it, then, as is always the case with the locos I build, drove it hard! A nasty grinding noise occurred! On investigation, the intermediate layshaft had come out of its bearing on one side. What a fag and fiddle (and another word beginning with 'f') to get it back in place. I then soldered brass 'cheeks' to the outside of the gearbox frame, preventing any sideways movement. Does anyone know if this process is recommended/ncessary? I just can't be bothered making gearboxes now. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.  

 

 

 

I trend to use a blob of solder to hold it in place either side, or sometimes a blob of glue.

[gingerangles]

6 hours ago, 65179 said:

 

There is the Judith Edge kit for the Q4: 

Regards,

Simon

 

 

Thanks @65179 👍

I've been in touch, looks like they dont have any but can make an etching for me.  Sounds quite advanced mind and does not have the cast parts.

[Tony Wright]

The embargo has been lifted and I can show the images I took of Accurascale's forthcoming 'Buckjumper', in this case the J68.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please note that this is a 'proving' model, and any 'discrepancies' will be sorted on the production examples (and, yes, I know its passenger train is rubbish, but that's not Accurascale's responsibility). 

 

It ran superbly.

[Tony Wright]

One more............

 

 

In a wider context, perhaps its (admittedly inaccurate) train isn't so awful. 

 

You can see 'me' about to take the second picture in my previous post!

 

Maybe many models are best seen in a scene such as this - in an overall 'layout' context (though the J68 can stand up to close scrutiny); I know mine are.

 

 

[Farang]

I'm not sure if this is the best place to post this but I ask all you loco modellers.

I bought a Hornby Britannia but it arrived with the smokebox door dart snapped off.

Is is impossible to repair. Does anyone know where I should look for a suitable replacement - probably a lost wax casting?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Tony Wright]

16 minutes ago, Farang said:

I'm not sure if this is the best place to post this but I ask all you loco modellers.

I bought a Hornby Britannia but it arrived with the smokebox door dart snapped off.

Is is impossible to repair. Does anyone know where I should look for a suitable replacement - probably a lost wax casting?

Thanks in advance.

 

London Road Models does a lost wax set of smokebox door darts.

 

Regards,

 

Tony.