Wright writes.....

[NZRedBaron]

1 hour ago, polybear said:

 

 

Captain Bill Smith (who saved and preserved J52 68846) had originally hoped to save a much larger Loco (A3?) but those "in the shed" steered him towards the J52 as being much more sensible.

 

 

 

 

Huh; the version I had heard was that he was looking at something like an Ivatt C12.

[polybear]

13 minutes ago, NZRedBaron said:

Huh; the version I had heard was that he was looking at something like an Ivatt C12.

I did include “IIRC”…..

I’ll check the book tonight - unless someone beats me to it.

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, 65179 said:

 

I think 90632 is a 2mm scale conversion of the Farish N gauge WD.

 

Regards,

Simon 

Thanks Simon,

 

I believe you're right. It's so good, I assumed it was 4mm!

 

 

 

The starting point.

 

The 2mm Finescale chaps really do produce some fantastic mechanisms, transforming N Gauge locomotives beyond recognition. 

 

Regards,

 

Tony.

 

P.S. Since corrected...............

Edited August 15 by Tony Wright
to add something

[Tony Wright]

Some more dirty Austerities............

 

 

There were several on Stoke Summit, though cleaner motive power was more-prevalent. 

 

 

 

This one (modified Bachmann) rejoiced in the sobriquet 'The Flying T*rd'!

 

 

Compared with my weathering, Tony Geary's is 'heroic'. 

 

 

Another DJH visitor.

 

 

And another.

 

 

And another look at Dave Shakespeare's modified Bachmann one.

 

I wonder how many other layouts have run so many Austerities?

 

 

Gamston ran one or two DJH ones.

 

 

 

This much-modified Bachmann example (I think it's Bachmann) runs on Retford. I'm not sure who converted it to EM, but it definitely has Tim Shackleton's superb weathering. 

 

 

[30368]

11 hours ago, APOLLO said:

Mucky old Dub D's, we hated them as we knew not what number they carried !!!

 

Mid 60's, they were everywhere around Wigan, and hated, and suddenly they were gone, and (just a little bit) missed.

 

As a Southerner DubD's were not something we saw very often but not totally unknown.

 

I do though recall a vist to Wakefield shed around 1963/4 and of the 20 engines on shed at the time, 17 were WD 2-8-0s. It seemed as if they occupied every space on the shed and all looking very busy..

The other three were B1 61161 and 8Fs 48399 and 48274(?). Given that an ex Turkish Railway 8F carries the number 48274 I must have seen the original... Until I checked the number I had no idea about this connection.

 

Kind regards,

 

30368

 

Edited August 15 by 30368

[Tony Wright]

Why, why do I still take on work which others have started? I used to think I was of average intelligence, but obviously not! 

 

I'm looking at an example in front of me. The frames are erected and painted (it would seem squarely) but provision has only been made to accommodate the rear pick-ups (it's a six-coupled). The drivers are on (Markits, thankfully) as are the rods and a High-Level drive. There's a slight tight spot in the rods when power is applied to the motor's brush terminals, which will need their removal to cure. 

 

The tender is built and primed. It looks OK. 

 

A start has been made on cleaning up the principal castings (it's a white metal body), but there are innumerable scars caused by too-vigorous (and coarse) filing. Several parts appear to be missing, including the smokebox door and a set of steps. 

 

I'm not sure if all the (etched) motion components are present, because there are gaps in the frets, and a few bits in polythene bags.

 

It's for a friend, but why didn't I have the 'courage' to just say 'sorry'? 

 

Almost every loco which passes through my hands built by others sets me thinking 'I wouldn't build it like that', and this is no exception. So, from now on (with what remains of my diminishing intelligence), I'll only build 'virgin' kits.

 

Why are so many kit-built locos made so badly? 

Edited August 15 by Tony Wright
to add something

[30368]

2 minutes ago, Tony Wright said:

Almost every loco which passes through my hands built by others sets me thinking 'I wouldn't build it like that', and this is no exception. So, from now on (with what remains of my diminishing intelligence), I'll only build 'virgin' kits.

 

I didn't notice that you had "diminishing intelligence" when I met you last month, quite the opposite. Keep up the good work!

 

Kind regards,

 

30368

[dibateg]

It's remarkablehow much the thread moves on, I've only been away for 3 days!

 

I remember now, 61975 was mine - a Bachmann model, the wheels were undersize as I recall. So I do claim responsibility! I was thinking of my Proscale K3 61832, I only have a print of yours that you gave me Tony. 

 

Incidentaly the WD's 90040 and 90299 were both built by Allen Hammet - originally with Sharman wheels. They did tend to shift on the axle with rough driving, so I replaced them with the Markits WD ones when they came available.

 

Best Regards

Tony

 

 

[trw1089]

With the theme of weathering and of K3s (but also wary that non-kit built locomotives are a bit taboo here), I recently did up these two as weathering is one of my favourite pastimes.  I’m always inspired by Tom Foster’s work, and Tim Shackleton’s methods really helped me transform my weathering approaches but I also like to try many different methods, including airbrushing, powders, washes, dry brushing, pastels and the like.  Always working from a photographic reference is a must for me, but also knowing what it’s like to work the real thing helps.  For me, it’s about texture and subtlety, except for the end of steam when the motto with weathering should be “if a lot is good, more will be better…”

 

 

 

but living here in Australia, I also get to work on some different prototypes but the same rules apply

Edited August 15 by trw1089
Adding more pics

[Harry Lund]

On 12/08/2024 at 23:21, Mike 84C said:

Just for a change this Sunday past my wife and I went up to Louth and visited two gardens that are participating in the National Open Gardens scheme. A bit strange in Louth, there is a beautifully preserved Station and signalbox but worth another visit because we could not stop. But at Fotherby we were walking down the main street to the next garden visit and lo there is a level crossing with a double track main line, rails in situ and level crossing gates collapsing into the undergrowth. Rather sad. But both gardens were well worth visiting if you have the slightest interest in gardening. I recommend The secret garden of Louth, it quite mad, a tropical garden with banana trees and bamboos and little shaded areas with seats and things in them its got a face book page and Woodlands in Fotherby traditional and completely different.

Please forgive a short diversion..   It was good to see the reference to Louth on your thread, Tony.   York's predecessor was an 80% complete model of Louth, abandoned when lockdown provided an unexpected opportunity to start on York earlier than planned as a lockdown project.   The station building and platform signal box were by Geoff Taylor, and featured in his books.   The rest, boards, track, signals, buildings etc, by me, with help from York Modelmaking.   I never got round to working out how to model the fine trainshed.   The layout is in storage, future undetermined.

 

To give a flavour.   Photos include the magnificent station building, the Keddington Road crossing and signal box, both of which still exist, the loco shed and yard, and the substantial goods shed, long gone.    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now back to LB!

 

Giles

 

 

[2750Papyrus]

That's a fine looking layout, especially the buildings.  Hopefully, sometime in the future it can see the light of day again.

[Mark Laidlay]

2 hours ago, trw1089 said:

With the theme of weathering and of K3s (but also wary that non-kit built locomotives are a bit taboo here), I recently did up these two as weathering is one of my favourite pastimes.  I’m always inspired by Tom Foster’s work, and Tim Shackleton’s methods really helped me transform my weathering approaches but I also like to try many different methods, including airbrushing, powders, washes, dry brushing, pastels and the like.  Always working from a photographic reference is a must for me, but also knowing what it’s like to work the real thing helps.  For me, it’s about texture and subtlety, except for the end of steam when the motto with weathering should be “if a lot is good, more will be better…”

 

 

 

but living here in Australia, I also get to work on some different prototypes but the same rules apply

I thought I was looking at my own roster as I have those three VR locos, that is if the N class is Korean brass.  I even wrote the Australian magazine review of the Eureka R class.

[Tony Teague]

4 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

Why, why do I still take on work which others have started?

 

Because you can't resist a challenge?

(and because you are being helpful to a 'victim' of poor loco building).

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, trw1089 said:

With the theme of weathering and of K3s (but also wary that non-kit built locomotives are a bit taboo here), I recently did up these two as weathering is one of my favourite pastimes.  I’m always inspired by Tom Foster’s work, and Tim Shackleton’s methods really helped me transform my weathering approaches but I also like to try many different methods, including airbrushing, powders, washes, dry brushing, pastels and the like.  Always working from a photographic reference is a must for me, but also knowing what it’s like to work the real thing helps.  For me, it’s about texture and subtlety, except for the end of steam when the motto with weathering should be “if a lot is good, more will be better…”

 

 

 

but living here in Australia, I also get to work on some different prototypes but the same rules apply

That's some very-impressive weathering; thanks for showing us.

 

With regard to the K3s, I assume you've renumbered the top one? If so, you've chosen an incorrect one, I'm afraid. The style of cab (longer sides and smaller windows) only suits the later-build K3s, and 61836 probably should retain RH-drive. 

 

Some examples...........

 

 

This shows the different style of cab - Bachmann to the left; the later style (the only one Bachmann does) and SE Finecast to the right (several cab styles are provided in the kit). 

 

Bachmann's K3 drivers are too small in diameter, as is evident here.

 

 

Tony Geary's modified/weathered Bachmann K3.

 

 

The earlier style of cab is evident on this SEF example (and the RH-drive). 

 

 

 

Also on this example.

 

 

I built this example for a customer, utilising the earlier cab (seen painted previously).

 

 

And rebuilt this example for myself, using the later style of cab. 

 

All K3s with this style of cab had LH drive.

 

 

 

The difference in cab-styles is quite distinctive.

 

 

It's quite easy to fit an SEF cab to a Bachmann K3.

 

This one has an SEF chassis with Bachmann motion.

 

 

To start with, this 'extensive' Bachmann K3 modification retained its chassis. 

 

However..............

 

 

 

 

Such was its poor performance that I made an SEF chassis for it, fitting the Bachmann motion. 

 

The earlier style cab and conversion to RH drive make an early-build K3, especially with a London Road GNR tender. 

 

I don't think there's a 'prejudice' here against non-kit-built locos (several of the above examples are sourced from RTR K3s), but, please, add the front steps to your pair of K3s.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

Edited August 15 by Tony Wright

[Tony Wright]

5 hours ago, dibateg said:

It's remarkablehow much the thread moves on, I've only been away for 3 days!

 

I remember now, 61975 was mine - a Bachmann model, the wheels were undersize as I recall. So I do claim responsibility! I was thinking of my Proscale K3 61832, I only have a print of yours that you gave me Tony. 

 

Incidentaly the WD's 90040 and 90299 were both built by Allen Hammet - originally with Sharman wheels. They did tend to shift on the axle with rough driving, so I replaced them with the Markits WD ones when they came available.

 

Best Regards

Tony

 

 

Thanks Tony,

 

And, after working on Leighford (where the picture was taken), Stoke Summit and Charwelton, your Anchorage K3 now sees regular service on Little Bytham...........

 

 

 

It's a privilege to own such a beautifully-natural loco.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

[New Haven Neil]

18 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I still find it staggering that from a class of over 700 engines and which lasted to almost the end of steam on BR, not one survived into preservation.  None ending up in Woodhams Yard was only part of the reason; enthusiasts had their eyes on more glamorous engines.

 

There is one, but it wasn't an ex BR but ran in Sweden.  It is now presented as a BR loco at the Keighley and Worth Valley railway.

[Keith Turbutt]

19 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I still find it staggering that from a class of over 700 engines and which lasted to almost the end of steam on BR, not one survived into preservation. 

Not sure if anyone has already commented on this, but although it is true that none have been preserved that were in BR stock, one of the engines that went overseas for war service has been brought home and preserved on the KWVR and carries the number 90733 which follows on from the last BR number. It has been rebuilt to original as built condition.

A photograph and more info can be found on Wikipedia under "WD Austerity 2-8-0 79257" which was it's original number. I'm not sure about it's present condition.

WDs could always be recognised by the clanking of their rods as they rolled effortlessly along. A remarkable design that outlasted more modern designs but were perfect for the job that they were built for.

 

 

Edited August 15 by Keith Turbutt
Sound of their clanking rods

[Keith Turbutt]

21 minutes ago, Keith Turbutt said:

Not sure if anyone has already commented on this, but although it is true that none have been preserved that were in BR stock, one of the engines that went overseas for war service has been brought home and preserved on the KWVR and carries the number 90733 which follows on from the last BR number. It has been rebuilt to original as built condition.

A photograph and more info can be found on Wikipedia under "WD Austerity 2-8-0 79257" which was it's original number. I'm not sure about it's present condition.

WDs could always be recognised by the clanking of their rods as they rolled effortlessly along. A remarkable design that outlasted more modern designs but were perfect for the job that they were built for.

 

 

Ah, somebody did beat me to it while I was composing my reply!!

[90164]

 

 

This is my O gauge WD, built from a Snow Hill. 90164 was a regular performer n the line that ran passed my bedroom window when I was a kid. The number is etched in my memory.

 

Regards,

 

Frank

[APOLLO]

2 hours ago, Keith Turbutt said:

WDs could always be recognised by the clanking of their rods as they rolled effortlessly along. A remarkable design that outlasted more modern designs but were perfect for the job that they were built for.

 

Yes I remember the "Kerlink Kerlank" sound quite well. I just about remember visiting Grandad at Belle Green Lane Ince Wigan (on the Springs branch to Kirkless Iron Works) when quite young around 1957 and climbing on the outside toilet roof which backed onto the line when one occasionally clanked past just behind the signal on this view. It was either that or swing on the gates !!

 

 

Riddles (Their designer) said he did not care how long they would last as long as they did the job to help to win the war, so to last until 1967 they did quite well indeed.

 

My photo of a few posts ago shows a Dub D on the then (mid 60's) truncated Springs Branch at Manchester Road, which by then was part of Central Wagons scrapyard used for loco storage.

 

 

The B1 behind was this unfortunate creature. (Photo care of Wigan World).

 

 

Brit15

[New Haven Neil]

On Tyneside WD's were known as 'Iron Lungs' due to the rod knock!

[trw1089]

5 hours ago, Tony Wright said:

That's some very-impressive weathering; thanks for showing us.

 

With regard to the K3s, I assume you've renumbered the top one? If so, you've chosen an incorrect one, I'm afraid. The style of cab (longer sides and smaller windows) only suits the later-build K3s, and 61836 probably should retain RH-drive. 

 

Some examples...........

 

 

This shows the different style of cab - Bachmann to the left; the later style (the only one Bachmann does) and SE Finecast to the right (several cab styles are provided in the kit). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think there's a 'prejudice' here against non-kit-built locos (several of the above examples are sourced from RTR K3s), but, please, add the front steps to your pair of K3s.

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

I hope you don’t mind my selective quoting here Tony and I am always cautious about posting my work here because I know you’ll point out the errors that I may be oblivious to.  
 

Yes, I did renumbered both as I used previous advice on here about the tenders to select both of these examples, but didn’t know about the cab differences.  I’m modelling Wakefield Westgate and surrounds in 1952 so am quite selective about the locos I choose and their renumbering so I can have examples that would have been active in the area, with at least one or both of these based at Doncaster shed in the time I model.  I wasn’t aware of the difference in cabs, so will take that under advisement, but whilst I do build a number of kit built locos, I haven’t yet got a prolific box of spares that might have a spare K3 cab, so will have to suffer the small window cab for the time being.  Am also very aware of the limitations of the Bachmann K3 wheels, but K3s were also such irregular performers through Westgate that I doubt I will operate both of these much anyway and they may be just “layout locos” whilst I concentrate on more prolific classes such as my beloved J6s (which you’ve already seen and looked after for Gilbert) and the very many J39s that were based at Ardsley in my modelling period. As for front steps, yes, something that I have yet to fit.

 

Kind regards

Tony

[Barry O]

could it be that most of the WDs were totally worn out when they went out of service. The ones I saw (and heard) from West Hartlepool looked worn out and struggled to pull the coals trains out of our pit yard!

 

I have two DJH WDs.. I built neither of them.. but one is clean (well as clean as I remember any WD) the other I weathered..

 

Cleaner one first

 

and a dirtier one

 

apologies for the quality of the pictures my camera was playing up...

 

Baz

 

[Tony Wright]

9 hours ago, trw1089 said:

I hope you don’t mind my selective quoting here Tony and I am always cautious about posting my work here because I know you’ll point out the errors that I may be oblivious to.  
 

Yes, I did renumbered both as I used previous advice on here about the tenders to select both of these examples, but didn’t know about the cab differences.  I’m modelling Wakefield Westgate and surrounds in 1952 so am quite selective about the locos I choose and their renumbering so I can have examples that would have been active in the area, with at least one or both of these based at Doncaster shed in the time I model.  I wasn’t aware of the difference in cabs, so will take that under advisement, but whilst I do build a number of kit built locos, I haven’t yet got a prolific box of spares that might have a spare K3 cab, so will have to suffer the small window cab for the time being.  Am also very aware of the limitations of the Bachmann K3 wheels, but K3s were also such irregular performers through Westgate that I doubt I will operate both of these much anyway and they may be just “layout locos” whilst I concentrate on more prolific classes such as my beloved J6s (which you’ve already seen and looked after for Gilbert) and the very many J39s that were based at Ardsley in my modelling period. As for front steps, yes, something that I have yet to fit.

 

Kind regards

Tony

Good morning Tony,

 

My pointing out any 'errors' in anyone's work (including my own, after others have spotted them - there are many!) is not to have a 'pop' at anyone but to be constructively-critical. Like it or not, many seem to 'use' this thread as a source of reference; a reference for building their own models. Granted, one should never model a model, but they can form a reference point. 

 

Regarding K3s, by the way, even though the Bachmann model is only suitable for later builds (the majority, to be fair) with LH drive and the larger cab, I've seen many examples where it's been renumbered to an earlier example. There's always the exception, of course; at least one, 61811, from the earlier series, was altered to LH drive, though it still retained the earlier style of cab. 

 

I might well have an etch for the earlier style of cab. If I can find it, you're welcome to it. 

 

You need never be concerned about posting images of your work on Wws..............

 

 

Modelling/weathering to this standard is inspirational!

 

Regards,

 

Tony. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Barry O]

@RThompson posted a picture his Consett A.

 

I have a kit myself but have had the opportunity to weather a couple of these for customers of Mike Edge

 

 

This one is in P4.. 

 

Can't remember but I think this is OO..

 

 and a bit of buffer beam dirt.

 

Both use diluted Indian ink as a base then powders added 

 

Baz