Tales from The Room of Doom. Dipping a toe in various bucolic backwaters.

Reader mode
76043

76043

Western Thunderer
I wonder if Dapol's next small loco might be an LNER prototype?

I have an 08 and it requires careful handling with all the parts etc, but it's running qualities are excellent with the flywheel and Zimo decoder. I'm with Rob, I wouldn't be interested in scratch building when there's so much quality stuff around, best to crack on and build a layout for all this great stuff. I'd love to make a version of Selbury Works Siding by John Allison, a layout I loved reading about in RM many years ago.

Looking forward to seeing what you produce.

Tony
 
oldravendale

oldravendale

Western Thunderer
adrian said:
I agree and I'm rather surprised that a B4 hasn't been proposed by at least one of the manufacturers. I have to say it's not one I would personally consider to avoid any accusations of "wish-listing" but there was a nice kit produced years ago by Vulcan/Eric Underhill but they are very rare and there has been nothing since to my knowledge. So I do think there is a gap in the market for such a loco and yes if it was RTR and gets people interested in 7mm all to the good.
Click to expand...
Indeed, and I have one.....precious things.....!

Brian
 
Pencarrow

Pencarrow

Western Thunderer
I think that's the point Tony, you only have so much time for modelling - some more than others. I don't have sufficient time to spend it building kits of every loco and item of stock on the Pencarrow hit list, so see RTR (where available) as a route to spending more time making buildings (which I enjoy).

There are those whose preferences are the other way around to mine - kit locos and RTP buildings. Some like Rob get excellent results from the creative use and modification of RTR and RTP.

Each to their own. The main thing is enjoying what you do.

(That's probably enough drivel on the subject in Rob's thread anyway)
 
Peter Cross

Peter Cross

Western Thunderer
I agree Chris, but and there is always a but, for my 1930's time period, apart from a few industrials and wagons there is nothing RTR. It was the same in 4mm till I gave it up.
It is great that there is so much low cost RTR around, but the modelling is limiting, industrial scene. BR diesel, or our old favourite GW, and of course the happiest bunch I'll run anything.
This is all good as it introduces more people to our great hobby and scale. I've seen some nice results using RTR and RTP. I just don't want to see what you used to get in the modeller and constructor, many layout looking the same and copying off of each other rather than prototype of whatever is fancy.

Or is it me wanting to be to specific.
 
Captain Kernow

Captain Kernow

Western Thunderer
Peter Cross said:
I agree Chris, but and there is always a but, for my 1930's time period, apart from a few industrials and wagons there is nothing RTR. It was the same in 4mm till I gave it up.
It is great that there is so much low cost RTR around, but the modelling is limiting, industrial scene. BR diesel, or our old favourite GW, and of course the happiest bunch I'll run anything.
This is all good as it introduces more people to our great hobby and scale. I've seen some nice results using RTR and RTP. I just don't want to see what you used to get in the modeller and constructor, many layout looking the same and copying off of each other rather than prototype of whatever is fancy.

Or is it me wanting to be to specific.
Click to expand...
I think that's a fair point, but in terms of rolling stock, a good RTR product, especially weathered in the hands of a master like Rob, will look every bit as good as the same built from a kit, perhaps better. Given the fact that any given locos and items of rolling stock will pretty much 'look' the same, whether RTR, kit built or scratchbuilt, the danger in terms of every layout 'looking the same' would come with RTP buildings. But again, in the hands of someone like Rob, an RTP building, modified and weathered, looks as individual as something built from scratch.
 
NHY 581

NHY 581

Western Thunderer
Captain Kernow said:
I think that's a fair point, but in terms of rolling stock, a good RTR product, especially weathered in the hands of a master like Rob, will look every bit as good as the same built from a kit, perhaps better. Given the fact that any given locos and items of rolling stock will pretty much 'look' the same, whether RTR, kit built or scratchbuilt, the danger in terms of every layout 'looking the same' would come with RTP buildings. But again, in the hands of someone like Rob, an RTP building, modified and weathered, looks as individual as something built from scratch.
Click to expand...


You are far too kind.


Rob.
 
Jordan

Jordan

Mid-Western Thunderer
76043 said:
I'd love to make a version of Selbury Works Siding by John Allison, a layout I loved reading about in RM many years ago.
Click to expand...
One of my all-time favourite layouts, too. I saw it several times in the 1980s; on board sound was a real novelty back then, and although incredibly crude by today's standards, it gave the locos some 'life' and added much to the atmosphere of such a simple layout.
 
Alex W

Alex W

Western Thunderer
I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but I've read the comments on this thread and the Lambs Leep thread and have some thoughts on the use of rtr. For me, it comes down to time. When I started building Diddington, I made a few decisions, one of which was I wanted to get something running and reasonably presentable within a relatively short space of time. One of those decisions was to use rtr when it was suitable, as I felt I didn't have the time to build everything. I think the thing is to select items that are compatible and would be seen together, not mix things up. Weathering greatly enhances models, and adds inividuality. The results, as you show, are far greater than the sum of the parts. It's also quite fun to tell people at exhibitions that everything they see on the layout can be purchased on the trade stands in the hall.
 
Last edited:
NHY 581

NHY 581

Western Thunderer
Alex W said:
I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but I've read the comments on this thread and the Lambs Leep thread and have some thoughts on the use of rtr. For me, it comes down to time. When I started building Diddington, I made a few decisions, one of which was I wanted to get something running and reasonably presentable within a relatively short space of time. One of those decisions was to use rtr when it was suitable, as I felt I didn't have the time to build everything. I think the thing is to select items that are compatible and would be seen together, not mix things up. Weathering greatly enhances models, and adds inividuality. The results, as you show, are far greater than the sum of the parts. It's also quite fun to tell people at exhibitions that everything they see on the layout can be purchased on the trade stands in the hall.
Click to expand...

Always happy to welcome you to the party Alex.

I agree wholeheartedly with what you say. Time plays a huge part in my approach and try to maximise what little I have.
Also, it's all down to how things are presented. I've had people congratulate me on how nice an EM gauge layout Mutton is then look a tad bewildered when I explain it's PECO code 75.

For me, I am comfortable in my inability to build locos in either scale to the standard of today's RTR and why would I try when so many of the locos I would want are now available or about to emerge. The current standards are pretty high in the world of 4mm RTR and that trend is continuing into 7mm.
This also saves huge amounts of time which I then use to build layouts.
That said, I do want to try different things in 7mm. In having to go with a small (very!) layout, I should have time to spend on building things by using a basis of RTR supported by kits, scratch built buildings and kit built track.
I have no plans to add to the three 4mm layouts currently built............though the Hornby L&SWR Terriers have been released..........and the Bachmann 1P is due in a couple of months....
As ever, we shall see........


Rob.
 
NHY 581

NHY 581

Western Thunderer
Evening all.

Leading on from the above, the Bachmann 1P will end up (for now) on Bleat Wharf. Going forward I would love a 4mm roundy roundy based on Edington Junction. Name wise, I would revert to Eweington Road.

The 1P will operate the branch services to Bleatwater.

As for the Terriers, a nice pre-grouping BLT would be of interest.......maybe lacking fidelity in some areas for the purists but I do like the idea....

Rob.
 
NHY 581

NHY 581

Western Thunderer
Morning all.

Alex W said:
How about a "bitsa" station, so you do part of the station while keeping it in a small space?
Alex
Click to expand...

I can fit a full terminus into my usual 4ft board, Alex.. So a pre-grouping Terrier terminus is achievable but the focus is on the 7mm at present. ( See Lambs Leap thread)


4mm wise, not a lot going on but I did take the opportunity to take some snaps of the trackwork on Sheep Dip.

Here you go...

Rob.

20200723_193007-01.jpeg 20200723_193038-01.jpeg 20200723_192955-01.jpeg 20200723_192932-01.jpeg
 
Alex W

Alex W

Western Thunderer
Looks nice Rob. I've pinched some of your track painting ideas for the latest bits on Yelverton.. Very pleased with the results.
 
Tim Watson

Tim Watson

Western Thunderer
I don’t have any issues with how a layout is built, it is the artistry and overall effect that counts, as shown on these threads.

I like building as much as I can - and CF shows what 36 years time investment from a good group of modellers can produce. Conversely, Lynton, which is much much smaller in scope and a ‘private’ layout, will use a great deal of commercially available stuff, but with careful modifications to produce a scale model: I don’t think I’ll have another 36 years to make a layout!

Tim
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
What's New?
Top