Barry Rhys

Lovely job, Castle. I Shell BP-leased to see what Stefan Mex of his too. Not too subtle though. It Texaco-at of muck for a tank wagon to look realistic. Think I'd better go now... Neil

Sorry Andy, have to say I think the fourth one is not a reasonable response. I think you should change it to: And add a fifth one: Neil

Hello Charlie, what with me being a recalcitrant hippopotamus, anything with "MUD" in the title is of immediate interest. I'm just sooo jealous of the bloke with the cool hat and wellies shovelling sh*te! (In fact - surely not? - that picture on your wall in the bottom piccy could almost be a fellow hippo!) Anyway, less of this idle chatter, actually I wanted to let you know that your embedded link 'www.ingr.co.uk/faring' is actually embedded as 'http://http//www.ingr.co.uk/faring.html%22>http://http//www.ingr.co.uk/faring.html' - and therefore doesn't function very well.... You may want to edit that! Nonetheless I found the actual website, and there's some fascinating stuff on there, even for a standard-gauger like me. Do you intend to include any of the water in the clay pit lapping alongside the mini-digger? I'll definitely keep looking in on this now. Neil

Hi Stuart (and other contributors to this thread), Just to clear up a possible misunderstanding, the "Dunalastair V Pickersgill 4-4-0" referred to by Coach is in fact the "Caledonian Pickersgill 4-4-0" loco voted on in the poll. Actually the real Dunalastair "family" (four classes generally known as Dunalastairs I - IV) were all built by McIntosh between 1896 and 1910, but three further classes of 4-4-0 subsequently built by Pickersgill between 1916 and 1922 are commonly referred to as Dunalastair V's. It would be a little unhelpful of me to suggest now - particularly since I've not contributed anything earlier - that maybe the 22 votes for the Pickersgill 4-4-0 and the 8 votes for the "Dunalastair" 4-4-0 probably reflect a "group" vote for a Caley 4-4-0 type, particularly since the North British "Glen" and "Scott" 4-4-0 votes quite possibly similarly reflect a common desire for an NB 4-4-0 type (and likewise the Caledonian Jumbo and 812 Classes for a Caley 0-6-0!), but hopefully at least people may see that there is not such a wide 'fragmentation' of wishes across widely differing types, which may be thought to be the case at a quick glance at the poll results. This isn't meant to question any of your points Stuart, just to clear up a possible point of confusion. As a Caley modeller, I appreciate that you and others here are actually trying to do something instead of simply talking about it. Neil

And, given that my experience in the saddle is limited to many hours on a series of 531-framed touring bikes, and that as a toddler I was too frightened of the beach donkeys at Barry Island to even conceive of going near them (they were just so bloody big!), I'm also happy to hand over the reins (didn't you see that one Nick?) of equine advisor to 57xx. Mikkel, I'm also a regular reader of your blog, I think the atmosphere you manage to portray in your photos is fantastic. I had previously found the gwr.org site and read all of the modelling articles several times - especially the RTR- and kitbashing projects for the Triang clerestories and Ratio 4-wheelers. But until your mention above, I had never realised you were its compiler, so thanks for all the inspiration. One thing I notice about your gwr.org site (and this blog obviously!) is the high standard of photography. I have read many RTR-bashing articles in 60's and 70's Railway Modellers, MRConstructors etc (a long series of articles by Terry Gough on making Southern Coaches from Triang clerestories and Graham Farish suburbans is a good example) that could potentially inspire today's modellers to have a go at crossbreeding their favourite locos and coaches instead of incessantly crying out for the ready-served version, but the articles were frequently let down (my opinion only) by uninspiring photos. This is not a criticism of the modellers, but more a comment on how much the illustration of an article can affect the project's appeal. So seeing a picture like this: http://www.gwr.org.uk/ego/c22large2.jpg illustrating your article on the C22 conversion really makes me want to try it myself, even though I'm not even a GWR modeller! I would definitely recommend any modeller to look at the projects on that site, irrespective of their era/regional/scale interests (and as it's costing you dosh to keep the site archived, your generosity is appreciated). Anyway, having set your standards sufficiently high that the level of discussion of detail has reached the shape of the horse's legs and whether a label on Agnes Wilkinson's luggage would read Ms or Miss, might I suggest that, for an Edwardian lady (even a suffragette), maybe the shape of Ms Wilkinson's legs is a little too visible? I have a feeling that the length and style of her dress, and particular the rather rakish style of the hat, is more reminiscent of the 40's and 50's than the Edwardian period - though I'm not a fashion expert by any means. What do you think Mikkel? Actually, the longer I look, the more I think the lady looks amazingly like Margaret Thatcher - the nose, the hair, straight back, everything!! I'm just going to go back now and gaze at those first and fifth photos taken beneath the platform awning. Just stunning! Look forward to the next additions. Neil

Mick, they're lovely models of wagons that actually look like they're being used - specially the faded 'NE' on the first one. Out of interest, what are the hairy bits sticking out of the top of the first one - is it a load, or just an accident? Do the D&S castings include interior detail (planks, door edges, bolt heads etc)? - if you happen to have a piccy of the inside of either of these wagons, I'd be interested in seeing it. Now my "why do you always have to spoil it" comment - God, I'm starting to feel guilty before I've even made it: Have a look at the brakes on No.714420. As far as I can see, put the brake lever down, and the brakes will come even further off... Interestingly, although it's an easy mistake to accidentally fit a standard lever to the brake side of a Morton-braked wagon (and the corresponding Morton-clutched lever to the non-brake side), you appear to have 2 sets of Morton-style 'left-over-right' brakes on the same wagon B) . Are the 2 models of the same wagon type? (I notice they have different axlebox types, but otherwise appear identical.) The first wagon is correct for 'either side' brakes, ie. twin v-hangers each side (I think - though I'm not certain from the photo) and separate 'right-over-left' brakes each side. So on the D&S wagons, are the brake sets reversible to make 'left-over-right' from 'right-over-left' (that is, brake shoe and rivet detail on front and back of the brake castings - in which case they would be ideal for the spares box!), and you've accidentally fitted them the wrong way round? Or have you managed to raid the spares box for 2 sets of Mortons from other wagons (stop sniggering at the back there...)?? Well I've seen enough high-quality modelling from you to think you'll take this info like a man, and not beat me up when you see me. Please feel free to enquire when I'm going to get off my a*se and actually do some modelling myself Look forward to seeing some more Scottish stuff too. Neil