Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sotto

  1. That makes sense from simple observation - I back onto the Waterloo- Kingston - Waterloo loop line, and all the gardens have their own fences, with a gap to the railway fence. The gap isn't really big enough to be useful for maintenance, but the gardens have been here since 1880s and have no doubt gradually encroached on the gap. Digging at the end of my garden reveals a ditch parallel to the line and filled with rubbish (broken bottles etc). I suspect this was the original boundary and there would then have been useful space between the two.
  2. That's a whole new topic. I'll add 'getting a trackpin (or other sharp object) stuck behind your thumbnail.'
  3. Look, I am not suggesting it is some sort of swindle or conspiracy . It is a high cost sales model, rather like selling insurance door to door used to be. Both lead to the cost of the product being higher than it otherwise would be. Neither are conspiracies or cons. In addition it has the potential for problems caused by the numerous transactions required where one would occur in a conventional sale. You may think the way they are sold is totally fair and they are good value- that's fine. I don't think so and that's fine too. There is not much point arguing because we clear
  4. Well, a bit of googling reveals only complaints; Hachette have a Trust pilot score of 93% Bad or Poor out of 232 reviews, mainly around customer service . I know that people who are happy don't write reviews but that's still not good- and the fact that you have to interact in the first place with customer service means there was a problem which you would prefer not to have had, even if you are happy with the solution. And there is so much more scope for problems with this business model than a normal sale. The forum is going to be populated mainly by serious hobbyists who know how
  5. I was half hoping for a contrary view, so thank you- I would like to have faith in traders in general! Nevertheless, you are taking a risk that you would not take with a conventional purchase (failure to produce for whatever reason, not just insolvency). It may be a small risk but its still there. I did not realise how big Hachette were- I just associate them with partworks. Interestingly the Wikipedia article you reference mention problems with missing parts- which is one of the issues I would anticipate. Also surely there is an inevitable value problem- yo
  6. Who knows? I was not making a judgement on whether it was worth £1200; my issue is with the deceptive method of selling and the risk that you won't get all of it. Although you are also asked to take it on trust that it is worth £1200.I wouldn't buy a finished model for that price, unseen by me or any one else, unreviewed, just from a manufacturers advert. It's a gamble. It might payoff, it might not.
  7. Looks fairly sharp practice to me. Not immediately obvious that it costs £1200; the number of issues is lurking in the FAQs. And the ridiculously large increase in price per part after initial £2.99. I know you can work these things out from the advert, but they are relying on people signing up without noticing the actual cost, many of whom will not see it through so will have been ripped off. If you are happy with the cost, what guarantee do you have of getting all the parts? You could spend £1000 and end up with part of a model if they cease trading. Essentially you are gambling
  8. Not just Kings Cross; I remember being accosted by ladies of the night just around the side of Leeds main station. No doubt all been gentrified since, but I think it was within the last 20 years, so legitimate modelling territory even for recent times. Obviously though, they were/are not naked -that seems a bit unnecessary on a layout to me, but other views are valid as well!
  9. It's not just cars and models! I was told not so long ago by some builders of fast jets that the F35 Lightning was the first jet that left their factory with an absolutely straight fuselage. Previous efforts like the Eurofighter (Typhoon) were built banana shaped so on first flight would display natural tendency to turn left/turn right/climb/descend which had to be calibrated out by adjusting controls so that input equalled output.
  10. Well, we are all playing with toys, whether it is model trains or unnecessarily fast cars!
  11. Going back to the start of this topic, I think there is something in the OP's point, even if it was partly just intended to spark off a discussion (a success if so!). It is about the options out there, now that O gauge is so much more affordable. Most (all) of us are constrained by some blend of budget, space, and modelling time/skill. If for example you have a space of 9 ft by 2 feet and a budget of say £750, you could build something interesting in N, OO, or O. It won't be the same thing in each scale, but it can give just as much pleasure, perhaps to different people. Not N fo
  12. Perhaps slightly off topic, but there are some interesting old petrol stations here, just waiting to be modelled. https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=23&t=1493362&i=340
  13. It isn't that long ago that people got their drinking water through lead pipes ; not a good idea but even then it took a very long period of constant taking in small amounts of lead to do any harm. To occasionally touch the stuff is harmless! Handwashing always a good idea anyway.
  14. That's probably it- I was working in the City in 1991 when that happened so I'd have been aware of it. But the report shows the buffers stayed compressed, so rebound cannot have been the issue. I'm going to find out! https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/HSE_Cannon1991.pdf
  15. I thought those 'new' additional frames were to prevent the buffers pushing back out after they were compressed? I m fairly sure there was an incident (at a London terminal?) where a train hit buffers at low speed, but damage and injury was caused by the rebound. I might be imagining this though!
  16. Yes, I'd already seen that in your narrow gauge thread. I like it! I have been experimenting- the Budget Model Railway people seem to thing you are limited to very small locos in their 18 inch diametre layout- although they do comment that an old Triang Hymek will do it. Actually various older models will do it- especially the old short coaches and short DMUs contemporary to the Hymek. Of course you still have to hide the bends or it looks daft (not sure I care about that) and clearance is an issue, so 0-16.5 is a great solution.
  17. This video was a bit of an eye opener for me- I had always assumed oo gauge needed minimum radius 18 inches- ie diametre 3 feet. With care, obviously not so. A small oo roundy roundy just for fun is now on my list!
  18. A couple of bicycles? Bound to be some employees arriving by bike.
  19. If you do decide to try polish the easy to find alternative (in your own bathroom) is toothpaste, especially the ones that claim to be 'whitening'. But that doesn't look like fine scratches, and anyway fine scratches occur in use, not in storage, so I expect 34 is right.
  20. I am with you on o-16.5- my last completed layout was o-16.5, but it was deliberately intended as a minimum cost layout using up bits and pieces I already owned + kits and modified oo stock- with hindsight a little more ambition could have lead to something like you describe. As it was, it was just an end to end. This lead to a dangerous interest in O gauge- but I really have room only for a shunting plank. It's the buildings etc that really appeal in this scale so I am not out buying £750+ locos! And I have a fair amount of OO gauge stock currently unused.
  21. End to end's seem like the purist option to me somehow, probably because as a child it never occurred to me that a layout could be anything other than a roundy roundy. Now, I would love to have room for a roundy roundy, and I really don't see why that should not be combined with some sidings for shunting. I'll just have to dream!
  22. I have actually got one of those circular levels (for levelling record playing turntables) and had never thought of using it for track laying-- Duh!!
  23. Gloss versus matt is a minefield! It seems to be received wisdom that matt is the way to go for OO and N gauge owing to apparent viewing distances, and it is probably a best approximation, even for clean stock. Consistency again. But back in the real world we have all seen the sun glint off a parked car on a clear day perhaps half a mile away- easily N gauge viewing distance. That would look very odd in model form even if it could be replicated. And then videos of models introduce a third reality- I imagine those tinplates look more realistic in a video than in reality. Certainly tha
  24. This has got me thinking about what it is that creates the illusion of reality. There is more to it than just detail and proportion.. We started off here referring to 0-16.5. One thing I like about this is that it allows the use of 1:43 road vehicles. I like real cars- so let’s have them on the layout! But there is an immediate dilemma. Modern ones are more detailed, more easily found, and are (generally) at their claimed scale, so why do I prefer 1960s/70s die casts? One obvious reason is that they require restoration which is itself fun (I wouldn’t pay for a perfect one anyway
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.