Headstock

Because some people think it is ok to do it, they can't see that it is a crime that can have serious consequences, If you don't think it is as serious as other crimes mentioned above, you might wish to look at the theft of images in the catfishing case associated with the Delphi murders, horrific! Image theft is a crime, no better than breaking into a house and steeling from the owners.

Evening Apollo, If that is the case, why have you set your images to C All rights reserved on your Flickr settings? Wouldn't under creative commons be more appropriate, if you don't mind people using your images? Do you know how to change you settings?

People don't take image theft seriously, until something serious happens. In cases were photographs of peoples family, kids and Grand kids have been taken without permission and digitally manipulated, people suddenly have a much better appreciation for the law. Just recently in America, there was an instance related to a famous case, were a man stole online photographs from a trendy young mans website. He then used the photographs to pretended to be that young man, in order to set up a catfishing operation to lure young girls. I'm sure that there are plenty of fans of Roberts work, such as yourself, who would supply him with free photographs if he was to actually ask for them.

Good Afternoon Robert, I don't wish to embarrass you by physically pointing out were you are not using public domain images. I've just looked at one of your images and found were you have got the original image from. The person that originally posted it holds the copywrite and makes it very clear that it is covered by 'All rights reserved'. At the very least, you must seek permission of the copywrite holder if you wish to use the image and provide a credit. It's simple with copyright images, illegal, don't use it. Legal, provide a credit. The responsibility is yours to check if the original image is genuinely in the public domain or not. This particular image makes it quite clear it is not. All i'm asking of you, is if you use copywrite images, seek the permission of the copywrite holder and provide a credit. Some people will say yes, others may wish a payment, some will say no.

Good afternoon Robert, I'm not keen on the way you do things rather than what you do, you sometimes take other peoples artwork, other peoples photographs and other peoples paintings and coble them together and claim it as your own work. I can see were you are getting some of your material from and it is not right. You provide no credits for sources and I doubt that you have asked permission of the copyright holders. I'm a working artist who has had his work stolen in the past and used to advertise somebody else's digital services. I can tell you now, I sued their asses. The pandemic has been a difficult financial time for many creatives, especially freelancers. Their work is their income and their reputation. As for those who support what you are doing, no doubt they are in financial clover but the shoe would very quickly be on the other foot if it was their work that was being misappropriated. Perhaps you would consider crediting the artwork and photographs that you are using or at least provide reassurance that you have received the creative persons permission to use their work. Expensive stock photography may not be an option for your hobby but I'm sure that if you can't do so yourself, those who support you would be willing to go out and take suitable photographs for you to use. Tony or others may be able to help in this regard.

Good morning Tony, as you wish.

Good morning David, that's far more than just a photo of a RTR loco.

Good day Chas, I have a soft spot for the SEF V2, yours displays a great deal of craftsmanship and skill.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

That's and interesting wagon, should I be triggered?

Afternoon Mick, you can pick fault with anything. However, I would much rather look at your V2 or Tony's V2 or any of the other stuff that people build, faults and all. This thread is rather rapidly becoming just another display cabinet for RTR loco photography, kind of boring.

Afternoon Andrew, it seems like you have a similar situation to myself, I will use RTR quite happily when I want to. Though being inspired by the real railway rather than wish lists, the major manufactures rather surprisingly don't deliver that much of use to myself. Once a decade they do and I snap it up. I found myself in a similar position to yourself with the Bachmann V2 but concerning the Hornby A2/3. It was bought as a quick fix, mainly as a B16 backup loco but had a number of assembly issues that required a rebuild. It also needs a repaint so swapping it out for a replacement was pointless. It will probably stand idle for sometime as I have also decided to build the last few of my kits. Having seen the Bachmann effort, a Comet Trice Crownline V2 will probably displace the A2/3 anyway. I haven't given up on RTR locomotives completely, I will try the new A5 tank but if I am dissatisfied in anyway it will go back, no more adding to the cue.

Good morning Andrew, it's far too clunky looking for a V2 IMO. My own impression, in addition to your own comments, is that the running board valance on both loco and tender looks to thick. There is also some ill defined ugliness going on with the underside of the boiler, this area is so open on the prototype and hard to get right on a model. The LNER livery looks mostly good, excepting around the spectacle plate firebox band as you mention. I's a shame that Hornby couldn't have applied the same finish to the A2/3, it would have been the finest mass produced 4 mm LNER loco in my opinion. Based on photographs only of this model, I think that there are plenty of kit built V2's about that are better than this loco. I am rather pleased I ordered two of the Mike Trice bodies while the opportunity presented itself. One caveat on your review, are you taking measurements from the written instructions on the isinglass drawing or measuring the drawing itself? If the latter, this is a no no, the isinglass drawings are not accurate enough to do this. Even on a works drawing, you should go by the written sizes and not measure the drawing itself.

Good morning Tony, I understand your point but your original question was, why don't you get involved with Hornby? I'm only trying to answer the question. Your points are probably doing a better job of answering your own question.

Good evening Tony, Not a criticism, but worth noting how the case of the 'sci-fi bogies' leaves me outside the mainstream and the orbit of the RTR manufactures. The 'sci-fi bogies' are a good example of this, because I don't need an extravagant design solution, that side steps but doesn't necessarily deal with the real problem. I would never need to produce such a complication, because I was taught that good track work is paramount before any stock starts to roll. Get the track right and everything else gets a whole lot easier.

Good morning Tony, some interesting points as usual. I think that paragraph two hints at why I wouldn't be interested in paragraph one. Hornby and I are involved in different, though parallel hobbies and for different reasons. I have used the Mail coach style of articulation. However, I haven't compared the two directly in a controlled manner, both work under the conditions they are intended for. The articulated bogies of my examples that employ different pivot positions, are quite different in the wheelbase. As a result, a direct comparison of how one compared to the other would be slanted. Re the last paragraph. I don't think it's a case of forgetting about the majority of railway modelers, I'm not against purchasing RTR products for myself. Unfortunately the manufactures don't provide a lot of products that I would want to buy. When I did indulged in a tip top product last year, presumably aimed at the vast majority of railway modelers, it made me sad, as it required lots of work to correct it's defects and bring it up to the standard of the illustration in the advert.

Good evening Tony, my latest twins have a 4 Millennial or 5/32 of a red faced Boomer between the articulated ends. They ride on center pivot articulated bogie, though the pivot doesn't take the weight. They are designed to negotiate a 3 Boomer or 914.4 Millennial curve. This they do with aplomb. The underframe on the dia. 210 is actually identical to the Twin FO-FO, though the three bogies are of different types. I must take some new pictures of the twin under construction, as the time consuming process of weathering, transfers, varnishing, glazing and adding the door furniture is now complete*. I have to confess, if I broke into the Hornby secret experimental lab, I wouldn't care too much for a sci-fi bogie, designed for use on the carpet in the linen closet. What about your made up wagons and mutant Gresley's, would be my battle cry, just before I was I was ejected from the premises. This is the original completed twin, it only ran at one exhibition, although it was a five day event. It ran without a problem. * Drying time mainly, though the glazing of compartment door carriages is always a bit of a marathon rather than a sprint.

Good evening Tony, the presence of a RTR twin FO-FO in BR condition, does not mean that the South Yorkshireman or Master Cutler can be accurately modelled, unless hobbyists are prepared to build some other carriages to run with the twin. In the case of the South Yorkshireman, the twin FO-FO only ran in the formation for a couple of months before being transferred to the Master Cutler. It remained in the Master Cutler service until the name only was transferred to a not very successful ECML service.

Morning Jesse, there's probably a caption in that but I won't push my luck.

Meanwhile.....

Good afternoon Tony, both the terms Cement mixer and Space ship came from the London extension. The GC had a long tradition of bestowing locomotives with nicknames, from Jersey Lillie to Pom Pom, Tiny's and those NER bloodspitter things.

It must be Thursday, crazy caption competition time.

Good afternoon Mick, nice to see a painted teak NER carriage. One of my Fathers recollections, that he would retell from when he was a little lad, was seeing NER carriages in painted teak. They looked completely convincing and very smart apparently. They were often much nicer than the real teak carriages, especially the ex GNR old bangers. I already have a GER van or two, a third would be an extravagance, so if I become so inclined, I could just about get away with a single Nana van. I haven't got a lot of RTR wagons, a few 1923 RCH minerals, some LNER steel opens and vans and a couple of Guards van conversions. All have been quite good. I'm full of hate for your evil wagon*. For sheeting, I use super market till receipts and O gauge Helvetica transfers for the numbers etc. *Honest.

I'm thinking it is rather a shame about the clutch situation, though easily corrected, even if you don't have a second van. The modeling of the AVB on the Banana van goes further than any previous representation in RTR. I could find a place for the Oxford model amongst a raft of my own kit built Banana vans, they represent empties returning to Southampton docks.

Morning John, yes, that's why I asked the question. It turned out that BR clasp brake gear wasn't being used to describe BR clasp brake gear, rather the LMS system on BR builds.