Malcolm 0-6-0

Sounds like some bus schedules I've seen.

I overheard this conversation from the trio in the bottom left hand corner - Him "Bloody typical of these developer blokes. Those buildings were there for a 'undred year and the greedy landlord decided to pull 'em down" Her (blue hat) "Bert stop moanin' I 'ear he's going to put up a pub" Him "A pub?, well oi might have been a bit 'asty then. But mark moi words he'll charge over the odds for a 'alf to pay for building the thing" Her (in grey hat) "Oh get along wi' yer Bert! the proice you charge for this fish you sell, you should be the last to complain about overcharging" Him "Oi watchit, Oi've got this expensive delivery boik to maintain. Yer think air for the tires grows on trees!"

The second one is a little more conventional. I was hunting through eBay for some cheap chassis and came across one of those Triang/Hornby freelance industrials. The price was modest so I bought it. What wasn't mentioned was that it appeared to have been store in a bucket of water and all the bits that could rust had. However the body being plastic wasn't, however it was missing the smokebox door. My first job was to see if I could actually get the motor working. That took a couple of hours and gentle nudging of it with some power. Eventually I got it working. Then it came to the body which was as you can see a virulent shade of red with moulded on detail. Well the colour and the moulded on detail had to go, and it needed to have the handrails replaced with proper ones. The other job was to enlarge the coal bunker and to replace the moulded on access ladders. So here it is.

Over the years I've built a few freelance (for want of a better term) "industrials" using what would otherwise become scrap. Mainly just for the hell of it. There's two that I'd like to post but I'll do it in two posts. Stop it from becoming pic and text heavy. The first is a bit way out. I wondered what a larger Vertical Boilered Tank would look like. I'd picked up a selection of junked chassis on eBay in a job lot and one of those was a powered bogie off some sort of diesel. Its length and prominent engine meant it sat in the spares draw for a couple of years. Then I thought what would it look like if it was turned into a VB 0-4-0? So here it is. It has one unfortunate fault, it runs OK but the engine is enclosed in a plastic box and the noise is pretty loud. It wasn't quiet before I enclosed it and it just got louder. The cab came from a junk Mainline Manor class I picked up while the bunker and water tank are just scratch built. Apart from the cab and chassis it's all Evergreen sheet and I had some spare lengths of ladders, one of which I stuck on the back. The various rails are just wire and knobs. The motor was centrally mounted so where the shaft for the armature protrudes was turned into the funnel.

Lucky indeed, especially for Kevin, who may have had to have his legs shortened just to appease our sight lines ...... Just wondering, are there moves amongst the gentry in Little Muddle to change the name to Muddle Parva?

I once attempted to build a cart in 00 as I was a little stunned by the price of a particular kit. Not a success - somehow I stuffed up the measurements and wound up with what could only be described as an inconveniently over size double wheel wheelbarrow. Nice work so far as we have come to expect.

Another fine job - I really do enjoy watching the process unfold from raw plastic to the final lovely model.

Two pics - the first in progress and the second finished. Not the greatest model accuracy wise but I feel closer to the mark than Hornby's ancient effort with its oversize cab and moulded on detail etc. It was my first attempt at scratch building a loco - I'd done it before with aircraft models so please excuse my then crude metal rod bending skills. Basically the body is based on a length of suitable diameter conduit, added to with Evergreen plastic and assorted scavenged parts. The black finish in the pic has toned downed considerably over time. I get it out occasionally for a run on the track.

First up very nice job on the doors - really look the dog's whatsits. But one thing if I may, and not trying to appear picky, concerns the rather ornamental light in the yard of the adjoining building. To me it looks a little too spiffy, I'd be inclined to go for a simpler light fitting over the door of that building.

A couple of years back I had a nearly similar idea, but it was more like what could I do to make it closer to accurate? I gave up on that fairly quickly as being impossible. I then scrapped the body completely, saved the buffer beams, safety valves, dome and chimney for spares and finished up scratch building a J83. Which while not the most accurate rendition was certainly a lot closer to the J83.

Its interesting how that arched entry to the far right appears to have either got bigger in the later of the two pics, or is that a trick of the camera angle. Certainly there appears to be a enlargement of the window of the room above passage.

Which was one of the problems I was in a vague way alluding to. Our mutual problem is not one of sensible regulation, but one of over regulation which can create harmful collateral effects not considered when apparently sensible changes are not sufficiently examined. As I pointed out in the case of people under 18 being legally unable to buy ordinary kitchen cutlery. The Australian legislative and legal system is pretty much the same as that of the UK. Obviously there are some different approaches in regulations which affect things but broadly speaking we're pretty much identical. And our criminal enterprises are probably the same also and usually arising from fights over control of the lucrative drug trade. In Victoria a few years ago, the police were concerned about their legal difficulties in bringing to trial people known to be involved in firearms related matters, especially possession of illegal firearms. All too often after gang members or in the case of our bike gangs their club houses were raided and illicit arms discovered the police were frustrated because they couldn't pin down who to charge with the offences because they met a wall of silence. So serious criminals were able to escape prosecution. While the illicit arms could be seized those responsible would go free or facing lesser charges - firearms crimes being subject to quite, and understandably, severe penalties. In order to address this matter an amendment to the Firearms Act was drafted and without any consultation was to be submitted to the Parliament. Being involved in these matters in my day job I was made aware of the changes the amendment would make. Now to be clear I personally felt that aim of amendment to close this annoying loophole was acceptable as, being involved in the field I don't want the privileges (not rights along the US model) we legal firearms owners have, eroded because of the actions of a criminal minority. However while the intent was excellent the wording was a disaster. On receiving a draft of the proposed change I immediately contacted by email the Department and the senior adviser who had been responsible for drafting the change. I pointed out that the wording as it stood had the potential to drag into any criminal charges laid, people who were innocent of any involvement simply because they may have been in proximity to the perceived offence. This is dangerous because even if you are innocent and clearly demonstrated to be innocent in the ensuing criminal trial you are subject to costly legal charges and in the case of weapons offences, being deemed a prohibited person which can impact on one's life in all sorts of nasty ways. I pointed out that there needed to be legislative safeguards in place to prevent this. The senior adviser rang me and also, and fortunately replied by email. I say fortunately because being young and enthusiastic they thought that I, being old and beyond retirement age, was someone who needed to be addressed in a condescending and patronising fashion along the lines of "you're concerns are noted but we have studied the matter and you will understand that the expert advice we have received shows that what you are claiming won't happen, etc.". Now having been involved in this area far longer than the person who was lecturing me had been alive, I was not all that mollified by their reply. So I did exactly what was necessary - I circulated the response to my query, with my additional comments, to other senior officials involved in the issue, as well as amongst my contacts in our common area of interest. The result was that the senior adviser who drafted the changes was moved away, and the legislative changes were not put to the parliament. The changes were quietly shelved - I wasn't all that popular in some official circles but that's something that happens. About a year later the change was quickly rushed through the parliament at the end of a a sitting. Guess what happened - the first case that came up under this ill-considered change collapsed on appeal along the lines of what I suggested would happen, much to the chagrin of the authorities and rendered that section of the Act unenforceable until it was redrafted. So that is a small example of what happens when governments lose sight of the need to consider collateral problems when they draft legislation based on "good" intentions. If governments or individuals forget to be careful what they wish for the end results can be at the least embarrassing, and at worst disastrous. So much of what we are seeing in many areas now as the power of social media and the instantaneous transmission of events and reactions are leading us ever more in the direction of legislation being a reaction to something rather than a tool to create something that is of long term benefit but does not erode any further those few privileges and rights we have left.

For Britain and for other Commonwealth countries who have gone down the immediate post-war track of expanding social services etc. the end result has been this dictatorship of "good" intentions. As I watch the way in which people accept gradual erosion of their range of liberties I more and more think that in the end a badly run inefficient private sector enterprise of any kind is far more acceptable than badly run inefficient public sector enterprise of any kind. The reason is that it is far easier for governments to legislate to change laws to achieve their aims than it is for the private sector. The government need only cite a few generally rare cases of whatever calamity, crime etc. and it will get its way. That situation arises because governments can make the laws and, if they have a sizeable majority, can pass them despite demure, while a privately owned industry etc. has to defend itself in the courts if there is opposition. Now graft and corruption can be brought to bear but if done by private industry it becomes publicly apparent far more quickly than if the same erosion of a range of liberties by government, because governments have the draconian powers to render any observation of their decision making process completely impenetrable. They talk of FOI but anyone who had experience of that process knows that it is run by the Circumlocution Office in such a way as to render FOI completely impossible for the average organization, business or individual. Yet for some bizarre reason the citizens that are quite willing to accept erosion of liberties by their elected government will get themselves in a frenzy if a private business does something that inconveniences them. One need only look at the hoops that a developer has to leap through to get a commercial enterprise up and running (especially in Australia) that will have positive economic benefits if completed compared with something like how easy it is for a government to restrict, or make the process of orderly disagreement by citizens nigh on impossible. Or for example the excessive compulsory acquisition of private land for infrastructure development when, in many cases, it is unnecessary except as a place to park construction vehicles for the life of the project. The cost to the citizen who has their house and land acquired in such a way is far greater in all terms (relocation, memories etc.) than the cost to government of acquiring the property. But overall it is the sheep like way in which people are encouraged to overreact to criminal events by government so that they can strengthen laws which restrict activities that generally speaking may be unpopular with some activists. On the sillier side, but which demonstrates the sheep like tendency of people to accept these electioneering stunts as worthwhile policy, I offer one thing in which I was centrally involved in my day job. About 10 years ago in Victoria we had a couple of instances of people (mainly teenagers) attacking each other with imitation swords which were sold quite freely in those sort of shops that sell gifts and collectables. Our government, as ever decided, that these few instances were sufficient reason to move what are essentially toys to the Control of Weapons Act. Items which to a genuine arms historian and collector interested in edged weapons were absolute and unattractive junk. It didn't matter that no one had been attacked with a genuine edged weapon. So many collectors were forced into a regulated system controlled by the Control of Weapons Act, because a handful of teenagers did something stupid. Not to mention that because these things suddenly became illegal unless you could demonstrate a valid reason to own them quite valuable antiques were being crushed willy nilly by the government. Fortunately the organization for which I work was able to put a stop to this and begin serious negotiations with the government to stop the the process and properly examine just who might have a valid reason to own them. But the upshot of this is that in this state it is illegal for a person under the age of 18 to go into a shop and by ordinary kitchen cutlery. Now if a non-government business sought to introduce such silly restrictions they'd be laughed out of business. Ironically by the same "model" citizens who applaud the actions of the government. The government is able to do it because it controls the input to the media by playing the morally bankrupt "in the public interest" card while the majority of citizens are powerless to stop them. We all recognise the need for a government to do something constructive about things like COVID-19 but we seem unaware that with many of the tracking mechanisms there is no real absolute sunset clause. During WW2 many sorts of equipment were impressed for military use. Once the war finished those same items were all returned over a period of time if still in existence, or compensation was offered. In many cases the owners were happy to get the compensation, but if those peculiar circumstances were to happen again how certain are we that our modern caring thoroughly "democratically" elected governments could be trusted not to retain the tightened screws because they find them a useful power.

Would that be the rare Austin Poseur for the discriminating and fashionable motorist?

Yes but they discovered that while a prone pilot was OK with the Gs his chances with a head on collision were minimal .....

Excellent piece of modelling, as usual.

Yes, one does enjoy the bountiful abundance of Hilda.

Now I know we're discussing tolerance etc. with perfect equanimity but admitting that may be a step to far ................

I know I shouldn't laugh but the moment our state government announced the snap 5 day shut down the supermarkets were stripped of toilet paper. It seems to be a genetic feature of human beings. Personally I stocked up on beer, but that's a daily occurrence and isn't COVID related.

A walking advertisement for too much cocaine.

We're on stage 4 until Wednesday midnight unless more community cases pop up. The tracing has narrowed possible contacts with infected people down to half a dozen public localities - fortunately none near me. Bloody nuisance.

We are - there is some dispute at the moment re the nebuliser. He is claiming that he was given permission, the state Health Dept. is denying that. He was offered other medication according to the Health Department. Either way or not, there are a great many people (millions) pissed off by this episode. We had more less got the plague down for the count and then that is destroyed by this. His ID is confidential however there are cries in the media for his identity to be released that's how upset some are. I can't say I blame them in a way - we had basically from mid June to mid November in 2020 in lockdown and the economic damage is huge. Considering that lockdown was caused by idiot security guards who didn't have the brains to even follow basic rules. Hopefully this coming Wednesday will see the end of it. Today I see that the number of confirmed cases is 14, just from this one person.

What is going to happen I think is that there will be two scenarios based on historical examples - 1. In 1912 the sitting President Taft (Rep.) ran for re-election against Woodrow Wilson (Dem.). Theodore Roosevelt who had been Taft's predecessor as Rep. President decided to form a third party and ran against Taft and Wilson. He split the Rep. vote and Wilson got elected. 2. In 1932 Hoover the incumbent President (Rep.) was defeated by Franklin Roosevelt* (Dem.). Hoover's defeat was because of his, and the Republican Party's lamentable record during the Great Depression and in the 1920s. They refused any sort of economic intervention. That led to a Democrat ascendency for 20 years. It lasted until 1952 when Eisenhower (Rep.) was elected President defeating Adlai Stevenson (Dem.). In the first scenario if Trump runs in 2024 he will have with him the thuggish MAGA and Proud Boy elements of the Republican base plus the idiot white Evangelicals. This is the ultra conservative lot. I suspect he'll form his own party while the Republicans will field a candidate who is not tainted by that impeachment farce. That will split the Republicans like in 1912. However the reality maybe that impending criminal suits launched in New York plus civil suits launched by the families of the people killed in that little insurrection incited by Trump will so damage the Trump name by then that he won't run. Either way the Democrats will win because after this episode the Republican Party has lost all credibility - except in that ultra right wing core group of Evangelicals, MAGA and Proud Boys. In the second scenario (which I think more likely), Trump won't run in 2024 because the aforesaid law suits will have either rendered him ineligible, or simply unelectable. Plus Trump is not noted for long term persistency and his businesses are financially troubled. The Republicans will try to find a candidate not sullied by the Jan 6. insurrection. There are some, or it could be a state governor who has steered clear of the DC mess. While the Democrats probably led by Harris will win. Biden by then will really be too old. I think that such is the sour taste in the mouths of the majority of US voters that the Republicans will need years to rebuild their name. The acquittal was not a satisfactory response from the Republican Party. 20 years in the wilderness is unlikely but it will be some time. Bear in mind that the Republicans had a 12 year ascendency under Reagan (elected 1980) for two terms followed by George Bush Snr. Elected 1988) for one term. That ended in 1992. Just my thoughts, and I could be completely wrong ...... (I apologise I'm a US politics junkie which is strange for an Australian I admit). * The two Roosevelts were actually distant cousins from different branches of the family. Which explains their political differences.

It basically turned his whole room into an airborne COVID cloud. This escaped when staff opened his door to deliver food. His family was in the room with him and they also caught it. The people who delivered the food got it as well - this new strain is super infectious.

Well just as an update from the antipodes (Victoria, Australia) we were just landed with a 5 day snap lockdown because some asthmatic in quarantine from returning from the UK dropped your version of the plague on us. He was using a nebuliser which in effect turned his hotel room into a vapour cloud of infection which got into the AC. Damn good thing we're use to lockdowns, however he may still be lynched. Nebulisers are on the banned list - he was offered other forms of treatment. Geez we'd been going well.