maq1988

Would be an interesting test case. I'm sure the pre-order book was a strong consideration for taking on the IP. Hatton's privacy policy does state "We may also share or transfer your data with third parties should all or some of its business transfer to another party. " The reading of 'its' is important here. Does its refer to Hattons themselves - or - another third party such as a delivery firm that was going to be used but later was changed. Rightly, Hattons could have contacted all pre-orders to say "go contact Rails or you get nothing at all, we aren't sending your details over", leaving Rails in a position they've paid for just the IP that might have no interest and maybe people miss this transfer communication and their pre-orders do not get done. Or, Hattons takes the risk to send the data to Rails to try and keep the majority of people happy but run the risk of falling foul of the law. There are some examples and cases that cover selling of personal data during an insolvency, but nothing that I can find easily about a voluntary business closure.

I don't fully disagree, but you swap the incorrect placement of holes of wire handrails that have a prototypical 'gap' behind them, but the wrong overall profile shape - for moulded handrails that are the right profile shape, but without the 'gap' behind them. Either is a compromise. (I'm buying a few either way the handrails are done. Hopefully the 45s and 46s come along soon after. From my viewing distance I'm sure I'd never notice which way round they are 😄 )

Oddly I would say the opposite, I think you are far more likely to damage the surrounding bodywork scraping off a block of moulded plastic than popping out two contact points for a wire

Another vote for wire - I'm sure if someone was inclined they could replace the wire version with a suitable home-made alternative more to profile.

I won't comment on eye science, but having read the piece my thoughts between the first and second picture is multi-parted. The first feels more real. The first looks like it was taken in natural light, this provides a softness. Yes the scenic detail is there as well but basic, giving rise to weathered track and the corrugation of the building in the background. There's shadow, and greenery. The colour of the chute is okay - it's not wild pink or something untamed. Dark grey isn't amiss here. This adds to the realism I perceive. The second photo, of 2296 is bland, I'd say unnatural light showing a harsh bare trackbed. The building behind is basic with no detail, no weathering. No shadows. The only colour is the stark red of the wagon, and the yellow of the locomotive. The eye is forced to notice these objects. You mention the block background for photo 1, whilst it's extremely flat it is overpowered by the scene and colours in front so my eye isn't drawn to it. The second photo background is busy, multiple shapes and colours. The immersion is lost. Perhaps a lack of depth of field is due to the first photo having tracks clearly at the front of the picture with the siding behind giving feel of depth, and the second has little reference in the foreground to how far away the track is in the scene. There's also more '3D' in the first, the angle taken just above the chute gives an idea of size, where the only real thing to compare to in the second is maybe the roof, I assume it is meant to be pitched but it looks almost vertical. EDIT: To those who can 'see' what the finished scene in picture 2 is meant to be have a better visual imagination than I. From that photo I would struggle to understand what I was meant to be seeing develop. Anyway, I'm rambling as well and have about as much knowledge on the subject as a wet teaspoon.

Wow, okay. I'm sure you didn't mean it quite how it's been taken but there's plenty of skilled young people who are good enough to run a large exhibition. If you've got younger members in your club who seem to be interested but struggling. Then teach. Clubs keep saying come along and learn new modelling skills from others - would we say a young newcomer to a club might not have the 'aptitude' to build a kit, or wire a layout. How do they learn to improve... you teach. If clubs are after people in their 20s, 30s, 40s let's not forget these people may not even have time to attend regular clubs. They've got full time employment, young families and other commitments. They might not have time that older retired people have, to sit and plan, call/email layout owners / venues to organise a large show.

Ah that's a disappointment, I missed 2023 and was looking forward to this year. That said, it's been many years of great shows with much logistics that goes on behind the scenes - the club members and all involved must be praised. The Warley club has done an amazing job every year to get things up and going at the NEC. My best to the Warley club and it's members.

Shocked, didn't expect that news - saddened for those who are losing jobs and for those who've helped bring models to a competitive market. Not an easy thing to do. Hopefully an orderly closure allowing staff time to move on to other things. The customer service staff were always polite on the phones and emails.

No sympathy for WCRC on this, but my parents were caught out this week by the cancellation. A trip they'd been looking forward to for months. I'm sure now they've been shut down it'll be resolved as it's a money maker.

There's a board in a socket just behind one of the cab ends (Co side), that would be where the decoder goes.

I couldn't make it to Warley... yay for late arriving COVID! I'm really glad to see PECO is still investing in N gauge. Whilst it looks not to be a direct updated version of their kits (which were a cheapish way to get a decent rake together) the images posted look really good.

Another nice addition - thank you Rapido for continuing to support this scale. I'll have a few of these.

N gauge please Rapido!

£100 is quite a lot but I'm torn between a what if RTC or a BR livery in Teak

The author of that piece says in a comment at the side that people paying for access to the content they appreciate "seems like a great idea". If people aren't going to pay £12 to remove adverts for a year I doubt people would pay to access RMweb at all. Something (or someone) has to keep the lights on. I agree with other commenters some of the adverts are distracting/offputting/off-topic. In line video is a particular peeve of mine. I would be willing to give up two £6 PECO wagon kits and instead pay for ad-free RMweb for a year.

Then blame the algorithms used to generate the adverts, that's beyond Andy's control. Ironic, that the website you use to link to justify using adblockers itself has 'You have 2 free member-only stories left this month. Sign up for Medium and get an extra one' at the top of the page... what's that, if not paying for content? There might not be adverts - so pay for content. Put all of RMweb behind a paywall?

The full page video adverts are kind of annoying between posts - how else do you recommend keeping the place running? You don't want to pay, but you want to use.

Is your monitor a full screen (square) display or widescreen like a TV? 1280x1024 seems very compact for today's web. A widescreen resolution should push the advert to the right a bit more away from the main white text viewing area

Did you at least end up with double the ad revenue? :D As a techie myself, I can only apologise.

Bold strategy - users want to use a 'free' website. Website costs money to run... website has no income... website shuts down. I say this as a non-RMWeb Gold member. £12/yr isn't much for effectively what has been a free service for years. Problems - yes there have been. Loss of photos was a big one recently. One hopes lessons have been learnt. Database performance was another last year. I didn't sign up with my electricity provider for massive price hikes, but if the bill isn't paid the lights go out. I can hook my bike to a generator and pedal for free though. Andy said the forum was over 1TB in size when photos issue happened, who is paying for backups, maintenance, hosting, moderation, bandwidth fees, software licensing costs... ? Is there an argument to be had about the definition of an obtrusive ad, maybe? Personally I'd prefer them to be static and not the pop-over style like the Digitrains one.

I'd hope the opposite may happen, if TT does start taking hold then maybe Farish will re-evaluate prices to being 'competitive'. I do find it daft that an N coach can cost the same as one in OO when there's much less material to use... labour costs and lower overall production volume isn't taken into account though. Hornby think there's a market for a smaller scale, an as an N modeller it's not a surprise I'd think the logicial choice would have been to move to a smaller, but existing marketplace. Oh can you imagine if Hornby brought their OO range to N gauge.

I wonder if we'll ever see these released as an addition to the plastic kit range - I'd be happy to assemble + paint some myself. I know the 10ft wheelbase kits have their issues but it was a nice cheapish way to build up a quick rake of basic wagons.

I'd put forward "it depends what you want" from modelling. I model N because I want longer more prototypical trains. N isn't for shunting or constant loco swapping. The same could be said for O and space being used as an argument against it as 20+ wagon freights is far too large. A lot has been promised on TT:120 - but let's see how it goes. I wouldn't say TT is irrelevant but it does muddy the waters somewhat. At the moment Hornby 'only' have 88 items of rolling stock in the TT range whereas they've got something like 250+ coaches alone in OO. It's going to take a while for TT to settle in. I think it depends on Bachmann's take as they've now invested in OO9. Can they afford to move into yet another scale and not potentially annoy their OO and N customer base through more perceived lack of focus? Hornby's page for TT:120 says a 'good' size OO layout is 6x4, IMHO that's barely enough room to get OO track to do a 180. PECO TT doesn't even have set radius curves in the range right now. I'd like to see a starter fiddle with flexitrack to get around a bend easily. We've veered off topic, only Bachmann really know what the future holds for their product line. I welcome more entrants into the N space, should they see a market for it.

I wonder how big a production run they did on those - it's likely produced so it went with the matching 31. I did get the ModelZone Exclusive RTC Class 24 and matching RTC coaches a few years back. I'm now looking at some of the old split chassis models to convert to basic DCC control. Viewing from a few feet away some of the lack of newer detail could be forgiven. Though these can now command a hefty price second-hand.

There surely comes a point that if you can't actually get production capacity your business becomes at risk - not that I expect it'd be feasible for Bachmann or any manufacturer to be able to purchase their own equipment now to produce models either in the UK or abroad, PECO being the exception as they seem to already have injection moulding machines. You can't please everyone. I have no interest in Sealink Mk1s or Birdcage stock. I'm sure someone does. It's such an odd mix on the website. I don't know how Bachmann decide on what to do next but maybe just releasing set batches would be useful. Do BR Maroon, then B&C, then Blue&Grey, so on until you get back around. (They may already do this)