Jump to content
 

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium

I've posted w/o a detailed analysis of panel heights, as I wanted to get in before the Hattons people go to their exhibition this weekend. The Earley Railway Carriage & Wagon Co's drawing office staff have been on overtime as it is.

Edited by Compound2632
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

has our Mayor been in correspondence with the Manchester Guardian ?

 

Suzi Quatro in her leather catsuit on TOTP and going to see Jenny Agutter in 'Walkabout' at the local Arts Centre for an English Lesson in '73 set the tone for my ideal woman..

..long after I'd had a bit of a thing that i didn't really understand at the time for Emma Peel..

 

Mr mayor back to the railway if you please 

 

Nick

  • Like 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 06/10/2019 at 22:15, Andy Kirkham said:

 

At the risk of pontificating on a subject I know little,I have the impression  that Boulton & Paul, along with Blackburn enjoyed a kind of charmed existence, continuing over many years to receive government orders for new designs despite producing nothing but duds.

 The original B&P were primarily furniture manufacturers ! They did a lot of sub-contracting for the larger aircraft firms, selling off their aircraft division in the 1930s. The B&P Overstrand was actually very advanced for its time featuring as it did the first fully enclosed and rotatable nose gun turret ( an old vacuum-formed 'kit'  of the Overstrand from the 1970s is stashed away in CKPR's big box of non-railway modelling distractions).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2019 at 18:25, ChrisN said:

I have, like others, given up on that thread, but if the hard work of you and James helps to make the final product better, all to the good.  Well done for your efforts

Agreed - I was going to make the point on that thread that this was rather like going back to the days of Exley's generic coaches in a multiplicity of 'authentic' liveries but then decided, probably wisely, not to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
7 minutes ago, CKPR said:

 The original B&P were primarily furniture manufacturers ! They did a lot of sub-contracting for the larger aircraft firms, selling off their aircraft division in the 1930s. The B&P Overstrand was actually very advanced for its time featuring as it did the first fully enclosed and rotatable nose gun turret ( an old vacuum-formed 'kit'  of the Overstrand from the 1970s is stashed away in CKPR's big box of non-railway modelling distractions).

They were also famous for Dog kennels and used to advertise in  the doggy press and have a stall at Crufts...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, CKPR said:

Agreed - I was going to make the point on that thread that this was rather like going back to the days of Exley's generic coaches in a multiplicity of 'authentic' liveries but then decided, probably wisely, not to.

 

It ain't what you say, it's the way that you say it ...!

 

 

While we are on the subject of British aircraft named for obscure English places and minor seaside resorts, who can forget the Bristol Bisley?

 

685634346_BristolBisley.jpg.4018de644437ac68b11fa68ccc6eef26.jpg

 

 

Or, indeed, probably the worst British Light Bomber of the war, the egregious Fairey Frinton? 

 

1593967223_FaireyFrinton.jpg.795f4e67cc8b9262e147bbcac932aeae.jpg

 

 

 

Edited by Edwardian
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jwealleans said:

 

Might have been useful if we'd ever fallen into conflict with an Incontinental power rather than a Continental one......

 

Ha!

 

Do I recall correctly that you are demonstrating at Hartlepool this coming weekend?  

 

If so, I may see you on Sunday.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was going to post recently on a Facebook thread about the paucity of modern models of US RTR 0-6-0s with something about how they are all the rage in the U.K. RTR scene (with the proviso that an 0-6-0 can be a relatively far larger loco in the U.K. than the US) and that none were foobies, in fact that the U.K. had moved away from generic models (at least in the non-trainset market) and no new mouldings had been produced for years. I’m now glad that Bradway Tunnel meant I lost my post and I couldn’t be bothered to re-type it...

Edited by Talltim
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Edwardian said:

Or, indeed, probably the worst British Light Bomber of the war, the egregious Fairey Frinton? 

 

I thought that post was held by its sister, the Fairey Battle (a near-coastal town!)

 

Fairey_Battle.jpg.a46de3e619f962294acbf22b152100ae.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Battle

 

Quote

In May 1940 the Battle suffered many losses, frequently in excess of 50 percent of aircraft sorties per mission. By the end of 1940 the type had been withdrawn from front line service and relegated to training units overseas. As an aircraft that had been considered to hold great promise in the pre-war era, the Battle proved to be one of the most disappointing aircraft in RAF service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Battle

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2019 at 00:09, Annie said:

 the question of 'lit' and 'unlit'

That option is very prototypical - when the SLNCR bought its first bogie coaches in the early 20s (straight sided cletestories that looked 30 years older of course) it couldnt quite spring for lights in all of them so one became infamous as the daylight coach...

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hroth said:

 

I thought that post was held by its sister, the Fairey Battle (a near-coastal town!)

 

Fairey_Battle.jpg.a46de3e619f962294acbf22b152100ae.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Battle

 

 

 

The battle worked out ok as a trainer and target tug. If we're playing worst RAF plane of ww2 I'm going for the saro lerwick (following the obscure town theme).

A flying boat noted as being unstable in flight, unstable on water, structurally unsound on water, and if one engine failed its control surfaces were inadequate to compensate, so it'd fly in circles, but it was also underpowered and couldnt maintain height on one engine, so slowly descending circles.

In its 3 years of service over 50% of aircraft crashed....

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All this bemoaning the Fairy Battle, when it was a pretty typical 30s design. The Me110 and the Ju87 Stuka were rapidly withdrawn when the Luftwaffe lost air superiority. The Me110 re-emerged as a night fighter, but so did the Boulton Paul Defiants, and an aircraft with two crew was at an advantage in the radar eqipped night war. The reason Fairy Battles didn't appear in this role might be that they were all shot down in suicidal daytime bombing raids in the 1940 campaign

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

you'll be posting pictures of cute kittens next.

 

Well, if the Fox Walker conversion does not prove feasible, I need an alternative.  If it does, well, I'll have an excuse for a second B2  model!

 

Both B1s, and, so I''m told, early B2s (introduced 1905) had the same tank/smoke box arrangement as you see on the W4 model.  Given that I have to get the styrene sheet out and play, I may as well fabricated wooden buffer beams and a new cab and call it a B1!

 

Off to York just now to hob nob with the Great and Good; I would expect some news during the course of the day. No spoilers, mind.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...